Articles by alphabetic order
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
 Ā Ī Ñ Ś Ū Ö Ō
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0


Difference between revisions of "Digitalizing tibet A Critical Buddhist Reconditioning of Hjarvard’s Mediatization Theory"

From Tibetan Buddhist Encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
Line 8: Line 8:
  
  
Na svato nāpi parato na dvābhyāṃ nāpy ahetutaḥ utpannā jātu vidyante bhāvāḥ kvacana kecana.1
+
[[Na]] svato nāpi parato na dvābhyāṃ nāpy ahetutaḥ utpannā jātu vidyante bhāvāḥ kvacana kecana.1
  
  
  
On 7 July 2014, on day two of the Preliminary Teachings of the 33rd Kalachakra, we observed his Holiness the Dalai lama read from the 2nd century Indian Buddhist philosopher, Nagarjuna’s Precious  
+
On 7 July 2014, on day two of the Preliminary Teachings of the 33rd [[Kalachakra]], we observed his Holiness the [[Dalai lama]] read from the 2nd century [[Indian Buddhist]] [[philosopher]], [[Nagarjuna’s]] [[Precious Garland]] ([[Ratnāvalī]]) and [[Letter to a Friend]] ([[Suhṛllekha]]). We were participating in the 33rd [[Kalachakra]] {{Wiki|ceremony}}, which was an [[esoteric]] [[Tantric empowerment]] centered on the [[Kālachakra]] [[Tantra]], held in leh, {{Wiki|ladakh}}, [[India]], between 3 and 14 July 2014, and led by the [[14th Dalai]] [[lama]], [[Tenzin Gyatso]]. The {{Wiki|immediacy}} of the [[Dalai lama’s]] {{Wiki|charisma}} was palpable. Ironically, however, what drew us three to this remote
 
   
 
   
Garland (Ratnāvalī) and Letter to a Friend (Suhṛllekha). We were participating in the 33rd Kalachakra ceremony, which was an esoteric Tantric empowerment centered on the Kālachakra Tantra, held in leh, ladakh, India, between 3 and 14 July 2014, and led by the 14th Dalai lama, Tenzin Gyatso. The immediacy of the Dalai lama’s charisma was palpable. Ironically, however, what drew us three to this remote
+
[[Himalayan]] location was that the {{Wiki|ceremony}} was being digitalized – tweeted, blogged, Facebooked and video-streamed over cyberspace and across the {{Wiki|globe}} (Figure 9.1). Moreover, we found that the digitalization of the [[Kalachakra]], and the [[Dalai lama’s]] {{Wiki|charisma}}, were not an afterthought, but had been calculated in advance and had been incorporated into the ceremony’s discussions, {{Wiki|community}} building and [[symbolism]]. For example, as the teachings began that day, the Dalia [[lama]] thanked “those who are here {{Wiki|physically}}, and those who are not.”2 Because of the assumption that [[Buddhism]] [[concentrates]] on a [[mindful]] [[awareness]] of the [[body]], digitalization might seem [[Wikipedia:Anti-life|antithetical]] to [[Wikipedia:Authenticity|authentic]] practice (Grieve 2017). As the oldest proselytizing [[religion]], however, [[Buddhism]] has always had a penchant for utilizing the latest developments (Grieve and Veidlinger 2016). One might assume, mutatis
 
   
 
   
Himalayan location was that the ceremony was being digitalized – tweeted, blogged, Facebooked and video-streamed over cyberspace and across the globe (Figure 9.1). Moreover, we found that the digitalization of the  Kalachakra, and the Dalai lama’s charisma, were not an afterthought, but had been calculated in advance and had been incorporated into the ceremony’s discussions, community building and symbolism. For example, as the teachings began that day, the Dalia lama thanked “those who are here physically, and those who are not.”2 Because of the assumption that Buddhism concentrates on a mindful awareness of the body, digitalization might seem antithetical to authentic practice (Grieve 2017). As the oldest proselytizing religion, however, Buddhism has always had a penchant for utilizing the latest developments (Grieve and Veidlinger 2016). One might assume, mutatis
+
mutandis, that the 2014 {{Wiki|ceremony}} was merely transmitting the same old analogue [[dharma]] in new digitized bottles. Does not all [[communication]], even the spoken [[word]], rely on [[physical]] vehicles that extend [[communication]] practices (cf. Grieve 2006, Krotz and Hepp 2011, 143, Sorokin 1947, 51–52)? History shows, however, that the [[Buddhist]] use of different media technologies is not a [[neutral]] [[transmission]] of content, but  
 
mutandis, that the 2014 ceremony was merely transmitting the same old analogue dharma in new digitized bottles. Does not all communication, even the spoken word, rely on physical vehicles that extend communication practices (cf. Grieve 2006, Krotz and Hepp 2011, 143, Sorokin 1947, 51–52)? History shows, however, that the Buddhist use of different media technologies is not a neutral transmission of content, but  
 
  
conditions how the teachings (dharma) are communicated (Grieve 2017, Grieve and Veidlinger 2016, Veidlinger 2006). For example, dharma screened on a television would not be received the same as read in a book, which in turn would not be the same as played in a video game (Campbell and Grieve 2014, 1–21, Grieve 2017). This is not simply the assertion that active media determine and penetrate passive religious messages (Goody 1986, Havelock 1986, cf. Innis 1951, Mcluhan 1964, Ong 1967, Postman 1985). We found that the Kalachakra and digital technologies mutually conditioned one another (Campbell 2010, Grieve 2006, Hoover 2006). In this chapter, to analyze the mutual conditioning of the Kalachakra and digital media technologies, we theorize the distinction between digitization and digitalization. What does the small grammatical difference of the al add to our analysis (Derrida 1988)? As opposed to analogue media, such as films and newspapers, which use a physical or chemical property to communicate, digital media consist of electronic, programmable bits (Grieve 2017, 217). Digitization refers to creating a digital copy of a physical phenomenon or an analogue object. For example, one can click on www.dalailama.com/teachings/kalachakra-initiations and see a digital image of the Dalai lama.3 Digitalization, on the other hand, is not the mere translation of the analogue into the digital but is furthermore the conditioning of social structures and practices through  
+
[[conditions]] how the teachings ([[dharma]]) are communicated (Grieve 2017, Grieve and Veidlinger 2016, Veidlinger 2006). For example, [[dharma]] screened on a television would not be received the same as read in a [[book]], which in turn would not be the same as played in a video game (Campbell and Grieve 2014, 1–21, Grieve 2017). This is not simply the [[assertion]] that active media determine and penetrate passive [[religious]] messages (Goody 1986, Havelock 1986, cf. Innis 1951, Mcluhan 1964, Ong 1967, Postman 1985). We found that the [[Kalachakra]] and digital technologies mutually [[conditioned]] one another (Campbell 2010, Grieve 2006, Hoover 2006). In this [[chapter]], to analyze the mutual {{Wiki|conditioning}} of the [[Kalachakra]] and digital media technologies, we theorize the {{Wiki|distinction}} between digitization and digitalization. What does the small {{Wiki|grammatical}} difference of the al add to our analysis ([[Derrida]] 1988)? As opposed to analogue media, such as films and newspapers, which use a [[physical]] or chemical property to {{Wiki|communicate}}, digital media consist of electronic, programmable bits (Grieve 2017, 217). Digitization refers to creating a digital copy of a [[physical phenomenon]] or an analogue [[object]]. For example, one can click on www.dalailama.com/teachings/kalachakra-initiations and see a digital image of the [[Dalai]] lama.3 Digitalization, on the other hand, is not the mere translation of the analogue into the digital but is furthermore the {{Wiki|conditioning}} of {{Wiki|social}} structures and practices through  
  
Figure 9.1  Geshe lobzang Samstan reviewing live broadcast at the HHDl media center in leh, ladak (photograph by Christopher Helland, July 2014).
+
Figure 9.1  [[Geshe]] [[lobzang]] Samstan reviewing live broadcast at the HHDl media center in leh, ladak (photograph by Christopher Helland, July 2014).
Digitalizing Tibet 141 the process of being digitized. Usually, digitalization is used to describe the disruption to economies by digital media (McChesney 2013, Weinelt 2016). We extend the term to also refer to other social fields, particularly religion. For example, in the 2014 ceremony, the placing of colored grains of sand by the Dalai lama to begin the construction of the  
+
Digitalizing [[Tibet]] 141 the process of being digitized. Usually, digitalization is used to describe the disruption to economies by digital media (McChesney 2013, Weinelt 2016). We extend the term to also refer to other {{Wiki|social}} fields, particularly [[religion]]. For example, in the 2014 {{Wiki|ceremony}}, the placing of colored grains of sand by the [[Dalai lama]] to begin the construction of the  
  
 
   
 
   
Kalachakra’s maṇḍala was scripted to allow for its video-streaming to a global audience.4 This chapter chronicles our first steps toward creating a theory to describe, analyze and understand Tibet’s digitalization. To begin the process we undertake a critical reconditioning of the work of the Danish scholar, Hjarvard (2011), who describes mediatization as a long-term process by which media transform society and culture. We maintain that Hjarvard’s overemphasis on secularization occurs because of his reliance on a Protestant understanding of religion as a more or less reliable communication with the supernatural. Our chapter is not a rejection of Hjarvard’s theory, per se, but rather a Buddhist reconditioning (cf.  
+
[[Kalachakra’s]] [[maṇḍala]] was scripted to allow for its video-streaming to a global audience.4 This [[chapter]] chronicles our first steps toward creating a {{Wiki|theory}} to describe, analyze and understand [[Tibet’s]] digitalization. To begin the process we undertake a critical reconditioning of the work of the {{Wiki|Danish}} [[scholar]], Hjarvard (2011), who describes mediatization as a long-term process by which media [[transform]] [[society]] and {{Wiki|culture}}. We maintain that Hjarvard’s overemphasis on secularization occurs because of his reliance on a {{Wiki|Protestant}} [[understanding]] of [[religion]] as a more or less reliable [[communication]] with the [[supernatural]]. Our [[chapter]] is not a rejection of Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|theory}}, [[per se]], but rather a [[Buddhist]] reconditioning (cf.  
 
