Dzogchen Ponlop on an American Buddhism.

Interesting view point from the author of "Rebel Buddha" (see my review of the book by clicking on this sentence) on the possibility and viability of an "American Buddhism." Special thanks to the "Rebel Buddha" blog for the video. This isn't coming from a pop-star, celebrity or a person who tries on the latest, "Buddhist flavor of the month." This is Dzogchen Ponlop Rinpoche. A very respected, world-renowned, Tibetan Buddhist scholar, and one of the highest teachers in the Nyingma lineage. He is also an accomplished Karma Kagyu lineage holder, and abbot of Dzogchen Monastery, which is one of the great monasteries of his lineage.
James: Even if there evolves a mixed-Buddhist lineage in America from the cauldron of melting Buddhist ideas; there will still be a place for the traditional lineages. Zen, Theravada, Tibetan, Pure Land, and the others will always have a strong, undiluted foot-hold here in America. However, it is inevitable as the Rinpoche describes for a specific American Buddhist tradition to form. No one can say what it will look like exactly but the melting is well underway.

I personally am happy right where I am in the Zen tradition of Thich Nhat Hanh. However, I would have to kindly disagree with the notion that Buddhism in Asia is "pure." Buddhism in Vietnam for example is a blend of Mahayana, Theravada and Pure Land Buddhism. Yet, not many people attack it as a bastardization of Buddhism as some say of Buddhism in America.

Culture wise, Tibetan Buddhism is rather particular to Tibet, Nepal and Bhutan. Their cultural traditions are very different from say the traditions of practice in Thailand or Japan for example. Yet, not many say they are a watered down mess of Buddhist ideas. All I am saying is that Buddhism is fluid and subject to change and adjustments like any other phenomena in this ever evolving life-span. Personally, I keep practicing my Soto Zen lineage but delight in the proliferation of ideas merging together in the cauldron of change.

I must admit that It is a bit odd to me that the people who oppose a mixing of traditions to form a unique "American Buddhism" are so resistant to change when Buddha taught that it is inevitable. Why would Buddhism be immune to it? And, why assume that change must be "bad" or "less than" other forms of Buddhism because it's adapting to a new culture -- American culture? Perhaps the traditionalists need to probe their discomfort with such a change and meditate on why it bothers them so much. There is plenty of room for everyone, and not everyone walks the exact same path in Buddhism -- even within the same lineage or tradition. Including the older, established ones such as in Theravada. Even within Theravada (which is arguably the tradition that sticks to uniformity the most) has it's variations.

We all must remember that change isn't necessarily always "bad." That said, an "American Buddhism" won't be for everyone and that's not just fine, it's the way things have to be in a complex, diverse, ever-changing world. If it adheres to the three jewels, the four noble truths, and the eightfold path while teaching compassion, emptiness and the other biggies in Buddhism then I welcome it.

~Peace to all beings~

"Unmistaken Child" Documentary on PBS is Worth Your Time.

I was recently sent an advanced copy of an upcoming documentary on PBS titled, "Unmistaken Child." It follows the journey of a young monk in Nepal looking for the reincarnation of a great lama who also happens to be beloved friend. This documentary was as much about finding the courage to believe in yourself as much as it was about finding the reincarnated Rinpoche.

As a Zen Buddhist, I try not to follow my mind down the rabbit hole into the realm of what happens after death too much because it is keeps me from staying in the "now," which is really the only moment available to us. It is where our practice takes place. So I have been taught that if I concentrate too much upon what might happen I miss what is happening. However, for the sake of conservation I have no problem with the idea of death and dying. I also have no problem with the idea of rebirth and suspect that it happens. Likewise I have no problem with the possibility that nothing happens after you die.

However, reincarnation of a specific person or "soul" seems counter to what the Buddha taught but I'm no expert. As a skeptic of the Tibetan Buddhist tradition of reincarnating lamas I must admit though that this documentary really makes me reconsider the possibility again. I truly marveled at how accurate the process was. Look for a cameo from the Dalai Lama.

