The dalai lama has been & continues to be a cia "asset" since the mid 1950's. The gullible outnumber the wise. Pity the world.

You're a twat.

I think he did your fat friend a favour.

A lot of journalists are fat. It's better they're told.

As for the line that the Chinese 'liberated' Tibet - well, it doesn't surprise me to read it here.

If you want to invade a country and get a round of applause from the UK left, wave a red flag, and spout some red cant.

They'll swoon all over you.

If South Africa was still under apartheid, I suspect Archbishop Tutu would be too political for your taste, too.

And maybe your friend is fat.

It is unfortunate that you and you friend take offense to an innocent joke. His holiness often makes similiar comments about himself. Ego check.

As to his political ends, Is the response of the chinese politiburo the responsibility of the one to whom it is directed? The response quoted here is the typical and predictable response evoked by chinese political spokesmen every time His Holiness makes a step towards another country and yes, even in the country of his own residence. You failed to mention that the chinese government's claim to Arunachal Pradesh is diputed by India, which claims the entire province, hence the Indian name. In fact, even in countries like the US to which it makes no claim, it makes similiar statements meant to pressure and influence world leaders. Does seeking international help to assist in the struggle for basic human rights and dignity make him a politician? If so, then so he is, and I'm sure he appreciates your criticism, ill informed or not. Your repetition of chinese "liberation" of Tibet propaganda , however, clearly indicates a certain bias

The Dalai Lama is a 'political monk' because he believes his people are being oppressed and undemocratically occupied. He is supposed to be the spiritual leader of his people, if he did not highlight the Tibetans plight he would, no doubt, be branded as unpragmatic. I am confused how you can praise Tutu, who is political, and 'reserve judgement' on Dalai Lama, for doing the same.

I wonder if Mr Byrnes has read any of the Dalai Lama's works, or his collaborations with American scientists concerning emotions and the mind? Many of which have nothing to do with politics, and are simply there to improve people's lives via the ancient wisdom Buddhism has to offer.

I am also confused by your inclusion of the "fat" comment. The aim of Buddhism is to reach 'unafflicted reality' of the mind. The Dalai Lama is normally honest to a degree that many people in the 'western world' are not. However, that just highlights the destructive memes in the 'western world', not in the Dalai Lama's.

The Dalai Lama is an inspirational figure to many people, including me (and I'm not Buddhist).

The office of Dalai Lama is a political position. He is also a highly trained monk which is something unique amongst world leaders.
But it is his job to deal with political issues.
He is not the spiritual head of his school of Buddhism, that job is entitled Gaden Tri Rinpoche, which is not a public office whatsoever.
I personally think the Dalai lama's talents would be much better used in teaching, but he has responsibilities and a will to acknowledge them in relation to the expectations of the Tibetan people.
In his dual role, he is a sort of gateway for the general public in relation to Tibetan Buddhist traditions.
Because of his political role he is visible.
But this dual role is not a form of duplicity, it is the nature of a political office established centuries ago.

It's true that we could cast a more critical eye over the Dalia Lama and what he does. He gets an enormous amount of uncritical sympathy from a certain kind of liberal western audience. But when you dig deeper, do you find anything untoward? Yes, he is a political monk - how could he not be? Along with the Panchen Lama is holds the highest political and religious office in Tibet. His counterpart took a different more pro-Chinese line and suffered the terrible consequences of remaining in China. Remember that the DL came to high office before Truman or our Queen. He was a contemporary of Mao and Nehru. But he has not incited his people to cultural revolution, pogrom, jihad, armed struggle or even civil disobedience. He has not enriched himself or betrayed his country or principles in order that he might seek an easier life. And yet he is still condemned as a 'serpent' by his country's oppressors, and as a 'political old monk' by those who seek business favours with his enemies or by those cynics and contrarians who presumably just can't stand the idea of someone who appears to be too good to be true.