In the New Era: National Laws are Higher than the Buddhist Canon

Shangda Monastery in Chamdo area

The Chinese-selected Panchen Lama, Gyaltsen Norbu recently visited Thailand. On his return to Beijing, he affirmed “that he was able to deeply appreciate the greatness of the motherland while he was in a foreign country.”
It is a month after Norbus' foreign visit that Xinhua announced that he was part of a Buddhist delegation led by Yanjue, the acting President of the Buddhist Association of China, who traveled to Thailand to attend the ceremony on the occasion of festival of Vesak.
It was said that it was the Panchen Lama's first trip abroad.
Interestingly, Gyaltsen Norbu had spoken at a Buddhist conference in Hong Kong in 2012.
This is not counted as a foreign visit!
In Hong Kong, Norbu had said that he valued inner sciences.
In Thailand, he gave a speech on Let the Light of Compassion and Wisdom Shine upon the World, asserting that since he came “to the foreign country, he could personally better understand the vastness of the motherland, the profound cultural heritage of the Chinese nation, and the unity and harmony of the three major Buddhist communities in China.”
He remarked: “We are fortunate to be in the era of the development and rise of New China, and thank the Communist Party of China for leading the Chinese people in achieving the tremendous transformation of standing up, growing rich, and becoming strong.”
He further emphasized that he has a responsibility and an obligation to guide Tibetan Buddhism to adapt to the socialist society with Chinese characteristics, "to constantly adhere to develop Tibetan Buddhism in the Chinese context, to maximize the positive role of religion, and to make due contributions to safeguarding the unification of the motherland and promoting ethnic unity."
What a program, but what does “adapting Tibetan Buddhism to the socialist society with Chinese characteristics” mean?
An article on a Chinese website run by Xinhua gave an answer.

Testing the monks’ and nuns’ legal knowledge
All monks in Tibet had recently been invited to pass 'legal knowledge' examinations: “In order to promote the basic and leading role of the rule of law, and actively guide the adaptation of religion to the socialist society, and enhance the legal knowledge level and the rule of law awareness” among monks and nuns in Tibet.
You perhaps thought that monks and nuns were supposed to specialize in the Teachings of the Buddha, but in the New Era, they need to be lawyers too.

A New Vinaya?
Xinhua reported that the new program was are jointly organized by the Tibetan Autonomous Region’s Justice Department, the Law Office, the Communist Party’s United Front Work Department and the Religious Bureau. According to the statistics quoted by Xinhua, some 30,000 passed the examination.
On which topics were the tests conducted?
The monks had to answer questions on the Chinese Constitution, the State Security Laws, Anti-Terrorism Laws, Anti-Spying Laws, Environmental Protection Laws, Internet Safety Laws and Regulations on Religious Affairs Matters.
Quite comprehensive?

But where is the Buddha?
All the top TAR’s ‘legal’ big shots visited the test centers.
Lobsang Gyurmey, vice chairman of the Political Consultative Conference and Danba, the Head of the TAR Justice Department inspected the Ganden Monastery's examination center.
Gao Yang, deputy secretary and vice chairman of the Party Committee of the Political Consultative Conference, inspected the test center at Sera Monastery, he was accompanied by Jayong Rinchin, Inspector in the Justice Department. Similarly, Drepung and other monasteries were ‘inspected’ at the time of the examinations.
Xu Xueguang, deputy director of the People's Congress Standing Committee, and the vice chairman of the District Political Consultative Conference and Sonam Rinchen were spotted in Drepung Monastery.
Jigme Gyalpo, Deputy Head of the TAR Justice Department was also on the job, conducting “in-depth inspections and guidance at the examinations’ scene.”
According to Xinhua, after the launch of these (compulsory) tests, “the legal literacy and the rule of law awareness of religious faculty members in our Region have been further improved.”
The website affirmed that “National laws are higher than religious canons and obeying these laws should come before adhering to (Buddhist) precepts”; all this in order to create a harmonious and stable social situation for Tibet.
The examinations created “a good atmosphere of the rule of law.”
In these circumstances, one understands that students in Hong Kong or in Taipei are a bit nervous, to join the Motherland’s ‘legal system in the New Era’.

