Lukar Jam Atsock in an undated file photo. Facebook
By Lobsang Wangyal
MCLEOD GANJ, India, 11 March 2017
Writer and Tibetan independence activist Lukar Jam Atsock has been condemned by Tibetans around the world for a poem which appears to denigrate the Dalai Lama.
Lukar on 5 February published a poetry tribute on his Facebook page to Professor Elliot Sperling, a leading historian of Tibet and Tibetan-Chinese relations, who had passed away on 1 February 2017.
The poem was titled “You are the one who should have lived for 113 years!”, meaning he felt that Sperling’s demise came too early.
“113 years” seemed to refer to the Dalai Lama, who has said on a number of occasions that predictions and his own dreams have suggested that he would be living for 113 years. In January in Bodh Gaya, the Dalai Lama assured his followers that he will live for more than 100 years.
The Tibetans inferred that the title of Lukar Jam’s poem implied that Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama is not the one to live for 113 years.
A group purportedly representing more than 2,000 Tibetans from around the world criticised Lukar Jam for their perception of his poem in a press conference convened for the purpose.
A letter signed by 2,221 Tibetans and titled “Lukar Jam: Enemy of Tibetans” was presented to the press. The letter said that Lukar’s “113” remark has “pained Tibetans beyond imagination.” It called for all Tibetans to disassociate from him for his “unceasing baseless criticism” against the Dalai Lama.
The letter was also sent to the Office of the Dalai Lama, and the Central Tibetan Administration’s Executive (Kashag), Legislature (exile Parliament) and Department of Security.
Sikyong Lobsang Sangay (the Tibetan political leader) while reading his annual 10 March statement, digressed to criticise Lukar Jam on Friday, without explicitly mentioning his name.
In a show of protest over Lukar’s “113” remark, a cafe in Dharamshala refused to serve him. A video showing the owner speaking about the refusal has gone viral on Facebook.
Speaking to Tibet Sun on the phone, Lukar said, “What the Sikyong has said is all politics, what the group is saying is propaganda coming from a brainwashed lot, and what I am saying is art.”
“These all have nothing to do with each other.”
A former political prisoner, Lukar Jam ran for the position of Sikyong, the Prime Minister of Tibetans in exile, in the 2015 exile Tibetan elections.
Update:
Note:
"Lukar Jam’s poem in tribute to Elliot Sperling", in original Tibetan and in English translation, is published here on Tibet Sun on 14 March 2017.
"Open letter to Sikyong on Mr Lukar Jam’s security " is here on Tibet Sun on 16 March 2017.
I think Tibet Sun is the one who made a bad image for Lukar Jam. There are thousands of his pictures on the Internet — why did you guys choose that particular picture that makes a bad impression of him, like a Gunda in Hindi movies.
What would have happened if Lukar mentioned 114 years instead if 113 years? or 109 years? although in some statements Kundun has mentioned a reduction to 108 years?
The hysteria is comical in a usual setting, but in this situation there have been threats and vandalism committed towards Lukar and his family.
The Sikyong has played his part in this mess and I would advise Lukar to also take the Sikyong to court for his March 10 address that has added fuel to the fire.
Phuntsok Paldenla appears to have missed the point about democracy and the Ayatollah.
Thank you Gyalpot la, I agree with you. Your commentary has a moderating influence and I think it is a good example to others. We sometime tend to ignore/neglect the real issues, and focus more on less significant events.
It is true that China is dividing us on different grounds, and spending huge amount of money to buy some of our people. We need to be extra careful and never let those traitors take advantage of such situations. I appreciate a moderate voice that is expressed without hurting others in the name of free speech.
Don’t shoot the messenger, Happy Son. This will be even worse than the Lukar Jam issue. Tibet Sun is doing what it needs to be doing, and, in fact, they are doing a commendable job.
From the likes of Mr/Ms Bell, Palden, Tenzin Kalsang, and gyalpot, what I am gathering is that when Lukar criticizes the Dalai Lama, that’s freedom of speech, and when others express their view, that’s becoming like Ayatollah. If that’s how you believe and want us to take, there’s no space for debate. We have reached a dead end.
The 2,221 is a huge number, and they have decided using their own intelligence to keep away from Lukar. They have exercised their freedom of speech when they presented that idea and requested others to do the same. Whether others follow or not is their choice. Or, is it that Lukar Jam is the one who should have freedom of speech!
