Author Topic: Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'  (Read 11281 times)

WisdomBeing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2096
    • Add me to your facebook!
Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'
« on: September 20, 2012, 06:46:38 PM »
I thought I would like to share this article though it does not really fit into General Buddhism or Dorje Shugden, so allow me some leeway here on topics (perhaps the admin of this site would like to start a ‘general’ board which covers other topics!). Anyway, I thought this was interesting because:

  • Why would the Dalai Lama need to emphasise that Lobsang Sangay is the political leader as opposed to Chief of Cabinet? Are they not the same?

  • Why does the Cabinet place so much importance on the Dalai Lama’s guidance on this issue? Especially as the Dalai Lama has retired from politics. Shouldn’t the cabinet be able to decide on its own?

Perhaps this is why the Cabinet will never be able to be independent of the Dalai Lama – whatever name or title they wish to give their political head, because the spiritual head, the Dalai Lama, will always dictate their political direction?

Ergo, the ban will never be lifted by the political cabinet until the Central Tibetan Administration grows up and makes its own decisions.



Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'
http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?article=Tibetan+Parliament+changes+'Kalon+Tripa'+to+'Sikyong'&id=32159
Phayul[Thursday, September 20, 2012 15:55]

DHARAMSHALA, September 20: The Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile today unanimously adopted a resolution to change the official title of the head of the Dharamshala based Central Tibetan Administration from “Kalon Tripa” to “Sikyong.”

Kalon Tripa, in English has been referred to as ‘Chief of Cabinet’ while the new title, Sikyong, translates to ‘Political Leader.’

However, the title ‘Kalon’ for the remaining members of the Kashag (Cabinet) will continue to remain same.

The Charter amendment bill number 39 was introduced by Kalon Dhongchung Ngodup of the Security Department, who read out from a recent speech given by Tibetan spiritual leader His Holiness the Dalai Lama in Italy on his preference for the use of the title ‘Sikyong.’

He revealed on the floor of the house that strong sentiments for the title ‘Sikyong’ have also been expressed and shared by Tibetans inside Tibet.

Last year, during the public inauguration of the democratically elected leader of the Tibetan people, Dr Lobsang Sangay, the Dalai Lama had used the term Sikyong in his congratulatory speech.

“I took over the political leadership of Tibet from Sikyong Tagdrag Rinpoche when I was 16-years old. Today, in the 21st century, when democracy is thriving, I hand over the political leadership of Tibet to Sikyong Lobsang Sangay,” the Dalai Lama had said.

During the ensuing debate in the parliament, few lawmakers expressed concerns over the title change, inquiring whether or not it would invite unwanted repercussions and pressure on the existing Tibetan exile administration. Reservations were also raised on whether the title change would effect a departure from the present administrative role of the head of the cabinet.

However, a large majority of the Tibetan parliamentarians and Kalons, who took part in the debate and supported the Charter amendment bill, prominently cited from His Holiness’ speeches.

Discussions on the political, diplomatic, administrative, and historical need and repercussions of the title change remained minimal.

Few of the speakers also made strong requests to their colleagues in the house not to obstruct the bill and clear the path for its unanimous adoption considering it to be the Dalai Lama’s guidance.

The Charter amendment bill number 39 was unanimously adopted in the afternoon session on the 7th day of the ongoing 4th sitting of the 15th TPiE.

Speaker Penpa Tsering in his address thanked the parliamentarians for their cooperation and support in the unanimous adoption of the resolution and guided the Kashag to table all needed amendments in the Charter of the Tibetans-in-Exile following the title change.
Kate Walker - a wannabe wisdom Being

vajratruth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 706
Re: Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'
« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2012, 01:06:51 PM »
His Holiness The Dalai Lama knows that the Tibetan Government in exile, now embodied in the CTA is unable to command a presence amongst world governments except by patronage of the Dalai Lama. Most people see the Tibetan cause as being represented by the Dalai Lama in person and not the CTA.

