This review of David Michie's book 'The Dalai Lama's Cat' was really long over due. I read it over two weeks ago but put off writing about it not only because I was travelling a fair bit but also because I was pretty torn up about how I felt about it. I didn't have a clear opinion; I didn't love it but neither did I hate it. So, what follows are really some of my reactions to the book.
Using the perspective of a cat was really clever. I may be getting my philosophies mixed up but I think cats are seen as evolved beings in Zen and Tibetan Buddhism. HHC / Snow Lion embodies this rather well by offering us incisive observations about human nature (or herself; sometimes the two overlap), and her hilarious struggles with the more earthy aspects of the (cat/human) body. And this is precisely why using a cat is so clever: I don't think using a human voice would have been as effective in conveying this constant struggle between our higher and lower selves. Any practitioner of spirituality will tell you that it is not big events that are tough to handle but the every day uncertainties; the choice between walking the unexplored path, and submitting to our conditioning over many lives and lifetimes. The anecdotes to highlight these problems of human nature smacked a bit of 'stories with a lesson' bottled in new-age psychotherapy jargon.
And this is what I really struggled with while reading the book. The alacrity with which the author constantly wants to teach us spiritual lessons either through the Dalai Lama or his acolytes is a bit heavy handed, and begins to really grate toward the end. The anecdote involving the interaction between the Indian man from the telephone company and the Dalai Lama's translator is quite pat to the point of being formulaic: An emotional upheaval + calming presence + astute psycho analysis = epiphany + problem solved. I would have liked to see more resistance. How and why do these individuals accept the pearls of wisdom so swiftly? Where is the all-knowing ego that resists all overtures of higher teaching? Stories from Zen Buddhism (and even Indian spirituality) are replete with characters that defy their masters and question their teachings. That seems more natural to me. It is how most disciples would behave, and would eventually connect the dots of teachings that their masters have laid out. HHC's experience of slumming it outside the monastery when it is being painted is my favorite for that very reason. The struggle is quite real in that one. She does not want to accept her circumstances, and when she does -- albeit reluctantly -- wisdom is gained. Not only that, it also opens her up to new ways of experiencing love and friendship.
Besides the structure of the stories, the other troubling bit was the philosophy over certain matters. This is obviously a more personal reaction than an intellectual response to the content. The Dalai Lama's justification of the consumption of meat to meet human deficiencies does not really sit well. It gives humanity the power to decide the fate of beings whose emotional intelligence comes close to our own. Science has made progress enough to render the consumption of meat for nutritional purposes rather unnecessary. This explanation would be acceptable if it weren't for the sheer amount of time and pages that the author dedicates to the description of food. Is the food being consumed to fortify the body or to satiate cravings? It left me feeling a little conflicted because on the one hand this is a philosophy that shuns violence of any kind and on the other we have the spiritual leader of one of its sects justifying its necessity.
The stress on generosity is just as confusing. The Dalai Lama is quoted as saying something to the effect of "current success comes from a past generosity." Doesn't the very act of charity imply that one expect nothing in return? And if one knows that today's charity will reap rewards in the future, how is that act altruistic? Even if the rewards are not articulated as clearly as "future success," an unconscious expectation of it remains. Doesn't that negate generosity?
Having read a wide range of books on spirituality, I find this one lacking in depth. I think it is a good starting point but it only scratches the surface of what a new initiate has to face as she begins her spiritual journey. Humorous and astute in places, it's lack of direction left me reaching for Osho's laser sharp talks.
Using the perspective of a cat was really clever. I may be getting my philosophies mixed up but I think cats are seen as evolved beings in Zen and Tibetan Buddhism. HHC / Snow Lion embodies this rather well by offering us incisive observations about human nature (or herself; sometimes the two overlap), and her hilarious struggles with the more earthy aspects of the (cat/human) body. And this is precisely why using a cat is so clever: I don't think using a human voice would have been as effective in conveying this constant struggle between our higher and lower selves. Any practitioner of spirituality will tell you that it is not big events that are tough to handle but the every day uncertainties; the choice between walking the unexplored path, and submitting to our conditioning over many lives and lifetimes. The anecdotes to highlight these problems of human nature smacked a bit of 'stories with a lesson' bottled in new-age psychotherapy jargon.
And this is what I really struggled with while reading the book. The alacrity with which the author constantly wants to teach us spiritual lessons either through the Dalai Lama or his acolytes is a bit heavy handed, and begins to really grate toward the end. The anecdote involving the interaction between the Indian man from the telephone company and the Dalai Lama's translator is quite pat to the point of being formulaic: An emotional upheaval + calming presence + astute psycho analysis = epiphany + problem solved. I would have liked to see more resistance. How and why do these individuals accept the pearls of wisdom so swiftly? Where is the all-knowing ego that resists all overtures of higher teaching? Stories from Zen Buddhism (and even Indian spirituality) are replete with characters that defy their masters and question their teachings. That seems more natural to me. It is how most disciples would behave, and would eventually connect the dots of teachings that their masters have laid out. HHC's experience of slumming it outside the monastery when it is being painted is my favorite for that very reason. The struggle is quite real in that one. She does not want to accept her circumstances, and when she does -- albeit reluctantly -- wisdom is gained. Not only that, it also opens her up to new ways of experiencing love and friendship.
Besides the structure of the stories, the other troubling bit was the philosophy over certain matters. This is obviously a more personal reaction than an intellectual response to the content. The Dalai Lama's justification of the consumption of meat to meet human deficiencies does not really sit well. It gives humanity the power to decide the fate of beings whose emotional intelligence comes close to our own. Science has made progress enough to render the consumption of meat for nutritional purposes rather unnecessary. This explanation would be acceptable if it weren't for the sheer amount of time and pages that the author dedicates to the description of food. Is the food being consumed to fortify the body or to satiate cravings? It left me feeling a little conflicted because on the one hand this is a philosophy that shuns violence of any kind and on the other we have the spiritual leader of one of its sects justifying its necessity.
The stress on generosity is just as confusing. The Dalai Lama is quoted as saying something to the effect of "current success comes from a past generosity." Doesn't the very act of charity imply that one expect nothing in return? And if one knows that today's charity will reap rewards in the future, how is that act altruistic? Even if the rewards are not articulated as clearly as "future success," an unconscious expectation of it remains. Doesn't that negate generosity?
Having read a wide range of books on spirituality, I find this one lacking in depth. I think it is a good starting point but it only scratches the surface of what a new initiate has to face as she begins her spiritual journey. Humorous and astute in places, it's lack of direction left me reaching for Osho's laser sharp talks.