Bbc Interview With The Dalai Lama

[camerata]

Did anyone see this on UBC last night? The Dalai Lama was being grilled by a rather sour woman in the manner normally reserved for shifty politicians. One of her contentions was that non-violence hadn't worked in Tibet. It seemed to me she was implying he was a hypocrite because the CIA trained and armed Tibetan guerillas in the 60s yet now he advocates non-violence. HH handled the interview pretty well but I think the BBC could have chosen a better interviewer who understands the difficulties of being both a spiritual and political leader.

[chechoie]

I don’t mean to be discourteous to the Dalai Lama but I thought he came over a bit weak in the interview. I mean he did not hold his own position very well.

I don’t think the interviewer was that tough on him. I’ve seen her at work before and she can be really hard hitting.

I came away with the impression that the old boy actually does think to himself that he has failed miserably in his mission to protect Tibetan culture and get some kind of autonomy for his country.

Not for want of trying of course, he has tried very hard and for a long time to get the world’s attention and as usual the world does precious little.

He looked very tired as well I thought.

I think that the only hope for his cause is, (as he alluded to in the interview), that China itself is changing and the people of China will in the end help preserve Tibetan culture.

It may be too late by then, certainly too late for this Dalai Lama.

[jimbob]

I agree with the OP. The interviewer was agressive and rude. Generally when a leader of a country gives you an interview the best you should do is be polite, even if you do ask tough questions!

[chechoie]

Well, the programme was called “Hardtalk”.

People who agree to come on this programme know they are going to be grilled

and are going to be asked tough questions, so should be prepared.

I suppose it all depends on your opinion of what is rude and what is not rude.

I honestly didn’t think she was rude to him.

I also think the Dalai Lama is old and wise enough to defend himself, I just got the impression he was under par in this interview.

Regards,

[jimbob]

I agree he was underpar (he must be getting on a bit now!) but again I do feel it was less of an interview and more of a grilling with the interviewer having a pre-determined point of view instead of following a balanced attempt to get answers. I expect bias and interrogation from Fox News but always thought the BBC should more neutral in its approach to getting answers.

Anyhoo, I am just glad I do not have to pay my damned expensive TV license anymore!

[camerata]

I think he could have replied as a spiritual leader rather than a political leader on some points. He admitted his policy of non-violence hadn't brought the desired (political) result, but he could have stressed that it had probably saved a lot of lives and suffering. The Tibetans never had a hope in he11 of getting anywhere through violence. Things could have been much worse for them if their guerillas had been more effective.

[ourmanflint]

I agree with the OP. The interviewer was agressive and rude. Generally when a leader of a country gives you an interview the best you should do is be polite, even if you do ask tough questions!

The Dalai Lama is not the leader of Tibet is he??? He is the spiritual head of the Buddhist machine!!! even in Tibet politics should be left to politicians, not figureheads, he just found himself in a position where he had to comment as there was no one else to do it for them.

Can anyone enlighten me as to the Tibetan government as it was pre-1959? I hope there was some sort of elected government and not just the Potala Palace!! After spending 2 months in Khampa, and Amdo, I have little regard for monks anymore, they really do just behave like medieval monks in Europe, living off the hard work of others and getting fat... not like Thailand where they seem integral to the community.

Actually I could have swore I met him a few weeks back in Ganzi, Sichuan, the Dalai lama, at the blessing of the new super stupa there. Spitting image of the guy, even sounded like him, but I guess there must be lots of Lama's that look and sound like him.

[Suthep_Steve]

Can anyone enlighten me as to the Tibetan government as it was pre-1959?

The Dalai Lamas were temporal leaders of Tibet who came to power during the 17th Century (CE) with the support of the Mongols. Although widely revered as incarnations of the Buddha of Compassion Avalovakiteshvara, the Dalai Lamas do not head the school of Tibetan Buddhism to which they belong namely the Gelug Tradition (There are 5 main schools within Tibet). That post belongs to the Ganden Tripa although the Dalai Lamas are usually influential in choosing the Ganden Tripa.

The Dalai Lama pre 1959 was in effect an absolute ruler of the country of Tibet. He generally administered the country through the Tibetan parliament or Kashag. Which to my knowledge was generally picked from the most senior monks and members of Tibetan lay society by none democratic means. Tibetan society as a whole up until 1959 was administered along feudal lines with an Aristocracy at the upper end and serfs down at the bottom.

