Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
No More HHDL Reincarnation?
MindGate
United States Veteran
I do not know how many of you believe in reincarnation. For me, I personally do not believe in it, but I believe it could be possible. I'm not sure how it would happen or anything, but thats not the point of this thread.
HHDL said recently that he may just appoint the next Dalai Lama instead of going through the reincarnation process of choosing the next Dalai Lama. Or, the next Dalai Lama may be a female.
How do you feel about this? Comments?
0
Comments
Progress.
Personally I am not a fan of Tibetan Buddhism or the Dalai Lama, but good on him, I suppose.
I enjoy books written by the Dalai Lama, but not Tibetan Buddhism in general. Too much dogma.
Hmm... maybe he feels that the time spent searching for the next incarnation and the time where the incarnation is young it would be just a distraction, that he thinks that it would be wasted energy and time, because he probably knows people he thinks would do a good job themselves. I am talking about the political position.
I wonder if he is talking about a state leader and a spiritual leader as well. I would think that his role as spiritual leader would require finding the reincarnation and appointing him ?
Interesting.
Hope it all goes well.
Im pretty sure there will be more, but most likely the chinese will pick them.
Whether Tibet needs another Dalai Lama or not - and he is 'reborn' for them - I have no doubt that Avalokiteshvara/Chenrezig continues to manifest in the world while beings suffer.
I know it's not the same the as the proposed HHDL plan but it does point to the fact that wavering from traditions can likely lessen people's confidence.
"Tibetans Reject China's Panchen Lama"
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5343165
BTW, I can't believe I forgot..., er..., I mean..., 'misplaced' the details.
If the Catholics chose their Bishops and Popes this way, you'd be screaming about the injustice to the children. Buddhism cannot operate by different rules, just because it's the religion we follow. This HHDL escaped from the cocoon of the insulated temple when he had to escape the Chinese. Perhaps he's learned something the others didn't have a chance to.
I'm with Johnathan here. HHDL maybe feels like he'll be enlightened. Or he just sees it now is more important to get a new DL instead of his rebirth. So then there will be two, haha.
Personally whatever is the reason, if this will happen I'd be very glad and I think it is a very good thing to do.
Sabre :vimp:
He has variously speculated a) that he would be reborn in the West, b) possibly in the East, but in female form c) not reborn at all, no more DL's. Only time will tell.
Of course the Chinese will try to manipulate the system (the real Panchen Lama is still alive and well, BTW, but sequestered by the Chinese) and appoint their own DL. but the Tibetan people will be wise to that ruse, so the Chinese would be wasting their time. And the Tibetans have already out-manouvered the Chinese; the Karmapa was appointed by the Chinese but approved by HHDL, and clearly the plan on the Tibetan side is for the Karmapa to approve the next selection of the DL. The Chinese will have difficulty protesting, since the Karmapa is "their guy".
So, needless to say, it will be interesting.
And parents who either willingly or because of the social pressure don't complain are irrelevant. If anything, knowing your parents willingly sent you away would make it worse! He'll spend his nights blaming himself. If he'd been a better son, his parents would still love him.
Yes, it was abuse. It's a practice that needs to stop. Ask a social worker, ask a child psychologist what this practice means to a child.
The choice to dedicate one's life to saving others is something an adult willingly takes on with full knowledge of the sacrifice involved. To force that upon a child is simply wrong.
This does not even begin to touch on the sexual abuse some of the little boys suffer at the hands of the older monks. see: www.lamashree.org/dalailama_08_childabuse_tibetanbuddhistmonasteries.htm The material in this report was confirmed by a PBS special on Tibetan monasteries in the late 1990's.
Children are raised by a village, not just their parents - child rearing is a far more collective enterprise. And a child who is selected to go to a monastery will be loved and cared for, as much by the monks as his parents. Even in the West we have foster parents, adoption, boarding schools etc. The Dalai Lama has always said he was well-loved - even spoiled. Any sadness in his life is to do with what happened to his country and people, not because he was raised in a monastery.
