The Truth of Tibetan Buddhism

简体 | 正體 | EN | GE | FR | SP | BG | RUS | JP | VN                 The Truth of Tibetan Buddhism Home | GUEST BOOK | LOGIN | LOGOUT

Sexual scandals of Lamas and Rinpoches

über die Dalai Lamas

Before Buddhism was brought to Tibet, the Tibetans had their believes in "Bon". "Bon" is a kind of folk beliefs which gives offerings to ghosts and gods and receives their blessing. It belongs to local folk beliefs.

In the Chinese Tang Dynasty, the Tibetan King Songtsän Gampo brought “Buddhism” to the Tibetan people which became the state religion. The so-called “Buddhism” is Tantric Buddhism which spreads out during the final period of Indian Buddhism. The Tantric Buddhism is also named "left hand tantra" because of its tantric sexual practices. In order to suit Tibetan manners and customs, the tantric Buddhism was mixed with "Bon". Due to its beliefs of ghosts and sexual practices, it became more excessive.

The tantric Master Atiśa spread out the tantric sex teachings in private. Padmasambhava taught it in public, so that the Tibetan Buddhism stands not only apart from Buddhist teachings, but also from Buddhist form. Thus, the Tibetan Buddhism does not belong to Buddhism, and has to be renamed "Lamaism".

   
                  Psychosis, Stabbing, Secrecy & Death at a Neo-Buddhist University in Arizona(2)

Psychosis, Stabbing, Secrecy & Death at a Neo-Buddhist University in Arizona(2)

Secrecy is endemic to both the structure and the metaphysics of Roach’s organization. Buddhist knowledge was secret. His relationship with McNally was secret. Whether or not it involved intercourse was secret. The instructions for rituals were secret. The nature of his realizations was secret. The locations and identities of many of his teachers were secret. Tantric practices were secret. In the absence of physical coercion, secrecy was the key currency of Roach’s power.
And how’s this for secrecy? As of this writing, there are close to 7000 reads of the letter from the Venerables Chandra and Akasha, who are reportedly taking care of McNally in her seclusion, and close to 5000 reads of the letter from McNally. Only the first letter has been left open to comments, and after one week of exposure there are only 16 comments. This is akin to a blackout in social media culture. My personal social media network connects me to several old Diamond Mountain affiliated friends. None to my knowledge have shared these two letters. I have only seen four shares of Roach’s letter, and only a handful of comments upon it, all expressing condolence to McNally and the assistants, and none with any questions. I have reached out to several of these old friends to express my dismay at the events, to ask how they are handling the news, to ask about the health of the community, and to ask if there is any more to share, and I receive eerily similar responses: “Geshe Michael’s letter tells it all, dear,” and “Anything more I would have to say about it would be gossip, dear.” Everybody’s calling me “dear.”
Two things to note here: as an ex-member of this cult, I will not likely be a trusted confidante in a time of trauma and loss, unless it is to those who crave the empathy of an outsider. I understand this. But my friend’s comment about “gossip” reveals something deeper than any social exclusion. All students of Roach have taken initiation into the Bodhisattva Vows, one of which explicitly forbids criticism of the clergy. The Brahma Net Sutra gives a definition of this major vow. Stalinist bureaucrats would be proud:
A disciple of the Buddha must not himself broadcast the misdeeds or infractions of Bodhisattva-clerics or Bodhisattva-laypersons, or of [ordinary] monks and nuns—nor encourage others to do so. He must not create the causes, conditions, methods, or karma of discussing the offenses of the assembly. As a Buddha’s disciple, whenever he hears evil persons, externalists or followers of the Two Vehicles speak of practices contrary to the Dharma or contrary to the precepts within the Buddhist community, he should instruct them with a compassionate mind and lead them to develop wholesome faith in the Mahayana. If instead, he discusses the faults and misdeeds that occur within the assembly, he commits a Parajika offense.
It is now Friday. Last Saturday, when I came across the news, I thought that surely it would be widely known by now. But as the days have dragged on and I have pounded together these thoughts and memories, it has become clear that nobody from within the Diamond Mountain community, or perhaps those sympathetic to them, would be broadcasting these events, along with the cascade of questions they raise. So here I am, and here we are.

