Brad on Dalai Lama

The cynic strikes again!

I was surprised by a couple of accusations (for lack of a better word) made about the Dalai Lama. The most interesting was the apparent belief that his effort is at some level about money. Speaking from my experience of seeing him at UNI, the President of the University announced prior to him speaking that all proceeds of the event were going to a scholarship fund at the University, about $25,000. To break it down, the event was attended by about 7,500 people and at $17 a ticket that is about $125,000 in revenue. The facility would be rented at a significant expense, there were entertainment acts that were likely paid, and security measures and costs were expensive (metal detectors, armed security), since someone wants to kill most religious leaders. Put all that stuff together and I doubt the money motivation is a reality. If money was a motivator ticket prices would have been $150 each like a Metallica concert, and they still would have sold 7,500. And if it was about money, would the President of the University stand at the podium in front of 7.500 people and gobs of media and lie?

The other issue with your post is the commentary about his ornate throne and people at his feet. When I saw him he sat on a black leather couch, next to the President of the University, with a UNI visor on. I would guess the Madison Square Garden version of his appearance is likely driven by New York theatrics and the need for pomp and circumstance in that culture(New York culture, not Tibetan culture) rather than a requirement of the Dalai Lama. If it is a requirement, he must have relaxed his high standards for us poor farmers in Iowa.

As far as your religious assertions, I am about as ignorant as they come on that subject. I would take you at your word on the hardcore adherent beliefs in their religion being the right one. This topic is far more than there is room for on this blog. I agree with your concern about that leading to violence, and have never understood the concept of killing in the name of a God, any God.

Why is it that religious leaders are viewed so myopically that their opinions, visits, and speeches are distilled to exclusively a religious context? As I have said before, his visit was not to espouse or even discuss his religious beliefs but to speak about "The Power of Education" and its ability to cultivate socially responsible global citizens.