![]() |
|
Spaces home Soli Deo GloriaProfileFriendsBlogMore ![]() | ![]() |
Soli Deo GloriaIn lumine tuo videbimus lumen
August 29 达赖喇嘛的新梦想和新希望
图片地址: http://www.konglingxi.com/DLLM.JPG 文章地址: 达赖喇嘛的新梦想和新希望
17日清晨,当曼哈顿岛在地铁低沉的轰鸣和街道上的车水马龙中渐渐苏醒的时候,数十名中国留学生和海外藏人学生来到了坐落在繁华的42街上的凯悦酒店(Grand Hyatt Hotel)。我是其中一员。此前几十分钟在地铁里我都战战兢兢地担心一本正经穿起的西装是否已被拥挤的人群弄得狼狈不堪,然而到达酒店之后我惊奇的发现其他女学生们都换上了鲜艳的裙子或者旗袍,藏族同胞们更是穿上了他们的民族服饰。我们此行并不是为了一场演出,而是即将会晤达赖喇嘛,以作为努力探索西藏未来的一部分。
今年春天,雪域高原的动荡使得很多中国学生迫切地认识到汉藏两族人民彼此了解、交换视角和感受的重要性。尽管在纽约Hunter College学的是英国文学专业,我在两三年前阅读中国学者王力雄的《天葬》后便对西藏产生了浓厚的兴趣。推动这次活动的哥伦比亚大学毕业生孔灵犀曾在4月见到过达赖喇嘛,并在《与达赖喇嘛单独会谈》一文中描述了很多我在国内的媒体中没有读到过的视角——比如曾经寻求独立的达赖喇嘛在1988年公开放弃独立、寻求自治的中间路线的事实,比如达赖喇嘛和孔灵犀同学一同紧握奥运衬衫时支持北京的坚定话语,比如达赖喇嘛对较为激进的藏青会的尖锐批评和与藏独派别旗帜鲜明的不同立场等等。在海外生活多年,一方面,我在西方媒体的画面上看到他那打动海外无数男女老少的微笑、在报纸与网站上读到的是他声明放弃独立的主张,一方面我却又在新华社的网站看到评论员慷慨激昂地抨击“达赖集团”的种种“阴谋”。他真的是数次改变自己的立场、出尔反尔的小人吗?他真的是一个“披着狼皮的和尚”吗?他真的在大力鼓吹所谓的“大藏区”,意图将占中国版图四分之一的神圣国土分裂出去吗?带着这些疑惑,我希望一探究竟。
八点三十分,在达赖喇嘛驻纽约代表的带领下,我们来到了楼上的会议室,而达赖喇嘛已经在穿堂中等候,带着爽朗的笑容,亲切的和每一位学生握手,接受我们献上的哈达。这让我想起在小学,慈祥的班主任教导我们不仅要尊重不同民族的风俗和礼仪,更要尊重他们的宗教、信仰和文化。明亮的会议室中,达赖喇嘛和蔼地招呼我们,同我们围绕着茶几坐成一圈。在孔灵犀同学简短的介绍之后,达赖喇嘛首先感谢了我们的到来,表示虽然和中国政府的交流不尽如人意,但他对中国人民的信任却丝毫没有动摇。他还说,尽管中国大陆媒体将他“妖魔化”,说他是“披着袈裟的狼”,但是就他个人而言,作为一名佛教徒,这些诽谤反而能够锻炼他的忍耐和怜悯心。但是真正让他在感情上难以接受的,是每当想到“如果百万中国百姓和佛门子弟们”都对他怀有敌意的话,他不由得“……感到悲伤。我总是希望能够在精神领域上面帮助他们”。
达赖喇嘛一生致力于推进人本理念和和谐社会的信条。作为一个佛教领袖,他也非常赞赏中国的儒家学说,因为儒家学说所着重推广的家庭伦理观念同样强调这些向上的社会价值。“然而,”他说,“中国现在非常缺乏这种价值观。”在对中国在经济方面取得的重大发展加以肯定的同时,他指出,中国社会缺乏的是一种对人性价值的普遍肯定,而精神生活的匮乏导致了人们缺少自我约束力,乃至于产生诸如腐败,贫富悬殊等等社会问题;缺乏公开媒体的体制则更是为这些问题的滋生和蔓延提供了温床。他说,“我只是一个普通的出家比丘,想要造福于中国人民,想要帮助他们了解什么才是生命的真正价值……然而,如果中国人民现在认为达赖喇嘛很坏,是‘活魔’,这让我遗憾地感到,或许我能为他们效劳的机会在越变越少。”
放眼未来,他把希望寄托在了年轻一代人的身上,因为西藏的未来并不属于他自己或现在的政府领导人,而属于更懂得交流、沟通、合作的汉藏两族未来主人翁。在他眼中,一个尊重普世价值的中国是包括汉、藏在内的各族人民为之奋斗的共同目标。因为只有一个真正开放、人民享有法治与言论自由的社会,才能够妥善处理各种民族问题;他还表示在退休后愿意与全国人民一起为中国的社会与政治体制进步而努力,因为,民主与法治是解决当前所面临的各种问题的最佳选择。
达赖喇嘛说,“现在唯一的希望是像你们一样年轻一代思想开明的汉人。这是我们希望的基石;同样还有年轻一代的藏人,你们是西藏未来的主人翁。”他又特别叮嘱在座的藏人学生:“不论你们喜欢不喜欢,(汉人和藏人)都要好好生活在一起,把任何族裔都当成兄弟姐妹般对待。”达赖喇嘛还说,汉藏两族人民是好兄弟、好邻居,相互间体谅与理解是和睦相处的前提。他认为年轻人往往有着自由的思想以及更好的理解和沟通能力,对于自由平等的价值也有着更深刻的认识,因此他相信关于西藏的一系列复杂的历史遗留问题会在我们这一代人得到解决。
那么,到底什么才是关系到西藏人民的切身利益的问题呢?由于达赖喇嘛先前反复提到西藏文化的保护,我想这也许是他最为关心的问题之一吧,于是问到:“从刚才您的话听的出来您十分重视传统和人文价值,因此我想请问在您对保留西藏传统文化所做的努力中,有哪些成功与失败?哪些方面是您觉得最困难的部分?”