It truly was remarkable to follow the journey of the young monk seeking his reincarnated teacher and watching his struggles, his triumphs, courage and undying patience and respect for his mentor. The documentary did a wonderful job in showing us the intimate process of testing children to reveal the new body of this master. The dialogue was minimal, which seemed fitting for such a sacred and serious mission. I didn't realize how intricate the process was for finding a reincarnated lama. I had some idea from the movie "Kundun" as to how the Dalai Lama was found but I didn't know that the process involved divination of the ashes of the cremated teacher, astrological charts and dream interpretation.

It was fascinating to discover just how deep Tibetan Buddhism is intertwined with the metaphysical. After watching this movie and getting even more insight into the heavily ritualized nature of Tibetan Buddhism, it really does seem like its own branch of Buddhism. So instead of the traditional recognition of only two main branches of Buddhism, Theravada and Mahayana, it makes sense that some say there is a third--Vajrayana, because Tibetan Buddhism is so unique. While there is some overlap with Mahayana schools, Tibetan Buddhism has such a distinct nature, which is probably due to its development in such an isolated region of Asia.

Anyway, the documentary was enthralling, inspiring, educational and revealing. The scenery of the Nepalese highlands is stunning and worth viewing this film for that alone. The high mystical peaks seem so very fitting for such a otherworldly exploration. I highly recommend you watch it when it airs on PBS (Public Broadcasting Service) here in America on April 7th at 10p.m. (check your local listings).

~Peace to all beings~

Bill Maher: Buddhism is a Crock and Outdated.

The Worst Horse as usual is on its game in reporting another example of just how foreign Buddhism still is to many in the West. Bill Maher, the American comedian and t.v. show host (who I usually find hilarious) recently said some pretty uninformed things about Buddhism. His comments are in red and mine in yellow:

Maher: [Buddhism] really is outdated in some ways — the “Life sucks, and then you die” philosophy was useful when Buddha came up with it around 500 B.C., because back then life pretty much sucked, and then you died – but now we have medicine., and plenty of food

(James::Not all of us Bill, a lot of people in this world don't know where their next meal will come from. And medicine? Americans can't even afford medicine these days let alone impoverished countries. Go to Africa where I lived for two years and tell me there's enough food and medicine for everyone. Then tell me that thus there isn't much suffering from it.),

Maher: and iPhones, and James Cameron movies – our life isn’t all about suffering anymore.

(James: And life wasn't all about suffering back in Buddha's time either)

Maher: And when we do suffer, instead of accepting it we try to alleviate it,

(James::Buddhists seek to alleviate suffering too but we also have had the revelation that no amount of "relieving" can end the suffering. What Buddhists are more interested in other than alleviating suffering is to END suffering once and for all through, what I would consider to be the first "12 Steps" program that is the Eight-Fold Path). If Buddha saw life as hopeless as Maher believes he taught then why would he have even tried to develop a system to deliver himself from it?

Maher: Tiger said, “Buddhism teaches that a craving for things outside ourselves” makes us unhappy, which confirms something I’ve long suspected about Eastern religions: they’re a crock, too. Craving for things outside ourselves is what makes life life

(James: And despite its highlights, life is full of a lot of suffering Bill. There isn't enough money--even for a lot of millionaires who won't be "satisfied" until they get a BILLION dollars. Even those that spend their money can never buy enough houses, clothes, boats, vacations to feel satisfied for long. We lust after something until we get it and then quickly become bored with it and we return again to enslaving ourselves to crave once more. Buddha didn't say that we couldn't enjoy life but that we should enjoy life in moderation to reduce our suffering, and he laid out a path that many people have followed over the millennia toward lasting peace of mind and happiness.

And Buddha didn't command any of this, which is what I think separates Buddhism from many of the traditionally defined, "religions." Buddha encouraged seeing for oneself if his techniques do indeed bring about a greater peace and a life of less suffering by direct experience, which isn't unlike the scientific method where direct observations are the basis of knowledge. Pursue a life of constant seeking for the next "buzz of pleasure" and then live life for at time following the Buddha's guidelines and see, which way gives you the strongest feeling of satisfaction and happiness of life. If you find you think Buddhism is only causing you more problems then best of luck. Sincerely. A lot of people come and go with Buddhism. Buddhism doesn't want to force anyone to do anything. Buddhism would rather let the people come to it so that they are making a choice of their own free will and feel ready to follow such a path).

