The Dalai Lama on Reincarnation, Part 4

By The Dalai Lama

Continued from:
The Dalai Lama on Reincarnation, Part 1
The Dalai Lama on Reincarnation, Part 2
The Dalai Lama on Reincarnation, Part 3

Using the Golden Urn 

As the degenerate age gets worse, and as more reincarnations of high Lamas are being recognized, some of them for political motives, increasing numbers have been recognized through inappropriate and questionable means, as a result of which huge damage has been done to the Dharma.

During the conflict between Tibet and the Gurkhas (1791-93) the Tibetan Government had to call on Manchu military support. Consequently the Gurkha military was expelled from Tibet, but afterwards Manchu officials made a 29-point proposal on the pretext of making the Tibetan Government’s administration more efficient. This proposal included the suggestion of picking lots from a Golden Urn to decide on the recognition of the reincarnations of the Dalai Lamas, Panchen Lamas and Hutuktus, a Mongolian title given to high Lamas. Therefore, this procedure was followed in the case of recognizing some reincarnations of the Dalai Lama, Panchen Lama and other high Lamas. The ritual to be followed was written by the Eighth Dalai Lama Jampel Gyatso.  Even after such a system had been introduced, this procedure was dispensed with for the Ninth, Thirteenth and myself, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama.

Even in the case of the Tenth Dalai Lama, the authentic reincarnation had already been found and in reality this procedure was not followed, but in order to humour the Manchus it was merely announced that this procedure had been observed.

The Golden Urn system was actually used only in the cases of the Eleventh and Twelfth Dalai Lamas. However, the Twelfth Dalai Lama had already been recognized before the procedure was employed. Therefore, there has only been one occasion when a Dalai Lama was recognized by using this method. Likewise, among the reincarnations of the Panchen Lama, apart from the Eighth and the Ninth, there have been no instances of this method being employed. This system was imposed by the Manchus, but Tibetans had no faith in it because it lacked any spiritual quality. However, if it were to be used honestly, it seems that we could consider it as similar to the manner of divination employing the dough-ball method (zen tak).

In 1880, during the recognition of the Thirteenth Dalai Lama as the reincarnation of the Twelfth, traces of the Priest-Patron relationship between Tibet and the Manchus still existed. He was recognized as the unmistaken reincarnation by the Eighth Panchen Lama, the predictions of the Nechung and Samye oracles and by observing visions that appeared in Lhamoi Latso, therefore the Golden Urn procedure was not followed. This can be clearly understood from the Thirteenth Dalai Lama’s final testament of the Water-Monkey Year (1933) in which he states:

“As you all know, I was selected not in the customary way of picking lots from the golden urn, but my selection was foretold and divined. In accordance with these divinations and prophecies I was recognized as the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama and enthroned.”

When I was recognized as the Fourteenth incarnation of the Dalai Lama in 1939, the Priest-Patron relationship between Tibet and China had already come to an end. Therefore, there was no question of any need to confirm the reincarnation by employing the Golden Urn. It is well-known that the then Regent of Tibet and the Tibetan National Assembly had followed the procedure for recognizing the Dalai Lama’s reincarnation taking account of the predictions of high Lamas, oracles and the visions seen in Lhamoi Latso; the Chinese had no involvement in it whatever. Nevertheless, some concerned officials of the Guomintang later cunningly spread lies in the newspapers claiming that they had agreed to forego the use of the Golden Urn and that Wu Chung-tsin presided over my enthronement, and so on. This lie  was exposed by Ngabo Ngawang Jigme, the Vice-Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, who the People’s Republic of China considered to be a most progressive person, at the Second Session of the Fifth People’s Congress of the Tibet Autonomous Region (31st July 1989). This is clear, when, at the end of his speech, in which he gave a detailed explanation of events and presented documentary evidence, he demanded: “What need is there for the Communist Party to follow suit and continue the lies of the Guomintang?”

Deceptive strategy and false hopes

In the recent past, there have been cases of irresponsible managers of wealthy Lama-estates who indulged in improper methods to recognize reincarnations, which have undermined the Dharma, the monastic community and our society. Moreover, since the Manchu era Chinese political authorities repeatedly engaged in various deceitful means using Buddhism, Buddhist masters and Tulkus as tools to fulfil their political ends as they involved themselves in Tibetan and Mongolian affairs. Today, the authoritarian rulers of the People’s Republic of China, who as communists reject religion, but still involve themselves in religious affairs, have imposed a so-called re-education campaign and declared the so-called Order No. Five, concerning the control and recognition of reincarnations, which came into force on 1st September 2007. This is outrageous and disgraceful. The enforcement of various inappropriate methods for recognizing reincarnations to eradicate our unique Tibetan cultural traditions is doing damage that will be difficult to repair.

