I will always chose monkhood over prime ministership

Interview with Ven. Prof. Samdhong Rinpoche
Prime Minister of the Tibetan government in exile
Dharamsala, November 23, 2003

We met Ven. Prof. Samdhong Rinpoche, the new Kalon Tripa or  Prime Minister of the Tibetan Government in Exile in his Office of the Kashag [Cabinet] in Dharamsala. Following an old wish of His  Holiness the Dalai Lama to democratize the Tibetan society and after nearly 30 years of efforts and several intermediary steps, the head of the executive branch of the government has been recently elected by direct suffrage. It was the first time in Tibetan history. Though  the Oracle has recently predicted a new earthquake in the Himalayan region, a great peace pervades the premises of the Central Tibetan Administration at the end of this afternoon in We met Ven. Prof. Samdhong Rinpoche, the new Kalon Tripa or Prime Minister of the Tibetan Government in Exile in his Office of the Kashag [Cabinet] in Dharamsala. Following an old wish of His Holiness the Dalai Lama to democratize the Tibetan society and after nearly 30 years of efforts and several intermediary steps, the head of the executive branch of the government has been recently elected by direct suffrage. It was the first time in Tibetan history. Though the Oracle has recently predicted a new earthquake in the Himalayan region, a great peace pervades the premises of the Central Tibetan Administration at the end of this afternoon in

Claude: My first question is: how would you like to be addressed: Mr. Prime Minister [your secular designation] or Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche [your religious title].

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: Samdhong Rinpoche is fine.

Claude: The meaning of my question is what is more important for you: to be the Prime of Tibet or a monk?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: A monk!

Claude: After your election, in your letter of acceptance, you mentioned that your vows are more important than your present post.

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: If my duties [as Prime Minister] come in  conflict with my vows, I do not think that I will leave the monkhood, I will certainly leave the prime ministership.

Claude: Tibet has been for more than 2100 years a theocracy, today Tibet (at least in exile) has become a full-fledged democracy. Do you feel that Tibet as nation has taken an irrevocable step in electing you as the Prime Minister through a direct suffrage?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: I am unable to say if it was a fortunate or unfortunate step. Sometimes, I feel that it is unfortunate because when we were free, we were together in Tibet and we were not able to democratize our society. We were not able to move with the times and take our own responsibility by electing our leaders. Therefore the nation became weak, particularly during the times between successive Dalai Lamas. There is usually a 20/25 years gap between the death of a Dalai Lama and the majority of his reincarnation. During these periods, there was a leadership vacuum in Tibet. Nobody thought of democratization. In that way, it came too late. On the other hand, we are passing through a great crisis; the nation is occupied by foreign forces. The handful of people living outside [Tibet] have numerous problems. The younger generation which is born and brought up outside Tibet has no idea of what Tibet is and what Tibet was. The youth have a sense of patriotism only because they have heard about Tibet through their parents. Yet, they cannot feel the land, the country and the people. It is a very critical and difficult juncture. At such a moment, the people have shown an unprecedented faith in me. In this way, I can say that it is a fortunate thing. I feel happy to be able to serve the people, our nation and His Holiness the Dalai Lama, not in good days, but in days of crisis. For me, it is perhaps more important.

Claude: Do you feel than an enlightened theocracy (with the most enlightened person leading the country) is superior to a democratic system?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: I sometimes use one word before ‘democracy’, that is ‘genuine’. In all of my writings, you will find that I always speak about ‘Truth, Non-violence and Genuine Democracy’ as my guiding principles. Democracy has two levels: one is the democracy as it is practiced in India and everywhere else in the world: particularly the multi-democratic system which is nothing else than a competition of groups. In an ordinary democratic system, if I had got
51% of votes, I could consider that I won the elections. But I will govern only on behalf of these 51%. The other one is a ‘genuine democracy’ which, in my opinion, should be characterized by the cessation of the division between the ruler and the ruled. In our case, I got almost 85%; it is quite close to consensus and that too without publicizing, without campaigning. People were left to act on their own. That is quite a genuine expression. I think that it is better than an enlightened dictatorship which might be good for a specific time, but is always followed by a dark period or a vacuum.