Maher: — I don’t want to learn to not want, that’s what people in prison have to do

(James: We're in a prison, now, Bill--look around you--We Want a better job, want a new car, want our body to heal quicker or look sexier, want our spouse to change to how we think they should be, and on and on. It's a prison without bars that lures us with shiny new distractions to keep us from finding a way out of the suffering. However, it doesn't have to be an either or proposition as you're stating. You're saying Buddhism says "life sucks, it has no meaning, purpose or value" but that is a common misconception. That isn't Buddhism--that's nihilism. Buddhism teaches that there is a way to live in balance with things of the world yet reduce your long-term suffering. That is what Buddhism offers).

Maher: And reincarnation? Really? If that were real, wouldn’t there be some proof by now? A raccoon spelling out in acorns, “My name is Herb Zoller and I’m an accountant.” …something?

(James: First of all not all Buddhists believe in reincarnation. A lot of Buddhists believe in rebirth and yet still others believe in neither. As for proof? Even science says that energy never disappears but simply changes form. There are many Buddhists who say that it doesn't really matter much what happens after death (if anything) because the only moment we have is this one. For these Buddhists they focus on the rebirth that happens within this lifetime. For example, I am a completely different person from who I was 10-12 years ago when I was an ardent Mormon who was politically conservative. Now I am a Liberal Buddhist!!

But the point of rebirth, in my view, isn't so much about whether we are reborn a slug, or even reborn at all but rather that we realize how our actions affect our future. It's about becoming aware of how we alone are the architects of our own life and what our life becomes is directly influenced by our actions. So, for me, it comes down to what you reap is what you sow. And if all you water are seeds of hatred, greed and delusion then you will reap a lot of misery but if you water seeds of love, compassion and patience then you will reap the opposite and leave a better world behind then when you were born into it.

Maher: People are always debating, is Buddhism a religion or a philosophy: it’s a religion. You’re a religion if you do something as weird as when the Buddhist monks scrutinize two-year-olds to find the reincarnation of the dude who just died, and then choose one of the toddlers as the sacred Lama: “His poop is royal!” Sorry, but thinking you can look at a babbling, barely-housebroken, uneducated being and say, “That’s our leader” doesn’t make you enlightened. It makes you a Sarah Palin supporter.

(James: Bill, I like you--I really do, and while I think your usually well informed, on Buddhism you're quite ignorant. Only one school of Buddhism believes that their teachers are reincarnated, and that's Tibetan Buddhism. If you have a problem with Tibetan Buddhism then take that up with the Dalai Lama, but I would have expected you to know better than to lump all Buddhists together. I didn't want to write this to defend Buddhism so much as to explain it, as best as a common practitioner like myself can to those who aren't familiar with Buddhism so they, can hear both sides).

~Peace to all beings~

Thank-You Tibet!

James: When you think of the awesome power of the Chinese Communist Party and the relative weakness of Tibet one would think that Tibetan culture would have been extinguished like a butter lamp being blown out by a cold, Himalayan wind. Countless Tibetans have fled Chinese occupied Tibet for decades upon decades but the most important aspect to the exodus was the knowledge carried out with these hearty folks -- especially the monks and elders. They have carried with them the sacred and historic traditions of Tibetan Buddhism and the greater Tibetan culture. So while Tibet itself is still under siege the Tibetan heart is alive and beating strong. Tibetans have been adopted and taken in by the world and all have benefited. Tibetans are given sanctuary to ride out the storm of religious intolerance and militant occupation of their homeland and the world has been given access to the precious jewel of Tibet -- Tibetan Buddhism.

