A WOMAN’S VOICE (II): THE ALLEGEDLY ‘CRUEL TIBETAN QUEEN’, MARGYELMA AND ‘UNRELIABLE’ BIOGRAPHIES: A white, male biographer’s treatment and ‘shaky sources on the ‘villainess Tibetan queen’, Margyel Dongkar, the denigration/silencing of a female scholar-translator’s comments on it, and another unreliable biography about the 16th Karmapa

“Margyelma’s legacy as a quasi-historical, literary, and folk figure, remains strong in the contemporary Tibetan imagination. For example, it is not uncommon to hear male practitioners refer to women they are unhappy with as incarnations of Margyel Dongkar.”–Joe McLellan (2023)

“It actually doesn’t take much to be considered a difficult woman, that’s why there are so many of us.” – Jane Goodall

Yesterday, the Treasury of Lives (TOL) posted a new biography of the 8th Century woman, Margyel Donkar, also known as Margyenma, who was one of King Tri Songdetsen’s wives. She is said to have came from a Bon background and is accused in legend of having forced the exile of the translator Vairocana. The new biography was said to be part of the TOL Women’s initiative to address the serious imbalance of female biographies published on their website. 

The new biography on Margyelm Donkar by Joe McLellan

On the one hand, it was good to see a new publication of a female biography, however, the language used in the TOL Facebook post describing how ‘popular Buddhist histories portray her as one of the great villains in Tibetan Buddhist history” and how her ‘smoldering bitterness and cruelty’ led her to impede the ‘noble work of Buddhist leaders’ reeked a bit of sexism and potential bias in the telling of a woman’s story.   I noted that Joe Mclellan was the white, male biographer (who is also listed as a Contributing Translator on a heavily-funded translation project that actively discriminated against me, a female survivor) and that it was acknowledged that ‘little about her can be confirmed historically’. Thus, the at times subjective language and interpretation in it reminded me of another white male scholar, Michael Sheehy’s subjective and questionable treatment of the autobiographical account of Tibetan Buddhist female, Kunga Trinley Wangmo, see my article about that here.

So, I then made a brief comment on the TOL Facebook post, pointing out the potential sexism and misogynist bias not only in McLellan’s language but also in the shaky source material itself, which is more often than not written by men. My comments were welcomed by several women (cross cultures), who agreed with me that challenging or ‘difficult’ women in male historical accounts are often ‘demonised’ or made into witches historically by men who feel challenged by them. I responded to them by sharing the above article about Kunga Trinley Wangmo.

My comments were then suddenly ‘attacked’ by an unknown Tibetan man (who shall remain nameless, to avoid ’empowering’ him with a platform here) saying that ‘western feminism disease has no place here’ and that my comments were ‘mudslinging’ on a ‘beautiful’ new biography. Typical sexist, mansplaining.  When I jokingly replied that ‘western feminism’ (whatever that means) was not a disease, and if it was then why was he posting about Taylor Swift, a white woman who has benefited greatly from feminism (as have other female pop stars) on his own FB timeline? Ha ha ha. He then responded in an even more derogatory, sexist way that usually there is an ‘ugly, single, miserable woman’ behind such ‘western feminist’ comments.  I blocked him.

The biographer, Joe McLellan’s patronising  response: ‘She has nothing to say’!

Sadly, it does not end there though, when I then warned Alex Gardner, the director of Treasury of Lives in an email about the sexist/derogatory comments about women on the post and requested them to moderate it, their response was to take all the comments down, including mine, and limit me also from making any more comments! So, bizarrely, I was silenced/punished for making perfectly valid and reasonable comments as a female scholar-translator in the Buddhist Studies field, and then defending myself and other women against a personal attack of sexist, derogatory comments about women.

When a female editor at TOL then apologised and suggested allowing me to re-post my initial comments about the biography (before the misogynist attack), Gardner refused citing that the biographer McLellan himself (without any sense of irony or shame) had told the TOL editors I had ‘nothing to say!’ How patronising is that not only to me but to the FB readers? Also, what message does that send to people? Can you imagine what might have happened if someone had posted similar racist or homophobic comments? 

Treasury of Lives then followed up their actions by publishing the following statement below, naming me as a ‘reader’:

“Comments on this post are removed due to accusatory and hostile language. We welcome comments and discussion, but please everyone, be kind and generous. For those who missed it, a reader noted the misogynistic language in the biography—language that the author did not condone or affirm, but rather documented—and also questioned whether men can be trusted to write the biographies of women. These points sparked both valuable and unkind comments and as a result of the later we chose to remove the entire thread.”

Yet not clearly stating who had actually made the accusatory and hostile, and more importantly sexist and misogynist comments, nor allowing myself, the woman attacked to respond with her own voice. At the least, TOL confirms that McLellan (the biographer) neither condoned or affirmed the misogynist and sexist language in the biography. Yet, I would add, the fact that he/they do not question it explicitly either, is also problematic.

McLellan ends his biography on Margyelma with the following statement:

“Her legacy as a quasi-historical, literary, and folk figure, remains strong in the contemporary Tibetan imagination. For example, it is not uncommon to hear male practitioners refer to women they are unhappy with as incarnations of Margyel Dongkar.”

