Wake me UP

🙏 🙏

A single spark can grow into raging flames with the help of blowing wind. Likewise, merits can grow rapidly by undertaking positive actions diligently, no matter how small the actions are. Therefore, if one is not smart but diligent, his flames of wisdom will be sparked in a short time and then keep blazing. On the contrary, if one is too lazy, then no matter how smart he thinks himself is, he wouldn’t be able to make any real progress in the worldly or unworldly affairs.

🙏 🙏 🙏 Lama kheno 🙏 🙏 🙏

ཀརྨ་པ་མཁྱེན་ནོ། 🙏 🙏 🙏

སྐུ་ཚེ་ལོ་བརྒྱར་བརྟན་དུ་གསོལ།། 🙏 🙏 🙏

🙏 🙏 🙏

After posting a few videos and newspaper articles and reports relating to the current war in Ukraine, I received some mails asking why I can’t just do prayers and say encouraging words as lamas are supposed to do, instead of being so divisive.
I have in fact been doing prayers and I will continue to pray for world peace. But I also felt like doing a bit more within the limits of my capacity. I simply wanted to urge us to see things from all sides rather than from just one side. Having that bigger picture is supposedly a good thing, isn’t it?

I’ve also been asked why I am so interested in political matters, and would I rather be a politician. Obviously, if I wanted to be a politician, I would jump on a left or right-wing bandwagon and say what people want to hear. But isn’t it better to know a bit about politics and what our politicians are up to if you want to drink fresh water and breathe fresh air on this planet or not get nuked?

Some commentators say I am being anti-western. Far from it. For a big chunk of my life, I grew up admiring, loving, and even worshipping the west, and I still do admire a lot about the west. In fact, I’ve tried so hard to understand the west that I’ve sometimes been labelled a totally westernized Tibetan lama.

That said, of course western culture is so vast and deep that I cannot claim to know even a fraction of it.

Even though I wasn’t born into a Bengali family that makes you read Charles Dickens and Jane Austen at a very young age in the hope you’ll one day win the Booker Prize and speak perfect Queen’s English, I still did my best to understand western literature by looking up almost every word in the dictionary.

And even though I wasn’t born into a Hong Kong family that makes its children take extra late hour lessons in western classical music at a very young age, I still pushed myself to listen to classical, jazz and blues music, and even began to appreciate it.

I grew up hearing the glories of London and New York – so much so that, long before I went there, I knew names of streets and buildings there. Later, I even made a point of visiting the house where Orson Welles lived. Still, I know all that is not nearly enough to understand the west.

And yet, I wonder how many Pennsylvanian families push their children to read the Mahabharata at a young age or how many Sydney families push their children to learn tanpura and study the glories of Varanasi and Xi-an.

I was not alone in my efforts to study the west. Many people in my part of the world did the same or much more than me, because we looked up to the west as superior and sometimes even looked down at our own cultures as inferior.

America, for example, dwells so deeply in the hearts and minds of many Asians that they believe more in “American exceptionalism” than do many Texans – so much so that they can’t wait to be reincarnated in the Land of the Free. We all know that many Asians will do anything to get a green card and many pregnant Chinese ladies will try by all means to have their babies born in America.

I can’t help but wonder if people from London, Amsterdam or Lisbon really understand this deep in their hearts, since they come from countries that have only experienced colonizing others and never being colonized themselves. Just imagine residents of Lisbon or Amsterdam priding themselves on speaking Hindi, or Londoners considering themselves upper class for using chopsticks instead of knives and forks.
I am really puzzled that, when I simply question how much colonialism has wounded and damaged entire civilizations, I get such strong reactions both from colonizing countries and from the victims of colonialism. Does that mean that colonialism is actually still happening?

Although attitudes have shifted in recent years, the inferiority-superiority complex that is a colonial legacy is still very much alive in my part of the world. It is a safe bet that a Samsung executive in Seoul wearing hanbok instead of suit and tie will get severely questioned if not fired. And while a prominent Singaporean or Hong Kong Chinese may proudly flaunt being Christian, a public figure or academic in the west may well hide his Hindu or Buddhist affiliation for fear of being labelled a hippie, cultist or worse.

