RELIGIONS : Buddhism

For Buddhism, the teachings of the "enlightened one", salvation, liberation or "nirvāna" is being freed from "samsāra", the cessation of suffering ("dukkha"). This liberation can take place during life or after consciousness lost its support.

Hence, the First Noble Truth can be seen as the foundation of Buddhism (cf. "bodhi" or "enlightened") :

"What, O Monks, is the Noble Truth of Suffering ? Birth is suffering, sickness is suffering, old age is suffering, death is suffering. Pain, grief, sorrow, lamentation, and despair are suffering. Association with what is unpleasant is suffering, disassociation from what is pleasant is suffering. Not to get what one wants is suffering. In short, the five factors of individuality are suffering."
Buddha : First Sermon.

Liberation from suffering is the goal of the teachings of Gautama the Buddha, the Bodhi-dharma. The Truth of Suffering is followed by the Truth of Arising ("samudāya"), namely the fact of desire. This is then followed by the Truth of Cessation ("nirodha"), pointing to the end of suffering through the transformation of the personality to bring peace, joy, compassion and a refined awareness where there was doubt, worry, anxiety and fear, absent in the enlightened mind, energy (voice) and body. Cessation means there is an end to suffering. Liberation or "nirvāna" is achieved by the Truth of the Path ("mārga"). This is the Eightfold Path or "middle way" between all extremes. It is divided in Wisdom, Morality and Meditation.

Put simply : we suffer because of our afflicted emotions. Harmonize these and "nirvana" is a fact.

Wisdom :
1. Right Understanding (or Right View) : acceptance and experiental confirmation of the teachings of the Buddha (the "dharma") ;
2. Right Resolve : commitment to developing right attitudes ;
Morality :
3. Right Speech : telling the truth and speaking in a thoughtful and sensitive way ;
4. Right Action : abstaining from wrongful bodily behaviour (killing, stealing, and extreme sensual pleasures) ;
5. Right Livelihood : not harming others by one's occupation ;
Meditation :
6. Right Effort : control the mind and gaining positive states of mind ;
7. Right Mindfulness : cultivating constant awareness ;
8. Right Meditation : developing deep levels of mental calm by concentrating the mind & integrating the personality.

All existing things coming into being bear three characteristics or "marks" : unsatisfactoriness ("dukkha"), impermanence ("anicca") and absence of self-essence ("anattā") independent of the universal causal process. The Third Noble Truth (the end of suffering) points to non-attachment to the impermanent, in particular the soul, considered in Hindu teachings as permanent and immortal. This teaching of "anātman", does not deny the existence of the soul, but does not attribute any permanent and immortal status to it (cf. the ātman). Likewise, the Buddha did not come across an eternal creator-God (Brahman), and could therefore not acknowledge the identification of this would-be permanent soul with the Supreme God (cf. ātman = Brahman). This was a revolutionary teaching, contradicting centuries of Vedic thought and ritual practice aiming at realizing this soul and therefore realizing Godhood. Indeed, Buddhism is an unorthodox, renouncer movement ("samana"), explicitly turning its back to any onto-theology.

Buddhist theology understands all phenomenal being as causally interdependent, meaning that all beings are conditioned by something else, making their existences relative to these conditions. In an absolute sense, nothing substantial, permanent, identical or atomic can be found. Subjectivity is also devoid of persisting psychic entities that imply an eternal, unchanging substance (like the "ātman"). There is no permanent, unchanging "I"-principle, ego or Self. Emptiness ("shūnyatā"), interdependence and non-substantiality form a consistent whole. Because every relative thing is connected with every other relative thing, things cannot be posited as "on their own" like independent substances. As they are all linked and without substance (although cyclic energy or movement occurs), they are relative aggregates in constant movement empty of inherent existence.

In fact, "shünyatā" should be translated as "full-emptiness", for every phenomenon is empty of substance but full of interdependent arisings.

The aggregates or five factors of individuality ("skandhas") are : (1) the physical body ("rūpa"), (2) sensations and feelings ("vedanā"), (3) cognitions ("samjńā), (4) character traits and dispositions ("samskāra") and (5) consciousness ("vijńāna"), or in other words : sensation, affect, cognition, will and consciousness. They are "carryied" by a lawful, universal world-order of interdependent causes and are thus not random, not probabilistic, but determined. Nevertheless, these aggregates (both physical & mental) pass through the inconceivably rapid moments of arising, existing & ceasing. They thus change incessantly and are therefore impermanent and unsatisfactory (when used). They do not bear witness of an immortal ego, eternal soul, Self or Creator of it All. This is quite important. Buddhism is not against the Divine (atheism), but against theo-ontology : the positing (labeling) of an objective, eternalized Being or "substantia", an underlying "outer" thingness : permanent, separated, defined, continuous and solid. Its intent is transtheist.

Although the Buddha affirmed the bundles imply a carrier, he would not attribute any substantial, unchanging, essentialistic meaning to this carrier whatsoever. Doing this, would imply the re-entry of ontology of the solid, substantial, essential and self-existing, autarchic world-system, which is not evidenced by sensation, emotion, thought, will, the consciousness of the five senses, nor the over-arching consciousness.

In the Elder schools of Buddhism (tradition mentions 18 schools, although over 30 different names came down to us), of which the Theravāda is the only one surviving today, "nirvāna" is a place of salvation, the "abode of immortality", a supramundane ("lokotttara"), not spatially localizable, different mode of existence. Enlightenment takes place in time but is also always already there outside time. These various Hīnayāna schools and sects (a term, together with "Mahāyāna", coined during the Council of King Kaniska in the first century CE), introduced different positive views on "nirvāna". For example, in the Vātsīputrīya school, very prominent in the third century BCE, it is a positive state in which the person continues to exist (i.e. they reject the "anātman").

For Buddhist logic (cf. Dharmakīrti) the source of knowledge is a differential moment, flash or point. As soon as one identifies this momentary flash with a mental picture or idea, a secondary, relative, unreal reality is created (constructed). This is the activity of the labeling, conceptual, dualistic mind. This mind "runs" on the afflictive emotions and is the cause of subtle suffering : mental obscuration. Through the "dharma" of the Buddha one may empty the mind of constructions (transcend the final duality between "samsāra" & "nirvāna") and arrive at "the Other Shore", the undifferentiated, indiscernible & indestructible "nirvāna". So "nirvāna" is peace, liberation from the afflictions, their causes & effects. All Buddhist "vehicles" (or ferries to this "Other Shore" of wisdom) agree with this.

Buddhism has a predilection for ethical questions. But its ethics is not inferred from an eternalized ontological scheme, for being is viewed as a totality of impermanent aggregates.

Life is a moving fabric of interdependent dualities and it is impossible to understand life without knowing both good & evil. An impartial judgement can not be reached without knowing both sides. Hence, evil must be understood and tested together with good.

The true purpose of human existence is to reach the "Other Shore". This is wisdom mind conquering labeling mind.

If this goal is relinquished, our passions overwhelm us (cf. the power of the devil "Māra", who hinders "wholesome roots") and, running in circles of madness, we are lost in the web of deceptive glamour, fettered to appearances and the eighth worldly preoccupations. The "dharma" teaches life & death, good & evil per se do not exist. They are modifications of the unenlightened mind, caught by the illusions of the "samsāra" and can not be conceived as existing independently. This is their "emptiness" for, on the one hand, due to the experience of impermanence and constant change, all form is found to be "empty" of substance. On the other hand, because emptiness "itself" is not a substance either, the absence of substance is witnessed "as form". Of what kind ? As continuous interdependence, i.e. the functional (meta)physics of the vast network of possible determinations (classified as causal, interactive, statistical, formal, teleological, etc.).

Good & evil are inseparable twins, as life and death. The intent initiating an act determines whether it is good or evil. Non-dual "nirvāna" is beyond good & evil and delivers from ignorance.

The "dharma" of the Buddha points to the true nature of reality, which is absolute. "Absolute" means "set apart". The essence of experience is inexpressible. This un-saying is rooted in the direct experience of nonconceptual thought, called "wisdom". Samsaric existence is conceptual & unsatisfying. This is the first truth to accept.