Moreover, they say they are waiting for my death and will recognize a Fifteenth Dalai Lama of their choice. It is clear from their recent rules and regulations and subsequent declarations that they have a detailed strategy to deceive Tibetans, followers of the Tibetan Buddhist tradition and the world community. Therefore, as I have a responsibility to protect the Dharma and sentient beings and counter such detrimental schemes, I make the following declaration.

The next incarnation of the Dalai Lama 

As I mentioned earlier, reincarnation 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. It is a reality that no one else can force the person concerned, or manipulate him or her. It is particularly inappropriate for Chinese communists, who explicitly reject even the idea of past and future lives, let alone the concept of reincarnate Tulkus, to meddle in the system of reincarnation and especially the reincarnations of the Dalai Lamas and Panchen Lamas. Such brazen meddling contradicts their own political ideology and reveals their double standards. Should this situation continue in the future, it will be impossible for Tibetans and those who follow the Tibetan Buddhist tradition to acknowledge or accept it.


When I am about ninety I will consult the high Lamas of the Tibetan Buddhist traditions, the Tibetan public, and other concerned people who follow Tibetan Buddhism, and re-evaluate whether the institution of the Dalai Lama should continue or not. On that basis we will take a decision. If it is decided that the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama should continue and there is a need for the Fifteenth Dalai Lama to be recognized, responsibility for doing so will primarily rest on the concerned officers of the Dalai Lama’s Gaden Phodrang Trust. They should consult the various heads of the Tibetan Buddhist traditions and the reliable oath-bound Dharma Protectors who are linked inseparably to the lineage of the Dalai Lamas. They should seek advice and direction from these concerned beings and carry out the procedures of search and recognition in accordance with past tradition. I shall leave clear written instructions about this. Bear in mind that, apart from the reincarnation recognized through such legitimate methods, no recognition or acceptance should be given to a candidate chosen for political ends by anyone, including those in the People’s Republic of China.

Speech of His Holiness the Dalai Lama to the European Parliament

By the Dalai Lama

Madame Speaker, Honourable Members of the Parliament, ladies and gentlemen. It is a great honour for me to address the European Parliament. I believe the European Union is an inspiring example for a cooperative and peaceful co-existence among different nations and peoples and deeply inspiring for people like myself who strongly believe in the need for better understanding, closer cooperation, and greater respect among the various nations of the world. I thank you for this kind invitation.

I consider it as an encouraging gesture of genuine sympathy and concern for the tragic fate of the Tibetan people. I speak to you today as a simple Buddhist monk, educated and trained in our ancient traditional way. I am not an expert in political science. However, my life-long study and practice of Buddhism and my responsibility and involvement in the non-violent freedom struggle of the Tibetan people have given me some experiences and thoughts that I would like to share with you.

It is evident that the human community has reached a critical juncture in its history. Today’s world requires us to accept the oneness of humanity. In the past, communities could afford to think of one another as fundamentally separate.

But today, as we learn from the recent tragic events in the United States, whatever happens in one region eventually affects many other areas. The world is becoming increasingly interdependent. Within the context of this new interdependence, self-interest clearly lies in considering the interest of others. Without the cultivation and promotion of a sense of universal responsibility our very future is in danger.

I strongly believe that we must consciously develop a greater sense of universal responsibility. We must learn to work not just for our own individual self, family or nation, but for the benefit of all mankind. Universal responsibility is the best foundation both for our personal happiness and for world peace, the equitable use of our natural resources, and, through a concern for future generations, the proper care for the environment.

Many of the world's problems and conflicts arise because we have lost sight of the basic humanity that binds us all together as a human family. We tend to forget that despite the diversity of race, religion, culture, language, ideology and so forth, people are equal in their basic desire for peace and happiness: we all want happiness and do not want suffering. We strive to fulfill these desires as best we can. However, as much as we praise diversity in theory, unfortunately often we fail to respect it in practice. In fact, our inability to embrace diversity becomes a major source of conflict among peoples.

