Talk:Dalai Lama

Dalai Lama lies ?

From the Article:

The current 14th Dalai Lama seeks separate Tibet from China, although he lies to the Western world that he only seeks autonomy.

Surely this cannot be included without very strong evidence. It would be grounds for a libel suit in the UK. 82.13.143.58 (talk) 01:58, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

The comment has been removed from the article. --User:Iambus^৹ | talk 04:51, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

the person who continually adds that line is Lxoe. I have attempted communication with him on his talk page regarding this continuing POV edits. I have also linked him to His Holiness so that he can read and understand the definition. If he reads this discussion page (which, statistically speaking, is unlikely given that most vandals don't care about the community which they vandalize), I also encourage him to read libel and Reliable Sources for wikepedia's policies on spreading lies about living people. If the Dalai Lama were truly a mean-spirited person as this person claims he is, I imagine HH would want to sue Lxoe for posting unsourced and untrue information about him. Interesting catch-22. It's always those who are willing to lie about others who end up victimizing those who aren't willing to victimize. Dragonnas (talk) 16:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC) (I always forget to sign my comments :P)

Even though Lxoe did not provide adequate sources for his claims, there are articles that talk about protesters calling him a lier like this one from reuters for example. Maybe add to criticism or to the current Dali lama's page? --stanthefisher —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.176.131.66 (talk) 12:06, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

This article is about the Dalai Lama lineage, not the 14th Dalai Lama. But even at that page, it would be undue weight to write up this one Reuters article. Bertport (talk) 14:26, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

"Spiritual and temporal leader"

The first line of the article says, "Dalai Lama is the title given to an individual who is the spiritual and temporal leader of Tibetan Buddhists worldwide." This seems quite unclear and requires a lot more nuance. What does it mean to say that he is the temporal leader of Tibetan Buddhists? So a convert to Tibetan Buddhism living in, say, France, would acknowledge the Dalai Lama as his or her temporal leader? How so? Even to say that the Dalai Lama is a temporal leader of Tibetans in Tibet is highly controversial and not really in evidence. As for whether the Dalai Lama is the spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhists, this is also controversial. There are five major sects of Tibetan Buddhism (Gelug, Kagyü, Nyingma, Sakya, and Jonang) and the Dalai Lama is the de facto head of one of them. The controversial issue is his role in the other four sects, which are hardly marginal. Traditionally, he has no role. This being the case, it won't due to say that he is the spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhists. Pending a rewrite that resolves these issues, I am removing the first sentence.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 21:00, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

You're aware that this removes a huge chunk of context, right? If it needs to be made more specific, make it more specific. That sentence is the first time in months that the article has started with an introduction which gives the lay reader a reasonable place to start, and its omission isn't a very good idea. I'd much rather it be re-added without "temporal" and with "worldwide" made sect-specific. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:08, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Good suggestion. I agree that the previous intro was not very good, but the new version was not that great, either, since it led with inaccuracies right off the bat. I like your suggestion, at least as a temporary measure, and I have rewritten the opening sentence accordingly.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 21:16, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

The revision is perfect, thanks. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 22:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, sometimes he was seen as spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhist, but in fact this is not true. Before PRC occupation Dalailama was political leader of Tibet, after Chinese invasion he becomes (unnoficial but accepted) representative of Tibetans and Tibet's affair on international stage. His function is is politcal and national, but not religious (except Gelug school). But he is also most popular buddhist teacher (and maybe Buddhist) on the world. In this context sometimes he can be seen as a representative of Buddhism in the modern world. Maybe mixing this two roles (political leadership of Tibet and popularity as a Buddhist teacher) in media made this mistake so common. --Tadeusz Dudkowski (talk) 21:29, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

A couple of references below which addresses the question above:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJY1eK9jQ28&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fruuxoDQpSc&feature=related —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.234.106 (talk) 00:05, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

The dalai lama is not a teacher or leader of Buddhism- he is a teacher and leader of tibetan buddhism (lamaism). Buddhism and tibetan buddhism are two different religions by western defintions in the same way Roman Catholicism and Mormonism are two different religions. 81.157.99.169 (talk) 00:09, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep in mind that they fall under the category of Buddhism. Similar to Christianity, it has many branches. You cannot deny that they are totally separate religions, just like Tibetan Buddhism and Zen Buddhism. Prowikipedians (talk) 04:23, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Buddhism amd tibetan buddhism are not simply branches of the same religion, they are different religions by western definition. A Mormon does not agree with the Christianity of a Roman Catholic, and a Roman Catholic will not agree with the 'Christianity' of a Mormon. The dalai lama is accepted by tibetan buddhists as a teacher, he is not accepted by buddhists in general as a buddhist teacher. 81.133.120.149 (talk) 11:29, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Dalai Lama = Spiritual Leader who takes care of you in your next life. Panchen Lama = Temporal Leader who takes care of you in this life. So, strictly speaking, Dalai Lama cannot head a "government in exile". That's why the PRC is hanging on to the Panchen Lama.--VimalaNowlis (talk) 11:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

