this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2025

128 points (97.1% liked)

Not The Onion

18900 readers

1895 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

Links to news stories from...
...credible sources, with...
...their original headlines, that...
...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

kescusay@lemmy.world

128

Panchen Lama says reincarnation must follow Chinese laws, be endorsed by Beijing (www.scmp.com)

submitted 15 hours ago by FTonsilStones@programming.dev to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world

24 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Second-highest figure in Tibetan Buddhism makes apparent reference to succession of exiled spiritual leader Dalai Lama

top 24 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] aarch0x40@piefed.social 92 points 15 hours ago

This has been expected since the abduction of the real Panchen Lama

[–] Redacted@lemmy.zip 43 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Hes only saying that because he was kidnapped and brainwashed

[–] aMockTie@piefed.world 40 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

Archive link.

This apparently isn't even the "real" Panchen Lama, but is the one chosen by China to replace the one that was kidnapped and was chosen by the Dalai Lama.

[+] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -10 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

This apparently isn’t even the “real” Panchen Lama

Sort of the joke of religious doctrine. These people aren't actually reincarnated Buddhist Wizards who can magically divine the destiny of their successors.

This Panchen Lama is as much "real" as the current Dalai Lama is "real".

These are humans, they can be educated and influenced as easily as anyone, and their politics/religion is a consequence of their upbringing rather than some magical pre-birth spiritual intuition. And they can also grow up, realize their position in the world, and regret their decisions in hindsight.

In 1999, the Dalai Lama suggested that the CIA Tibetan program had been harmful to Tibet because it primarily served American interests, claiming "once the American policy toward China changed, they stopped their help ... The Americans had a different agenda from the Tibetans."

Gyalo Thondup, the Dalai Lama's elder brother, also expressed frustration with the role of the CIA in Tibetan affairs. In a 2009 interview, he stated "I never asked for CIA military assistance. I asked for political help. I wanted to publicize the Tibet situation, to make a little noise. The Americans promised to help make Tibet an independent country. All those promises were broken." He continues, claiming that America "didn't want to help Tibet. It just wanted to make trouble for China. It had no far-sighted policy for Tibet. I wasn't trained for this (clandestine operations). We didn't know about power politics."

During the Tibetan program's period of activity, some of its largest contributions to the CIA's interests in the region came in the form of keeping the Chinese occupied with resistance, never actually producing a mass uprising establishing independence for Tibet from Beijing. The program also produced a trove of army documents that Tibetan insurgents seized from the Chinese and turned over to the CIA in 1961 in what has been referred to as "one of the greatest intelligence successes of the Cold War".

[–] aMockTie@piefed.world 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I don't follow religious doctrine either, but as long as the adherents aren't acting in ways that are harmful to others, I personally try not to insult or belittle them or their beliefs.

The information regarding the CIA is interesting though. The fact that the US reneged on their promises and only used Tibet to extract information about China is depressing, but not surprising.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

as the adherents aren’t acting in ways that are harmful to others

The Buddhist successors to the Mongolian/Qing Dynasty were plenty harmful to others. That's what sparked the student revolts responsible for their leadership's removal.

You can blame the icky yicky communists for polarizing and galvanizing upwardly mobile tibetan youth into an insurgency. But falling back on CIA agitprop to justify what was effectively a US military operation intended to destabilize a border region isn't proof of your humanitarianism. Even the Dalai Lama himself regrets letting the CIA militarize Tibet.

The fact that the US reneged on their promises and only used Tibet to extract information about China is depressing, but not surprising.

It's the story of the Cold War told over and over again. The goal of these operations is to spark civil war, not to liberate or liberalize any population.

[–] aMockTie@piefed.world 1 points 3 hours ago

The Buddhist successors to the Mongolian/Qing Dynasty were plenty harmful to others. That's what sparked the student revolts responsible for their leadership's removal.

It's my understanding that those harms were political and not religious in nature.

