The New Kadampa Tradition (NKT) was registered in 1992, and there were two sexual scandals involving senior monks in the first 15 years. These monks disrobed in 1995 and 2007.
As a result of these scandals, safeguards were put in place against the possibility of such harm happening again in the future. Some of these safeguards are included within A Moral Discipline Guide: The Internal Rules of the New Kadampa Tradition (NKT)-International Kadampa Buddhist Union, which have been set up and modified over the years by Geshe Kelsang, largely as a response to issues that have arisen as the NKT adapted from Tibetan to modern society. Over the years the NKT has been doing its best to learn from mistakes, prevent future problems, become democratic and transparent, and protect its members. Since these safeguards were put in place, the NKT has been scandal free.
The Internal Rules also encourage members to speak up, anonymously if they prefer. Internal Rules 7§3, Removal of a General, Deputy or National Spiritual Director, gives the officers and members authority to dismiss him or her if they break their ordination vows (etc.):
If the officers or Members of the Charity ignore these rules 7§1 and 7§2, particularly while understanding at any time that a General or Deputy Spiritual Director has performed any of the above inappropriate actions, then it will be recognised publicly that the NKT-IKBU is spiritually impure. Therefore to protect the NKT-IKBU society from such impurity the officers and Members of the Charity must apply effort to maintain these two rules.
When monks or nuns break their vows, they are removed from their responsibilities in accordance with the ordination vow of celibacy and the Internal Rules 7, 8§3, 11§2, 12§3.
In accordance with the ordination vow of celibacy and the Internal Rules, any ordained person who engages in sexual conduct is asked to leave their position, as well as the community for a certain time period. They are no longer allowed to use their ordination name or wear the robes or live in a Dharma Center for at least one year. Disrobed monks and nuns may return to NKT Centers later, but, with a few exceptions, they cannot teach Kadampa Buddhism again. See the Internal Rules 11.2.
One of the functions of the Internal Rules is to be a “moral discipline guide” and to explain what to do in such circumstances. The rules apply to everyone in the organization: the General Spiritual Director (7§1), the Deputy Spiritual Director (7§2), the National Spiritual Directors (7§4), Resident Teachers (8§3) and Administrative Directors of NKT Dharma Centers, as well as residents and students (11§1); everyone is accountable and responsible for their actions.
However, according to the Bodhisattva vow, Mahayana Buddhist practitioners also try to develop compassion for those who break their celibate discipline and disrobe and, even as they reject their actions as wrong, avoid this secondary downfall:
Forsaking those who have broken their moral discipline: We incur a secondary downfall if we ignore with a judgmental of self-righteous attitude those who have broken their moral discipline. This commitment advises us that we should keep the intention to help all living beings, including those who have broken their moral discipline. ~ The Bodhisattva Vow, Tharpa Publications
11§2. If any ordained person breaks his or her ordination vows, then he or
she cannot live in an NKT-IKBU Dharma Centre for at least one year.
After one year, with some conditions, he or she can return to live in a
Dharma Centre, but cannot thereafter teach Dharma or participate in the
NKT Teacher Training Programme, even if he or she later takes
ordination for a second time.
11§2. If any ordained person breaks his or her ordination vows, then he or she cannot live in an NKT-IKBU Dharma Centre for at least one year. After one year, with some conditions, he or she can return to live in a Dharma Centre. During the year of probation, he or she cannot participate in any of the three daily Study Programmes of a Dharma Centre, but (at the discre-tion of the Centre managers and Resident Teacher) may attend occasional Centre classes as a visitor. He or she may attend NKT-IKBU Festivals and Dharma Celebrations. Other than for some particular, specific reasons, he or she cannot teach Dharma or participate in the NKT Teacher Training Programme, even if he or she later takes ordination for a second time.
That is a radical alteration to the rules.
Yes. There have been several cases of people who disrobed being given permission to teach again as lay people, or even to re-ordain.
This is generally after a considerable period of time, and if they have been able to show that they have changed so much that it is clear that they will not break their vows of celibacy again. There is also far stricter monitoring and zero tolerance for any inappropriate behavior.
My post with regard to this topic was awaiting moderation but I can no longer see that information. Will it be approved or rejected? Thank you.
Dear John, the comment thread was running very long so we deleted the repeated comments. We have asked a couple of senior students to comment on your points about spiritual rules versus the Internal Rules as we are still having some trouble figuring out what is inadequate with what we have answered already. We will see if we can get some more replies.
What I find inadequate is your replies do not deal with the problems I encountered when following the advice to contact the NKT office if I wanted clarification over an issue. I outlined the problems I had in those posts which have been deleted. You asked me to be more specific about some of the points I was trying to make, which I did. That post has also disappeared. I also asked if the details of the second individual involved in sexual scandals could be known, as those related to Samden were published.