When no Dalai Lama was available or when the Dalai Lamas were too young to rule power was generally in the hands of a Regent, who was normally a Lama Monk.

[rikpa]

Can anyone enlighten me as to the Tibetan government as it was pre-1959?

The Dalai Lamas were temporal leaders of Tibet who came to power during the 17th Century (CE) with the support of the Mongols. Although widely revered as incarnations of the Buddha of Compassion Avalovakiteshvara, the Dalai Lamas do not head the school of Tibetan Buddhism to which they belong namely the Gelug Tradition (There are 5 main schools within Tibet). That post belongs to the Ganden Tripa although the Dalai Lamas are usually influential in choosing the Ganden Tripa.

The Dalai Lama pre 1959 was in effect an absolute ruler of the country of Tibet. He generally administered the country through the Tibetan parliament or Kashag. Which to my knowledge was generally picked from the most senior monks and members of Tibetan lay society by none democratic means. Tibetan society as a whole up until 1959 was administered along feudal lines with an Aristocracy at the upper end and serfs down at the bottom.

When no Dalai Lama was available or when the Dalai Lamas were too young to rule power was generally in the hands of a Regent, who was normally a Lama Monk.

What is the fifth school of Tibetan Buddhism? I was always under the impression it was four, the Geluk, the Kagyus, the Sakyas, and the Nyingmas.

And yes, the head of the Geluk-pa school is Ganden Tri Rinpoche, though of course like all Tibetan roles this is by appointment and political, even if it is largely meritocratic (and not based on the tulku system). The 100th Ganden Tripa is amazing, and does embody all of the qualities of the most erudite of Geluk-pas, which is saying a lot. As an aside, I had the blind luck to help as an escort on his visit to NYC in Sept. '99 to the World Trade Center, two years to the day before they fell. What strangeness, but a blessing to be in his presence.

All the best,

E.

[Suthep_Steve]

What is the fifth school of Tibetan Buddhism? I was always under the impression it was four, the Geluk, the Kagyus, the Sakyas, and the Nyingmas.

Whoops my mistake the four main Tibetan Schools.

Must have been great to meet the Ganden Tripa. I've never met him but I saw his throne in the original Ganden monestry and was blessed with his hat.

[rikpa]

What is the fifth school of Tibetan Buddhism? I was always under the impression it was four, the Geluk, the Kagyus, the Sakyas, and the Nyingmas.

Whoops my mistake the four main Tibetan Schools.

Must have been great to meet the Ganden Tripa. I've never met him but I saw his throne in the original Ganden monestry and was blessed with his hat.

Ha! I was wondering if you were adding in the Bon-pos or splitting the the Kagyu school with the Drikung Kagyus.

All the best,

E.

[rikpa]

After spending 2 months in Khampa, and Amdo, I have little regard for monks anymore, they really do just behave like medieval monks in Europe, living off the hard work of others and getting fat...

It would be so great to be able to diagree with you, but the fact is that Tibet was one of the most corrupt places in the world. I can't stand the mealy-mouthed Western ideals that have taken hold wrt to this so-called Shangri-la. It is positively sickening in the USA, for example.

And yet, I have a little story. My friend William, (who I strangely bumped into on the subway this morning, an alumn of Gaskin's "Farm" and a former editor of "High Times" of all publications!), had an unusual experience. His former wife was dying of cancer. They both attended a medical conference (she was an MD) at which the Dalai Lama was present. She, as a physician asked a question from the floor, and was answered by the Dalai Lama, relating to death. He answered her gladly. But that was not the end of it.

After the session, they were outside and saw the Dalai Lama's car leaving, and she knocked on the window. He not only recalled her question, but after a brief conversation, invited them to be treated by his own doctor!

Which they did after a flight to Dharamsala and after a private audience with HH Dalai Lama. There was nothing anyone could do to save her. She died soon after, but the compassion that radiated from the Dalai Lama can never be forgotten. They were not photo-ops; they were simple human beings in pain. And (pardon me) Avalokiteshvara took them in and gave everything he could.

The Dalai Lama has *earned* the role of Avalokiteshvara, IMO. That simple, unpublicized act has resulted in William now working with Robert Thurman on a biography of the Dalai Lama. His entire life is spent honoring this Bodhisattva.

What more is there to say than this is the embodiment of Avalokitheshvara?

I remain in awe at such a simple, costless act of compassion that has transformed so many, lives, including my own.

[ourmanflint]

After spending 2 months in Khampa, and Amdo, I have little regard for monks anymore, they really do just behave like medieval monks in Europe, living off the hard work of others and getting fat...

