Here is an interesting observation from:
http://www.arebuddhistsracist.com/why_would_the_dalai_lama_lie.htmlWhy would the Dalai Lama lie?
Dalai LamaIt is clear that the Dalai Lama's public reputation is based on his wholesome values of human rights, peace, love and tolerance. He often attends human rights events and speaks publicly about harmony and religious freedom.
So if he were to admit that the Tibetan government is implementing a ban on a religious practice he would have to explain why.
It seems that the Dalai Lama would then be forced to admit that he told people they must stop practising Dorje Shugden. He would have to admit that he agrees with the ban and with the religious discrimination imposed by the CTA.
It would suddenly make it difficult for him to then publicly tell people to respect all religions.
It would also make it difficult for him to be taken seriously when he talks of Chinese human rights violations when he himself supports human rights violations by his own government.
In short he takes the politician's way out of uncomfortable situations - he avoids answering the issue directly and when pressed he simply lies. Not exactly what you would expect from a Buddhist monk, but not a huge surprise for a politician.
So it's easier to lie, smile, laugh and confuse the whole situation with Buddhist debate about doctrinal differences. After all which politician or journalist will be prepared to debate with the Dalai Lama about Buddhism?
For as long as the Dalai Lama keeps the debate focussed on religion he doesn't have to answer questions about what the CTA are doing and why he has told them to do it.
He doesn't have to explain why people were told to leave their jobs in the government, he doesn't need to explain why people were stopped from receiving teachings in their monasteries, and he doesn't need to explain why the Tibetan Parliament has passed a resolution branding people as 'criminals' because they practice a prayer that prior to 1996 was considered to be just fine.
I must admit that this anonymous journalist sure has pretty sharp observations. I do wish him much success, and for anyone who wishes to give him more in and news... here is what he says in his site:
About me
So who am I?
Without trying to give you the cliched Zen Buddhist style answer, which I'm tempted to, I shall remain anonymous.
The reason for my anonymity is quite straightforward. I'm an independent journalist currently based in the UK and during the course of my research and preparation for this publication I have encountered a staggering amount of abuse and threats.
Whilst this is what I do for a living there is absolutely no reason for any of my family or colleagues to be targeted with bullying or intimidation. So for their sake I have taken the precaution of publishing this anonymously.
If you are an accredited journalist and would like more details, source information, photograph permissions and the like please get in touch. I will try and be as helpful as possible and can forward your request to any of the photographers that have supplied me with images for this publication. You can email me at:
If you just want to abuse me then you can email me at:
[email protected] (LOL like this part... all the ANTIs can go here!)
