Published in Le Nouvel Observateur on August 14, 2008 —
Thousands of French people are turning to the " living Buddha " visiting our country. Religion specialist Frédéric Lenoir deciphers the fascination exerted by this peaceful warrior.
Le Nouvel Observateur – You have devoted several books to Buddhism and Tibet, and you have often met the Dalai Lama. Do you think his popularity is a passing fad?
Frédéric Lenoir: This enduring popularity, which has persisted for some twenty years, suggests a deep interest in the man and his message. The Dalai Lama resonates with people from very diverse social backgrounds, from the bourgeois bohemians to employees and retirees. He is perceived as a simple, funny, and spontaneous man. And at the same time, he is known to carry the burden of all the suffering of his people. This makes him particularly moving.
NO – It seems to resolve a contradiction: how to fight without losing one's composure…
F. Lenoir. – Yes, by resisting with a smile on his lips, he reconciles what we consider to be opposites. And this joy of living mixed with human tragedy gives great weight to his Buddhist message, since he is a living witness to the authenticity of his words.
NO – But why is he loved by ordinary people, who are not particularly interested in Tibet or Buddhism?
F. Lenoir. – Because he is ordinary in his behavior despite an extraordinary destiny. He doesn't present himself as a great scholar. He speaks in very simple terms, he is always open, welcoming, relaxed, and bursts into laughter at the slightest thing. He often replies that he doesn't know, which is extremely rare among men of his stature.
NO – And this aura of sanctity, of moral authority?
F. Lenoir. – Despite everything that's happening between China and Tibet, he has never wavered in his message of benevolence and non-violence. He is neither sour nor bitter. He insists that no one speak ill of the Chinese. One gets the sense that this man is driven by an extraordinary strength. Where does he find it? Probably in his spiritual practices, in a self-examination worthy of the greatest philosophers of Antiquity. We are in the presence of a Marcus Aurelius, an Epictetus. The Dalai Lama begins his days with four hours of meditation. This is undoubtedly what gives him the emotional distance of the wise. And then there is this kindness that shines on his face when you see him on television or in photographs. I have, moreover, personally witnessed acts of selfless kindness toward people who had nothing to offer him, far from microphones and cameras.
NO – But doesn't it primarily respond to the need for a change of scenery in our jaded societies, in search of easy esotericism?
F. Lenoir – There are certainly several motivations for the Dalai Lama's popularity, which may even overlap in some cases. There is certainly a superficial curiosity about an exotic wisdom that offers a pleasant change from our own traditions. But there is also a deeper search for an answer to the dual collapse of major religious and political ideologies. Our societies are experiencing a serious crisis of traditional religions. Belief in the political system that succeeded them has, in turn, been discredited for the last thirty years or so. These successive disillusionments have generated a collective need, a questioning of the meaning of existence.
NO – But what meaning can the Dalai Lama bring to those disillusioned with Christianity or Communism?
F. Lenoir. – He acknowledges that collective actions, even those advocating a magnificent ideal, can be exploited by strategies of domination and descend into violence unless they are based on individual transformation. He says: all social or political revolutions will be pointless if each person does not undergo their own inner revolution. He thus aligns himself with the prevailing current of contemporary individualism by asserting that what matters most is the individual's work on themselves.
NO – We are far from classical Buddhist teachings ...
F. Lenoir. – It's true that the Dalai Lama has changed his approach. For a long time, through his books and major public lectures, he transmitted traditional, sometimes very complex, Buddhist teachings. In the mid-1990s, he realized that his audiences lacked the necessary background to understand Buddhism, which generated many misunderstandings. He decided to convey simpler values centered around timeless questions like happiness and self-control. How can we be responsible for our lives in such a way as to be happy while also making others happy? This message, which resonates with ancient wisdom, lies at the crossroads of the individual and the collective, through an ethic of responsibility – that's his key phrase. We are responsible for humanity. Hence his interest in ecology. He is at the forefront of this fight in the name of the Buddhist concept of the interdependence of phenomena, according to which every local action has general, planetary consequences.
