The Dalai Lama

Cory

I am doing my junior report on the Dalai Lama. The topic cannot be so generalized, so I made it: His Holiness the Dalai Lama and His Influence On the Spiritual Society. I know quite a bit about this topic, but I would like some more information so I can have a sound basis for my essay.

Gui

The information you seek is at your fingertips.

taiyaki

He talks a lot about respecting other religions.

Also he speaks a lot about science and the importance of cultivating a dialogue of ethics that move beyond religion.

Stuff like that.

Nirvana

Cory, If I were writing a paper on the Dalai Lama's influence on spiritual society myself, I'd focus on the Dalai Lama's growth and development as a loving, inclusivistic human being —highlighting areas where he's opened up over the last decade or so.

I think that there's a lot of material out there on such things in the Dalai Lama's life. I also think that the subject of his own spiritual growth would make the jacket of a very good sorting bin of any data you would want to present.

In my own experience, my spiritual teacher continued to grow from a more narrow person into a more widely compassionate and accepting person as he grew older.

sharonsaw

I would highlight His Holiness' respect for other religions:

His Holiness attending Mass in Vienna
http://blog.tsemtulku.com/tsem-tulku-rinpoche/great-lamas-masters/dalai-lama-attending-mass-in-vienna.html

His Holiness and the Cardinal
http://blog.tsemtulku.com/tsem-tulku-rinpoche/great-lamas-masters/his-holiness-the-cardinal.html

If you want something more mystical, try this.. see what His Holiness the Dalai Lama says about oracles!
http://blog.tsemtulku.com/tsem-tulku-rinpoche/uncategorized/fantastic-oracle-film.html

Good luck!

Cinorjer

You might discuss how, although the Dalai Lama is only the head monk of one sect of one small isolated nation's Buddhist tradition, he has become the voice and image of Buddhism around the world for most non-Buddhists. As such, his openness and humor and good will have impressed world leaders and people of other religions.

Cory

Thanks for the help guys, I have Wisdom of Forgiveness and I am using that as one of my sources.

karasti

I think the HHDL has had a big influence on the spread of Buddhism in the west. His book writing and his fairly frequent visits have put Buddhism in the spotlight in a way it wouldn't have been otherwise, and when people get curious, they start seeking information. When I think about his spiritual influence, that is what comes to mind first for me. He doesn't just lead and influence his own. He has influenced a world.

MaryAnne

came across this today:

Jeffrey

He says that secularism or any religion can be compatible with kindness.

Dakini

Cory said:

I am doing my junior report on the Dalai Lama. The topic cannot be so generalized, so I made it: His Holiness the Dalai Lama and His Influence On the Spiritual Society.

He says Buddhism is a "religion of kindness". That could apply to other religions, couldn't it? The idea of Christian charity, and so forth. A Spriritual Society is a society of kindness and the Golden Rule.

Search the Dalai Lama on Amazon.com to see if there are other books relevant to your topic, then look them up at your library or bookstore.

You might want to explore the DL's close friendship with Bishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa, too.

Astonishingly, the DL has said many times that Communism is well-suited to Buddhism (he was referring to the Soviet Union, not so much China), because it's atheist, and Buddhism is non-theistic. Buddhist principles of mindfulness, kindness, non-attachment to material things, and the precepts as a basic behavioral guide, could easily be applied to an atheist society. He continues to be fascinated by communism, and believes it's the ideal system for human society, being based on collective ownership and action. He has a utopian view of it.

How long does this report have to be?

Cory

I haven't gotten to that point yet, but I intend on writing two to three pages front and back. I have a book right now that discusses his impact on the spiritual society a lot. Most of the content is conversations with the Dalai Lama. It is called Wisdom of Forgiveness. There are two more books at my school library about the Dalai Lama and I intend on reading those too. I will have plenty of information, but I am in search for ideas such as the ones here.