That said, I do think the Tibetans are well aware that their practices have to change with the modern world, which is likely to be what the Dalai Lama is considering.
FWIW my grandparents in UK were whipped to motivate them to study. It was the norm in many parts of the world, including the US, 80 years ago when HHDL was small.
Wow. Good points. Thank you, Ada_B.
Actually if you read 'The Story of Tibet' Conversations with the Dalai Lama by Thomas Laird, you will see that HHDL missed his mother terribly. He was tested by Ketsang Rinpoche at the age of 2 and taken to Kumbum monastery at the age of 3, kept there for 20 months and taken to Lhasa at the age of 4. He was allowed to see his family for the next 4 years and then was slowly separated from his parents.
(from Chapter 11 of the book)
On the matter of the education of tulkus, we would do well to look first at our own system of boarding schools and military academies before criticising others: pots and kettles, my dears, motes and beams.
It seems you are coming more from a Theravada view of enlightenment. This view of enlightenment does not apply to Mahayanists.
This grabbing a boy and proclaiming him a reincarnated Boddhistava is simply not compatible with Buddhist philosophy nor necessary unless you want a compliant, trained figurehead for a theocracy. Who do you think ran the kingdom while the infant grew to adulthood? That is no longer the case, so most likely HHDL will pick an adult. The way it should be.
Children are children. Let them be what they are.
That's really interesting to learn all the ripple effects about these out dated dark chapters in Buddhism. Yet they didn't happen too long ago. They're out dated rituals just based on dogma and hardcore religion, they do need to be remade for modern society. With this in mind I do hope the dalai lama picks the new successor to be a studying monk who would actually like the role, rather than a young child.
As I said, he was a normal boy forced into a mold for political reasons, as his childhood memories support. Tibetan Buddhism is so interwoven with native Animism, only an accident of geopolitical cold war posturing caused it to become the image of Buddhism to the Western world. What China did to the country was brutal, but this Buddhist theocracy was no paradise. However, the Tibetan Buddhism we see today is not the same thing that ruled the country back then.
"The fifth Dalai Lama is known for unifying the Tibetan heartland under the control of the Gelug school of Tibetan Buddhism, after defeating the rival Kagyu and Jonang sects and the secular ruler, the Tsangpa prince, in a prolonged civil war.
His efforts were successful in part because of aid from Gushi Khan, a powerful Oirat military leader. The Jonang monasteries were either closed or forcibly converted, and that school remained in hiding until the latter part of the 20th century.
With the Gushi Khan as a largely uninvolved overlord, the 5th Dalai Lama and his intimates established a civil administration which is referred to by historians as the Lhasa state. The core leadership of this government was also referred to as the Ganden Podrang by metonymy from the name of the Dalai Lama's residence at Drepung, much as the president of the United States and his closest advisors can be referred to as "the White House".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Tibet
Buddhism has now been forced to adapt to the Western culture, which Lama Chime doesn't see as anything more than what has happened historically anyway. Buddhism moved from India to China (and then back again), to Tibet, to Japan, to Thailand and in each culture, was reinterpreted.
Lama Chime is Tibetan, chosen via the cultural traditions of old Tibetan Buddhism, but I haven't heard him say anything to suggest he wants a continuation of these practices. Things move on. The leaders in the West are often married, with children, and don't live as monks. Most of our teachers are lay teachers, holding down other jobs and teaching in the evenings and weekends, unless they are retired (as my lay meditation teacher is), in which case they devote themselves to teaching and to their practice.
I know to some, this is seen as "Buddhism-Lite" and dilution of the pure Dharma. However, others simply see this as a sign that Buddhism is once again adapting to a different culture.