NO – The fact remains that, for many observers, the Dalai Lama's success is primarily explained by the decline of our traditional religions, that he thrives on the ruins of Judeo-Christianity. What do you think? F. Lenoir. – What you say is true of the success of Buddhism in the West in general. But the Dalai Lama reaches far more people than just the fringe who convert or are interested in Buddhism. And as a religious figure, he inspires widespread support because he projects an exceptional image of tolerance. He responds to the intolerance that has been the great flaw of monotheistic religions for centuries. By agreeing to engage in dialogue with everyone, by remaining free from any sectarian rhetoric, he appears as a kind of antipope, as a perfectly tolerant sage who does not, however, renounce his convictions. He affirms that there are paths to wisdom in all religions. And therefore, as he tirelessly reiterates, one should not change religions, but rather find within one's own the seeds of spirituality present everywhere. His discourse breaks with the active proselytizing of other religious leaders.
NO – Including that of the Tibetan lamas, because we are witnessing a rapid expansion and institutionalization of Tibetan Buddhism in our latitudes…
F. Lenoir. – That's correct, and we shouldn't be fooled. There is indeed a disconnect between the Dalai Lama's anti-proselytizing discourse – which is sincere, as I have often witnessed – and the significant expansion of Tibetan Buddhism in the West since the 1970s. Most of the lamas, both Tibetan and Western, who run the newly established centers are actively seeking to recruit through advertising, marketing, and a certain degree of persuasion. There is indeed proselytizing on the ground, even if it is not aggressive and remains far less intense than, for example, the proselytizing of Pentecostals.
NO – Would you say that Tibetan religious figures have a strategy of conquering Western elites? You write in your book that such a decision was made after the loss of Tibet…
F. Lenoir – If the Chinese hadn't invaded Tibet, the lamas would never have left their country. After some fifteen years of exile, they decided to use Western influence to preserve their culture. Westerners passionate about Buddhism – mostly French, in fact – had gone to India to find them and persuaded them to establish centers in Europe and America. They offered them the means to teach the language, transmit the texts, and keep their culture alive. It was a historic opportunity. From that moment on, there was, in effect, a general strategy on the part of the Dalai Lama and the Tibetans to accept all requests to establish centers in the West, with the aim of preserving their culture and influencing Western public opinion on the Tibetan cause. In this way, they gained public support – against governments that are careful not to act effectively, particularly in international forums. This widespread sympathy undoubtedly contributed to the fact that Tibet is still alive.
NO – Why is Tibetan Buddhism, among all schools of Buddhism, the most successful, particularly in France?
F. Lenoir. – Tibet is one of the oldest Western myths. From the Middle Ages onward, Marco Polo and missionaries brought back fabulous tales of lamas endowed with magical powers. This image has permeated Western consciousness to this day. Just reread "Tintin in Tibet" to see for yourself! Added to this is a special relationship between Tibet and France. Many explorers have written vivid accounts, such as Father Hue at the end of the 19th century, Alexandra David-Néel, and the films of Arnaud Desjardins—a whole lineage that has sparked this interest in France. We must also consider the French schizophrenia, both Cartesian and Catholic, to which Tibetan Buddhism responds perfectly. Like all forms of Buddhism, it is pragmatic and rational—one must experience things before believing; But Tibetan Buddhism is also the most "religious" and the most "magical," attaching great importance to rituals, saints, the clergy, and sacred images. There are bodhisattvas, grand ceremonies with music and incense, and monasteries. The French—like the Spanish and Italians—therefore find in it the Catholicism of their childhood in a new form. This creates unconscious connections. It is also noticeable that, in Anglo-Saxon Protestant countries like Germany and England, Zen, with its sober and austere approach, finds greater success.
Interview by Ursula Gauthier,
Le Nouvel Observateur