China’s Misguided Religious Battle
Image Credit: Flickr / Rubber Bullets

China’s Misguided Religious Battle

0 Likes
80 comments

At a time when the world has been horrified by recurring news of Tibetan monks and nuns self-immolating in protest over Beijing’s repressive policies, the Chinese government is attempting to widen its control over religious activities. Indeed, the Communist government is even making pronouncements on theology.

This isn’t the first time the government has waded into theology. In 1995, the Dalai Lama named a Tibetan boy as the reincarnation of the previous Panchen Lama – the second holiest figure in Tibetan Buddhism. But the atheistic Communist Party stepped in, put the boy under house arrest, and named another as the reincarnation of the Panchen Lama.

To use a biblical analogy, this is akin to King Herod choosing not to order the death of the baby Jesus, but instead orchestrating his kidnapping and the substitution of another boy in his place.

Through its actions, Beijing has created a huge religious problem for Tibetan Buddhists, who no longer know where the genuine Panchen Lama is and, of course, won’t be able to follow the ritual of identifying his reincarnation when he dies. Chinese political meddling has thus created theological issues for believers. Despite the Constitution’s guarantees, the government isn’t allowing Tibetans freedom of belief.

Back in 2007, China institutionalized such meddling in theological issues by issuing regulations on the reincarnation of all Tibetan “Living Buddhas.” According to these regulations, reincarnations must be submitted to the party’s Religious Affairs Bureau for approval.

The gall of this announcement is astonishing. Previously, the Party claimed the right to approve pregnancies. Unapproved pregnancies were terminated. But how, one wonders, does the party disapprove a reincarnation? Reincarnation is, after all, the belief that the soul of a person returns to reside in a new human body, either as a human being or even as an animal or a plant. One either believes or does not believe in reincarnation. It’s ridiculous for a nonbeliever to claim the right to decide who can or cannot be reincarnated.

And if, in the minds of the faithful, a holy man has indeed been reincarnated, who is the Party to decided that such a spiritual event hasn’t taken place? The party operates on a material level – it has no authority at the spiritual level.

Of course, the Party’s claims to such authority are rooted in politics. It cites precedents dating back to the time of Mongol and Manchu rule in China. But the Mongols and Manchus were believers who revered Tibetan lamas. Today’s Chinese leaders are atheists who can by no stretch of the imagination be considered patrons of the faith.

The party wishes to control the entire hierarchy of Tibetans lamas so that, in future, it can claim that all lamas were reincarnated through its approval. Instead of a separation of church and state the church will become the instrument of the party-state.

Ultimately, it boils down to controlling the next Dalai Lama. The incumbent is now 76 years-old, and Beijing sees the endgame as approaching. It hopes to groom a boy who will become an instrument of party policy rather than a spokesman for Tibetan cultural and religious autonomy.

However, the wily Dalai Lama is fully cognizant of this game plan and hopes to thwart it by throwing down a theological gauntlet. In a 4,000-word statement last September, the purpose of which was clearly political but whose weapons were theological, the Dalai Lama displayed his full armory of theological weapons.

“Reincarnation,” he said, “is a phenomenon which should take place either through the voluntary choice of the concerned person or at least on the strength of his or her karma, merit and prayers. Therefore, the person who reincarnates has sole legitimate authority over where and how he or she takes rebirth and how that reincarnation is to be recognized.”

Comments
80
JohnX
September 11, 2012 at 19:53

The silence is deafening.
 
Or maybe just like many atheists, I am deaf.

JohnX
March 6, 2012 at 17:45

Liang1a wrote: “Liang’s response:
All the more reason to see why religions are nonsense and dangerous to the welfare of the people. Religions must be eradicated to save the people.”

My question is to save the people for what? What beautiful utopian dream will you give them?

The Soviet Union was completely athiest in the 1950s, 60s and even some would argue up the late 80s. Its Churchs were if they existed controlled by Government and athiest people put in place to watch any old people who still had the audacity to believe. Thier children were educated from the age of seven on the benefits of atheism, some may argue brainwashed. Atheism was protected by the State, enshrined in its laws.

The power resided in the state, imprisonment of religious figures was normal, etc.

Where is this beautiful utopian world that they created? This world without religion? If it is such a success then why is religion growing in mother Russia? The social ideals or the most basic pure forms of religions have to do with social issues, behaviours towards one another.

What utopian ideals are atheists bringing to the table? Question everything, accept nothing without consideration. You would wipe out all the good that religion has brought simply to remove the bad?

Oro Invictus
March 5, 2012 at 06:24

I’d like to make a moment to interject in this current barrage of platitudes, bigotry, grandstanding, and what-have-you and try and bring back some measure of reason to these proceedings; I will attempt to do so through some simple questions and thoughts, directed to everyone, not purely against one specific side. I will, however, hone my statements in response to three particular lines of thinking which are apparent here. Many of the things I will touch upon I stated in my earlier post here, but given it has since been buried by a deluge of bickering and exhorting I believe readdressing them here has merit; also, forgive me for the relatively simple nature of the below, as I seek simply to use this as a base-line for returning things to a more rational point. If anyone would like me to further expound on some items below, I would be more than happy to.

