Why the Dalai Lama's reincarnation is up for debate

The Dalai Lama is important, so important that he might decide not to come back after his next death.

  • Tibetan monks from all over the world are scheduled to visit India to discuss the issues related to the next reincarnation of the Dalai Lama.
  • Some, including the Dalai Lama himself, have questioned if the institution should be continued.
  • The final decision will have far reaching effects, since China is unlikely to let the monks have the last word on the matter.

The world's most famous Buddhist, the Dalai Lama, is 83 years old. Questions about his next reincarnation are uncomfortably pressing. However, a planned meeting of Tibetan Monks in India, initially slated for this week, may change the future of the position and Tibetan Buddhism forever by agreeing to not have him come back at all.

Why would they do a thing like that?

The Dalai Lama is not only the spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhism but also historically the leader of the Tibetan state. Given the precarious situation in Tibet, most observers maintain it was invaded by China in 1950 and remains under brutal military occupation, the question of who comes next and how that is determined is extremely important for the Tibetan people, the Chinese government, and Tibetan Buddhists all over the world.

The stage has been set for a legitimacy crisis following the death of the current Dalai Lama by the Chinese government, who really don't like the Dalai Lama and have gone to great lengths to reduce his influence. Two years ago, they blockaded Mongolia after they allowed him to visit. His image is banned in Tibet, and they have called him a "wolf in monk's clothing" to leave no doubt as to how they feel about him.

The most serious problem was created in 1995 when the second holiest Lama in Tibetan Buddhism, the Panchen Lama, was identified by the Dalai Lama and then arrested by the Chinese government, who declared their own Panchen Lama to replace the six-year-old prisoner. Since the Panchen Lama helps to pick the next Dalai Lama, to control one is to nearly assure control of the other.

In any case, China has already declared its right to pick the next Dalai Lama and requires all high-ranking Lamas to have a permit to reincarnate and will undoubtedly choose their own Lama while announcing the one the Tibetans choose is a pretender who didn't fill out the paperwork. This isn't without precedent, as the Qing Dynasty often intervened in the process of finding the next Dalai Lama during the 1700s.

Given the importance of the Dalai Lama to the Tibetan people and the Tibetan Government in Exile, it is understandable why they might want to take steps to assure that the next one isn't a puppet and is chosen in a way that is theologically satisfying.

How can the Tibetans do that? How does any of this work?

The Dalai Lama you know, Tenzin Gyatso, is the 14th Dalai Lama. He is part of a line of spiritual leaders going back 700 years. Each Dalai Lama is maintained to be the living incarnation of Avalokiteśvara, a Buddhist saint of compassion, who continuously returns to Earth to live a life of service to the Tibetan people. As an enlightened soul, they are not required to reincarnate but chooses to in order to help reduce human suffering. Such beings are called Bodhisattvas and are highly respected in many branches of Buddhism.

The basic details on how the next Dalai Lama is found are well known. After his death, high ranking monks, clergymen, and the Panchen Lama gather for a series of rituals and meditation. These events often take place at holy locations in Tibet. Using the information on where to look they collect from these practices and clues given to them by the sacred sites, they set out to find the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama.

When they think they've found him, the holy men subject the child to a series of tests, including having him try to identify which personal items placed in front of him were owned by his previous incarnation, to determine if they got it right. If they did, the new Dalai Lama is enthroned shortly afterward.

As the reincarnation of a Bodhisattva, the Dalai Lama is assumed to have some control over the details of their reincarnations. He could also choose to not select rebirth as a child but to incarnate in an already living person. Tenzin Gyatso has also said he might come back as a woman and has assured he would probably be born in India the next time around; if there is a next time.

What would they do instead?

One thing the monks will consider is if they should alter some of the ritual involved in finding the next Dalai Lama, since getting unrestricted access to the holy sites in Tibet is unlikely. They could just decide to change the rituals so that they don't need the Panchen Lama or specific locations in Tibet to find the next reincarnation successfully.

They are also open to more radical options, however. One proposal that has been making the rounds is that the system of reincarnation should be replaced with one of nomination. The Dalai Lama himself endorsed the idea in an interview with Nikkei. Saying "one elder, truly popular and respected, can be chosen as Dalai Lama. I think sooner or later, we should start that kind of practice."

He has also suggested that he might not come back at all as the institution is getting old. He once told the BBC:

There is no guarantee that some stupid Dalai Lama won't come next, who will disgrace himself or herself....That would be very sad. So, much better that a centuries-old tradition should cease at the time of a quite popular Dalai Lama.

If he decides to come back, the Dalai Lama will have plenty of issues to deal with right out of the gate. The question of how and if he should be the one to deal with them must be settled now. While few of the ideas above are pleasant ones, they may be the only things that can maintain the spiritual independence of Tibetan Buddhism.

Big Think
Sponsored by Lumina Foundation

Upvote/downvote each of the videos below!

As you vote, keep in mind that we are looking for a winner with the most engaging social venture pitch - an idea you would want to invest in.

Keep reading Show less

Essential financial life skills for 21st-century Americans

Having these financial life skills can help you navigate challenging economic environments.

Photo by Jp Valery on Unsplash
Personal Growth
  • Americans are swimming in increasingly higher amounts of debt, even the upper middle class.
  • For many, this burden can be alleviated by becoming familiar with some straightforward financial concepts.
  • Here's some essential financial life skills needed to ensure your economic wellbeing.
Keep reading Show less

Scientists create a "lifelike" material that has metabolism and can self-reproduce

An innovation may lead to lifelike evolving machines.