Yet, McLellan provides no sources or empirical research for making such ‘personal’ assertions at all. Who are these ‘male practitioners’ he refers to, when and how did he ‘hear’ them say that and what and whom is he referring to when he says the ‘contemporary Tibetan imagination’?

Considering that my own two published biographies on Treasury of Lives (about two important Karma Kagyu teachers) were subjected to a very lengthy editorial process, that took over six months, where things were changed by unnamed editors that I then sometimes had to insist be reverted due to inaccurate rendering of the source material, it is noticeable that a white, male scholar’s unfounded and rather sexist assertions about a historical Tibetan woman (with no caveat explanation) got through the editor’s cut. Or will I just be gaslighted as my ‘female imagination’?

The fact that this biography then got over 800 likes on Treasury of Lives Facebook says it all though, when their average number of likes for new biographies is 30-40. What does that tell you about their readership? They really like biographies about women, only if they are demonised and use potentially hostile and sexist language and male-biased sources about them? Interesting eh? Truth is indeed stranger (and more sexist) than fiction.

Not the first time feedback ignored – 16th Karmapa’s biography

Sadly, this is not the first time I had my feedback bypassed/ignored by Alex Gardner at Treasury of Lives. Last year, I wrote a couple of times to Gardner about his treatment of the 16th Karmapa’s life-story published on TOL, due to its one-sided and inaccurate treatment/misrepresentation of the 16th Karmapa’s life.

In particular, Gardner not mentioning an important historical fact, document and event in the 16th Karmapa’s life, his giving a hand-written letter in an amulet to the 12th Tai Situpa (ten months before he passed away) that predicted his re-birth as Ogyen Trinley Dorje in Tibet with the same named parents, and that ALL the other main Karma Kagyu ‘heart-son’ lamas, 12th Gyeltsab Rinpoche and 3rd Jamgon Kongtrul Rinpoche accepted the letter as authentic (bar 14th Zhamarpa) is strange indeed.

There was also no mention of the undisputed fact that the 14th Zhamarpa (and his followers), after the 16th Karmapa passed away, accused Tai Situ of being a fraud and liar and that the sacred letter was fraudulently created by Tai Situpa.

The TOL biography by Gardner also misleadingly misrepresents the 17th Karmapa issue in a subjective way as two equally weighted ‘sides’ in a conflict of two viable candidates. Gardner writes, for example, that:

“The two sides accused the other of deception, violent clashes have followed, and Karma Kagyu communities around the world have been forced to choose between the two.”

However, this is not correct. Karma Kagyu communities have not been ‘forced to choose between the two’ at all. The vast majority of Karma Kagyu monastics, laypeople and teachers freely chose right from the very start (without any pressure) the officially recognised 17th Karmapa, Ogyen Trinley Dorje, who was enthroned at the main seat of the Karmapas in Tsurphu monastery, Tibet by the main Karma Kagyu lamas and monastics there. It was the 14th Zhamarpa’s putting forward another candidate that forced his own followers to choose between the two, but not that of the Karma Kagyu as a whole. Yet, even to this day, the Zhamarpa’s candidate had never been chosen as authentic by the vast majority of Karma Kagyu followers inside, and outside Tibet.

It was the 14th Zhamarpa’s putting forward another candidate, Thaye Dorje, that forced his own followers to choose between the two, but not that of the Karma Kagyu as a whole. Yet, even to this day, the Zhamarpa’s candidate has never been chosen as authentic/valid by the vast majority of Karma Kagyu followers inside, and outside Tibet.

Gardner’s biography also mainly relies on a biased and one-sided source, such as the biographical material of Gerd Bausch (who is neither a recognised scholar nor translator) and not the more objective and independent account by British journalist, Mick Brown in his book the Dance of 17 Lives, in which he interviews all involved parties in the issue. For more on Brown’s account, see my recent podcast interview with him  here.

Is it therefore a mere coincidence that the biography Treasury of Lives re-posted on their Facebook, straight after the Margyelma one was that of the 16th Karmapa? Who knows, but there are no coincidences when it comes to karma.

Conclusion

In sum, TOL published a woman’s biography as part of a funded initiative to increase awareness and publications of women’s history within Tibetan and Himalayan Buddhism that ‘demonises’ her, using sexist and misogynist language and shaky or non-existent textual sources, with questionable assertions by the white, male biographer. The biography about 16th Karmapa is also questionable in terms of its subjective assertions and sources, and omission of an important event and document in his life.

As Jane Goodall famously said, women who speak out or challenge male dominance and patriarchy are often labelled as difficult, ‘Margyemas’ (or ‘Karens’) for actually doing nothing more than having an opinion that other people (mainly men) find challenging or that exposes sexist discrimination, lies and  misogyny.  As some women have rightly stated, these terms rather than merely describing a woman’s behaviour, have become a ‘harmless and fun’ way for men to silence and control women’s voices, experiences, feelings and opinions. I sent this article to Alex Gardner and Joe McLellan but have yet to get any private response to it.

Dedicated to all the ‘difficult’ women who never had a chance to voice their stories and experiences, or had them hijacked, recounted unfairly or inaccurately by sexist men (and their enablers).

Music? Dakini Song, Black Magic Woman by Fleetwood Mac,  A Woman’s Voice is a Revolution by s.k.a.l.a · Conscious Route and Revolution by Tracy Chapman and ‘finally the tables are starting to turn…’.

Written by Adele Tomlin, 6th January 2023.