   
 
   
Dissanayake 2009b, 453). A critical Buddhist reconditioning of Hjarvard’s theory of the mediatization of religion is significant for two reasons. First, it affords the tools to understand the digitalization of the Dalai lama’s charisma, and thereby to understand the Tibetan diaspora’s contemporary multimedia, multifaceted, and multi-situational virtual conditions. Despite geographical Tibet being subsumed under the Chinese State, these conditions have allowed the Tibetan government in exile, official religious organizations, and politically and religiously motivated individuals to imagine a nation. Second, a Buddhist reconditioning expands Hjarvard’s theory beyond the Procrustean bed of its Protestant normative framework and affords a theory of mediatization for analyzing Asian religions.5 Reconditioning Hjarvard’s theory illustrates how scholars’ own religious backgrounds shape research not only by affording particular content and symbolic forms, but also by privileging particular types of theorization (Grieve 2006, 11–13). Being aware of the second order categories through which we interpret religious phenomena allows researchers to be conscious not only of how society and culture shape religion but also of how religious media contribute to social change. Furthermore, it addresses how local theories of religion and media affect the understanding of the category of religion itself.
+
Dissanayake 2009b, 453). A critical [[Buddhist]] reconditioning of Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|theory}} of the mediatization of [[religion]] is significant for two [[reasons]]. First, it affords the tools to understand the digitalization of the [[Dalai lama’s]] {{Wiki|charisma}}, and thereby to understand the [[Tibetan]] diaspora’s contemporary multimedia, multifaceted, and multi-situational virtual [[conditions]]. Despite geographical [[Tibet]] being subsumed under the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[State]], these [[conditions]] have allowed the [[Tibetan government in exile]], official [[religious]] organizations, and {{Wiki|politically}} and religiously motivated {{Wiki|individuals}} to [[imagine]] a {{Wiki|nation}}. Second, a [[Buddhist]] reconditioning expands Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|theory}} beyond the Procrustean bed of its {{Wiki|Protestant}} normative framework and affords a {{Wiki|theory}} of mediatization for analyzing {{Wiki|Asian}} religions.5 Reconditioning Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|theory}} illustrates how [[scholars]]’ [[own]] [[religious]] backgrounds shape research not only by affording particular content and [[symbolic]] [[forms]], but also by privileging particular types of theorization (Grieve 2006, 11–13). Being {{Wiki|aware}} of the second order categories through which we interpret [[religious]] [[phenomena]] allows researchers to be [[conscious]] not only of how [[society]] and {{Wiki|culture}} shape [[religion]] but also of how [[religious]] media contribute to {{Wiki|social}} change. Furthermore, it addresses how local theories of [[religion]] and media affect the [[understanding]] of the category of [[religion]] itself.
  
the Kalachakra’s Digitized Mediascape A Tibetan Buddhist (Vajrayāna) ceremony, the word Kalachakra means cycles of time, and involves practices of purification, teachings and  
+
the [[Kalachakra’s]] Digitized Mediascape A [[Tibetan Buddhist]] ([[Vajrayāna]]) {{Wiki|ceremony}}, the [[word]] [[Kalachakra]] means cycles of time, and involves practices of [[purification]], teachings and  
 
   
 
   
Tantric empowerment. During the 33rd Kalachakra, the Dalai lama spoke in person to an estimated 150,000 participants consisting of local ladakhis, Tibetan refugees, Indian nationals and international  
+
[[Tantric empowerment]]. During the 33rd [[Kalachakra]], the [[Dalai lama]] spoke in [[person]] to an estimated 150,000 participants consisting of local ladakhis, [[Tibetan refugees]], [[Indian]] nationals and international  
  
142 Gregory Price Grieve et al. spectators. The 2014 ceremony was also digitalized and disseminated across the globe. Since 1954, either in India or abroad, the Dalai lama has conducted the Kalachakra teaching, usually every year or every other year, with the 2014 ceremony in ladakh being his 33rd initiation.6 The event in 2014 lasted 12 days, commencing on 3 July and concluding on 14 July, and consisted of three main components: ritual performances by monks, public teachings and the Dalai lama initiating disciples into the Tantric traditions. Monks performed numerous rituals associated with Kalachakra  
+
142 Gregory Price Grieve et al. spectators. The 2014 {{Wiki|ceremony}} was also digitalized and disseminated across the {{Wiki|globe}}. Since 1954, either in [[India]] or abroad, the [[Dalai lama]] has conducted the [[Kalachakra]] [[teaching]], usually every year or every other year, with the 2014 {{Wiki|ceremony}} in {{Wiki|ladakh}} being his 33rd initiation.6 The event in 2014 lasted 12 days, commencing on 3 July and concluding on 14 July, and consisted of three main components: [[ritual]] performances by [[monks]], public teachings and the [[Dalai lama]] {{Wiki|initiating}} [[disciples]] into the [[Tantric traditions]]. [[Monks]] performed numerous [[rituals]] associated with [[Kalachakra]]
  
including the earth-offering dance, the construction of a sand maṇḍala, apotropaic rites to ward off evil spirits, the production of talismans and offerings to deities associated with the Tantra.7 The initiated disciples gained authorization from the Dalai lama to practice and study the rituals and traditions of the Kālachakra Tantra, specifically under the guidance of gurus within the Kalachakra lineage. In 2014, between the Tantric ritual ceremonies, the Dalai lama also gave a series of teachings on Buddhist philosophy, aimed at the global audience, that emphasized Buddhism as a universal mind science (a term used in english) (Singh 2016). Time is a key aspect of the ceremony. The Kālachakra centers on a deity and maṇḍala that are replete  
+
[[including]] the earth-offering [[dance]], the construction of a sand [[maṇḍala]], apotropaic [[rites]] to ward off [[evil spirits]], the production of {{Wiki|talismans}} and [[offerings]] to [[deities]] associated with the Tantra.7 The [[initiated]] [[disciples]] gained authorization from the [[Dalai lama]] to practice and study the [[rituals]] and [[traditions]] of the [[Kālachakra]] [[Tantra]], specifically under the guidance of [[gurus]] within the [[Kalachakra lineage]]. In 2014, between the [[Tantric ritual]] {{Wiki|ceremonies}}, the [[Dalai lama]] also gave a series of teachings on [[Buddhist philosophy]], aimed at the global audience, that emphasized [[Buddhism]] as a [[universal]] [[mind]] [[science]] (a term used in english) (Singh 2016). Time is a key aspect of the {{Wiki|ceremony}}. The [[Kālachakra]] centers on a [[deity]] and [[maṇḍala]] that are replete  
  
with temporal significance and present a cosmology based on three connected temporal frameworks: inner cycles of time, outer cycles of time and the alternate cycles of time (Singh 2016). The inner cycle refers to internal states of the body including energy points (chakras) and channels. The outer cycles of time are associated with the movement of astrological entities like the sun, moon and stars. The alternate cycles of time are associated with Tantric meditations aimed at enabling practitioners to obtain enlightenment. These three cycles are unified within the cosmic body of the tutelary deity (yidam) of Kalachakra.8 During the Kalachakra initiation, the consecrated grounds for the empowerment ceremony are ritually generated as the universe or  
+
with {{Wiki|temporal}} significance and {{Wiki|present}} a [[cosmology]] based on three connected {{Wiki|temporal}} frameworks: inner cycles of time, outer cycles of time and the alternate cycles of time (Singh 2016). The inner cycle refers to internal states of the [[body]] [[including]] [[energy]] points ([[chakras]]) and [[channels]]. The outer cycles of time are associated with the {{Wiki|movement}} of [[astrological]] entities like the {{Wiki|sun}}, [[moon]] and {{Wiki|stars}}. The alternate cycles of time are associated with [[Tantric meditations]] aimed at enabling practitioners to obtain [[enlightenment]]. These three cycles are unified within the [[cosmic body]] of the [[Wikipedia:tutelary deity|tutelary deity]] ([[yidam]]) of Kalachakra.8 During the [[Kalachakra initiation]], the [[consecrated]] grounds for the [[empowerment ceremony]] are [[ritually]] generated as the [[universe]] or  
  
maṇḍala of Kalachakra. The audience present become enveloped into the deity’s sacred space. In the course of the rituals, the Dalai lama, as Vajra Guru, assumes the identity of Kalachakra at the maṇḍala’s center. The ceremony concludes after he invites disciples to become symbolically reborn into the Kālachakra maṇḍala through a series of seven initiations, after which the Dalai lama authorizes the initiates to practice traditions connected with the Kālachakra Tantra, such as the six-session Guru Yoga, and generation and completion stage rituals. Besides offering a fascinating mythological drama, what drew us to the ceremony was that it took place not only in physical and mythical locations, but also in a digitalized mediascape, a term that describes the virtual environments created by digitized global media flows ( Appadurai 1990, Helland 2016, cf. Baudrillard 1995).9 Although ladakh is a remote and isolated community in the Himalaya Mountains, network connectivity with the event was prioritized by the Indian  
+
[[maṇḍala]] of [[Kalachakra]]. The audience {{Wiki|present}} become enveloped into the [[deity’s]] [[sacred]] [[space]]. In the course of the [[rituals]], the [[Dalai lama]], as [[Vajra Guru]], assumes the [[Wikipedia:Identity (social science)|identity]] of [[Kalachakra]] at the maṇḍala’s center. The {{Wiki|ceremony}} concludes after he invites [[disciples]] to become [[symbolically]] [[reborn]] into the [[Kālachakra]] [[maṇḍala]] through a series of seven [[initiations]], after which the [[Dalai lama]] authorizes the [[initiates]] to practice [[traditions]] connected with the [[Kālachakra]] [[Tantra]], such as the six-session [[Guru Yoga]], and [[generation and completion]] stage [[rituals]]. Besides [[offering]] a fascinating [[mythological]] {{Wiki|drama}}, what drew us to the {{Wiki|ceremony}} was that it took place not only in [[physical]] and [[mythical]] locations, but also in a digitalized mediascape, a term that describes the virtual environments created by digitized global media flows ( Appadurai 1990, Helland 2016, cf. Baudrillard 1995).9 Although {{Wiki|ladakh}} is a remote and isolated {{Wiki|community}} in the [[Himalaya]] [[Mountains]], network connectivity with the event was prioritized by the [[Indian]]
  
  
 
AU: This part of the sentence seems abrupt and incomplete. Please consider revising this sentence for clarity and readability.
 