On religion as a destabilizing force…

One thing constantly spouted here is that religion, by its very nature, breeds hatred and intolerance and thus should be expunged; indeed, it is undeniable that some of the worst excesses of mankind have been tied to religion and the antipathy it breeds through sectarianism and inflexible dogma. However, I must ask this: How does this differ from any other of the various (to use a somewhat trite phrase) “-isms” which characterize so much of our world today? Can the exact same faults of religion be laid at any codified system of belief? The most devastating wars in history and most horrid atrocities were driven by secular forces rather than religious ones; commonly cited examples like the Dark Age and the Crusades were as much instigated and driven by politics as religion. Consider the excesses of the Crassius, Nero, Barbarossa, Henry VIII, Napoleon, Bismarck, Franco, Kim Il-Sung, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, Pinochet, Ceaușescu, Mugabe, and Niyazov (to name a relative few); these were men who instigated atrocity, famine, and chaos from a seat guided by politics, not by any idea of god.

Ah, you say, but what of the extremists who perform suicide attacks and slaughter civilians? To this I point how the soldier marching to war is virtually the same, simply replacing “God” and “Salvation” for “King” and “Country”; outside of that, the only other difference is the possibility of surviving, which isn’t even always true for said soldiers (be it the ordained death of the kamikaze or the implicit one of the Russian soldier being thrown against the Germans during their offensive). Likewise, the civilian deaths incurred by religious extremists are unfathomably minute when compared to those perpetrated by secular militaries, even if one does not consider those civilian deaths which were definitely accidental.

Perhaps, then, you would seek to point out how religions do not yield tangible benefits, while nations and science does? To that I reply: How does one define or tally these benefits? What is seen as a boon to one is clearly not to another and, likewise, what is seen as cause to one is seen as incidental or an effect to another. A man struck by a bullet may consider himself unfortunate, however, what if said bullet caused him to fall in pain and thus miss a sniper’s bullet to his skull? If two people, whose only other reference is the other, move further apart, does it mean that either one is moving and, if so, which one? Perhaps both are moving or neither are, with the area of space between them itself expanding? On a less esoteric level, one might claim the end of the Cold War was a boon for humanity, while others might claim it ended what little geopolitical stability and galvanizing public forces existed as part of that conflict. Likewise, some see evolution as evidence that there is no divine plan; others may say that it instead, by its very mechanism, proves that there is one. More relevantly, the CPC states that it has brought stability and prosperity to the people of Tibet, whereas the people of Tibet feel that they have instead lost their freedom and control over their lives while simultaneously having their culture and spiritual beliefs suppressed and subsumed.

In the absence of an objective truth, each person must instead choose their own ideal of what is right and wrong, with progress then garnered via consensus. There is no such thing as a “right” answer and the only answers which can be considered “wrong” are those which inherently preclude the existence of another’s opinions; one cannot impose beliefs and consensus, for to do so will inherently result in a reversal of Hegelian dialectic processes, with the greater whole shattering and dispersing, leaving behind only disarray.

On the CPC as a “rational” entity…

Another argument that has been made is that the CPC, as an officially atheist government, is solely guided by the principles of rationality and is thus inherently superior and preferable to whatever spiritual system or cultural grievance the Tibetans have. Even if we ignore my refutation of such a definition of an objective rationality as well as the fact that atheism is, itself, a religion (it is a codified system of belief as to non-temporal entities, that being the nonexistence of a God), the CPC (and, indeed, any one party system) functions and governs, for all intents and purposes, as a theocratic entity. Where does the right to rule come from? The CPC would say the will of the people, yet that answer is rendered untenable by basic logic; while there are many means of doing so, a simple proof to refute their claim is as follows:

1) The will of the people is defined as the consensus of individuals who are able to make choices without coercion; coercion can vary from intimidation, to bribery, or (most importantly) the restriction of information.

2) The CPC claims it is rules by right of the will of the people, meaning that the people must be allowed to freely choose what they wish (at least in terms of choice of government) without hindrance and with free access to information.

3) As the CPC defines its right to rule via the will of the people, if it does not serve the will of the people, it therefore is rendered invalid as a government and must (by basic social government theory, such as that enshrined in “The Mandate of Heaven”) relinquish power.

4) The CPC, as part of its stated practice, heavily restricts information to its citizenry (it also engages in coercion through violence, intimidation, etc. but I will stick with the issue of information as not even the most die-hard supporter of the CPC will deny this practice).

5) Since the citizenry is not given free access to information, they cannot make educated decision and their choices for leadership become controlled by the party; as such, the will of the people is suppressed and replaced with an imposed opinion.

6) Since the will of the people is suppressed, the CPC cannot rule by such right, thus rendering it invalid and (using the logic enshrined in political theory) irrational.

Indeed, such a line of reasoning can be taken a few steps farther to show how the PRC functions like a theocracy:

7) Given the CPC is invalid as a government, it must either reform itself and allow the people free access to information from this point on, or it must relinquish power.

8) The CPC has and will not step down, still claiming it has a right to rule.

9) Thus, despite the lack of any logical reason for legitimacy, the PRC believes that a reason exists for them to be in power; as such a reason must then be non-temporal and/or metaphysical in nature in the absence of one born for rationality (at least, the very rationality they claim to rule by). Such a codified belief in ruling and power conferred by immaterial entities is exactly like a religion.

