What if Dalai Lama decides not to come back to this life again?

After his visiting to the U.S., Dalai Lama talked to the reporter that he considers not to come back to this world again, or he could choose a person to represent his authority before he leaves this world. This is startling, even to a non-Tibetan like me. In fact, as I remember, he has made such statements couple years ago, but still, hearing these words again frightens me.

I am not a Tibetan, and thus I will not be able to feel what they feel when they hear this. However, as a Chinese Buddhist having known and familiar with the reincarnation system in Tibetan Buddhism, I feel sad and frustrated. Dalai Lama is considered the reincarnation of Avalokiteśvara, the Bodhisattva of Compassion and also the most praised and worshipped goddess in Chinese culture. She represents great mercy and love, and it is widely believed that whenever a person suffers from any kinds of pain and calls her name, the Bodhisattva will come and help release the person from pain. Thus, when the representation of this icon in this world decides not to come again, does this mean that we, the pathetic human beings, are finally left for eternal pain waiting for the Judgement Day, as is described in Christian tradition?

Of course not, I personally believe (according to my religious belief) that all gods are loving and they will not leave us. Dalai Lama is only making this statement according to the difficult political situation of Tibet. He understands well that his presence represets all Tibetans, and as long as he holds the idea that Tibetans and their culture should not be suppressed by the Chinese government, China will never welcome him and his people. Indeed, this is a dilemma, and he is left with no solution but not to come again. But such a decision will have a great influence on Tibetans because it is impossible for them to imagine the world without Dalai Lama. Thus, he says it is possible to name his successor while he is alive. In fact, this could be a good way since no more reincarnation is involved, and the new successor will be a new individual without all the past history which may be a hindrance for him to rule Tibet. In other words, this new leader is more like a political ruler than a religious icon, whose lack of religious power may make Chinese government fear less.

But still, this dilemma is still not solved. If the new successor is no longer the reincarnation of the previous Dalai Lama, he will never be Dalai Lama, even with the current Dalai Lama's consent. Tradition exists according to his internal laws, and once they are destroyed it will take a very long time for the new laws to develop and function. Tibet as a political regime has been in difficult condition, and it is undoubtedly true that their culture are greatly damaged due to the political situation. Religious belief and tradition are the reason why this culture can still survive and also the reason why Chinese government fears it so much. If Dalai Lama breaks this tradition, I wonder how this culture can be maintained without losing the essence of it. Dalai Lama says that as the time progresses, Tibetan culture should also progress and change so as to match the contemporary world. I agree with him, but I do not think that destroying the core of the culture is the best way to force an old culture to progress. Also, I believe the Chinese government will not change their attitude just because the new Dalai Lama is no longer the reincarnation of the previous ones.

I am unable to imagine a Tibet without Dalai Lama, and I am also unable to imagine a Dalai Lama who is not a Dalai Lama. Call me superstitious! I do believe in this magical reincarnation system, and I do think Dalai Lama has the wisdom and knowledge that has been passed down through such system. This is the difference between me and him. He is an old man with great wisdom and knows what life means and the rules of the world. I am only a human who tries to use my little knowledge to understand the world. Maybe his not coming back would in fact benefit his beloved people. But as a human being, I just don't think that such decisions can solve the dilemma between Tibet and China.

Studying vs. Living

Recently a friend, or more precisely speaking my previous student, contacted me about her current studies and whether she should go for PhD studies. After reading her message, I suddendly realized that I must thank her for cotacting me. This message says that she trusts me as a friend, and more than that, it helps me develop and reaffirm my own ideas about life.

She says:

唉,真的深深體認,書念越多越覺得知識匱乏,
最近看了些關於研究的書,不斷提到後現代,後結構,
就越念越焦慮,因為都搞不清楚這些是什麼,想要搞清楚一點,但後面又有一堆書等著我

然後又忍不住反問自己,努力爬上金字塔頂端的目的是什麼
腦袋裝了有用的東西沒好好利用也是白費,但更進一步的想,
即使想要把有用的東西好好發揮(利他),可以做得到嗎?
這是我在思考的問題,我有認真的考慮PhD的事,錢是一個很大的問題,自己的能力是另一個問題,
但除此之外,我更考慮到的是,花個幾百萬所得來的學歷真的可以發揮到他的實質價值嗎(我不是指之後可以賺多少錢回收)

