JohnB Posted October 3, 2007 Share Posted October 3, 2007 http://www.tibetcustom.com/article.php/20070803133532961 The new rules which come into force on September the 1st state that "Lama's are no longer allowed to reincarnate with out first obtaining permission from the communist authorities". Damn but I'd love to see the form you fill out for this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dak Posted October 3, 2007 Share Posted October 3, 2007 iirc, the lama dies and is re-encarnated into a baby, which will grow up to be the next lama. iow, whoever the next lama is will claim to be a re-incarnation of the last. I assume that if the last one didn't have permission to re-encarnate, then the new one will be held guilty of unlicenced re-encarnation (this is the stupidest serious conversation i've ever had), so effectively the communist party would be able to forse the monks to co-operate on threat of witholding licence to re-encarnate. iow, it seems like a guise to legalify putting their boss in jail if they don't co-operate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royston Posted October 3, 2007 Share Posted October 3, 2007 so effectively the communist party would be able to forse the monks to co-operate on threat of witholding licence to re-encarnate. You're forgetting they have Steven Seagal on their side...go Steve ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1veedo Posted October 3, 2007 Share Posted October 3, 2007 I'm pretty sure this means that the Chinese government picks the next lama so they'll chose someone who'll keep all the Chinese Buddhists in line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSandman Posted October 3, 2007 Share Posted October 3, 2007 Crap, i guess the reicarnation is out for that area. Good thing I'm not a buddhist. I could just imagine them killing animals 'cause they think they're recicanates of something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted October 3, 2007 Share Posted October 3, 2007 I'm pretty sure this means that the Chinese government picks the next lama so they'll chose someone who'll keep all the Chinese Buddhists in line. This parallels my initial reaction. It will be curious to see how the Tibetan (is it limited to them?) Buddhists react to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnB Posted October 4, 2007 Author Share Posted October 4, 2007 I think 1veedo has got it. The new Panchen Lama was removed by the Chinese a number of years ago (and hasn't been seen since:-( ) and the current one is 72. The boy put forward by the Chinese as the new Panchen Lama has not been accepted by the Buddhists. The important fact to keep in mind is that it is the Panchen Lama who will choose the next Dalai Lama and since the current one is a thorn in their side the Chinese probably want to control who the next one is. As an interesting aside. The current Dalai Lama has said that his next incarnation will be born outside Tibet and the new rules specifically forbid the Tibetan Buddhist monks from accepting anyone born outside Tibet as a Living Buddha. I think he's got the Chinese worried. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted October 4, 2007 Share Posted October 4, 2007 The chinese have taken this almost to the point of comic. Does the government honestly think they'll score points with the Buddhists by attempting to control their religion? I mean, just the fact that government is claiming to be able to control Buddhist spiritual aspects is just laughable. I just feel that, the more the Chinese government interferes with the buddhists, the more rebelous the Tibetans will get... and China will definitely attract more international scorn. It's despicable that a nation we consider an emerging world power would treat people (people they consider their own people!) this way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted October 4, 2007 Share Posted October 4, 2007 even the chinese think this is stupid. i'm studying with a couple of people from beijing and one of them is in the same project group as me. he shares the rest of the worlds veiwpoint on this as do the others from beijing. i think it is important we remember that there is a distintion between the chinese government and the chinese people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDNA Posted October 4, 2007 Share Posted October 4, 2007 Welcome to your future............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaper Posted October 4, 2007 Share Posted October 4, 2007 I guess its not quite as bad as suing God... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnB Posted October 5, 2007 Author Share Posted October 5, 2007 i think it is important we remember that there is a distintion between the chinese government and the chinese people. Very true. IA, sorry if I gave any other impression, where I used the term "Chinese" I was indeed referring to the "Chinese Government". Lockheed, that twit is a US Senator? Since they have time for frivolous court cases maybe you guys need less of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted October 5, 2007 Share Posted October 5, 2007 John, you didn't give me that impression, because i know you well enough to discount the other way it could be taken. just making sure we make it painfully obvious to anyone who might get miffed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted October 5, 2007 Share Posted October 5, 2007 I guess its not quite as bad as suing God... I heard about this on the news... it turns out the motive behind the suite is to point out the ridiculous sue-crazy, lottery type system that our legal system turns out to be. The message and intent was actually positive here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaper Posted October 5, 2007 Share Posted October 5, 2007 I heard about this on the news... it turns out the motive behind the suite is to point out the ridiculous sue-crazy, lottery type system that our legal system turns out to be. The message and intent was actually positive here. I know, but the fact that it was allowed in the first place should cause some concern among us all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDarwin Posted October 5, 2007 Share Posted October 5, 2007 Lockheed, that twit is a US Senator? Since they have time for frivolous court cases maybe you guys need less of them. State senator. They're the people that pretty much can do anything they want since most people don't really pay attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted October 5, 2007 Share Posted October 5, 2007 I know, but the fact that it was allowed in the first place should cause some concern among us all. yep... that's pretty much the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest026 Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now