Requests to the Diamond Mountain Board: Rob Ruisinger, Nicole Davis, Jigme Palmo, Charae Sachanandani, Scott Vacek, Tim Muehlhausen, Evan Osherow.
  1. Remove Michael Roach from the Board of Directors. His past intimacy with McNally and his current spiritual influence over you will make it impossible for you to perform your regulatory function under the articles of Diamond Mountain’s  501(c)(3) non-profit status. Surely you must also recognize that he is not fit to disinterestedly administrate any internal inquiry into the death of his former lover’s husband.
  2. Disclose everything that you knew about the domestic violence, the stabbing, and the other retreatant’s reactions/responses, and how you have addressed their concerns. Show the transparency that will expose the effects of the power relationships you foster.
  3. Invite full police, state, and medical official investigations. Bring in professionals to question all principles.
  4. Explain why you thought it reasonable to allow two disturbed and mutually violent people to remain in each other’s presence after clear evidence of potentially mortal danger to both of them.
  5. Explain why you did not call on local law enforcement and mental health officials to intervene in a circumstance for which you have no qualification.
  6. Create an emergency fund for the residential mental health care of Christie McNally, in the eventuality that this is recommended by public health professionals. In the event that this episode destroys her professional teaching career, create an additional fund for her continuing education and career transition.
  7. Describe the educational or work experience  of the “assistant” who was assigned to chaperone the couple that would have qualified him or her to care for a mentally ill and mutually violent couple.`
  8. Report the medical doctor referenced in Roach’s letter as having sutured Thorson’s wounds to the appropriate medical licensing board so that they can investigate why he/she did not report Thorson’s stab wounds to authorities.
  9. Release the remaining retreatants from their ritual vow of silence, so they can say anything they need to related to the events, their leadership, and their concerns. Release them further from their long-term vow against disclosing grievances against their leadership.
  10. Show publicly that the retreatants currently under your care have no history of mental illness that might endanger their health within the context of the severe isolation of your retreat property and the potentially provocative nature of the meditation practices that you advocate.
  11. Disclose the protocol by which you evaluate the mental health of retreatants, and how you will update this protocol in view of this tragedy.
  12. Disclose the qualifications of the replacement Retreat Leader, John Brady, and have him issue a statement detailing how he is specifically administering to the retreatants who have been disturbed by these events.
  13. Publish the transcript of McNally’s February 4th talk, in which she made allusion to the domestic violence and the stabbing.
  14. Provide the link on your website to McNally’s letter of 4/19, to both end the silencing of her point of view, but also to expose the clear psychosis at the very heart of your faculty.
  15. Remove Michael Roach from the teaching schedule of Diamond Mountain University until he has shown that he has put himself under the supervision of his lineage, perhaps by submitting himself for monastic review to his home community of Rashi Gempil Ling, in Howell, New Jersey.

Requests to the Mentors of the Greater Buddhist Community, including the Office of the Dalai Lama
Modern Western Buddhism prides itself on being anti-authoritarian grounded in reason, and non-cultish. In the light of Thorson’s death, its time for the community mentors to step up and prove it.
There are many mentors I have in mind. All of them are either non-sectarian or have scholarly or secular backgrounds. I’ll name a few, but please suggest more: Robert Thurman, Pema Chodron, Sharon Salzberg, Michael Stone, Blanche Hartman, Bernie Glassman, Stephen Batchelor, Mathieu Ricard, Sylvia Boorstein, Jeffrey Hopkins. Also: the senior teachers of FPMT will probably be up to the task. Here are some things you can do to help both the safety of Diamond Mountain residents, but also the general movement towards responsible leadership in Buddhist and other spiritual organizations.
  1. Please take time to investigate Roach’s history and teachings, and publish your thoughts on the broader Buddhist life to those students of Roach who are confused, in distress, and perhaps hungry for a more grounded cosmology. A series of calm, welcoming, non-judgmental open letters might be most helpful.
  2. Please disclose any protocols for mental health and physical safety that you have designed as leaders or members of Buddhist communities that would be helpful to the Diamond Mountain Board as they go through a necessary review of their own practices.
  3. Offer gratis counseling/conversation to any Diamond Mountain practitioner who might reach out for a broader view.
I also call on the Private Office of His Holiness the Dalai Lama to review these events and to consider reiterating and strengthening its censure of Michael Roach, first initiated in 2006.