Every human has the possibility to reach "nirvāna", the non-dual state. Responsibility for one's actions and emancipation lies within the reach of every "sentient being". It is not reliance on faith, but "nirvāna" which brings to Truth. Its characteristic are absence of arising, subsisting, changing, and passing away. With "dharma", Buddhism denotes the "natural law", as well as the ethico-spiritual teachings of the Buddha. These teachings are thought to be objectively true and in accordance with the deep nature of things, encompassing both the functional, conventional truth and the absolute, ultimate truth. Buddhist "omniscience" involves both (a) the natural & consensual phenomena and (b) the absolute & universal "moral law" (or determining super-causality, "karma" and its associated logic of merit), whose requirements were (re)discovered by the Buddha and the Buddhas before and after him. Indeed, the Buddha did not invent the "dharma", but, as a homeopathic doctor, discovered it himself !

If the notions of karma and reincarnation (cf. infra) are eliminated from the basket of teachings (which would run against the teachings of the Buddha), then Buddhism would be identical with an elaborate form of scientific humanism. However, "dharma" manifests in the law of karma, the neglect of which entails the continuation of endless suffering in the cycle of rebirth. Also beginningless time would be meaningful and the vast suffering of the universe without cause. Without the reincarnating spiritual code of the carrier (stored in deep-consciousness), physical death would indeed become the natural terminus and thus, as it is inevitable, available to all without effort. Peace would have lost its meaning.

The ideal of the "bodhisattva", introduced by the Mahāyāna schools in the first century C.E., broadened & united Buddhism's salvic & ethical perspectives. Liberation through renunciation or "nirvāna" (the Hīnayāna) was deemed necessary but insuficient, for sentient beings continue to suffer after the foe-destroyer or arhat attained liberation (entered "nirvāna") and the methods do not allow to purify massive negative karma swiftly. Hence, to achieve liberation takes a very long time and many painful incarnations. According to the Mahāyāna, Buddha wanted to find a way to help all sentient beings discover the "Other Shore" as soon as possible. The Great Vehicle brings universal "bodhicitta" or "compassion" into the equation. They add compassion to love. Just truly wanting somebody else to be happy is not enough. Causing somebody elso to be happy is. Compassion is a verb. The bodhisattva pledges to help all sentient beings achieve the peace he or she has achieved. Liberation ("nirvāna"), associated with what happened to Buddha Shākyamuni under the Bodhi tree, preludes final enlightenment ("parinirvāna"), associated with the death of Buddha's physical body. The bodhisattva may return from this plane of the "dharmakāya" and invest another incarnation to help sentient beings.

Liberated, the bodhisattva dwells in the direct experience of the absolute, in the bliss of cognizing one's identity with the absolute and in total detachment from the worlds. He postponed the extinction in "nirvāna" until all beings are liberated, and this regardless of how long it takes. Given his state, this cannot harm him. The crucial initial stage of a bodhisattva is the "thought of enlightenment" or "bodhicitta". When deepened, the aspirant takes the Vow of the Bodhisattva ("pranidhāna"), namely to save all beings by leading them to liberation. To connect with all sentient beings, this dedication is supreme.

The reasons for the Mahayanist expansion are unclear. Tradition, as always, tries to uphold the founding myth of original Great Vehicle teachings initiated by Buddha and kept secret among his initiates. This "strategy" is also found in many religions, especially when the process of canonization has begun (this urge to codify is usually the result of an increased number of adherents and the need to manipulate them to reduce problems). However, regarding Buddhism, there is a yawning space between the first definitive texts (ca. 250 CE) and the death of the "enlightened one" (ca. 486/483 BCE). Even if elaborate ad hoc assumptions are accepted (like an adept oral tradition), then the fact remains differences were not recorded and so are lost. But does Buddhism need a "founding text" ? If the experience of peace is everybody share, then only the "core" needs to be codified. It seems the Elder schools kept this heart of the basic teachings of the Buddha intact (grounding the "sutric" approach to meditation). Perhaps the turbo systems added by later vehicles, are mostly contributions of enlightened practitioners. But this would not make them less Buddhist ! This is unthinkable in "closed" traditions such as the religions "of the book" (Judaism, Christianity & Islam).

In fact, in Tibetan Buddhist philosophy, the definition of a proponent of Buddhist tenets is a person asserting the four seals. Each of the schools have their own particular interpretation of these seals, and non-Buddhist tenets are systems which do not assert them :

1. all compounded phenomena are impermanent ;
2. all contaminated things are miserable ;
3. all phenomena are selfless ;
4. nirvāna is peace.

History shows Buddhism survived by adapting to changing circumstances, both within the community as in its milieu (in India). The following consecutive strands appear :

1. Classical period (ca. 500 - 0 CE) : in this existential, basic level, man's situation is studied and ways (or "dharma-doors") are found to liberate conform the example of Buddha Shākyamuni. Liberation can be attained, but only as a monk, after hard work and mostly after many lifetimes - the Elder Schools of which only the Theravāda survived ;

2. Religious period (ca. 0 - 6th century CE) : with the rise of the Mahāyāna in the first century CE, the salvic intention of the Elder Schools is superseded by a wish to liberate all sentient beings. The bodhisattva returns to this world as long as luminous beings suffer. The need to shorten the length of suffering is felt. The layperson, helped by bodhisattvas and Buddhas also attains "nirvāna". The latter not only points to liberation (the first, "individual" step), but also to the total realization of Buddhahood, for by one's very nature one is inseperable from the absolute. Liberation may be attained in a single lifetime. In the Pure Land school, founded in 402 CE by Hui-yuan, a Chinese monk, the most devotional side of the Great Vehicle emerged. With the rise of Ch'an in China (ca. 6th - 7th CE), the most stringent "yogic" form of the Mahāyāna was achieved, nondependent on sacred texts or intellectual analysis and emphasizing sudden enlightenment "hic et nunc" ;

3. Logical period (5th century CE - 1000 CE) : with the development of the two truths by Nāgārjuna (2th or 3th CE), the founder of the Mādhyamika school, Buddhism began to slowly integrate the fundamental logical distinction between relative truth of the world of illusion and the absolute truth of that selfsame world. It represented the "Middle Way" between existence and nonexistence, proving any affirmation about existence as an eternal substance to be inaccurate and making clear how eternal substance excludes causality (and so action & merit). Hence, nothing is independent of conditions and all things are empty of a permanent state of identity or self (or selfless) and so full of functional connectivity. If previously, all ideas and cogitations were deemed illusion (for based on the dualism of the conceptual, constructive mind and so not appearing as they truly are), and only intuition or higher wisdom ("prājńā") was of any avail, now arguments proved why some conceptual thoughts liberate and analytical meditation was refined. The fundamental concept is "shūnyatā" (cf. Nāgārjuna, Dignāga, Dharmakīrti), translated as "emptiness". "Shunya" also expresses "purna" (full), "lopa" (absence), "akasa" (universe), "bindu" (dot) and "vrtta" (circle). It always goes hand in hand with "karunā", compassion for all living beings ;

4. Esoteric period (middle 8th century - 1419 CE) : between the time of the magical Padmasambhava, a contemporary of the Tibetan king Trisong Detsen (755 - 797 BCE), and the death of the great scholar, reformer and creator of Gelugpa doctrine Tsongkhapa (1357 - 1419 CE), the Vajrayāna or "Diamond Vehicle" flourished, primarily in northeast and northwest India. Developing out of the teachings of the Great Vehicle, it reached, along with the Mahāyāna it embraced, Tibet, China and Japan. Other names for it are Tantrayāna and Mantrayāna. Its first coherent, doctrinal systems were developed in India between the 6th and 10th centuries CE, although it entered the world stage, at the earliest, in the third century CE. All tantra's originated in India and Hinduism had its own tantric models, devoid of the concept of "shūnyatā". The emergence of the Kālachacra Tantra in the 10th century CE markes the close of the creative phase of Vajrayāna.