To me, gyalpot from Canada seems naive for asking Kundun to intervene and speak about the Lukar issue. What could he say, really? Are you expecting him to say what Lukar has said is allright, in the name of freedom of speech? Ask those who are opposing Lukar about the statement to keep quiet? No, do not ask him to come down to this low level (abusing freedom of speech) zap by Lukar. Rather than Kundun saying something about such issues, it should be us using our freedom of speech sensibly and judiciously, so that no such situations come about at the first place.
His Holiness has played his role already in proving all that we need to have. Now it’s us who need to take care of what is with us and bring it forward. It’s on us whether to make it or break it, whether in the name of freedom of speech act like a mad person without taking any responsibility, or be considerate.
In old Tibet, when His Holiness passed by on his way from Potola palace to Norbu Lingka, ordinary Tibetans had the right to step in front of his path, stop the procession, and offer their petitions regarding their grievances or concerns. And now in this 21st century you would deny me the right to petition HH?
The current situation is grave and needs his council and guidance. What he says, I am in no position to assume. Freedom of speech claims on both sides of the divide are understandable, but when one side takes physical action by threatening the other’s life and those of his family and damaging their property, the boundary has been crossed. This type of behavior is practiced by authoritarian regimes and not countries who claim to be “Democratic”.
I made my petition because Kundun is the only one both sides will listen to, and no one else. And as far as I can see, both sides need a good scolding for being stupid and irresponsible — more importantly, the criminal elements that tend to disrupt everything happening in our society!
Tibet Sun has emerged as the undisputed king of objective, non-partisan print media in Tibetan politics, in covering pieces with audacity and strong commitment for reporting facts. Tibet Sun has shed light on numerous news, facts, and other information that other mainstream media outlets, such as Phayul, VOA, etc., have not.
For this reason alone, Tibet Sun is a fast-evolving force in spearheading the fledgling Tibetan democracy. Those who diss Tibet Sun are uncomfortable with democracy, and are more suited to totalitarian political spaces such as China, where journalists are arrested and their works censored on trumped-up grounds of preserving great good, or unity, or potential to cause hurt to people. But they are all excuses.
Every once in a while we have this nasty irritating flare-up of some people getting riled over perceived vilification of Kundun by one Tibetan or another. This has been going on, not for the first time, during our long history. And this time around, it is even worse, with MPs shouting allegations, even the Sikyong lamenting the unfortunateness of Lukar Jam’s choice of “113”.
But more important than this, have we Tibetans considered the fact the Chinese are using our hot-headedness as a weapon to divide us and weaken our resolve? The Chinese have failed to suppress us when they have confronted us directly, but when they use our own people, spies, collaborators, and the disenchanted, we seem to boil over and melt down to our base elements!
If we want to continue our quest for freedom, we have to learn to calm down, take a deep breath, and rationalize events, instead of running around in a frenzied, crazy war dance trance. Do we, or rather the elected people, have contingencies in place to counter Chinese plans to keep us divided, distracted, and in turmoil? This is one of many incidents; I feel the Chinese are using us to destroy ourselves.
I bow down three Time to His Holiness, before I make this audacious request:
I wish His Holiness would speak to us and calm everyone down, as he has often done in the past with others in similar situations. With this generous act, it would kill (metaphorically) two birds with one stone. First, although we may seem ungrateful, disrespectful, and tardy, but in a sense, we are still every one of us Tibetans, your wards and a kind word or two from you would put us at peace and bind us together stronger. Second, your gracious act would let the Chinese know that they cannot use Tibetans against each other in your name and that we are bound stronger than ever in our fight for justice and dignity.
Policy and ideological differences in society are natural. It is healthy to engage in debate and listen to different shades of opinion — this is a very healthy development. People are definitely very hurt when somebody attempts to attack the person of His Holiness the 14th Dalai lama. There is sudden outburst of spontaneous anger and sadness in people and such emotion is very natural and expected in life.
Many of us don’t know who is Lukar and what he stands for. But I have respect for any patriotic Tibetan who is pro-Tibetan. For us, it doesn’t matter whether Rangzen or Umay lam. Both are options, and it is like plan A and Plan B for us. Please don’t waste your time in hurting fellow countrymen. Tibet Sun seems to be sometime thriving in such charged atmosphere.