Even in the eyes of Tibetans, the role of the Kalon Tripa is not so much to lead the nation but to execute the instructions of the Dalai Lama. And therefore there is a need to build legitimacy into the role of the Prime Ministership as a political leader now so that the CTA does not become completely redundant when HHDL eventually passes away. This is especially important knowing that China will likely to claim the right to recognize the next Dalai Lama now that it is in possession of the Golden Urn. Drawing lots from the golden urn is an important final step in the confirmation of the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama, established by the Qing Emperor and followed ever since.

Traditionally to Tibetans, there is no separation between politics and religion and before the Chinese invasion, Tibet was a theocracy. Even when a new constitution was drafted three years after HHDL fled Tibet, there was complete subordination to the Dalai Lama in all important areas. The idea of making decisions independent of the Dalai Lama or indeed a lama is something new to Tibetans. The previous Kapon Tripa was Samdhong Rinpoche, also a lama.

Lobsang Samgay is not only the first Prime Minister who is not a monk, but also the only Kalon Tripa who has never step foot in Tibet. While his position as Kalon Tripa, empowers him on paper to lead the cabinet, he has many obstacles and steep tradition to overcome. With so much against him, I wonder why he was HHDL's choice of candidate.

A sign that Sikyong Lobsang Sangay is finally really in charge and leading the Tibetans into a new future would be his removal of the Dorje Shugden ban. That would symbolize his coming out of the Dalai Lama's shadows. It appears HHDL does want him to be the true leader and perhaps he should take the cue.

Ensapa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4124
    • Email
Re: Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'
« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2012, 03:20:54 PM »
For me, the whole downgrading thing just does not stop. They have to keep changing names and roles just to keep up with the times and represent something. The Kalon Tripa is supposed to be the supreme secular head of state, and that is understood by everyone but why is it that a name change is required? is it to mark a change of role from the Dalai Lama's minister to the people's minister? If it is then sikyong should really do something to exercise his power: Lifting the Dorje Shugden ban on a secular level and preventing people from discriminating against Dorje Shugden practitioners and things like that. If he cannot do that, then the change of title is useless. its just changing a name and nothing else. Everyone knows that names are useless, its just a label and nothing more at the end of the day. It is actions that matter of the person holding that particular role that matters, and their actions. The Katri can call himself sikyong now, but if he still has to walk behind the Dalai Lama's shadow, then what is the use of changing the name? I feel that it is pretty useless that he still has to ride behind the Dalai Lama's robes.

The sikyong or whatever should really improve Dharamsala and its infrastructure and remove the ban. That is the only way that a sikyong can establish himself.

yontenjamyang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 733
    • Email
Re: Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'
« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2012, 08:20:05 AM »
To me this represent a shift of the ex Kalon Tripa's role from Chief of Cabinet to the "peoples" political leader. It is an attempt by the CTA to refocus the role of their head as a political rather then a cabinet role. By all accounts the role is the same role, the same person and help by the same team I suppose; but this rebranding is to denote that the head of the CTA now represent the people rather then the government.

Further, since the Sikyong now represent the people, we have to ask whether the people includes Shugden practitioners. I am sure the people includes Bonpos, Christian and Muslim. But does the people includes Shugden practitioners? If not, then however one can address the head of the CTA as , it does not really matter. If yes, then the Sikyong should immediately ease the suffering and the disparaging of the Shugden practitioners and lift the ban.

Anyway, this is a step in the right direction as it "further" away from the Dalai Lama. Sorry to say this. Perhaps, the lifting of the ban is coming?

Big Uncle

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1995
Re: Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'
« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2012, 09:07:47 PM »
Hmmm... When I first read about this, I was like... What difference does that make? Well, I kinda changed my mind because I think it has an impact on people's perception about the Tibetan government in exile.