These teachings form a living & authentic esoteric tradition, combining elements of yoga and nature religion with original Buddhist concepts. Being esoteric, it incorporates occult & magical techniques. In this view, the fruit of Buddhahood is possible in one lifetime, in as little as three years or, very exceptionally, in six months. Theoretically, it may even happen in an instance ! Bang ! Gap ! Enlightened !

So in Tibet, integrating inveterate shamanistic, magical and occult practices, the world-view of the Buddha-dharma was again extended. Both psychological methods and highly ritualized practices characterized by a symbology of light rose : the Vajrayāna, or occult, esoteric Buddhism. It remained operational for over a millennium, remained isolated until 1959, gathered its best forces and spread to the West. Today, it is with us as Tibetan Lamaism, with temples and meditation centres all over the world. Vajrayāna is a minority within Buddhism the Western pop-mind equates with Buddhism as such. Of the ca. 350 million Buddhists world-wide, Chinese officials state Tibet has more than 46.300 Buddhist monks and nuns, while the number of Tibetans is estimated at ca.6.5 million.

As late as the 16th century, the "God-King" of old (not unlike the Egyptian divine king), became the living presence of the Solar Buddha of Compassion (Avalokiteshvara), guiding the world from its top (cf. the institution of the "Dalai Lama", in principle holding all spiritual and temporal powers). The titles of this God-King are "Dalai Lama" or "Ocean of Wisdom" ; "Kundun" or "Presence". The title of "Dalai Lama" was conferred by the Mongul ruler Altan Khan (1507 - 1582), "dalai" being a Mongol word for "ocean". In the West, the Dalai Lama makes clear he does not consider himself a "God-King", but for the common Tibetan he still is. Tibetan education has apparently not done away with this Medieval superstructure ;

5. Western period (1959 - today) ? : with the present XIVth Dalai Lama, fleeing Tibet for India and seeking help from the West, in particular the CIA, Tibetan Tantrism was made available to Western readers & practitioners and the "wish-fulfilling jewel" could "shine from the West". After five decades, this New Buddhism, labeled "Navayāna", or New Vehicle, incorporates the best of both Theravāda, Sutric Mahāyāna, Zen, the Pure Land school, Tantric Vajrayāna, and Bonpo Dzogchen, etc. Clearly this movement was initiated by the Tibetan Lamas themselves, publishing cherished secrets and performing public rituals.

Views of "nirvāna" differ among all these schools. The Mādhyamikas identify it with emptiness ("shūnyatā"). The Yogāchāra with the cessation of discrimination (the non-distinctness of "samsāra" and "nirvāna") & the (idealist) awareness that only mind exists, whereas the phenomena are but confusion of mind. Finally, "Dzogpa Chenpo" (the "Great Perfection") is the direct discovery of the natural, non-conceptual, non-dual, clear state of mind, one with the essence of the base of reality, the absolute inherent existence of emptiness, expressing a manifold of energies or movements, of which the luminous ground of mind is part.

Sub-traditions : Theravāda (or Hīnayāna), Mahāyāna, Pure Land, Zen, Varjayāna, Nichiren ... each with various schools & sects ... and recently Navayāna (or "New Vehicle").

Criticism of Buddhism :

§ 1/+ Specialists discovered two outstanding elements in the teachings of Gautama the Buddha : the absence of Divine revelation & the no-soul. Rarely, almost never, can these be found in other systems and nowhere do they occur combined. Buddhism is therefore very original. No doctrinal dogma and no provision for a centralized authority are in place. Only the accuracy of a truth verifiable by a nominal, reasonable mind is acceptable. Spiritual truth -in Buddhism fundamentally related with the issue of spiritual freedom- is its own proof.

Individual effort is stressed and self-reliance is the essence of the spiritual practice. The Buddhist is responsible to himself for his actions and does not behave irresponsibly in order to avoid the outcome of his evil thoughts, words & deeds (loss of benefits or merit, "punya"). The four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path, training in discipline & morality, meditation, wisdom & insight are the basic salvic operators as summed up in the Tripitaka and taught by the Elder Schools. Although seeking refuge in someone else is rejected, in the Pansil ceremony, the thrice repeated declaration : "I take refuge in the Buddha. I take refuge in the Teaching. I take refuge in the Brotherhood of Monks" precedes the promise to observe the Five Precepts : not to kill, not to steal, not to commit adultery, not to lie, not to take intoxicants.

§ 2/+ To lack a permanent and immortal soul implies that Buddhism has to introduce a new psychogenesis, especially in terms of "karma" and reincarnation, both confirmed by the Buddha. The "I" or empirical ego of the "personality" is a temporal composition of different parts, a bundle of 5 attributes permanently coming to pass, ceasing and rising. These attributes are constantly moving and changing like the waters of a swiftly flowing river (cf. endless wandering or "samsāra"). Physical, psychological and sociological dispositions and acquired attitudes, prejudices, beliefs, norms, expectations, values and the countless memorized experiences of an entire lifetime together constitute this ever-changing sense of "I-ness". As soon as our mind says "I", selfishness and lack of compassion ensue. As the "I" is caused by the impermanent, it is sizeable, destructible and attached. So the illusion of separation (and not of the ego as such) is the first cause of sorrow. It seems as if we are separate beings, but we are not. The Eightfold Path leads to a state of purity, to a deathless bliss amidst continuous change. The cravings (psychological traits) active at the time of physical death are able to exist independently of their extinct brain and are transferable to another newly born living being, to eventually become a part of its consciousness.

"Everyone, big and little, strong and weak, works continually -and in general unconsciously- at the formation of new groups whose members, through lack of perspicacity, are not aware of their heterogeneity and, who insensible to the discordances of their voices, or without dwelling on it, shout in chorus "I", I am Me !"
David-Neel, A. & Lama Yongden : The Secret Oral Teachings, City Lights Books - San Francisco, 1974, p.103.

The notion of transferable attributes seems to run against the idea of impermanence. Who secures the transfer and how ? Although there is no substantial soul, physical death is not the end of the story. The mind and the body (like two persons in one boat) travel together, but at the end of this life the latter perishes, while its constituent parts return to the material plane of the world-order. Nevertheless, the mind is not annihilated by physical death. Existing in a realm of its own, it continues to exist as does its personality. Although essentially impermanent, it nevertheless lasts longer than the body. The "spiritual code" of each person's mind (or own-Self) will survive and, driven by its inherent karmic forces, seek a new vehicle to incarnate. Eventually, the conceptual mind, as an entity of the dual world, jumping from life to life catching the carrot, will perish in the fire of liberation. But, on this other, absolute shore of reality (the "dharmakāya"), it nevertheless conditions a Buddha-field of its own. Hence, every Buddha and bodhisattva (every enlightened being) has characteristics. In this way, transmigration is explained, as well as the influence of bad actions done in this life on the next life.

§ 3/+ The Great Vehicle (Mahāyāna) and Zen ("Ch'an"), part of the former, define a spectrum. The Great Vehicle introduces a variety of Buddhas & bodhisattvas who actively help the layperson to attain liberation (this may even lead to highly developed magic-oriented ritual schools like the Vajrayāna). Like all of us, these bodhisattvas reincarnate (manifest in or assume a physical body on our plane). In Zen, more than in any other school, except Dzogchen, the prime importance of enlightenment ("kenshō" or "satori") is stressed. Zen Buddhists sternly regard doctrine, intellectual analysis, and ritual practices as of little to no use. Zen likes to be unorthodox, nondependent on Divine revelation, "direct pointing to the human heart", leading to Buddhahood (cf. Nansen Fugan). All these schools have their own texts, local beliefs and dogma's.