10) By the principle of identity which can best be conveyed via the colloquialism “a rose is a rose is a rose”, the CPC is a religious entity. As it is a religious entity and serves as sole governing body for the PRC, the PRC currently is a theocracy.

As you can see, trying to utilize the claim of the PRC serving as a “rational” bulwark against the “irrational” Tibetan system of self-governance is foolish and only highlights an utter lack of understanding of basic statecraft, an extraordinary level of denial, and/or an unfathomable level of hypocrisy. If you want to argue things in economic and geopolitical terms, fine, but trying to utilize social consensus and rationale will only serve as yet another exercise in self-defeating diatribes.

On the reality of Tibet, past and present…

At the same time, many people seem to believe and/or espouse that A) Tibet was a paradise before the PRC annexed it or B) Tibetan self-autonomy or independence would result in them returning to theocratic rule. The first point is patently untrue; Tibet was, at that time, mired in abject poverty with an extremely draconian government. True, the latest Dalai Lama was in the process of repealing many of these laws and reforming government institutions, but Tibet was still devastatingly poor and still a theocracy (which is to say a religious autocracy, albeit a relatively popular one, given the lack of incidents of unrest reported in the region, even after the PRC came in and began looking for reasons to justify their rule).

Indeed, early on the Dalai Lama actually helped facilitate the PRC’s control of Tibet, out of the hope that they would provide the needed support to raise the country out of poverty while letting it retain its autonomy with minimal oversight; while I doubt, like any good politician, this was solely done out of seeking the best for the Tibetan people by the Dalai Lama, I do believe (overall) his intentions were good and (relatively) unselfish. Unfortunately, this was also an extraordinarily naïve enterprise the Dalai Lama undertook, not entirely dissimilar to the Scottish nobles when they granted England “temporary” jurisdiction so they could deal with infighting and then (as they thought) receive the country back when things were settled (mind you, the intentions of the nobles here are far less pure than that of the Dalai Lama). What’s more, I have little doubt that, had the PRC not annexed Tibet, that many of the more caustic institutions there would remain, as even the Dalai Lama alone could not have removed all of them without the complete support of the clergy (though, whether or not such an arrangement would be preferable to the Tibetans over what they have today is debatable, though the nature of the current protests may serve as an indicator in that regard).

On the other hand, the PRC cites that, if it were to grant Tibetans the autonomy they seek (of course, they absolutely refuse to entertain the notion of Tibetan independence, similar to Taiwan [despite the fact that, for all intents and purposes, it is independent and unification looks less and less likely the longer things go on]), Tibet would return to a despotic, theocratic nightmare unseen out of places like Iran. This is even more foolish than the earlier statement, as it utterly fails to recognize the Dalai Lama’s recent moves to separate his office from that of Head-of-State and ignores the framework laid out by the government in exile. What’s more, it ignores the precedent of how systematic transitions of governments work; while it is true that societies do not always trend towards democracy, it is also true that they rarely (if ever) become more autocratic without large amounts of internecine sectarian conflict and/or the absence of a legitimately viewed government. Unlike Rome, Nazi Germany, Russia, and China prior to their respective authoritarian shifts, Tibet has a well-defined national identity and a ready-made government (or, more probably, institution which can coordinate the formation of a new government) in the government in exile, which enjoys overwhelming support by Tibetans in and out of Tibet. Likewise, it would also enjoy foreign support (particularly in the event of full independence) from other nations which have declared their championing of the Tibetan peoples’ struggle.

In closing, I’d like to apologize for this lengthy dissertation; I expectantly gained some free time and thus believed this was a worthy usage for it. I’m an extremely fast writer and tend to be verbose, such that my posts do tend towards being longer, even with just a minimum amount of free time. What’s more, I also apologize for writing this so late after the article has been posted, ordinarily I limit myself to making posts and replies to a three or four day period afterward an article is put up (this way I am able to respond to others’ replies to my posts), but given the subject matter and the nature of comments here, I believed it was necessary to do this now.

Liang1a
March 4, 2012 at 18:30

Matthew Tan wrote:
The self-immolations of monks are no fault of China. They want to believe that they will attain “enlightenment” straightaway and go for a “glorious after-life”. It is their own choosing. And it is ultimately the responsibility of the Dalai Lama Gang who teaches this kind of THEOLOGY.
What China needs to do is to EDUCATE the monks and the common Tibetan folks and try to the best of its ability to prevent them from doing stupid things. Sometimes, China will need to detain them or keep them under house arrest. So be it !!! To save their lives!
—————————-

Liang’s response:
All the more reason to see why religions are nonsense and dangerous to the welfare of the people. Religions must be eradicated to save the people.

MatthewTan
March 4, 2012 at 10:32

The Dalai Lama Cables: A Wolf in Monk’s Robes?

The Communist Chinese regime regularly refer to the Dalai Lama as ‘a wolf in monk’s robes’. They claim that he is behind violent protests in Tibet, that his supposedly compassionate wish to help flood and earthquake victims in China and Tibet is just a political ploy, that his travels around the world giving teachings is part of a political strategy to attack China and that the he uses the monks and monasteries in Tibet to organise insurgency.