Just finished listening to:རྒྱལ་གཅེས་དཔའ་བོ་ཨ་ཚོགས་ཀླུ་མཁར་བྱམས་ཀྱིས་113 སྐོར་གསལ་བཤད། 2017 and am very sorry Lukar is not a top-notch journalist.
Nevertheless, I call on the Chithu and Kashag to establish institutional safeguards to ensure JUST CAUSE and DUE PROCESS to all critics and Tibetan activists.
The Tibetan tendency to use His Holiness’ name to put down political opponents is wrong, and we need institutional safeguards of just cause and due process to overcome people using religion and His Holiness’ name to win political arguments. Similarly, I think Trijang, Alo Chozod, and now Lukar are worthy of better insight.
Norbu Tsering La from Kollegal Tibetan resettlement camp claims Lukar “stole yaks.”
Yaks love their homeland and in my experience have a homing instinct second to none. Yaks are loyal and territorial and will gore anyone trying to “steal” them. Horses and cows can be rustled. Maybe Norbu La is thinking of pigs who grunt like yaks!
Two opposing forces in human history: totalitarian vs democracy. Puritans are unforgiving of human frailties and totalitarians believe in thought policing; democracies do not believe in this zero-sum thinking, but believe that in spite of the faults and problems of democracy there is a synergy that makes democratic governments more fair and stable. We can hold His Holiness in the highest esteem without being browbeaten mobbing Lukar.
A certain mind-set enabled regent Takra’s minister to pocket Reting’s execution order; Dalai Lamas from 6th to the 12 died young and according to Gyalo Thondup attempts were made to murder the 13th and the 14 Dalai Lama by religious zealots. Pro-Chinese Tibetans do not believe in freedom of speech and my humble attempt at explaining laws on libel and defamation have fallen on deaf years.
I hope the Tibetan administration can establish commitment to just cause and due process. And an end to ayatollahs who say your freedom of speech ends when my feelings are only ruffled.
Listen up folks: Free speech entails the right to offend. Recent example is the Charlie Hebdo case where an unflattering caricature of prophet Mohammed was featured in the paper. Presidents and prime ministers have marched in solidarity in defence of free speech.
Only Lukar knows what he meant in his poem. People who read strange meanings are only engaging in over-sensitive speculations. They are enemies of free speech and have no function in society’s advancement except as noise-makers inciting chaos.
Parliamentary proceedings have prominently featured Lukar’s affair. Alas, what a tragedy. A man who was an MP was openly urging the public to take the hint and ostracise Lukar’s jam. This is utterly unacceptable. If Mr Jam said something you disagree with, put forward your argument to him or the public. The public will decide using their own intelligence. You don’t go around to tell people “don’t serve him in restaurant, don’t associate with him.” This only shows the intolerance of the MP himself.
The issue here is not about what His Holiness achieved or failed to achieved. This is not about choosing between Lukar and His Holiness. (For gods sake let’s have a real debate here without tossing in the Dalai Lama’s name like it is an Ace of Hearts in a card game.)
The question is: Where is it right for an MP to encourage the public to ostracise a man for expressing his views?
The malaise that has engulfed a certain section of our people in their zeal to prove their loyalty towards His Holiness by condemning Lukar Jam is extremely worrisome. Although I have previously written my brief thoughts, I still feel compelled to write again.
An attack of this nature is actually an attack towards His Holiness\ lifelong work of implementing Democratic values in the exile community.
Kundun in his lectures and interviews around the world consistently talks on the values of Democracy, and Censorship as being immoral. I’m led to believe that His Holiness is very serious about the importance of Democratic values, as he voluntarily often without being prompted describes in great detail the history of the implementation of a Democratic system for the exile Tibetan community. Sadly the 2,221 signers have not been following the lectures, teachings, and interviews of His Holiness.
Any attack on Free Speech in the Tibetan exile community is an obvious rejection of Kundun’s core values and lifelong work.
The silence of His Holiness on this issue is troublesome, and his legacy is in serious jeopardy. If again harm is caused to those that subscribe to Free Speech, we have all been witness in recent years to the beatings of prominent Tibetans who have exercised their Democratic rights of Free Speech. I couldn’t agree more with Cynthia Bell’s assessment, and would advise Sonam Tso to lift the fog that is covering his/her eyes. The phrases used like “social disorder” is from a playbook used by the Chinese to suppress free speech.