Dakini said:

Astonishingly, the DL has said many times that Communism is well-suited to Buddhism (he was referring to the Soviet Union, not so much China), because it's atheist, and Buddhism is non-theistic. Buddhist principles of mindfulness, kindness, non-attachment to material things, and the precepts as a basic behavioral guide, could easily be applied to an atheist society. He continues to be fascinated by communism, and believes it's the ideal system for human society, being based on collective ownership and action. He has a utopian view of it.

BhikkhuJayasara

Dakini said:

Astonishingly, the DL has said many times that Communism is well-suited to Buddhism (he was referring to the Soviet Union, not so much China), because it's atheist, and Buddhism is non-theistic. Buddhist principles of mindfulness, kindness, non-attachment to material things, and the precepts as a basic behavioral guide, could easily be applied to an atheist society. He continues to be fascinated by communism, and believes it's the ideal system for human society, being based on collective ownership and action. He has a utopian view of it.

very scary, illogical, and definitely utopian to say the least.

Cinorjer said:

You might discuss how, although the Dalai Lama is only the head monk of one sect of one small isolated nation's Buddhist tradition, he has become the voice and image of Buddhism around the world for most non-Buddhists. As such, his openness and humor and good will have impressed world leaders and people of other religions.

like most westerners as a child my first experience with Buddhism was the DL, I still have some of his books on my shelf and I think for the most part when he sticks to dhamma he has some decent things to say.... when he goes beyond that though....

I have said it before, in many ways if China did not invade Tibet.. I may not be a buddhist, or at least I would not of been exposed to Buddhism at a younger age.

I admit to having a bit of a complex with the concept of the DL representing me as a Buddhist.. and I do go out of my way to educate people about the reality of the situation.. that is more my own hang up then anything else though. the DL certainly does not represent me as a buddhist. I think my issue is more with the politics, obsession with a piece of land, and how people elevate him then the actual man himself.


It may not be a bad idea with your topic of " his influence on the spiritual society" to include different sides of that.

regardless, Cory, good luck with your report and it's good to see someone doing a little promoting of Buddhism among the young generations.

MaryAnne

Copied from above:
"He continues to be fascinated by communism, and believes it's the ideal system for human society, being based on collective ownership and action. He has a utopian view of it. "

Americans also have a very 'utopian view' regarding democracy and capitalism. And at the same time are absolutely conditioned (some might say 'brainwashed') for many generations to vilify and revile any other form of government; i.e; Socialism or Communism.

Reality is, there is no one single, simple form of government that works 100% for 100% of its people/country. Not one.
Neither is any form of government free from the corruption and influences of power and money - on any or all levels ... America included. I believe the DL is educated, experienced, and realistic enough to know that.

While he may lean towards the IDEA of a more "communistic" (or more likely - Socialistic?) world view of governing, I really doubt he actually 'obsesses' over communism or holds an utopian view of it. But even if he does, I'm sure he's got his reasons for believing so....

Cory

@jayantha Writing about the Dalai Lama was the first thing that came to mind when I heard I had to write a report. Any opportunity I get to write about buddhism I do. World history last year, English this year, and even US History as well. Buddhism is one thing that I can always write about and never get bored. Thank you for posting, you always have the best things to say, at least from what I have observed my short time on this site.

Cory

@maryanne I agree, and doubt that he would be communist, especially since his home land was taken by Communist China durring the Cold War.

BhikkhuJayasara

Cory said:

@jayantha Writing about the Dalai Lama was the first thing that came to mind when I heard I had to write a report. Any opportunity I get to write about buddhism I do. World history last year, English this year, and even US History as well. Buddhism is one thing that I can always write about and never get bored. Thank you for posting, you always have the best things to say, at least from what I have observed my short time on this site.

awesome keep up the good work!

