“When a Tibetan is confronted with a conflict, his reaction should immediately be: ‘How can I resolve this in dialogue?’ ” – His Holiness the Dalai Lama

 

      Back in the fall of 2004 I had just begun a PhD program in religion and philosophy. The first academic forum of the year highlighted as keynote speaker scholar Edward Said. Said wrote and taught extensively about colonialism and human rights at Columbia University until he passed away that very weekend in 2004. The topic of our forum was Globalization and Religion.  Drawing a broad range of scholars to our New Jersey campus over a period of three days, the presentation that remains most prominent for me was that of a scholar from China.  Addressing the pros and cons, culturally and economically, of “globalization” from his own perspective he did not (or perhaps could not) address issues of religion.  It surprised me, though, that during the questions not one person posed the most obvious interrogative: What about the incredible tension between Tibet and the Chinese government?  Bringing forward issues of economic prowess, diplomacy, human rights, and of course, freedom of religion was the very purpose of the forum.  Tibet and China presented a pertinent case study for extrapolating the potential for globalization, oppression of democratic forces, and human rights.  How would life for people in all countries be affected by the changes “globalization,” as it was perceived in 2004, might impose? Positive conjecture and cautious optimism were countered with serious concern and often outright disapproval of this next wave of economic interrelationship.

 

       An important moment in this tense relationship will take place during the first week of August in Geneva, Switzerland.  Entitled “Finding Common Ground,” The International Fellowship of Reconciliation together with the Swiss Tibetan Friendship Association will sponsor a conference in Geneva between Chinese and Tibetan scholars, scientists, journalists and other members of Chinese and Tibetan civil society. The conference, closed to outside observers, will take place from 6 – 8 August and will be attended by more than 100 delegates from around the globe. The Fellowship of Reconciliation will be represented by its vice-president Françoise Petremand, the International Secretariat’s Executive Director Johannes R. Schot, and the conference convener Jonathan Sisson (previous President of IFOR).

 

In an exclusive interview with Joerg Eigendorf, a German journalist writing for Die Welt that took place in Dharamsala, India on July 5 of this year, Mr. Eigendorf reported that His Holiness has begun to call for non-violence, such as that espoused by Mahatma Gandhi, when he travels to other countries.  This marks a break with his earlier position of speaking primarily of Buddhist values.  HH the Dalai Lama also commented on the moral issues and greed informing the global financial crisis.  Still, according to his interview with Eigendorf, the Dalai Lama remains a supporter of globalization in general.

 

Although His Holiness the Dalai Lama has consistently sought to find a “peaceful resolution”  for the people of Tibet to live in Tibet yet maintain some level of autonomy and self-determination the terms of that autonomy are far from being realized.  According to the press release for the upcoming Geneva event, the Dalai Lama, in his 10 March 2009 statement said, “We need to look to the future and work for our mutual benefit. We Tibetans are looking for a legitimate and meaningful autonomy, an arrangement that would enable Tibetans to live within the framework of the People’s Republic of China.”

The conversation in Geneva will most likely serve as a continuation of this key topic of autonomy for the Tibetans.  In November of last year, a Tibetan coalition presented “the Memorandum on Genuine Autonomy for the Tibetan People” to  Chinese government officials. Central to the notion of autonomy within the current People’s Republic of China is that Tibet as a “nation” and “people” with a distinct culture will find representation under China’s governance coalesce under one primary link. Presently, Tibetans are somewhat “balkanized” or “gerrymandered” in such a way that they enjoy no ability to find a unified voice.  A passage from the memorandum here speaks clearly to the Tibetan goals, “Whereas, we are committed, therefore, to fully respect the territorial integrity of the PRC, we expect the Central Government to recognise and fully respect the integrity of the Tibetan nationality and its right to exercise genuine autonomy within the PRC. We believe that this is the basis for resolving the differences between us and promoting unity, stability and harmony among nationalities.”