达赖喇嘛说,在中国以外的区域,他所做的努力主要是保存西藏语言文字,在印度流亡藏区他们要求为藏人建立独立的学校。他把目光移向了在场的藏族学生们,问他们在哪里出生。“印度。”“尼泊尔。”“纽约。”“新德里。”流亡藏族学生们纷纷回答道。
“这就是我们的年轻一代”,他说。流亡藏人们从生下来就从未亲眼看到过西藏,但是西藏的精神在他们身上非常强大,并且,由于免受政治干预,他们所受的藏文化教育在总体上要比国内的藏人所受的藏文化教育更为完整和系统化。“另一方面,是寺院。现在在印度,藏传佛教的寺院体系已经很好的建立起来了,因此很多从西藏来的学生和僧侣都加入了我们,因为这里有更博学的导师和更自由的环境;而在西藏自治区内,共产主义爱国教育比佛教教育更受重视。”
这番话引起了我的深思。我想起了今年3月《时代周刊》上的一篇文章,插图的照片显示了拉萨一片歌舞升平的夜生活:歌舞厅、网吧里人满为患,大型购物中心鲜艳的霓虹灯和远处布达拉宫影影绰绰的轮廓形成的鲜明对比。我的心一下子被拉到了很远很远;我想到了青藏高原纯净的蓝天,皑皑的雪山,还有一望无际的草原,藏羚羊,古寺庙和青稞酒。许多流亡藏人的年轻一代至今没有踏上过他们的故土,而在中国境内的藏人又对他们的传统的文化、价值观和生活方式有着多少模糊的记忆?同样,西藏无法避免中国现代化进程中出现的城乡差距和贫富差距问题——当上海北京的农民工兄弟仍在高楼大厦的阴影下过着清苦的生活时,远在青藏高原的纯朴藏民们,又有多少能够享受现代文明的灯红酒绿与歌舞升平呢?
其他学生们则有着丰富的视角和表达。我们问了很多问题,并阐述了我们对近期一系列事件的看法。北大政治学博士胡瑞新精辟地分析了3月的西藏骚乱和6月的瓮安骚乱的异同及影响,并且提出了一些非常深刻的建议,以至于在场旁听的达赖喇嘛驻美代表都表示出赞许之情。来自中国山东、在美英两国学习政治学的大四学生黄仁正同学提出了一个较为尖锐的问题。他说,“中国政府对您提出的“大藏区”(也就是除了西藏自治区,还包括青海甘肃云南四川四省的部分区域)的概念有很多质疑,请问您对这个问题究竟持什么样的立场,同时会怎样对待大藏区内其他各族人民?”黄同学的问题道出了在座很多汉族学生的疑惑。互联网上盛行的流言一直说达赖喇嘛想要把占中国国土面积四分之一的“大藏区”分裂出去,还要把其他各族居民都赶走,我也一直很好奇,到底这些传言有多少可信度。
达赖喇嘛的回答可谓一语中的。他说,我们从未在行政划分上提出“大藏区(Greater Tibet)”的概念;我们唯一关心的是所有的藏族这一少数族裔的人民,他们有许多生活在自治区以外的区域。“现在一共有大约600万藏人。由于我们不寻求独立,因此我谨代表600万藏人同胞向中央政府请求平等的保存西藏文化、宗教和环境。”他认为地域上的界限并不是他所考虑的问题;重要的是一国之内,政令统一,对少数民族权益的保护更不应由于居住地的不同而有所差异。
达赖喇嘛关于大藏区的一番话让我想起了在国内新闻上所“揭露”他的“谎言”。新华网的一篇时评说,“5月6日,达赖在接受德国《明镜》周刊专访时刚刚说过:‘我们追求的是大藏区自治的美好前景。’”我不禁打了一个冷颤——我们看到达赖喇嘛所有的“谎言”都来自对西方媒体的引用,到底是整个西方世界已经不在乎个人诚信,还是国内报道的“俯卧撑”下另有隐情?