A particularly sad fact of human history is that conflicts have arisen in the name of religion. Even today, individuals are killed, their communities destroyed and societies destabilized as a result of misuse of religion and encouragement of bigotry and hatred. According to my personal experience the best way to overcome obstructions to inter-religious harmony and to bring about understanding is through dialogue with members of other faith traditions. This I see occurring in a number of different ways. In my own case, for example, my meetings with the late Thomas Merton, a Trappist monk, in the late 60s, were deeply inspiring. They helped me develop a profound admiration for the teachings of Christianity. I also feel that meetings amongst different religious leaders and joining together to pray from a common platform are extremely powerful, as was the case in 1986 during the gathering at Assisi in Italy. The recent United Nations Millennium World Peace Summit of Religious and Spiritual Leaders held last year was also a laudable step. However, there is a need for more of these inititiatives on a regular basis. On my part, to show my respect for other religious traditions I went on pilgrimage to Jerusalem - a site holy to three of the world’s great religions. I have paid visits to various Hindu, Islamic, Christian, Jain and Sikh shrines both in India and abroad. During the past three decades I have met with many religious leaders of different traditions and have discussed harmony and inter-religious understanding. When exchanges like these occur, followers of one tradition will find that, just as in the case of their own, the teachings of other faiths are a source of both spiritual inspiration and as well as ethical guidance to their followers. It will also become clear that irrespective of doctrinal and other differences, all the major world religions help to transform individuals to become good human beings. All emphasize love, compassion, patience, tolerance, forgiveness, humility, self-discipline and so on. We must therefore embrace the concept of plurality in the field of religion, too.

In the context of our newly emerging global community all forms of violence, including war, are totally inappropriate means of settling disputes. Violence and war have always been part of human history, and in ancient times there were winners and losers. However, there would be no winners at all if another global conflict were to occur today. We must, therefore, have the courage and vision to call for a world without nuclear weapons and national armies in the long run. Especially, in the light of the terrible attacks in the United States the international community must make a sincere attempt to use the horrible and shocking experience to develop a sense of global responsibility, where a culture of dialogue and non-violence is used in resolving differences.

Dialogue is the only sensible and intelligent way of resolving differences and clashes of interests, whether between individuals or nations. The promotion of a culture of dialogue and non-violence for the future of mankind is a compelling task of the international community. It is not enough for governments to endorse the principle of non-violence without any appropriate action to support and promote it. If non-violence is to prevail, non-violent movements must be made effective and successful. Some consider the 20th century a century of war and bloodshed. I believe the challenge before us is to make the new century one of dialogue and non-violence.

Furthermore, in dealing with conflicts too often we lack proper judgment and courage. We fail to pay adequate attention to situations of potential conflict when they are at an early stage of development. Once all the circumstances have progressed to a state where emotions of the people or communities involved in disputes have become fully charged, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to prevent a dangerous situation from exploding. We see this tragic situation repeated time and again. So we must learn to detect early signs of conflict and have the courage to address the problem before it reaches its boiling point.

I remain convinced that most human conflicts can be solved through genuine dialogue conducted with a spirit of openness and reconciliation. I have therefore consistently sought a resolution of the issue of Tibet through non-violence and dialogue. Right from the beginning of the invasion of Tibet, I tried to work with the Chinese authorities to arrive at a mutually acceptable, peaceful co-existence. Even when the so-called Seventeen Point Agreement for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet was forced upon us I tried to work with the Chinese authorities. After all, by that agreement the Chinese government recognized the distinctiveness and the autonomy of Tibet and pledged not to impose their system on Tibet against our wishes. However, in breach of this agreement, the Chinese authorities forced upon Tibetans their rigid and alien ideology and showed scant respect for the unique culture, religion and way of life of the Tibetan people. In desperation the Tibetan people rose up against the Chinese. In the end in 1959 I had to escape from Tibet so that I could continue to serve the people of Tibet.

During the past more than four decades since my escape, Tibet has been under the harsh control of the Government of the People´s Republic of China. The immense destruction and human suffering inflicted on the people of Tibet are today well known and I do not wish to dwell on these sad and painful events. The late Panchen Lama’s 70,000-character petition to the Chinese government serves as a telling historical document on China’s draconian policies and actions in Tibet. Tibet today continues to be an occupied country, oppressed by force and scarred by suffering. Despite some development and economic progress, Tibet continues to face fundamental problems of survival. Serious violations of human rights are widespread throughout Tibet and are often the result of policies of racial and cultural discrimination. Yet they are only the symptoms and consequences of a deeper problem. The Chinese authorities view Tibet’s distinct culture and religion as the source of threat of separation. Hence as a result of deliberate policies an entire people with its unique culture and identity are facing the threat of extinction.

