As an exercise in breathless celebrity worship, however, it was an utter failure, owing entirely to the way in which he conducts himself. You look at this man, knowing full-well how revered, how great and honorable a soul he is... and you laugh. Because this is the man that's sitting in front of you:
He's patently ridiculous. And it's actually quite wonderful.
The talk he gave centered on the need for a return to ethics, especially a secular/universal system of ethics (pointing out that America's recent financial crisis was precipitated by a crisis in ethics). It was difficult to understand half of what was said, as his English isn't fantastic and his translator periodically had to help facilitate his communication. On top of that, he was prone to tangents in an endearingly grandfatherly way; the man talks about whatever it is he wants to talk about, ticket price be damned. What he had to say about ethics, non-violence, and compassion (always compassion) weren't terribly surprising, either. He himself states that, while powerful, these are extremely simple concepts.
What did surprise me was, despite his obvious idealism, is that he's also profoundly realist. An MIT student asked if one can reconcile working for the military-industrial complex with a belief in non-violence. The Dalai Lama's response was, basically, "A man's gotta eat." He echoed this sentiment several times during the talk, stating that, while he wouldn't exactly applaud one's choice to build bombs for a living, you can't effect change through pure idealism. Rather, it all starts with compassion (again with the compassion?).
The other moment he surprised me was when he told us all how much he respected and loved George W. Bush. That's right. Our George W. Bush. "You can have him!" would probably have been the sentiment of most of the audience. It's not to say the Dalai Lama approved of Bush's administration or policies, though; rather, the things he talked about were Bush's sense of humor, his humility and directness (traits that really have been ascribed to him by basically anyone who's written on the topic). It went to show, and I believe it was meant to, that he's operating mainly at the level of human interactions - that politics is top-down, while he intends to work from the ground up.
He loves to laugh. In fact, he's almost constantly chuckling when he's not contemplative or voicing profundities. He made jokes about living in exile and about why the Chinese government is so afraid of him (it's because of his devil horns, apparently). He even joked that when Chinese officials searched his person (and I kid you not) he warned them that his constipation might prevent them from searching his shit. Sans vulgarity of course - the Dalai Lama may deal in cheap laughs, but this was a family affair.
All in all, it was fascinating to hear him speak. He was an unexpected character. MIT undergrads, on the other hand... well, their behavior was expected. During the Q&A a girl asked this question:
"What do you think MIT's role should be with regard to big industry - specifically pharmaceutical companies?" (Fishing for the Dalai Lama to diss the school)
His replay was this: "I don't know. Hmmm. (Something like 'do what you feel is right'). Next question."
The audience laughed and applauded his non-answer, which was entirely appropriate. He had failed to remember where he was no less than three times over the course of the talk. He clearly had no real picture of MIT as an institution; how could he begin to advise them on their relationship with big-pharma?
The girl then attempted a follow-up question, ignoring the Q&A format and apparently irritated by the snub. The Dalai Lama shut her down.
"Next question."
The girl then made a face. At the Dalai Lama. Seriously. Her nose scrunched up and her mouth hung open in outrage, an unspoken "That bitch!" practically dangling from her lips. Well, you know what? Probably no total consciousness for you.
Buddhists one, snotty undergrads zero.
No comments:
Post a Comment