To be sure Tibetans must long for home and be greatly pained to see their homeland changed so much. As well as obviously worrying for their friends, family and fellow Tibetans still living in that stunningly beautiful country. However, if any peoples are prepared to outlast and actually thrive due to such change and upheaval it would be the Tibetan people. That is because most of them are Buddhist and as we fellow Buddhists know the core of the Buddha's teachings are on how to deal with suffering and change. Surely some Tibetans wanted to stand and fight--and some did but the majority knew it was better to push that ego aside and move on toward India and the greater Tibetan diaspora so that their culture could survive. If they would have stayed to fight then they would have probably been nearly completely wiped out as a people and as a culture. Their traditions would have been lost under the dusty, dirty boot of oppression but as it is their culture is alive and well in dozens of countries keeping the flame burning.

Thich Nhat Hanh has often spoke of what it means to have a home and what is our true home. He like the Dalai Lama is an exile from his homeland. In Nhat Hanh's case, Vietnam:

Who amongst us has a true home? Who feels comfortable in their country? After posing this question to the retreatants for contemplation, I responded. I said: “I have a home, and I feel very comfortable in my home.” Some people were surprised at my response, because they know that for the last thirty-eight years I have not been allowed to return to Vietnam to visit, to teach, or to meet my old friends and disciples. But although I have not been able to go back to Vietnam , I am not in pain. I do not suffer, because I have found my true home.

My true home is not in France where Plum Village practice center is located. My true home is not in the United States . My true home cannot be described in terms of geographic location or in terms of culture. It is too simplistic to say I am Vietnamese. In terms of nationality and culture, I can see very clearly a number of national and cultural elements in me –– Indonesian, Malaysian, Mongolian, and others. There is no separate nationality called Vietnamese; the Vietnamese culture is made up of other cultural elements. I have a home that no one can take away, and I feel very comfortable in that home. In my true home there is no discrimination, no hatred, because I have the desire and the capacity to embrace everyone of every race, and I have the aspiration, the dream to love and help all peoples and all species. I do not feel anyone is my enemy. Even if they are pirates, terrorists, Communists, or anti-Communists, they are not my enemies. That is why I feel very comfortable.

Every time we listen to the sound of the bell in Deer Park or in Plum Village , we silently recite this poem: “I listen, I listen, this wonderful sound brings me back to my true home.” Where is our true home that we come back to? Our true home is life, our true home is the present moment, whatever is happening right here and right now. Our true home is the place without discrimination, the place without hatred. Our true home is the place where we no longer seek, no longer wish, no longer regret. Our true home is not the past; it is not the object of our regrets, our yearning, our longing, or remorse. Our true home is not the future; it is not the object of our worries or fear. Our true home lies right in the present moment. If we can practice according to the teaching of the Buddha and return to the here and now, then the energy of mindfulness will help us to establish our true home in the present moment.

James: The Dalai Lama and many, many Tibetans understand this concept and thus where ever they are, they are home. We should all do this regardless of what country we live in. We could be living in our home country yet still feel disconnected from it, which can make us feel isolated and maybe even ignored. If, however, we follow the advice of The Dalai Lama and Thich Nhat Hanh then we will never feel alone where ever we go because home is not a place but rather a state of being/mind. Our true home travels with us and can be accessed at any time. It can not be taken away regardless of how many foreign soldiers might occupy our country. So, In recognition of the survival of Tibetans and Tibetan culture, 2010 will be a year to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Tibetan resilience. An organization called, Thank You Tibet! is setting up a community online to find creative ways to honor Tibetan culture and people. If you have some time and the inclination do check it out because who amongst us hasn't benefited in someway by Tibetan culture?

~Peace to all beings~

Clinging to a Moment in Time.

I wanted to add some additional thoughts about the current discussion bubbling up to the surface in the Buddhoblogosphere about sanghas and teachers, which I addressed in my last post found here. As you know I support both online sanghas and interactions with teachers as well as the traditional sanghas and teacher environments. I am somewhat bewildered by those who refuse to acknowledge the usefulness of iSanghas (online sanghas). Especially when there are those, which are run and administered by ordained monks!! We have to let go of this idea which bubbles up from time to time that online sanghas and teaching environments are always inadequate.