With regard to the alteration of the rules, that is done and you gave your reasons. It was said in this arena that the tradition followed the teaching of Je Tsongkhapa, etc. and, having read most of the books , I do not see anything to dispute.
My last post included a section from Lam Rim Chen Mo which addressed the issue of purification following trangression of the four root downfalls. I was using this to point out that Geshe la may have had this in mind when making the original rule about not being able to teach Dharma again. I also included Geshe-la’s words in an earlier post about the spiritual rules are impossible to change.
This led me to the question about spiritual rules and those dealing with everyday matters such as elections etc. Granted, the spiritual side of things will inform how business is conducted, but I believe they should be separated.
I look forward to the senior students replies and those from yourselves regarding my fist points above.
Hi John,
Sorry to hear that. Have you tried contacting the NKT Office or Education Council Reps in the last few weeks?
After a number of years trying to elicit a response from the NKT office and various centres I gave up. I then tried again when I wanted a copy of the up to date rules. I described the problem in an earlier post, which has been deleted, that presented itself when trying to obtain a response to that request. When this site appeared, I hoped for an avenue where questions would be answered.
As it says on this site, you can address your comments now to the NKT office and they plan on answering. I’m sorry they didn’t answer in the past, but if you address this to Gen Lhachog, Education Council Representative, you should get a reply. If you don’t, let us know and we’ll pursue it.
I will do that. Thankyou.
Is Kelsang Lhachog resident teacher at Manchester KMC? If so, e-mail sent on 21st November. No response as yet.
No, she is the deputy Education Council representative based at Manjushri Centre.
Further to my comment awaiting moderation, is this an official site sanctioned by the NKT?
This site is sanctioned by the New Kadampa Tradition.
Thank you.
Contained within the documents above there is an extract from a talk given by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso.
. We say Internal Rules but in reality they are spiritual commitments.
If you check carefully, within the Internal Rules no permission is given to change them. Some people said we need to give exception to make changes in the future because situations change, society changes, and many circumstances and conditions change so maybe it will be necessary later to make changes. But I said no. This is because it is not an ordinary constitution, but a spiritual constitution — they are spiritual commitments. It is like the Kadampa Geshe Chekhawa when he taught Training of Mind or Lojong, extensively making eighteen commitments as a method to improve practitioners’ experience of Lojong quickly and unmistakenly. Similarly I made these nineteen commitments.
I taught extensively for almost 25 years until now and I wrote many Dharma books and organized many Dharma centres, and now I have made nineteen commitments as a method for gaining authentic results from Dharma practice, as a quick method for individuals to attain the ultimate goal, and for maintaining the NKT as a pure society or community that will be a very special example in the world. This is why I made these nineteen spiritual commitments. No one can change these. When Buddha Shakyamuni gave Bodhisattva teachings he made nineteen root and forty-six secondary commitments of the Bodhisattva vows in order for people to make quick progress on the Bodhisattva path. Similarly, with Tantric ordination. No one can change these. Just because society, situations, and people are different we cannot say that we need to change Geshe Chekhawa’s eighteen commitments. We can’t say this because this is spiritual practice; it is Dharma so therefore no one can change. So, I do not accept that changes need to be made to the Internal Rules.
Given that changes have been made, especially with regard to teaching again following breaking moral discipline, I would appreciate your thoughts.
During his lifetime, some changes were made with Venerable Geshe Kelsang’s input and approval, and voted on by members of the Education Council.
‘We can’t say this because this is spiritual practice; it is Dharma so therefore no one can change. So, I do not accept that changes need to be made to the Internal Rules. The return of Kadam Neil/ GenThubten to teaching role has provoked much discussion following his disrobing and subsequent re ordination. This was in contravention of those ‘spiritual’ rules. So, what you seem to be saying is Geshe la changed his mind over spiritual matters which, as he said, could not be changed.
Venerable Geshe-la himself created and provided the Internal Rules as a moral discipline guide to protect the New Kadampa Tradition and ensure it can function as a democracy, primarily once he had passed away. He was therefore at liberty to suggest updates to these in any way he thought made sense. In each instance, such as 11§2 that you are referring to, the Education Council weighed up and agreed to his changes. There have been several cases of people who disrobed being given permission to teach again as lay people, or even to re-ordain.
Dear John, won’t be long, we are just looking into some of the things you are asking. Some have already been addressed in a previous comment to you and we are checking one or two other things. Thanks.
Thank you.
I asked a few days ago how your enquiries were progressing but that message does not appear here. The question was asked as you said,
‘Dear John, won’t be long, we are just looking into some of the things you are asking.’
Any clarification would be appreciated.
While you are waiting for clarification, presumably from elsewhere, of the points I raised, perhaps you can clear up the following.
