Kritik am Buch „The Shadow Of The Dalai Lama ... - Neues von Shi De

But can we conclude from Jiang Qing’s preference for the imperial form of power that she is an
incarnation of Guanyin? On the basis of her own view of things, we must probably reject the
hypothesis. But if — like the Buddhist Tantrics — we accept that deities represent force fields which
can be embodied in people, then such an assumption seems natural. The only question is whether it is
in every case necessary that such people deliberately summon the gods or whether it is sufficient
when their spirit and energy “inspire” the people in their possession to act. What counts in the final
instance for a Tantric is a convincing symbolic interpretation of political events: The mythic
competition between China and Tibet, between the Chinese Emperor and the Dalai Lama, between the
Empress Wu Zetian and the Tibetan kings, between the Empress Dowager Ci Xi and the Thirteenth
Dalai Lama, all give the conflict between the Fourteenth Dalai Lama and Jiang Qing a metapolitical
meaning and render it comprehensible within a tantric scheme of things. The parallels between these
conflicts are so striking that from an ancient viewpoint they can without further ado been seen as the
expression of a primordial, divine scenario, the dispute between Avalokiteshvara and Guanyin over
the world throne of the Chakravartin.
Before we in conclusion compare the religious-political role of the three “Empresses” with one
another, we would like to once more emphasize that it is not us who see in China a matriarchal power
which opposes a patriarchal Tibet. In contrast — we plan in the rest of this study to report several
times upon Chinese androcentrism. What we nonetheless wish to convey is the fact that from a
Lamaist/tantric viewpoint the Chinese-Tibetan conflict is perceived as a battle of the sexes. Tantrism
does not just sexualize landscapes, the elements, time, and the entire universe, but likewise politics as
well.
From a Chinese (Taoist, Confucian, or Communist) viewpoint this may appear completely different.
But we must not overlook that two of the female rulers we have introduced were fanatic (!) Buddhists
with tantric (Ci Xi), or proto-tantric (Wu Zetian) ideas. Both will thus have perceived their political
relationship to Tibet through Vajrayana spectacles, so to speak.
Wu Zetian let herself be worshipped as an incarnated Buddha and a Buddhist messiah. Her religiouspolitical
visions display an astonishing similarity to those of the Kalachakra Tantra, although this was
first formulated several centuries later. As Chakravartin she stood in mythically irreconcilable
opposition to the Tibetan kings, who, albeit later (in the 17 th century), were entitled to the same
designation. Admittedly, one cannot speak of her as an incarnation of Guanyin, since the cult of the
Chinese goddess first crystallized out in her time. But there are a number of indications that she was
the historical individual in whom the transformation of Avalokiteshvara into Guanyin took place. She
was — in her own view — the first “living Buddha” in female form, as is likewise true of Guanyin.
Most unmistakably, Guanyin is “incarnated” in Ci Xi, since the Empress Dowager openly announced
herself to be an embodiment of the goddess. There are many indications that the Chinese autocrat was
deeply familiar with the secrets of Lamaist Tantrism. She must therefore have seen her encounter with
the Thirteenth Dalai Lama as an elevated symbolic game for which in the end she had to pay for with
her life.
With Jiang Qing, the statement that she was a incarnation of Guanyin is no longer so convincing. The
fanatical Communist was no follower of Buddha like her tow predecessors and maintained an atheist
image. But in her “culturally revolutionary” decisions and “proletarian” art rituals, in her contempt for
all clergy, she acted and thought like a “raging goddess” who revolted with hate and violence against