Claude: The Regency in the case of Tibet?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: Yes, regency was not good for the Tibetan people. Secondly, enlightened kings or dictators might serve people very well and protect the interests of the people, but there is also another demerit: people become lazy, they are no more able to take responsibilities for themselves. They feel that everything will be done for them by the enlightened leader or dictator and they just remain idle. This makes people and nation weak. Therefore, people’s participation and people taking responsibility in the nation’s affairs is more important. Participation is absent in a dictatorship.

Claude: What are your main objectives as a Prime Minister not recognized so far by any nations?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: My main objectives are two: the first one is to have a breakthrough in the deadlock that we are facing at this moment between the Chinese leadership and His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Since 1994, we lost the connection and since then we are not able to restart a dialogue. Dialogue is the only way through which the Tibetan problem can be addressed and solved. The emphasis of the policy of the present Kashag [Tibetan Cabinet] is to achieve a breakthrough in this deadlock. For this, we are using all possible ‘genuine’ means which can be employed: international campaign, good offices of various nations through their bilateral discussions and dialogue with China, people to people contacts, so on and so forth. This is my first objective. The second objective is to improve and bring a lot of change in the administration of the Tibetans in exile: namely the Central Administration and the administration of the various settlements. For this matter, education is the top most priority. We are getting a good education for the Tibetan children, but we are not yet satisfied with this system. A fundamental change in the education system should be brought about. This is my first priority. Then, I want to make the Tibetan settlements sustainable, eco-friendly and cohesive communities in harmony with the nature and between the people.

Claude: Some people feel that the monasteries are becoming too rich. What is your opinion?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: Yes that is also my view. Though, they may not be very rich from the viewpoint of the number of monks and the money they receive, if you divide the money received by the number of monks, they may not be very rich. But apparently, they look very rich, they are building unnecessary luxurious temples and halls, this is a matter of great concern to me. At the same time, the health conditions of the monks, their education and research facilities are not being given top priority. Building huge houses or constructing huge statues receives more priority. I don’t think that the Tibetan government in exile will be able to change this substantially, but I am talking about it quite loudly and we shall try to do something.

Claude: About the negotiations: what is the framework of the negotiations?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: The framework is very clear. His Holiness made it crystal clear in 1988 in his Strasbourg Proposal. There is not a big difference between the Chinese and His Holiness’ position. His Holiness said that the entire Tibet territory which means the traditional three regions which are at present divided into 6 pieces should be reunited (the so-called Tibet Autonomous Region is only half of it). His demand is “let it be joined together”. All the Tibetan speaking people, the Tibetan ethnic group should form a single entity.

Claude: You do not include Monpas [from Tawang – Arunachal Pradesh] or Ladhakis?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: No, they are entirely different. I am speaking about the Tibetans under Chinese occupation, these Tibetans should be combined under one state or one region whatever it might be called. For this region, autonomy should be granted as China has promised and practiced in Hong Kong or Macao which have a democratic system. “One Country, Two Systems” is an accepted formula. Similarly Tibet should have a separate basic law based on a genuine democratic system. Within that basic law, Tibetans could govern themselves and look after their religious, cultural, economic affairs as well as education and health. The Central government of China could look after the external affairs and until Tibet is declared a ‘Zone of Ahimsa’, the defense can be taken care of by Central government. These are our parameter and of course, we will ask them not to change the demographic situation, not to shift Chinese population into Tibet. These are our few demands. China theoretically accepts territorial autonomy in its constitution and also accepts that a democratic system can be adopted by a portion of China. If it is granted, Tibetans can willingly accept to be part of China.