AU: This part of the sentence seems abrupt and incomplete. Please consider revising this sentence for clarity and readability.
Digitalizing Tibet 143 Government and an enormous effort was made to allow the live web streaming of the ritual. A dedicated team of people working for the Office of His Holiness the Dalai Lama ensured that the ritual practices were beautifully presented online for anyone to witness. This included the several rituals associated with preparing the site, the preliminary teachings, empowerments and a special camera above the Kalachakra sand maṇḍala so people could see its construction and development as the ritual progressed. By allowing for this form of intimate connection to occur through the Internet, new media  
+
Digitalizing [[Tibet]] 143 Government and an enormous [[effort]] was made to allow the live web streaming of the [[ritual]]. A dedicated team of [[people]] working for the Office of [[His Holiness the Dalai Lama]] ensured that the [[ritual practices]] were beautifully presented online for anyone to {{Wiki|witness}}. This included the several [[rituals]] associated with preparing the site, the preliminary teachings, [[empowerments]] and a special camera above the [[Kalachakra]] sand [[maṇḍala]] so [[people]] could see its construction and [[development]] as the [[ritual]] progressed. By allowing for this [[form]] of {{Wiki|intimate connection}} to occur through the [[Internet]], new media  
  
allowed new observers to participate in fundamentally new ways. Because Tibet’s mediascape no longer merely augments actual geographic locations and physical events, and is not limited to synchronous time, but holds together and maintains (dhṛ) a global community (sangha) of practitioners, it can neither be understood through the categories of center and periphery, nor referent and represented (Appadurai 1990, de Saussure 1916). Yet, as we argue below, this is not merely the transmission of content, but the conditioning of distinct practices. For example, on that same day, a deeply devoted  
+
allowed new observers to participate in fundamentally new ways. Because [[Tibet’s]] mediascape no longer merely augments actual geographic locations and [[physical]] events, and is not limited to synchronous time, but holds together and maintains (dhṛ) a global {{Wiki|community}} ([[sangha]]) of practitioners, it can neither be understood through the categories of center and {{Wiki|periphery}}, nor referent and represented (Appadurai 1990, de Saussure 1916). Yet, as we argue below, this is not merely the [[transmission]] of content, but the {{Wiki|conditioning}} of {{Wiki|distinct}} practices. For example, on that same day, a deeply devoted  
  
practitioner from the USA rested in a hotel room in leh, located about eight kilometers from the teaching site. She had been lying in bed, exhausted, watching the  Dalai lama’s teachings live on her computer. She held her prayer beads and a book of teachings on Nagarjuna’s texts that had been handed out during the first day of teachings. At the same time, she was online and supplementing the live teachings with additional materials, looking up terms and concepts and even posting information to her friends. That afternoon she told us that she was deeply grateful for the live webcasting of the teachings and that her exhaustion had not caused her to miss any of the day’s important events. When we asked her if she felt part of the ceremony, she answered with no hesitation: “Oh yes, I was definitely there with you” (personal communication).
+
[[practitioner]] from the {{Wiki|USA}} rested in a hotel room in leh, located about eight kilometers from the [[teaching]] site. She had been {{Wiki|lying}} in bed, exhausted, watching the  [[Dalai lama’s]] teachings live on her {{Wiki|computer}}. She held her [[prayer beads]] and a [[book]] of teachings on [[Nagarjuna’s]] texts that had been handed out during the first day of teachings. At the same time, she was online and supplementing the live teachings with additional materials, looking up terms and [[Wikipedia:concept|concepts]] and even posting [[information]] to her friends. That afternoon she told us that she was deeply grateful for the live webcasting of the teachings and that her exhaustion had not [[caused]] her to miss any of the day’s important events. When we asked her if she felt part of the {{Wiki|ceremony}}, she answered with no hesitation: “Oh yes, I was definitely there with you” (personal [[communication]]).
  
  
Hjarvard’s theory of the Mediatization of Religion In order to analyze the Kalachakra’s digitalization, our chapter aims to recondition Hjarvard’s theory of the mediatization. Our first step is to describe it straightforwardly in this section, and critically recondition it in the following section. At its core, mediatization argues that media plays a part in the shaping of society and analyzes the long-term  effects that media have on human life worlds (Hjarvard 2014, Krotz 2009, 2014, 137–139, Krotz and Hepp 2011, lundby 2014, 7, Martín-Barbero 2003, 88, Schulz 2004). The driving purpose of Hjarvard’s particular theory of mediatization, however, is to describe and analyze the role that religion and media play in what he calls high-modern societies – the current globalized, highly mediated, and neoliberal consumeristic world (passim. Hjarvard 2008a, 2011, 124).
+
Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|theory}} of the Mediatization of [[Religion]] In order to analyze the [[Kalachakra’s]] digitalization, our [[chapter]] aims to recondition Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|theory}} of the mediatization. Our first step is to describe it straightforwardly in this section, and critically recondition it in the following section. At its core, mediatization argues that media plays a part in the shaping of [[society]] and analyzes the long-term  effects that media have on [[Wikipedia:Human life|human life]] [[worlds]] (Hjarvard 2014, Krotz 2009, 2014, 137–139, Krotz and Hepp 2011, lundby 2014, 7, Martín-Barbero 2003, 88, Schulz 2004). The driving {{Wiki|purpose}} of Hjarvard’s particular {{Wiki|theory}} of mediatization, however, is to describe and analyze the role that [[religion]] and media play in what he calls high-modern {{Wiki|societies}} – the current globalized, highly mediated, and neoliberal consumeristic [[world]] (passim. Hjarvard 2008a, 2011, 124).
  
  
144 Gregory Price Grieve et al. Hjarvard’s theory of the mediatization of religion can be analyzed through two propositions and three outcomes. He builds his theory of mediatization of religion upon an analytic and a synthetic proposition. The analytic proposition is the distinction he makes between the merely descriptive term mediation and the transformative mediatization (Couldry and Hepp 2013, 191, livingston 2009, 6–7). As a theory, the descriptive term mediation analyzes how different types of media influence the content of their message. As Hjarvard writes, “mediation refers to the act of mediation via a medium, the intervention of which can affect both the message and the relationship between sender and receiver” (2011, 123). For example, in politics, mediation describes when a Tweet’s 140-character limit changes the message that politicians deliver. For Hjarvard, mediatization is analytically different because it evaluates the transformative effect that media have on society and culture, and how media colonize other institutions. As Hjarvard writes:
+
144 Gregory Price Grieve et al. Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|theory}} of the mediatization of [[religion]] can be analyzed through two propositions and three outcomes. He builds his {{Wiki|theory}} of mediatization of [[religion]] upon an analytic and a {{Wiki|synthetic}} proposition. The analytic proposition is the {{Wiki|distinction}} he makes between the merely descriptive term [[mediation]] and the transformative mediatization (Couldry and Hepp 2013, 191, livingston 2009, 6–7). As a {{Wiki|theory}}, the descriptive term [[mediation]] analyzes how different types of media influence the content of their message. As Hjarvard writes, “[[mediation]] refers to the act of [[mediation]] via a {{Wiki|medium}}, the intervention of which can affect both the message and the relationship between sender and receiver” (2011, 123). For example, in {{Wiki|politics}}, [[mediation]] describes when a Tweet’s 140-character limit changes the message that politicians deliver. For Hjarvard, mediatization is analytically different because it evaluates the transformative effect that media have on [[society]] and {{Wiki|culture}}, and how media colonize other {{Wiki|institutions}}. As Hjarvard writes:
  
While the study of mediation pays attention to specific instances of communication situated in time and space (e.g., the communication of politics in blogs during a presidential campaign), mediatization studies are concerned with the long-term structural change in the role of the media in culture and society. (2013, 2–3 [italics in original])
+
While the study of [[mediation]] pays [[attention]] to specific instances of [[communication]] situated in [[time and space]] (e.g., the [[communication]] of {{Wiki|politics}} in blogs during a presidential campaign), mediatization studies are concerned with the long-term structural change in the role of the media in {{Wiki|culture}} and [[society]]. (2013, 2–3 [italics in original])
  
These transformations allow media to dominate other social fields. As he writes: “mediatization denotes the social and cultural process through which a field or institution to some extent becomes dependent on the logic of the media” (2011, 119; cf. Hjarvard 2008b). In this case, Twitter and other social media become a “part of the very fabric” of life, not just on an individual political message, but on the field of politics more generally (ess 1996, 9). While analytic propositions point to a theory’s internal logic, synthetic propositions refer to how the theory interprets the world. Hjarvard’s synthetic proposition is that media and religion are similar because they play a part in constructing the reality of lived social worlds. This synthetic framework reflects early theories concerning the social construction of reality of the sociologist of religion Peter Berger (1967, 3–28; cf. lövheim 2011, Schulz 2004). Citing Berger, Hjarvard maintains that “‘religion has been the historically most widespread and effective instrumentality of legitimation’ of socially defined reality’” (citing Berger 1967, 32, Hjarvard 2011, 130). Relying primarily on european survey data, Hjarvard posits that media, like a secular canopy, has taken over this role as a modern commercial version of the traditional religious world-constructing “sacred canopy” (cf. Berger 1967, Couldry and Hepp 2013, lövheim 2011, 155–156).
+
These transformations allow media to dominate other {{Wiki|social}} fields. As he writes: “mediatization denotes the {{Wiki|social}} and {{Wiki|cultural}} process through which a field or institution to some extent becomes dependent on the [[logic]] of the media” (2011, 119; cf. Hjarvard 2008b). In this case, Twitter and other {{Wiki|social}} media become a “part of the very fabric” of [[life]], not just on an {{Wiki|individual}} {{Wiki|political}} message, but on the field of {{Wiki|politics}} more generally (ess 1996, 9). While analytic propositions point to a theory’s internal [[logic]], {{Wiki|synthetic}} propositions refer to how the {{Wiki|theory}} interprets the [[world]]. Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|synthetic}} proposition is that media and [[religion]] are similar because they play a part in constructing the [[reality]] of lived {{Wiki|social}} [[worlds]]. This {{Wiki|synthetic}} framework reflects early theories concerning the {{Wiki|social}} construction of [[reality]] of the sociologist of [[religion]] Peter Berger (1967, 3–28; cf. lövheim 2011, Schulz 2004). Citing Berger, Hjarvard maintains that “‘[[religion]] has been the historically most widespread and effective instrumentality of legitimation’ of socially defined [[reality]]’” (citing Berger 1967, 32, Hjarvard 2011, 130). Relying primarily on european survey {{Wiki|data}}, Hjarvard posits that media, like a {{Wiki|secular}} {{Wiki|canopy}}, has taken over this role as a {{Wiki|modern}} commercial version of the [[traditional]] [[religious]] world-constructing “[[sacred]] {{Wiki|canopy}}” (cf. Berger 1967, Couldry and Hepp 2013, lövheim 2011, 155–156).
  
