[Buddha-l] Contemporary Tibet

[jkirk]

> Dear Buddha-l'ers
>
> Interesting article here on contemporary Tibet, by Jamyag Norbu:
>
> http://www.opendemocracy.net/arts/tibet_2600.jsp
>
 > Regards,
> Steve Hopkins
=======================
Fascinating article.....and a cultural conundrum:

Norbu wrote:
"...What is mind-boggling in retrospect is the absolute faith of the public
and even the Dalai Lama in these predictions that never even came remotely
close to being realised."
"...His Holiness himself, in an interview in an Italian journal, declared
that he did not regard the account of Shambala as symbolic or legendary and
believed that the apocalyptic events prophesied would actually come to
pass."

[I don't know about Shambala, but I know plenty of Americans including
myself who sense that a great devolution is not so far ahead, if the right
means are not adopted in the body politic. So I share HHDL's pessimism, if
that's what it is.]

together with:
"...Probably this would be a good time as any to mention that I personally
do not reject the existence of deities, ghosts and oracles. I think that
what people regard as real are to a great degree conditioned by the
worldview of the period they live in. "

  and

"...There is a theory that material phenomena, even physical laws, are
conditioned by the belief systems of the period. While if we enter the world
of quantum physics even the most bizarre event that we can think of has a
chance of happening. Even something like the molecules of my body falling
apart and assembling again in the next room."

Well, there's the new age quantum mechanics stuff all over again.

I see little difference between HHDL's occasional claims of belief, and this
author's, in that both of them are caught between two radically different
cultures. The Dalai Lama has also cautioned people many times of the
Buddha's injunction to experience for oneself, not to take "whatever it is"
on someone else's word or text (this could include his official Oracle, for
that matter). But the predicament for HHDL might personally be a bit
different than it is for Norbu, but it's also paradoxically the same --a
conflict of cultural ideas and identities. The Dalai Lama as grand
leader/ruler (even) of the Tibetans in exile must not appear when speaking
with co-religionists (or anticipating their presence in some audience) on
certain occasions to appear to be too radical or eccentric about religion,
as his credibility as their leader would suffer. He must maintain as much
Tibetan cultural identity as possible. In secular appearances before
non-Tibetan audiences, he can appear to be much more modern (which I suspect
he actually is).  It's a problem of public role and cultural identification.
Same for Norbu, only in his case it's probably a personal (rather than
public) issue, of wondering how much of his cultural identity to shed in
favor of some kind of modernity. If a Tibetan decides to shuck every vestige
of traditional cultural beliefs, what might be left? Only the language? At
least Norbu can take heart in the fact that historically Tibetans always had
their skeptics.

Joanna