I have led the Tibetan freedom struggle on a path of non-violence and have consistently sought a mutually agreeable solution of the Tibetan issue through negotiations in a spirit of reconciliation and compromise with China. With this spirit in 1988 here in Strasbourg at this Parliament I presented a formal proposal for negotiations, which we hoped would serve as a basis for resolving the issue of Tibet. I had chosen consciously the European Parliament as a venue to present my thoughts for a framework for negotiations in order to underline the point that a genuine union can only come about voluntarily when there are satisfactory benefits to all the parties concerned. The European Union is a clear and inspiring example of this. On the other hand, even one country or community can break into two or more entities when there is a lack of trust and benefit, and when force is used as the principal means of rule.

My proposal which later became known as the “Middle Way Approach” or the “Strasbourg Proposal” envisages that Tibet enjoy genuine autonomy within the framework of the People’s Republic of China. However, not the autonomy on paper imposed on us 50 years ago in the 17-Point Agreement, but a true self-governing, genuinely autonomous Tibet, with Tibetans fully responsible for their own domestic affairs, including the education of their children, religious matters, cultural affairs, the care of their delicate and precious environment, and the local economy. Beijing would continue to be responsible for the conduct of foreign and defense affairs. This solution would greatly enhance the international image of China and contribute to her stability and unity -- the two topmost priorities of Beijing -- while at the same time the Tibetans would be ensured of the basic rights and freedoms to preserve their own civilization and to protect the delicate environment of the Tibetan plateau.

Since then our relation with the Chinese government has taken many twists and turns. Unfortunately, I must sadly inform you that a lack of political will on the part of the Chinese leadership to address the issue of Tibet in a serious manner has failed to produce any progress. My initiatives and overtures over the years to engage the Chinese leadership in a dialogue remain unreciprocated. Last September, I communicated through the Chinese Embassy in New Delhi our wish to send a delegation to Beijing to deliver a detailed memorandum outlining my thinking on the issue of Tibet and to explain and discuss the points raised in the memorandum. I conveyed that through face-to-face meetings we would succeed in clarifying misunderstandings and overcoming distrust. I expressed the strong belief that once this is achieved then a mutually acceptable solution of the problem can be found without much difficulty. But the Chinese government is refusing to accept my delegation till today. It is obvious that Beijing’s attitude has hardened significantly compared to the eighties when six Tibetan delegations from exile were accepted. Whatever explanations Beijing may give concerning communications between the Chinese government and myself I must state here clearly that the Chinese government is refusing to talk to the representatives I have designated for the task.

The failure of the Chinese leadership to respond positively to my Middle Way Approach reaffirms the Tibetan people’s suspicion that the Chinese government has no interest whatsoever in any kind of peaceful co-existence. Many Tibetans believe that China is bent on complete forceful assimilation and absorption of Tibet into China. They call for the independence of Tibet and criticise my “Middle Way Approach”. Others are advocating a referendum in Tibet. They argue if conditions inside Tibet are as the Chinese authorities portray it to be and if the Tibetans are truly happy, then there should be no difficulty holding a plebiscite in Tibet. I have also always maintained that ultimately the Tibetan people must be able to decide about the future of Tibet as Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India, stated in the Indian Parliament on December 7. 1950: “…the last voice in regard to Tibet should be the voice of the people of Tibet and nobody else.”

While I firmly reject the use of violence as a means in our freedom struggle we certainly have the right to explore all other political options available to us. I am a staunch believer in freedom and democracy and have therefore been encouraging the Tibetans in exile to follow the democratic process. Today, the Tibetan refugees may be among the few communities in exile that have established all the three pillars of democracy:- legislature, judiciary and executive. This year we have taken another big stride in the process of democratisation by having the chairman of the Tibetan Cabinet elected by popular vote. The elected chairman of the Cabinet and the elected parliament will shoulder the responsibility of running the Tibetan affairs as the legitimate representatives of the people. However, I do consider it my moral obligation to the six million Tibetans to continue taking up the Tibetan issue with the Chinese leadership and to act as the free spokesman of the Tibetan people until a solution is reached.

In the absence of any positive response from the Chinese government to my overtures over the years, I am left with no alternative but to appeal to the members of the international community. It is clear now that only increased, concerted and consistent international efforts will persuade Beijing to change its policy on Tibet. Although the immediate reactions from the Chinese side will be most probably negative, nevertheless, I strongly believe that expressions of international concern and support are essential for creating an environment conducive for the peaceful resolution of the Tibetan problem. On my part, I remain committed to the process of dialogue. It is my firm belief that dialogue and a willingness to look with honesty and clarity at the reality of Tibet can lead us to a mutually beneficial solution that will contribute to the stability and unity of the People’s Republic of China and secure the right for the Tibetan people to live in freedom, peace and dignity.