Even now, looking at the comments on my page, you’d be surprised how many of those upset with my remarks and calling me anti-western are Asians who grew up just like me admiring the west and seeing everything about the west as supreme.

Some commentators rightly say I have no knowledge of political science. In fact, my only political science education has been in the WhatsApp, WeChat and YouTube Universities, along with reading occasional articles in magazines and newspapers.

But one thing I have done along the way, at least, is to stop reading, watching or listening to just one angle of a story. Isn’t being open-minded and receptive to all perspectives a core liberal-democratic value?
If I read or suggest that others read and listen to non-mainstream media, whether from China, Russia or elsewhere, how can a culture that promotes and prides itself on free speech and open-mindedness categorize that suggestion as anti-democratic or pro-communist?

So, I am baffled why people, who eagerly condemn and criticize others in the name of free speech and critical thinking, get so edgy and defensive when I simply raise the kinds of questions I have.
I don’t understand why merely questioning some of the west’s actions and history immediately categorizes one as a Putin-lover, communist, or anti-western. If we immediately label or ostracize anyone who does not endorse our view, what then is the difference between us and them? And if we live in fear of backlash or being outcast for having forbidden views, what really makes us more free than them?

Some argue that in Pyongyang, Beijing and Moscow, I can’t even say what I am saying here, and that a beneficiary of liberal democracy like me should appreciate and not ungratefully trash the very society that gives me this right. But if our own society makes a mistake, are we supposed to accept that mum’s the word? And what is the point of praising how much freedom of speech and thought we have if we close our own ears, dictate our will to others, and even kill them in the name of freedom and democracy? Isn’t that hypocritical?

I am brainwashed to expect much better from a liberal society than what we get right now. Why downgrade ourselves and set our benchmark so low that we have to compare and prove ourselves better than these autocracies?

Yes, I have questioned what the real fundamental difference is between what we treasure and call free press and what we label and look down on as propaganda from elsewhere. If I ask, aren’t they both propaganda, with our free society version just far more sophisticated and better at brainwashing, does asking that question make me a traitor to the free world?

Why does merely questioning whether the Russia-Ukraine war may not only be between Russia and Ukraine but may also involve the U.S. and NATO somehow categorize one as not caring about all those dying in Ukraine? Is it sacrilegious to ask whether this war may actually be a perfect showcase to market weaponry the way a Paris or Milan fashion show exhibits Gucci shoes or Prada blouses? Are such questions taboo in a free society?

Is it really unfair to think that if George Bush and Tony Blair had spent even one hour in prison for killing so many people under the false pretext that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, then the likes of Putin would think twice before acting as he is now? But since that never happened and since European and American warmongers still roam freely, is it unreasonable to think that future Putins may feel they have clearance to do the same?

Similarly, may we speculate that, if the United States took full responsibility for its own overthrow of democratic governments and support of dictatorships in Chile, Guatemala, Brazil, Iran and elsewhere, it might have more ground to question autocracy than it does today?

For that matter, is it acceptable to question the west’s claims that it opposes autocracy at all, and ask whether its real aim is simply not to lose its present hegemony? After all, time and again in the history of U.S. interventions abroad, we’ve seen freedom and democracy sacrificed to economic interests.

If India, for instance, were to emerge as a strong global economic power threatening U.S. economic control, might the U.S. not find every way to demonize India, perhaps seeing a “like-minded”, democratic challenge as an even greater threat than China? (Rest assured such a challenge won’t happen any time soon, since India has injected itself with a western-style democracy that keeps the country at snail’s pace).

As citizens of the world who don’t want to be killed or nuked just because a country loses its hegemony, aren’t we obliged at least to ask such questions? Surely, that’s even more so when the current hegemonic power has such a dubious record: After all, the last I recall, there is only country that has actually nuked another country.

Oh of course, Japan at that time was evil, and it’s the west’s god-given duty to trash all evil. But I for one can’t buy the view that one side is utterly evil while the other is the paragon of virtue. And if there really were such a thing as evil, then – based on the actual actions of nations – it would take a lot to convince me that the west is not evil.

Happy Teacher's Day

Happy Teacher's Day 🙏