I believe that it is completely acceptable to have deep respect for His Holiness and also be able to publicly disagree with certain viewpoints. Otherwise the comparison to the Ayatollah is accurate.
With due respect to Cynthia Bells, I totally disagree and reject his unsubstantiated allegations against the Tibetan people. As a Tibetan, I would like to assure him that there is really no threat to Lukar’s life for expressing his view. Lukar should understand that people who have been hurt by his poetry also have the same freedom of speech to say that their sentiments have been deeply hurt by him.
There is certainly unrestricted freedom of speech for Tibetans in peaceful India, and nobody should have any doubt about it. But it is the duty of every right-thinking person to respect others’ sentiments and not cause social disorder.
The present Dalai lama has provided the best possible leadership to Tibetan people for over five decades. I sincerely believe that not many people in this world can do what His Holiness has done for us during this difficult period in Tibetan history. His Holiness truly deserves the honor and love of Tibetan people, and this is our acknowledgement of his selfless service to Tibetan nation.
I strongly suggest Cynthia Bells not to compare Tibetans with Iranians. There is no such tradition of issuing death threats against others. Whether Tibetan democracy is sham or not, it will be decided by Tibetans during elections. But he has the right to comment and I fully respect his freedom.
Tibetans are MFs. Oops… I know that’s inappropriate and irresponsible. You can’t say anything you wish in the name of freedom of speech. I know I am free to express my thoughts, but I also have the responsibility to exercise that.
Lukar Jam is free to express his thoughts and feelings, but his freedom of speech ends where others feelings begin. His reference to His Holiness was uncalled for. By that title, it evidently refers to His Holiness, and this in essence imply that His Holiness is less important for Tibetans.
If Elliot Sperling has done more and cared more for Tibet, I will not have any problem in accepting that title and the comparison. And when we all know that this is not a good comparison, the problem arises.
Is this what you will expect from someone who wanted to be a Sikyong and lead Tibetans? Using “the year 113” is irresponsible and insensitive, and hurts the feelings of the Tibetans. Dalai Lama has not only saved, nurtured and protected the Tibetan movement, he is also the saviour of this and future lives of many Tibetans. Lukar should have been a bit more sensitive before making such a statement.
Support and glorification for him by some is ok, but to blow the situation out of proportion that there is threat to his life is baseless and uncalled for. There is no danger to his life. Had there been anything like that, it would have happened long back as [I believe] his hate and target towards His Holiness for years is well known. Personally he can decide whatever he wants, but when he speaks in the public domain, he should be more careful not to harm others while using his freedom of speech.
“Tibetans are MFs” is illegal under the law prohibiting knowingly speaking falsehood. You are not protected under any law .. except the law of the jungle.
I have taken pride in saying to non-Tibetans that we Tibetans never say “MFs”, and genitalia are not insults.
Long story short, in my view with characteristic Tibetan reasoning, you seem to dismantle your own point, especially at the end, when you say “he should not harm others while using his freedom of speech.”
The gist of the problem is that Tibetans have no freedom of speech when it concerns His Holiness, as he is literally a living breathing God to them and he is bigger than your 2,000-year-old history or Tibet. And it stirs so much trouble in your community even for any perceived slight, even poetic license, when it comes to His Holiness. Iranians probably enjoy a greater freedom of speech. I feel that your democracy is a sham, conceived half in heaven and half on earth.
Tibet Sun is shining. You have good reporting and you can see what Lukar wrote that caused this tempest in a teapot; except a concerted effort was made to incite the mob and create communal violence against one man without any help from China.
His Holiness is above the reach of criticism by Lukar. Lukar wrote an elegy, a eulogy on the death of his friend in an expected emotional state — among normal people, eulogies are not susceptible to thought policing.
An opaque 2k group made a connection from Lukar’s eulogy to incite mob violence by saying that his statement about the golden-haired Prof was actually an attack on His Holiness.
What is your definition of “attacking” His Holiness?
I do not know Lukar, but I am troubled by people who seem to espouse totalitarian politics, and while living in democracies are willing to deny the rights and responsibilities enjoyed by immigrants to people like Lukar.