§ 4/- The bulk of authoritative scriptures of the numerous traditional schools covers tens and hundreds of thousands of pages. The Pali Canon (restricted to one school, namely the Theravāda) fills 45 huge volumes in the complete Siamese edition, exclusive of commentaries. The recent Japanese edition of the Chinese scriptures consist of 100 volumes of 1,000 closely printed pages. Because at present, scholars have no objective criterion to isolate the original teaching of the Buddha (although the Tripitaka is considered as the most trustworthy), discussions on the subject lead to fruitless disputes. Moreover, tradition holds Buddha stated that the things he revealed are very few in comparison with those which did not reveal. In Buddhism, books written by genuine practitioners are often more interesting than meticulous linguistic and philological knowledge of Sanskrit, Chinese, Japanese or Tibetan texts.

§ 5/- In all schools, the role of woman is problematic, and a mysogynist streak is evident. In Theravāda, they are accepted with great reluctance and identified with illusion (cf. the death of Gautama's mother Maya directly after giving birth and the transfeminine birth myths). In Mahāyāna, they are a "lower incarnation" and need a sex-change (the Pure Land of Buddha Amitabha accepts only men). In Vajrayāna, they are wisdom-consorts used to assist the male guru and only seldomly receive the same power as men. Although this situation is inconsistent with the principles of Buddhism, it nevertheless remains an important cultural factor part of the spiritual "canons" of the schools. Hence, Buddhist sexual morality, like that of all major religions, remained incomplete and biased.

§ 6/- Although the basic notion of Tantrism involves the primordial wholeness and completeness of being (represented by the union of the male method-deities with their female wisdom-consorts or yab-yum), the deeply entrenched domination of woman by the male elite (using sexual intercourse with woman exclusively to charge their spiritual batteries), gave rise to tantric teachings in which the mother goddess emanated from the masculine god, and the androgyny (male-female forces possessed by a man) remained uncompensated by gynandry (female-male forces possessed by a woman), building in a fundamental disparity within the tantric system (cf. the Trimondi Studies by Mariana and Herbert Röttgen). Bi-sexual eroticism is then reduced to heterosexual machoism. As a result, and not solely because of feminist critique, some Western practitioners try to develop a Buddhist system for the West, i.e. in harmony with Western science, secular thought and basic human rights. This runs against the authoritarian approach and involves a rethinking of the schools of Sutra, Tantra and Dzogchen in terms of the discoveries of Western secular science.

In January 2007, the author wrote to bhikkhu Tenzin Gyatso, the XIVth Dalai Lama, and respectfully asked him what he thought about the severe criticism of the Trimondi's. As yet, he did not receive any answer, not even an acknowledgment of reception.

Seem contrary to the spirit of the "dharma" of Buddha Shākyamuni, promoting liberation from all attachment (also attachment to rituals of renunciation) : (a) the hierarchic "power" relationship between pupil and teacher (in Zen, the teacher is a mentor, never a super-being of sorts) ; (b) the public performance of rituals with magical weapons of war, pain, etc. (like cleavers, skull-cups, daggers, axes, hooks, etc.) and (c) the ideological propagation of dangerous warrior-myths like Shambhala, part of the Kālachakra Tantra.

Contemporary Buddhist Tantra works out two systems leading to a blissfull union of polarities and not to one males only. On the one hand, the vajra-male "takes" the form-energy (bell) of the woman (the wisdom-consort) to reach androgyny, on the other hand, the lotus-woman "assimilates" the force-energy (vajra) of the man (the vajra-consort) to reach gynandry. In the spirit of the Highest Yoga Tantra, androgynous guru-god and gynandric mistress-goddess are one. This Tantric scheme is far more balanced. It can already be found in Taoist alchemy, were both male and female bodies are able to achieve enlightenment by means of their respective erotic energies.

It goes without saying, that of the ca.50.000 Tibetan monks & nuns, some are excellent spiritual masters, and teach the "dharma" in the spirit of the Buddha (keeping Tantra secret and for experienced practitioners).

§ 7/- Between the various schools of Buddhism of a given tradition, internal contradictions also pertain (cf. between Zen and Vajrayāna, between the Pure Land school and Mādhyamika).

For example, in Vajrayāna, a crucial difference exists between sūtrayāna and Dzogchen, the so-called Great Perfection, preserved in the Nyingma and Bon traditions of Tibet. The historical lineage is said to begin with Garab Dorje around the 7th century CE, who summarized the 6.4 million verses of Dzogpa Chenpo in "The Three Incisive Precepts" (Tsiksum Nedek) :

"A direct introduction into the nature of mind is the first imperative.
Absolute conviction in the practice is the second imperative.
Gain confidence in release is the third imperative."

Sūtrayāna strictly follows the emptiness-teachings of the Middle Path and so considers both the world (object) and the person (subject) as devoid of inherent existence. So to reach liberation, renunciation, compassion and the so-called "analytical" meditation on emptiness are considered as valid. This authentication is gradually inferred and the logic of emptiness yields two truths, namely conventional or everyday truth and the absolute truth of the enlightened ones. Some conventional truths accommodate the coming of absolute truth. In Dzogchen, by contrast, the base of all is unbounded wholeness, and although its essence is deemed "empty", it is also of the nature of clarity (light) and energy (spontaneous display from emptiness). Both runs against the sūtric notion of emptiness. Only a non-gradual, immediate introduction to or a direct discovery of the natural state of mind enlightens. Moreover, in Dzogchen, analytical, inferential logic cannot validate the direct experience of the nature of mind, which lies outside the conceptual mind. These differences show the dogma holding that both object and subject are empty is not accepted by all and thus doubtful.

§ 8/- The idea both the cosmos (God) and humanity (soul) have no permanence does not necessarily contradict the effective causality of conventional truth, nor the presence of subtle layers of reality. This alone explains the "personal" character of the reincarnating soul. From an absolute perspective (sub specie aeternitatis), the essence of the soul itself may well be "empty" and thus ruled by the law of dependent origination effectively constituting the experience of "samsāra". But for a person seeking liberation, a someone rather than a something, the own-Self is a trans-mortal reality (ideality), a genuine position before and after the death of the physical support of consciousness. If both merit and personal character are to survive this physical destruction, then a focus of consciousness other than the empirical ego has to be postulated. Although this own-Self is not a substance, not an immortal essence, it nevertheless is crucial to assure the continuity of information as long as liberation is not attained. Likewise, cosmology points to a singular beginning of the universe (some 15 billion years ago) and if so, then the Buddhist notion of "beginningless time" is in doubt, except if a periodic system of multiple "Big Bangs" is designated, entering metaphysics. For creationists, the question "What before the Big Bang ?" is pertinent and points to a creation and so to a Creator, both denied by Buddhist dogma. It is said the historical Buddha told his followers not to consider these matters, which seems hardly a philosophical attitude to be saluted. One does not address mysteries by turning away from them. Of course, if we know they remain mysteries, why bother ?

§ 9/+ The historical Buddha did not make worldly spirits define the "dharma" he discovered. The body of truth was beyond any possible affirmation and refutation, and so negative theology was the only possible way. The path of Lord Buddha is mystical, i.e. everyone discovering the absolute absoluteness directly. This invites personal responsibility. Why not identify the ontological stratum of transcendence proposed by monotheism, i.e. identify the ineffable essence (or face) of the Abrahamic "God" with the ultimate transcendence of the Dharmakāya ? In Qabalah, Christian negative theology and Sufism the same ideas pertain. Moreover, although the Buddha avoided worldly gods & goddesses, he nevertheless used the term "Divine" to describe final liberation.

§ 10/- The epistemology proposed by traditional Buddhism is mainly idealist. This means the object of knowledge (objective reality) is made part of the subject of experience. In the Mind Only school this is self-evident, but an idealistic streak runs through most if not all Buddhist constructions. The logical necessity of thinking the object as such is avoided, crippling the philosophy of mind proposed (cf. Clearings, 2006). As Hinduism, traditional Buddhism then relapses into the ontology of universal illusion. Only in Dzogchen something more is said about reality than emptiness, namely the light-nature of the mind one with absolute reality (unbounded wholeness).