Digitalizing Tibet 145 From his analytic and synthetic propositions, Hjarvard delivers three outcomes, the first of which is disciplinary. He maintains that media theory about religion has been dominated by two major paradigms. On the one hand are those effect-paradigm frameworks concerned with how people are affected by exposure to various media, while on the other, the audience centered framework explores how people make use of media for their own purposes (passim. Hjarvard 2011, 121, 2013, 2, cf.  Jenkins 1992, Preiss et al. 2007). Skeptical of these approaches, Hjarvard posits mediatization as a third approach, which stresses the interaction and transaction of actors and structures. “According to mediatization theory, media are not outside society, but part of its very social fabric” (2011, 121, cf. 2013, 3). As such, “mediatization studies move the focus of interest from the particular instances of  
+
Digitalizing [[Tibet]] 145 From his analytic and {{Wiki|synthetic}} propositions, Hjarvard delivers three outcomes, the first of which is disciplinary. He maintains that media {{Wiki|theory}} about [[religion]] has been dominated by two major [[paradigms]]. On the one hand are those effect-paradigm frameworks concerned with how [[people]] are affected by exposure to various media, while on the other, the audience centered framework explores how [[people]] make use of media for their [[own]] purposes (passim. Hjarvard 2011, 121, 2013, 2, cf.  Jenkins 1992, Preiss et al. 2007). Skeptical of these approaches, Hjarvard posits mediatization as a third approach, which stresses the interaction and transaction of actors and structures. “According to mediatization {{Wiki|theory}}, media are not outside [[society]], but part of its very {{Wiki|social}} fabric” (2011, 121, cf. 2013, 3). As such, “mediatization studies move the focus of [[interest]] from the particular instances of  
  
mediated communication to the structural transformations of the media in contemporary society” (2013, 2). Hjarvard’s second outcome is that mediatization leads to secularization by colonizing many of the cultural and social functions that organized religious institutions traditionally held. Citing Berger, Hjarvard defines secularization as “the process by which sectors of society are removed from the domination of religious institutions and symbols” (citing Berger 1967, 107, Hjarvard 2011, 130). Hjarvard maintains that in high-modern societies media are an all-embracing force ( Hjarvard 2008b, lövheim 2011). Yet, the problem is not less religious content in the media (cf. lash 2005). As Hjarvard writes, “with the help of the most sophisticated media technology,  
+
mediated [[communication]] to the structural transformations of the media in contemporary [[society]]” (2013, 2). Hjarvard’s second outcome is that mediatization leads to secularization by colonizing many of the {{Wiki|cultural}} and {{Wiki|social}} functions that organized [[religious]] {{Wiki|institutions}} [[traditionally]] held. Citing Berger, Hjarvard defines secularization as “the process by which sectors of [[society]] are removed from the {{Wiki|domination}} of [[religious]] {{Wiki|institutions}} and [[symbols]]” (citing Berger 1967, 107, Hjarvard 2011, 130). Hjarvard maintains that in high-modern {{Wiki|societies}} media are an all-embracing force ( Hjarvard 2008b, lövheim 2011). Yet, the problem is not less [[religious]] content in the media (cf. lash 2005). As Hjarvard writes, “with the help of the most sophisticated media technology,  
  
supernatural phenomena have acquired an unmatched presence in modern societies” (Hjarvard 2013, 78). Rather than less content, secularization occurs because “a series of structural transformations of religion in the modern world, including a decline in the authority of religious institutions in society, together with the development of more individualized forms of religious beliefs and practices” (2013, 79). Hjarvard knowingly sidesteps Berger’s later work in which the American sociologist denounces his earlier secularization thesis (cf. Berger 1999, 2, Hjarvard 2011, 130). Hjarvard supports Berger’s original secularization hypothesis by arguing that “increased public visibility is not to be equated with a growing support for religion, or involvement in religion” and that “secularization is still an important component of the modernization process of contemporary societies in Western  
+
[[supernatural]] [[phenomena]] have acquired an unmatched presence in {{Wiki|modern}} {{Wiki|societies}}” (Hjarvard 2013, 78). Rather than less content, secularization occurs because “a series of structural transformations of [[religion]] in the {{Wiki|modern}} [[world]], [[including]] a {{Wiki|decline}} in the authority of [[religious]] {{Wiki|institutions}} in [[society]], together with the [[development]] of more individualized [[forms]] of [[religious]] [[beliefs]] and practices” (2013, 79). Hjarvard knowingly sidesteps Berger’s later work in which the [[American]] sociologist denounces his earlier secularization {{Wiki|thesis}} (cf. Berger 1999, 2, Hjarvard 2011, 130). Hjarvard supports Berger’s original secularization {{Wiki|hypothesis}} by arguing that “increased public visibility is not to be equated with a growing support for [[religion]], or involvement in [[religion]]” and that “secularization is still an important component of the [[modernization]] process of contemporary {{Wiki|societies}} in [[Western]]
europe, USA and elsewhere” (2011, 131). Hjarvard argues that secularization leads to an increase of what he terms banal religion – that process by which religious practices become loosed from the authority of organized religion, and become more and more individualized and subjective because they are guided by the logic of a commercialized media. “Banal religion is banal in the sense,”  
+
{{Wiki|europe}}, {{Wiki|USA}} and elsewhere” (2011, 131). Hjarvard argues that secularization leads to an increase of what he terms banal [[religion]] – that process by which [[religious]] practices become loosed from the authority of organized [[religion]], and become more and more individualized and [[subjective]] because they are guided by the [[logic]] of a commercialized media. “Banal [[religion]] is banal in the [[sense]],”  
  
  
146 Gregory Price Grieve et al. that it is unnoticeable and does not constitute a highly structured proposition about the metaphysical order or the meaning of life, and it is religion in the sense that it evokes cognitions, emotions or actions that imply the existence of supernatural agency. (2011, 128)
+
146 Gregory Price Grieve et al. that it is unnoticeable and does not constitute a highly structured proposition about the [[metaphysical]] order or the [[meaning of life]], and it is [[religion]] in the [[sense]] that it evokes [[cognitions]], [[emotions]] or [[actions]] that imply the [[existence]] of [[supernatural]] agency. (2011, 128)
Hjarvard argues that banalization occurs because “media may not only provide information about religion but also create narratives and virtual worlds that invite people to have experiences of a religious-like character … and community-building among people with similar religious orientation” (2011, 126). For Hjarvard, banalization occurs in a three-step process. First, he argues that data shows that banal religions serve media logics and not religious logics. As Hjarvard writes, popular culture’s “religious representations serve the particular media genre in question and the religious meanings are not to be taken too literally” (2011, 129). Second, Hjarvard maintains that because they are not meant to be taken literally, banal religions are inauthentic. As he writes, “despite their pervasiveness and very explicit nature, the religious representations do not constitute a coherent religious narrative, nor are we, as an audience, to take them seriously as real religious symbols, practices or meanings” (2011, 129). Third, banal religious practices are anomic because, they “challenge the authority of existing religious institutions by disembedding specific religious meanings from their original context and rearticulating them in new ways” (2011, 129).
+
Hjarvard argues that banalization occurs because “media may not only provide [[information]] about [[religion]] but also create [[Wikipedia:narrative|narratives]] and virtual [[worlds]] that invite [[people]] to have [[experiences]] of a religious-like [[character]] … and community-building among [[people]] with similar [[religious]] orientation” (2011, 126). For Hjarvard, banalization occurs in a three-step process. First, he argues that {{Wiki|data}} shows that banal [[religions]] serve media [[logics]] and not [[religious]] [[logics]]. As Hjarvard writes, popular culture’s “[[religious]] {{Wiki|representations}} serve the particular media genre in question and the [[religious]] meanings are not to be taken too literally” (2011, 129). Second, Hjarvard maintains that because they are not meant to be taken literally, banal [[religions]] are inauthentic. As he writes, “despite their pervasiveness and very explicit [[nature]], the [[religious]] {{Wiki|representations}} do not constitute a coherent [[religious]] {{Wiki|narrative}}, nor are we, as an audience, to take them seriously as real [[religious]] [[symbols]], practices or meanings” (2011, 129). Third, banal [[religious]] practices are anomic because, they “challenge the authority of [[existing]] [[religious]] {{Wiki|institutions}} by disembedding specific [[religious]] meanings from their original context and rearticulating them in new ways” (2011, 129).
  