I am afraid of the possibility that Chinese agitprop by Fifth Columnist will hijack the Tibetan government in exile by refusing to elucidate Lukar’s “attacks” on His Holiness.
We have here an eulogy of a dear departed friend who was a rare Western Prof pro-Rangzen; and referring to His Holiness as “La-Gen” which means Elder Lama. But his political rivals told Tibetans insulted His Holiness as referring to Old Monk and used this campaign to kick him out of the democratic election.
Did this rise to a faux pas violating protocol and etiquette? Or worse?
Please go a step higher and spell out what you mean by “attacking” His Holiness.
Every year Tibetan politicians celebrate the occasion when His Holiness gave the Tibetans the Suray Gift of democracy: my question is, did Lukar violate the bounds of rights and responsibilities in a polity under democratic norms?
Our forefathers and foremothers gave us Tibetans the gift of treasuring individuality and regarding mob mentality as beneath the precious human birth. We have a duty to respect the teachings of His Holiness.
2,221 people who wanted to ostracise Lukar Jam in no way represent the 7 million Tibetans. They are just a speck of dust — less than 0.2221 percent. Their calls for co-operation from the public in punishing Mr Jam by passive-aggressive antics are pathetic and point to a profoundly parochial and tribalistic stste of mind.
Peace and democracy are words tossed around like flowers during a boisterous Indian wedding. But swords and daggers are wielded when a man partakes in democracy and express his views. The baffling irony of this farce on a small hill transcend cosmic funniness. After all, what man worth his salt will condone this melodrama. Parliamentarians are behaving like bad boy bullies at the back bench encouraging the public to ostracise Mr Jam. This is such a lowlife thing. How many of them have a college degree? How many of them know what democracy means? How many of them know who John Stuart Mill is?
I disagree with Norbu la, and I think there is no question of disliking or hating any Tibetan asking for complete independence from Chinese rule. Rangzen is what we all Tibetans dream for and want for ourselves.
Many of us only accept “Middle path” as a realistic way of resolving the Tibetan issue, since the regime we are negotiating with is very uncompromising.
Our fight is not between Rangzen and Middle path, and we should avoid unnecessary confrontations amongst ourselves. Our energy and strength should be mobilized towards our common enemy. The policy differences are natural in a democratic society, and it should be considered as our strength, not weakness.
Some comments we read are very hurtful and do not deserve a space in Tibet Sun.
Maybe Prof Sperling should have lived to 113, but only HH the Dalai Lama has the power to determine the time of his own passing. So I do not regard Lukar’s statement as dissing His Holiness.
For Lukar’s statement to be defamatory it has to be known to be false, spoken with malice aforethought, and harm proven.
Of course, we know that a lot of people who hate people committed to Rangzen will use His Holiness as a stick to attack rather than provide a reasoned criticism.
We can support Umey Lam without acting with vitriol to people with different political viewpoints.
In occupied Tibet, Tibetans cannot criticize the government. The Sikyong is cloaking himself in the Dalai Lama’s holiness and going after his rival, Tibetans who praise Western scholars, and Tibetans standing up for Tibetan independence.
Rangzen is a pie in the sky like the martyrs on Masada fighting for rebirth of Israel.
Umey Lam is worthy of all of our support if only the Chinese government would make reciprocal concessions. 70 years ago there were zero Chinese in Lhasa; 30 years ago Chinese population in Lhasa was about 60 percent; today Chinese are over 90%.
If a Tibetan is bitter about this and makes intemperate statements, the rational response should be corrective rather than punitive.
I have no problem with his stand on “Rangzen”, but what was done by HHDL to make him attacking repeatedly!!!
[[Thank you Sonam — your comment is now a Letter to the Editor — Web Admin ]]
Lukar Jam is very safe and nobody is going to assault him physically. There are people with a vested interest in our community who are exaggerating everything, and Lukar has no reason to be worried.
India is a free and democratic country with a strong judiciary system to deal with any matters. The law will take its own course and punish those whoever breaks it. Nobody should act as a judge and pass comments that will cause more pain and chaos, intentionally or unintentionally.
Let this matter end here and wait for better things to happen. Please don’t fish in the troubled waters.