Jason

Jayantha said:

Dakini said:

Astonishingly, the DL has said many times that Communism is well-suited to Buddhism (he was referring to the Soviet Union, not so much China), because it's atheist, and Buddhism is non-theistic. Buddhist principles of mindfulness, kindness, non-attachment to material things, and the precepts as a basic behavioral guide, could easily be applied to an atheist society. He continues to be fascinated by communism, and believes it's the ideal system for human society, being based on collective ownership and action. He has a utopian view of it.

very scary, illogical, and definitely utopian to say the least.

A very reactionary thing to say, in my opinion, particularly when the Dalai Lama's position is being somewhat mischaracterized here. For one thing, the Dalai Lama's not an uncritical fan of communism (and here I'm talking about the totalitarian political systems that developed in places like Russia, China, and Vietnam), and he most certainly doesn't consider the Soviet Union to be an example of the type of Marxism or Marxist regime he supports. As he once famously said:

Of all the modern economic theories, the economic system of Marxism is founded on moral principles, while capitalism is concerned only with gain and profitability. Marxism is concerned with the distribution of wealth on an equal basis and the equitable utilization of the means of production. It is also concerned with the fate of the working classes--that is, the majority--as well as with the fate of those who are underprivileged and in need, and Marxism cares about the victims of minority-imposed exploitation. For those reasons the system appeals to me, and it seems fair. I just recently read an article in a paper where His Holiness the Pope also pointed out some positive aspects of Marxism.

As for the failure of the Marxist regimes, first of all I do not consider the former USSR, or China, or even Vietnam, to have been true Marxist regimes, for they were far more concerned with their narrow national interests than with the Workers' International; this is why there were conflicts, for example, between China and the USSR, or between China and Vietnam. If those three regimes had truly been based upon Marxist principles, those conflicts would never have occurred.

I think the major flaw of the Marxist regimes is that they have placed too much emphasis on the need to destroy the ruling class, on class struggle, and this causes them to encourage hatred and to neglect compassion. Although their initial aim might have been to serve the cause of the majority, when they try to implement it all their energy is deflected into destructive activities. Once the revolution is over and the ruling class is destroyed, there is [not] much left to offer the people; at this point the entire country is impoverished and unfortunately it is almost as if the initial aim were to become poor. I think that this is due to the lack of human solidarity and compassion. The principal disadvantage of such a regime is the insistence placed on hatred to the detriment of compassion.

The failure of the regime in the former Soviet Union was, for me, not the failure of Marxism but the failure of totalitarianism. For this reason I still think of myself as half-Marxist, half-Buddhist.

Marxism itself is ultimately a method of analysis and presentation (i.e., historical materialist and logically dialectical). Furthermore, Marxism and totalitarianism aren't synonymous simply because totalitarian regimes utilize Marxist methods and terminology, and the Dalai Lama seems to understand this. But whatever one's views about Marxism may be, I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that the Dalai Lama's words on the subject are scary or illogical (I'd concede they're arguably utopian, though).

Personally, I find it remarkable that the Dalai Lama can say such things after what 'communist' China has done to his country. And just for reference, Buddhadasa Bhikkhu had somewhat similar ideas, so don't just pick on the Dalai Lama.

karasti

If you take communism (or any other such theories) for what it is, it is interesting to read about. The version that Russia and China and Cuba and other have instituted is a rather bastardized version based on their own perception and shouldn't be used to base your opinions on communism as a theory. When westerners think "Communism" what they think is usually pretty far off base compared to what it actually is defined as, because of how Russia/China/Cuba have gone about things. The authoritarian governments that are set up in those countries, where so many of the best food, medicine, resources go to the government and not the people is NOT what communism was theorized to be.

Now, I'm not saying it's the way to go. Just that what we think, and what it truly is by definition are generally quite far off.

Cory

@Karasti Very true, just today I had to do an essay about the cold war in my History class.

BhikkhuJayasara

Jason said:

Jayantha said:

Dakini said:

Astonishingly, the DL has said many times that Communism is well-suited to Buddhism (he was referring to the Soviet Union, not so much China), because it's atheist, and Buddhism is non-theistic. Buddhist principles of mindfulness, kindness, non-attachment to material things, and the precepts as a basic behavioral guide, could easily be applied to an atheist society. He continues to be fascinated by communism, and believes it's the ideal system for human society, being based on collective ownership and action. He has a utopian view of it.

very scary, illogical, and definitely utopian to say the least.

