一
2006 年，達賴喇嘛在印度舉行時輪金剛灌頂法會，他在會上批評當今藏人喜好皮草的虛華作風不僅庸俗，而且有違佛教義理。幾天之後，西藏各地就有人紛紛公開焚燒價 格高昂的豹皮外衣狐狸帽子。當地官員大為震怒，認為這是以「達賴喇嘛為首的藏獨分子的精心運作」，然後下令藏人要重新穿上皮衣，因為它們證明了黨的德政使 大家過上了好日子，甚至以穿不穿戴皮草來檢證大家的「政治覺悟」（關於這次事件的詳情，可以參見西藏作家唯色的《看不見的西藏》）。
這樁近乎鬧劇的事件可以說明兩個問題：一是北京為何在國際民間外交的戰場上佔不去達蘭薩拉的上風，二是流亡在外的達賴喇嘛為什麼在藏人心目中仍然享有如此巨大的影響力。
先談第一點。現在恐怕沒有任何一個國家膽敢得罪中國，承認西藏流亡政府的地位。但是在民間社會的層面上，情形就完全不同了。對大部分西方人而言，達賴喇嘛 甚至可能是位比現任教宗本篤十六世還要受歡迎的宗教領袖。達賴喇嘛極少談及本篤十六世關心的墮胎和「性氾濫」等很容易被人批為保守的議題，他的主題一直是 和平、寬容、理解和慈悲，所以就算不能贏得所有人的支持，至少也沒有多少人會對他有惡感。
為什麼每次西藏出事，每次有藏獨的集會遊行，我們都會看見一大群演員、名流、作家和知識分子站出來支持他們？相反地，支持中國政府的「國際友人」這時都到 哪裏去了呢？對很多人來說，達賴喇嘛代表了一套美善而完整的價值觀，他對西藏的種種訴求則符合了當今人權觀念的整個論述。再赤裸點說，大家會覺得聲援達賴 喇嘛是為了「義」，給中國面子反對分裂則是為了「利」。
再也沒有比06 年「皮草事件」更好的例子了。達賴喇嘛的主張不只出自慈悲，更與流行的動物權益運動若合符節，國際進步青年聞之莫不稱善。反過來看，西藏地方官員竟然為了 抵制達賴喇嘛的影響，不惜違反世界潮流和保護野生動物的國家方針，要求藏民重新披上動物的皮毛。其間高下實不可以道里計。
In 2006, the Dalai Lama gave the Kalachakra initiation in India. On this buddhist mass, he criticized today's Tibetian's fondness for fur for being not only vulgar, but also against the moral principles of Buddhism. A few days later, people around Tibet started to openly burn their expensive leopard fur coats and fox fur hats. Local officials were furious, and regarded this as “a meticulously planned operation of the Tibetan seperationists headed by the Dalai Lama”, and then ordered Tibetans to put their fur coats back on again, because they wanted to show that the Communist party’s benevolent leadership gave the Tibetans good living standards. They even used whether the person wore fur or not as a proof of the person’s “political consciousness” (details regarding this incident can be found in the Tibetan author Wei Se’s “The Unseen Tibet” ).
This near farce-like incident can illustrate two problems: First, why Beijing cannot have the upperhand of Dharamsala at international non-governmental diplomacy. Second, why the Dalai Lama in exile still enjoys such enormous influence in the hearts of the Tibetan people.
Let’s talk about the first problem first. There is probably no country in the world that would dare to offend China and recognize the position of the Tibetan government in exile. But the situation is completely different at a non-governmental level. For most Westerners, the Dalai Lama is probably even more popular and likeable than the current Pope Benedict XVI as a religious leader. The Dalai Lama rarely talked about issues such as abortion and sexual promiscuity, which Benedict XVI is concerned about. These issues can easily be criticized for being conservative. His subjects have always been peace, tolerance, understanding and compassion. Even if these may not win the support of everyone, at least they keep people from disliking him.
Why is it that every time Tibet has a mishap or when there is a public meeting or demonstration for Tibetan independence, we always see a large group of actors, celebrities, writers and intellectuals standing up to support them? On the contrary, where are the “international friends” of the Chinese government? For many people, the Dalai Lama represents an integrated value of beauty and goodness. His various demands for Tibet are consistent with the entire discussion on contemporary human right concepts. To express this more frankly, people feel that supporting the Dalai Lama is for “justice”, while showing respect to China’s anti-separation is for “benefits”.
There is no better example than the 2006 “fur incident”. The stands of the Dalai Lama do not only come from compassion, but is also consistent with the popular animal rights movement. When the international young activists hear this, they all say that it is “righteous”. Conversely, Tibet officials actually risked going against international trend and the national policy of wildlife protection just to resist influence from the Dalai Lama and urged Tibetans to put animal fur back on again. 其間高下實不可以道里計。