It’s sad to read comments that would make a person believe that we Tibetans have our own Ayatollah that we follow.
All of you who are lambasting Lukar Jam (including the Sikyong) do a great disservice towards Kundun’s vision of a democratic Tibetan society, which includes all the fruits and warts of a free society.
Shame on you all !!!!
I hope and pray for Lukar Jam and his family’s safety. Given the comments from this thread and other social media, the radical Tibetans may physically harm him using His Holiness name.
Lukar Jam was in prison not because of his political activities against Chinese. He was imprisoned because he stole yaks. There are a few followers who jump like a small fishes on the sand. Long live His Holiness.
lukar Jam has actually served in a Chinese prison. Most people who criticise him live in a bubble. He is the Gedun Choephel of our age, and 50 years later we will know the meaning of what he is saying.
Lukar Jam should run away and seek asylum in America from the attack on his free speech by the Tibetan government.
Lukar Jam mentioned about the number 113, and he said that is not meant for His Holiness. He is trying to fool the whole Tibetan. In my view, he thinks he is the only person who knows a lot, and the rest of the Tibetans don’t know anything. That’s his perception.
Wrong, Lukar la, you have to come out of it and respect 99% of the Tibetans who put His Holiness Photo inside their altars.
Maybe Lukar has gone through lots of hardships while serving his prison terms and may have found the life in exile totally unreal.
These days people like to gloat over their intellectual prowess forgetting their roots. They may have poor sense of judgement over right and wrong.
Let’s close this Lukar Jam chapter for once and all. Views expressed are his own and nothing more than that. Many of us haven’t seen or read his poetry, and it is no use discussing this issue any more. Let’s also not ostracize him to the extent of breaking point, as he should realize that His Holiness the Dalai lama has given us the best possible leadership during this critical period in Tibetan history. The words cannot express our gratitude to His Holiness, for His lifelong services to the Tibetan nation which is undisputable. Lukar Jam needs to respect this sentiment of Tibetan people and present his view without hurting our soul. He has an inalienable right to different views, and both sides should exercise restraint for the greater interest of Tibet and Tibetans.
His Holiness The Dalai Lama is the symbol of Tibet as inscribed in our charter and we cannot tolerate if anybody shows disrespect to the symbol of our country.
Lukar Jam spent more time in prison than probably all these people trying to ostracize him for the love of his country. Mr Jam’s mistake was not to know how intolerant we are to our thinking people, and he should have changed the years to 112 in due deference to His Holiness.
I think that Lukar Jam is exactly doing what CCP has been trying hard to do for the past decades. That’s to bring down our idol and revile His Holiness. If Lukar Jam has freedom to do or say anything, then I or anyone has freedom to refuse him food at his restaurant 100 times.
We shouldn’t give much importance to someone who has been accused of stealing yak and spending time behind bar.
I think it could be helpful to look into these individuals who are busy causing divide within our community? I am not concerned about Lukar Jam. I am more concerned about those behind “petition” and videos that cause greater disunity within the community.
If these individuals truly cared about His Holiness, wouldn’t it make more sense for them to practise His Holiness’ teachings rather than always looking for ways to cause division?
I’m not understanding what is the purpose of this petition. I wish His Holiness openly scolds them, and brings an end to this type of witch hunt in our society.
We Tibetans seem to have a hard time learning from our past mistakes. This situation with Lukar Jam reminds me of the early seventies when late professor Dawa Norbu was accused of similar critiques of HH in one of his Tibetan Review editorials. The people opposed to his views event went so far as to plan a mob attack to punish him.
Despite all that, like the late professor, I firmly believe Lukar Jam is a true patriot. I do not condone his views on His Holiness, but we do not want to lose a good Tibetan, just because he has a tendency to put his foot in his mouth once in a while.
As for politicizing the issue, it is a shame that some of our leaders can’t see beyond their sphere of influence and add to turmoil and misinformation that could cause us more harm and give leverage to our enemies.
Sonam Tso, you’ve hit the nail on the head. Right on. I totally concur with you.
“I don’t agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
— Voltaire
Why give so much importance to Lukar Jam and his worldly views. He has the right to say whatever he wants and we have the right to reject him. Let’s not give him undue privilege of being in the limelight and issue numerous rebuttals to disagree with him. Only a handful of people show interest in reading his poetry and many are not simply aware of his existence. It is only the media who are passionately creating such sensationalism, and Lukar considers this as a great honor.
