China Lifts 17-year Ban on Dalai Lama Photos at Tibet Monastery

[DharmaSpace]

BEIJING — Chinese officials have lifted a ban on Tibetan monks displaying photographs of the Dalai Lama at a prominent monastery, a rights group said on Thursday, an unexpected policy shift which could ease tensions in the restive region.
 
The decision concerning the Gaden monastery in the Tibetan capital Lhasa - one of the most historically important religious establishments in Tibet - reversed a ban introduced in 1996, the Britain-based Free Tibet group told Reuters, citing sources with direct knowledge of the situation.
 
It was made as similar changes are being considered in other Tibetan regions of China, and may signal authorities are contemplating looser religious restrictions and a policy change over Tibet, three months after President Xi Jinping took office.
 
Chinese officials in western Qinghai province are also considering lifting a ban on Tibetans displaying pictures of the exiled spiritual leader, according to the International Campaign for Tibet, a U.S.-based advocacy group.
 
It said there were also draft proposals in the region to end the practice of forcing Tibetans to denounce the Dalai Lama, and to decrease the police presence at monasteries.
 
Officials in Lhasa and Qinghai could not immediately be reached for comment.
 
Such measures appear calculated to reduce tensions between the Tibetans and the government after a series of Tibetan self-immolation protests against Chinese rule.
 
Beijing considers the Dalai Lama, who fled China in 1959 after an abortive uprising against Chinese rule, a violent separatist. The Dalai Lama, who is based in India, says he is merely seeking greater autonomy for his Himalayan homeland.
 
Since 2009, at least 120 Tibetans have set themselves on fire in China in protest against Beijing's policies in Tibet and nearby regions with large Tibetan populations. Most were calling for the return of the Dalai Lama.
 
“Tibetans' reverence for and loyalty to the Dalai Lama has almost no equal among the world's communities and if this policy is extended beyond this individual monastery as other reports suggest, it will be very significant for the Tibetan people,” Free Tibet spokesman Alistair Currie said.
 
The new policy at the Gaden monastery and the discussions in Qinghai come after a scholar from the Central Party School published an essay questioning China's policy on Tibet.
 
So far, President Xi has said very little publicly about Tibet. His late father, Xi Zhongxun, a liberal-minded former vice premier, was close to the Dalai Lama. The Tibetan leader once gave the elder Xi an expensive watch in the 1950s, a gift the senior party official still wore decades later.
 
“There's increasingly a view that due to the critical nature of the situation of Tibet, a discussion of a change in some hardline policies is merited and there's a need for the Dalai Lama to be involved in some way,” Kate Saunders, spokeswoman for the International Campaign for Tibet, told Reuters.

Saunders said that Tibetans at the meeting raised the possibility of the draft proposals in Qinghai being implemented either in August or September.

The Dalai Lama has been a constant thorn and a source of embarrassment for the Chinese. The Dalai Lama can give China more sleepless nights than Washington's fighter jets or aircraft carriers around the Taiwanese Straits. That is how much Chenrezig is considered a bitter foe of the Chinese people.

But now pictures of the Dalai Lama is allowed to be displayed within Tibet itself, that is progress by the Chinese. CTA you can learn more from the practical Chinese. Isn't it time to allow Dorje Shugden pictures to be placed freely everywhere now. China has finally allowed 'Mother of all Enemies' picture to be displayed in Tibet, and why won't CTA start considering to lift the ban on Dorje Shugden for that matter. Dorje Shugden is hardly an enemy of the state, Dorej Shugden was the very one assisted the Dalai Lama out of Tibet. His Holiness the Dalaia Lama being the 'golden goose' for the CTA. Without the Dalai Lama, CTA is but a speck in this wide cosmos.

CTA time to to something substantial before His Holiness goes to the purelands (not that we want him to). Lifting the ban may be the only chance you have to make a mark in this world, take it, there is no way you will bring the Chinese to the negotiation table without HHDL.

Perhaps the Chinese is not being entirely sincere, but at least they try something new. That is applaudable, you don't keep sitting like a duck.

What is CTA trying new to bring more harmony for its people it supposedly represents and for Tibetan and Tibet's cause? The ban splits the Tibetans and spiritual practitioners, without Dorje Shugden, the Dalai Lama's would not have the opportunity to wow the WORLD at large.
 

[Blueupali]

This is a step in the right direction from China; we should be allowed to have pictures of whichever religious figures we like on our shrines.
  Yes, the CTA could definitely learn from this; basically just separate religion and state.  This guy likes that lama that guy likes that other lama, that other guy likes another religion.... it's really no problem.
  If we could have the CTA separating religion and state to begin with, then this would have been easier for China to accept Dalai Lama photos; if he were not so influential in politics they probably wouldn't have considered him a threat.
  That said, all governments need to allow free prayer, religion, and free speech.  Basically we need to be into non-oppression, or we will be like the fishing town where the people and the fish keep cycling back and forth and eating each other (when they are humans:)).  I oppress you you oppress me, when does it end?
  So I am glad they are allowing the Dalai Lama's photo, and I hope they will allow for religious freedom generally.
 