The Dalai Lama, himself, laughs at these claims, and the western media laugh with him. China is portrayed as almost hysterical in its demonizing of the Dalai Lama. But is there any truth to what they say?

The brutal suppression of the Tibetans who resist communist rule in Tibet is well documented, and we absolutely oppose injustice and oppression anywhere. However, the Dalai Lama is a political leader, and all political leaders must be held up to scrunity.

As Tibetologist Jens-Uwe Hartmann of the Humboldt-Universität in Berlin said:

‘The glorification of the Dalai Lama in his capacity as a political leader will not help the democratisation process. A critical debate on his political statements must be possible and should not be suppressed by the argument that criticism only serves the Chinese.’

We have examined the declassified US State Department documents and we have found evidence that could support all three of the Chinese claims:

With respect to organising protests, the Dalai Lama and his representatives refer to the protests as ‘spontaneous’. However, in a telegram from the New Delhi Embassy dated 30 March 1967, we can see that the Bureau of the Dalai Lama privately admit that they were involved in organising these ‘spontaneous’ protests.

With respect to exploiting natural disasters – such as floods and earthquakes – for political gain, a telegram from the US Embassy in Calcutta, dated 8 January 1955, describes a ‘Tibetan Flood Relief Commitee’ set up by the Tibetans in exile. The telegram makes it clear that the benefits of supporting the relief effort are to win a propaganda coup over the Chinese communists and to support the resistence fighters positions. Furthermore, the telegram explicitly reveals that the ‘tibetan exiles conceived TFRC principally as a psychological tactic against Chinese communists.

With respect to using teaching visits as a political strategy against China, a United States Government Office Memorandum dated 21 February 1952 contains fascinating information. The context of the memo is a discussion of how best to respond to the Dalai Lama’s request for US assistance against the Chinese Communists. The Dalai Lama’s request was brought by his brother Taktse Rimpche. In the memo a discussion between various interested parties, including the CIA, is referenced. The CIA went on to formulate and fund a strategy of anti-communist propaganda with the Dalai Lama that included sponsoring him personally, and well as establishing Tibet Houses on his behalf in various locations and encouraging him to teach widely. In the discussion mentioned in this memo, they describe organising a teaching tour by distinguished Buddhist leaders as:

‘a major step towards utilizing certain elements of the Buddhist world in one aspect of psychological warfare’.

With respect to using uses the monks and monasteries in Tibet to organise insurgency, a telegram from the US Embassy in Calcutta to the Secretary of State in Washington, dated 11 September 1952, reveals:

‘Gyalo and Shakabpa with Dalai Lama’s knowledge seriously considering forming secret organisation to infiltrate Tibet from India, and possibly Nepal, using Tibetan Monasteries as centers for anti-communist resistance; propaganda first, weapons later.’

We know from other documents that this plan was put into effect.

Of course these declassified documents are now revealing old facts, but also they reveal a modus operandi. In A Great Deception we traced the various events surrounding the violent uprising in Tibet before the Beijing Olympics in 2008 back to the Dalai Lama and his key respresentatives.

While the Chinese government clearly has blood on its hands, it would appear that the Dalai Lama is not so innocent after all

MatthewTan
March 4, 2012 at 10:25

Liang1a,I thought you are discussing THEOLOGY. But as I read further, I realised you are NOT. You are exercising REASON and LOGIC. Good!!!

You are right that the Chinese Government can simply DEPOSE the Dalai Lama from his spiritual and political office. In fact, the 6th Dalai Lama you mentioned was DEPOSED by the Manchu Emperor before he died. The 13th Dalai Lama was DEPOSED by the Manchu Empress Dowager not once, but twice. But he was RESTORED to office by President Yuan Shih Kai.

However, it is too late to DEPOSE the current Dalai Lama.

Mao Zedong did NOT DEPOSE him from his POLITICAL OFFICE – in fact he reserved it for him for SIX YEARS until 1964 because he wanted to HONOUR a SECRET AGREEMENT signed during 1951.
Then it was “cultural revolution” and chaos.

Deng Xiaoping sought to RECONCILE with the Dalai Lama from the early 1970s, all the way even up to 1989 when the DALAI LAMA WAS INVITED TO CHINA to attend the death ceremony of the Panchen Lama. But the Dalai Lama was too proud and bargained for too much over protocol matters. So he missed the opportunity.

China remains open to RECONCILATION with the Dalai Lama, for the sake of his believers inside and outside Tibet. An ideal solution is that the Dalai Lama abandon independence TOTALLY, and dismantle all the political organizations that was set up to “free” Tibet, return to Tibet, and take up his political office again, subject to Chinese laws and supervision.