There are many beautiful things about Tibetan practice (my tradition is Karma Kagyu). I find the mantras, the singing and the symbolism very wonderful and spiritual. Many of the lamas are people I respect immensely, and live admirable lives, the Dalai Lama included. Many of our teachers are superb: wise, good humoured and kind. But ethnically, I'm British, not a Tibetan and I feel absolutely no need to adopt everything about Tibetan culture just to practice Buddhism. So I take what I find helpful, and what I don't find helpful, I ignore.
I am equally happy to adopt Zen or Theravada practices I find helpful, and this is encouraged within my sangha. As Lama Chime says, we are not studying to become Tibetan!
I strongly dislike sectarianism. I believe it is a misunderstanding of the Dharma - there are many vehicles, many rafts with which to cross the river. But ultimately we have to step off the raft anyway, if we are to be enlightened. Why be attached to something that is only temporary and only going to hold you back? One lesson I have learned from the Zen people is the necessity to ultimately drop all concepts.
Before anyone decries another cultures practices as child abuse we should look to our own culture and distinguish between the emotional, physical and educational neglect that constitutes child abuse and the practice of nurturing a tulku from childhood. Rather than proposing reform of a tradition thousands of years old in a culture that is marginally understood it might be better to focus on making a change in one's own country to the appalling statistics of the abomination of true child abuse. It might also be worth considering that there is no outcry in Tibet over these practices. Referencing an institution such as Roman Catholicism as a role model for avoiding child abuse is akin to praising Nazis for choosing the ancient swastika as a symbol based upon its spiritual history. The Roman Catholic church has proven through its administration that child abuse, while abhorred, is condoned, indeed even covered up. Such blatant, repeated, unspeakable abuses far exceed the nurturing, loving life given to tulkus.
Discussion of HHDL's speculation to name a successor rather than rely on the reincarnation process does not preclude his reincarnation. It seems to suggest a disillusionment with the efficacy of the work associated with the post. Perhaps other work is more desirable in his next existence. Conceptualizing such decisions about existence across time in different incarnations is relatively implausible to western thinking steeped in Judeo-Christian morality. Seems the best one can do is consider the possibilities rather than condemn. In closing, no pun intended, a quote from Dean Spanley in the movie of the same title (made from the novel written by Lord Dunsany) seems apropos;
"Only the closed mind is certain."
He would also have the option of appointing a successor (though that would make it very easy for the Chinese to put up a pretense of being the upholders of the tradition and finding a reincarnation), /and/ reincarnating, just not as a DL. An enlightened being and the embodiment of Chenrezig have many options. No matter what happens, there undoubtedly will be a messy and painful struggle in some form, given the high stakes.
2. Tibetan culture is not mysterious or barely understood or some exception to the rules, and just because something is tradition or widely accepted in the culture does not excuse it from being what it is. People are people, everywhere. If you look at the world with a clear mind, you see all people are the same. They all suffer, have the same desires and fears and hopes. In other words, the Dharma is universal.
3. "the loving life given to tulkus"? There's your problem. As long as you think of a human being as an object, you won't see the humanity. He's not a tulku. He's a little boy. He doesn't get to make the decision to be a Buddhist monk, it's forced upon him and that's wrong.
As long as I look at the child and see a little boy, no better or worse than any other little boy and certainly no different, and you look at the child and see some ancient reincarnated Buddhist monk sitting in the boy's body like a parasite, we won't have a meeting of the minds.
There is no tulku just as there is no little boy - except in the craving mind that suffers with correcting what is perceived as wrong from one painfullly limited perspective. Which is precisely your problem - while we are assigning problems - you have focused - out of very personal experience it seems - on only fear, hope and desire - the basis of all suffering experienced by all sentient beings - as the predominant experiences in a life that is also full of love, attention, education, compassion and reverence. Why, if this practice that offends you so is so wrong is it not railed against by the very institution and its adherents that is based in loving kindness, compassion and wisdom? You have missed the mark broadly with respect to understanding Tibetan culture with openness. However, you have aptly stated your conviction that an identification with an inner wounded child provides truth of existence - in a somewhat distorted reality. Apologies if offense is taken but no apology offered for seeing truth.