§ 11/- Although Buddhism is often presented as an ethical philosophy, one should not forget only intention is paramount in Buddhist morality. This means the equation of ethics is reduced to a subjective, idealist construction, granting no importance to objective goals and values (cf. Behaviours, 2006). Only this explains why in Tantrayāna the most evil deeds (like human sacrifice or eating filth) may be accepted if they are deemed to lead to universal liberation, the ultimate intention.

§ 12/+ Finally, because of its dogmatic idealism and recuperation (transformation) of Hindu spiritual technology (yoga), Buddhism developed an extremely refined psychology of emancipation, containing a large amount of operational paths to liberation.

The more one studies Tibet, the clearer its complexity becomes.

Just like the uncorrupted Pyramid Texts of Unas, the much larger corpus of millennia old Buddhist material preserved by Tibetan Lamaism is remarkable and contains a multitude of skillful methods and profound insights into the ultimate nature of phenomena, the wisdom of the Buddha.

In Tibet, native Bön (shamanism, divination, magic, cult of the dead, spirit-worship) and monastic Lamaism (the monastic form prevalent in the schools of Tibetan Buddhism) intermixed. In the 1950s, both were forcefully ousted and replaced by Communist dictates ... The Tibetan government-in-exile estimates that due to Mao's violent policies, between 1950 & 1959, ca. 1.200.000 people were tortured & killed (although this number has been criticized and adjusted to no more than 500.000), 95% of the monasteries looted and sacred texts & images destroyed. In the '60, the Cultural Revolution killed another 173.000 Tibetans. Tibetan Buddhism was systematically humiliated (the most important temple, the Jokhang, was turned into a pig stall and its historical Buddha statue destroyed !). The Communists tried to root out religion, but -as in Russia- shamefully failed ...

The legitimacy of this Communist invasion can and should be questioned, criticized and rejected. Nor can the old political connections between pre-Communist China and Tibet be overlooked. Obviously, nothing condones the violence with which Communist China tried & tries to so-call "liberate" Tibet. Nor does it justify the Chinese claim Tibet was always part of China, which is obviously not the case. In fact, when overrun by the Communists, Tibet was independent.

Let us consider most major historical facts.

It is interesting, before dealing with the more recent history, to remember the terms of the treaty signed between the Chinese and the Tibetan Emperor in 822 :

"The Great King of Tibet, the Miraculous Divine Lord, and the Great King of China, the Chinese Ruler Hwang-ti, being in the relationship of nephew and uncle, have conferred together for the alliance of their kingdoms. They have made and ratified a great agreement. Gods and men all know it and bear witness so that it may never be changed ; and an account of the agreement has been engraved on this stone pillar to inform future ages and generations.

The Miraculous Divine Lord Tri-tsug De-tseji and the Chinese King Wen Wu Hsiao-te Wang-ti, nephew and uncle, seeking in their far-reaching wisdom to prevent all causes of harm to the welfare of their countries now or in the future, have extended their benevolence impartially over all. With the single desire of acting for the peace and benefit of all their subjects they have agreed on high purpose of ensuring lasting good ; and they have made this great treaty in order to fulfil their decision to restore the former ancient friendship and mutual regard and the old relationship of friendly neighbourliness.

Between the two countries no smoke nor dust shall be seen. There shall be no sudden alarms and the very word 'enemy' shall not be spoken. Even the frontier guards shall have no anxiety nor fear and shall enjoy land and bed at their ease. All shall live in peace and share the blessing of happiness for ten thousand years. The fame of this shall extend to all places reached by the Sun and the Moon.

This solemn agreement has established a great epoch when Tibetans shall be happy in the land of Tibet, and Chinese in the land of China. So that it may never be changed, the Three Precious Jewels of Religion, the Assembly of Saints, the Sun and Moon, Planets and Stars have been invoked as witnesses. An oath bas been taken with solemn words and with the sacrifice of animals ; and the agreement has been ratified.

If the parties do not act in accordance with this agreement or if they violate it, whichever it be, Tibet or China, nothing that the other party may do by way of retaliation shall be considered a breach of the treaty on their part.

The Kings and Ministers of Tibet and China have taken the prescribed oath to this effect and the agreement has been written in detail. The two Kings have affixed their seals. The Ministers specially empowered to execute the agreement have inscribed their signatures and copies have been deposited in the royal records of each party.

Tibet and China shall abide by the frontiers of which they are now in occupation. All to the east is the country of Great China ; and all to the west is, without question, the country of Great Tibet. Henceforth on neither side shall there be waging of war nor seizing of territory. If any person incurs suspicion he shall be arrested ; his business shall be inquired into and he shall be escorted back.

Now that the two kingdoms have been allied by this great treaty it is necessary that messengers should once again be sent by the old route to maintain communications and carry the exchange of friendly messages regarding the harmonious relations between the Nephew and Uncle. According to the old custom, horses shall be changed at the foot of the Chiang Chun pass, the frontier between Tibet and China. At the Suiyung barrier the Chinese shall meet Tibetan envoys and provide them with all facilities from there onwards. At Ch'ing-shui the Tibetans shall meet Chinese envoys and provide all facilities. On both sides they shall be treated with customary honour and respect in conformity with the friendly relations between Nephew and Uncle."

When the last Emperor of Tibet died (Lang Darma in 842), the empire fell apart. The fundamental & radical conflict between native shamanism (Bön) and Buddhist Lamaism had led to violent tensions and a drastic split between, on the one hand, royals, aristocrats and leading Lamas adhering to Buddhism and, on the other hand, those adhering to the native Bön, safeguarding their own local authority against any central power. This conflict had been there from the start (cf. Padmasambhava's role, from 763 onwards, in binding the "evil" spirits). As soon as Lang Darma was enthroned, he turned against the monastics. For a century, Buddhism was eradicated in Middle Tibet. Tibet fell apart and internal wars between monasteries & their wealthy patrons were ongoing.

In the 11th century, the Dharma of the Buddha was reintroduced. Besides the "old" Nyingma school (Padmasambhava), new schools saw the light, called "Kadam" (Atisha), "Sakya" (Sakya Pandita) & "Kagyu" (Milarepa). A few centuries later, the Kadam school was reformed and, headed by the Dalai Lamas, became the Gelug school. The presence of these early schools of Buddhism, each with their own focus and points of attention, as well as the divisions between powerful, wealthy chieftains sponsoring the monasteries (while later, the rich monasteries backed the aristocrats), divided Tibet politically. This lasted until 1268, when it willingly became part of the Mongol Empire.

This empire was created by Djingis Khan (1155/1162/1167 - 1227) and his 125.000 "nomadic barbarians". It exceeded the Roman Empire. Between 1207 and 1215, he subdued the kingdoms on his southern borders : Ujgurs, Tangut & Jin. For the moment, the Song Chinese, proud & strong, were left alone. Until his death, Djingis Khan conquered a vast territory West of China, including Iran, Afghanistan, Kazachstan, Turkmenistan, parts of Turkey, Armenia, Azerbeidzjan and large parts of Russia & Europe.

In 1240, Djingis Khan's grandchild, Godan Khan, dispatched a small army to Tibet. It encountered little resistance, killed 500 Tibetans, ransacked several monasteries and left. But during their raids, their commanding officer got fascinated by Buddhism and the spiritual powers of the Lamas. In 1247, the monk Sakya Pandita became Godan Khan's teacher. When later Kublai Khan (1215 - 1294) became prominent, he also showed interest in Buddhism and was taught by Sakya Pandita's nephew, Phagpa Gyaltsen. When he became the "Great Khan" (in 1260), Phagpa became his imperial teacher. In 1268, three years after Phagpa was send back to Tibet to be installed as the Mongol vazal or vice-king of Tibet, the Mongols established their rule in Tibet and erected the administrative system. In that same year, the alphabet developed by Phagpa, devoid of Chinese characters, became the official writing of the Mongol Empire (it remained in use for 110 years).

The Mongols began conquering the Song Chinese only as late as 1258, but because of the fierce resistence, this took more than two decades. In 1271, Kublai Khan named his own dynasty, the "Yuan", completing the destruction of the Song Chinese in 1279. The "Yuan" Dynasty was Mongol, not Chinese. Kublai Chan tried to separate both and his Forbidden City was intended to do just that. As a Mongol enclave in Beijing, its access was forbidden to the Chinese !

