I think it’s a misconception to assume that pacifism is an essential part of Tibetan Buddhism. That seems to be a Western misconception, based on wishful thinking about what the Westerners want to see as an attractive alternative to Christianity, unsullied by any contact with real Buddhists. The government of Tibet kept real, and was not afraid to use, an army from the time the lamas began to rule that country until they lost it to the Red Chinese in 1950.

(I’m sure the response of the Western Buddhist wannabees would be that the government of Tibet wasn’t practicing “true” Buddhism, but that’s a bit like saying that the popes haven’t been practicing “true” Christianity. Come to think of it, I’ve heard people say that too. There are some people you just can’t argue with.)

I don’t know that pacifism is an essential part of Tibetan Buddhism. But pacifism or non-violence would certainly seem to characterize the teachings of the best known Tibetan Buddhists including the Dalai Lama, and of Buddhists generally. The Buddhist belief that there is no self, but only a sequence of mental experiences, and therefore no necessary conflict between different selves, would seem to lend itself to pacifism. By contrast, Western Christianity, with its strong sense of moral dichotomies, would seem to be more naturally warlike.

The entire Catholic Magisterium seems to have gone left of AL Gore with exception of abortion. Most of them like Sodano and Martino support socialism via the UN. The Pope is a liberal. Do we need further evidence? I state this as someone who questions the reasons for the Iraq war. The last thing we needed was platitudes. Overall I guess I would have excepted a stricter stance of pacifism from the Dalai Lama.

The fact that the Dalai Lama’s country is occupied by a brutal communist tyranny may have sharpened his mind. The Vatican and most of the Roman Catholic leadership have become the enemies of Western civilisation and propagandists for U.N global rule.