A very reactionary thing to say, in my opinion, particularly when the Dalai Lama's position is being somewhat mischaracterized here. For one thing, the Dalai Lama's not an uncritical fan of communism (and here I'm talking about the totalitarian political systems that developed in places like Russia, China, and Vietnam), and he most certainly doesn't consider the Soviet Union to be an example of the type of Marxism or Marxist regime he supports. As he once famously said:

Of all the modern economic theories, the economic system of Marxism is founded on moral principles, while capitalism is concerned only with gain and profitability. Marxism is concerned with the distribution of wealth on an equal basis and the equitable utilization of the means of production. It is also concerned with the fate of the working classes--that is, the majority--as well as with the fate of those who are underprivileged and in need, and Marxism cares about the victims of minority-imposed exploitation. For those reasons the system appeals to me, and it seems fair. I just recently read an article in a paper where His Holiness the Pope also pointed out some positive aspects of Marxism.

As for the failure of the Marxist regimes, first of all I do not consider the former USSR, or China, or even Vietnam, to have been true Marxist regimes, for they were far more concerned with their narrow national interests than with the Workers' International; this is why there were conflicts, for example, between China and the USSR, or between China and Vietnam. If those three regimes had truly been based upon Marxist principles, those conflicts would never have occurred.

I think the major flaw of the Marxist regimes is that they have placed too much emphasis on the need to destroy the ruling class, on class struggle, and this causes them to encourage hatred and to neglect compassion. Although their initial aim might have been to serve the cause of the majority, when they try to implement it all their energy is deflected into destructive activities. Once the revolution is over and the ruling class is destroyed, there is [not] much left to offer the people; at this point the entire country is impoverished and unfortunately it is almost as if the initial aim were to become poor. I think that this is due to the lack of human solidarity and compassion. The principal disadvantage of such a regime is the insistence placed on hatred to the detriment of compassion.

The failure of the regime in the former Soviet Union was, for me, not the failure of Marxism but the failure of totalitarianism. For this reason I still think of myself as half-Marxist, half-Buddhist.

Marxism itself is ultimately a method of analysis and presentation (i.e., historical materialist and logically dialectical). Furthermore, Marxism and totalitarianism aren't synonymous simply because totalitarian regimes utilize Marxist methods and terminology, and the Dalai Lama seems to understand this. But whatever one's views about Marxism may be, I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that the Dalai Lama's words on the subject are scary or illogical (I'd concede they're arguably utopian, though).

Personally, I find it remarkable that the Dalai Lama can say such things after what 'communist' China has done to his country. And just for reference, Buddhadasa Bhikkhu had somewhat similar ideas, so don't just pick on the Dalai Lama.

karasti said:

If you take communism (or any other such theories) for what it is, it is interesting to read about. The version that Russia and China and Cuba and other have instituted is a rather bastardized version based on their own perception and shouldn't be used to base your opinions on communism as a theory. When westerners think "Communism" what they think is usually pretty far off base compared to what it actually is defined as, because of how Russia/China/Cuba have gone about things. The authoritarian governments that are set up in those countries, where so many of the best food, medicine, resources go to the government and not the people is NOT what communism was theorized to be.

Now, I'm not saying it's the way to go. Just that what we think, and what it truly is by definition are generally quite far off.

the same can be said for capitalism,as there is no true capitalist society on the planet today, only bastardized versions. all of the "ideals" that people think up with regards to politics and economics rarely work as intended in the real world, that is to be expected.

I continue to disagree with his position,especially his lack of knowledge on capitalism, but the poor guy in a monk though he shouldn't be worrying about any politics, so I wont hold it against him.

Either way thank you @jason for your clarifications on the DL's words. I don't want to derail Cory's thread into politics so we can end here I think.