Despite Communist Chinese propaganda, the Mongols first subdued Tibet (1268) and then the Song Chinese (1279). So when Tibet became a vazal of the Mongol Empire, the Song Chinese were still independent. The Mongols ruled both countries independently from each other. The Mongols, establishing "khanates" in both China & Tibet, did not establish Chinese authority over Tibet, although they brought both together under one rule. So it is not the case that Tibet became part of the Chinese Yuan Dynasty ! The Mongols ruled both the Tibetans & the Chinese. In 1368, the latter drove the Mongols beyond the Great Wall and initiated the Ming Dynasty.

Meanwhile, in 1352, Changchub Gyaltsen rejected the Sakya Dynasty installed by Kublai Khan in Tibet. In 1358, he was accepted by the Mongols as the new vice-king, but he soon replaced Sakya-officials loyal to the Mongols. He died in 1364 and his nephew headed the so-called "Phamo Drupa-reign" or Gyaltsen Dynasty. In 1368, Tibet rejected any connection with the Mongols and became again independent. In the same period, the Kadam school became the Gelug school. At the end of the Phamo Drupa-reign (ca. 1434), a new fraction rose in power. This Rinpung fraction of kings backed the Kagyupas and ca.1500 this school found reasons to curtail the power of the fast growing Gelugpas. Finally, the Kagyu monks ransacked Gelug monasteries and destroyed them. From 1450 onwards, Tibetan fractions are constantly at war. In 1565, Tsang kings supporting the Kagyupas took over power in Middle Tibet. The political chaos was complete. The Tibetans, despite Lamaism and the constant building of monasteries, was unable to unite !

Between the Mongols, conflicts were also unending. Although not a "Great Khan" or Emperor, Atlan Khan (1543 - 1583) was the most prominent leader of his time. He ransacked Chinese cities, and in 1550 burned the outer quaters of Beijing. In 1571, he signed a treaty with the Ming Emperor. Atlan Khan was not one of the loyal subjects of the Chinese Emperor, but wanted to be treated as an equal.

When Atlan Khan heard of Sonam Gyatzo, the head Lama of the Gelug school (initiated by Tsongkhapa), he wanted to meet him. In June 1578, both men met and exchanged honorary titles. Atlan Khan translated "Sonam" (meaning "virtue") "Gyatzo" (meaning "ocean" or "dalai") as "ocean of virtue". The full title he gave was : "delightful Vajradhara, excellent & brilliant ocean of virtue". As "Lama" was an honorary title for reincarnated teachers ("tulkus"), the title "Dalai Lama" or "Ocean Teacher" was coined. "Gyatzo" or "ocean" remained the last name of all Dalai Lamas. Sonam Gyatzo became the IIIth Dalai Lama (he died in 1588), while the Ith and IIth Dalai Lamas received this title posthumously (the First was a pupil of Tsongkhapa, the founder of the order of the Gelugpas).

Just like Phagpa Gyaltsen before him, Sonam Gyatzo became the teacher of Atlan Khan. Within half a century, nearly all Mongols had become Buddhists, and thousands of monks lived in Mongol monasteries. The Mongols were very loyal Gelugpas, who venerated the Dalai Lama as the foremost of the Lamas. Thanks to the Mongols, the institution of the Dalai Lama became extremely powerful in Tibet, while the Gelug became the most prominent school of the land.

Conveniently, in 1589, the IVth Dalai Lama reincarnated as the great grandchild of Atlan Khan. It was the first time a manifestation of Avalokiteśvara was born in a non-Tibetan, a Mongolian boy called "Yonten Gyatzo". The East Mongols, who accompanied him to Lhasa, stayed there to protect him, for the conflict between Kagyu & Gelug and their wealthy noble patrons was still very much alive. In 1605, the army of nobles defending the Kagyu-school drove the Mongols out, but they returned in 1619.

The East Mongols were increasingly unable to help the Dalai Lamas. In 1617, the IVth Dalai Lama died, and some say he was poisoned. Lobsang Gyatzo, the Vth Dalai Lama, the so-called "Great Fifth", was born in the same year. His father belonged to the Nyingmas, who are not celebate. Despite the institution of the Dalai Lama (or because of it ?), the conflict with the Kagyupas & their protectors continued. The Great Fifth studied the teachings of the Nyingma, Sakya & Gelug schools. As the king of Tsang (in Shigatse) still formed an alliance with the violent Kagyupas opposing the Dalai Lama, his studies did not include the teachings of that school.

As the West Mongols were on the rise, Goesjri Khan, a king of the Kosjot-Mongols, was asked by the regent, Sonam Rapten, to protect the Vth Dalai Lama (1617 - 1682). Help was needed, for the intense & violent conflict between Gelug & Kagyu split the country. Ironically, the East Mongols now took sides with the king of Tsang & the Kagyupas. So the West Mongol king Goesjri Khan had to fight Mongols who had supported the IIIth Dalai Lama ! It took three years before Goesjri Khan could install the Vth Dalai Lama as the head of a united Tibet. In 1642, the king of Tsang was killed and the Great Fifth went to Shigatse to sit on his throne, with Goesjri Khan and Sonam Rapten on both sides. This enthronement scene has become a symbol for the Dalai Lamas as temporal & spiritual rulers of a united Tibet. Goesjri Khan became "king of Tibet" and the regent "desi" or prime minister. Both often joined forces to implement Gelug policies "de manu militari". They also had to fight in Bhutan, were prominant Kagyupas remained active.

In 1644, the former Jin, now called "Manchu", crossed the Great Wall. These non-Chinese entered Beijing and started the conquest of China, eradicating the Ming, which would take 17 years to complete. Earlier, in 1636, the East Mongols had capitulated to them and two years later they conquered Korea. Exactly like the Mongols before them, they gave their Dynasty a Chinese name "Qing", meaning "pure" and also made sure the native (Han) Chinese would not intermix with the Manchu. The only Mongol armies remaining undefeated were those of the West, like that of Goersjri Khan. This situation prompted them to take interest in the Fifth Dalai Lama, for his influence on the Mongols was well established.

In 1652, a decade after the unification of Tibet, the Manchu Emperor Shunzi wrote to the Great Fifth for the third time. For the Dalai Lama this was an opportunity to finish his work : convert Tibet, Mongolia & China to Buddhism. For the Manchus, it was an opportunity to use the Dalai Lama to pacify the Mongols. But in the minds of the native Chinese advisors of the Emperor, Tibet had to be seen as a province of China ! Manchu documents describe Tibet as a foreign country, a territory "beyond the border" of the Great Wall. First it was decided the Emperor would meet the Dalai Lama outside the Great Wall. Then, to protect the Emperor, the Chinese advisors -seeing bad omens- convinced him to meet the Dalai Lama in his palace in Beijing. Note how the Manchu Emperor invited the Dalai Lama before finishing his conquest of China !

The Great Fifth was treated as the ruler of a smaller, independent nation. In Januari of the year 1653, the Emperor and the Dalai Lama greeted each other for the first time. Having tea, they decided to drink at the same time. Because Tibet was a smaller nation, the throne of the Chinese Emperor was a little higher, but the Dalai Lama sat down next to the Emperor. The motivation of the Manchu ruler was clear : he knew the Dalai Lama was protected by the powerful army of the West Mongols and that in their eyes he was a spiritual authority. By forming an alliance with him, he hoped to assure his western borders would be secure while continuing conquering the Ming.