Perhaps, it is a reminder from the Dalai Lama that the power lies in their hands and they should wield it. I dunno. I just feel that it is  not as simple as just a name change. I don't mean it is anything mystical, I think it is some kind of message from the Dalai Lama to his ministers. Perhaps, it is a reminder to forge ahead politically and formulate their own policies.

DharmaDefender

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 988
Re: Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'
« Reply #5 on: September 26, 2012, 03:55:16 PM »
Sounds like a dilution of power to me. And yeah, what difference does it make? Just another instance of the Tibetan government wanting to look like their progressive, but refusing to let go of the past. So much attachment to the way things were...do the old generation of Tibetans really believe that if they return to Tibet, that things will return to the way they were? 50 years is a long time, and clearly from the Chinese pictures many things have changed.

Anyway, didnt Buddha teach that attachment causes suffering? ;D

Ensapa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4124
    • Email
Re: Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'
« Reply #6 on: September 26, 2012, 05:32:55 PM »
Hmmm... When I first read about this, I was like... What difference does that make? Well, I kinda changed my mind because I think it has an impact on people's perception about the Tibetan government in exile.

Perhaps, it is a reminder from the Dalai Lama that the power lies in their hands and they should wield it. I dunno. I just feel that it is  not as simple as just a name change. I don't mean it is anything mystical, I think it is some kind of message from the Dalai Lama to his ministers. Perhaps, it is a reminder to forge ahead politically and formulate their own policies.

It dosent make a difference because sikyong or kalon tripa, both still will misuse HHDL's name to achieve their ends and to "test" their influence and power over the people. How I see it is that they are not interested for the people's welfare but they only want power and influence. As long as they misuse HHDL's name they are not really leaders of their community or country, but merely clowns who use HHDL's name and power to control the people. If they can do something like lift the ban, which should not really be implemented on a secular basis in the first place, then yes, they are a true government and not just a bunch of clowns with nice names and a nice title. But they cant. I am waiting for the day where the sikyong declares that it is illegal to give death threats to Dorje Shugden practitioners or discriminate them in any way. That will be the mark of a real sikyong.

till then, they can keep changing their names, but nothing will happen.

Amitabha

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 85
    • Email
Re: Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'
« Reply #7 on: September 27, 2012, 06:09:39 AM »
 :-*
DL was skilfull into marking a deeper impression of assisting a smoother handing over of its democratic supervision over to CTA political control through the proposed change of 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'. This also left with deeper and far reaching impression from all walks of life including foreign dignitary etc on the change. In DL democratic leadership from his vast experience as Dharma supremacy in vajra tradition, his "entourage" is liken to cabinet led but the chief on democratic movement beyond materialism and political spectrum. Political leadership is representing on the secular aspect and more self central motivated along the line of its country, party and/or political interest.  8)

DharmaDefender

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 988
Re: Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'
« Reply #8 on: September 28, 2012, 01:22:35 PM »
It dosent make a difference because sikyong or kalon tripa, both still will misuse HHDL's name to achieve their ends and to "test" their influence and power over the people. How I see it is that they are not interested for the people's welfare but they only want power and influence. As long as they misuse HHDL's name they are not really leaders of their community or country, but merely clowns who use HHDL's name and power to control the people. If they can do something like lift the ban, which should not really be implemented on a secular basis in the first place, then yes, they are a true government and not just a bunch of clowns with nice names and a nice title. But they cant. I am waiting for the day where the sikyong declares that it is illegal to give death threats to Dorje Shugden practitioners or discriminate them in any way. That will be the mark of a real sikyong.

till then, they can keep changing their names, but nothing will happen.

Yes the mark of a real Sikyong is someone who protects ALL of his people, and not just a select group, regardless of their belief.

You bring up a good point Ensapa. Its the same story with Western governments though, shuffling around the people and dropping them in different roles but essentially keeping the same faces. Nothing is going to change as long as the core is dominated by a group of old fogies.

To bring about real, long-lasting change, you HAVE to purge out the old, and bring in the new because no matter how progressive Dr Lobsang is touted to be, he will never be able to outmatch and outweigh the influence of the older generation of Tibetan government officials.