在撰写本文的今天,我早已和黄仁正同学回家查了个究竟。我们找到《明镜》周刊的网页,查到这个5月6日采访、在12日发表的问答原文。达赖喇嘛确实谈到了西藏的自治问题,他说道: Dalai Lama: Our policy of extensive autonomy for Tibet offers the best prospects. The Tibetans must have the power to decide on all issues relating to culture, religion and the environment. This is something completely different from being an independent state. Under international law, this new Tibet would also be part of the People's Republic of China, which would remain responsible for foreign and security policy. (达赖喇嘛:我们[所提出的]广泛自治政策能给西藏带来最美好的前景。藏民必须有权决定关于[自己的]文化、宗教和环境的事务。这从根本上而言是有别于一个独立国家的。在国际法下,这样的新西藏也是中华人民共和国的一部分,中国继续对外交和防御政策负责。)
可见,这里并没有提到所谓的“大藏区”。那么,相关传言是哪里来的呢?我们接着往下看,发现《明镜》的记者确实问到了关于“大藏区”的问题,而达赖喇嘛是这样回答的: Dalai Lama: It is my moral obligation to speak for 6 million Tibetans, and the cultural rights and freedoms must apply to all Tibetans -- as it is stated in the Constitution. (为六百万藏人说话是我的道德义务。文化权利与自由必须适用于所有的藏人——而这是[中华人民共和国]宪法所载明的。) <http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,552775-2,00.html>
我们又查阅了若干个新闻报道、专访和纪录片,发现他前后的立场是一致的,那就是:1988年他就已放弃任何独立的想法,绝不诉诸暴力,一心回归中国,仅仅只要求六百万藏人的信仰自由和文化上的保护,无论他们是否居住在现行的西藏自治区内。这就是他所要求的“广义西藏”自治的全部含义,毫不涉及具体行政区域或土地的划分。并且,这种文化上的而非政治或权力的自治,完全不涉及到主权领土的重新定义,更何来“分裂神圣国土”一说?至于那些达赖喇嘛要恢复农奴制的传言,更是连一丝一毫的根据也无法找到。
至此就我们个人而言,真相已经大白:我们真正必须面对的问题已经不在西藏境外的所谓“达赖集团”,而是在六百万藏人的内心——如何将每年几十亿的经济援助和地方建设转变成藏人对政府的忠诚成了我国政府在西藏工作的首要难题。而对达赖喇嘛等人种种误解让我们一度忽略了西藏问题的实质,却为了一些捕风捉影的传言而对藏族同胞的合理诉求不予理睬。年初的大规模抗议活动最终演变成为骚乱这一警讯也并没有使得政府重新反思其在西藏问题上的既定政策,而是仅仅将注意力集中在骚乱本身这一表象,从而忽视了深层次的藏人不满情绪的根源。
会后我们一行人走在都市的大街上,黄仁正和巴纳特教授谈论着中国政府接班人习近平的内外政策,精通五门语言的孔灵犀和同样学语言的帕尔登则讨论着从语言的深层结构而论藏语是否应当归属于印欧语系。我和女生们走在一起,静静地听着刘丽天和红朵普交换着一位青海藏民的轶事。看着大家的脸上洋溢着年轻的笑容满怀希望地走在一起,滑过我心迹的则是我们中间每一位同学的亲身经历……
刘丽天的父亲是管理西藏和新疆问题的政府官员,通过父亲的关系自己也数次深入过这些纯朴的少数民族的美丽故乡。她和弟弟从小就忿恨西藏人——在放假希望爸爸带他们出去玩时,腐败的西藏政府官员却拿着包括冬虫夏草在内的大量名贵物品一批接一批地来家里找爸爸要求拨款。而她长大后亲自去西藏的三次经历,却又让她把纯朴的西藏人民和她心中那群讨厌的官僚区分开来,明白了疯狂开采冬虫夏草和藏红花对环境会带来的破坏,也亲眼看到了拨款所建的娱乐中心等设施对大多数具有宗教信仰的贫穷藏人而言是多么的毫无作用。孔灵犀是本次活动的组织者,也是一位业余发明家。本是搞古代文学出身的他,在探索西藏密宗与文化的历史关系时被3月的流血冲突所震惊,并开始了促进汉藏对话的努力。黄仁正同学以山东省高考状元的身份来到了爱荷华大学,和我一样,他的西藏情节归功于中国学者王力雄的著作《天葬》。在海外求学的三年多里,他不断地用他严谨的政治学训练思考着中国的种种现实问题,同时也近距离批判地审视着西方政治的种种利弊,希望能够为未来中国构建坚若磐石的宪法基础。而刚在哥大拿到戏剧学硕士的佛教信徒张结星,是一位祖辈就已扎根在新加坡的华裔可爱女孩。她永远也忘不了六年前随父母在西藏探访时所亲历的那一幕幕,忘不了她的同龄好友——失去双亲的美丽女孩朵卡被抓走的那个黄昏,更忘不了和朵卡相依为命的8岁弟弟不顾一切地追逐着黑色尾烟时所发出的那撕心裂肺的哭喊……
我们在路边转了一圈没有找到安静的咖啡屋,便回到了酒店的自助餐厅坐下。此时,同学们的讨论也更多集中在如何促进汉藏民间的交流和对话上。刘丽天对一同组织这次活动的哥伦比亚大学西藏问题专家巴纳特教授说,达赖喇嘛作为一个佛教徒的诚挚和善良,以及他本人一直的立场和态度是国内的朋友都不知晓的。她在北京读大一的弟弟看到孔灵犀的文章后,惊奇地问她为什么达赖喇嘛的立场突然来了180度大转弯。黄仁正对此问题的评论则更像一个共和主义者:“今后如果有更多的人能够理智地去批判性地了解和探索,而交流和对话始终是自由的,那么蛊惑人心的言辞反而会丧失辩护的力量。”是的,也许信仰和文化的差异造成了各种误解与敌视,然而,只有充分的、无障碍的沟通才能让真相大白于天下,让蛊惑人心者——无论是汉人还是藏人——都无处藏身。