In closing, for now…
I’m so grateful I grew up since my involvement with Roach ended in 2000—at least a little bit. I readThe Guru Papers: Masks of Authoritarian Power, by Joel Kramer and Diana Alstad, went into therapy, worked on my daddy/authority issues, and now I return to meditation only once in a while to touch the quieter parts of my experience: not to escape anything or fantasize about what’s not here. I have a good and meaningful job. I don’t fly around the world chasing bliss and approval, responsible to nothing but the wind of my thought, avoiding those who know me best. I am no longer, as Leonard Cohen sings, “starving in some deep mystery, like a man who is sure what is true.” Like Ian seemed to be.
Goodbye, Ian. A younger, thinner, sadder version of myself died with you in that cave, dry as dust. I send my love to your child, wherever he or she is.


Matthew Remski is an author, yoga teacher, ayurvedic therapist and educator, and co-founder of Yoga Community Toronto. Please check out his site for more writings on Ayurveda and Yoga.




~
The opinions expressed by the authors at elephant journal and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not reflect the opinions of elephant journal or any employee thereof. elephant journal is not responsible for the accuracy of any of the information supplied in the article above.

___________
CORRECTIONS (posted 5/6/12, 5am)
As I wrote above, I expected to get some details wrong. I invited corrections, and received several, for which I am grateful. I hope that crowd-sourcing this story helps to establish a clearer picture.
Most corrections are minor. I have a few dates wrong, and I misrepresented the housing situation for retreatants at DM. I’ve also taken out a few terms that are immaterial to the argument, but which some found offensive.
The correction of substance involves my omission of Roach’s statement that he and the Board alerted the police to the contents of McNally’s talk on 2/4/12.  Roach doesn’t describe this in detail in his open letter, which led me to presume that the disclosure was not clear enough to provoke further law enforcement interest. I might be mistaken here. In any case, my omission created the impression that the Board did less than they did, and I have corrected it. My contention is that the strongest disclosure would have evolved from professional, on-site investigation at that point.
While I am grateful for the corrections, none of my critics have substantially engaged the core material of the article: the 15 suggestions I make to the Board.
Here are the corrections I’ve made so far:
Abstract: changed “…failure to report..” to “…failure to fully report…”
1st graph: changed “camped out” to “in retreat”
7th graph: changed “I’ll reconstruct the general history according to the available accounts, but also by drawing on my personal knowledge of this cult, and my understanding of cult  dynamics in general.”
to
“I’ll reconstruct the general history according to the available accounts, but also by drawing on my personal knowledge of this group, which is informed by my understanding of cult dynamics.”
 7th graph: changed “camping” to “in deep seclusion”
11th graph: changed
“His rebellion even alienated his followers from the Dalai Lama, the head of their own lineage, who publicly censured him in 2006.”
to
“By association, his rebellion separated his followers from the Dalai Lama, the head of their own lineage, who through his Public Office, censured Roach in 2006. In what I presume to have been an attempt to heal the rift the Public Office left the door open for Roach’s followers to attend teachings of the Dalai Lama, and many did and still do. Many remain convinced that Roach’s teachings and those of the Dalai Lama are part of a coherent cloth, but there is much debate on the matter.”
graph 13: 