How can the dl = spiritual leader who takes care of you in your next life, when he gets reborn into this life after he dies? Where have you seen the dl take care of anyone? It seems he gets taken care of by everyone else. He certainly appears to have a better life than most of his Tibetan followers, and he's not been seen to make any pilgrimages of kneeling taking a few steps forward, then dropping on his knees and so on. 86.136.143.144 (talk) 11:20, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Chinese propaganda

This article should really have a section dealing with the anti-Dalai Lama propaganda prevalent in mainland China. At the least, the vast gulf between the views of the Chinese and the West deserves a mention; it's virtually unparalleled. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.54.132.95 (talk) 18:08, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

What does the West know about the dalai lama? As far as I know, every western country is nominally Christian (apart from insignificant places like Bosnia). So by definition the West is anti-dalai lama, as Christianity clearly states that Christianity is the only true religion. All this American President meets dalai lama business is simply political and not because American Presidents believe the dalai lama. 86.176.51.166 (talk) 23:52, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

This is text-book Chinese propaganda. There is no need to bring religion into politics when comparing the different views of the Westernized world against one prevalent in mainland communist China. The fact of the matter is not which god one follows but the constant attacks faced by the 14th dalai lama, Tenzin Gyatso, by the PRC alongside the constant badgering from the PRC to any and every other nation out there to boycott all talks and moreover any mode of communication by the 14th Dalai Lama.

As for answering your first question, 86.176.51.166 , it might as well could be that the West knows more about the dalai lama than the Chinese. You could look at the method of selecting the 15th dalai lama the PRC picked to clear any doubts concerning how much they actually (do not)know about Tibetian culture.

The talks between the American president and the dalai lama could be political or spiritual or something more along the lines of matters that doesnt concern you, me or anyone else. Calling it as "simply political" reeks of a biased POV and clearly shows that you are in no state of mind to give a neutral view so your opinion doesnt even matter. Was†ed(Ag@in) _{‡ † ©} 20:43, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

First of all there is no such a thing as a text-book Chinese propaganda; no more than text-book western propaganda. Secondly, the dl and his selection is not Tibetan culture- if you care to call it a Tibetan culture, then it was actually an imported culture. Thirdly, if the dl is supposed to be a religious leader, then why should he be discussing politics with the US president, when everyone knows mixing religion and politics has a deadly consequence for the world currently seen in the Middle East and parts of Africa. 86.178.77.164 (talk) 22:38, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Dalai Lama Twitter feed

I noticed a previous editor added a link, and RegentsPark removed it. While I agree it has no place in the prose section of the article, is there a problem with linking it in the External Links section? Given that it has been officially announced, I would think it qualifies under WP:ELOFFICIAL. Does anyone object to linking it from the EL section? —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 20:28, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

In my opinion, no. The twitter feed duplicates information already provided on the Daiai Lama's official page, which is an inclusion test under WP:ELOFFICIAL. (Though, it would be a marked improvement over having a section titled 'Dalai Lama on twitter'!)--RegentsPark (talk) 21:20, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, like I said, it has no place in the article prose. If the main official link also links to Twitter, then I agree there is no justification. Even if it didn't link to the Twitter feed I'd be conflicted, and since it does, I think I agree with you that it is unnecessary. —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 21:41, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't link to twitter, but contains the same information. On reflection, if you think it useful, go ahead and add it since it is under the control of the Dalai Lama's office and twitter is an important enough information feed to be of value. --RegentsPark (talk) 21:50, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Interview with HHDL where he speaks on his reincarnation

I added an external link to this page titled something like, "An Interview with the Dalai Lama in which he discusses his Own Reincarnation," which linked to the interview here: http://www.yowangdu.com/tibet/hh-dalai-lama/dalai-lama-interview.html

It was removed by someone and then reinstated by YellowMonkey I think, and then removed again apparently. Could I get some insight into why it was removed? This discussion is very relevant to ongoing discussions on what will happen to the role of the Dalai Lama upon his death.

169.230.6.23 (talk) 20:46, 17 March 2010 (UTC)Yolanda