Brothers and sisters of the European Parliament, I consider myself as the free spokesman for my captive countrymen and women. It is my duty to speak on their behalf. I speak not with a feeling of anger or hatred towards those who are responsible for the immense suffering of our people and the destruction of our land, homes, temples, monasteries and culture. They too are human beings who struggle to find happiness, and deserve our compassion. I speak to inform you of the sad situation in my country today and of the aspirations of my people, because in our struggle for freedom, truth is the only weapon we possess. Today, our people, our distinct rich cultural heritage and our national identity are facing the threat of extinction. We need your support to survive as a people and as a culture.

When one looks at the situation inside Tibet it seems almost hopeless in the face of increasing repression, continuing environmental destruction, and the ongoing systematic undermining of the culture and identity of Tibet. Yet I believe that no matter how big and powerful China may be she is still part of the world. The global trend today is towards more openness, freedom, democracy and respect for human rights. Sooner or later China will have to follow the world trend and in the long run there is no way that China can escape from truth, justice and freedom. The consistent and principled engagement of the European Parliament with China will accelerate this process of change that is already taken place in China. Since the Tibetan issue is closely related with what is happening in China, I believe there is reason and ground for hope.

I would like to thank the European Parliament for the consistent display of concern and support for the non-violent Tibetan freedom struggle. Your sympathy and support have always been a deep source of inspiration and encouragement to the Tibetan people both inside and outside Tibet. The numerous resolutions of the European Parliament on the issue of Tibet helped greatly to highlight the plight of the Tibetan people and raise the awareness of the public and governments in Europe and around the world of the issue of Tibet. I am especially encouraged by the European Parliament’s resolution calling for the appointment of an EU special representative for Tibet. I strongly believe that the implementation of this resolution will enable the European Union not only to help promote a peaceful resolution of the Tibetan issue through negotiations in a more consistent, effective and creative way but also provide support for other legitimate needs of the Tibetan people, including ways and means to preserve our distinct identity. This initiative will also send a strong signal to Beijing that the European Union is serious in encouraging and promoting a solution of the Tibetan problem. I have no doubt that your continued expressions of concern and support for Tibet will in the long run impact positively and help create the conducive political environment for a constructive dialogue on the issue of Tibet. I ask for your continued support in this critical time in our country’s history. I thank you for providing me the opportunity to share my thoughts with you.

Thank you.

Dalai Lama: What Do I Really Fear? Being Eaten By Sharks!

Outside the Dalai Lama’s temple complex in Dharamsala, hundreds of young monks in crimson robes are locked in animated verbal combat. Against a Himalayan backdrop of jagged white peaks and a bright iris sky, the next generation are holding a debate, clapping their hands triumphantly when they score a point over their opponent.

Inside the high-security cloisters, the bravado gives way to a more sombre scene as selected devotees wait in line for the man they regard as their living god. These include local teachers waiting to be blessed for their devotion; a wealthy looking white-haired Western man in a black Tibetan robe; and a glamorous young Australian woman in a tight cheongsam and high wedges. As Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama, passes down the line, the emotion is too much for some. One young woman starts weeping and locks her fingers into his, holding his fist to her cheek.

At the end of the line, the Dalai Lama stoops to meet the gaze of 81-year-old Lhakchung, a wheelchair-bound tailor now dying of cancer. He looks intently into his eyes. There are tears running down the old man’s lined cheeks – he knows this will be the last blessing before he dies and he is looking for comfort, perhaps even hope. Instead, the man regarded by Tibetans as a living incarnation of the Buddha of Compassion, places a traditional white scarf around his shoulders and urges him to come to terms with his fate. It is at once moving and hard, religious and scientific. “I have nothing to give. I told him to pray. We all have to die,” he explains afterwards, matter-of-factly.

Over the past 53 years, the Dalai Lama has been able to offer little more in the way of hope to Tibetans. Exiled since 1959, he watched helplessly as China imposed its totalitarian rule on Tibet. Today, Tibet is no closer to freedom but, without him, the Tibetans might have been forgotten, simply another group of exiles clinging on to a fragmented culture.

Despite Beijing’s countless efforts to discredit him, the Dalai Lama has become one of the world’s most revered leaders, praised for the non-violent way he has led his people, and has a rockstar-like following (tickets to next month’s lecture tour of Scotland, for instance, sold out within hours). Along with his close friend Archbishop Desmond Tutu, he remains one of the last great surviving 20th‑century icons of peace.