It is useless talking about him and let’s not waste our time and energy arguing over this fellow. I am sad many commentaries are out of context in Tibet Sun and this is doing a great disservice in our community.
His Holiness is a wonderful person. He is peace and kindness. I think Lukar Jam is acting in a stupid manner.
I like the Dalai Lama.
Suzy
Constructive criticism is deemed as positive but blasphemous insinuation is generally perceived as irreverently negative. Anyway, it’s your discernment.
Also, it’s crucial that you look at the subject’s track record over the years. Then make the call which can be a reflection of your character and standing in our society. Nothing more nothing less.
In retrospect, the silver lining on this is today’s youths are actively expressing their views in the spirit of democratic process.
Whatever happens just don’t resort to violence. We all have our view and opinion. He shared his opinion and so do we have the right to express our view. Whether you wanna serve him or not or ban him that’s our choice. Just don’t get violent or abusive, that he feels threatened. That’s the beauty of being in a democratic country is all about.
I think a healthy society always goes together with criticism of the people. Alienating him from society is not an intelligent solution. Such silly footsteps will definitely mess up our peaceful society.
If Tibet belongs to Tibetans, Lukar Jam has the right to voice his opinions. I believe Lukar Jam is a passionate man, and having spent years in Chinese prison says a lot about him.
Publicly criticizing and alienating him from Tibetan society only exacerbates the situation, and we Tibetans should learn to practice what His Holiness teaches. I understand it’s an emotional response, but we need to use reason more than emotion.
It’s high time we show the world that we have space for different opinions and we have tolerance. It will be embarrassing if anything happened to Lukar Jam just because he wrote some poems which may or may not be intended against HHDL as we claim, but it’s not clear. The only person who knows is the poet himself.
CCP (Chinese Communist Party), a notorious political party emblematizing as brutal, senseless and inhumane entity, has conventionally demonized His Holiness in order to fulfil its political agenda, misleading the vast majority of people who lack the essential channels to access the right information. Even such a bestial political party, which may have such ugly ploys in its political agenda, has never overtly accursed His Holiness to live a short life. In this regard, even a most forgiving society cannot digest such an inauspicious act. There is a limit on freedom of speech. When freedom of expression exceeds certain demarcations it hurts others.
༧གོང་ས་༧སྐྱབས་མགོན་ཆེན་པོ་མཆོག་གི་ཆོས་སྲིད་ཀྱི་རླབས་ཆེན་མཛད་འཕྲིན་མཐའ་ཡས་པའི་བཀའ་དྲིན་རྣམས་བདག་ཅག་བོད་མི་ཡོངས་ཀྱིས་དུས་ནམ་ཡང་གཞལ་ཐབས་མེད་པ་ཞིག་ཡིན།
་བོད་ཀྱི་དུས་སྐབས་གཉན་འཕྲང་ཅན་འདིར་ཚང་མས་དམ་འཛིན་གནང་དགོས་པ་དོན་གྱི་སྙིང་པོ་ཞིག་ཡིན་པས་བོད་མི་ཡོངས་ནས་ཡིད་གཟབ་ཐོག་རང་བཙན་ཁ་ལ་འཁྱེར་ཏེ་བོད་མིའི་ནང་དཀྲུགས་ཤིང་བཟོ་མཁན་ལྟ་ལོག་པ་༧གོང་ས་མཆོག་ལ་མཚན་སྨོད་ཞུ་མཁན་ཀླུ་མཁར་བྱམས་རིགས་ལ་མགོ་མ་འཁོར་བ་གནང་གལ་ཆེ།།
Tibetans, if you have power to ban or discriminate against someone, please use that power for the Communists who have snatched our country, but not Lukar Jam who is simply fighting for its Freedom. Or ban the Shugden party who is openly against His Holiness. Lukar Jam never said or did anything against His Holiness, and he never accepted it. We are forcefully blaming him for something he never did.
Lukar Jam, don’t forget that if 2,000 Tibetans condemned you that’s not the point, because 98 thousand is not there. So you might be an enemy for them, but definitely not for the rest of us.