CHINA WILL NOT DISCUSS THE POLITICAL FUTURE OR STATUS OF TIBET WITH THE DALAI LAMA. CHINA WILL ONLY DISCUSS THE PERSONAL FUTURE OF THE DALAI LAMA.
That is, he may even be given the No. 1 position of Tibet if China is satisfied with the ways he intends TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE WELFARE OF THE TIBETAN PEOPLE.
I think this position of China is good. China is giving him a chance, and giving all his followers a chance of long-term sustainable RECONCILATION.
Many Westerners, especially NEWLY ELECTED Presidents and Prime Ministers do not understand or appreciate China’s position, because they are receiving bite-size and distorted information. (NOT TO MENTION MANY WRITERS HERE.)
But after a while, they DO UNDERSTAND AND ACCEPT. What remains is so-called “concerns about human rights”. Fine!!! China needs to prove it to them, Chinese way.
If the Dalai Lama keeps on refusing and rejecting China’s goodwill and offer, then let him disappear into history.
NO LOSS. Only a little disturbance now and then and here and there. And some embarassments and rebuke from the Westerners. China is used to it, and hardened to it.
The Dalai Lama Gang is not able to work up any real “Dalai Lama spring”. That is the most important thing. (That is what he is trying very hard to do). Even he is able to do it, China still can change course and “upgrade” the political offer.
These are all merely political bargaining and positioning, and neither side wants to give in too much away unless forced to do so.
The self-immolations of monks are no fault of China. They want to believe that they will attain “enlightenment” straightaway and go for a “glorious after-life”. It is their own choosing. And it is ultimately the responsibility of the Dalai Lama Gang who teaches this kind of THEOLOGY.
What China needs to do is to EDUCATE the monks and the common Tibetan folks and try to the best of its ability to prevent them from doing stupid things. Sometimes, China will need to detain them or keep them under house arrest. So be it !!! To save their lives!
If these monks don’t accept Chinese “patriotic education”, and such stupid things carry on, the Dalai Lama will be HISTORY. FOREVER AND EVER.

Liang1a
March 3, 2012 at 18:18

Below is an article that I wrote a few years ago. I think it is appropriate to post it here as it pertains to Dalai Lama and how false he is both as a person and as a religious entity:
=====================================

For decades Chinese government has been trying to defend itself against foreign
accusations that it invaded Tibet, slaughtered millions of Tibetans, destroyed the Tibetan culture, and imposed control and punishment over the Tibetans. The root cause of this is because the 14th Dalai Lama has been recognized by the foreigners as the “rightful” spiritual and temporal leader of Tibet and as such is being used by the foreigners as a focal point to rally those who are anti-Chinese to demonize China. At the same time, the Chinese government has silently acknowledged the leadership rights of the Dalai Lama thus giving him the aura of authority to continue his role as the rightful leader of Tibet fighting for the independence of his Tibet and the freedom of his Tibetan people. Therefore, the solution of establishing peace and security in Tibet and solidify China’s sovereign right over Tibet is to remove the perceived role of spiritual and temporal leadership of the 14th Dalai Lama.

Before I explain how this could be done, let me give a brief history of the Dalai Lama. The term lama means teacher or guru. Dalai means ocean in Mongolian. Therefore, the name Dalai Lama means Ocean Teacher or Teacher with Ocean-Deep Wisdom. Dalai Lama is a position first conferred on a Tibetan monk by a Mongolian Khan. When a Dalai Lama died, he is supposed to reincarnate into a man while most people will come back as whatever they deserve to be such as pig or flea depending on the life he lived. The reincarnated boy has the right to succeed to the position of Dalai Lama. In other words, since the Dalai Lama obviously is in reality nothing more than a man and subject to death by old age and other causes, he obviously cannot live forever. To get around this mortal defect the spirit comes back repeatedly by being reborn again and again and succeed to the position of Dalai Lama each time for de facto immortality. A sort of human version of the phoenix.

The trick, of course, is to find the right boy who is the true reincarnation of the recently demised Dalai Lama because unlike the phoenix, the new baby does not pop up out of the death bed of the old Dalai Lama. And apparently whatever deity is in charge of reincarnation isn’t obliging enough to rebirth the new Dalai Lama next door and with a bright star shining over his head. So the new Dalai Lama had to be searched for literally throughout the whole world. And expectedly there were contending claims by different pretenders to the position of Dalai Lama.

In feudal Europe, the election of the pope was subject to political influence and there was a time when there were actually three popes who excommunicated each other as the false pope. Unlike the Catholic pope who is elected by the cardinals, the newly reincarnated Dalai Lama is supposed to be discovered by some monks charged with the task of finding the reincarnated Dalai Lama. This depends on the candidate recognizing artifacts belonging to the old Dalai Lama. Of course, this is random and uncertain at best. If 20 artifacts with one of them being the artifact that belonged to the old Dalai Lama were shown to 20 boys, then the probability that at least one of them will pick the right artifact is
1 – 0.95^20 = 0.64. If they were shown to 100 boys, then the probability of at least one of them picking the right artifact goes up to 1 – 0.95^100 = 0.994. So it is a mathematical certainty that sooner or later some boy will pass all the tests and be identified as the reincarnated Dalai Lama. Therefore, it is clearly nonsense to say that since a boy candidate selected the right artifacts and passed other random tests he must be the reincarnated Dalai Lama. It is also nonsense that the fact that some boy passed the tests proved the truth of reincarnation.