Shogo Hamada/Cornell University
Surprising Science
  • Scientists at Cornell University devise a material with 3 key traits of life.
  • The goal for the researchers is not to create life but lifelike machines.
  • The researchers were able to program metabolism into the material's DNA.
Keep reading Show less

New fossils suggest human ancestors evolved in Europe, not Africa

Experts argue the jaws of an ancient European ape reveal a key human ancestor.

Surprising Science
  • The jaw bones of an 8-million-year-old ape were discovered at Nikiti, Greece, in the '90s.
  • Researchers speculate it could be a previously unknown species and one of humanity's earliest evolutionary ancestors.
  • These fossils may change how we view the evolution of our species.

Homo sapiens have been on earth for 200,000 years — give or take a few ten-thousand-year stretches. Much of that time is shrouded in the fog of prehistory. What we do know has been pieced together by deciphering the fossil record through the principles of evolutionary theory. Yet new discoveries contain the potential to refashion that knowledge and lead scientists to new, previously unconsidered conclusions.

A set of 8-million-year-old teeth may have done just that. Researchers recently inspected the upper and lower jaw of an ancient European ape. Their conclusions suggest that humanity's forebearers may have arisen in Europe before migrating to Africa, potentially upending a scientific consensus that has stood since Darwin's day.

Rethinking humanity's origin story

The frontispiece of Thomas Huxley's Evidence as to Man's Place in Nature (1863) sketched by natural history artist Benjamin Waterhouse Hawkins. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

As reported in New Scientist, the 8- to 9-million-year-old hominin jaw bones were found at Nikiti, northern Greece, in the '90s. Scientists originally pegged the chompers as belonging to a member of Ouranopithecus, an genus of extinct Eurasian ape.

David Begun, an anthropologist at the University of Toronto, and his team recently reexamined the jaw bones. They argue that the original identification was incorrect. Based on the fossil's hominin-like canines and premolar roots, they identify that the ape belongs to a previously unknown proto-hominin.

The researchers hypothesize that these proto-hominins were the evolutionary ancestors of another European great ape Graecopithecus, which the same team tentatively identified as an early hominin in 2017. Graecopithecus lived in south-east Europe 7.2 million years ago. If the premise is correct, these hominins would have migrated to Africa 7 million years ago, after undergoing much of their evolutionary development in Europe.

Begun points out that south-east Europe was once occupied by the ancestors of animals like the giraffe and rhino, too. "It's widely agreed that this was the found fauna of most of what we see in Africa today," he told New Scientists. "If the antelopes and giraffes could get into Africa 7 million years ago, why not the apes?"

He recently outlined this idea at a conference of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists.

It's worth noting that Begun has made similar hypotheses before. Writing for the Journal of Human Evolution in 2002, Begun and Elmar Heizmann of the Natural history Museum of Stuttgart discussed a great ape fossil found in Germany that they argued could be the ancestor (broadly speaking) of all living great apes and humans.

"Found in Germany 20 years ago, this specimen is about 16.5 million years old, some 1.5 million years older than similar species from East Africa," Begun said in a statement then. "It suggests that the great ape and human lineage first appeared in Eurasia and not Africa."

Migrating out of Africa

In the Descent of Man, Charles Darwin proposed that hominins descended out of Africa. Considering the relatively few fossils available at the time, it is a testament to Darwin's astuteness that his hypothesis remains the leading theory.

Since Darwin's time, we have unearthed many more fossils and discovered new evidence in genetics. As such, our African-origin story has undergone many updates and revisions since 1871. Today, it has splintered into two theories: the "out of Africa" theory and the "multi-regional" theory.

The out of Africa theory suggests that the cradle of all humanity was Africa. Homo sapiens evolved exclusively and recently on that continent. At some point in prehistory, our ancestors migrated from Africa to Eurasia and replaced other subspecies of the genus Homo, such as Neanderthals. This is the dominant theory among scientists, and current evidence seems to support it best — though, say that in some circles and be prepared for a late-night debate that goes well past last call.

The multi-regional theory suggests that humans evolved in parallel across various regions. According to this model, the hominins Homo erectus left Africa to settle across Eurasia and (maybe) Australia. These disparate populations eventually evolved into modern humans thanks to a helping dollop of gene flow.

Of course, there are the broad strokes of very nuanced models, and we're leaving a lot of discussion out. There is, for example, a debate as to whether African Homo erectus fossils should be considered alongside Asian ones or should be labeled as a different subspecies, Homo ergaster.

Proponents of the out-of-Africa model aren't sure whether non-African humans descended from a single migration out of Africa or at least two major waves of migration followed by a lot of interbreeding.

Did we head east or south of Eden?

Not all anthropologists agree with Begun and his team's conclusions. As noted by New Scientist, it is possible that the Nikiti ape is not related to hominins at all. It may have evolved similar features independently, developing teeth to eat similar foods or chew in a similar manner as early hominins.

Ultimately, Nikiti ape alone doesn't offer enough evidence to upend the out of Africa model, which is supported by a more robust fossil record and DNA evidence. But additional evidence may be uncovered to lend further credence to Begun's hypothesis or lead us to yet unconsidered ideas about humanity's evolution.