CNN网站热议美国学者对达赖喇嘛的批评
他是首位就藏人自焚这一敏感问题批评达赖喇嘛的西方学者。
我们看看CNN网页上读者最初的反应（留言太多，只录了最初的一些留言，网址如下http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/12/my-take-dalai-lama-should-condemn-tibetan-self-immolations/comment-page-5/#comments）：
BG
I would like to if the Tibetans who killed themselves this way are monks or ordinary Tibetans.
Why? What difference would it make? Is an act of protest any less significant because a monk did it, or any more significant because an 'ordinary' (read, atheist?) did it?
July 12, 2012 at 4:31 pm
owen
TO BG:
To those who died,it's no difference because life is the same.
But because of their background, yes, it matters.
Monks used to be the upper class under Dalai la ma rule. They are under the same roof with Da lai.
They protest to maintain their interest. Ordinary people who used to suffer much,they are more comparatively content about their current life. That's the difference,
July 12, 2012 at 9:09 pm
BG
@ owen
"Monks used to be the upper class under Dalai la ma rule. They are under the same roof with Da lai."
But who are they trying to impress? Not the Dalai Lama, but rather the international community, the vast majority of which has no idea as to the hierarchical relationships of this culture. What the international community recognizes is that Tibetans are self-immolating in protest. So, really, owen, your first statement is more accurate:
" ... it's no difference because life is the same."
Whether you're one of the dead, or a casual observer of the international news.
July 12, 2012 at 9:52 pm
Phil
Prothero, go back to school. All your articles lack reality. I don't know what world you are living in.
July 12, 2012 at 3:39 pm
Richard
Say this to the Chinese government not Dalai Lama...
July 12, 2012 at 3:34 pm
Sam
Instead of asking what drove them to self immolate. Prothero asks, "So where are the protests against these Tibetan protesters?" Am I on Chinese government propaganda website or CNN?
July 12, 2012 at 3:32 pm |
James
What on earth is this author talking about?
He asks, "So where are the protests against these Tibetan protesters?". Is he serious? Foundation of his argument is completely wrong. Instead of saying, why are they protesting, he asks the complete opposite. If you need the answer to your flawed question, here you go; there is not only protest against the Tibetan protesters in Tibet but these protesters are beaten, shot to death, tortured to death, life imprisonment, etc. by the Chinese communist government.
I am extremely said that CNN has this ignorant author as their "regular contributor". He needs to know more before writing a completely flawed article. This is as bad as CNN getting the Health Care Bill wrong.
July 12, 2012 at 3:03 pm |
China News Service 中国新闻社
The only difference is that we print his commentaries with the comic strips on Sundays, and CNN publishes him on weekdays.
Please enjoy Mr. Prothero's work. We pay him pretty well.
July 12, 2012 at 3:26 pm |
ME II
@Stephen Prothero,
The ethics of your argument seem questionable. While i can see a justification for the Dalai Lama being somewhat responsible for the immolations, but only in light of him being a de-facto leader of the Buddhist monks themselves, which I don't think you asserted, but not as the spiritual leader of the Tibetans.
Just because his words might reduce the incidents of self-immolation does not make him responsible for the incidents that do occur. As.signing responsibility for someone else's actions to a person simply because they are spiritually respected seems weak at best.
In addition, as.signing responsibility as an accomplice to secondary suicides is just ridiculous in my mind. Not only would that require him to be responsible for what is a personal choice of the first suicide but also the choice of the second suicide. By that logic, the responsibility via ramifications would never end. This seems to me to be equivalent to the vendettas of old; a never-ending chain of responsibility. Would he also be responsible for the broken leg of the bicyclist who wreaked because he was distracted by the flames burning the monk in question?
In addition, comparing an action taken by a protesting individual to an action that directly harms others, e.g. homicide bombers, is just wrong, by the weak analogy fallacy.
And sati was a cultural expectation upon the widows, as I understand it, not a personal decision and again not equivalent.
I think the question / statement you want to be making is "Self-immolation is not an ethical method of protest." By virtue of the secondary suicides you mentioned this may be valid.
July 12, 2012 at 3:02 pm |
Ngawang Yonten
Wow, its really pity that someone can blindly write on such important and political subject like Tibetan Self Immolation like playing some sort of chess game.
When Stephen blames Dalai Lama for not speaking against Self Immolation by which he can stop such Self immolation, blogger is only concern of aftermath of such tragic protest, where his critical thinking went wrong by not going into the roots of such Self immolation. To solve every problem, it is very important to find and make right of its root causes. In Tibetan self immolation cases, the root causes are the repressive policies adopted by the Chinese CCP in Tibet. Merely pumping multi-million dollar into Tibet will not win the hear and mind of Tibetans, they need to understand Tibetan way of life, culture and above all Buddhism and return of Dalai Lama.
July 12, 2012 at 12:44 pm |
China News Service 中国新闻社
Stephen Prothero is also a regular contributor to our publications, where we have found him to be a most useful idio – ... ah, most perceptive journalist. Stephen's next assignment will be to analyze the social and theological merits of our complete ownership of the entire South China Sea.
July 12, 2012 at 3:17 pm |
Shira
I am baffled by the apparent equivalence drawn here (in the article and comments) between killing oneself to make a political point and killing others - widows or innocent bystanders - for religious or political reasons. Clearly, self-sacrifice can be effective, as the Vietnamese and Tunisian examples show. If an individual wishes to sacrifice him- or herself to make the world better, I think that is within his or her rights.
I suggest that Prof. Prothero would like it if he didn't have to keep hearing about the suffering of the Tibetan people. In fact, the self-immolations do far more to keep the issue alive in the world media than do the words and life-example of His Holiness. Painful as the constant reminder is, it is not lacking in purpose. We should support the right of Tibetan people to choose how to live and whether and how to give their lives.
July 12, 2012 at 11:41 am |
The events in the history only proved that...an atheist founded, emulated and inspired (Mao's) regime are needed to be wipe out upon the face of the earth than Christianiy (Catholic) and Islam (Arab Nations) and any other organization, group or government
"When the Vietnamese monk Thich Quang Duc immolated himself in Saigon in 1963 to protest the persecution of Buddhists by the South Vietnamese government of Ngo Dinh Diem, the world took notice. Malcolm Browne’s photograph of the monk becoming a martyr won the Pulitzer Prize, and Diem's Roman Catholic regime fell before the year’s end."
And...
"And so it goes with self-immolations. The suicide by fire of Tunisian street vendor Mohamed Bouazizi is widely seen as a key catalyst of the Tunisian revolution and the wider Arab Spring. Less well known is the fact that over a hundred Tunisians later set themselves on fire in copycat incidents."
Both of them worked.
Meanwhile...
"Today, Tibet is witnessing an epidemic of self-immolations. In fact, since March 16, 2011, more than 40 Tibetans have followed Thich Quang Duc’s lead, setting themselves on fire to protest the Chinese occupation" of Tibet.
Obviously, they didn't work.
I would highly recommend that immolating China would be a better option. And if..US, UN, NATO and their superpowers allies in the world join forces for this common goal, it could be done in justa blink of an eye.
July 12, 2012 at 11:18 am |
Huebert
So your answer is to massacre over 1.5 billion civilians. How christian of you.
July 12, 2012 at 11:23 am |
china's primitive obsession of creating a dragon empire is making them a huge threat for world's peace
"So your answer is to massacre over 1.5 billion civilians. How christian of you."
Yes huebert, before china makes it double.
July 12, 2012 at 4:54 pm |
评论
发表评论