‘A Moral Discipline Guide – The Internal Rules of the New Kadampa Tradition– International Kadampa Buddhist Union.
Effective from 01 August 2001.
Revised 2003, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2013, 2020, 2023’
‘The New Kadampa Tradition (NKT) was registered in 1992, and there were two sex scandals involving monks in the first decade. As a result of these, safeguards have been put in place against the possibility of such harm happening again in the future.’
If the two ‘sex scandals’ refer to ex Deputy Spiritual Directors, then they were not both in the first decade. The safeguards appeared following this.
The above states, ‘he ‘safeguards’ are to be ‘Effective from 1st August 2001,’ which they clearly weren’t.
You are right. Updated that page, thank you John.
Hi John, we still have not figured out exactly what you are asking that we haven’t answered. We were one year out on the Internal Rules, apologies for that. Venerable Geshe-la was entitled to update the Internal Rules as he is the one who provided them as safeguards for the tradition.
new kadampa information on 29 October 2023 at 14:56
New Kadampa Information wrote…..
‘Dear John, won’t be long, we are just looking into some of the things you are asking. Some have already been addressed in a previous comment to you and we are checking one or two other things. Thanks.’
This reply would from yourselves indicates further clarification with regard to matters not covered by your reply. A post which does not show on this forum from myself was awaiting moderation. ‘The other things I was asking’, were contained within that post.
Could you distil your remaining exact questions?
Yes, but it will be within a day or two.
Tibetan Buddhism, for all its incredible and liberating teachings, has also been culturally transmitted over the centuries in Tibet through a very patriarchal lineage. It is heavily tilted in the favor of monks, not nuns, having all the prestige, power, and resources. Lay teachers have not been much of a thing — rarely granted large audiences, permitted to teach a few people perhaps here and there.
When Venerable Geshe Kelsang Gyatso came to the West, he decided to do away with this patriarchal system, saying shortly after he arrived in London that he was going to train up monks, nuns, lay women, and lay men equally. They were to have the same education and be given the same opportunities to teach. This was, and still is, quite revolutionary.
Then when in 2005 Samden broke his vows and slept with students, Venerable Geshe-la did not countenance it — Samden was banished, and Geshe-la wrote to him:
“Because the NKTs reputation and power of the Resident Teachers has been destroyed by your activities now the future development of the NKT will be difficult both materially and spiritually. However, I myself and all my students are working hard to recover the damage you made. We will never allow your sexual lineage to spread in this world.”
Since this time, almost twenty years ago, there have been no such scandals in the NKT. And the General Spiritual Director also happens to be a nun, which is unprecedented in Tibetan Buddhist history.
Compare this to the advice Lama Zopa gave after the sexual scandals involving the revered FPMT master, Tibetan monk Dagri Rinpoche, where he cautioned against criticizing him and advocated pure view:
“Therefore, I want to tell the students who have received initiations and teachings from Dagri Rinpoche that you should definitely one hundred percent rejoice, no matter what the world says, no matter if some people criticize him.”
https://fpmt.org/lama-zopa-rinpoche-news-and-advice/advice-from-lama-zopa-rinpoche/lama-zopa-rinpoches-advice-to-students-of-dagri-rinpoche/?fbclid=IwAR3rHdcuxJrCIVlCOpL9zY5r6P6P50ZXDdZGf2JKDy9VxrzO2cjHxcjfHbQ
Although there is spiritual truth in Lama Zopa’s words, and it is understandable why he might write this for the sake of his faithful students, this is not very acceptable in the modern world, to put it mildly. Even before the age of #metoo this could be seen as protecting the patriarchy versus the victims.
Venerable Geshe-la has moved very far away from the Tibetan establishment for reasons like this – not because he has rejected the Buddhism that has been carried down through all the Indian and Tibetan masters, of course, nor that he does not respect and love Tibetans who are practicing within their system. It is because the patriarchal monastic system of delivery means it has had and will continue to have some challenges in adapting to the modern world. He has explained on many occasions how pure view or Guru yoga has to be an internal practice, not the governing principle of our organization – and with the Internal Rules this is now policy. He put a lot of space between the New Kadampa Tradition and Tibetan politics as well, rejecting the feudal mixture of religion and politics to embrace democracy. Although he has been criticized for “breaking away”, and his motivations have been mistrusted and mischaracterized by some Tibetans and their followers (as is understandable), this was the right thing to do. It has made Dharma more available to people all over the world without any cultural or political requirements.
Venerable Geshe-la has all the while not moved even a millimeter away from the lineage of Buddhadharma passed from Buddha Shakyamuni via Atisha and Je Tsongkhapa – all his books are based entirely on their texts. Anyone who reads these books, attends teachings at Kadampa Centers, or practices this Dharma knows this to be the case.