In an ideal world, yeah the government would logically think that to cement their influence, they could remove the ban. But I feel there are a few reasons why they cannot do this...

Im aware that within the 50 stanzas of guru devotion, theres a verse that says if your guru instructs you to do something and you cannot comply, you can explain in polite words why you cannot do so. So why havent the govt explained why they cannot comply?

  • I guess you can never think to challenge someones opinion, when youve been brought up to never even THINK of challenging their opinion
  • why challenge the establishment... and be the only casualty? Its a case of diffusion of responsibility, and living in fear of losing your power, isnt it?
  • in fact, challenging the status quo can only lead to two things IF its not the ENTIRE government calling for the change: (a) if its just a few people calling for change, then those few would be vilified by the Tibetan population for going against the Dalai Lama (b) those few would be vilified by the other members of the government for going against the establishment

At the end of the day, no matter what anyone insists, the simple truth is this - the Dalai Lama is still in power and until he (unfortunately) passes into clear light, everything the government wants to do can be vetoed by him.

Therefore I think the best strategy actually, is to bombard the CTA with so much logic that we begin to sow the seeds of discord in their minds. Nothing sinister. My thinking comes from Inception. Theres a particular line in the movie that I like, about how an idea is like a virus - once it takes root, it spreads like wildfire and its extremely difficult to be rid of.

Well, lets sow the idea in the government officials minds. They might not speak out loud now what they really think, but when the right conditions are present in the future, perhaps they will because its bothering them so much, it becomes impossible to ignore.

Ensapa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4124
    • Email
Re: Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'
« Reply #9 on: September 28, 2012, 03:12:16 PM »
Yes the mark of a real Sikyong is someone who protects ALL of his people, and not just a select group, regardless of their belief.

You bring up a good point Ensapa. Its the same story with Western governments though, shuffling around the people and dropping them in different roles but essentially keeping the same faces. Nothing is going to change as long as the core is dominated by a group of old fogies.

To bring about real, long-lasting change, you HAVE to purge out the old, and bring in the new because no matter how progressive Dr Lobsang is touted to be, he will never be able to outmatch and outweigh the influence of the older generation of Tibetan government officials.
It is funny and ironic that the old Tibetan ministers who are famous for being corrupt and backward are being allowed to still be in office. in a real democratic parliament, non performing ministers are fired from office and when a new prime minister takes office, the old ones are asked to retire, or they retire voluntarily as they know their time is up and it is time for the next generation to take over.

In an ideal world, yeah the government would logically think that to cement their influence, they could remove the ban. But I feel there are a few reasons why they cannot do this...

Im aware that within the 50 stanzas of guru devotion, theres a verse that says if your guru instructs you to do something and you cannot comply, you can explain in polite words why you cannot do so. So why havent the govt explained why they cannot comply?
Or maybe, they just lack the courage and logic to think to actually read between the Dalai Lama's lines and to actually do the right thing of focusing on the Dharma as opposed to trying to please the Dalai Lama on the surface, perhaps things might get better for them. But I dont think that will happen anytime soon because all they care about is themselves, and not even for the Tibetans.
  • I guess you can never think to challenge someones opinion, when youve been brought up to never even THINK of challenging their opinion
  • why challenge the establishment... and be the only casualty? Its a case of diffusion of responsibility, and living in fear of losing your power, isnt it?
  • in fact, challenging the status quo can only lead to two things IF its not the ENTIRE government calling for the change: (a) if its just a few people calling for change, then those few would be vilified by the Tibetan population for going against the Dalai Lama (b) those few would be vilified by the other members of the government for going against the establishment

At the end of the day, no matter what anyone insists, the simple truth is this - the Dalai Lama is still in power and until he (unfortunately) passes into clear light, everything the government wants to do can be vetoed by him.