Tomorrow he will be in London to receive the Templeton Prize at St Paul’s Cathedral. The honour is awarded annually to someone who has encouraged common ground between science and religion – Mother Teresa was its first recipient – and, with its £1.1 million purse, is by some measure the world’s largest prize. The Dalai Lama will announce how he is to spend the money during the ceremony. The award follows the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize for his commitment to non-violence, and highlights his championing of science as a vital element in religious life.

It is hard not to be in awe of a man billed as a living divinity, and his charisma is undeniable. But when I met him in Dharamsala last week, I discovered a less godly and more human leader than I was expecting; one who spoke of his achievements and regrets, his strengths and weaknesses, and his eventual demise, which poses the problem of a successor.

This is an interesting time for the Dalai Lama. Last year he passed the political leadership of exiled Tibetans on to an elected prime minister. He remains their spiritual leader – and the future Dalai Lama will be an exclusively spiritual figure. “So after my death I have no worries about the leader of the spiritual tradition,” he says. “I’ve made a significant contribution regarding the preservation of Tibetan Buddhist culture and also forming a Tibetan refugee community outside Tibet. It is now one of the most successful refugee communities in the world.”

However, his succession is unlikely to be an easy transition. The Karmapa Lama has been touted as Tibet’s next spiritual leader, and in Tibetan spiritual hierarchy he ranks only behind the Dalai Lama and Panchen Lama. But the current Panchen Lama was chosen by Beijing, and followers of the Dalai Lama do not recognise him. The Dalai Lama’s own choice was rejected by China; that particular boy then mysteriously vanished and has not been seen since.

The same could happen with the Dalai Lama’s reincarnation. Indeed, such is his fear of Chinese attempts to impose a pro-Beijing successor that he says the Tibetan people could choose not to have another Dalai Lama at all. “If, at the time I pass away, or even before, the majority of the people feel the Dalai Lama institution is no longer relevant, the institution will automatically cease,” he says, adding, “I am not worried about that.”

The Dalai Lama was born Lhamo Thondup. His family were farmers in the Tibetan region of Amdo, then already part of the Chinese province of Qinghai. He was selected as the “rebirth” of the 13th Dalai Lama at the age of two, by a search party sent to look for the new incarnation. There had been a series of strange omens. For instance, the head of the embalmed 13th Dalai Lama, which was originally facing south-east, suddenly turned to face north-east, so the party headed in that direction. When Thondup was eventually found, he was presented with various items, some of which had belonged to the 13th Dalai Lama. He correctly identified his possessions, crying: “That’s mine! That’s mine!”

At four, Thondup was taken in a procession of lamas (spiritual masters) to the Tibetan capital of Lhasa, and renamed Tenzin Gyatso. His monastic education started at the age of six, but he was still allowed some fun. He describes a childhood in which he loved images of military hardware, marching soldiers and war – in particular Royal Navy gunships from the First World War.

“The war picture books kept by the 13th Dalai Lama, those pictures of the British Navy at the time – their guns, their battleship guns – I found very attractive,” he tells me. It is an unexpected confession for an icon of peace, but he waves away its significance.

“Every child loves a uniform,” he says, recalling children marching behind his Tibetan army parades in Lhasa before his exile.

He also inherited his predecessor’s wind-up film projector and a series of other mechanical gadgets which, he says, sparked his lifelong interest in science and logic. He dismantled, and then reassembled, each one to understand how it worked. If he were not a monk, he would have liked to have been an engineer.
Indeed, when he met Chairman Mao Tse-tung and Premier Chou En-lai in “Peking” – as he still calls the Chinese capital – for the 1954 talks following China’s invasion of Tibet, Mao himself told him he had a “scientific mind”.

He soon developed a close relationship with both men, despite them having unleashed the might of the People’s Liberation Army on his country. Mao served him with his own chopsticks, and Chou played him at ping-pong. “Chairman Mao gave me food in the Chinese tradition. I felt great honour but also fear. He was a chain smoker, too, lots of coughing, so I thought I might get a virus from his chopsticks,” he says with his trademark naughty giggle.

Mao had initially praised Lord Buddha as a “revolutionary”, but later told the Dalai Lama that “religion is poison”. Despite their closeness, five years later the Dalai Lama was forced to lead his Tibetan government into exile in Nehru’s India. The Dalai Lama made the north Indian hill town of Dharamsala his spiritual centre as well as his home, establishing a “government in exile”. Since then, several thousand Tibetan exiles have settled there.