Here is what I think:
關於方法學以及相關的理論，尤其是後現代論述，我們需要做的是盡其所能的去了解，並思考這些論述對於學習、研究、寫作有沒有幫助。若是覺得沒有，那麼我們應該暫時將它放在一邊，等過一段時間後再來重新接觸它。

並不是所有研究都需要運用到極為高深的理論。做學問需要「就事論事」的態度，不是所有研究都是哲學、文化、文學研究，所以這些論述只是用來幫助我們思考，並且輔助我們在某些觀點上的不足。當然的，去知道、了解世間萬物是一種很棒的學習態度，但是我們更必須培養對「知識的認知」與「發掘知識界線的觀念」。要把自己抽離出來，站在第三者的角度來檢視自己，如此一來我們才能真正的知道自己是什麼、欠缺什麼、需要修正什麼。換句話說，讀書做學問就是一種修行的態度，它幫助我們修持自身的行為、舉止、思想、態度。當我們走進了這一條途徑，慢慢的我們會發現在這條路途中停不下來，會一直更想深入某種未知的領域。而這種衝動便是所謂的動力，也是做研究中不可或缺的最基本的元素，它比起所謂的知識程度或者研究方法來得更重要。

藉禪宗的話來說，「當下」就是人應該要注意的行動基準。換句話說，若是繼續讀 PhD 已經是已經考慮的問題，那麼就應該著手進行它。不要去思考什麼不行的問題。直接去做、直接去生活就是「當下」的意義，而禪宗也就是藉此為方法來幫助其子弟們「悟禪」。我不是要說人都要去「悟禪」，而是藉此觀念此來幫助我們了解，與其在世俗中受苦，何不在世俗中努力生活。苦海無邊，煩惱不斷，那就盡己所能的渡過苦海、斬斷煩惱。人永遠不會知道下一秒鐘的自己會是如何，就算是經過精心設計，仍是有不可預知的變數在中間。那何必煩惱？就把握「當下」，努力去做吧。

Later she talks about Foucault:

然後看了 Foucault 談到死亡的美學,就覺得像這樣的天才發展出來的想法應該也只有世上少數金字塔頂端的人有那樣的機會去探索體認他的看法,對於其他多數的芸芸眾生,每天都為了基本的生存而掙扎,談什麼美學呢
又或者我們太習慣於很表淺的生活,所以不習慣去想,或不願意去想這高層次的生命議題,就像我曾問過我爸對於死亡的看法,他給我的回答是他不想談,因為他覺得死了就死了,對於自己的死似乎顯得無能為力

This part is crucial since it makesme think in deep what my thought is on life, living and death:
美就在生活之中；美學就是生活的學問。不可否認， Foucault 是那金字塔頂的人，但他仍是在這俗世欲海中沉浮，也因為他意識到生命的沉浮不定，迫使他去更深入的思考到底人究竟是什麼、生命的意義到底是什麼、死亡會什麼是可怕的？一般人對死亡那種晦暗不明的回答很是有趣的，這種回答其實是包含了恐懼、無能為力、放棄與因為放棄後所得到的豁達。但是畢竟人是不捨其一生中所擁有的一切，就算有了那一點點的豁達，也會因恐懼的升高而抹煞了因豁達所引發的釋然。死亡就是死亡，既然會死，何必去想？既然不用想它，那麼何不把握當下，努力去成就生命的美好？與其說是死亡的美學，它更是生命的美學、更是俗世生活的根基。佛學說要為死亡做準備（如《西藏生死書》中對生命與死亡的詮釋），但這事實上是要求我們努力去成就此生的美好，而不是去畏懼死亡的恐怖。

Foucault 並未放棄人生，雖他與佛理哲學無太大關係，但我們仍可發現到他的概念與禪思想並無衝突之處。他的AIDS病症事實上是督促他不斷思考的原動力。人都需要有極大的創傷、挫折來使他意識到自身的意義。當然我不是說人都需要經歷如此恐怖的病痛，但我們卻可以藉由閱讀、學習來發現「人的意義」，由別人的真實經驗來輔助我們那麼微小的、平庸的思想。

當一個人書讀的越多，知識累積的越深，他將發現他自己也是金字塔頂端的一員。甚至慢慢的他更發現到，原來每一個生命個體都是一個金字塔，只是他是否願意將自己推上那塔頂罷了。