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

metaphysical history, he succeeded in establishing himself as Avalokiteshvara and as the final station
of a total of 57 previous incarnations of the god. Or was it — as he himself reported — really a
miracle which handed him the politically momentous incarnation list? Through a terma (i.e., a
rediscovered text written and hidden in the era of the Tibetan kings) which he found in person, his
chain of incarnations was apparently “revealed” to him.
Among the “forebears” listed in it many of the great figures of Tibetan history can be found —
outstanding politicians, ingenious scholars, master magicians, and victorious military leaders. With
this “discovered” or “concocted” document of his, the “Great Fifth” could thus shore himself up with
a political and intellectual authority which stretched over centuries. The list was an especially
valuable legitimation for his sacred/worldly kingship, since the great emperor, Songtsen Gampo, was
included among his “incarnation ancestors”. In his analysis of the introduction of the Chenrezi cult by
His Holiness, the Japanese Tibetologist, Ishihama Yumiko, leaves no doubt that we are dealing with a
power-political construction (Yumiko, 1993, pp. 54, 55).
Now, which entities were — and, according to the Fifth Dalai Lama’s theory of incarnation, still are
— seated upon the golden Lion Throne? First of all, the fiery Bodhisattva, Avalokiteshvara, then the
androgynous time turner, Kalachakra, then the Tibetan warrior king, Songtsen Gampo, then the
Siddha versed in magic, Padmasambhava (the founder of Tantric Buddhism in Tibet), and finally the
Fifth Dalai Lama himself with all his family forebears. This wasn’t nearly all, but those mentioned are
the chief protagonists, who determine the incarnation theater in Tibet. The Fourteenth Dalai Lama, as
the successor of the “Great Fifth” also represents the above-mentioned “divinities” and historical
predecessors.
In an assessment of the Buddhocratic system and the history of Tibet, the power-political intentions of
the two main gods (Avalokiteshvara and Kalachakra) must therefore be examined and evaluated in
the first place so as to deduce the intentions of the currently living Dalai Lama on this basis. “It is
impossible”, the Tibetologist David Seyfort Ruegg writes, “to draw a clear border between the 'holy
and the 'profane', or rather between the spiritual and the temporal. This is most apparent in the case of
the Bodhisattva kings who are represented by the Dalai Lamas, since these are both embodiments of
Avalokiteshvara ... and worldly rulers” (Seyfort Ruegg, 1995, p. 91).
If we assume that the higher the standing of a spiritual entity, the greater his power is, we must pose
the question of why in the year 1650 the Fifth Dalai Lama confirmed and proclaimed the first
Panchen Lama, Lobsang Chokyi Gyaltsen (1567–1662), his former teacher, as a incarnation of
Amitabha. For indeed, Amitabha, the “Buddha of unending light”, is ranked higher in the hierarchy
than the Bodhisattva who emanates from him, Avalokiteshvara. This decision by the extremely power
conscious god-king from Lhasa can thus only be understood when one knows that, as a meditation
Buddha, Amitabha may not interfere in worldly affairs. According to doctrine, he exists only as a
principle of immobility and is active solely through his emanations. Even though he is the Buddha of
our age, he must nevertheless leave all worldly matters to his active arm, the Bodhisattva
Avalokiteshvara. Through such a division of responsibilities, a contest between the Panchen Lama
and Dalai Lama could never even arise.
Nevertheless, the Panchen Lamas have never wanted to fall into line with the nonpolitical role
assigned to them. In contrast — they have attempted by all available means to interfere in the “events
of the world”. Their central monastery, Tashi Lhunpo, became at times a stronghold in which all those