So if I show up in person and talk to an ordained teacher at the agreed upon building I will get a "better" Dharma than if I interact with the same teacher via chat, phone or video-conferencing? Is the "specialness" (that some "purists" claim comes with physical presence of a teacher) the smell they give off? Is the trick being your smell mixing with their smell? I know that's silly sounding and that's the point because purists are being silly with this issue in my view. Whatever happened to the idea of 84,000 different ways of teaching the Dharma? I fully support traditional sanghas and a lot of other Buddhist traditions. However, we practice a belief system that was developed by a man who had NO Roshi or other Buddhist "Master" to help him. Even ordained teachers who wander the temples and meditation centers will tell you that no amount of interaction with a teacher will enlighten you. In the end it is each one of us who has to do the work. It doesn't matter if a Zen Master stands on his head while chanting unless you do the work yourself. That's not to say that interaction with an ordained teach is WRONG--It's not wrong AT ALL. It's very important and should remain intact but there is plently of room and elasticity in Buddhism to allow for iSanghas.

However, at what point are we clinging to something simply because "that's the way it's always been done?" Isn't being a "purist" in this case attaching way too much importance to the ritual of the student/teacher relationship? As well as the ritual of formal buildings and temples? Don't get me wrong I want to maintain these wonderful buildings and tradition of having a teacher to work with in person. However, I don't see "iSanghas" as a disease that will ruin Buddhism, which is an attitude I see behind much of this hyperventilation over these new developments in Buddhism. The original "temples" were forests. So was the change that would come with the advent of more formal temples with ornate carvings, golden statues and beautiful artwork poisoning the "traditional forest sangha" set-up? What about the great masters who left the temples after a time to study alone in a cave? Were they not "credible teachers?"

Were those caves hindrances to their practice? Tell that to all the great teachers who have come from that tradition, which is especially strong in Tibetan Buddhism. Tell Buddhadharma that the meditation he was doing in that cave wasn't "the real Dharma" because there was no teacher right there to constantly whack him on the back. So my point is that change is inevitable and we seem to be able to see that in our daily lives with learning to adapt to changes at work, in relationships and in all areas of life. Yet I have seen a strange stubborn streak in some practitioners when it comes to change in Buddhism seen here with the virtual sanghas and online interactions with a teacher. Hell, there are STILL people who say that Mahayanist Buddhists aren't TRUE Buddhists!! Some people are still fighting that change, which was a difference that arose ages ago.

~Peace to all beings~

The Next Dalai Lama to be a Woman?

In 50 years of exile from Tibet, this self-professed “simple monk” has been the driving force behind the growing prominence of women in Tibetan exile society. He has even suggested that his next reincarnation could and should be a girl. “Woman is more compassionate and has more power to understand and feel the needs of others as compared to man,” he said at a press conference last November in Dharamsala, his exile home in northern India. That the Dalai Lama—believed by Tibetan Buddhists to be the 14th reincarnation of the Buddha of compassion—should return to the world as a woman is a radical notion that perturbs even open-minded Tibetans, men and women alike. And despite his wishes, the 15th reincarnation will very likely be a boy, just like all the prior ones.

In the film he also spoke admiringly about a milestone in Tibetan history known as Tibetan Women’s Uprising Day. On March 12, 1959—just days before he fled his homeland -- about 15,000 women spontaneously gathered in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa in an unprecedented display of peaceful protest against China’s invasion of Tibet.

Those women were “heroines,” says the Dalai Lama in A Quiet Revolution. It was “as if they already knew the feminist movement!” He laughs gleefully as though he has told a hilarious joke. At the time, Tibet was closed to the outside world. To a Tibetan, Simone De Beauvoir and Betty Friedan might as well have been Martians.

James: I find it odd in a way that some Tibetan Buddhists who revere The Dalai Lama not only as their spiritual leader but also for being the very incarnation of the compassionate Bodhisattva Avalokitshevara (or Guan Yin) would disagree with him on this issue. How can he be wrong if you believe his very essence is to convey, show, teach and bring about compassion? He basically has a Phd in Compassion. I think he knows the subject better than most of us. Also, If we are all one then by not allowing women to potentially be a Dalai Lama is to deny a part of all of us.Besides, I have read several accounts where Avalokiteshvara is somewhat androgynous and has at least, a strong feminine side to him. In some cultures Avalokiteshvara is actually a woman in the form of Guan Yin. I don't see why it would be so controversial for the Dalai Lama to reincarnate as a woman if Avalokiteshvara is equal parts male and equal parts female. The Dalai Lama recognizes the deep compassion and nurturing instinct that many women have is essential in a world that grows more and more cold, harsh, mean and uncaring. And I can't think of a better way for the Dalai Lama to teach everyone about the equality of all people than by being reincarnated as a woman.

