News that the Dalai Lama may retire in the next year is to be welcomed by all those sick of the cant, flattery and new age-type nonsense that have long surrounded this former guest editor of French Vogue magazine – however much his followers, such as the distinguished thespians Steven Seagal and Richard Gere, or his friends in the CIA might vouch for him.
It’s not that the cause of Tibet does not deserve international sympathy and attention. But it would be served far better by a purely political leadership, not one whose “mystical” aura allows for next to no examination or criticism about its aims and its strategies. I’ve posted before asking why it is that we think the current Dalai Lama is a living saint.
For a longer look at “His Material Highness”, who due to the “blissful, thoughtless exceptionalism” with which the West regards Buddhism, “combined with a Hollywood cult that almost exceeds the power of Scientology… fused with weightless Maharishi and Bhagwan-type babble” is thought of as “a saintly god-king” exiled from “an idealised Tibet”, I heartily recommend this article from Salon by Christopher Hitchens. “Far from his Holier-than-all image, the Dalai Lama supports such questionable causes as India’s nuclear testing, sex with prostitutes and accepting donations from a Japanese terrorist cult,” begins the introduction.
Read it and see if you don’t agree with me that it’s time to say good bye and good riddance to this worldly prelate. As for his retirement: there’s one show I’m sure he’d always be welcome on (just think of the fee he could command). As Nigel Havers exits, who’s next for the jungle? Welcome, the Dalai Lama, to “I’m a celebrity… Get me out of here!”.