四位西藏学生和我们分享了他们各自的经历和感受。在印度流亡藏区出生的红朵普告诉我们说,“流亡藏区在一次投票中,超过百分之六十四的藏人支持中间道路,支持达赖喇嘛根据国际与中国局势的发展,审时度势地全权做出决定。然而,很多年轻藏人的民族主义情绪高涨,大家在一起讨论时,大多都希望西藏人民能够建立自己的国家,甚至对中国人有着相当的敌视情绪。我想如果汉藏学生能够不定期地有着更多的沟通,这一定会有利于今后两族人民的真正和解。” 懂汉语的帕尔登则希望我们大家能够建立一个网络平台或邮件组,以期能够更多地理性探讨问题,因为他觉得中文网络上充诉着对达赖喇嘛的种种指责都是找不到出处或根据的扑风捉影,而这也无形地加剧了年轻一代藏人对汉人的敌视情绪。
的确,我们在国内似乎永远都无法看到达赖喇嘛主张和表态的全貌,我们对事实真相的摄取、判断和分析已经被只会引用个别词句的攻击性评论所代替;可是当发现达赖喇嘛不寻求独立是一个基本事实,当发现“大藏区的美好前景”——这些曾经令我们出离愤怒的辞藻——仅仅只是空穴来风和某些媒体的一家之词时,当发现假想中的敌人原来是愿意与我们共同奋斗的朋友、而我们多年来对他的指控却是对基本事实的凌辱和践踏时,我们的良知不禁受到了残酷的拷问。这使我们迫切地感觉,努力推动汉藏两族民间的沟通和对话是最终取得民族大团结的唯一途径。在此也希望有兴趣的同学通过网络和我们取得联系(lingxi@gmail.com)。我们可以和西藏同学一起展开交流和讨论、分享各种信息和彼此的感受,我们还已经和达赖喇嘛驻美代表接洽达赖喇嘛明年初访问美国时,我们会带50-100名爱国留学生和达赖喇嘛展开充分的详谈,并和西藏“流亡政府”的最高层官员进行理性对话,让他们更进一步地了解我国的国情和我国政府的一贯政策。也许对话双方的意见会有分歧,但我们坚信和平、理性的沟通是迈向任何解决方案不可或却的第一步。
祖国在历经百年的苦难和沧桑后,需要敢于探索和追求真理的一代人来继承东方的原道精神和西方的理性美德,继续先辈们为走向共和所做出的不懈努力。的确,尽管我们的探索会不可避免地受到指责,然而我们的目的是对话与理解——我们没有带上标语口号或高音喇叭,也没有携带任何意识形态或未经调查的言语指控,因为我们有理由相信,敌意只能带来更大的分歧,而汉藏两族多元化的交流永远是解决问题的最佳良方。如今,达赖喇嘛正在考虑完全退休,也许他会被允许以普通公民的身份回国到中国,也许他会被迫客死他乡,但无论如何,这位老人正在用自己身体力行的人本主义精神在汉藏青年的身上传播着希望的种子。
郑姗姗就读于美国Hunter College,主修英国文学和心理学。
A Chinese Student's Interview with the Dalai LamaA Chinese Student's Interview with the Dalai Lama
After the turmoil in early March, China’s media heavily attacked the Dalai Lama as the sponsor of violence in Tibet, setting off a surge of nationalistic reactions among Chinese students and immigrants around the globe. Is the whole world hoodwinked by the simple monk, or are we who built up blind hatred based on distorted information? Either case, as a student supporting the Olympic Games and an individual who has determined to make contributions to the harmonious society, I do not wish to see Chinese and Tibetan peoples hating each other due to lack of necessary communications. With some questions and advice, I came to Colgate University and met with the Dalai Lama in a private house on April 24th, 2008.
In fact, after watching the turmoil in Lhasa on the Internet, some friends and I organized a panel discussion on Tibet in the International Affairs Building at Columbia University, where we included not only Tibetan speaks such as the Dalai Lama’s representative to the United States, Director of Tibetan Youth Congress in US, but also scholars such as Director of Modern Tibetan Studies at Columbia, as well as a political analyst representing the views of the Chinese government. It has been our firm belief that the best way to resolve bias and misunderstanding is through free exchange of ideas among people with different perspectives from all walks of life. The discussion lasted for three hours, with around one hundred and eighty attendees, including some of my friends and classmates, who, even at that time, had expressed their wish of hearing the Dalai Lama’s positions towards the Olympic Games, Tibet’s future and the Youth Congress.