Claude: Do you see any role for India? India had a treaty agreement with Tibet signed at the Simla Convention in 1914 and ratified in 1947/48. What role do you see for India in solving the dispute with China?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: India has a very important role. Even without looking at the legal aspect: the Treaty between India and Tibet and the historical relations, even in today’s situation, India is the most appropriate country which should plead with China for negotiations with His Holiness. Tibetan refugees are in India, His Holiness is in India and India has a [border] dispute with Chi na because of Tibet. Otherwise India has no border with China. If the Tibetan issue is solved, the Sino-Indian relationship can be stabilized and improved and the border issue can be resolved. Many things can be done and India would benefit in her trade relations with Tibet as she used before 1959. Therefore India should come forward and take the leading role [in the negotiations] between China and His Holiness.

Claude: Recently the Chinese’s propaganda linked Kashmir, Sinkiang and Tibet. How would you respond to this propaganda?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: They tried to take advantage of the American problem. The US were looking for support to oppose terrorism. At that time, China told the Americans that they should help China to fight terrorism in Tibet and Xinjiang. This is quite obviously an unacceptable proposition. In Xinjiang, there has been a kind of armed resistance, but it has been sporadic. As far as Tibet is concerned, there is no violent resistance for the past 36 years. Everybody knows this. China also clubbed Taiwan as a terrorist state; China tried to make ‘separatism’ and ‘terrorism’, synonyms. This has not been accepted by anyone. After a few days, China has stopped repeating this argument; they must have realized that it is not a good propaganda.

Claude: You are one of the most well known proponents of nonviolence in India? Do you think that non-violence can solve all problems?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: Yes! I think that non-violence can solve allproblems provided that people really believe i n it and practice it properly. Many people today see non-violence as a better alternative. I do not agree to that. Non-violence is not an alternative, it is the only way. There is no other alternative, all the violent ways can seemingly solve the problems in a temporary manner, but it cannot eradicate the root cause of problems. The root cause of problems is hatred. Today, all the problems come out of hatred. This element can never been eliminated by violence. If there is fire, we have to find something opposite to the nature of fire to extinguish it. If in order to extinguish fire, you put more fuel or more oxygen, it will never stop the fire; it will increase the fire. Maybe for some time, the fire will subside but it will rise again. People think that terrorism is terrible, of course, terrorism is terrible, the incident which took place on September 11, in Washington and New York, is a very very bad action and whomever has committed it should be condemned with full force. At the same time, to take revenge is not good. If anybody wants to take revenge, the proper way is to react with compassion and in a non-violent manner. That way alone the root cause which makes people terrorists, could be eradicated. But they have very immaturely reacted with violence, with a lot of violence and then of course, this violence has created a lot of resentment and anger in the mind of many people. You cannot kill all the people; these people will try again to take revenge. As they are not able to fight with military force, they will commit again the same type of actions here or there. This type of terrorist acts can never come to an end by reacting to it through violence. India has been experiencing it for more than twenty years, in the Punjab, in Nagaland and now in the Kashmir. They have always tried to suppress it by force, through military or police action, but it has never subsided.

Claude: According to you they cannot be a ‘just’ violence?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: No, violence cannot be just. But defined in a different way, to cause injury or pain to other people, may not be necessarily be violence. For example, if a person is killed for the benefit of the killed person, for the real benefit of the killed person. In this case, although there is an act of killing, it is not considered as an act of violence.

Claude: Is it similar to the story when during one of his previous incarnations the Buddha killed a robber in a boat when the robber was going to make the boat sink and kill 500 people?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: Yes, Yes. He killed one of the robbers to save people lives and also to save that person to commit a crime and for that the Bodhisattva sacrificed himself for the sake of the robber. This kind of act is an exception. It is not considered as a violent act, but it is very difficult because the mature compassionate people are difficult to find these days. Otherwise, harming others, with the intention of harming others, out of anger or out of revenge, out of hatred, cannot be justified. How can it be justified?

Claude: You do not believe in self-defense?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: No, I do not believe in self-defense. Of course, there can be different ways of self-defense: you can run away, you can hide. These are acceptable self-defense. But fighting back is not acceptable.