Finally, in conversation with Mr. Eigendorf,  HH the Dalai Lama spoke directly to the issue of spiritual life and education for people who will continue to live within the context of globalization. “History, math, languages and economics – these are all subjects for the brain. But responsibility – moral responsibilities, responsibilities regarding society – these are things that come from the heart. This, combined with the power of the brain, is what governments and large companies need. I will give you an example: we Tibetans believe that our national issue with China can only be resolved non-violently. This is what we preach from Kindergarten onwards throughout the entire education of an individual. When a Tibetan is confronted with a conflict, his reaction should immediately be: “How can I resolve this in dialogue?” It is important to us that young people in our schools understand that violence is the wrong way, that violence cannot solve problems. This attitude has become a part of many Tibetan’s lives through education and training. The same needs to occur in regards to economy and justice.” 

To learn more about this upcoming event follow the “Finding Common Ground” link above.

Word for today: hagiography. And, what it is?  The study of hags?  Actually, it is the study of saints and the entire genre of literature such life stories generated.  I have been thinking about saints recently.  In the early years of this millennium it was not too hard to be granted status as a saint in Europe, parts of the Near East, even North Africa (Hippo was the home of St. Augustine).  One merely needed to show some kind of impressive level of faith, community involvement, or an act that led one’s local community to believe that one possessed a true gift – producing something others witnessed to be miraculous. Without much or any intervention from the church hierarchy, people were “canonized” on the local level. Even a dog was made a saint in his local village. Stories about such people became a literary form unto itself.  Later, the church wanted more control, bishops became involved in signing off on the matter, then eventually entire committees and the Pope developed a schematic by which to measure folks. The birth of the canonization process and its bureaucracy signaled the end of the community-recognized simple saint.

 

Contemporary hagiographers may need to look no further than social media for a post-modern take on a kind of community-confirmed saintliness.  And where might this be found?  In the months since the economy really took a downturn folks have been losing savings, their homes, and material possessions, yet social media conversations have generated a digital din amidst the ethers. What is going on? Gathered around the village campfire of Facebook and Twitter people are taking a moment to affirm intelligence, wit, humor, and examples of commitment to the common good.  While not miraculous, the little “thumbs up” icon on Facebook seems to me a good example of a small little saintly “high-five” folks have been exchanging lately. 

 

Pop culture in the US and around the globe is shifting, I would argue, toward a kind of dialogue one might not have recognized even 2 years ago – when many folks were far more interested in Starbucks, martinis, and buying designer shoes on credit than sharing little glorifications about puppy-rearing.  Frankly, I have heard more about barbecue, humor, happiness, travel, weddings, and reunions this summer than I can remember. Even this afternoon public policy guru Robert Reich offered up a radio piece on the tried and true American Road Trip – just his son, a big dog and dad (Reich) riding shotgun. In scratching the surface of the dark rich soil beneath the rocks on rarely trodden American paths one might hit forgotten bedrock. And why does this matter? Humans value affirmation – even as simple as the little “thumbs up” to remind another that his or her  joke deserves a laugh, that one’s favorite bloom is cool, or that a friend’s insight into an issue matters.  As though reviving from a long afternoon snooze, what before seemed like the stuff of high accomplishment seems to have been more of an unsteady blur - working the cell, the blackberry, the vacation and the weekend.  Folks suddenly have the time to look at each other, to hunt down the high school friend, to re-connect in a qualitatively different way. Further, this is not really cute or romantic, but almost driven by a need to find a stability we did not know we had lost.

 

While we continue to debate health care, foreign policy, police ethics, human rights, nominate a new Supreme Court judge, and a host of similar news-worthy ventures, the deeper levels of communication between folks seem to percolate.  Humans excel at communication crafted across boundaries - over or on walls, scribble on scraps of paper, leaving messages large or small that transcend the confines of time, of culture…sometime even geographic boundaries.  So, canonize a friend with a thumbs-up or some other metaphor of affirmation…and maybe this whole downturn will follow our hearts – not our pocketbooks.