Not every rupture in Roach’s world is political or theological. Ian Thorson was the retreat assistant for Roach and McNally. Sometime between 2003 and 2005, Thorson and McNally became lovers. She separated herself from Roach, who was shortly thereafter seen swanked up in Armani and hitting the Manhattan clubs with Russian models. McNally and Thorson soon began making charismatic inroads into the New York yoga scene, teaming up to teach wholly fictional “ancient Tibetan asana practices for reaching spiritual goals using a partner”.
to
Not every rupture in Roach’s world is political or theological. McNally separated herself from Roach in 2008 or 2009, who was shortly thereafter seen swanked up in Armani and hitting the Manhattan clubs with Russian models. McNally soon partnered with Thorson, and began making charismatic inroads into the New York yoga scene, teaming up to teach wholly fictional “ancient Tibetan asana practices for reaching spiritual goals using a partner”.
graph 14: removed “probably vegan” from the description of Thorson, as one commenter found it offensive.
graph 19:
“This is all crazy-making. I believe.”
to
“I remember being enthralled by Shantideva’s breathtaking and poetic subject/object blurring: it taught me a lot about consciousness. But now I see how dangerous such poetry can be without existential grounding.”
graph 20:
“But at some point (we won’t be sure until the Board does a thorough public inquiry) the other retreatants began hearing episodes of domestic violence from within the secluded house she shared with Thorson. Retreatants are sworn to silence by retreat protocol, so of course nothing was reported – until McNally reached out, consciously or not, for help.”
to
“But at some point (we won’t be sure until the Board does a thorough public inquiry) episodes of domestic violence erupted within the secluded house she shared with Thorson. Retreatants are sworn to silence by retreat protocol, so if any of them were aware of trouble, there would be pressure against reporting. But then, McNally reached out, consciously or not, for help.”
graph 23:
“Roach and the Board interviewed the retreatants and their assistants and found out that yes, Thorson and McNally had been battering each other for some time, with Thorson probably being the majority aggressor. McNally’s letter of 4/19 confirms this (complete with delusional justifications).”
to:
“Roach reports that local police were made aware of the contents of McNally’s talk, but chose to take no further action. I hope further investigation reveals why. If the police reviewed a transcript or audio recording of the talk, I would be concerned that they might not have derived enough context from this alone to be sufficiently alerted to the potential for danger. I don’t imagine that anyone internal to the group would have been able to provide police with the full spectrum of concern, including Thorson’s history, the history of internal power dynamics, the philosophical zeitgeist of the group, and the violence-laden meditation visualizations of their Tantric practice.”
 graph 30:
“The decision to not immediately report the battering or stabbing to outside law enforcement or mental health services is coherent with general cultic resistance to outside influence. The sheriff or the shrink would be, I believe, as invasive to Diamond Moutain property as other Buddhist teachings or teachers would be to Diamond Mountain cosmology and lineage.”
to:
“The decision to not immediately invite outside law enforcement or mental health services to the property to examine the situation and interview the principles is, I believe, coherent with group’s general resistance to outside influence. On site, the sheriff or the shrink would be, I believe, as invasive to Diamond Moutain property as other Buddhist teachings or teachers would be to Diamond Mountain cosmology and lineage.”

graph 33: “tent” to “residence”
graph 35:
“A common characteristic of many of Roach’s followers (including myself way back when) is familial alienation.”
removed: a commenter pointed out this was an unfair generalization