The Dalai Lama has not had an opportunity to discuss religion – or play table tennis – with today’s Chinese leaders, and to outsiders the prospects do not look good. A series of anti-Chinese protests by monks throughout Tibet in 2008 was brutally put down by armed police, and children were among the estimated 160 killed.

China accused the Dalai Lama of organising the uprising – a charge he denies – and has since charged him with encouraging the self-immolations of Tibetan monks and nuns (there have been more than 30) in protest against government attempts to marginalise the Tibetan language and culture.

The Dalai Lama has so far remained silent, offering them neither support nor condemnation. “If I say anything negative, then their families will feel very sad,” he says. “Of course, I cannot say this is good. So I remain silent. I can only pray and share their determination, their willpower. Nobody normally sacrifices their own life without reasons – they’re concerned about Tibetan culture, Tibetan Buddhist faith.”

He still hopes that China will change its approach to Tibet and will initiate democratic reforms within his lifetime. “My lifetime means if I remain another 10, 20 years, then definitely we’ll see it. If I die next year, I don’t know.”

He believes that the Arab Spring has had a deep impact on China’s thinking, and that Buddhist logic could offer its leaders a way out of totalitarianism. “If they face the reality, then there is no reason for fear or distrust” – which he believes are the product of China’s rule. “A lack of transparency results in distrust and a deep sense of insecurity.”

To some, this might seem naive. China furiously protested when President Obama held talks with the Dalai Lama, for instance. And last October, he was denied a visa to South Africa to attend Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s 80th birthday celebrations (he was due to deliver a lecture). The Archbishop accused the South African government of bowing to pressure from China.

The Dalai Lama’s high profile may also account for reports of an assassination plot. Last year he was warned that Chinese agents had trained Tibetan women to kill him using scarves laced with poison. “They would have said they were sick, to receive a blessing from me, and my hand would have touched them.”

He believes his popularity worldwide is due to his focus on common human desires for happiness and contentment. “Human beings – we are all physically, emotionally, the same. And importantly, everybody wants a happy life. We need money, it’s useful, but if we put all our hopes on these things, it’s wrong. We must look at our inner values, that’s the main thing to bring inner strength, self-confidence and inner peace. The ultimate source of happiness is within ourselves.”

He cites Nelson Mandela, Archbishop Desmond Tutu (“a very close friend; always joking”), Mahatma Gandhi and Albert Einstein as people who inspire him, but says he has been most heavily influenced by the second-century Indian Buddhist monk Nagarjuna. “He said that there is a huge gap between appearances and reality. Appearance is something absolute, but reality is not that way – everything is interdependent, not absolute. So that view is very helpful to maintain a peace of mind because the main destroyer of a peaceful mind is anger.”

But he hasn’t quite mastered this himself, he concedes. He gets angry “quite often” with “advisers, secretaries, other people around me when they make some little, little mistake, then sometimes I burst. Oh yes! Anger, and I shout! And some harsh words. But that remains for a few minutes, then it’s finished.”

At 76, he doesn’t have time to allow his rage to linger. He wakes at 3.30 every morning, meditates for four hours, pounds the treadmill, and then uses Buddhist prostrations to relax. He hasn’t watched television for two years, doesn’t read novels or poetry, but stays up to date with Newsweek and Time and is a BBC radio “addict”. He stops work just after three in the afternoon and is tucked up in bed by 7pm.

He wishes he had been more studious and less playful as a young boy, and regrets not learning to swim. His great fear, though, is of flying and of sharks. “Long flights, those I really feared, but now I’m used to them,” he says. “The fear now is that I never learnt to swim so if the plane crashes on water, I would immediately go deep under the sea and be enjoyed by a shark. That I really fear.”

The greatest single thing in life, he says, is the intelligence of human beings. “With the help of human intelligence, we have the ability to develop infinite love and infinite compassion.”

It is what drives his dedication to others, and inspires his favourite prayer from an eighth‑century Indian Buddhist master. “So long as space remains and suffering of sentient beings is there, I will remain to serve,” he recites. “That prayer really gives me inner strength.”

By Dean Nelson, The Telegraph, May 13, 2012

Why the Dalai Lama is Hopeful

“I told President Obama the leaders of the Chinese Communist Party are missing a part of the brain, the part that contains common sense,” the Dalai Lama said to me during our conversation in London Wednesday.