[WisdomBeing]

Hey Dharmaspace,

I am really glad to hear of this news, but please could you provide the original source url of the article? I have heard this news awhile back regarding the Chinese authorities relaxing their mandate on HH the Dalai Lama's picture and then the Chinese issued a statement saying it was not true. I do hope it is true this time round because it is about time.

It would be interesting to see if the Dorje Shugden monasteries in Tibet, China, put up HH the Dalai Lama's photos if it is permitted to do so.

[Matibhadra]

Another tired hoax, just like the one about the Jokhang's “demolition”.

Anyway, why should China allow pictures of a criminal politician supporter of self-immolations to be displayed anywhere, let alone in monasteries?

[Matibhadra]

And why would any pure monastery free from politicization want to display pictures of a samaya breaker who rejects and despises his own root gurus?

And let's not forget that the “Dalai Lama” openly supported the bloodshed perpetrated by Tibetans in Lhasa in March 2008. His status therefore would be more that of a wanted criminal. In this sense “wanted” posters would indeed make sense!

Anyway, would US allow a mosque to hold pictures of, say, Osama Bin Laden, or of any of the purported 911 attackers?

[Blueupali]

And why would any pure monastery free from politicization want to display pictures of a samaya breaker who rejects and despises his own root gurus?

And let's not forget that the “Dalai Lama” openly supported the bloodshed perpetrated by Tibetans in Lhasa in March 2008. His status therefore would be more that of a wanted criminal. In this sense “wanted” posters would indeed make sense!

Anyway, would US allow a mosque to hold pictures of, say, Osama Bin Laden, or of any of the purported 911 attackers?

Well, technically, the U.S. is SUPPOSED to allow pictures of anyone in a mosque, as long as its okay with the people running the mosque.  Now, in reality is the U.S. government somewhat prejudiced against Islamic people after 911?  It seems to many people like they are; even though most Islamic people are of course not terrorists. 
  Look, I don't personally have a picture of the Dalai Lama, though I have Dorje Shugden and one of the Karmapas (not the Dalai Lama's one) as well as Milarepa and other Buddhist lamas and dieties.  So, if these guys want a picture of the Dalai Lama, let's support that, and if we want whichever pictures of whatever lamas, let's support that too.  No, I don't have a picture of any politicians on my shrine either, but one person's politician is another person's lama:).

[Matibhadra]

Well, technically, the U.S. is SUPPOSED to allow pictures of anyone in a mosque, as long as its okay with the people running the mosque.  Now, in reality is the U.S. government somewhat prejudiced against Islamic people after 911?

The US is also supposed not to torture people as in Guantanamo, not to spy on its own citizens, not to wage war without authorization both of the UN and of its own Congress, not to surrender the control of the country to private bankers, not to discriminate against Black, Native Indian, Latin or Muslim people, not to support dictatorships and racist regimes which use weapons of mass destruction, and many other things, but this has hardly anything to do with actually happens.

The funny thing is that many Western people are so “concerned” with the “freedom” of Tibetans in China, while overlooking their own state of slavery and the brutality of their own tyrannical regimes.

[Tenzin Malgyur]

DharmaSpace, this is some good news. Now, the Tibetans have the freedom to possess a photo of His Holiness Dalai Lama and also to display it without being convicted. I see this as a step the Chinese government is taking towards gaining the trust of the Tibetans. Now it seems to me that the CTA is the one who is trying to split the Tibetans with the ban on Dorje Shugden. If only the CTA would focus its effort towards the well being of the Tibetans instead of dictating which deity they should not worship, it is just a matter of time they could get their independence.

[Blueupali]

Well, technically, the U.S. is SUPPOSED to allow pictures of anyone in a mosque, as long as its okay with the people running the mosque.  Now, in reality is the U.S. government somewhat prejudiced against Islamic people after 911?

The US is also supposed not to torture people as in Guantanamo, not to spy on its own citizens, not to wage war without authorization both of the UN and of its own Congress, not to surrender the control of the country to private bankers, not to discriminate against Black, Native Indian, Latin or Muslim people, not to support dictatorships and racist regimes which use weapons of mass destruction, and many other things, but this has hardly anything to do with actually happens.

The funny thing is that many Western people are so “concerned” with the “freedom” of Tibetans in China, while overlooking their own state of slavery and the brutality of their own tyrannical regimes.