So on April 22nd, I zigzagged through the highway system without satellite signals, and managed to arrive at the very beautiful upstate institute, Colgate University, where His Holiness was giving a lecture on “happiness.” Five thousand eager faces crowded in the lecture hall where a fresh energy was surging through the air. Sitting in the ballroom between two large screens, he spoke slowly in a sincere manner. Despite making some occasional grammar mistakes, he was clearly a man of swift intelligence and great personal charisma. During the two-hour lecture, the main theme was always about compassion, pity, tolerance, understanding and forgiveness. After the event, when the audience was slowly dissolving into the beautiful campus with smiling content, I saw twenty Chinese students waving national flags outside the lecture hall and shouting “We’re one family, don’t break it!” Due to sore throat, I couldn’t engage more communication with my fellow students, but I thought when seeing the Dalai Lama I would ask some serious questions that we all care about.
On the 24th, in Colgate Inn, a beautiful hotel with classic renaissance style decorations, after meeting several Buddhist students, the Dalai Lama was going to hold a news conference with Chinese media, including the Xinhua News Agency. He shook hands with each journalist as he walked into the small conference room, where some fifteen journalists representing ten media groups had set up their equipments behind the chairs. A female journalist not knowing the proper etiquette put a hada over his neck. Throughout the press conference, he explained his commitment to non-violence, his support to the ‘greater unity’ between Han Chinese and Tibetans, his promise of not-seeking-independence and his support to the Games, which he wishes to attend.
Finally at noon, we were led to the front yard of a two-floored house where a security check was friendly operated by some officers who, after asking where I am studying, were a little surprised by being boldly asked back where they are working. They were not those legendary CIA agents, but working for the State Department. At the door, the Dalai Lama and a Tibetan monk along with some staffs from the delegation greeted us. Following Tibetan custom, I shook hands with His Holiness and offered him a hada which represents purity; he pronounced “huan yin (welcome)” in Chinese, inviting me to sit down on the sofa. I mentioned that the feverish emotions displayed by people discussing the Tibet issue are perhaps due to the limited information received and the lack of real heart-to-heart communications between Chinese and Tibetans, especially the younger generations. I was hoping to hear his opinions.
The Dalai Lama felt that this is a serious moment as both sides are too emotional, and explained the Tibetan sentiments through historical perspectives. Before Yuan Dynasty, Tibet remained relatively independent, not being part of any central administration. Even since Yuan Dynasty, from Tibetan point of view, the relationship between the emperors of China and Tibet is not like that between a subject and a ruler, but like the relationship between a priest and a patron. Tibet was an independent nation before the Liberation Army entered Tibet. Before 1949, taxes were not collected in Tibetan area. Occasionally, some Chinese came like warlords and collected money, and created some trouble, burning down some monasteries, but the essential Tibetan life remained the same; there was no control or restrictions. After 1949, since the Liberation Army came representing the new government, of course much powerful and much organized, Tibetan life in every field had some kind of interference or control. So in 1956, the reform started in the common area, which was good and necessary, but the manner of the reform, mainly class struggle, carrying the same manner as in the mainland, was simply unfit in Tibet. Unlike that in mainland China, the relationship between landlord and peasants was generally like that between parents and children, landlord often showing great compassion and care. During the reform, landlords were thrown into prisons, some cases serfs beating the landlords. In other cases serfs remained silent and kept crying. Then resentment came, and uprising started, from Tibet to Xikang in the year of 56 and 57, and then spread to the whole area in 57 and 58. Numerous Tibetans were killed. A notebook that the Tibetans obtained from a Chinese military officer tells that from March 1959 to September 1960, eighty-seven thousand Tibetans lost their lives in Lhasa. Several thousand Chinese soldiers were also killed. The whole event was “very very sad”.
In 1954 the Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama both as representatives of National People's Congress went to Beijing and other cities from central Tibet. He showed a moving voice when he was in reminiscence of the scenes: “Chairman Mao was a great person, talking slowly with me, and very dignified, each word, occasionally some coughing, is really wonderful. I was so much impressed. During that period I also had opportunities to visit some heavy industries—since childhood, I had a keen interest in mechanical things, so I was interested in visiting big factories. At local places, party secretaries, vice secretaries, provincial governors and majors dined with us, drinking Maotai (the most famous Chinese liquor), though I couldn’t drink. I met all levels of officials and party members, many of which participated in the Long March. At that time, I was very interested in Marxism, so when I was in Beijing, I told communist party officials that I want to join the communist party. They told me to ‘wait a little bit’. In the summer of 1955, I left Beijing for Lhasa, and met Commander Zhang Guohua en route, a very nice person, Comrade Zhang Guohua, who was traveling from Lhasa to Beijing. I told him, ‘last year when I was traveling from Lhasa to Beijing, my heart was full of doubt and anxiety, but traveling on the same road back to Tibet now, I am full of confidence and hope.’