A Necessary Provincializing of Hjarvard’s  Mediatization theory like a lens that focuses on a particular phenomenon, social scientific theories are second-order semiotic, analytic, synthetic frameworks that abstract, organize and interpret lived worlds in order to rationally explain, understand and predict types of human behavior (Morton 1980). At its core, Hjarvard’s theory seems straightforward. “Our inquiry takes its point of departure in the classical question in the sociology of the media, namely, how the media come to influence the wider culture and society” (Hjarvard 2013, 1). This would seem to be the perfect tool to understand the digitalization of the Kalachakra. Theories, however, are not free-floating principles that exist untethered to the problems of human lifeworlds (Davidson Reynolds 1971). Theories of religion, no less than the religious phenomena they are theorizing, are bound by, entangled with and constituted by their historic-geographic location (Grieve 2006). Hjarvard’s theory is limited for understanding Asian religion because it was fabricated in, and built to analyze, as Hjarvard himself writes, the “historical developments in the north-western part of europe” (2013, 27).  
+
A Necessary Provincializing of Hjarvard’s  Mediatization {{Wiki|theory}} like a lens that focuses on a particular [[phenomenon]], {{Wiki|social}} [[scientific]] theories are second-order {{Wiki|semiotic}}, analytic, {{Wiki|synthetic}} frameworks that abstract, organize and interpret lived [[worlds]] in order to {{Wiki|rationally}} explain, understand and predict types of [[human]] {{Wiki|behavior}} (Morton 1980). At its core, Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|theory}} seems straightforward. “Our inquiry takes its point of departure in the classical question in the {{Wiki|sociology}} of the media, namely, how the media come to influence the wider {{Wiki|culture}} and [[society]]” (Hjarvard 2013, 1). This would seem to be the {{Wiki|perfect}} tool to understand the digitalization of the [[Kalachakra]]. Theories, however, are not free-floating {{Wiki|principles}} that [[exist]] untethered to the problems of [[human]] lifeworlds (Davidson Reynolds 1971). Theories of [[religion]], no less than the [[religious]] [[phenomena]] they are theorizing, are [[bound]] by, entangled with and constituted by their historic-geographic location (Grieve 2006). Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|theory}} is limited for [[understanding]] {{Wiki|Asian}} [[religion]] because it was [[fabricated]] in, and built to analyze, as Hjarvard himself writes, the “historical developments in the north-western part of {{Wiki|europe}}” (2013, 27).  
Digitalizing Tibet 147 He understands the mediatization of religion, both as phenomenon and sociological theory, as stemming from and defining of modern Northern european society (2013, 5–7, cf. Thompson 1995). As  Hjarvard writes, “the theoretical framework and analytic outline presented (…) may be more suitable to describe developments in north- western europe than elsewhere in the world” (2013, 80). Hjarvard maintains that “media are not a unitary phenomenon” and he argues that “the mediatization of religion may take different forms and generate different outcome in, for example, the USA, Brazil, or India, depending on religious, social and media context” (2013, 81, cf. Hoover 2006). Hjarvard is pushing in two directions. Mostly he wants to differentiate the Nordic experience from that which appears in North America (2013, 81). Hjarvard, however, also sees the Western experience as unique, and implies that if mediatization appears in the developing world, it is a product of european culture being exported through globalization (2013, 18). Because of its unabashed eurocentrism, to be useful for analyzing  
+
Digitalizing [[Tibet]] 147 He [[understands]] the mediatization of [[religion]], both as [[phenomenon]] and {{Wiki|sociological}} {{Wiki|theory}}, as stemming from and defining of {{Wiki|modern}} [[Northern]] european [[society]] (2013, 5–7, cf. Thompson 1995). As  Hjarvard writes, “the {{Wiki|theoretical}} framework and analytic outline presented (…) may be more suitable to describe developments in [[north]]- [[western]] {{Wiki|europe}} than elsewhere in the [[world]]” (2013, 80). Hjarvard maintains that “media are not a unitary [[phenomenon]]” and he argues that “the mediatization of [[religion]] may take different [[forms]] and generate different outcome in, for example, the {{Wiki|USA}}, {{Wiki|Brazil}}, or [[India]], depending on [[religious]], {{Wiki|social}} and media context” (2013, 81, cf. Hoover 2006). Hjarvard is pushing in two [[directions]]. Mostly he wants to differentiate the Nordic [[experience]] from that which appears in [[North America]] (2013, 81). Hjarvard, however, also sees the [[Western]] [[experience]] as unique, and implies that if mediatization appears in the developing [[world]], it is a product of european {{Wiki|culture}} being exported through globalization (2013, 18). Because of its unabashed eurocentrism, to be useful for analyzing  
  
Tibetan Dharma, and Asian religion more generally, Hjarvard’s theory requires provincialization, a term which recognizes the limitations of using Western social sciences to explain and understand modern Asia (Chakrabarty 2000, cf. eliade 1961). Provincialization, however, does not reject european thought out of hand, but rather reconditions it, as the anthropologist Chakrabarty, writes “from and for the margins” (2000, 16). Provincialization is not antithetical to Hjarvard’s understanding of mediatization as a “meso-theory” (2013, 3–5). His “ambition is not to build a ‘grand theory’ in order to establish universal definition” (2013, 3, Hjarvard 2011, 124, cf. Krotz and Hepp 2011, 137–138). As he writes: “By considering mediatization theory as a middle-range theory, we have sought to avoid the pitfalls of both the grand claims typical of  macro-level theorizing and the celebration of heterogeneity typical of certain micro-level analysis” (2013, 153). Hjarvard is skeptical about making broad meta-theories, because he is conscious that media’s influence on religion will differ depending on historical and geographic location. “For instance,” he writes, “mediatization may imply something rather different if we compare the use of media by Pentecostal movements in India” (2011, 120). Hjarvard’s theory, even for its stated awareness of its own limited nature, needs provincializing because it naturalizes a Protestant framework, which occurs because of the dominance of european survey data in his case studies, but also because of a crypto-Protestantism that informs and has shaped social thought since the late 19th century (engelke 2012, Grieve 2006). Hjarvard defines religion as the “human ability to ascribe intentional agency to unexplainable occurrences, to make anthropological projections into a metaphysical world” (2011, 129). His substantive definition implies a transmission theory of communication that of  
+
[[Tibetan]] [[Dharma]], and {{Wiki|Asian}} [[religion]] more generally, Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|theory}} requires provincialization, a term which [[recognizes]] the limitations of using [[Western]] {{Wiki|social sciences}} to explain and understand {{Wiki|modern}} {{Wiki|Asia}} (Chakrabarty 2000, cf. eliade 1961). Provincialization, however, does not reject european [[thought]] out of hand, but rather reconditions it, as the anthropologist Chakrabarty, writes “from and for the margins” (2000, 16). Provincialization is not [[Wikipedia:Anti-life|antithetical]] to Hjarvard’s [[understanding]] of mediatization as a “meso-theory” (2013, 3–5). His “[[ambition]] is not [[to build]] a ‘grand {{Wiki|theory}}’ in order to establish [[universal]] [[definition]]” (2013, 3, Hjarvard 2011, 124, cf. Krotz and Hepp 2011, 137–138). As he writes: “By considering mediatization {{Wiki|theory}} as a middle-range {{Wiki|theory}}, we have sought to avoid the pitfalls of both the grand claims typical of  macro-level theorizing and the celebration of heterogeneity typical of certain micro-level analysis” (2013, 153). Hjarvard is skeptical about making broad meta-theories, because he is [[conscious]] that media’s influence on [[religion]] will differ depending on historical and geographic location. “For instance,” he writes, “mediatization may imply something rather different if we compare the use of media by Pentecostal movements in [[India]]” (2011, 120). Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|theory}}, even for its stated [[awareness]] of its [[own]] limited [[nature]], needs provincializing because it naturalizes a {{Wiki|Protestant}} framework, which occurs because of the dominance of european survey {{Wiki|data}} in his case studies, but also because of a crypto-Protestantism that informs and has shaped {{Wiki|social}} [[thought]] since the late 19th century (engelke 2012, Grieve 2006). Hjarvard defines [[religion]] as the “[[human]] ability to ascribe intentional agency to unexplainable occurrences, to make anthropological {{Wiki|projections}} into a [[metaphysical]] [[world]]” (2011, 129). His substantive [[definition]] implies a [[transmission]] {{Wiki|theory}} of [[communication]] that of  
 
AU: Please confirm whether the edits made to the sentence retains the intended meaning.
 
AU: Please confirm whether the edits made to the sentence retains the intended meaning.
  
148 Gregory Price Grieve et al. content being transmitted more or less reliably through different media (Shannon 1948, Shannon and Weaver 1949). The substantive definition forces him to make a distinction between banal and institutional religion, between the small folk practices of a “common religion” and the greater institutionalized orders of “official religion” (Hjarvard 2011, 129–130). He defines banal religion as “the beliefs and practices held by ordinary people,” and institutionalized religion as that which reflects “official religious texts and practices advanced by the priesthood” (2011, 130). Because his theory necessitates a church, Hjarvard’s institutional understanding of media needs to be provincialized as well. True, he poses his theory as pure social science. “Mediatization is, in our understanding, a non-normative concept” (2013, 18 [italics in original]). In the end, however, his use of mediatized religion is not a neutral sociological category. It is normative, because, as Hjarvard writes, “media are not in the business to preach” and “media’s representation of religion does not originate from the institutionalized religion or have close resemblance with religious texts” (2011, 126, 132,  
+
148 Gregory Price Grieve et al. content being transmitted more or less reliably through different media (Shannon 1948, Shannon and [[Weaver]] 1949). The substantive [[definition]] forces him to make a {{Wiki|distinction}} between banal and institutional [[religion]], between the small {{Wiki|folk}} practices of a “common [[religion]]” and the greater institutionalized orders of “official [[religion]]” (Hjarvard 2011, 129–130). He defines banal [[religion]] as “the [[beliefs]] and practices held by [[ordinary people]],” and institutionalized [[religion]] as that which reflects “official [[religious]] texts and practices advanced by the priesthood” (2011, 130). Because his {{Wiki|theory}} necessitates a {{Wiki|church}}, Hjarvard’s institutional [[understanding]] of media needs to be provincialized as well. True, he poses his {{Wiki|theory}} as [[pure]] {{Wiki|social science}}. “Mediatization is, in our [[understanding]], a non-normative {{Wiki|concept}}” (2013, 18 [italics in original]). In the end, however, his use of mediatized [[religion]] is not a [[neutral]] {{Wiki|sociological}} category. It is normative, because, as Hjarvard writes, “media are not in the business to {{Wiki|preach}}” and “media’s [[representation]] of [[religion]] does not originate from the institutionalized [[religion]] or have close resemblance with [[religious]] texts” (2011, 126, 132,  
  