second last graph:
 changed “Like Ian was.” to “Like Ian seemed to be.”
____
CORRECTION (posted 5/18/12 6:30am)
section on Shantideva:
And of course all cultists have handy scriptures to back them up: As Shantideva says in the third chapter of Bodhisattva’s Way of Life(one of Roach’s favourite texts):
His the knife, and mine the body:
the twofold cause of suffering.
He has grasped the knife,
I my body.
 At which is there anger?
Those who injure me are really impelled by my actions.
For this they will go to the realms of hell.
Surely it is they who are harmed by me?
I remember being enthralled by Shantideva’s breathtaking and poetic subject/object blurring: it taught me a lot about consciousness. But now I see how dangerous such poetry can be without existential grounding.
 changed, through dialogue with Phurba and others, to:
There’s an old adage: “The devil quotes scripture.” A self-validating metaphysics will twist anything to its purposes. I remember Shantideva’s  Bodhisattva’s Way of Life being one of Roach’s favourite texts. In it the sage writes (as per Stephen Batchelor’s translation of 6:43):
Both the weapon and my body
Are the causes of my suffering.
Since the other gave rise to the weapon,
and I to the body,
With whom should I be angry?
I remember being enthralled by Shantideva’s breathtaking and poetic subject/object blurring: it taught me a lot about consciousness and the stickiness of private perspective. But now now I have to wonder whether Roach’s usage of this and similar passages, distorted by his solipsism, has been gasoline to his dangerous fire.

 


Die Dalai Lamas

»Die Dalai Lamas werden von ihren Anhängern als fortgeschrittene Mahayana Bodhisattvas angesehen, mitfühlende Wesen, die sozusagen ihren eigenen Eintritt in das Nirvana zurückgestellt haben, um der leidenden Menschheit zu helfen. Sie sind demnach auf einem guten Wege zur Buddhaschaft, sie entwickeln Perfektion in ihrer Weisheit und ihrem Mitgefühl zum Wohle aller Wesen. Dies rechtertigt, in Form einer Doktrin, die soziopolitische Mitwirkung der Dalai Lamas, als Ausdruck des mitfühlenden Wunsches eines Bodhisattvas, anderen zu helfen.«

?Hier sollten wir zwei Dinge feststellen, die der Dalai Lama nicht ist: Erstens, er ist nicht in einem einfachen Sinne ein ?Gott-König?. Er mag eine Art König sein, aber er ist kein Gott für den Buddhismus. Zweitens, ist der Dalai Lama nicht das ?Oberhaupt des Tibetischen Buddhismus? als Ganzes. Es gibt zahlreiche Traditionen im Buddhismus. Manche haben ein Oberhaupt benannt, andere nicht. Auch innerhalb Tibets gibt es mehrere Traditionen. Das Oberhaupt der Geluk Tradition ist der Abt des Ganden Klosters, als Nachfolger von Tsong kha pa, dem Begründer der Geluk Tradition im vierzehnten/fünfzehnten Jahrhundert.«

Paul Williams, »Dalai Lama«, in
Clarke, P. B., Encyclopedia of New Religious Movements
(New York: Routledge, 2006), S. 136.

Regierungsverantwortung
der Dalai Lamas

?Nur wenige der 14 Dalai Lamas regierten Tibet und wenn, dann meist nur für einige wenige Jahre.?

(Brauen 2005:6)

»In der Realität dürften insgesamt kaum mehr als fünfundvierzig Jahre der uneingeschränkten Regierungsgewalt der Dalai Lamas zusammenkommen. Die Dalai Lamas sechs und neun bis zwölf regierten gar nicht, die letzten vier, weil keiner von ihnen das regierungsfähige Alter erreichte. Der siebte Dalai Lama regierte uneingeschränkt nur drei Jahre und der achte überhaupt nur widerwillig und auch das phasenweise nicht allein. Lediglich der fünfte und der dreizehnte Dalai Lama können eine nennenswerte Regieruagsbeteiligung oder Alleinregierung vorweisen. Zwischen 1750 und 1950 gab es nur achtunddreißig Jahre, in denen kein Regent regierte!«

Jan-Ulrich Sobisch,
Lamakratie - Das Scheitern einer Regierungsform (PDF), S. 182,
Universität Hamburg