The 6th Dalai Lama was a man with great sexual appetite who spent his nights with many women and wrote love poems. He was sent to Beijing by the Mongol king of Tibet and died en route, probably murdered. After that there were two rival pretenders to the position of Dalai Lama. The emperor of China ultimately installed his own candidate in 1720. From this it is clear that there is really nothing holy or mystical about the Dalai Lama. In fact the Dalai Lama is whomever the people or whoever has the political power want him to be. Many of the Dalai Lamas also died young, apparently murdered by political rivals.

9th Dalai Lama: 1806 – 1815 (9 years life span)
10th Dalai Lama: 1816 – 1837 (18 years life span)
11th Dalai Lama: 1838 – 1856 (18 years life span)
12th Dalai Lama: 1857 – 1875 (18 years life span)

From the above, it is clear that if they were not murdered, then the job of Dalai Lama isn’t conducive to longevity. And if a Dalai Lama can’t even live a normal lifespan, then it certainly calls into question what kind of living god he really is? Obviously he is no god at all.

And if Tibetan monks will go to the length of murdering a living Dalai Lama, then it is quite certain that they will do whatever they can to avoid bringing back the reincarnated Dalai Lama who will obviously grow up and be just as uncooperative as his prior incarnation. Therefore, the monks who murdered the Dalai Lama would surely do whatever they could to avoid bringing back the true reincarnation of the Dalai Lama and find someone else who is amenable to their domination as the new Dalai Lama. Chances are, the new Dalai Lama had been picked from a family friendly to the most powerful and influential monks of the time and not really the true reincarnated Dalai Lama, granted that there really is reincarnation.

Furthermore, if you were the powerful monk who orchestrated the murder of the Dalai Lama would you bring back the reincarnation of the murdered Dalai Lama so that he could accuse you of murdering his prior incarnation and have you skinned alive? Obviously not. You would do whatever you could to avoid bringing back the true reincarnation so as to avoid being exposed as the murderer. Therefore, everything considered, there are compelling reasons beyond reasonable doubts that the true lineage of the original Dalai Lama had been long lost. This then proves beyond any reasonable doubt that the current Dalai Lama is not the true reincarnation of the original Dalai Lama and is actually a false pretender undeserving of the title of Dalai Lama.

Another example of the political nature of the Dalai Lama is that the second Dalai Lama was the grandson of the Mongol Khan who conferred the title of Dalai Lama on the first Dalai Lama. So the Mongol Khan’s grandson was very happily discovered to be the Dalai Lama following the death of the first man to receive the title of Dalai Lama. And that gave the Mongol Khan great political influence over Tibet through his grandson. This shows that the conferring of the title on the first Dalai Lama was nothing more than a ploy for the Mongol Khan to solidify his political control over Tibet. It is quite obvious that the Mongol Khan had already planned to have one of his grandsons to become the Dalai Lama when he conferred the title of Dalai Lama on the first of the lineage. So the institution of Dalai Lama is all about politics and very little about religion or spirituality.

It was Emperor Qianlong who conferred the power of both the spiritual and political leadership on the Dalai Lama in 1751. The emperor also decreed that the selection of the Dalai Lama and other high lamas was to be under the supervision of the high commissioner of the Chinese central government. Another decree by the Chinese emperor was that the Dalai Lama must be chosen by picking out a name from a golden urn which contains several names of likely candidates. From the above, it is clear that the Chinese central government has the right through historical precedence to control the selection, sanctioning, removal, and replacement of the Dalai Lama.

Now we go back to the original question of how to neutralize Dalai Lama as a danger to China’s national sovereignty. There are many ways to deal with this. We see by the above history that it was Qianlong who conferred the power of both the spiritual and political leadership on the Dalai Lama. Therein lies the historical precedence for the right of the central government of China to remove the power of both the spiritual and political leadership from the Dalai Lama. All the central Chinese government needs to do is to issue a simple decree removing all spiritual and political power from the Dalai Lama. After the decree is issued, the Dalai Lama will no longer be able rightfully to laid claim to any power of leadership of any kind over Tibet and the Tibetan people.

Of course, the West will scream loud and long. And the Dalai Lama will deny that the Chinese government has the right to strip him of his power of leadership over Tibet and the Tibetan people. But immediately China is defining the game and the rules. The West and the Dalai Lama will then be responding to China’s initiative and start to play China’s game and by China’s rule. The onus will then be on the West and Dalai Lama to prove that he has the power he claims. All China needs to do is just refer to its decree stripping the Dalai Lama of his power and let them scream and fulminate.

Once the Dalai Lama lost his power of leadership he would be referred to as Llhamo Döndrub which is his name at birth. Since he has become just an ordinary monk, it will become pointless for China to talk to him about the future of Tibet. This will render all pressure from the West to talk to the man Llhamo Dondrub weightless and pointless.

At the same time, China can also appoint a commission to study the history of the Dalai Lama lineage to look for any evidence of skullduggery. It is likely that given all the apparent murders and political maneuverings in the past, there must be many evidence of foul plays during the selection process that can be used to prove that the lineage of the Dalai Lama was long lost and that the 14th Dalai Lama is not the true reincarnation of the original Dalai Lama. Therefore, in addition of stripping his power the Chinese government can pronounce the Dalai Lama false and could not be the reincarnation of the original Dalai Lama even if there were such a thing as reincarnation. Then it is up to the West and Llhamo Dondrub to prove he really is the reincarnation of the original Dalai Lama. Obviously, anything the West and Llhamo Dondrub say can never be fully proved. So there will always be doubt once the Chinese government pronounced him a false Dalai Lama.

