×
Home Companies Industry Politics Money Opinion LoungeMultimedia Science Education Sports TechnologyConsumerSpecialsMint on Sunday
×

Sceptre and altar: the Karmapa case

Sceptre and altar: the Karmapa case
Comment E-mail Print Share
First Published: Wed, Feb 02 2011. 08 17 PM IST
Updated: Wed, Feb 02 2011. 08 17 PM IST
The police seizure of large sums of Chinese currency from the Indian monastery of the China-anointed but now India-based Karmapa Lama—one of the most important figures in Tibetan Buddhism—has revived old suspicions about his continuing links with China, and forced him to deny that he is an “agent of Beijing”.
The Dalai Lama, the Panchen Lama and the Karmapa Lama are the three highest figures in Tibetan Buddhism, representing parallel institutions that have intermittently been at odds with each other. China, seeking to tighten its grip on Tibet, has worked to control the traditional process of finding the reincarnation of any senior lama who passes away.
In 1992, Beijing helped select and install the seven-year-old Ogyen Trinley Dorje as the 17th Karmapa Lama. He became the first reincarnated “living Buddha” recognized and ratified by Communist China. But in 1999, Dorje made a stunning escape to India through Nepal. This attracted the world’s attention, but the apparent ease with which he and his entourage managed to flee also caused deep suspicion.
Earlier, in 1995, China had installed its own marionette as the Panchen Lama after its security agencies abducted the Tibetans’ six-year-old appointee. The official Panchen Lama simply disappeared. Now Beijing is waiting for the current Dalai Lama—who is over 75 and has had bouts of ill health—to pass away so that it can anoint his successor. The Dalai Lama, however, wants his successor to come from the “free world”. This has set the stage for the emergence of two rival Dalai Lamas—one chosen by Beijing, and the other by the Tibetan exile movement.
In fact, there are already two rival Karmapa Lamas—the Chinese-appointed one lives in the Dalai Lama’s shadow in Dharamsala, while the other has set up shop in New Delhi. The Indian government has sought to maintain peace by barring both contenders from the sacred Rumtek monastery in Sikkim.
In that light, the discovery of 1.1 million yuan and large sums of other foreign currency has ignited a fresh controversy over Dorje. While his supporters have staged protests against the police raid and questioning of their leader, Indian officials have expressed apprehension that China may be funding Dorje as part of a plan to influence the Karmapa’s Kagyu sect, which controls important monasteries along the Indo-Tibetan border.
Himalayan communities have historically been closely integrated. But with Tibet locked behind an iron curtain since the 1951 Chinese annexation, local Himalayan economies and cultures have weakened. Tibetan Buddhism, however, still serves as the common link, with the Karmapa’s Kagyu sect a powerful influence on the Indian side.
The cash haul has reopened a question that arose in 1999: Was Dorje’s flight to India stage-managed by Beijing, or was he a genuine defector who simply got fed up with living in a gilded Chinese cage?
China had several possible incentives to stage his “escape”. One reason could have been to strengthen his claim to the title at a time when the rival contender (backed by important interests in India, Bhutan and Taiwan) appeared to be gaining ground. A more potent reason was the fact that the Kagyu school’s holiest institution is the old Rumtek monastery, where the sect’s all-powerful “black hat” is located. The hat, believed to have been woven from the hairs of female deities, is the symbolic crown of the Karmapa. Had Dorje remained in Tibet, he could have lost out to his rival.
Beijing would also have drawn comfort from the fact that in the murky intra-Tibetan politics, its Karmapa, oddly, had the Dalai Lama’s backing. The latter belongs to the contending Gelug school and, according to Tibetan tradition, has no role in selecting or endorsing a Karmapa. Yet, driven by political calculations, the Dalai Lama gave his approval. Historically, the Dalai Lamas and Karmapa Lamas had vied with each other for influence until the Gelug school gained ascendancy over the Kagyu order.
The last Karmapa died in 1981, and the raging controversy over the successor also epitomizes a struggle for control of the $1.5 billion assets of the Kagyu order, the richest in Tibetan Buddhism. Indian security agencies were supposed to have kept Dorje under close surveillance, yet today they suspect him of receiving funds illicitly from China.
Unlike its increasingly vituperative attacks on the Dalai Lama, China, tellingly, has not denounced (or derecognized) its Karmapa, although his flight to India signalled its failure to retain the loyalty of a supposed puppet. The Mandarin-speaking Dorje has occasionally criticized the Chinese government —he accused it of wanting “to create this ethnic conflict” in Tibet. But Beijing has refrained from attacking him, making clear it wants him to eventually return. The cash haul, of course, has been greeted by the rival Karmapa as “exposing” his challenger. Control of the Rumtek monastery is now embroiled in rival lawsuits.
The Karmapa-centred puzzle, the shadowy politics and the intrigue are just a forerunner of what India can expect when two duelling Dalai Lamas emerge after the present incumbent passes from the scene. The Dalai Lama is India’s greatest asset vis-à-vis China. And India must have a plan to positively influence the succession to the post, rather than merely be at the receiving end as in the Karmapa affair.
Brahma Chellaney is professor of strategic studies at the Centre for Policy Research in NewDelhi
Comments are welcome at theirview@livemint.com
Comment E-mail Print Share
First Published: Wed, Feb 02 2011. 08 17 PM IST
More Topics: Tibet | Buddhism | Dalai Lama | China | Kagyu sect |