英国卫报刊文称达赖喇嘛荒谬可笑http://www.sina.com.cn 2008年06月18日10:20 新华网
新华网消息：英国《卫报》网站5月29日发表文章，题目是“打倒达赖喇嘛”，文章摘要如下。
还有哪位政治人物比达赖喇嘛更荒谬可笑的吗？他是位摒弃世俗利益而爱好身着栗色袈裟过简朴生活的“谦逊僧人”。但1992年，达赖却成为法国《时尚》杂志的特邀编辑。该杂志可谓是颓废派高级时尚阶层的《圣经》。
达赖自诩为转世活佛———活佛可“超脱生死轮回”。但他最为人所熟知的是与理查德·基尔和莎朗·斯通等愚昧无知的西方名流过从甚密。
达赖说，他希望西藏实现自治和政治独立。但他自己却甘愿给热衷于羞辱中国的西方大国当走狗。据称，从上世纪50年代末至1974年，达赖喇嘛每月从中央情报局获得1.5万美元资金。此外，达赖一向“任人唯亲”。在位于印度北部达兰萨拉的流亡机构里，达赖提拔他的兄弟及其妻子担任要职。
从表面上看，达赖是个行为诡异、爱傻笑的现代喇嘛。实际上，他是旧西藏压迫性封建制度的产物。
达赖喇嘛要求宗教自由。而他却对佛教多杰雄登教派的信徒实施迫害。
最值得注意的是，达赖喇嘛被西方政府当作其与中国进行文化战的攻城木。世界许多国家领导人对达赖阿谀奉承，中央情报局还为其提供资金，其原因并非在于他们十分关心西藏自由，而在于他们希望在国际上向世界政治中的新竞争者逐步施压。
那些奴性十足的西方信徒们不但不是在“帮助西藏”，他们还在充当压制西藏地区发展真正的自由民主运动的帮凶。
达赖喇嘛之所以能够以“最高精神权威”和万能的最高领袖自居至少有一个原因，即有影响力的西方人士赋予了达赖饰演这一角色的权力。由此，他们一直在充当蒙骗西藏民众的帮凶。
-------------------------------------
原文如下:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/may/29/downwiththedalailama
Down with the Dalai Lama
Why do western commentators idolise a celebrity monk who hangs out with Sharon Stone and once guest-edited French Vogue?
All comments (273)
Brendan O'Neill guardian.co.uk, Thursday May 29 2008 Article historyHas there ever been a political figure more ridiculous than the Dalai Lama? This is the "humble monk" who forswears worldly goods in favour of living a simple life dressed in maroon robes. Yet in 1992 he guest-edited French Vogue, the bible of the decadent high-fashion classes, which is packed with pictures of the half-starved daughters of the aristocracy modelling skirts and shirts that most of us could never afford.
He claims to be the current incarnation of the Tulkus line of Buddhist masters, who are "exempt from the wheel of death and rebirth". Yet he's best known for hanging out with clueless western celebs like Richard Gere and Sharon Stone (who is still most famous for showing her vagina on the big screen). Stone once introduced the Dalai Lama at a glittering fundraising ball as "Mr Please, Please, Please Let Me Back Into China!"
The Dalai Lama says he wants Tibetan autonomy and political independence. Yet he allows himself to be used as a tool by western powers keen to humiliate China. Between the late 1950s and 1974, he is alleged to have received around $15,000 a month, or $180,000 a year, from the CIA. He has also been, according to the same reporter, "remarkably nepotistic", promoting his brothers and their wives to positions of extraordinary power in his fiefdom-in-exile in Dharamsala, northern India.
He poses as the quirky, giggly, modern monk who once auctioned his Land Rover on eBay for $80,000 and has even done an advert for Apple (quite what skinny white computers have got to do with Buddhism is anybody's guess). Yet in truth he is a product of the crushing feudalism of archaic, pre-modern Tibet, where an elite of Buddhist monks treated the masses as serfs and ruthlessly punished them if they stepped out of line.
The Dalai Lama demands religious freedom. Yet he persecutes a Buddhist sect that worships a deity called Dorje Shugden. He outlawed praying to Dorje Shugden in 1996, and those who defied his writ were thrown out of their jobs, mocked in the streets and even had their homes smashed up by heavy-handed officials from his government-in-exile. When worshippers complained about their treatment, they were told by representatives of the Dalai Lama that "concepts like democracy and freedom of religion are empty when it comes to the wellbeing of the Dalai Lama".
As the Dalai Lama tours Britain, lots of people are asking: why won't Brown receive him at Downing Street? I have a different question: why should Brown, who for all his troubles is still the head of an elected political party, meet with an authoritarian, fame-chasing, Apple-loving monk?
The Dalai Lama has effectively been turned into a cartoon good guy. In America and western Europe, where backward anti-modern sentiments are widespread amongst self-loathing sections of the educated and the elite, the Dalai Lama has been embraced as a living, breathing representative of unsullied goodness. Despite the fact that he advertises Apple, guest-edits Vogue and drives a Land Rover, he is held up as evidence that living the simple eastern life is preferable to, in the words of Philip Rawson, westerners' "gradually more pointless pursuit of material satisfactions". Just as earlier generations of disillusioned aristocrats fell in love with a fictional version of Tibet (Shangri-La), so contemporary un-progressives idolise a fictional image of the Dalai Lama.
Most strikingly, the Dalai Lama is used as a battering ram by western governments in their culture war with China. The reason he is flattered by world leaders and bankrolled by the CIA is not because these institutions care very much for liberty in Tibet, but rather because they want to ratchet up international pressure on their new competitors in world politics: the Chinese. You don't have to be a defender of the authoritarian regime in Beijing (and I most certainly am not) to see that such global sabre-rattling is more likely to entrench tensions between the Tibetan people and China, and increase instability in world affairs, rather than herald anything like a new era of freedom in the east.
Far from "helping Tibet", the slavish western worshippers of the Dalai Lama are helping to stifle the development of a real, lively movement for liberty and democracy in the Tibetan regions. One author on the Tibetan independence movement argues that "the Dalai Lama's role as ultimate spiritual authority is holding back the political process of democratisation", since "the assumption that he occupies the correct moral ground from a spiritual perspective means that any challenge to his political authority may be interpreted as anti-religious".
At least one reason why the Dalai Lama can pose as "the ultimate spiritual authority" and all-round supreme leader of Tibetans and their future is because influential elements in the west have empowered him to play that role. In doing so, they have been complicit in the infantilisation of the Tibetan people. Tibetans now suffer the double horror of being ruled by undemocratic Chinese officials on one hand, and demeaned by the Dalai Lama and his western supporters on the other.
----------------------------------
20天前的旧闻，明明是卫报网站的COMMENT IS FREE（自由评论栏目），新华网却以卫报官方观点的口吻报道给国人听，误导视听，实为可耻！可惜的是在国内这个著名的开放论坛凯迪，却不可以发表一篇只是阐述基本事实的帖子，可叹！