Simultaneously, the Chinese government can appoint a new monk to be the head of the Tibetan Buddhism in the place of the Dalai Lama. This in itself will negate the claim of the Dalai Lama to be the spiritual head of Tibet. And as the Tibetan monks transfer their allegiance to the new head of Tibetan Buddhism, they will lose their allegiance to the Dalai Lama and forget him.

As I said above, the West and the current Dalai Lama will scream and yell and fulminate. But they will not be able to do anything. And many in the West will accept the fact that the man Llhamo Dondrub is no longer the Dalai Lama and has no value as a pawn in their mischiefs against China and drop him like a piece of trash. Some may continue to support him, but he will not have the same moral authority that he has now. And as China develops Tibet and increases the incomes and standard of living of the Tibetan people, they will forget him and concentrate on improving their own lives instead of wasting their time with somebody who represents the old brutal and tyrannical feudal system that had oppressed and brutalized their fathers and grandfathers and kept them poor. And China by taking control of the situation and using forceful initiatives can compel the West to play China’s game and by China’s rules and thereby strengthen the security of the motherland for the benefit of all the diverse peoples of the Chinese nation.

For those who wish to read more about Tibet and Dalai Lama, please go to the following links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibet

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalai_lama

SCdad07
March 3, 2012 at 09:10

@canadian_observer -

I am not the only one who explodes at your delineating WMD (Words of Mass Deception).

Let the ‘Living God’ Dalai Lama explain to the world why Dr. M. Parenti’s description of ‘Friendly Feudalism’ was false.

The feudalism system, using “living god” Lama ism of such to besiege ‘beyond enslavement’ for centuries to Tibet commoners, could be called into United Nation crime against humanity today.

Robin Hood was against….

SCdad07
March 3, 2012 at 07:52

Does feudalism (serfs) mean anything to you as a human?

Look around the world where hot spots are burning? Is religion coming to rescue or it is the cause of chaos (where people have to kill the other)?

SCdad07
March 3, 2012 at 07:45

I hope Frank Chin would write on:

“China misguided policy: How winning mind and souls through education and economic advancement fails in Tibet.”

“Feudalism in Tibet is superior to Slavery (Slave Owner has responsibility to feed the slaves) and D.Lama reins supreme.”

“Vatican on Fallujah: meeting the fate of ‘Sodom and Gomorrah’.”

SCdad07
March 3, 2012 at 06:19

Who ever could put his man into the highest place would gain the most – an eternal ‘Truth’ for humanity?

Whether it is a low local official post, the president of the only super power in the world, or, religious leader (living god), same shit – possess the power to conduct and influence.

Latest news quote: “The Tibetan spiritual leader said in a statement that when he is “about 90″ he will consult Buddhist scholars to evaluate whether the institution of the Dalai Lama should continue at all. He is 76.”

Why consult if you alone know where you are going next?

SCdad07
March 3, 2012 at 05:33

During the medieval period, ‘whatever yours are mine and mine is mine’ carried out by the ‘warlords/kings’ with ‘his holiness blessings’.

Did they setup any “no torture zone’ beyond EEZ? Inquisition by French king made famous of today’s ‘Black Friday’!

For decades, the Africans brought into western world under chains as slaves were not considered ‘human’ by Vatican, and, therefore, their masters did not commit any injustice.

SCdad07
March 3, 2012 at 05:15

Tibet culture is quite alive. China always treasures the culture of her many minorities.

Tibet population was estimated to be 2.62 million (the 2000 population census) from UNESCAP.org. That is a healthy growth from 1959 of 1.25 million.

There is no one-child policy in Tibet.

MatthewTan
March 3, 2012 at 02:24

(continued) The Chinese Government simply followed the historical practice – the TRADITION for past 200 years – which requires the use of Divine Lottery in a religious ritual before the statue of a Buddha, unless exemption is granted by the Central Government. The reincarnated Panchen Lama, one among many, was picked by the Buddha during the religious ritual. Not by the Chinese Government. The Government simply made sure that the proper religious procedures were adhered to.

As Catholics will tell you, God chooses the Pope, not men. Not the Cardinals, many of whom may be corrupt or immoral. And the methods of choosing really do not matter at all, if God makes the decision.

Why does it matter what method is used, if Buddha makes the decision? Unless the Buddha is false – in that case, any BUDDHIST theology is false.

