Information about IKKBO:
Resolution
Kunzig Shamar Rinpoche's message to the IKKC
Statement by the monks community at the IKKC
Open letter to H.H. the Dalai Lama
General information:
Background on
the Karmapa controversy
Prediction
About the Future of the Kagyu Lineage
By Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche.
Legal documents:
Court Decisions
Buddha's Not Smiling, By Erik D. Curren.
The Day the Last Monastery in Shangri-La Fell -
Buddha's Not Smiling is the anatomy of a crisis. On August 2, 1993, Rumtek monastery
was attacked. Its monks were expelled and the cloister was given to a lama appointed
by the Chinese government. But Rumtek was not in China, and its attackers were
not Communist troops. Rumtek was in India, the refuge for most exiled Tibetans.
And it was Tibetan lamas themselves who led the siege. Evidence shows that the
Chinese Communists directly supported Tibetan lamas and monks who attacked Rumtek
monastery.
More >>
Nov 1st
04 Novelist Tries to Wrestle with the Karmapa Controversy in Non-Fiction
Format: IKKBO Says that She Should Have Stuck To Fiction.
More >>
Oct 21th
04 Shamar Rinpoche Files Defamation Suit against Controversial Karmapa Book
Author Lea Terhune accused in spreading false information solely to harm Tibetan
Buddhist leader and lineage.
More >>
The supreme
court of India decision on Rumtek
[ Original Text ]
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.22903/2003
More >>
Group Loses
Legal Bid to Retain Control over Disputed Monastic Seat of the Karmapas
Indian Supreme Court Rejects Claim of Tsurphu Labrang, Clearing the Way for
the Karmapa Charitable Trust to Regain Control of Rumtek Monastery.
More >>
The International Karma Kagyu Buddhist Organization, based in New Delhi is dedicated to educating the wider public on issues relating to the disagreement over the identity of the Tibetan Buddhist leader known as the Karmapa.
Like
the Dalai Lama, the Karmapa is one of the highest lamas of Tibet.
The Karmapa was the first reincarnate lama of Tibet, stretching back
to the 12th century, 300 years before the appearance of the Dalai
Lamas.
A Succession Controversy
After the death of the 16th Karmapa, Rangjung Ripge Dorje (1923-1981), a controversy
arose over his successor. Today, there are two candidates for the title of
17th Karmapa: Thaye Dorje and Orgyen Trinley. Several controversial books have
been published recently on this dispute. The information in these books has
been questioned by many in the Tibetan Buddhist community for its accuracy.
The purpose of this website is to provide accurate and complete information
to journalists and others about the Karmapa controversy and especially the
controversy’s main point of contention, the possession of the seat of
the 16th Karmapa, Rumtek Monastery in India’s northeastern Sikkim state.
Karmapa’s Seat in Dispute
The 16th Karmapa established his headquarters at Rumtek after fleeing Tibet
at the time of the Chinese invasion in 1959. At his death in 1981, according
to his will, management of the monastery passed to an organization that he
had set up, the Karmapa Charitable Trust. The Trust managed Rumtek for 11 years
as the new Karmapa reincarnation was sought. Then, in 1992, after announcing
his own Karmapa candidate a year earlier, Situ Rinpoche and his followers arranged
with the local government of Sikkim at the time to seize control of Rumtek
from the Karmapa Trust. Ever since, legal possession of the monastery has been
the key issue of contention in the Karmapa controversy.
Beginning in 1992, the Karmapa Trust has been trying to regain control of Rumtek
through legal means. Three levels of Indian courts have ruled that control
of this monastery in the northeastern Indian state of Sikkim belongs to the
Trust. In 2002, the District Court in Gangtok, Sikkim first issued this ruling,
and the High Court of Sikkim affirmed it on appeal in 2003. On July 5, 2004
the Indian Supreme Court in New Delhi affirmed the lower courts’ decisions.
This site offers access to information and original documents about the Rumtek
case. Including the text of all three Indian courts involved in the matter.