~Peace to all beings~

"Bamso: The Art of Dreams." A book Review.

I was recently sent a copy of "Bamso: The Art of Dreams" and initially I thought it was more of a manual on how to use your dreams to better your life. And while it does offer some insights in how to use dreams to solve problems in your daily life it reads more like a novel or one person's dream diary. It certainly paints a very wonderful journey of the mind and it's an interesting read. However, personally I find the ideas of astral projection, mental projection and time travel through dreams to be distractions from our ideals as Buddhists of waking up from dreams and illusions.

I have found that the mind in Buddhism is not something to be encouraged. Also, In the book the teacher encourages the student to cultivate his imagination. For many Buddhists such an activity is going against much of the teachings on Dharma to reduce our fantasies and imaginations, which often distract us from the present moment of right here, right now. The Buddha taught that this present moment is all we have and I personally believe that gallivanting off into our dreams can be a really good way to lose focus and become distracted from true awakening.

That said, dreams can provide insights from time to time but attaching too much importance to them (I have found) just leads to more attachments. I have done astral projection before and while it was fun and interesting I didn't do much for me except cause me to attach to the warm fuzzies I often felt mentally traveling through fantasy worlds. It would probably best be appreciated in the Buddhist community by Tibetan Buddhists, who seem to be more open to dream analysis more than other schools. Especially the Dream Yoga and Dzogchen Tibetan Buddhist traditions. I do believe that sometimes dreams replay events from past lives but there is no way of knowing this for sure in a scientifically proven sense. However, I see most dreams as an amalgamation of the days events, worries, fears, hopes, desires and miscellaneous images. If we as Buddhists are too awaken to the illusory nature of our waking state then how is it that we should attach too much importance to our dreams?

The book did explain that if nothing else analyzing your dreams can bring about better sleep and relaxation during the day. Personally, it is quite distressing to have a nightmare and feel the distressing energy throughout the next day. So there suggestion in the book of combining dream analysis with meditation seems useful in letting go of the suffering that often comes with nightmares. Overall I personally wouldn't recommend this book for Buddhists who usually want to wake up from dream states, not enforce them. At least that's how I see it but I'm not a Buddhist master or anything. I know Buddha experienced dreams but somehow it's different, though I can't quite explain why. Perhaps it's that Buddha used his dreams to wake up, not enforce his delusions of the pleasure seeking self. As a Zennist who strips a lot of metaphysical aspects from his practice I'd give this book a 4 out of 10. If you're just looking for a good novel/story though I'd give it a higher rating. That said, I'd be happy to send this to anyone interested in it. Just email me: jaymur-at-gmail-dot-com. UPDATE: This book has now been claimed.

~Peace to all beings~

Buddhism in America by State.

I have often wondered which American states have the most Buddhists and one of the ways of doing that is counting the number of Buddhist centers in each state. Well, I found a map from 2004 by "The Pluralism Project." Not surprisingly much of the south, the center plains states and the northern Rocky Mountain states stretching from Wyoming up to Montana and Idaho have the least. Those are regions that are either: Sparsely populated, dominated by Christianity and/or traditionally conservative politics, which are all factors that make establishing a Buddhist center difficult. That said I envision Buddhism continuing to grow throughout America in the coming decades.