Therefore I think the best strategy actually, is to bombard the CTA with so much logic that we begin to sow the seeds of discord in their minds. Nothing sinister. My thinking comes from Inception. Theres a particular line in the movie that I like, about how an idea is like a virus - once it takes root, it spreads like wildfire and its extremely difficult to be rid of.

Well, lets sow the idea in the government officials minds. They might not speak out loud now what they really think, but when the right conditions are present in the future, perhaps they will because its bothering them so much, it becomes impossible to ignore.
I dont think the older generation of ministers would actually change but the incoming generation would do better. The older generation of ministers is showing impermanence as they age, and the more smarter younger generation is coming in. The younger generation will think a lot and we should really target them.

In any case, no matter how many times they change their name, they will still be what they are. So why change? to show people?

thaimonk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 652
Re: Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'
« Reply #10 on: October 07, 2012, 09:58:18 PM »
Kalon Tripa, Sikyong, Prime Minister, and so on whatever Lobsang Sangye's new name is or new position/title is will make no difference. Since he has taken office and now the hype is over, what is he doing? Where is he? What is he up to? No word, no news and no difference at all.

Huge hype about Dalai Lama handing over power to a lay person. What power does Lobsang Sangye have? None.

Tibetan Govt will be ruled by Dalai Lama and no one else. Simple as that.

icy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1491
Re: Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'
« Reply #11 on: October 17, 2012, 11:49:12 PM »
I agree with you Thaimonk.  Kalon Tripa or Sikyong or whatever they wish to call the Tibetan Prime Minister is just a figure head/puppet.  Sikyong cannot make any decision without consultation to the Dalai Lama.  All directives and policy-making are issued by the Dalai Lama and Sikyong has no muscles to flex.  Lobsang Sangye has no initiative.  Sikyong is only a facade for his shadowy moves.  I wonder how long more he will last unless he realises this himself and take a big step forward.

samayakeeper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 398
    • Email
Re: Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'
« Reply #12 on: October 21, 2012, 07:43:19 AM »
Kalon Tripa, Sikyong, Tibetan Government in Exile, Central Tibetan Admistration...whatever. These are are just but labels. Labels that people name. But the people behind these labels are almost the same - puppets and cronies. It's like playing a game, switching from one name to another, trying to confuse the public.

Does the name make the man or the man makes the name?

brian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 503
    • Email
Re: Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'
« Reply #13 on: October 21, 2012, 10:09:53 AM »
No matter what happens and whoever be the prime minister, one would never underestimate the influence power The 14th Dalai Lama have in CTA. In the eyes of public, Dalai Lama is the reincarnation of Cenrezig and it is understandable the CTA government or ministers will always be listening to Dalai Lama's words or advices. As such it is as good as to say the current prime minister is actually a muppet for the "self proclaimed retired from polictical scene and only concentrates in spiritual matters" influential leader of Tibet. One would never doubt when they refer Tibet, first thing that comes into mind would be The Dalai Lama. His influence is too strong and it is hard for anyone to fill in his post unless Dalai Lama passes on (eventually).

thor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1431
Re: Tibetan Parliament changes 'Kalon Tripa' to 'Sikyong'
« Reply #14 on: October 21, 2012, 06:31:02 PM »
To me, there are two ways to read this interesting development. One is that the Dalai Lama wants people to identify the Kalon Tripa ... oops, I mean sikyong, with political authority. So that people stop thinking of the Dalai Lama as the puppeteer behind the throne. To imbue with more aura of authority perhaps.

The other possibility is to indicate that the Sikyong only has power over political affairs, thus the lifting of the ban will be beyond him, as that is a spiritual affair after all.

But wait a minute.

If the purpose of the name change is to give more political power to the sikyong, why was it the Dalai Lama who made the decision then? And why is the Dalai Lama quoted in the fight to make this change? And, if the purpose of the name change is to remove the authority of the sikyong over spiritual affairs like the ban, does it mean that the sikyong can allow Shugden practitioners back into stores, hospitals, schools and such? Doesn't it????