The Dalai Lama is one of those people I’ve always just sort of uncritically accepted. I never gave him much more thought than being this sort of vaguely pleasant dude with a robe and a smile and a massively successful franchise in contemporary spiritual markets. Recently, I came across some rather public information about him and his past which puts that all in quite a different perspective. He’s a CIA man!
Communist China asserted it’s claim on Tibet in 1950, and for the first few years allowed the Lamas to maintain local control. According to Wikipedia, “Prior to Chinese rule, over 700,000 of
In 1956 the Dalai Lama, fearing that the Chinese government would soon move on
Makes the esteemed Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, sound slightly less spiritual, doesn’t it? (Here’s a fun photo of the young Dalai Lama feasting beside Mao Zedong)
Anyway, the dam broke in 1959 with an unsuccessful “popular” uprising against the Chinese occupation. This came after several years of CIA-backed training and funding of Tibetan revolutionary forces.
Starting in 1955 the CIA began to build a counter-revolutionary army in
In the Aug. 16 Newsweek magazine, an article entitled “A secret war on the roof of the world–spooks, monks and the CIA’s covert gamble in Tibet” describes details of the CIA operation from 1957 to 1965.
Similarly, a major article in the Jan. 25, 1997, Chicago Tribune described the special training of Tibetan mercenaries at
These mercenaries were then parachuted into
But apparently the guerrilla army never did more than engage in border skirmishing. As early as
From Rediff:
Lodi Gyari, the Dalai Lama’s personal representative in
“I have no clue whatsoever,” Gyari said. Speaking more generally of the CIA’s past support for the Tibetans, Gyari acknowledged: “It is an open secret. We do not deny it.”
The money for the Tibetans and the Dalai Lama was part of the CIA’s worldwide effort during the height of the Cold War to undermine Communist governments, particularly in the Soviet Union and
One of the best points in this whole thing though is this:
Puerto Rico has about the same size population as
You could change
10 Reader Responses
As for the Dalai Lama, yeah, old news. The Tibetans aren’t the pure, spiritual teddy bears that they’re portrayed as by romantics… they were basically a feudal people who had been exploited by a monastic elite for centuries. The sixty tons of treasure is just another case of that. Of course, I won’t blame that on Tenzin Gyatso- he was young, and under the thumb of numerous corrupt courtiers to boot. And the man he’s become is a far cry from the boy that he was.
In the Cold War, we pretty much paid off anyone who would fight the communists, even if they amounted to underwear-clad yahoos with air rifles, as long as they were in a position to stick it to the USSR or China (at least until the early 70’s, when Nixon made the smartest move of his career and played pattycake with Mao. Now, if only Condy Rice would shove Bush on a plane to Tehran to do the same move today, and close one more front in this sorry “War on Terror”…) The resistance in Tibet was pretty pathetic, but they never had a chance to begin with given the kind of numbers the occupying force of the People’s Liberation Army had on their side. Freeing
When I read this post, I immedaitely thought of this, from a few years ago.
http://www.cultnews.com/archives/000281.html
I’m not saying that this nutcase has anything to do with the Dalai Lama. But how strange would it be if he really was telling the truth? No one ever pictures the Dalai Lama being mixed up with criminal activities, but who is to say he is above that?
Personally, it would crack me up if the Dalai Lama was discovered to be some sort of shady underworld figure. It’s always the ones you least suspect…
This reminds me of one of my all-time favorite books, “The Missionary Position” by Christopher Hitchins. It does a similarly good job of poking a hole in another person that people unquestioningly accept as a Saint.. Mother Teresa… who comes off as quite a fraud after reading this terrific book.
chris doesn`t like billery either.
I recall reading an article by Hitch awhile back in which he took on the “cult” around the Dalai Lama, but I can’t remember when or where it was published (or if it was even Hitch, though it was certainly his style).
Yeah, Hitchens often has some interesting things to say… he’s a contrarian’s contrarian, which is probably why I like to read his writing, even though I disagree with him on a number of issues (such as the Clintons and the Iraq War). But hey, the best columnists to read are the ones that provoke you the most…
But hey, the best columnists to read are the ones that provoke you the most…
Amen to that!
- Nova Says:
July 27th, 2005 at 11:54 am
You really need to look into the historical situation in much more detail before making broad accusations like this.