cf. 120–121, cf. Grieve 2017, 79–87, Hjarvard 2013, 9–10). Hjarvard wants to understand media’s effect on institutions, which he describes as social fields which organize “a number of very central aspects of life,” and allocate both material resources and authority (2013: 21, 22, 43–44). This concentration on church reflects the strong role that organized institutions, such as the National (Peoples’) Church of Denmark (Den Danske Folkekirke), have played in Nordic countries. One can also see the role emile Durkheim has had in Hjarvard’s sociological understanding of religion. As Durkheim writes, “the idea of religion is inseparable from the idea of a church, it conveys the notion that religion must be an eminently collective thing” (1995, 44).
+
cf. 120–121, cf. Grieve 2017, 79–87, Hjarvard 2013, 9–10). Hjarvard wants to understand media’s effect on {{Wiki|institutions}}, which he describes as {{Wiki|social}} fields which organize “a number of very central aspects of [[life]],” and allocate both material resources and authority (2013: 21, 22, 43–44). This [[concentration]] on {{Wiki|church}} reflects the strong role that organized {{Wiki|institutions}}, such as the National (Peoples’) {{Wiki|Church}} of {{Wiki|Denmark}} (Den Danske Folkekirke), have played in Nordic countries. One can also see the role emile Durkheim has had in Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|sociological}} [[understanding]] of [[religion]]. As Durkheim writes, “the [[idea]] of [[religion]] is [[inseparable]] from the [[idea]] of a {{Wiki|church}}, it conveys the notion that [[religion]] must be an eminently collective thing” (1995, 44).
A Buddhist theory of Religious Mediatization To recondition Hjarvard’s theory of mediatization so that it is usable for understanding the Kalachakra’s digitalization, we need to pry apart his core insight from his theory of religious communication. Hjarvard’s core insight is that media influence society because their affordances “make certain actions possible, exclude others and structure the interactions between actor and object” (2013, 27). In fact, Hjarvard “recognize[s] the media as technologies, each of which has a set of affordances that facilitate, limit, and structure communication and action”
+
A [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|theory}} of [[Religious]] Mediatization To recondition Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|theory}} of mediatization so that it is usable for [[understanding]] the [[Kalachakra’s]] digitalization, we need to pry apart his core [[insight]] from his {{Wiki|theory}} of [[religious]] [[communication]]. Hjarvard’s core [[insight]] is that media influence [[society]] because their affordances “make certain [[actions]] possible, exclude others and {{Wiki|structure}} the interactions between actor and [[object]]” (2013, 27). In fact, Hjarvard “[[recognize]][s] the media as technologies, each of which has a set of affordances that facilitate, limit, and {{Wiki|structure}} [[communication]] and [[action]]”
  
(2013, 28 [italics in original]; cf. Grieve 2017, 48–50). While his overall theory focuses on the functions of religion, his model of religion is a normative one that requires a substantive or transmission theory of religious communication often assumed by many Protestants (Jennings 1969). In the postwar period, communication models have been dominated by the transmission theory of communication, pioneered in 1948 in an  
+
(2013, 28 [italics in original]; cf. Grieve 2017, 48–50). While his overall {{Wiki|theory}} focuses on the functions of [[religion]], his model of [[religion]] is a normative one that requires a substantive or [[transmission]] {{Wiki|theory}} of [[religious]] [[communication]] often assumed by many Protestants (Jennings 1969). In the postwar period, [[communication]] models have been dominated by the [[transmission]] {{Wiki|theory}} of [[communication]], pioneered in 1948 in an  
Digitalizing Tibet 149 influential article by the American Claude e. Shannon. A transmission theory of communication describes the communication of a message as a unidirectional signal from an informational source, through a transmitter, and noise source, picked up by a receiver and finally decoded at its destination (A ⇒ B) (Table 9.1). A transmission theory of communication is unidirectional, has one outcome, is causal, has discrete variables, transmits information, is message centered, has a fixed sequence and communicates separate events. A transmission theory leads to the analysis of communication either as a more or less reliable transmission, or as an ideological distortion from the information source.
+
Digitalizing [[Tibet]] 149 influential article by the [[American]] Claude e. Shannon. A [[transmission]] {{Wiki|theory}} of [[communication]] describes the [[communication]] of a message as a unidirectional signal from an informational source, through a transmitter, and noise source, picked up by a receiver and finally decoded at its destination (A ⇒ B) (Table 9.1). A [[transmission]] {{Wiki|theory}} of [[communication]] is unidirectional, has one outcome, is causal, has discrete variables, transmits [[information]], is message centered, has a fixed sequence and communicates separate events. A [[transmission]] {{Wiki|theory}} leads to the analysis of [[communication]] either as a more or less reliable [[transmission]], or as an {{Wiki|ideological}} [[distortion]] from the [[information]] source.
AU: The sentence seemed incomplete and from the context, to be in sync with the chosen field of Claude E. Shannon, the word ‘electrical engineer’ has been added.
+
AU: The sentence seemed incomplete and from the context, to be in sync with the chosen field of Claude E. Shannon, the [[word]] ‘electrical engineer’ has been added.
  
  
Table 9.1  A Mathematical Theory of Communication (after Shannon 1949)
+
Table 9.1  A {{Wiki|Mathematical}} {{Wiki|Theory}} of [[Communication]] (after Shannon 1949)
  
Information Source
+
[[Information]] Source
 
<poem>
 
<poem>
=> Transmitter => Medium as Noise
+
=> Transmitter => {{Wiki|Medium}} as Noise
 
=> Receiver => Destination  
 
=> Receiver => Destination  
Table 9.2  A Buddhist Theory of Communication
+
Table 9.2  A [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|Theory}} of [[Communication]]
  
Medium as Affordance
+
{{Wiki|Medium}} as Affordance
 
Acceleration +
 
Acceleration +
 
Retardance ~
 
Retardance ~
 
Stoppage  
 
Stoppage  
=>Condition (Pratyaya) 1
+
=>[[Condition]] ([[Pratyaya]]) 1
Condition (Pratyaya) 2
+
[[Condition]] ([[Pratyaya]]) 2
 
</poem>
 
</poem>
  
Painting with a broad brush, we describe what we call a Buddhist theory of communication as bidirectional, processional, reciprocal, continuous, meaning- and actor-centered, with flexible sequences and inseparable events (Table 9.2). Buddhist communication is distinct from a transmission theory, because it employs media practices to spread the Dharma through mutual conditioning. Rather than being a transmission theory of communication that models communication as the unidirectional transmission of data from source to destination, a Buddhist theory of communication models mediatization as the mutually dependent relationship between two different conditions (A ⇔ B) (pratayaya). In a transmission theory of communication media are neutral conveyers of information whose presence must be figured out as noise (A = m ⇒ B). In a Buddhist theory of media practice, media must be approached mindfully (smṛti) because they afford different types of interactions, which, depending on the mediascape, allow for the skillful teaching (upāya) of different types of Dharmic messages (A ⇐ m ⇒ B) (Table 9.3). AU: Please review and confirm the edits made to this sentence for coherence and clarity.
+
Painting with a broad brush, we describe what we call a [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|theory}} of [[communication]] as bidirectional, processional, reciprocal, continuous, meaning- and actor-centered, with flexible sequences and [[inseparable]] events (Table 9.2). [[Buddhist]] [[communication]] is {{Wiki|distinct}} from a [[transmission]] {{Wiki|theory}}, because it employs media practices to spread the [[Dharma]] through mutual {{Wiki|conditioning}}. Rather than being a [[transmission]] {{Wiki|theory}} of [[communication]] that models [[communication]] as the unidirectional [[transmission]] of {{Wiki|data}} from source to destination, a [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|theory}} of [[communication]] models mediatization as the mutually dependent relationship between two different [[conditions]] (A ⇔ B) ([[pratayaya]]). In a [[transmission]] {{Wiki|theory}} of [[communication]] media are [[neutral]] conveyers of [[information]] whose presence must be figured out as noise (A = m ⇒ B). In a [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|theory}} of media practice, media must be approached mindfully ([[smṛti]]) because they afford different types of interactions, which, depending on the mediascape, allow for the [[skillful]] [[teaching]] ([[upāya]]) of different types of [[Dharmic]] messages (A ⇐ m ⇒ B) (Table 9.3). AU: Please review and confirm the edits made to this sentence for coherence and clarity.
  
