The Karmapa Controversy

Once upon a time, not so long ago, two naive middle-aged Westerners were doing pilgrimage in the Himalayas. They were asked by a Tibetan Buddhist lama they knew to take some money to the secretary of the newly-enthroned young 17th Karmapa at Tsurphu, his monastery in Tibet, since they were going to Lhasa, a day's journey away, and that the money would help support and rebuild distant monasteries destroyed by the Chinese in the Cultural Revolution.

It sounded like a grand adventure, so they willingly agreed, even though they had little idea of what they were getting themselves into. Somewhat mystified (though also flattered) by the number of blessing cords they were given before their trip -- and which more than one high-ranking lama personally tied (loosely) around their necks -- they stowed the money in their luggage (only an envelope or two, so it couldn't have been that much, they never asked) and embarked.

Flash forward to 2011, with the Karmapa in the midst of a major brouhaha in India, largely about the cache of cash found in his borrowed monastery in Dharamsala, India. The politics of the current controversy are almost impossible to decipher from half a world away, so BoBu won't try. And we need to point out that our site isn't about reportage, it's about a balanced approach to Western Buddhism, which we will try to apply to the present situation as best we can. So here's our conclusion: let's not jump to any until all the facts are in.

In the interest of full disclosure, we have to add that we met the young Karmapa (more on the story next month) and spent a fair amount of time at the Karmapa's contested spiritual seat of Rumtek, in Sikkim, while we were on pilgrimage. We meditated in the room of the 16th Karmapa's preserved remains, chanted with the monks in the main temple, and celebrated Losar (Tibetan New Year) there. So we definitely have a bias in favor of HHK. However, we are not Karma Kagyupas nor do we feel personally obligated to defend anyone in the face of proven wrong-doing (which we strongly doubt has occured in this case). At stake are the Karmapa's large financial holdings (now mostly frozen, we understand), his traditional monastery in Sikkim and others in the border areas between India and Tibet, and most especially his integrity, so the charges are serious. (A recent Times of India piece said that the Indian government should apologize to the Karmapa, so we suspect the incident is winding down.)

Anyone who really wants to understand the situation needs to read up on a whole lot of Tibetan history, particularly pertaining to the Karmapa and the Sharmapa, who have been rivals since ancient times, because this could certainly be a big factor in the current confusion. (HHDL recognized the present incarnation, Orgyen Thinley Dorje, as the rightful Karmapa; the Sharmapa contests this.) This much said, we think it borders on chutzpah for most Westerners to believe we can easily penetrate the maze of geo-political maneuverings between India, China, and Tibet, which has been going on for centuries now and which also form part of the murky background of the current controversy. Just read some of Alexandra David-Neel's books ("Journey to Lhasa," et al) for a glimpse of what was going on 100 years ago when she evinced interest in getting into Tibet, which was then closed to the outside world. She was suspected of being a spy (one of the more unfortunate charges against the 17th Karmapa, with no serious basis in fact except its repetition by other interested parties), and accused of being an agent provocateur by the British, who didn't want a Frenchwoman getting into Tibet when they hadn't succeeded in nailing it down as one of their buffer zones to protect their interests in India.

When the Dalai Lama dies, China will inevitably -- and rather ridiculously for an avowedly anti-religious state -- name its own successor. Tibetans will inevitably reject him (or in the unlikely event of a female) her, as will most Buddhists world-wide. However, the stage could be set for another fierce, soul-sucking controversy. The Karmapa, who remains the third most important figure in Tibetan Buddhism, after the Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama (now unseen inside China, unknown if alive or dead), will be arguably the most important Buddhist figure in the world. Hence the grave importance of the current controversy. If the Karmapa's name and spiritual integrity are seen to be besmirched, who ultimately benefits?

Some Buddhist acquaintances of ours who think it's time for the whole hierarchy of ancient Tibetan Buddhistm to be dismantled have sent links to some somewhat hysterical-sounding reports of wrong-doing on the Karmapa's part, largely from unverified Indian sources. Their claims highlight the difficult differences between a materialistic world-view -- if HHK had so much money in his monastery, he must have some corrupt purpose for it -- and that of a bona fide spiritual one -- i.e., because of the laws of India pertaining to him, His Holiness Karmapa is not allowed to put said funds into a bank and so has collected donations from his millions of followers world-wide in order to buy his own piece of land, someday, in India, to replace the Karmapa's spiritual seat of Rumtek -- which the Indian government will not allow him to take over, or to visit, until the dispute over the legitimacy between the Karmapas is settled.

It seems particularly poignant and perhaps relevant that these issues are being raised now in a time of rising pro-democracy movements in the Middle East. In the current "Great Unraveling" prophesied by the Mayans, why should we suppose anything to be sacrosanct, including forms of feudal Tibetan Buddhism? The Dalai Lama isn't afraid of change, nor should we be. Test your practice against this ongoing story to see if we can hold to the truth of the dharma while keeping an open mind about the allegations against the Karmapa. Meanwhile, inform yourself from a variety of sources, from The New York Times to The Times of India to the Hindustan Times -- as well as the 17th Karmapa's official website -- to get a full scope of the issue. Government sources as well as many politicians are notoriously paranoid, so use your own discriminating wisdom, including that of Occam's razor: the simplest solution is often the truest.