Der Fünfte Dalai Lama,
Ngawang Lobsang Gyatso

Der Fünfte Dalai Lama, Ngawang Lobsang Gyatso

?Der fünfte Dalai Lama, der in der tibetischen Geschichte einfach ?Der Gro?e Fünfte? genannt wird, ist bekannt als der Führer, dem es 1642 gelang, Tibet nach einem grausamen Bürgerkrieg zu vereinigen. Die ?ra des fünften Dalai Lama (in etwa von seiner Einsetzung als Herrscher von Tibet bis zum Beginn des 18. Jahrhunderts, als seiner Regierung die Kontrolle über das Land zu entgleiten begann) gilt als pr?gender Zeitabschnitt bei der Herausbildung einer nationalen tibetischen Identit?t - eine Identit?t, die sich im Wesentlichen auf den Dalai Lama, den Potala-Palast der Dalai Lamas und die heiligen Tempel von Lhasa stützt. In dieser Zeit wandelte sich der Dalai Lama von einer Reinkarnation unter vielen, wie sie mit den verschiedenen buddhistischen Schulen assoziiert waren, zum wichtigsten Beschützer seines Landes. So bemerkte 1646 ein Schriftsteller, dass dank der guten Werke des fünften Dalai Lama ganz Tibet jetzt ?unter dem wohlwollenden Schutz eines wei?en Sonnenschirms zentriert? sei; und 1698 konstatierte ein anderer Schriftsteller, die Regierung des Dalai Lama diene dem Wohl Tibets ganz so wie ein Bodhisattva - der heilige Held des Mahayana Buddhismus - dem Wohl der gesamten Menschheit diene.?

Kurtis R. Schaeffer, »Der Fünfte Dalai Lama Ngawang Lobsang Gyatso«, in
DIE DALAI LAMAS: Tibets Reinkarnation des Bodhisattva Avalokite?vara,
ARNOLDSCHE Art Publishers,
Martin Brauen (Hrsg.), 2005, S. 65

Der Fünfte Dalai Lama:
Beurteilungen seiner Herrschaft I

?Gem?? der meisten Quellen war der [5.] Dalai Lama nach den Ma?st?ben seiner Zeit ein recht toleranter und gütiger Herrscher.?

Paul Williams, »Dalai Lama«, in
(Clarke, 2006, S. 136)

?Rückblickend erscheint Lobsang Gyatso, der ?Gro?e Fünfte?, dem Betrachter als überragende, allerdings auch als widersprüchliche Gestalt.?

Karl-Heinz Golzio / Pietro Bandini,
»Die vierzehn Wiedergeburten des Dalai Lama«,
O.W. Barth Verlag, 1997, S. 118

»Einmal an der Macht, zeigte er den anderen Schulen gegenüber beträchtliche Großzügigkeit. […] Ngawang Lobsang Gyatso wird von den Tibetern der ›Große Fünfte‹ genannt, und ohne jeden Zweifel war er ein ungewöhnlich kluger, willensstarker und doch gleichzeitig großmütiger Herrscher.«

Per Kvaerne, »Aufstieg und Untergang einer klösterlichen Tradition«, in:
Berchert, Heinz; Gombrich, Richard (Hrsg.):
»Der Buddhismus. Geschichte und Gegenwart«,
München 2000, S. 320

Der Fünfte Dalai Lama:
Beurteilungen seiner Herrschaft II

?Viele Tibeter gedenken insbesondere des V. Dalai Lama bis heute mit tiefer Ehrfurcht, die nicht allein religi?s, sondern mehr noch patriotisch begründet ist: Durch gro?es diplomatisches Geschick, allerdings auch durch nicht immer skrupul?sen Einsatz machtpolitischer und selbst milit?rischer Mittel gelang es Ngawang Lobzang Gyatso, dem ?Gro?en Fünften?, Tibet nach Jahrhunderten des Niedergangs wieder zu einen und in den Rang einer bedeutenden Regionalmacht zurückzuführen. Als erster Dalai Lama wurde er auch zum weltlichen Herrscher Tibets proklamiert. Unter seiner ?gide errang der Gelugpa-Orden endgültig die Vorherrschaft über die rivalisierenden lamaistischen Schulen, die teilweise durch blutigen Bürgerkrieg und inquisitorische Verfolgung unterworfen oder au?er Landes getrieben wurden.