“At that time, not only I myself wanted to join the Communist Party, there were also several hundred Tibetans who already joined the Communist Party during the 30s and 40s. I knew a Tibetan Communist from my hometown, who had some injuries on the nose, who proudly stated to us that it was due to a Japanese bullet, because he participated in the Sino-Japanese war; he was a member of the Communist guerilla force. I was not a communist but almost like an alternate member. Now those Chinese, unlike previous Chinese, are revolutionary-minded, very caring about brotherhood, socialism and equality. The nationalists and the Manchurians always made differences between minorities. But these Tibetan communists really felt proud of being communists and part of People’s Republic of China. Chairman Mao made the Seventeen Points, in which one point mentioned Military and Political Committee. We were very afraid seeing the word ‘military’, but when we saw the frame of autonomy, everyone was very happy. Then in the year of 1956, Autonomic Region Preparation Committee was founded. Foreign Minister and Martial Chen Yi, who addressed up as a Martial in a big ceremony, actually, it was he who emphasized the importance of establishing a unified autonomous region. So what we refer to as “all Tibetan area”, which includes the whole Tibet, part of Sichuan,Qinghai, Gansu and Xikang, was first promised by Chen Yi.”
Telling from the Dalai Lama’s feelings and sentiments, he showed true sincerity in reminiscence of those veteran revolutionaries of the Communist Party, and cherished very much the relationship with the central government. I think without the Dalai Lama’s influence and advocacy for non-violence, it would not have been possible for people living in the area, where the Dalai Lama is being worshiped as the Living Buddha, to live without long-term, large-scale violence and bloodshed. On the other hand, if the Chinese government could take heed to the reasons and sentiments behind the long-held resentment of Tibetan people, so as to deal with Tibetan affairs with greater flexibility, then “Tibetan loyalty to Han Chinese will naturally come.”
While I was having a moment’s reflection, his staffs reminded us that His Holiness had to go to the airport soon. So I hurried to proceed to the next part, which is the main purpose of my trip: seeking the creation of multiple communicative channels for exchange of views between Chinese and Tibetan people, which is of crucial importance for “minzu da tuanjie” (Great Unity of Ethnic Groups). I proposed the initiation for open-letter exchanges between Chinese and Tibetan students, to be posted on a website with translations in both English and Chinese, so that both peoples (and the whole world) can explore each other’s feelings and sentiments. Television debate(s) may also be held between overseas Chinese and Tibetan students on an American television channel. He enthusiastically endorsed those proposals, adding that in times of crisis, instead of being antagonistic or hating each other, people may discuss and explore what is real happening. I also mentioned that a very good friend of mine, who is a computer scientist, volunteers to make documentary films on the life of Tibetan settlements in India. He was very happy hearing about it and asked his delegation to give full support. His Holiness also accepted the advice that whenever he visits a place abroad, he should meet local Chinese students and immigrants, promoting the exchange of views and clearing up misunderstandings, accumulating grassroots support from Han Chinese.
Even in terms of the “Greater Tibetan Area”, he showed much room for further discussion. I advised him to return Tibet at any price, for the creation of two Dalai Lamas would not only bring too much controversy, but violence would also ensue, as his non-violence influence would fade and a Lamaist church outside Tibet would be accused of being out-of-touch. So a high degree of flexibility should be maintained, if not to abandon entirely the idea of “Greater Tibetan Area”. He responded that he welcomes any discussion regarding the issue, but the Tibetan people living in other areas have put all their hope, support and trust on him. Also in regard to language and culture, people living in Tibet and other areas are inseparable. What he hopes is that Tibetan people themselves make decisions on internal affairs, that the main posts in local Tibetan government should consist of Tibetans who know the language and culture, so positive outcomes may be ensured for protection of their religion, environment and the unique cultural identity. As for himself, he will not assume any position and will go into complete retirement, handing over all his authority to the local government after returning to Tibet. I think since Chinese government successfully solved Hong Kong and Macao issues with great political wisdom, ensuring their continued political stability and economic prosperity, would these also provide any experience or insights towards China’s Tibet policies? Under the Dalai Lama’s repeated promise of not seeking independence, the possibility of “Tibet governed by Tibetans” should enjoy a plenty of room for consideration. Even if some details were disputed and hard to settle immediately, any constructive discussions and meaningful communications between China and His Holiness would be extremely worthwhile.
Due to time-constraints, I asked only five questions out of the nine ones that I prepared:
1. Do you seek independence? Why? He emphatically answered: “No! For our own interests. Economically, a strong China provides much benefit to six million Tibetans who may live much better and much happier joining China for another thousand years.”
2. Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Jiang Yu said at a press conference on April 8: "The Dalai Lama is the head representative of the serf system, which integrated religion with politics in old Tibet. The 'middle way' approach that the Dalai Lama is pursuing is aimed at restoring his own 'paradise in the past', which will throw millions of liberated serfs back into a dark cage." So do you seek theocratic serfdom? He answered, smiling: “I think since many years, as everybody knows, that we never aim to restore the old system, and even the Dalai Lama institution, as early as 69, I made clear that this institution should continue or not is up to people.”
