Peer reviewed analysis from world leading experts

Panchen Lama’s appointment to the CPPCC: No panacea for discontent

Reading Time: 4 mins

In Brief

During a visit to Tibet in 2003, I saw pilgrims from eastern parts of the region approach a vendor in Lhasa whose sign proclaimed that he was selling photos of the Panchen Lama, the second most influential reincarnation in Tibetan Buddhism after the Dalai Lama. A pilgrim picked one up and then contemptuously tossed it on the ground, saying, ‘It’s the fake one.’

This incident highlights the crisis of legitimacy facing the PRC’s designated Panchen Lama, Gyaltsen Norbu.

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

He has recently been appointed to the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, which mainly endorses current Communist Party policies. This is an obvious attempt to raise his profile and enhance his legitimacy in the eyes of both Tibetans and Chinese. The main obstacle to this goal is that no Tibetan Buddhist will ever accept the idea that Gyaltsen Norbu—who was designated as Panchen Lama by non-Buddhist Communist Party officials who do not believe in reincarnation—has any legitimacy.

There are several hundred reincarnate lamas in Tibetan Buddhism, some of whom are merely local, associated with a particular area or monastery. The three most influential reincarnations—the Dalai Lama, the Panchen Lama, and the Karmapa—have traditionally been chosen by other senior lamas who use divination, oracles, and predictions by the deceased ‘predecessor’ lama. The CCP is attempting to create a new system in which it has sole authority over this distinctively Tibetan practice by citing dubious historical precedents and declaring that the Dalai Lama and other senior religious figures should play no role.

It is clearly ridiculous for an avowedly atheist regime to assert sole authority over a religious practice—particularly one as arcane as this one—but there are pragmatic considerations motivating PRC actions. The Dalai Lama is 76 and in fragile health, and the PRC wants to control his successor. In 1995 the Dalai Lama announced that a five-year-old boy named Gendün Chökyi Nyima was the reincarnation of the 10th Panchen, but several days later PRC officials declared that this was ‘illegal and invalid’ and subsequently imprisoned the boy along with his parents. They have disappeared, and all requests for access to them have been denied.

The PRC later announced that Gyeltsen Norbu was the true Panchen and ordered Tibetan Buddhists to endorse its choice. PRC officials have stated on numerous occasions that they intend to use their puppet Panchen to select a puppet Dalai Lama, but the prospects of this choice being accepted are negligible. A combination of threats and state violence have led some Buddhist leaders to verbally endorse Beijing’s moves, but it is doubtful that any believing Buddhist really accepts the notion that the PRC’s Panchen Lama has any standing to oversee the system.  The Dalai Lama has added to the PRC’s legitimacy problems by publicly announcing that he will reincarnate among Tibetan exiles and not in Chinese-occupied Tibet. Traditionally lamas have unquestioned authority to make such pronouncements, and recent angry diatribes against him by government officials attempting to obfuscate this fact only make them look ridiculous.

While Gendün Chökyi Nyima languishes in detention, Gyaltsen Norbu is seldom allowed to visit Tibet. Little is known about his life, but it is clear that he has little knowledge of Buddhism and that his education has concentrated on PRC propaganda. As a result, even if he wanted to play a role as a Buddhist leader he would lack the cognitive resources to do so, and he has yet to make any substantive statement on Buddhist doctrine or practice.

The PRC has indicated that it will force Buddhist leaders to endorse their future Dalai Lama, but the demonstrations of 2008 showed the limits of this approach. The PRC has deployed massive numbers of troops to Tibet, and prisons are full of dissidents. Torture is widespread in Tibetan prisons, and many die as a result of their treatment. Despite all this, tens of thousands protested across the Tibetan plateau in a blow for the Chinese government.

In my three trips to Tibet I have been struck by the continuing loyalty of the people to the Dalai Lama. The puppet Panchen has little chance of changing these attitudes because he is viewed as a creature of the Chinese who lives under constant guard in Beijing, knows little about Tibetan Buddhism, and has no standing among believers. When he chooses a successor to the Dalai Lama, PRC officials will proclaim this as an example of their commitment to religious freedom and will declare that the Tibetan masses accept it. They may even believe this themselves. But Tibetan Buddhists won’t.

3 responses to “Panchen Lama’s appointment to the CPPCC: No panacea for discontent”

  1. Your article raises implied issues besides Tibet.

    Tibetan nationalism in spite of Chinese occupation since WWII continues to exist and should be condemned.
    Unfortunately ascendant China will continue to absorb Tibet by cultural transformation over time.
    The Middle Kingdom was expanded and consolidated over millennia by the same process.

    The twentieth century witnessed similar great power annexation in, for example, Israel annexation of Palestine lands and British covert eviction of indigenous Chagos people from Diego Garcia to enable the US to build a military base.
    The British government secretly leased the archipelago from Mauritius in the 1960’s for the purpose of eviction.

    The UN Security Council was designed to protect voting member interests thru the power of an individual veto.

    Sadly, I witness selective memory and outrage in the discourse and media.
    Will great power hypocrisy ever end?

    I realise we need analysis and discussion to encourage collective insights.

  2. This article is too sentimental and assertive, severely weakening its arguments and risking its value as a qualified political analysis. Just to state some faulty points:

    1. 11th Panchen’s being selected to CPPCC is nothing surprising, if one knows the traditions of China’s political system and CPPCC.

    2. 11th Panchen’s was not picked by CCP officials by procedure. There were governmental influence and even interventions, though.

    3. China is not an atheist regime.

    4. China doesn’t invent any brand new “system” of the reincarnation. There is a controversial new administratative approaches (转世活佛管理办法), though.

    5. Last but not least, while I acknowledge that some tibetans deeply respect and even worship on Dalai Lama, it is really wierd to call it “loyalty”.

  3. I must say from the outset that I know very little about the Tibet Buddhism system.

    However, I have some questions: Is the Tibet Buddhism a really one hierarchical system, like the Vatican Catholic system, or more like Catholic, Anglican and Orthodox?

    Was that the case that the Panchen Lama and Dalai Lama chose the other Lama in the past?

    Were the three Lamas mentioned by John Powers working in harmony or had they had some rivalries?

Support Quality Analysis

Donate
The East Asia Forum office is based in Australia and EAF acknowledges the First Peoples of this land — in Canberra the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people — and recognises their continuous connection to culture, community and Country.

Article printed from East Asia Forum (https://www.eastasiaforum.org)

Copyright ©2024 East Asia Forum. All rights reserved.