It would be so great to be able to diagree with you, but the fact is that Tibet was one of the most corrupt places in the world. I can't stand the mealy-mouthed Western ideals that have taken hold wrt to this so-called Shangri-la. It is positively sickening in the USA, for example.

And yet, I have a little story. My friend William, (who I strangely bumped into on the subway this morning, an alumn of Gaskin's "Farm" and a former editor of "High Times" of all publications!), had an unusual experience. His former wife was dying of cancer. They both attended a medical conference (she was an MD) at which the Dalai Lama was present. She, as a physician asked a question from the floor, and was answered by the Dalai Lama, relating to death. He answered her gladly. But that was not the end of it.

After the session, they were outside and saw the Dalai Lama's car leaving, and she knocked on the window. He not only recalled her question, but after a brief conversation, invited them to be treated by his own doctor!

Which they did after a flight to Dharamsala and after a private audience with HH Dalai Lama. There was nothing anyone could do to save her. She died soon after, but the compassion that radiated from the Dalai Lama can never be forgotten. They were not photo-ops; they were simple human beings in pain. And (pardon me) Avalokiteshvara took them in and gave everything he could.

The Dalai Lama has *earned* the role of Avalokiteshvara, IMO. That simple, unpublicized act has resulted in William now working with Robert Thurman on a biography of the Dalai Lama. His entire life is spent honoring this Bodhisattva.

What more is there to say than this is the embodiment of Avalokitheshvara?

I remain in awe at such a simple, costless act of compassion that has transformed so many, lives, including my own.

I never meant to imply that all those from Tibet especially the Dalai Lama, were no good, and your story is very touching, but like you say there is a vast chasm of misunderstanding between what the west thinks Tibet represents and what it actually is. There are so many "romantic" notions of the nobility of the simple Tibetan, which is so far from the truth in my own small experience. I think I am more realistic now than I once was.

[rikpa]

H Flint,

Yes, there is a real dichotomy here. On one hand you had the corrupt monasticism that bled the country and corrupted both the religion and politics simultaneously, and on the other you have truly great and accomplished sages in spades, compared to other places.

I have no allegiance to any outward tradition, and yet have spent most of my time in the Tibetan vein of study. It is a clash of contrasts. The dark Dharmapalas and a land of sorcery somehow managed to co-exist with the pure, undiluted Dharma.

A healthy skepticism is warranted, I think (and this goes as much for the Theravada and Zen, IMO, and neither fare any better than the Tibetans from what I've seen).

Don Lopez's book "Prisoners of Shangri-la" is a good read (I imagine you must have read it), and a necessary one for Tibetologists. I was also introduced to Waddell's nasty treatment of the system early on, which was very beneficial (to remind me to remain skeptical), even if it is wildly biased throughout.

And yet I have seen so many instances of the sort of karuna that the Dalai Lama displayed towards my friend. So much so that it is unremarkable, except that it is so remarkable.

Perhaps this sums up institutional Buddhism in general, no matter the school. The Dhamma is pure and unstained, as always, and seems to consistently produce the genuine article, but the outer institutions leave much to be desired.

All the best,

E.

[pap]

H Flint,

Yes, there is a real dichotomy here. On one hand you had the corrupt monasticism that bled the country and corrupted both the religion and politics simultaneously, and on the other you have truly great and accomplished sages in spades, compared to other places.

I have no allegiance to any outward tradition, and yet have spent most of my time in the Tibetan vein of study. It is a clash of contrasts. The dark Dharmapalas and a land of sorcery somehow managed to co-exist with the pure, undiluted Dharma.

A healthy skepticism is warranted, I think (and this goes as much for the Theravada and Zen, IMO, and neither fare any better than the Tibetans from what I've seen).

Don Lopez's book "Prisoners of Shangri-la" is a good read (I imagine you must have read it), and a necessary one for Tibetologists. I was also introduced to Waddell's nasty treatment of the system early on, which was very beneficial (to remind me to remain skeptical), even if it is wildly biased throughout.

And yet I have seen so many instances of the sort of karuna that the Dalai Lama displayed towards my friend. So much so that it is unremarkable, except that it is so remarkable.

Perhaps this sums up institutional Buddhism in general, no matter the school. The Dhamma is pure and unstained, as always, and seems to consistently produce the genuine article, but the outer institutions leave much to be desired.

All the best,

E.

Very good stuff. Hope you keep posting here.