In 1682, the Great Fifth died. As he had forseen trouble, he asked the desi to keep his death secret while looking for his reincarnation. The Sixth Dalai Lama was found in 1685 and only in 1696 (when the Potala was finished) did he announce the Great Fifth had died 15 years earlier and that his reincarnation was 13 years old ! In 1697, Tsangyang Gyatzo became the VIth Dalai Lama. The desi who had found the boy was a Nyingmapa and he instructed the boy in Dzogchen & Tantra (involving erotical yoga). As a consequence, the VIth Dalai Lama did not want to take monastic vows and rejected those he had taken. In 1702, he decided to reject celibacy, turning against the Gelug rules. He drank beer, sang, made fun and had lots of girlfriends. Prominent Lamas and members of the royalty asked him to change his ways, but he adamantly refused. The grandchild of Goesjri Khan, Lhazang Khan, the king of Tibet, found the whole story of the hidden child insulting and rejected the desi and "his" VIth Dalai Lama. He formed an alliance with the Manchus ! In 1705, helped by his Mongols & the Manchus, he killed the desi. In 1706, the VIth Dalai Lama, due to the treason of Lhazang Khan, lost his throne.

In 1709, the Emperor of China dispatched his first Emperial Envoy (the amban). Lhazang Khan installed his own "VIth Dalai Lama", promptly rejected by the Tibetans. Some monks asked another fraction of the Mongols to help, and in 1717 these entered Tibet and killed Lhazang. But the VIIth Dalai Lama, who had recently been found, remained under Manchu control. In Tibet, because of these plundering Mongols, a period of violence ensued. In 1720, the Manchu army, now welcomed by the Tibetans, returned to Lhasa and remained three years. They expelled the Mongols and their Tibetan dynasty, installed Kelzang Gyatzo, the VIIth Dalai Lama, and initiated a loose Manchu protectorate (which would last 150 years). The Manchus remained interested in Tibetan Buddhism, and in 1744 Emperor Yonghegong turned his palace into a Tibetan Buddhist temple. Emperor Qialong built an enormous version of the Potala in his summer palace in Jehol.

Between 1697 (the enthronement of the VIth Dalai Lama) and 1875 (the death of Trinley Gyatzo, the XIIth Dalai Lama), Tibet was ruled by regents backed by the Manchus. The VIIIth Dalai Lama was a contemplative who let the regent conduct the administration. The other Dalai Lamas died too young to effectively rule (at 14, 16, 18 & 18). According to some Western historians, these five Dalai Lamas were systematically poisoned. According to the XIVth Dalai Lama, these boys died as the result of carelessness. In both cases, this only shows how weak the institution was.

Take note of this :

Since the collapse of the Tibetan Empire (842), Tibet needed a strong military ally to pacify its internal problems. Internal conflicts between Bön & Lamaism, between the kings and the central authority, between Kagyu and Gelug, between the conservative nobility and the reformists, etc. were -if not repressed by force- ongoing. During this history, fractions, splits and geosentimental, feudal landscapes too often emerge. Without Kublai Khan, Sakya Pandita's nephew, Phagpa Gyaltsen would, in 1268, not have initiated the Sakya Dynasty, enforcing the peace in Tibet by way of Mongol military power. Between 1368 (Tibet declares to be independent from the Mongols) and 1578 (Sonam Gyatzo meets Atlan Khan), Tibet was split and hostility reigned. Without the military help of Atlan Khan, Sonam Gyatzo, the IIIth Dalai Lama, would not have succeeded in controlling the Kagyupas. Without the army of Goesjri Khan, the Great Fifth would not, in 1642, have sat on the throne of the king of Tsang, and be declared the supreme temporal & spiritual ruler of Tibet, presence (kundun) of the Buddha of Compassion, Chenrezi (Avalokiteśvara). Without Goesjri Khan's army, ordering Kagyupas to become Gelugpas would most likely not have had any effect. Without the help of the Mongols, called upon by the Tibetans, Lhazang Khan would not, in 1717, have been killed. Without the Manchus, these selfsame Mongols would not, in 1720, have been expelled, allowing the VIIth Dalai Lama to be enthroned. Apparently, between 1720 and 1897, the Tibetans fully accepted the suzerainity of the Manchu Emperor, albeit in the form of a tributary relationship in harmony with Buddhism (cf. worldly protector versus spiritual teacher). During this period, Tibet was a Medieval feudal state run by regents and nobility.

The last chapter of this sad story becomes sadder (or more laughable, as You like) when mixed with the colonial interests of the British Empire, in particular its North-India politics.

In 1897, two years after he was enthroned, Trinley Gyatzo, the XIIIth Dalai Lama, no longer took advise from his Manchu administrators. His advisor Agvan Dorjiev (1854 - 1938) told him to look out for new powerful protectors. Maybe Nicolas II, the Tsar of Russia, could help ? Because London thought the Russians would indeed form an alliance with the Tibetans, endangering the northern border of the subcontinent, and given the weak Qing Dynasty (caused by the Opium Wars led by the British earlier), they organized a small invasion army and, in 1904, entered Tibet. So in July 1904, after appointing a regent to rule Tibet in his name, the XIIIth Dalai Lama fled to Mongolia to teach Buddhism. This may be construed as his greatest blunder. Suppose he would have welcomed colonel Younghusband and would have secured for himself a passage to London. There he could have made a strong, convincing deal with the British Empire, guaranteeing their northern India border. However, when Francis Younghusband arrived in Lhasa, he was told the Dalai Lama was unavailable ! Because the Tibetans wanted the British troops out of Tibet, the regent signed an agreement with him, stating Tibet accepted the British annexation of Sikkim and would pay them, effectively incorporating Tibet in the British Empire. This 1904 document is the first treaty signed by Tibet in accord with European law. If Britain would have honored this agreement, Tibet would have become a protectorate like Sikkim. But they did not, and the fact the Manchus told them the Dalai Lama had only religious authority only helped them to form the convinction the Dalai Lama was powerless and the 1904 treaty without real political backing.

In 1905, in defiance of the British, Chinese empirial troops led by Zhao Erfang invaded Tibet, destroying many monasteries. The Manchus started to colonize East Tibet, Mongolia & Manchuria. In 1906, when the British realized Tibet was anyway too poor and too difficult to rule, they signed a treaty with the Manchus, stating they would not annex Tibet, nor interfere in its government. The treaty affirmed Tibet was not outside Manchu borders, while nowhere the claim was made it was part of the Manchu Empire ! In 1907, they signed a treaty with Russia to the effect Russia would accept Chinese suzerainity over Tibet. By this dirty game, they guaranteed their northern Indian border as well as their annexation of Sikkim and the other Himalayan protectorates Nepal & Bhutan ! The result of this on Tibet no longer interested Britain ...

In 1908, the XIIIth Dalai Lama left Mongolia and travelled to Beijing. He was told to prosternate before the Empress, which he refused. Finally, he greeted her on his right knee ! During his stay, the Emperor Guangxu as well as the Emperess-doweger Cixi died. The last Emperor Pu Yi was enthroned and his uncle became regent. In 1909, Zhao Erfang was again dispatched to Lhasa, and he was so cruel to the Tibetans they called him "the Butcher". The XIIIth Dalai Lama, who had returned to Lhasa, realized his attempt to win the hearts of the Manchus had failed, and he fled Tibet again. In March 1910, he arrived in India and studied European statemanship. In 1911, the Qing Dynasty collapsed and Sun Yixian initiated the Chinese Republic.

For him, the Manchus, who had ruled China since 1644, had been brutal dictators. He praised the Chinese race (the Han) and praised the Ming Dynasty, his ancestors. In June 1912, during his exile, the XIIIth Dalai Lama proclaimed the independence of Tibet. But in that same year, Sun Yixian declared China to be a multi-ethnic state, with Manchu, Mongol, Tibetan, Han and Ujgurs. For him, the Tibetan declaration of independence was a farce. In January 1913, after a popular insurrection had expelled the Chinese troops, the XIIIth Dalai Lama was back in Lhasa. In 1914, the Simla Conference was held, resulting in the "Direct Agreement between Britain and Tibet", immediately rejected by the Chinese (although the treaty recognized Chinese suzerainity over Tibet). But things had moved on : arrived at this point in time, the Chinese Republicans rejected the treaty, considering Tibet a province of China. To them, the Britians had no claim whatsoever.