[/color]

You do make an excellent point; though I think a lot of the founders of America thought they WERE supposed to 'surrender control of the country to the private bankers' and they still keep trying to brainwash us into thinking that selfishness and greed are virtuous qualities.
  Okay, so yes, it's definately true that America is waging an ideological war with the Tibet cause, and China is trying to keep its own stance.  Also, it's easier to point the finger at other countries.  That said, its probably hard to live in a country that's been taken over by communist China, since China has to re-educate everyone and get rid of the imperialists, only to place their own rulers in charge of what the newly freed people are doing.  The problem is in both cases that people are politically driven in ideological pursuits.
  So in religious pursuits, they can have their pictures of whomever.  However, we as Buddhists need to investigate our teachers and our teachings as the Buddha taught us to, like we would investigate whether something sold as gold is really gold.
  So, I really feel it would be wise of everyone to remember that constantly telling each other 'that guy is a Buddha' or 'this guy is a Buddha' is false dharma.  We only really can say with certainty who is a Buddha if we are a Buddha ourselves.  So when we say 'so and so is a Buddha' it is sort of like we are saying that we are already enlightened; if we are not yet enlightened, then we are committing the negative act of lying about spiritual realizations.  So, we need to be more careful about this.
  I know that a lot of people  say, 'well the other guys who are recognized as Buddhas said that guy is a Buddha, so therefore he is one," but the logical fallacy is the same; how do we know the guys that recognized him are Buddhas?  We would have to be Buddhas ourselves to really know that.... and so on.
  Saying someone is a Buddha over and over and only really being friends with others who do the same is sort of like instigating a loyalty oath; it implies that we all have to say that the person is a Buddha and join in being brainwashed.
 

[Matibhadra]

So when we say 'so and so is a Buddha' it is sort of like we are saying that we are already enlightened; if we are not yet enlightened, then we are committing the negative act of lying about spiritual realizations.  So, we need to be more careful about this.

So logic and well stated.

And of course the same would apply to affirming that someone is *not* a Buddha. So, unless one is indeed a Buddha oneself, one cannot say that even the most sinister criminal is not a Buddha. In this sense, it would be imprudent to state that the Dalai Lama is not a Buddha.

If I remember well, Pabongkha Rinpoche neatly approaches the issue in the Liberation in the Palm of Your Hands, to the effect that even if a dog is a Buddha, this does not mean that we have to follow his example and start to crawl around like a quadruped.

In the same way, even if the Dalai Lama is Buddha, this does not mean that we have to follow him or imitate him in his evil actions and nauseating behavior.

[kris]

Thank you @DharmaSpace for sharing the good news.. when I read this news, the "lifting of ban towards Dorje Shugden" immediately come to my mind... is it a strong sign the Dorje Shugden ban will come to an end soon??

China has indeed moved miles ahead on this matter, while Tibetan In Exile are still circling on the same ground. It is time for CTA to act like a real country where the constitution should treat all citizens equally without discriminating their religion practices.

[Blueupali]

So when we say 'so and so is a Buddha' it is sort of like we are saying that we are already enlightened; if we are not yet enlightened, then we are committing the negative act of lying about spiritual realizations.  So, we need to be more careful about this.

So logic and well stated.

And of course the same would apply to affirming that someone is *not* a Buddha. So, unless one is indeed a Buddha oneself, one cannot say that even the most sinister criminal is not a Buddha. In this sense, it would be imprudent to state that the Dalai Lama is not a Buddha.

If I remember well, Pabongkha Rinpoche neatly approaches the issue in the Liberation in the Palm of Your Hands, to the effect that even if a dog is a Buddha, this does not mean that we have to follow his example and start to crawl around like a quadruped.

In the same way, even if the Dalai Lama is Buddha, this does not mean that we have to follow him or imitate him in his evil actions and nauseating behavior.

You make a good point.  Of course Buddhas emanate in all the realms and it is not possible for ordinary sentient beings like myself to tell which is which; sometimes they may act even like insane beings in order to teach people patience or what not to do etc.  So, when we meet an 'insane being' s/he could be a Buddha, or s/he could be a suffering sentient being like ourselves.  Since we cannot be sure, I think it is prudent to respect all beings, thinking now or later they are Buddhas but still act skillfully; for instance if the 'insane being' tries to stand in traffic, we try to get him out of traffic.  Whether he is a Buddha emanating to give us merit or simply a being like ourselves is really impossible for us to know at this point, but we should still act in a way that would be normal if he were a sentient being, and help him.
  So, when people say 'this guy is a Buddha; speaking against him gives us bad karma;' then I have to think that we don't know if he is a Buddha, but if he has actions which appear to harm others, then skillfully we should say so.  Also it seems like saying that anyone who doesn't agree with whomever we've decided is a Buddha is getting bad karma would justify, in some peoples' minds, ending their bad karma by any means possible.
  So, if some people see their local politican as a Buddha and want a picture on their shrine, I think we should uphold their right to this; I can't do it myself with anyone involved in politics; I often seriously think that Obama could be a cleverly disguised Padmasambava, but I'd not put Obama on my shrine.  However, to each their own.