The states that appear to have the highest concentration of centers are as usual on the east, west coasts and Texas of all places. Texas is part of the Bible belt region of states and has many who are anti-anything that isn't white, anglo-saxon, protestant. That said Texas is a big state with many immigrants I'm told. So that would boost the numbers, which I'm sure is especially large in the big cities like Dallas, Houston and San Antonio. Especially Houston with it's growing Chinatown. I'm sure the liberal, young, university town of Austin has a decent amount of Buddhists as well. New York is pretty self-explanatory. It has THE city (New York City) for diversity in all areas of life and not far behind is California where there is a very big Asian-American population as well. There are also many white-Americans who are very liberal and open-minded toward other beliefs. So no surprise that Buddhism is popular there either. So, California, New York and Texas are the big three.

The next level is where my state of Colorado is listed. It's that dark orange/brown, square state surrounded by all those white and tan states. Colorado has had a sizable Buddhist community since the 1970s when in 1970 Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche founded the Tibetan Buddhist Shambhala tradition in Boulder and established the Shambhala Mountain Center and Stupa near Fort Collins. In 1974 Rinpoche established Naropa University in Boulder, which private, Buddhist-inspired, ecumenical and nonsectarian. In addition, the many ethnic Tibetans, Nepalese and Bhutanese who moved to the northern Colorado area in part due to the Tibetan Buddhist centers established by Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche feel right at home with our high mountains, alpine environment and high altitude. I have spoken to several myself who have said it is like a home away from home due to the similar climate and concentration of Tibetan Buddhist centers. So combine all of that with a very liberal, open-minded, college town like Boulder and it's no wonder there are so many Buddhists and Buddhist centers here. You can find several Zen centers as well if that's your style.

Colorado has kind of become a Mountain West refuge for minority religions and beliefs. I'm not going to go into too many other states as this post would get way too long but the last one I'll mention is Hawaii. My wife grew up on the islands and I have seen many Buddhist centers, shrines and temples there. They are gorgeous, especially when put in front of the backdrop of the stunning Hawaiian scenery. One of my favorite places on Oahu is the Byodo-in temple at Temple Valley, which is a replica of the famous Byodo-in temple in Kyoto, Japan. There is also a very vibrant and wonderful Chinatown in Honolulu. Hawaii is not only a great place to live if you can afford it but the Buddhist community is quite vibrant and very much alive.

~Peace to all beings~

China Bans Reincarnation

In one of history's more absurd acts of totalitarianism, China has banned Buddhist monks in Tibet from reincarnating without government permission. According to a statement issued by the State Administration for Religious Affairs, the law, which goes into effect next month and strictly stipulates the procedures by which one is to reincarnate, is "an important move to institutionalize management of reincarnation." But beyond the irony lies China's true motive: to cut off the influence of the Dalai Lama, Tibet's exiled spiritual and political leader, and to quell the region's Buddhist religious establishment more than 50 years after China invaded the small Himalayan country. By barring any Buddhist monk living outside China from seeking reincarnation, the law effectively gives Chinese authorities the power to choose the next Dalai Lama, whose soul, by tradition, is reborn as a new human to continue the work of relieving suffering.

At 72, the Dalai Lama, who has lived in India since 1959, is beginning to plan his succession, saying that he refuses to be reborn in Tibet so long as it's under Chinese control. Assuming he's able to master the feat of controlling his rebirth, as Dalai Lamas supposedly have for the last 600 years, the situation is shaping up in which there could be two Dalai Lamas: one picked by the Chinese government, the other by Buddhist monks.

James: Well, for a communist state, China sure is interested in religion!! That of course is because they fear the Dalai Lama as he represents peace and freedom of not only religion but of thought as well. This law is just plain silly. Seeing how it is believed by many that the Dalai Lama can control his own rebirth he will simply be reborn in Dharamsala, India (where the current Dalai Lama lives) or elsewhere in the Tibetan diaspora. The Chinese government simply does not understand Buddhism and the fact that change is inevitable. The idea of banning reincarnation by a human law is as absurd as passing a law making winter illegal.

The Tibetan people will never recognize an impostor Dalai Lama chosen by a non-Tibetan Buddhist body. It would be like the Tibetan Buddhist leader saying that he would choose the next Pope of the Catholic church and only that "Pope" would be the "real" one. Of course no one would take that seriously and this law of the Chinese government is just as laughable.

PHOTO CREDIT: The Buddhist Channel News

~Peace to all beings~