One of the most well-regarded people in the world, His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama, came under fire this month for a brief clip in which he was seen kissing a child on the mouth and then asking the child to suck his tongue. The incident took place at a public gathering in Dharamsala in February. A longer video revealed that the child’s mother was on stage as well, and that the child had requested the Tibetan political and spiritual leader for a hug before the rest unfolded. To many, the larger context rectified the shock of the original clip that went viral.

            The Dalai Lama’s office has formally apologised for the incident, as is correct. The leader’s famously playful nature was highlighted, and his personal regret was expressed.

            However, other defenders of the actions and words caught on camera in February initially faltered by either referencing only the Tibetan greeting of touching foreheads but not the gestures that had caused consternation, or else by claiming that critique would destabilize the movement for Tibetan liberation. Then, less obfuscating and somewhat illuminating responses came to light. A social media post attributed to journalist Tenzin Pema talks about the phrase “nge che le jip”, which translates to “suck my tongue”, and the practice of “po” or lip-kissing – aspects of Tibetan elder-child bonds that do not have sexual connotations.

            But even if these customs were widely-known, which they were not, their grafting onto other mores is highly problematic. They pertain to the bodily autonomy of children. Intentionality is trumped by action in such scenarios. The extremely well-travelled Dalai Lama should have known this.

            It is healthy for cultures to evolve harmful aspects out of themselves. I’m not saying these practices are harmful, although they look that way to my foreign sensibility. That’s for people, especially young people, within the culture to decide. Individually or collectively.

            It’s true that people of an advanced age sometimes display bad manners because of the deterioration of the mind and the body. The faux pas can even be forgiven on this basis, but a prerequisite of this basis is acknowledgement of the leader’s essential fallibility as a human being. His history of important work shouldn’t be a blanket exoneration. He regrets the incident, but others keep defending it.

For some, this incident completely tarnishes the leader, and they have a right to that opinion. Personally, I’m not in favour of entirely cancelling the Dalai Lama over this. While I found the initial clip despicable I do understand that what happened was a bit different than portrayed.

However, to let the event slide can give rise to impunity for other quarters. When someone with the kind of influence that the Dalai Lama has is categorically excused in this manner, others will continue to be too. Age, affectionate disposition, cultural nuances, body of work and so on will continue to be used to conceal, rationalize or even allow abuse at large. These justifications have always been used against survivors. When it comes to children, we have to be especially careful about what we consider widely acceptable, for it can be used extremely damagingly – in secret.

An edited version appeared in The New Indian Express in April 2023. “The Venus Flytrap” appears in Chennai’s City Express supplement.