But it can be put back in. I am hopeful about the new Chinese leadership beginning late this year. The Communist leaders now lack self-confidence, but I have heard from my Chinese friends that after a year or two the new ones will take some initiatives, so more freedom, more democracy.

The Dalai Lama, with whom I have been talking periodically since 1981, was in an ebullient mood even for him. He was here referring to his meeting with Obama in 2011. I had asked the Dalai Lama about those national leaders throughout the world, from South Africa to Britain, who refuse to hold formal meetings with him because they fear Beijing’s anger. President Obama declined to meet him in 2009, the first rebuff from an American president since the Tibetan leader began visiting Washington in 1991.

The meeting that finally took place in 2011 was in the White House Map Room rather than the Oval Office, after Beijing had warned against such an encounter: “We firmly oppose any foreign official to meet with the Dalai Lama in any form.” In Britain, Prime Ministers Gordon Brown and David Cameron found other venues for their meetings, far from 10 Downing Street. Two weeks ago Cameron and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg held a brief unpublicized meeting with the Dalai Lama who was about to address several thousand admirers in St Paul’s cathedral. All such meetings, including the one at the cathedral, are routinely condemned by Beijing as “hurting the feelings of the Chinese people.”

“If these national leaders don’t see me that’s up to them,” the Dalai Lama said. “But slowly Chinese people realize they have been exploited, censored. The Communists tell them they don’t need Western-style democracy and human rights.’”

In recent months, there have been reports of self-immolations by Tibetans in China, and there are concerns that the human rights situation is worsening. Yet, as in previous meetings, the Dalai Lama reflected without rancor on Chinese Communist rule over Tibet. “What has kept Tibetans going for 2500 years? The Dharma.” This is the traditional Buddhist view of the universe and its principles of human behavior and wisdom. “How old is the Communist Party? Less than 200 years [it was founded in 1921]. Admiration for Tibetans throughout the world is always rising. Attitudes toward the Chinese Communist party, inside and outside China, couldn’t be worse.”

He noted that the Party sees how Aung San Suu Kyi, the Burmese opposition leader and a fellow Nobel Peace laureate, was admired throughout the world for more than twenty years when she was a captive in Rangoon and now, free at last, is welcome everywhere. She was in London this week, and Beijing cannot have been happy to see her meeting with the Dalai Lama on Wednesday. The Dalai Lama told Suu Kyi that he admired her courage.

The Dalai Lama said that the reason Chinese Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo is serving an eleven year prison sentence for subversion is “because he is not just one individual. There are thousands of intelligent thinking people in China who agree with him that change is necessary.” This means more transparency, he insisted, an end to violence, and a real legal system. “And there are also 1.3 billion other Chinese who because of their great culture have the brains to distinguish right from wrong. More and more they are aware of their rights.” The Party fears them, he added, and Liu is supposed to be a warning, an example, he agreed, of the Chinese saying “Strike the rooster to frighten the monkey.”

Particularly interesting was what the Dalai Lama had to say about the eleventh Panchen Lama, the second most eminent religious figure in Tibetan Buddhism, who has been chosen by the Chinese leadership in Beijing, in an apparent effort to impose further control on Tibet. The authentic eleventh Panchen, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, was chosen by the Dalai Lama in 1995 while the Tibetan leader was in exile in India. In accordance with tradition, he made the choice five years after the tenth incarnation died.

Beijing immediately denounced the choice as illegitimate, kidnapped the child and his family—who have never been seen again—and imprisoned for subversion the abbot of the Tashilunpo monastery, the Panchen’s traditional seat, who had first identified little Choekyi Nyima as a possible eleventh Panchen. Employing “authentic” rituals, the Communist Party then chose its own boy, Gyaincain Norbu. It was only too plain that this rigamarole, as the Dalai Lama has remarked to me over the years, was a dress rehearsal for Beijing to select his own successor, the Fifteenth Dalai Lama, who it hopes will be accepted by Tibetans, as their choice of Panchen has failed to be.

I was surprised, therefore, by the Dalai Lama’s comments about the spurious Panchen. He mentioned 2008, when an uprising swept throughout Tibet proper and regions of China populated by many Tibetans. Chinese properties were destroyed, some Han were killed, and a number of Tibetans are estimated to have been killed at the hands of the Chinese police and army.

“Of course Beijing wanted the boy to denounce the uprising,” the Dalai Lama observed. “But some of his friends have told me that he remains a Tibetan deep inside and preferred to remain silent. Beijing couldn’t use him.”

By Jonathan Mirsky, The New York Review of Books, 6/21/12