We are peace-loving people who believe in democratic values. We should be tolerant when it comes to people’s freedom of expression. But it doesn’t necessarily mean that I agree with Lukar Jam and his view of His Holiness the Dalai lama. Let him say whatever he likes, as it is up to the Tibetan people whether to accept or reject him. He has a social acceptance problem and this complexity is generating negative thoughts in his mind. So far, it is a proven fact that neither he has a huge fan base nor loyal supporters.
Fact: The last time Lukar Jam was here in MN, he wasn’t allowed to speak at the TAFM center. What does that tell you? Instead, a group of open-minded Tibetans organized his speech and a hotel, Being in America Lukar is being discriminated against, and I wonder where those orders came from to stop him from speaking publicly about his thoughts and views — c’mon Tibetans, let’s not be so blinded by religion.
PS: In the end, we want what’s best for our motherland. bhyo
Here is my view: This is not a criticism at all, it’s a hatred inside, a man with the destructive emotion, mentally ill. Can’t bear the loss of the election, and going totally psychopath. I don’t think he is a poet, or knows how to engage in healthy criticism. To me he devalued the poetic community. It seems like when he can’t fight for freedom he friended with the enemy and begged their terms of freedom.
“My religion is kindness.”
— His Holiness the Dalai Lama
My humble opinion as a non-Tibetan married to a Tibetan, is that your community members have to learn to tolerate criticism. A healthy society has different points of view, about religion, politics, economy, life. etc.
Even if someone criticizes His Holiness you can not call him/her enemy and ban him/her from being part of your community, this is violence, and violence is not good in any context. Tashi delek
Well spoken Sisa, am totally with you on this one
Technically, only a government body can impose a ban. People can only take a stand, and standing against what you believe as wrong is everyone’s right.
Totally agree with you, Sisa. We Tibetans lost our country because of this — we don’t allow criticisms and different political views.
Nathan Gyatso, your personal attacks on Sisa show how insecure you are about your own views and opinions. There’s no point debating with people not willing to listen so I’m out of here!! God bless Tibet and its people!!
Just FYI: criticizing a head of the nation in countries like UK, Canada, Poland, and Netherlands is a punishable offence. Let’s not even mention the Arab countries. Canada is proposing a bill that will make criticizing Islam a punishable offence.
His Holiness, in comparison, is not just our leader but a guardian who took it as personal responsibility for more than 60 years (continuing) to look after our well-being. But you would rather continue with your own distorted notion of freedom. Freedom comes with responsibility, and whether your conscience allows or not, it is every Tibetan’s responsibility to stand for His Holiness.
Freedom of speech is not a one-way road. If Lukar has the rights to criticize His Holiness, others too have the rights to give back his own taste of medicine.
Sisa: Technically, only a government body can impose a ban. People can only take a stand, and standing against what you believe as wrong is everyones right.
I don’t think that being married to a Tibetan man makes you more intelligent or entitled to lecture Tibetans.
Wishing or anathematizing anyone, let alone a most revered religious figure, to demise soon is immoral and is thus reprehensible. Insulting a religious figure, in other society, is deemed unacceptable and the insulter could be beheaded. The world has witnessed such instance recently though the Tibetan society is not as savage as such. You have to understand how much His Holiness means to the Ordinary Tibetans at first; only then you would have an idea of why people have felt so offended.
This will be one mark in exile history where still Tibetans are not ready to listen the talks if the talk is not what you want to hear. “I may not agree what he said but I will defend his right to say it.”
This is not about relation between what her statement about this issue and her marriage status. Every Tibetan should have space to express their opinions. Whether you agree or not is your choice. The person can sue the restaurant owner for not allowing to enter. This is discrimination among the people.
Stop criticizing one another — instead have the guts to discuss with each other.
Totally agree. As long as we are lacking in courage to discuss our issues openly and Honestly, the Tibetans in Tibet pay the price. The intolerance in our society is shameful and backward. 2017.
From my point of view, it seems like you would rather defend someone who’s patronizing us then take a stand for His Holiness against Lukar. It seems like amateurs and hypocrites believe that Liberals boycotting Melania Trump’s products is a solidarity for liberty and equality, but boycotting someone who repeatedly attacks His Holiness is against the freedom of speech.
As the adage goes “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet,” a lotus by any other insinuation remains so pure and resilient.
May Tenzin Gyatso live for eons.