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

praised the Tibetans as “one of the earth's most civilized peoples” (quoted by Bishop, 1989, p. 231).
“All the residents of Lhasa, rich and poor, high and low, are peaceful”, we can read in a contemporary
report. “Even the beggars of Lhasa have only to ply their trade for some time in the morning to get
enough food for the day. In the evening they are all nicely drunk. The people of Lhasa were
physically relaxed, mentally contended and happy. The food of the city is also nutritious. No one has
to strive to make a living. Life takes care of itself, as a matter of course. Everything is
splendid” (quoted by Craig, 1997, pp.86-87).
The Kundun also knows to only report only the most positive aspects of the past of the Land of
Snows: “The continuing influence of Buddhism produced a society of peace and harmony. We
enjoyed freedom and contentment” (Panorama no. 553, November 20, 1997, p. 2). Or at another
point: “A poor Tibetan had little cause to envy or be hostile towards the rich lord of his estate, then he
knew that everybody harvested what he had sown in his earlier lives. We were quite simply
happy” (Panorama no. 553, November 20, 1997, p. 2). This image of a poor, deeply religious, pure,
and blissfully happy Tibet has meanwhile become fixed in the consciousness of millions.
It has become a favored topic in, amongst other things, the esoteric literature, but above all in the
American film industry. The actor Brad Pitt, who played the role of the German teacher of the Dalai
Lama, Heinrich Harrer, in a melodramatic story (Seven years in Tibet), came to the following
conclusion once the film had been shot: “Look at the Tibetans, how poor they are in material terms.
And then look at them, how happy and peaceful they are, and their attitude to life with which they go
their way. This is simply fantastic. It gets under your skin. It is the hearts of the people which make
Tibet into Shangri-La, into paradise. In America this has become a real movement” (Panorama no.
553, November 20, 1997, p. 1).
Such glorifications have spread like wildfire in recent years. “The result is a one-sidedly bright image
of spiritual purity”, writes Tibet researcher Peter Bishop. “Many contemporary western studies go to
the great length to avoid confronting the shadow side of Tibetan spirituality. One can often encounter
a sociological naiveté that stands in stark contrast to claims of scientific scrutiny” (Bishop, 1993, p.
73).
In contrast, among the majority of the earlier travelers, the Tibet of old made a deeply negative
impression, at least with respect to its social situation, which are these days all too readily dismissed
as imperialist arrogance and European racism, although identical criticisms of social conditions were
also articulated by admirers of Tibetan culture. Alexandra David-Neel, for example, was just as
repelled by the general misery of the country as by the corruption of the priestly caste. Even such a
fanatic devotee of the Kalachakra Tantra as Nicholas Roerich complained about the general
decadence in the Tibet of the time.
Likewise, Heinrich Harrer does not paint a rosy picture of Lhasa in the forties, but rather depicts the
land as an unjust albeit fascinating anachronism. In his world famous travelogue, Seven Years in
Tibet, the German mentor of the young Dalai Lama writes: “The power of the monks in Tibet is
unique and can only be compared to a strict dictatorship. They keep a mistrustful eye on every
influence from outside which could threaten their power. They themselves are clever enough to not
believe in the limitlessness of their strength, but would punish anyone who expressed doubts about
this” (Harrer, 1984, p. 71).