  
The difficulty with modeling the Kalachakra through a transmission theory is that rather than clarifying the ceremony, it further mystifies the highly digitalized mediascape that we encountered. During the  
+
The difficulty with modeling the [[Kalachakra]] through a [[transmission]] {{Wiki|theory}} is that rather than clarifying the {{Wiki|ceremony}}, it further mystifies the highly digitalized mediascape that we encountered. During the  
 
   
 
   
Kalachakra, the Dalai lama often referred to the religion (dharma) as a shield, and that its effectiveness depended on the context in which it was delivered. In Buddhism, dharma usually refers to the Buddha’s teachings, which indicates not simply the transmitting of information, but also, with varying degrees of skill, the creation of efficient conditions that lessen suffering. Dharmic messages are not perceived by Buddhists as universal, but are dependent on the skill and means (upāya-kauśalya) of those that deliver them (Matsunaga and Matsunaga 1974). A transmission theory of religion leads to an interpretation of the Kalachakra’s mediascape as a loss of fidelity to the essential teachings. Yet, while there was contention over the digital broadcast of the ceremony, the arguments given by the officials assembled were not about a loss of fidelity to the original sources, but about the dangers that the teaching might offer to those unprepared for the initiation (personal communication). The concern was not about the corruption of the message, but that the message might cause harm (duhhka) to the untrained (personal communication). While the aim of Protestant communication is the transmission of symbols of belief about the supernatural, the aim of Buddhist communication is not merely to transmit content, but to create conditions which lessen suffering (Dissanayake 2009a). Because the Kalachakra did not just communicate information, but was aimed at lessening the suffering of its audiences, what we found was a complex relationship between event and digital communication. The communication was not the transmission of a passive referent (svabhāva) that was projected through the media, but rather a mutual conditioning (pratyaya) in which the ceremony and its mediascape were dependent on one and other (pratītyasamutpāda). With this in mind, to analyze the Kalachakra, we turned to a Buddhist model of communication that emerged from the ceremony.  
+
[[Kalachakra]], the [[Dalai lama]] often referred to the [[religion]] ([[dharma]]) as a shield, and that its effectiveness depended on the context in which it was delivered. In [[Buddhism]], [[dharma]] usually refers to the [[Buddha’s teachings]], which indicates not simply the transmitting of [[information]], but also, with varying degrees of skill, the creation of efficient [[conditions]] that lessen [[suffering]]. [[Dharmic]] messages are not [[perceived]] by [[Buddhists]] as [[universal]], but are dependent on the skill and means (upāya-kauśalya) of those that deliver them (Matsunaga and Matsunaga 1974). A [[transmission]] {{Wiki|theory}} of [[religion]] leads to an [[interpretation]] of the [[Kalachakra’s]] mediascape as a loss of fidelity to the [[essential teachings]]. Yet, while there was contention over the digital broadcast of the {{Wiki|ceremony}}, the arguments given by the officials assembled were not about a loss of fidelity to the original sources, but about the dangers that the [[teaching]] might offer to those unprepared for the [[initiation]] (personal [[communication]]). The [[concern]] was not about the corruption of the message, but that the message might [[cause]] harm (duhhka) to the untrained (personal [[communication]]). While the aim of {{Wiki|Protestant}} [[communication]] is the [[transmission]] of [[symbols]] of [[belief]] about the [[supernatural]], the aim of [[Buddhist]] [[communication]] is not merely to transmit content, but to create [[conditions]] which lessen [[suffering]] (Dissanayake 2009a). Because the [[Kalachakra]] did not just {{Wiki|communicate}} [[information]], but was aimed at lessening the [[suffering]] of its audiences, what we found was a complex relationship between event and digital [[communication]]. The [[communication]] was not the [[transmission]] of a passive referent ([[svabhāva]]) that was {{Wiki|projected}} through the media, but rather a mutual {{Wiki|conditioning}} ([[pratyaya]]) in which the {{Wiki|ceremony}} and its mediascape were dependent on one and other ([[pratītyasamutpāda]]). With this in [[mind]], to analyze the [[Kalachakra]], we turned to a [[Buddhist]] model of [[communication]] that emerged from the {{Wiki|ceremony}}.  
 
   
 
   
Table 9.3  A Mathematical Theory of Communication compared to a Buddhist Theory of Communication (after Dissanayake 1983)
+
Table 9.3  A {{Wiki|Mathematical}} {{Wiki|Theory}} of [[Communication]] compared to a [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|Theory}} of [[Communication]] (after Dissanayake 1983)
  
A Mathematical Theory of Communication
+
A {{Wiki|Mathematical}} {{Wiki|Theory}} of [[Communication]]
  
A Buddhist Theory of Communication
+
A [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|Theory}} of [[Communication]]
  
Unidirectional Bidirectional Outcome Process Causality Reciprocity Discrete variables Continuous variables Meaning transferred Meaning created Message-centered Actor-centered Fixed sequence Flexible sequence events separable events inseparable
+
Unidirectional Bidirectional Outcome Process [[Causality]] Reciprocity Discrete variables Continuous variables Meaning transferred Meaning created Message-centered Actor-centered Fixed sequence Flexible sequence events separable events [[inseparable]]
  
Digitalizing Tibet 151 Following the groundbreaking work of the media scholar Dissanayake, we assemble a Buddhist Theory of Communication by focusing on the work of the 2nd-century Buddhist philosopher, Nagarjuna (Dissanayake 1983, 2009b). Nagarjuna is the founder of the Mādhyamika (Middle-way) school of Mahayana Buddhism, and we are particularly interested in Chapter 1, Examination of the Conditions, from his magnum opus, the Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā). In this treatise, Nāgārjuna makes a distinction between causes (hetu) and conditions (pratyaya). By cause (hetu) he means that something has as an essential quality of its nature to bring about an effect on something else. For example, one might argue that in high-modern  
+
Digitalizing [[Tibet]] 151 Following the groundbreaking work of the media [[scholar]] Dissanayake, we assemble a [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|Theory}} of [[Communication]] by focusing on the work of the 2nd-century [[Buddhist philosopher]], [[Nagarjuna]] (Dissanayake 1983, 2009b). [[Nagarjuna]] is the founder of the [[Mādhyamika]] ([[Middle-way]]) school of [[Mahayana Buddhism]], and we are particularly [[interested]] in [[Chapter]] 1, Examination of the [[Conditions]], from his [[Wikipedia:Masterpiece|magnum opus]], the [[Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way]] ([[Mūlamadhyamakakārikā]]). In this treatise, [[Nāgārjuna]] makes a {{Wiki|distinction}} between [[causes]] ([[hetu]]) and [[conditions]] ([[pratyaya]]). By [[cause]] ([[hetu]]) he means that something has as an [[essential]] [[quality]] of its [[nature]] to bring about an effect on something else. For example, one might argue that in high-modern  
 
   
 
   
societies media have caused (hetu) changes to religion. By condition (pratyaya), on the other hand, he indicates that phenomena are not essential, but that different phenomena bring about each other’s state of existence. In this case, while distinct, religion and media would not be essential separate phenomena, but would mutually determine each other. Key to understanding a theory of Buddhist communication is the concept of dependent co-origination (pratītyasamutpāda). Pratitya translates as “having depended” and samutpada as “arising”, and is the notion that everything that comes into existence is dependent on something else ( lopez 2001, 29). Often argued to be the defining ontological heart of Buddhism, dependent co-origination states that all phenomena (dharmas) arise only in relationship to other phenomena, nothing exists on its own (Majjhima Nikaya 1.90). Rather than causing data, information that can be stored and transmitted, to be sent from a source to receiver, a Buddhist theory understands communication as mutual conditioning. While distinct, poles in a communicative act are not different. Conditioning indicates how person, event or process plays a role in generating, and being generated by, another person, state or process.  
+
{{Wiki|societies}} media have [[caused]] ([[hetu]]) changes to [[religion]]. By [[condition]] ([[pratyaya]]), on the other hand, he indicates that [[phenomena]] are not [[essential]], but that different [[phenomena]] bring about each other’s [[state]] of [[existence]]. In this case, while {{Wiki|distinct}}, [[religion]] and media would not be [[essential]] separate [[phenomena]], but would mutually determine each other. Key to [[understanding]] a {{Wiki|theory}} of [[Buddhist]] [[communication]] is the {{Wiki|concept}} of [[dependent co-origination]] ([[pratītyasamutpāda]]). [[Pratitya]] translates as “having depended” and [[samutpada]] as “[[arising]]”, and is the notion that everything that comes into [[existence]] is dependent on something else ( lopez 2001, 29). Often argued to be the defining [[Wikipedia:Ontology|ontological]] [[heart]] of [[Buddhism]], [[dependent co-origination]] states that all [[phenomena]] ([[dharmas]]) arise only in relationship to other [[phenomena]], nothing [[exists]] on its [[own]] ([[Majjhima Nikaya]] 1.90). Rather than causing {{Wiki|data}}, [[information]] that can be stored and transmitted, to be sent from a source to receiver, a [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|theory}} [[understands]] [[communication]] as mutual {{Wiki|conditioning}}. While {{Wiki|distinct}}, poles in a communicative act are not different. {{Wiki|Conditioning}} indicates how [[person]], event or process plays a role in generating, and being generated by, another [[person]], [[state]] or process.  
 
   
 
   
A Buddhist theory of communication, then, analyzes media practices not as the broadcasting of data between sender and receiver (A ⇒ B), but rather as the mutual conditioning of two or more communicators (A ⇔ B).
+
A [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|theory}} of [[communication]], then, analyzes media practices not as the broadcasting of {{Wiki|data}} between sender and receiver (A ⇒ B), but rather as the mutual {{Wiki|conditioning}} of two or more communicators (A ⇔ B).
  
Digitalizing the Kalachakra The Kalachakra’s digitalization creates an oscillation between the desire for transparent immediacy, the experience of what it was like sitting at the Dalai lama’s feet, and the opaque hyper-mediation of multiple media that highlighted mediatization. Rather than being transmitted as information from source to destination, the ceremony made visible how media condition each other by commenting on, reproducing and replacing one another. Kalachakra practitioners wanted to both multiply media sources – printed books, the use of translation radios, large television screens and the Internet – but at the same time to erase all apparent mediation, and experience the Dalai lama’s teachings directly  
+
Digitalizing the [[Kalachakra]] The [[Kalachakra’s]] digitalization creates an oscillation between the [[desire]] for transparent {{Wiki|immediacy}}, the [[experience]] of what it was like sitting at the [[Dalai lama’s]] feet, and the opaque hyper-mediation of multiple media that highlighted mediatization. Rather than being transmitted as [[information]] from source to destination, the {{Wiki|ceremony}} made [[visible]] how media [[condition]] each other by commenting on, reproducing and replacing one another. [[Kalachakra]] practitioners wanted to both multiply media sources – printed [[books]], the use of translation radios, large television screens and the [[Internet]] – but at the same time to erase all apparent [[mediation]], and [[experience]] the [[Dalai lama’s]] teachings directly  
AU: Nagarjuna is also given as Nāgārjuna. Please confirm which one would be the preferred form for consistency.
+
AU: [[Nagarjuna]] is also given as [[Nāgārjuna]]. Please confirm which one would be the preferred [[form]] for consistency.
  