All over Tibet
Examinations were conducted all over the ‘Autonomous’ Region, particularly in Shigatse, in Lhoka (Lhuntse County), in Nagchu, and Shangda Monastery in Chamdo area.
According to a notice of the United Front Work Department, the People's Committee, the Justice Department, the Religious Office and the Law Office worked hard for implementing the “Legal Knowledge Examination for Religious Faculty” in the entire Region.
A Notice entitled “Doing a Good Job in the Legal Knowledge Examination for Religious Faculty in the Region" required that by March 20 all the monks and the monasteries’ faculty members should be ‘uniformly’ tested.
The examination was conducted in two ways: a Tibetan-Chinese bilingual ‘open-book’ written test and an oral test.
Apart from the topics mentioned above, the questions checked the knowledge of the monks and nuns on the Communist Party's 19th National Congress, Xi Jinping's New Era of Socialism with Chinese characteristics, the Chinese Constitution, the National Flag Law, the National Anthem Law, the National Security Law, the National Regional Autonomy Law, and the Religious Affairs Regulations, and other party ethnic and religious policies and related laws and regulations.
This probably included the Rules for the Reincarnation of ‘Living Buddhas’.
Was the traditional system of debates practiced, is not mentioned.

The Patrols
Xinhua reported that in order to ensure the smooth and orderly examination, “a three-level patrol test group for districts, cities and counties” was formed.
The patrols checked each test center under their jurisdiction.
Moral of the story: “you better know Comrade Xi’s speeches,” because the patrol teams went “deep into the relevant temples to conduct an in-depth and detailed understanding of the examination arrangements and the order of the examination room.”
Xinhua explained that the legal knowledge test for religious faculty members is “another regional large-scale event since the launch of the Seventh Five-Year Plan."
Earlier 'tuition’ activities, and calligraphy contests were organized for the local monks and nuns.
The attendance of the examination was 100%.
It is a follow-up of the Communist Party's 19th National Congress, keeping in mind the spirit of the Tibet Work Forum. It is said that was an important initiative of Party Secretary Wu Yingjie for “strengthening the education on the rule of law.”
Will Comrade Wu get a promotion for organizing these tests?
Future will only say, but according to the news agency, “The purpose was to further promote the rule of law awareness and legal knowledge.” And more importantly to firmly establish the concept that “National law is higher than the Buddhist Canon” and of course for strengthening national unity, safeguarding the unity of the motherland, and striving for patriotism and law-abiding…

Is it why Gyalsten Norbu deeply appreciated the greatness of the Motherland when he was abroad?
I am wondering what would have Karl Marx and the Buddha have thought of the exercises.
They would have probably had heart attacks …for different reasons.
What would have been the reaction of Chairman Mao? I leave to you to guess.
These few photos speak for themselves.

Add caption

China must go beyond one-party system

My article China must go beyond one-party system is posted in NitiCentral.

Here is the link...