3. Chinese media portrays the Tibetan Youth Congress as a terrorist organization that supports violence, and also accuses that Your Holiness and the Tibetan Youth Congress are operating on two sides together to split China. How would you explain this situation, and what’s your relationship with the Tibetan Youth Congress? “At the beginning, we thought the Youth Congress was very important, just like any youth organization in a community—youth is the basis of the future. But around 1974, we made up our mind that we will return to China, so independence is out of the question. Therefore, we must find a middle-way, not the present situation, nor independence or separation. But gradually, the Youth Congress becomes very critical towards our position of not seeking independence and separation. So right from the beginning (of course they are Tibetans and Buddhists who often come to see me), I made it clear that your stance is very different from ours. I also often criticize them because they’re not realistic.”
4. When you pass away and the new Dalai Lama is still young, based on what you know, who would most likely assume your position of advocating the ‘middle-way’ appeals? Also, do you think that Tibetan people will accept the China appointed Panchen Lama? “Hopefully, I think I may not be dealing with the question of my reincarnation. As for the two Panchen Lamas, I think the official one Tibetans generally are not very faithful to, so it’s for our mutual interest to avoid such controversies.”
5. China has made many investments in Tibet in the last fifty years. In your opinion, from now on, in Tibet, what are the most important things that China and international groups should devote their financial resources to? “The local people should get some benefit. That’s very important, and some portion must be shared for the constructions of the local condition: hospitals, schools and some economic projects. That’s I think really important.” <http://www.uscn.tv/news_view_I1.asp?newsid=741>
After the meeting, he sincerely stated while holding an Olympic T-shirt: “I feel very happy holding this, because right from the beginning I already support that the famous Olympic Games should take place in the ancient, most populated nation, that is the People’s Republic of China.” < http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VnDzyA6j2I>
And wrote down the following message in Tibetan:
< http://www.konglingxi.com/DLLMnote.jpg>
With an ancient civilization and the greatest population, I pray that China achieves development and is able to provide great contribution towards the welfare of the international community.
From the Shakya monk the Dalai Lama April 24th 2008
When I returned to school, my Tibetan professor told me that for "China" His Holiness uses the Chinese word “Zhong guo”, the People’s Republic of China, NOT the Tibetan word Gyanag, which means traditional China without Tibet.
The meeting lasted for roughly 75 minutes, and I was deeply impressed by his sincerity and hospitality. His advocacy for non-violence, support for the Games and promise of non-independence are all consistent with what he has said and done in the West. As an ordinary overseas Chinese student, I think not only the future of Tibet requires formal discussions between Chinese government and His Holiness, but to abandon hatred and to promote harmony between Chinese and Tibetans also require continuous dialogues and communications between the two peoples, and this is the main purpose of my trip.
Lingxi Kong A fourth year student majoring in Greek and Latin at Columbia University April 26th, 2008 中国留学生:记与达赖喇嘛的单独会谈中国留学生:记与达赖喇嘛的单独会谈(含视频)/孔灵犀(图)
November 16 On Close ReadingStudents, as they began to write on the writings of others, were not to say anything that was not derived from the text they were considering. They were not to make any statements that they could not support by a specific use of language that actually occurred in the text. They were asked, in other words, to begin by reading texts closely as texts and not to move into the general context of human experience or history. Mere reading, it turns out, prior to any theory, is able to transform critical discourse in a manner that would appear deeply subversive to those who think of the studying of literature should really be studying of a combination of ethics, sociology, psychology and intellectual history. There are, after all, more important things than mere reading--there is life, for instance. Only specialists could have built their distinctive professional virtue— textual impeccability—into a theory of interpretation. And the current practice of close reading has lasted, not because it is commonsensical, but because specialists have appointed themselves the policemen of their own field. In an age of specialization, the specialist usually frightens off the amateurs. But this triumph of professionalism is not necessarily a triumph of intelligence or truth. What is at stake, then, is clearly the nature of reading; the question is not whether to be or not to be close but how to read in such a way as to break through preconceived notions of meaning in order to encounter unexpected otherness— in order to encounter objective truths through grounding in language and immersion in the literature, history, and culture of a society. For it is the question of the nature of the act of reading that can either illuminate or repress. September 28 Cheng
Cheng might never notice me quietly sitting in a corner managing to get out as much as I can from Latin Prose Composition. But we met in a dinner celebrating the very survival of the course at the end of semester, and were naturally surprised by each other’s unusual interest in Chinese stuff; she the labor issues and I the metaphysics. So it seemed logical that we often engage in discussions of various matters. She invited me to have tea or dinner in her apartment, and repeated the summons whenever I zigzagged my way through the train system coming to campus from my tiny shelter in Flushing. Cheng was a fine Latinist and, without any preparation, shot almost full score on the law school admissions test in sophomore year, but there was nothing ostentatious about her except the confident consciousness of having a mind that moved like a deadly laser among the shams and delusions of our time. This rather awed and frightened me, for I had some romantic fancies of my own. I comforted my pride by wondering whether Cheng’s sharp and decisive thinking, despite her passion for learning and precision of language, had ever allowed her to feel the wisdom hiding in the social and moral traditions of the race. But this is ungracious of me after having accepted her tea. She walked with me on the riverside discussing Chinese politics; she confessed her aversion to New York City and also to ancient Greek. She was young, yet leading noble and desperate causes, and sometimes coming out of the bout with success; she was determined to dedicate her whole life to future China. I admired her as a miracle among women, a rising star among the very brilliant and promising, but – though I several times met her in friendly debate – I never knew her intimately enough to like her as I had come to like Kevin or Bin. I believe that Kevin was the deeper, subtler, kinder person. June 26 None The academic enterprise that has developed in the modern West does not know what to make of the transcendent reality beyond perceptual or intellectual apprehension. Nescience, unknowing, negativity, apophaticism, using reason to defeat reason – choose what term you will – is unlikely to appear in a university catalogue. It may occur in the minds of some professors and some students, but none of them could correlate it with scholarship, their academic reason to be.