The Dalai Lama’s throne and in fact all the relics in the Potala are not considered to be the personal property of the Dalai Lama, they are the property of the state. The Dalai Lama, as is specified in the vows of a monk which he has always upheld, does not collect personal property or wealth. His only possessions are a few spiritual texts, a watch or two, and his robes and ritual objects (a rosary, etc.). When he requested that a new throne be built it was not his personal possesion but rather that of the state — the Tibetan Government. In the context of the Tibetan belief system, the creation of this throne was an offering to the protective dieties of
When the Tibetan Government went into exile along with the Dalai Lama of course they took whatever they could from their treasury. How else would they fund their exile government, and take care of the hundreds of thousands of homeless exiles who followed them to
As for the Dalai Lama receiving CIA funding, this should not be taken to imply that the Dalai Lama worked for the CIA. Rather, it should be taken to imply that the CIA helped subsidize the escape and re-establishment of his government. The CIA did fund the Tibetan resistance, and also provided money for the Dalai Lama’s relocation and the continuity of government. If funds were provided for his office, that does not in any way imply that he himself benefitted personally from that. Think about the complexity of trying to relocate an entire government and exile community, and run an insurrection, and establish international outreach and an office in NYC etc. Now add to that the complexity of doing this while being invaded, hunted, and while still a very young man with no political experience. That is the situation that the Dalai Lama faced at that time. Not only would the expense have been large, but the use of funds would probably be a bit disorganized as well — after all they were on the run as exiles, and were outside of their ancient feudal civilization for the first time. They didn’t have the luxury to squander money for personal gain — they were fighting for basic day-to-day survival!
You really need to look into the historical situation in much more detail before making broad accusations like this.
i love it!
tim, “you need” to do this and that. it’s an imperative. “you HAVE to.” after all, it’s not like it’s your site or anything; you’re here to take instruction from those more knowledgable than yourself.
regardless of his cia connexions (which, really, one can take or leave as one wishes), i’ve never been fond of the dalai lama because he’s more conservative & restrictive than the pope. here’s a good article on the subject (bug me not required):
In reality, Tibetan Buddhism is not a values-free system oriented around smiles and a warm heart. It is a religion with tough ethical underpinnings that sometimes get lost in translation. For example, he condemns homosexuality, and all oral and anal sex. His stand is close to that of Pope John Paul II, something his Western followers prefer to ignore. His
he’s also given up on the ‘free
Dreams can last a long time, but often enough give way to pragmatic reality. A dream that lasted 46 years ended today, when the Dalai Lama, spiritual and temporal leader of the Tibetan people, in a statement on the 46th anniversary of the annexation of
not that it’s the wrong idea, or that a mind shouldn’t be changed, but the figure that the west holds up as THE DALAI LAMA is far more complex and imperfect than the celebrity spiritualists would have us believe.
Hi Nova, thanks for your thoughts. I’m happy that I was able to start a dialogue on the subject. That’s all I really ever want. Noone is required to take my word on anything, after all.
As to your labelling what I wrote “accusations”, I think that’s rather inaccurate. What I did was piece together several other information sources to further my own understanding of a historical situation with which I was unfamiliar. The connections between the CIA and the Tibetan resistance are a matter of public record. This is not something I cooked up and decided to run around accusing people of. If you want to argue the validity of that information, feel free to take it to the original sources.
The Dalai Lama’s throne and in fact all the relics in the Potala are not considered to be the personal property of the Dalai Lama, they are the property of the state.
What you seem to be leaving out here is that most of the people in
Nothing about that implies that the Dalai Lama gained personally from that.
I never said that, and you’ll see that I even used a quote to illustrate the fact that he himself never gained personally from CIA funds. But then, he’s also the leader of a nation, and thus to say he didn’t benefit from it on some level is more absurd than anything I said. That’s like saying the President doesn’t “get” anything from living in the White House. Sure he doesn’t own it, but that doesn’t matter.
As for the Dalai Lama receiving CIA funding, this should not be taken to imply that the Dalai Lama worked for the CIA.
So in other words, when I get paychecks from my company, I shouldn’t consider myself to “work” for that company? That’s a nonsensical argument.
Rather, it should be taken to imply that the CIA helped subsidize the escape and re-establishment of his government.
I absolutely agree. The point I’m trying to make is that the CIA didn’t do this for altruistic reasons or simply because the Dalai Lama is a spiritual leader. They did it to fight communist
- hebrides Says:
July 27th, 2005 at 1:21 pm
Sure, both the pope and the Dalai Lama may not condone oral sex, homosexuality or even condoms, but one thing DOES separate them and make the DL and Tibetan Buddhism much more complicated, interesting and perhaps dark than ol’ Phallus Hat in
Source link: www.trimondi.de/SDLE/Index.htm
