Join our Mailing List

"For a happier, more stable and civilized future, each of us must develop a sincere, warm-hearted feeling of brotherhood and sisterhood."

The battle over the new Dalai Lama

December 16, 2007

Claude Arpi
Rediff, December 14, 2007

Imagine a committee of the Left parties headed by veteran Marxist Jyoti
Basu, with CPI-M General Secretary Prakash Karat, CPI-M Politburo member
Sitaram Yechuri, CPI General Secretary A B Bardhan and Buddhadeb
Bhattacharjee (West Bengal's chief minister) as members, along with a
few other 'religious Marxist experts' secretly meeting in Kolkata to
select the reincarnation of the CPI-M leader.

After a couple of days, white smoke may appear above the building where
they are meeting and a Vatican-style announcement made, Habemus Pappam
('We have a new pope' or, in this case, a new general secretary).

You may politely tell me: 'Do not play an April fool joke on me.'

Unfortunately, it is not a joke. It has happened in China. The stage was
set for the tragicomedy when, on July 13, the Communist government in
Beijing [Images] decided to implement the 'Measures on the Management of
the Reincarnation of Living Buddhas in Tibetan Buddhism.'

Soon after it was discovered on the State Administration of Religious
Affairs' Web site, the new policy was denounced as 'ludicrous and
unwarranted' by the Dalai Lama's [Images] government in exile. They
found that 'replete with contradictory statements and wild claims, the
document reflects the ulterior or true motives of the Chinese leadership.'

Obviously the Dalai Lama was targeted; China watchers knew that Beijing
had been 'preparing' for his succession.

Article 2 of 'The Measures' explains their purpose: 'Reincarnating
living Buddhas should respect and protect the principles of the
unification of the State, protecting the unity of the minorities,
protecting religious concord and social harmony, and protecting the
normal order of Tibetan Buddhism. (They)... may not re-establish feudal
privileges which have already been abolished.'

It makes an even more pointed reference at the Nobel Peace Prize
laureate: 'Reincarnating living Buddhas shall not... be under the
dominion of any foreign organisation or individual.'

If he could read some of the 14 articles listed in 'The Measures', poor
Karl Marx would be uncomfortable in his grave. They describe in great
detail how 'reincarnating living Buddhas should carry out application
and approval procedures.' Thirteen hundred years after the introduction
of the Awakened One's doctrine in the Land of Snows, China's Communist
Party has taken over the most sacred religious tradition of Tibet, the
search and recognition of the tulkuS or reincarnations of deceased
realised teachers (lamas in Tibetan).

 From September 1, the party and its 'religious department' will have
the monopoly over the selection: 'No group or individual may without
authorisation carry out any activities related to searching for or
recognising reincarnating living Buddha soul children.'

It practically means that the Communist Party of China forbids the Dalai
Lama and other senior lamas living in exile to perform their
centuries-old religious duties. They are even threatened: 'Persons and
units who are responsible for being in contravention of these measures
and who, without authority, carry out living Buddha reincarnation
affairs, shall be dealt administrative sanction by the people's
government religious affairs departments... when a crime has been
constituted, criminal responsibility shall be pursued.

Soon after the announcement, Lodi Gyari, the Dalai Lama's special envoy
declared: 'These stringent new measures strike at the heart of Tibetan
religious identity. They will only create further resentment among the
Tibetan people and cannot override the Party's lack of legitimacy in the
sphere of religion.'

The Chinese government's announcement strikes primarily at the current
negotiations that Lodi Gyari is holding with China since 2002 (six
rounds have been held so far) and more particularly at the 'genuine
autonomy' envisaged by the Dalai Lama. Can there be any autonomy if even
the innermost traditions are controlled by the party and its leadership?

On November 27, at a gathering of religious leaders in Amritsar
[Images], the Dalai Lama clarified his position: 'The Tibetan nation is
2,000 years old. The Dalai Lama institution is relatively recent -- only
a few centuries old. If I die, it will be a setback for the Tibetan
people for some time. But then, the struggle will continue.' He added:
'If the Tibetan people decide that the Dalai Lama institution is no
longer relevant, then it will automatically cease to exist. If people
feel that the institution of the Dalai Lama is still necessary, it will

He then spoke of a referendum: 'When my physical condition becomes weak,
then serious preparations (for a referendum) should happen.' He further
elaborated: 'The very purpose of reincarnation is to carry out the tasks
of the previous life that are not yet achieved. If I die while we are
still refugees, my reincarnation, logically, will come outside Tibet,
who will carry out the work I started.'

