"On the issue of 14th Dalai Lama's statement of being a 'Son of India', I've discussed several rounds with him and his heelers," the article said.
Prior to this, an article pulbished on Feb. 19 unveiled the fact that Dalai Lama had "ceded" southern part of Tibet to India.
On March 9, the Dalai Lama, who could no more turn a blind ear to critics, held a high-profile press conferrence in grandiosity in India and "produced three reasons for being son of India".
"I had patiently pointed out that all the three reasons were groundless," Yi Duo quoted his March 31 article as saying. "It was not so easy for the Dalai Lama to prove such a sonship, he had to give sufficient reasons."
Afterwards, the spokesman of the Dalai Lama's government-in-exile came to argue for him. Another overseas person named Chen was bold enough to argue that "son of India" could not be understood as "child of India". Chen defended that a son was a son, but a child was a child; as a matter of fact, it's true that the Dalai Lama is "son of India" and could not be denied for whatever reason on earth.
However, after Yi Duo's article titled "New Argument for the Dalai Lama's Claim as 'son of India' "was published, despite Mr. Chen's silence, the spokesman, secretary of the Dalai Lama's exiled government and overseas activists shouted curses in concert. In order not to disappoint them, Yi Duo would like to add some given that they were already exhausted in thoughts.
For their convenience, Yi Duo wanted to give them a nickname accoridng to their logic. Since the Dalai Lama called himself "son of India" as he worships Buddhism originated from India, those who worship him would in turn be called "grandsons of India". And Yi Duo bet they would be wild with joy for this new title.
Yi Duo read carefully the articles written by "grandsons of India". To his delight, the "grandsons" were willing to debate on this topic and their articles were long enough to show that they had taken pains to finish them.
It's a pity that these "grandsons" didn't make much progress in their writing. Taking their reasons for being "son of India" for example, they defended again and again but the listed reasons were the same three reasons given by the Dalai Lama with nothing new. They were the same as the Dalai Lama's arguments: "Buddhist knowledge was originated from India", and "the idea of non-violence was derived from Indian culture".
Yi Duo has long before pointed out that the national identity held by followers of the world's religions, including Buddhism, has no connection with which country or region this religion dates back to.
In the same way, the valuable idea and culture of human beings are shared among various nations and ethnic groups to different degrees. The national identity of the followers has nothing to do with the original country or ethnic group.
Taking Buddhism for example, there are many followers in the People's Republic of China (PRC), Japan, South Korea, Burma and Thailand etc. Except for the Dalai Lama, who else would admit that he is "son of India"?
In the Western world, there are numerous Christian followers, none of whom thinks he is son of ancient Pakistan, headstream of Christianity. The Dalai Lama has met the US presidents for many times. If he had praised the president as "son of Pakistan", the Dalai Lama would have been deemed as insane even if the president didn't criticize him in his presence.
Therefore, the smart "son of India" has not dared to address the American presidents this way so far.
The "grandsons of India" were quite dissatisfied that Yi Duo pointed out the fact that no Indian responded positively to the Dalai Lama, "son of India". On the contrary, they felt disrespected.
They specially quoted some reports to show India had admitted the Dalai Lama was "son of India", such as the report of "Voice of Tibet in Norway" that Indian scholars and philanthropists met personnel of "Tibetan government-in-exile" on April 29th as well as the report that Indian officials attended the ceremony hosted by the Dalai Lama clique to express gratitude to Himachal Pradesh while inciting a long talk of an Indian.
However, although Yi Duo read the quotations word by word, he did not find any sentence implying that these Indians admitted him as "son of India" or "son of Himachal Pradesh" except that these words were full of praises.
If one wants to be a son of someone, the precondition is that the former is willing and the latter claims him; it doesn't work if only one side agrees. The first precondition has been met, but with regard to the second, the Dalai Lama has to strive for it.