Unknowing, like the iconography that can seem to be its antithesis but in fact often is its cousin, is a more-than-academic matter. The standard academic program cannot handle it. Once experienced, known personally, ultimate reality dwarfs all of our studies, even our studies of ultimacy. It is whole and complete; we and our academic studies are all too partial. It never dies. We fill up cemeteries and the basements of libraries. The academic world is grass and flowers; grass withers and flowers fade.
From the perspective of the mystics whom we find most trustworthy, the academic approach is not to be despised, as long as it confesses its partiality. When it presents itself as a wholeness, which is rarely, the mystic has to smile. Often, however, it gets so preoccupied, so absorbed with its studies, that it implies that it is the best, perhaps the only real, game in town. Of course, if the only local opinions are making money, getting drunk, or fornicating, this suggestion will seem to have great merit. The best and brightest will be attracted, and for a while they will stay intrigued. However, this best-and-brightest appeal itself will eventually undo them, for it will never let them forget: They have been made for more. April 06 Law School Personal StatementLiving in the Lie
I grew up in a milieu of unemployed workers in Wuhan, a city hit hard by the economic reforms now sweeping over China, which at the end of the 20th Century was a bustling chaos of movement and energy, poverty and hope. As a laid-off factory worker himself and self-taught lawyer, my father tried his best to give legal support to poor people badly treated by their employers. Under his supervision, I studied laws through first-hand experience and was able to process some uncomplicated cases independently. When I managed to break through the Great Firewall of the Internet, got to know the Western press and improved my English reading the NY Times, the Washington Post, etc., I gradually turned myself from a passive reader into an activist, attending underground political discussions, writing essays on education, political reform and citizens’ rights. Those uncensored discussions were a powerful stimulus to the dissident intelligentsia of China in this turbulent and hopeful time. In May 2002, when I was 18, after the secret police tracked down my IP address, I was privileged to view the world from inside of a jail. I faced with trepidation some fifteen criminals, who, in turn, faced with consternation a skinny kid being kicked into their over-crowded cell under the alleged crime “plotting to subvert the socialist government.” Though they beat me up physically and coerced me into heavy labors, we got to know and learn from each other’s experiences. Zhang, a talented thief with polished skills, polished some English expressions by rubbing them against mine, and in return, taught me his lock-picking craft. Li, the most wanted drug trafficker in the city, was a man of somber spirit, proud strength and eloquent speech, a volcano seethed under his tight-lipped self-control; he taught me the persistence, the manly independence, the swift intelligence and the calculating taciturnity. The laws meant no more to us than hindrances to elude or ignore. There were genius criminals and un-subdued anarchists there; but more typical -- in this living room, bathroom, and dinning room, all crowded within a space no more than 500 square feet -- was the spirit of moral, political, and verbal freedom, seasoned and lightened with scintillating ideas and sinful gaiety, with unrelenting zest for huge economic gain and less explored sensitivity to human emotions. Coming out on the 37th day pregnant with ideas, I only found myself shipped to a concentration camp where I was thrown into solitary confinement; the only sound that penetrated my cell was the stamping of military boots and the muffled screaming from other cells. Often without anything to read, even a censored newspaper, I could talk to no one but interrogators trained to break my spirit. The police treated me inhumanely and in response I went on a five-day hunger-strike. Having stayed there for four months, I managed to attribute my release to the attention my case received on VOA and RFA broadcasts. Continuing to advise cast-off workers and organize political activities, I also resumed my interest in inventing while teaching myself English. On the Intellectual Property Day 2003, I found myself the youngest among the “Ten Greatest Inventors in Wuhan”, an honor given by the city government. My admission to Columbia worried the secret police: One week after the statutory time limit for acting on a passport application, the secret police rejected the idea that I should be free to leave China and was applying for an order from the Ministry of Security stating that my departure would constitute a threat to national security. Thinking I would be safe hereafter only in the anonymity of a metropolitan multitude, I immediately entrusted myself into a voluntary exile, and finally landed in Shanghai, where my grandfather was put into jail in 1957 during The Great Leap Forward Movement and died in despair in Tilan Bridge Prison. As a prominent judge himself and son of Chief Justice Cheng (r. 1953-67) of Republic of China (Taiwan), my grandfather believed what this country needs more than anything else is public search and discussion of the truth. The truth, the truth, the truth, the banishment of lies! That is where he thought people should be uncompromising, and culture, not just the political system, will be involved in those changes. | |||