Jedoch kehrte der Dalai Lama in seiner zweiten Lebenshälfte, nach Festigung seiner Macht und des tibetischen Staates, zu einer Politik der Mäßigung und Toleranz zurück, die seinem Charakter eher entsprach als die drastischen Maßnahmen, durch die er zur Herrschaft gelangte. Denn Ngawang Lobzang Gyatso war nicht nur ein Machtpolitiker und überragender Staatsmann, sondern ebenso ein spiritueller Meister mit ausgeprägter Neigung zu tantrischer Magie und lebhaftem Interesse auch an den Lehren andere lamaistischer Orden. Zeitlebens empfing er, wie die meisten seiner Vorgänger, gebieterische Gesichte, die er gegen Ende seines Lebens in seinen ›Geheimen Visionen‹ niederlegte.«

(Golzio, Bandini 1997: 95)

Der Dreizehnte Dalai Lama,
Thubten Gyatso

Der Dreizehnte Dalai Lama, Thubten Gyatso

?Ein anderer, besonders wichtiger Dalai Lama war der Dreizehnte (1876-1933). Als starker Herrscher versuchte er, im Allgemeinen ohne Erfolg, Tibet zu modernisieren. ?Der gro?e Dreizehnte? nutzte den Vorteil des schwindenden Einflusses China im 1911 beginnenden Kollaps dessen Monarchie, um faktisch der vollst?ndigen nationalen Unabh?ngigkeit Tibets von China Geltung zu verschaffen. Ein Fakt, den die Tibeter von jeher als Tatsache erachtet haben.?

Paul Williams, »Dalai Lama«, in
(Clarke, 2006, S. 137)

?Manche m?gen sich vielleicht fragen, wie die Herrschaft des Dalai Lama im Vergleich mit europ?ischen oder amerikanischen Regierungschefs einzusch?tzen ist. Doch ein solcher Vergleich w?re nicht gerecht, es sei denn, man geht mehrere hundert Jahre in der europ?ischen Geschichte zurück, als Europa sich in demselben Zustand feudaler Herrschaft befand, wie es in Tibet heutzutage der Fall ist. Ganz sicher w?ren die Tibeter nicht glücklich, wenn sie auf dieselbe Art regiert würden wie die Menschen in England; und man kann wahrscheinlich zu Recht behaupten, dass sie im Gro?en und Ganzen glücklicher sind als die V?lker Europas oder Amerikas unter ihren Regierungen. Mit der Zeit werden gro?e Ver?nderungen kommen; aber wenn sie nicht langsam vonstatten gehen und die Menschen nicht bereit sind, sich anzupassen, dann werden sie gro?e Unzufriedenheit verursachen. Unterdessen l?uft die allgemeine Verwaltung Tibets in geordneteren Bahnen als die Verwaltung Chinas; der tibetische Lebensstandard ist h?her als der chinesische oder indische; und der Status der Frauen ist in Tibet besser als in beiden genannten L?ndern.?

Sir Charles Bell, »Der Große Dreizehnte:
Das unbekannte Leben des XIII. Dalai Lama von Tibet«,
Bastei Lübbe, 2005, S. 546

Der Dreizehnte Dalai Lama:
Beurteilungen seiner Herrschaft

?War der Dalai Lama im Gro?en und Ganzen ein guter Herrscher? Dies k?nnen wir mit Sicherheit bejahen, auf der geistlichen ebenso wie auf der weltlichen Seite. Was erstere betrifft, so hatte er die komplizierte Struktur des tibetischen Buddhismus schon als kleiner Junge mit ungeheurem Eifer studiert und eine au?ergew?hnliche Gelehrsamkeit erreicht. Er verlangte eine strengere Befolgung der m?nchischen Regeln, veranlasste die M?nche, ihren Studien weiter nachzugehen, bek?mpfte die Gier, Faulheit und Korruption unter ihnen und verminderte ihren Einfluss auf die Politik. So weit wie m?glich kümmerte er sich um die zahllosen religi?sen Bauwerke. In summa ist ganz sicher festzuhalten, dass er die Spiritualit?t des tibetischen Buddhismus vergr??ert hat.

