It's time someone exposed the limitations of the books currently being issued under the authorship of the Dalai Lama. What I want to say is not that they express ideas other than his. My objection is that the ethical and political positions taken in these books are likely to infuriate even the most mildly ra-dical of readers.
To call these books anodyne is putting it mildly. The truth, rather, is that they are non-committal almost beyond belief. If the views expressed in The Art of Happiness at Work are in truth the Dalai Lama's, then I have to say that I find his views cautious in the extreme. But maybe they have been filtered for consumption in the mid-western states of the US, by his co-author, who runs a psychiatric practice in Phoenix,
Arizona.
I opened this book with moderate expectations of stirring words. It has long occurred to me that if the world's major religions announced that it was a sin to work in the manufacture of all armaments, then the chances for world peace would take a giant leap forward. What, I wondered, would one of the world's most esteemed Buddhist leaders have to say on the subject? Buddhists, after all, are said to be opposed to the taking of all life, even a mosquito's. What would His Holiness have to say about people taking a job producing weapons, some of them certainly capable of causing mass destruction, in the arms industry?
It's necessary to look at the bigger picture, the Dalai Lama says when confronted with the issue. Unless there's a fundamental change in society as a whole, he argues, "for defense purposes for the society, or even on the global level, nations do need weapons for security purposes. Especially in the American case, you look at the fact that in the world there are totalitarian regimes who are against democracy. I think so long as those nations are there, the American military power must remain." (page 164)
Democracy? Tibet has never been a democracy. And arms for democracy? Haven't we heard this somewhere before?
Again, "... there are Western European nations who produce weapons, but use them mainly for defensive purposes and do not abuse them. And similarly, the example of the United States, although the Russian threat is no longer there, so long as a totalitarian regime like China exists with a huge military power, some kind of deterrent power is necessary."
This is of course cogent realpolitik but hardly in line with traditional Buddhist thought on the use of force.
This cautious, tolerant approach extends throughout the book. The issue of mind-numbing, repetitive labor is raised -- a job on a production line, for instance, where there is no chance for the individual to make any choices (except to quit), or to interact significantly with his co-workers. Well, says the Dalai Lama, perhaps if such a worker spends time with his family and friends after hours, then such work might be tolerable. No strong stand against inhuman conditions in the workplace either, then.
In fact there are no strong stands against anything. The Buddhist concept of "right livelihood" is referred to, but it would seem that in His Holiness's view almost any work will fit this description if the individual's mental attitude to it is right.
Money too -- what matters is not how much you have but your attitude to wealth in general. This is in line with much spiritual teaching worldwide, though many will remember another great teacher saying it is harder for a rich man to get to heaven than for a camel to go through the eye of a needle.
RSS