When Chinese authorities implement a new law this month on the “reincarnation of Living Buddhas,” it will open a new and controversial phase in the looming battle to find a successor for the 72-year-old Dalai Lama.
The Chinese government described the new law as an “important move to institutionalize the management of reincarnation of Living Buddhas,” or lamas, as the monks in senior positions are known in Tibetan Buddhism.
The concept of reincarnation is viewed by non-believers around the world with a considerable degree of scepticism and amusement, but within the context of Tibetan culture it remains a centerpiece in spiritual life.
These Living Buddhas form the core of leadership in Tibetan Buddhism. They constitute a clergy of influential figures who are believed to be continuously reincarnated to pursue their religious work. At the apex of this spiritual elite is the Dalai Lama, which has an unbroken lineage of reincarnations extending 600 years. The current Dalai Lama is considered as the 14th Dalai Lama.
But the new measure has little to do with the esoteric realm of the afterlife and reincarnation. What Beijing is more concerned with has to do with the realm of politics and its political control over the future of Tibet.
The new regulations stipulate the Chinese government’s approval as a requirement in the search and recognition of reincarnated lamas. Though the Dalai Lama is not mentioned directly, the reference to the Tibetan spiritual leader is clear in a provision stating that “the reincarnation of a Living Buddha with a particularly great impact” has to be approved by the top Chinese leaders in Beijing. Otherwise, the government will consider the reincarnation as “illegal or invalid.”
If one leaves aside the last three hundred years of historical experience as it unfolded in Europe and America, and examines the phenomenon of death and the doctrine of the soul in all its ramifications—Neoplatonic, Christian, dynastic-Egyptian, and so on, one finds repeatedly the idea that there is a light body, an entelechy that is somehow mixed up with the body during life and at death is involved in a crisis in which these two portions separate. One part loses its raison d’etre and falls into dissolution; metabolism stops. The other part goes we know not where. Perhaps nowhere if one believes it does not exist; but then one has the problem of trying to explain life. And, though science makes great claims and has done well at explaining simple atomic systems, the idea that science can make any statement about what life is or where it comes from is currently preposterous.