[Matibhadra]

So, if some people see their local politican as a Buddha and want a picture on their shrine, I think we should uphold their right to this;

If someone merely owns any symbol, or makes any characteristic gesture or greeting, associated with National Socialism in Germany, this one goes straight into prison. Still, Germany is widely seen as a democracy.

A mere German or a Japanese distant ancestry would warrant an innocent US citizen being thrown in a concentration camp during wartime, even without possessing any symbols or pictures, let alone possessing them, but US would still consider itself a democracy.

Possessing symbols or pictures related to groups deemed as terrorist in US, such as the Black Liberation Army or the Al-Qaeda will not attract the sympathy of American law enforcement agents, and will for sure warrant a season in prison, but US still considers itself a democracy.

Now the question is, if China forbids displaying the picture of the Dalai Lama, who is widely known to support and incite every kind of terrorism and violence, from political self-immolations to bloody riots to ethnic murderings within China, with the open support of foreign powers known for having warred against, invaded and colonized China in the not so distant past, and to be eager to do so again whenever possible, where is the difference, Sir?

Is it different just because he is said to be a “religious leader”? Just because he received the Nobel Prize?

Such is the Western hypocrisy. Such is the result of the constant brainwashing perpetrated by Western war propaganda against their own citizens. They believe that they are better than the rest of the world, and that they have the sacred and divine mission of teaching the rest of the world the very “freedom” they lack themselves.

Meanwhile, this is just a theoric discussion, because in pratice it is well known that many monasteries in Tibetan areas openly display the picture of the Dalai Lama without any repression, which again shows how much Western war and hatred propaganda is based on blatant lies, misinformation and ignorance.

[Blueupali]

So, if some people see their local politican as a Buddha and want a picture on their shrine, I think we should uphold their right to this;

If someone merely owns any symbol, or makes any characteristic gesture or greeting, associated with National Socialism in Germany, this one goes straight into prison. Still, Germany is widely seen as a democracy.

A mere German or a Japanese distant ancestry would warrant an innocent US citizen being thrown in a concentration camp during wartime, even without possessing any symbols or pictures, let alone possessing them, but US would still consider itself a democracy.

Possessing symbols or pictures related to groups deemed as terrorist in US, such as the Black Liberation Army or the Al-Qaeda will not attract the sympathy of American law enforcement agents, and will for sure warrant a season in prison, but US still considers itself a democracy.

Now the question is, if China forbids displaying the picture of the Dalai Lama, who is widely known to support and incite every kind of terrorism and violence, from political self-immolations to bloody riots to ethnic murderings within China, with the open support of foreign powers known for having warred against, invaded and colonized China in the not so distant past, and to be eager to do so again whenever possible, where is the difference, Sir?

Is it different just because he is said to be a “religious leader”? Just because he received the Nobel Prize?

Such is the Western hypocrisy. Such is the result of the constant brainwashing perpetrated by Western war propaganda against their own citizens. They believe that they are better than the rest of the world, and that they have the sacred and divine mission of teaching the rest of the world the very “freedom” they lack themselves.

Meanwhile, this is just a theoric discussion, because in pratice it is well known that many monasteries in Tibetan areas openly display the picture of the Dalai Lama without any repression, which again shows how much Western war and hatred propaganda is based on blatant lies, misinformation and ignorance.

I do agree that the west could be more open-minded as well.  I think worldwide more tolerance would be helpful; people should be able to display pictures on shrines of people that they think are holy; also my great grandfather should not have had to change his name during the 2nd world war to pretend his ancestors weren't from Germany; American TSA 'say' that they only check people's headcoverings if explosives could be hiding under their head coverings, and that they will equally check anyone with a head covering, whether religious or not.  Okay, but I can leave hats and scarves at home whereas the majority of Islamic women would cover their hair, obviously.  So, we aren't targeting them?  So, I think allowing the local robed people on the shrine is a good instance of China showing tolerance.  So maybe the U.S. will take note of this, and realize that they need to be more tolerant toward Islamic and other marginalized groups. 

[hope rainbow]

This news "China Lifts 17-year Ban on Dalai Lama Photos at Tibet Monastery", came as a surprise first, but then maybe not such a surprise after all.
China is showing not to be the "evil" party that some may have perceived it to be in the past.
I do pray for peace in China and elsewhere.