Claude: In the past Buddhist monks like Bodhidharma went to China and practiced martial arts in self-defense?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: In these arts, you try to avoid the blows and also you do not try to kill the killer. This is the basic beauty of the martial arts. You put somebody unconscious for some time, but the practitioner of martial arts never kills the person.

Claude: What about a case like Kargil when a state like India is attacked. I believe that Mahatma Gandhi when he was told that the raiders were invading India in October 1947, said India should be defended by force.

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: I did not find that kind of statement in Gandhi’s works, but I heard this quotation earlier. However, Gandhi said that if he had to choose between cowardliness and violence, he would choose violence. I do not think that Gandhi approved or even appreciated the military actions in Kashmir. I cannot say definitively, but it is my doubt. I do not think that Gandhi could have put it that way. If Gandhi had been asked, he might have said to resort to a nonviolent
defense or satyagraha or taken his followers to the Kashmir border. I do not think that he was approached by anyone at that time. Anyway, he had nothing to do with the government at that moment. Even if Gandhi had said that Kashmir should be defended militarily, his intention might have been different. During the World War II, Gandhi was less mature at that time, he contributed to the war fund. It appears to me that Gandhi did not oppose the World War II. I therefore conclude that Gandhi’s knowledge of non-violence had not completely matured. He was in a stage of learning and in the later stages, he never recommended violence or thought that violence can be justified.

Claude: India has a long tradition of a separate group of people [the Kshatriyas] defending the Dharma. Do you have something similar in Buddhism?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: No, we have no similar tradition. Defense of the Dharma can only be done through dharmic practices. What is Dharma? Dharma is Agama [the Canon] and Adigama [the
Understanding of Canon]. The recitation and understanding of Canon can never be threatened by outside force. Similarly it cannot be protected by force or weapon.

Claude: Do you consider that the destruction of the great viharas by the Muslim invaders and the disappearance of Buddhism in India in the 10/12th century AD is due to the fact that Buddhism was not practiced as it should have been?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: That is right!

Claude: You mentioned about Indian freedom struggle and the fact that non-violence succeeded in throwing the British out of India, but the British were gentlemen, it is not the case of the Chinese
who can be ruthless.

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: Of course the situation is entirely different, British are law-abiding people, they follow the rule of law, they believe in democracy and they care for public opinion. Even if they have to do something unjust, they would do it through apparently just means. They would not kill anyone without a proper trial. The state might influence the judge to give a favorable judgment, it is another matter, but they go through a legal process. Population-wise, the British were very few in India. In this case it was easier for Gandhi to use nonviolent means. It would be entirely different in Tibet or in China for that matter. China does not believe in the rule of law, China does not believe in public opinion, human rights, etc. They can crush anything which may come in their way. But the question is the priority and the power of non-violence. If you are non-violent, you are really genuine and your compassionate mind is pure and matured, which means not contaminated by any impure things. Then the non-violent action should be effective in any situation. One cannot consider non-violence in terms of getting more effective with gentle and weak opponents, and less effective with ruthless opponents. If non-violence action methods have really a value and stand, then it should be equal with every opponent. The opponent is not the determining factor. The purity and genuineness of the non-violent action is the determining factor. This is my view.

Claude: Now, about the future of Tibet. You have written a very beautiful booklet about the future of Tibet. You write that you would like Tibet to be a very special society, based on Buddhist precept where for example there will be no circulation of money. Could tell us a few words about your vision of future Tibet?

Ven. Samdhong Rinpoche: The future society that I looking forward to is a non-violent society. To make a non-violent society, the economic system should be entirely different. If there a consumerist economic system, the society cannot be non-violent. I look forward to a nonviolent
society in which the education system and the economic system need to be entirely different from the one existing in the rest of the world. If we could have that, then a non-violent society could be established.

Claude: Thank you very much, Prof Samdhong Rinpoche!