A "grandson of India" snuffed at the writer's comment on the Dalai Lama's accompanying Indians for a cricket match, saying: “It's amusing to see how childish the Chinese can be, even about his attending an IPL match in Dharamsala, where he has lived for 50 years now. But he deliberately "ignored" the core of the issue: the writer is not blaming the Dalai Lama for watching a match, not to mention that it is a kind of filial piety for a son to accompany his daddy for a match; the kernel of the writer's comment lays on the timing that it was just the fourth day after the earthquake ravaged Yushu of China's Qinghai Province on April 14th when on April 18th the Dalai Lama buoyantly and gaily accepted Indians' invitation for the India's Premier League cricket game.
One should know that April 18th was not even beyond the soul releasing "first seven days" according to the Buddhist rules, and just one day before on April 17th the Dalai Lama had publicly told reporters that he was "deeply sorry" for the disastrous earthquake in Yushu. What's more, just months ago on February 14th, the Dalai Lama made his Tibetan new year's speech telling the Tibetans both home and abroad: "Tibetans in many areas at home think it is a time to yearn sufferings, so it is inappropriate to hold any celebration of the New Year like before."
It is obvious that, in the eyes of the Dalai Lama, none of the feelings of Tibetan siblings could ever overweigh the significance of licking his Indian daddy's booth. Isn't it the office secretary of "the Administration in Exile" who proudly announced that “the Dalai Lama does not need to kiss the ground to win the Indians"? But from the outrageous trading out of the ancestors' "south Tibet" to unscrupulously waggling for a cricket game, every single issue is "son of India's "convicted ass-kick punishment toward the naive "grandsons of India".
It is probably that the "grandson of India" who is now the office secretary of "the Administration in Exile" feels their exculpation and attacks are so sluggish and floppy that he finally, perhaps directed by someone else, takes out his trump, outrageously cursing "it is more villainous to attack the master than to kill a thousand people. You will play to hard luck and achieve nothing if you abuse the master. What's worse, your family will be broken up and you will die without descendents."
In fact, anyone who would like to go back through the articles of the writer will not find any abuse towards the Dalai Lama. The writer just quotes the original remarks of the Dalai Lama and put down several sentences of comments. But comparatively, the curses of "grandson of India" are absolutely going too far away from the Buddhist spirit, quite like what's coming out from wizardries or witcheries instead.
Thinking of this, the writers easily recalls a large-scale ill-willed prayer ritual held by the local government of Tibet at the Lubu Square of Lhasa in 1949: a gang of wizard and witches set up a bronze boiler which is 3 meters in diameter and 2 meters in depth; when the oil and water boils, they began to dance, giving curses while throwing a straw man into the boiler; then all people around clapped hands and heralded victory.
As is known to all, the curses did not hedge the peaceful liberation of Tibetan people at all. And now, "grandsons of India" has only the method of cursing left without even an oil boiler, and the effects of their tricks will naturally be heavily discounted. On the contrary, "grandsons of India" might have to stop and think: During the past decades you live far away from your native land, your families dispersed, while you slavishly depend on others for a living, even to the extent of ending up with begging to be sons or grandsons of another country, isn't it a kind of "karma" for your betrayal of your own country and your own nation?
Now the Dalai Lama is in a difficult dilemma on the discussions of his claim as "son of India". If he stops doing so, it will show all of Yi Duo's criticism towards him was right--a shame on him; if he continues to do so, it will exaggerate this topic and result in putting him in a even more awkward situation.
As a matter of fact, this topic is a shameful one for the Dalai Lama. Yi Duo has pointed out a path for him out of mercy advocated in Buddhism that he should admit honestly that he is wrong and puts an end to his misconduct.
However, if he wants to continue in the battle, Yi Duo will be more than happy to keep him company. But Yi Duo is afraid the Dalai Lama himself would be the one who is defamed to the greatest extent.
At this moment, another document drew Yi Duo's attention that on June 7, the Dalai Lama boasted in the Kashimir area that as he had "close ties" with India, he called himself "Peace Ambassador of India". It is so ridiculous to hear this when his previous claim as "son of India" has not been approved. Obviously, it is not easy for him to change!