Auf der weltlichen Seite stärkte er Recht und Gesetz, trat in engere Verbindung mit dem Volk, führte humanere Grundsätze in Verwaltung und Justiz ein und, wie oben bereits gesagt, verringerte die klösterliche Vorherrschaft in weltlichen Angelegenheiten. In der Hoffnung, damit einer chinesischen Invasion vorbeugen zu können, baute er gegen den Widerstand der Klöster eine Armee auf; vor seiner Herrschaft gab es praktisch keine Armee. In Anbetracht der sehr angespannten tibetischen Staatsfinanzen, des intensiven Widerstands der Klöster und anderer Schwierigkeiten hätte er kaum weiter gehen können, als er es tat.

Im Verlauf seiner Regierung beendete der Dalai Lama die chinesische Vorherrschaft in dem großen Teil Tibets, den er beherrschte, indem er chinesische Soldaten und Beamte daraus verbannte. Dieser Teil Tibets wurde zu einem vollkommen unabhängigen Königreich und blieb dies auch während der letzten 20 Jahre seines Lebens.«

Sir Charles Bell in (Bell 2005: 546-47)

Der Vierzehnte Dalai Lama,
Tenzin Gyatso

Der Vierzehnte Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso

?Der jetzige vierzehnte Dalai Lama (Tenzin Gyatso) wurde 1935 geboren. Die Chinesen besetzten Tibet in den frühen 1950er Jahren, der Dalai Lama verlie? Tibet 1959. Er lebt jetzt als Flüchtling in Dharamsala, Nordindien, wo er der Tibetischen Regierung im Exil vorsteht. Als gelehrte und charismatische Pers?nlichkeit, hat er aktiv die Unabh?ngigkeit seines Landes von China vertreten. Durch seine h?ufigen Reisen, Belehrungen und Bücher macht er den Buddhismus bekannt, engagiert sich für den Weltfrieden sowie für die Erforschung von Buddhismus und Wissenschaft. Als Anwalt einer ?universellen Verantwortung und eines guten Herzens?, erhielt er den Nobelpreis im Jahre 1989.?

Paul Williams, »Dalai Lama«, in
(Clarke, 2006, S. 137)

Moralische Legitimation
der Herrschaft Geistlicher

Für Sobisch ist die moralische Legitimation der Herrschaft Geistlicher ?außerordentlich zweifelhaft?. Er konstatiert:

?Es zeigte sich auch in Tibet, da? moralische Integrit?t nicht automatisch mit der Zugeh?rigkeit zu einer Gruppe von Menschen erlangt wird, sondern allein auf pers?nlichen Entscheidungen basiert. Vielleicht sind es ?hnliche überlegungen gewesen, die den derzeitigen, vierzehnten Dalai Lama dazu bewogen haben, mehrmals unmi?verst?ndlich zu erkl?ren, da? er bei einer Rückkehr in ein freies Tibet kein politische Amt mehr übernehmen werde. Dies ist, so meine ich, keine schlechte Nachricht. Denn dieser Dalai Lama hat bewiesen, da? man auch ohne ein international anerkanntes politisches Amt inne zu haben durch ein glaubhaft an ethischen Grunds?tzen ausgerichtetes beharrliches Wirken einen enormen Einfluss in der Welt ausüben kann.?

Jan-Ulrich Sobisch,
Lamakratie - Das Scheitern einer Regierungsform (PDF), S. 190,
Universität Hamburg