From this moment until his death in 1933, the Dalai Lama worked to reform & modernise Tibet. But senior Lamas & high officials, sticking to "ngarlam", the "traditional way", rejected these reforms, identifying them as "British atheism". In fact, they wanted to maintain their feudal privileges. When the Dalai Lama asked the monastery of the Panchen Lama (Tashilunpo) to pay additional taxed to finance the army, the latter refused and fled to Republican China for help !

This caused the Chinese to rightly claim Tibet was again unable to settle its affairs without outside help.

Between the end of the Qing Dynasty (1911) and the establishment of the People's Republic of China (1949), China was in turmoil. Civil war had caused enormous suffering and the matter of Tibet was temporarily suspended, although several Republican governments affirmed Tibet to be part of China. The suzerainity of China over Tibet was turned into the sovereignty of China. As early as 1950, the ultra-nationalist People's Liberation Army of Mao invaded Chamdo. For those Communist, the Buddhocracy of Tibet was backward. As the Republicans of Tjiang Kai-sjek had claimed earlier, Tibet was deemed a province of China.

At that time, the young XIVth Dalai Lama still believed Mao's Communist China could bring the necessary good reforms to Tibet. Moreover, nobody else was willing to help him (London, Paris & Washington betrayed him, while the matter of Tibet's invasion by the Chinese was never put on the agenda of the UN). On the 27th of September 1954, the XIVth Dalai Lama was elected to be the Vice Chairman of the Standing Committee of the first National People's Congress.

But in 1956, during his visit of India, he learned about the atrocities happening in Tibet in the name of Mao's communism and clearly realized this take on Vajrayāna Buddhism (and religion in general) was unacceptable. He returned to Tibet and then, after having established the Tibetan Government-in-Exile, fled to India ! There he established his own vast, world-wide network, with major communities in India, Europe and the United States.

"When the iron bird flies everywhere, then my Dharma will go to the West."
Tibetan saying attributed to Padmasambhava

Old Tibet, as the XIVth Dalai Lama insists, and history confirms, was not that pure, blissful land of compassion, heaven or "Shangri-La". It was a Medieval, isolated feudal Buddhocracy with an appalling human rights record. There was no word for "slave" or "serf", and these people were named "nyamthag" (weak and poor) or "chabang", "poor subjects". Although precise information is lacking, Western scholars estimate 60% of the population were serfs. Half of these serfs owned land, but had to pay heavy taxes to the nobility and/or the monasteries. About 20% were nomads and 20% monks. Criminals were systematically tortured : shackled, hands chopped off, eyes gouged out, thrown in scorpion pits, starved to death, publically humiliated, etc. Serfs & slaves were told their unchangeable position in the cast system was the natural result of wrong actions in previous lives. To be sure of a better rebirth, this had to be willingly accepted ! etc. etc.

These shameful historical facts do not condone any of the brutalities or "cultural genocide" inflicted upon native Tibetans and their land by the Communist Chinese. If we believe the XIVth Dalai Lama, he was ready, in his lifetime, to implement all the necessary changes himself.

Skeptical voices say this would have invited a subreptive return to autocratic & Buddhocratic Lamaism, which cannot be paired with contemporary scientific standards on education, human rights, etc. etc. In 1989, the XIVth Dalai Lama, who's ideas are very simple & clear, was awarded the Nobel Peace Price, which he dedicated to all beings but particularly to the freedom of the Tibetan people. The prestige of this price gave him access to the vast funds & services available in Europe and the United States. In 2007, he received the Congressional Gold Medal from the United States. In 2008, the year Communist China hosts the Olympic Games, Time 100 declares the XIVth Dalai Lama to be Nr.1 on the list of the World's Most Influential People.

So although the record of the "Great Fourteenth" is indeed remarkable, history allows us to doubt whether his Tibetan aristocrats would have allowed him to make the very drastic reforms needed to truly modernize Tibet. Senior Lamas and aristocrats wanted to keep their privileges and the clergy thought the Buddhas & Bodhisattvas would protect Tibet.

Even today, after half a century of relentless work in exile, senior Lamas remain conservative and autocratic.

Although in an autonomous Tibet (which remains part of China), Tibetan culture (writing, education, religion etc.) should be free, this should not prompt a return to the neo-feudal system of Buddhocratic rule, nor to a nepotistic would-be democracy or any form of religious intolerance (cf. the Dorje Shugden Affair). Given the autocratic stance of Lamaism and ingrained cultural habits, these matters are to be taken seriously. Indeed, the exiled government maintains a claim over territory it did not control before 1950, weakening the chances of ever reaching an agreement with the Communist government. Let us also remember that unlike many exile movements, the problem lies not with an autocratic leader, but with the very conservative, superstitious popular opinion of common Tibetans, often condoned (if not stimulated) by senior Lamas.

In the mid-1970s, the XIVth Dalai Lama, very much aware of the sad history of his own institution, told a Polish reporter the following : "The Dalai Lama office was an institution created to benefit others. It is possible that it will soon have outlived its usefulness." (quoted in Verhaegen, A. : "The Dalai Lamas : The Institution and Its History. Emerging Perceptions", in : Buddhist Studies, Printworld - New Delhi, n°15, 2002, p.5). The conservative Tibetan Lamas and aristocrats in exile responded by saying that since the Dalai Lama is a national institution, it was up to the people of Tibet to decide whether or not the Dalai Lama should reincarnate. This says it all !

Let us briefly summarize the track-record of the institution of the Dalai Lama :

I & II : part of the Gelug school, waging war with the Kagyupas ;
III : installed by the Mongol Atlan Khan, pacifying the country by force ;
IV : a Mongol boy, family of Atlan Khan, backed by the Mongols ;
V : a remarkable figure, uniting Tibet with the help of the Mongol Goesjri Khan ;
VI : a remarkable figure, not accepted, probably murdered or exiled ;
VII : a grey figure, installed by the Manchus who run the regents ;
VIII : contemplative with no interest in politics ;
IX - XII : all died very young, possibly murdered or neglected, again regents rule ;
XIII : a remarkable figure, but missing opportunities and unable to convince the Lamas to modernise ;
XIV : a remarkable figure, but exiled and banned from Tibet.

This record shows the institution never properly worked without the help of the Mongols or the Manchus. Moreover, of the 14 Dalai Lamas, only two (the Vth & the XIIth) really made a difference. Unlike hereditary dynasties, the tulku-system was more open to abuse and manipulation.

Was the institution a failure ?

The XIVth Dalai Lama is right when he claims the question of Tibet is not about the office of the Dalai Lama or his return to Tibet, but about the life & culture of the 6 million Tibetans of today. He also thinks Tibet (although independent in 1950) should relinquish its independence, remaining part of China. Lots of frustrated young Tibetans disagree with him on this. Cultural autonomy and a special kind of selfrule should be given in accord with the Chinese constitution, so the Dalai Lama says, while democracy and human rights remain his top priorities. He suggests an international commission of experts should look into the matter and agrees the secular principle separating State and Church is valid.

As long as the Dalai Lama is alive, the Communist Chinese have a golden opportunity to end this conflict peacefully, thereby winning the support of the international community. As history shows how all dictators and their military systems eventually crumble, the Chinese should realize that in the future their cherished borders could be in more trouble if the Dalai Lama died without any agreement. Suppose both parties find common ground and finally pacify their relationships. Then China proves it is ready to enter the postmodern era. Suppose this does not happen. Will the problems in Tibet just go away ? Clearly not. Nor will the international community trust the Chinese if they continue to deny the Dalai Lama and the rights of the Tibetan people he represents.

Note that while every prayer in Tibetan Buddhism ends by dedicating it to the welfare of all sentient beings, for centuries monastics sustained a Buddocracy run by an elitist minority headed by a god-king ! While Tibetan Buddhism, as the keeper of the whole Buddhadharma, and as a spiritual training purged from authoritarian policies, clearly benefits the individual, Lamaism & Dalai Lamaism, as political systems, cannot be said to really work. Buddhocracy is as dangerous as theocracy.