A week earlier, in Japan [Images], he had spoken of the possibility of
naming a new Dalai Lama while he was still alive. Chinese foreign
ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao had immediately rejected the process
which would 'blatantly violate religious rituals and historical
conventions of Tibetan Buddhism.'

The Tibetan leader's recent declaration raises some important questions.
First, in view of the intransigence of the Beijing government, it is
clear that the 'negotiations' will lead nowhere if institutions like
finding reincarnations are controlled by an atheist party in Beijing and
not by knowledgeable Tibetans.

Second, the present approach of the Dalai Lama is a continuation of his
past position; in 1963, he promulgated a charter to launch democracy in
his exiled government. In February 1992, he himself issued The
Guidelines For Future Tibet's Polity And Basic Features Of Its
Constitution in which he made significant suggestions for introducing
the democratic process in Tibet.

Categorically declaring that he will not hold any official position in
the future government, he mentioned a referendum. The Tibetan population
inside Tibet would be consulted and 'if the parliamentary system of
government is adopted, there shall be a president and a vice-president
elected by members of the two national-level houses and regional
assemblies.' The present proposal for his succession is the logical
continuation of these earlier statements.

Historically, the 'rule by incarnation' has not always been prevalent in
Tibet; it was only established during the reign of the fifth Dalai Lama,
Ngawang Lobsang Gyatso (1617-1682). In the 14th and 15th centuries for
example, the hierarchs of the Sakya monastery ruled over the Land of
Snows (as Tibet is also known); their succession was set up by way of
'transmission' from uncle to nephew. Contrary to what the present regime
in Beijing may think, there are no rules fixed for eternity for the
succession of Tibetan teachers.

Some historians (one of them was Michael Aris, the late husband of
Burmese leader Aug San Suu Kyi) believed that, at the beginning of the
17th century, two Dalai Lamas were alive at the same time (the sixth and
the seventh).

There was no fixed place either as to where a Dalai Lama should be
reborn -- the fourth one, Yonten Gyatso was born in Mongolia while the
6th one, Tsangyang Gyatso, took birth in India (in Tawang district of
today's Arunachal Pradesh).

During an interview for India Abroad (the Indian-American weekly owned
by in 2003, my then 13-year old daughter asked the Dalai
Lama a question which was bothering her: "Why can't the Dalai Lama be a
woman?" He answered: "Regency is a disruption. Many unfortunate things
happened during regencies. After the death of the 13th Dalai Lama, I had
two regents. Of course, both of them were my teachers, my gurus. I
respect them and I had full faith in them. However their conduct was not
always up to the mark, sometimes even harmful (to Tibet's interests). My
point is that if, in certain circumstances, a female form is more
useful, then certainly a female form will come."

That is to say, the Tibetan system of governance can evolve with time;
it is not for the Party to decide on a matter in which it is an ignoramus.

The Dalai Lama is also perfectly aware of the weakness of the Tibetan
system of 'rule by incarnation'. During the interregnum between the
death of a Dalai Lama and the attainment of majority by the newly
reincarnated child, there is a political vacuum lasting between 15 and
20 years.

The 19th century saw a succession of five Dalai Lamas. The Chinese,
through their ambans (or ambassadors) in Lhasa, made full use of this
weakness. Many historians surmise that the premature deaths of the
ninth, and up to the 12th Dalai Lamas, were not a mere coincidence. The
Chinese ambans certainly took great advantage of their 'timely departure.'

Today, even if the Dalai Lama holds a referendum to know if the Tibetan
people want the present system to continue, he will still have to decide
upon the best way to 'transmit' his knowledge and experience to 'carry
out the tasks of the previous life.'

One thing is sure, it is not for you or me or the Karats or Hu Jintaos
to decide; it is too profound a tradition to be left in the hands of the
CTC National Office 1425 René-Lévesque Blvd West, 3rd Floor, Montréal, Québec, Canada, H3G 1T7
T: (514) 487-0665
Developed by plank