Jason

Jayantha said:

I continue to disagree with his position,especially his lack of knowledge on capitalism, but the poor guy in a monk though he shouldn't be worrying about any politics, so I wont hold it against him.

Either way thank you @jason for your clarifications on the DL's words. I don't want to derail Cory's thread into politics so we can end here I think.

I'd be glad to end it here, although I'd just like to point out that the Dalai Lama was also the head of state for the Tibetan government-in-exile until he retired from that position in 2011, so he's probably not as ill-informed about political matters as you may think (and he had good reason to worry about them at the time).

BhikkhuJayasara

Jason said:

Jayantha said:

I continue to disagree with his position,especially his lack of knowledge on capitalism, but the poor guy in a monk though he shouldn't be worrying about any politics, so I wont hold it against him.

Either way thank you @jason for your clarifications on the DL's words. I don't want to derail Cory's thread into politics so we can end here I think.

I'd be glad to end it here, although I'd just like to point out that the Dalai Lama was also the head of state for the Tibetan government-in-exile until he retired from that position in 2011, so he's probably not as ill-informed about political matters as you may think (and he had good reason to worry about them at the time).

point taken... now back to school reports!

Dakini

Cory said:

@maryanne I agree, and doubt that he would be communist, especially since his home land was taken by Communist China durring the Cold War.

Communism sounds great on paper, it just hasn't worked out too well in practice. The DL has read plenty of theory, and that's what's attractive to him. I think maybe he finds it a bit more "altruistic" then capitalist theory. Lenin, after all, had a very enlightened nationalities policy. I wonder if the DL came across that in his reading.

Cory

Now, back to the report :coffee:

Sile

Just a wee point of clarification that the Dalai Lama is not the head of the Gelug sect - that's the Ganden Tripa, which I believe currently is Thubten Nyima Lungtok Tenzin Norbu.

Simonthepilgrim

@Cory To me, HHDL is a striking example of a new style of spirituality where beliefs (i.e. personal constructs) matter less than a spiritual life and practice. On a couple of occasions, one of which was to me personally in 2001, he has said to practising Christians (the other is recorded in Brother Steindl-Rast's wonderful book Deeper Than Words), "Lord Buddha is my door; Lord Jesus is your door". Spend some time with these simple words and you realise that they contain a whole programme for spiritual renewal far removed from sectarianism.

It has been my experience, meeting a number of Geshes that they are open to the idea that the bodies of belief, including the Buddhisms, are no more than 'doors'. Those of us who hold this view should take great care to avoid being drawn into any discussion on what is behind the door!

Nirvana

Simonthepilgrim said:

The bodies of belief, including the [schools of] Buddhism, are no more than "doors". Those of us who hold this view should take great care to avoid being drawn into any discussion on what is behind the door!

Pilgrim, could you expound on this? I cannot quite follow your meaning. ( @Simonthepilgrim )

robot

In Simon's absence I would like to take stab at it if you don't mind. See how close I get.
A body of belief, or belief in the teachings of your religion of choice, is a door to insight, realization.
If one feels compelled to discuss his realization, he must use the language of his beliefs. Buddha nature, oneness with God/Allah, cosmic consciousness, and such.
In such a conversation, the risk of causing friction, offence or confusion outweighs any benefit of going beyond a simple acceptance of common experience of spiritual realization and human kinship.
Even if you are in conversation with someone of your own religion, the risk of misunderstanding is there.

Nirvana

@robot, I thank you for your input. I believe you helped me digest the essence of what our esteemed Pilgrim said.
Thank you. In addition to this, though, perhaps we should all bear in mind also that:
Those who know don't say
And those who say don't know.

I mean, sometimes we go in that deep --way below our true depth. But @Simonthepilgrim, I think you and your wisdom is being too much shelved away these days. A lamp should not under a bushel barrel be placed.

The Doors! The Doors! (From the Divine Liturgy of the Orthodox Church)