MatthewTan
March 3, 2012 at 02:08

Frank Ching: Are you PRETENDING NOT TO KNOW that the Dalai Lama and Panchen Lama are more than religious institutions ? They are also POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS. The Dalai Lama was the vice-Chairman of the National People’s Congress and Head of (local) Government before 1959.
The reincarnations of lamas have always been fraught with controversies throughout the history of Tibetan Lamaism. That’s why the Manchu Emperor decided to use the Divine Lottery method to determine the reincarnations.
By the way, you are right that Manchu commoners in general were believers. But NOT SO for the Manchu Emperor who issued the edict on the Divine Lottery. And all the Manchu emperors and Manchu and Chinese high officers thereafter simply followed the Emperor’s edict. All the Tibetan lamas use the Lottery System (unless exempted by the imperial authority). NO DEBATE.
Why did the Emperor want to use the Divine Lottery? Because he no longer trust the determinations made by the high lamas.
There are three Kharmapa Lamas today. No fault of the Chinese government, since the one recognized by the Chinese government was also recognized by the Dalai Lama.
There were also two candidates for the Panchen Lama in July 1949. One was recognized by Chiang Kai-Shek government, another by the Lhasa religious regime. Chiang Kai Shek was a baptized Christian. He enthroned the Panchen Lama in spite of the objections of the Lhasa religious regime, and asked him to follow him to Taiwan which he refused to.
Of course, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama later accepted the Panchen Lama recognized by Chiang Kai Shek after the Communists took over. Why? Because there was NO THEOLOGY IN IT. No theological arguments have ever been presented the Dalai Lama, the Lhasa regime, or Chiang Kai Shek.
Determination of reincarnation of Lamas is a TRADITION unique to Tibetan practice. There was NO THEOLOGY. Otherwise why did the Emperor use the Divine Lottery WITHOUT invoking any theology? Instead, the Emperor pointed to corruptions and collusions by high lamas which compelled him to use the Divine Lottery.
The Manchu Emperor was also a REINCARNATION of Living Buddha, according to Tibetan and Manchu belief system. And when he said use the Lottery System (unless exempted by the imperial authority) – NO DEBATE.
The Chinese Government simply was following the Emperor’s edict – the Imperial Tradition for the past 200 years. The Chinese government throughout history has been approving and confirming the determination of reincarnations.
So, please…
DON’T BLUFF AND PRETEND TO TALK THEOLOGY. WE ALL KNOW IT IS POLITICS.

a_canadian_observer
March 3, 2012 at 02:06

@petter: Good catch. However, please note the follwoing:
1. “…don’t like communist”: china is anything but communist at the moment. I’m not sure what it really is.
2. Saying “they hate the policy that condemn their respected Dalai Lama” is totally different from saying “I want indepencence”. Can you not tell the difference? Do you know that a suppressive regime knows how to allow certain issues to be vented, to avoid an “explosion”?

Sitting Bull
March 2, 2012 at 20:41

Ask the American natives (leftover) and Australian Aborigines what is physical and cultural genocide as there is not many left.

After eliminating the natives the hypocrites European invaders who claaed themselves Canadians and Americans now talk about human rights.What bulshit is this?

Have u seen the flim”Last of the Mohicans”

Sit back, watch, and laugh out loud
March 2, 2012 at 19:33

@a_Canadian_observer aka a_Vietnamese_who Hates all things Chinese no matter what

I have never seen you being able to articulate anything meaningful, sensible of YOUR OWN. All you have been doing has been asking senseless questions, or quoting things MINDLESSLY from ‘you know what’ on the Internet. Remember, the Internet is fools’ paradise and wise people’s delight at the same time. I’m not a wise person, so I avoid the Internet like a disease.

Liang1a
March 2, 2012 at 16:21

petterf wrote:

March 2, 2012 at 11:04 am

YEAH. Lets ban the man that wants to ban religion.
Then later, we can ban you!

What is the point of it all? He is entitled to his views, and you are to yours, of course. But your ideas are you just as bad as the original comment’s ideas.
—————————————–
Liang’s comment:
Actually, in the process of eradicating rreligions it is not necessary to ban them. It is only necessary to require those who claim there are supernatural things to prove their claims. For instance, if a religous person say God crated the world then he is required to show evidence that the world was indeed created as he claims. If he cannot produce any scientific proofs then he must either stop making those baseless clams or be jailed for fraud or false advertising. Those who teach creation of the world by God should be arrested for misleading the youing people. Also those who sell religious charms or talismans must be required to prove that they are effective. Otherwise, the victims can be allowed to bring suits against those who sell those charms and talismans. And those who tell fortunes for a price should be jailed and pay compensations to their victims if their predictions did not come true. If the Chinese government enforces these laws against fraud and false advertising then religions will very quickly be eradicated from China. And China would be much better off for getting rid of these lies and deceits. In the end, China can only become a moral and ethical nation if the Chinese people are enlightened by the truth which can only be found in the real nature of the universe and the biological nature of the humans. Human nature has already evolved many good humane qualities such as compassion, loyalty, trustworthiness, etc. which if properly nurtured in the people will ultimately cultivate a harmonious and orderly and caring nation. But religions are like poisons that turn people away from the truth and fill them up with irrational hatred and bigotry and make them fight over unimportant things and make them hate irrational things and waste their time over irrational customs. Imagine how the world could be better if they are not required to rest on Sundays or refrain from eating pork or whatever.

John Chan
March 2, 2012 at 13:28

@Tom Chambers,
Bad mouthing without making any contribution is worse than ‘disappointing low level comments.’ Indeed ‘Shame, please think before you start writing you comments.’

Share your thoughts

Your Name
required
Your Email
required, but not published
Your Comment
required

Newsletter
Sign up for our weekly newsletter
The Diplomat Brief