In the early 1970s, the CIA published for its agents, a manual entitled: “The Art of China Watching”. At that time, the CIA wrote, “by most standards, China is a peculiar country”. Forty years later, China has not changed much; it remains difficult to grasp the moves and motives of a self-proclaimed ‘more transparent’ leadership.
For the watchers, the latest episode was enthralling to follow; I speak of the ‘public’ trial of Bo Xilai, a former Politburo member and Chongqing’s Communist Party Secretary.
Bo’s trial has been the object of immense speculation on the part of the ‘watchers’. Will it demonstrate some progress by the new leadership led by President Xi Jinping in the Art of Transparency, or will it be an old style drama à la Mao Zedong, enacted by a State which has understood the importance of using the modern means of communication such as Internet and micro-blogging. Old wine in new cyber bottles!
John Garnaut, the author of The Rise and Fall of the House of Bo wrote: “It would be a suitably jaw-dropping postscript to one of the most remarkable political shows on earth if Bo Xilai turns out to be the man who saves the Chinese legal system.”
But Bo has not really saved a system which has not witnessed major reforms and taken a step forward towards constitutionalism, the normal rule of law?
Probably not!
Garnaut explains that “as celebrity drama it doesn't get much more riveting than a fallen neo-Maoist, …brawling with his former right hand man and his current wife over infidelity, insanity, defection, a $3.2 million mansion in France, the murder of an Englishman and a ‘princeling’ child marooned in the United States.”
There is no doubt that the Intermediate People's Court in Jinan in the eastern Shandong province witnessed a historical event. All the ingredients were there: the ‘fallen’ hero, brilliantly defending himself and denouncing his wife Gu Kailai, who had ‘gone mad and always lies’; ‘sex’, with Bo stating that Gu was angry with him over an affair that the Red Prince had with another woman (Gu herself apparently had an affair with the Police Chief); but more interestingly, the relative transparency of the Court which regularly published transcripts of the proceedings. There was, of course, no way to check the veracity of the released documents as live transmission was not permitted by the Court (read the Party).
There is no doubt that the leadership has scripted the ‘show’ in detail during the previous week and the ‘transparency’ was a carefully calculated risk; knowing that it would be watched by hundreds of millions of avid spectators in the Mainland and abroad.
The Party had perhaps not planned such a spirited defence from the side of the fallen leader, but it remained within manageable limits for the new leadership. It has not always been so.
In his youth, President Xi Jinping must have heard (he was too young to remember ut ) about the fate of his father Xi Zhongxun, a vice-Premier, who during the Lushan Conference in July 1959 sided with Marshall Peng Dehuai, Mao’s old companion (more or less his equal). Peng had the courage to present a report on what was happening in the countryside; he spoke on the (today) infamous Great Leap Forward. During his inspection tour, the Old Marshal had seen peasants dying by millions. He told Mao in no uncertain terms that China was on the brink of the greatest man-made disaster; Mao never forgave Peng for having spoken against the Great Leap Forward and his lieutenant Xi Zhongxun also paid the hard price for having taken Peng’s side.
In September 1962, Mao, who had remained in the background after the Lushan Conference, decided to come back on the front stage. During the annual Plenum, he reemphasized class struggle ‘to prevent the emergence of revisionism’; denounced 'the members of the bourgeoisie right in the party ranks' and reasserted that the Great Leap Forward was the right thing for China. Peng and Xi Sr. were sent to the ‘countryside’, an euphemism for a purge at that time, without TV cameras, newspapers, micro-bloggers to report about their fate. Such were the ways of the Party during those days.
Today China has changed, though the manner in which decisions are taken by the inner core of the Party remains shrouded in absolute secrecy.
Although many ‘watchers’ believe that Bo went beyond the prepared script, Xinhua reiterated the Party’s position: “During the trial, both prosecution and defense sides had opportunities to fully express their opinions. Also, the court released trial transcripts through microblog.”
It reminded us that on April 10, 2012, Bo was suspended from the CPC Central Committee Political Bureau and the CPC Central Committee, on suspicion of serious discipline violations and the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection of the CPC filed a case for investigation.
The Party mouthpiece gave what will probably be the final verdict: “Although the country's legal system has a principle of tempering justice with mercy, a heavy sentence in line with the law should be handed to Bo, as he committed very serious crimes and refused to plead guilty. …he is not subject to any terms of leniency by law." Thus the Party has decided.
But in China everything is linked and Bo’s trial should be seen in the largest context of the continuous power struggle at the top of the Party. Soon after the trial ended, the Politburo announced the dates of the Third Plenum of the Central Committee in November, during which the ‘deepening of the reforms’ will be discussed. Bo Xilai who represented the ‘leftist’ wing of the Party, is now out of the game.
Observers believe that the Third Plenum should give some clear indications about the leadership's new economic agenda and if deeper ‘political’ reforms can be envisaged in the near future; they are badly needed to tackle the difficult challenges facing the country, such as corruption, polluted environment, regional economic imbalance or the restive ethnic provinces.
But by most standards, China remains a peculiar country and India is still far ahead in the field of rule of law and transparent governance, even if rampant corruption and other problems cannot be denied.
To become ‘normal’, China needs to go beyond a one party system.