You can blame the icky yicky communists

Why the disparaging adjectives? I feel like I'm missing the point.

falling back on CIA agitprop to justify what was effectively a US military operation intended to destabilize a border region isn't proof of your humanitarianism. Even the Dalai Lama himself regrets letting the CIA militarize Tibet.

I don't think there is any justification. It was selfish and self serving from the beginning. If the CIA had followed through on their promises, that would be a different story. But they clearly never intended to do so.

It's the story of the Cold War told over and over again. The goal of these operations is to spark civil war, not to liberate or liberalize any population.

Amen.

[+] theuniqueone@lemmy.dbzer0.com -16 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Look no matter how you feel about the China and i dislike their government as well the "kidnapped" person was according to them relocated and allowed to live a regular life and there is something to be said to not allow a six year old to be forced to a religious figure forced to abide by among other things vows of celibacy.

[–] aMockTie@piefed.world 6 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Forcibly relocating a child away from their parents is the literal definition of kidnapping. Whether or not he ended up having a good life afterwards does not change that fact.

[–] theuniqueone@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

His parents were relocated with him.

[–] aMockTie@piefed.world 6 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Thank you for the clarification, I see that now. What I also see from further research is that he and his family were taken by force and have not been seen publicly since. Whether or not that would be technically considered kidnapping or abduction feels like splitting hairs.

[–] theuniqueone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

I never said it wasn't kidnapping or wasn't wrong i just think there is nuance if he is really living as an ordinary citizen because i don't support forcing a six year old to become a religious figure, disallowed friends or any semblance of a normal childhood and forced to take lifelong vows of poverty and chastity which is what the Pachen Lama would do even if they gain political and religious power by doing so despite supporting religious freedom i don't think allowing that is part of it when it involves a child.

[–] 0x0@infosec.pub 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

There is no proof of life except word from xinnie the poo that the child is alive, they refuse to allow any external orgs to verify if it is true.

[–] aMockTie@piefed.world 1 points 3 hours ago

Sure, that's a reasonable opinion, but that also clearly wasn't the purpose behind his abduction. Without any evidence, it's impossible to say whether or not he is actually living, as an ordinary citizen or otherwise. I'm not trying to say that there isn't any nuance in the situation, but without knowing with certainty his ultimate fate and also living in his shoes, it's impossible to say which path would be preferable.

In your first reply, you put kidnapping in quotes and made it sound exclusively beneficial. Then in your follow up, you undercut my definition of kidnapping (and to be clear, you were technically correct). I interpreted all of that as a refutation of the idea that he was kidnapped. I apologize if I misunderstood at any point.

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 6 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

No matter how silly you think someone else's religion is, you don't get to dictate what others believe or how they get to believe. China has effectively made a religion functionally extinct with their actions. No matter how you slice it, it's a loss for humanity.

[–] theuniqueone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 hours ago

Did i say any of that I'm far from a china fan but respecting someone's religion is different than supporting a six year old being turned into a religious figure disallowed a childhood and forced to take lifelong vows of poverty and chastity which is what the Pachen Lama is forced to do.

[–] AceFuzzLord@lemmy.zip 32 points 12 hours ago

You know it's a fake Panchen Lama because they're saying the next Dalai Lama must adhere to what an atheist government that was responsible for annexing and taking over their land has to say.

[–] devolution@lemmy.world 31 points 15 hours ago

This is incredibly stupid.

[–] Someonelol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 13 hours ago

So a reincarnation based religious system that spans countless realities, creatures, and millennia is somehow beholden to this reality's 76 year old country led by a dictator? Makes sense.

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 20 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

Why would the rules of reincarnations be subject to any laws of man? How is it that Beijing could possibly exert control over metaphysical powers? To suggest so, proves the speaker does not believe in reincarnation and should be ignored on the subject, no?

No authority greater than Xi Xing Ping is absolute authoritarianism.

[–] brezel@piefed.social 4 points 14 hours ago

this is not suspicious at all.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago

collapsed inline media