152 Gregory Price Grieve et al. in all their charismatic immediacy. What holds the Kalachakra’s knot of media together is the Dalai lama, who stands at its center? Yet, rather than acting like a broadcast tower, which unidirectionally transmits a single message, the Dalai lama conditions between distinct audiences using distinct media channels. This mediation is interactive, flexible and between two or more people, and is not merely the one-way exchange of information but rather conversely, is a bidirectional exchange in which the message conditions both the sender and receiver. On 10 July, after days of teaching, the first day of the actual initiation began. Around noon, The Dalai lama explained that these were an engagement between master and disciple, in which he becomes the deity at the center of the Kalachakra. The Kalachakra’s immediacy arises (samutpada) from the Tantric empowerment that emerges between the ceremony’s physically assembled audience and the Dalai lama as a  
+
152 Gregory Price Grieve et al. in all their {{Wiki|charismatic}} {{Wiki|immediacy}}. What holds the [[Kalachakra’s]] [[knot]] of media together is the [[Dalai lama]], who stands at its center? Yet, rather than acting like a broadcast tower, which unidirectionally transmits a single message, the [[Dalai lama]] [[conditions]] between {{Wiki|distinct}} audiences using {{Wiki|distinct}} media [[channels]]. This [[mediation]] is interactive, flexible and between two or more [[people]], and is not merely the one-way exchange of [[information]] but rather conversely, is a bidirectional exchange in which the message [[conditions]] both the sender and receiver. On 10 July, after days of [[teaching]], the first day of the actual [[initiation]] began. Around noon, The [[Dalai lama]] explained that these were an engagement between [[master]] and [[disciple]], in which he becomes the [[deity]] at the center of the [[Kalachakra]]. The [[Kalachakra’s]] {{Wiki|immediacy}} arises ([[samutpada]]) from the [[Tantric empowerment]] that emerges between the ceremony’s {{Wiki|physically}} assembled audience and the [[Dalai lama]] as a  
 
   
 
   
Buddhist protector deity. Immediacy refers to a feeling of being with the Dalai lama. As Ong writes, immediacy “the existential relationship of person to person (I am in your presence; you are present to me), with the concept of present time (as against past and future)” (1967, 101). As the French moral philosopher levinas (1985) theorizes, in such face-to-face encounters, people are responsible to one and other as people rather than because of roles, institutions or other social structures. In other words, the immediacy of Tantric empowerment functions because, as the Dalai lama said, on 7 July, during the second day of teachings, he looked straight at the camera and pointing to his eyes and then to the assembled initiates, “You see me. I see you.” (personal communication). Transmission theories of communication are complicated by secrecy. The Kalachakra was described by the Dalai lama as secret.10 The use of secrecy in the ceremony indicates the difference between a Protestant influenced transmission theory of communication and a Buddhist influenced  
+
[[Buddhist]] [[protector deity]]. Immediacy refers to a [[feeling]] of being with the [[Dalai lama.]] As Ong writes, {{Wiki|immediacy}} “the [[existential]] relationship of [[person]] to [[person]] (I am in your presence; you are {{Wiki|present}} to me), with the {{Wiki|concept}} of {{Wiki|present}} time (as against {{Wiki|past}} and {{Wiki|future}})” (1967, 101). As the {{Wiki|French}} [[moral]] [[philosopher]] levinas (1985) theorizes, in such face-to-face encounters, [[people]] are responsible to one and other as [[people]] rather than because of roles, {{Wiki|institutions}} or other {{Wiki|social}} structures. In other words, the {{Wiki|immediacy}} of [[Tantric empowerment]] functions because, as the [[Dalai lama]] said, on 7 July, during the second day of teachings, he looked straight at the camera and pointing to his [[eyes]] and then to the assembled [[initiates]], “You see me. I see you.” (personal [[communication]]). [[Transmission]] theories of [[communication]] are complicated by secrecy. The [[Kalachakra]] was described by the [[Dalai lama]] as secret.10 The use of secrecy in the {{Wiki|ceremony}} indicates the difference between a {{Wiki|Protestant}} influenced [[transmission]] {{Wiki|theory}} of [[communication]] and a [[Buddhist]] influenced  
  
conditioning theory of communication (cf. Guhyasamājatantra). In a transmission religious model, secrecy would indicate when content was not delivered. This model does not work for the Kalachakra for two reasons. First, there were over 150,000 people assembled for the Kalachakra. In fact, because of the large numbers, the ceremony was televised on enormous monitors to the assembled crowd. Second, the ceremony was broadcast and simultaneously translated into a number of languages that could be listened to over small transistor radios. In other words, even the face-to-face immediacy was always already mediatized. In a Buddhist conditioning model of communication, secrecy is not merely the stoppage of content, but the blockage of media affordances in  
+
{{Wiki|conditioning}} {{Wiki|theory}} of [[communication]] (cf. [[Guhyasamājatantra]]). In a [[transmission]] [[religious]] model, secrecy would indicate when content was not delivered. This model does not work for the [[Kalachakra]] for two [[reasons]]. First, there were over 150,000 [[people]] assembled for the [[Kalachakra]]. In fact, because of the large numbers, the {{Wiki|ceremony}} was televised on enormous monitors to the assembled crowd. Second, the {{Wiki|ceremony}} was broadcast and simultaneously translated into a number of [[languages]] that could be listened to over small transistor radios. In other words, even the face-to-face {{Wiki|immediacy}} was always already mediatized. In a [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|conditioning}} model of [[communication]], secrecy is not merely the stoppage of content, but the blockage of media affordances in  
  
order to influence and affect the mediatization. For example, on 3 July, from our position just outside the main stage, we could see movement and hear chanting from the inner sanctum. The chanting was being broadcast over the radios, and the large monitors displayed close up,  
+
order to influence and affect the mediatization. For example, on 3 July, from our position just outside the main stage, we could see {{Wiki|movement}} and hear [[chanting]] from the inner sanctum. The [[chanting]] was being broadcast over the radios, and the large monitors displayed close up,  
Digitalizing Tibet 153 televised images of the Dalai lama and his senior monks. A transmission theory of communication could only describe this as a loss of signal. A conditioning model of communication could indicate how such secrecy was used to heighten immediacy. Many of the people in the crowd that we spoke to, felt as if they were having a direct and personal, even secret, conversation with the Dalai lama. Many people said that they felt as if the Dalai lama were speaking directly to them, and many claimed that the Dalai lama had made eye contact just with them. For example, a German woman sitting next to  
+
Digitalizing [[Tibet]] 153 televised images of the [[Dalai lama]] and his [[senior monks]]. A [[transmission]] {{Wiki|theory}} of [[communication]] could only describe this as a loss of signal. A {{Wiki|conditioning}} model of [[communication]] could indicate how such secrecy was used to heighten {{Wiki|immediacy}}. Many of the [[people]] in the crowd that we spoke to, felt as if they were having a direct and personal, even secret, [[conversation]] with the [[Dalai lama.]] Many [[people]] said that they felt as if the [[Dalai lama]] were {{Wiki|speaking}} directly to them, and many claimed that the [[Dalai lama]] had made [[eye]] [[contact]] just with them. For example, a [[German]] woman sitting next to  
  
us, thought at this point that the Dalai lama had invited to her to the stage, and pushed through the crowd until stopped by security. The Dalai lama was both very intimate and at the same time unreachable. For example, when the Dalai lama spoke with the chief oracle, he leaned in close and pulled a curtain-like cloth over his head and around the two of them, but at the same time there was an extreme close up of the event that was broadcasted on the big screens. Conditioning is key for the Kalachakra, because the ceremony was not merely the conveying of information but (ideally) a transformative,  
+
us, [[thought]] at this point that the [[Dalai lama]] had invited to her to the stage, and pushed through the crowd until stopped by {{Wiki|security}}. The [[Dalai lama]] was both very intimate and at the same time unreachable. For example, when the [[Dalai lama]] spoke with the chief {{Wiki|oracle}}, he leaned in close and pulled a curtain-like cloth over his head and around the two of them, but at the same time there was an extreme close up of the event that was broadcasted on the big screens. {{Wiki|Conditioning}} is key for the [[Kalachakra]], because the {{Wiki|ceremony}} was not merely the conveying of [[information]] but (ideally) a transformative,  
  
empowering and salvific Tantric ritual. Tantric rituals feature practices associated with specific classes of Tantric deities: tutelary deities (yidam), ḍākinīs (khandroma), and various types of Dharma protectors (dharmapāla). These invocations and use of these deities are ideally aimed toward soteriological ends, specifically, ultimately transforming the practitioner into the enlightened tutelary deity (yidam) residing at the center of its particular universe (maṇḍala). The Tantric specialist visualizes himself as the yidam residing in a maṇḍala surrounded by retinues of other deities  
+
[[empowering]] and salvific [[Tantric ritual]]. [[Tantric rituals]] feature practices associated with specific classes of [[Tantric deities]]: [[tutelary deities]] ([[yidam]]), [[ḍākinīs]] ([[khandroma]]), and various types of [[Dharma protectors]] ([[dharmapāla]]). These invocations and use of these [[deities]] are ideally aimed toward [[soteriological]] ends, specifically, ultimately [[transforming]] the [[practitioner]] into the [[enlightened]] [[Wikipedia:tutelary deity|tutelary deity]] ([[yidam]]) residing at the center of its particular [[universe]] ([[maṇḍala]]). The [[Tantric]] specialist [[visualizes]] himself as the [[yidam]] residing in a [[maṇḍala]] surrounded by {{Wiki|retinues}} of other [[deities]]
  
including ḍākinīs, Dharma protectors, and lesser mundane gods and goddesses. In Buddhist Tantric theory, by using the Tantric yidam to harness the power of the mind, one obtains spiritual powers (siddhi) to aid others in mundane matters that include healing, rainmaking, averting disasters and helping others to achieve the state of enlightenment. All practices, however, first require initiation by a guru. The guru takes on the persona of the yidam. Acting as the yidam, through a series of ritual empowerments they bring disciples into the maṇḍala and authorize disciples to engage in the practices of the yidam’s corresponding sādhana. The current Dalai lama’s Kalachakra initiations, such as the one held in ladakh, signals important shifts in this particular empowerment. The Dalai lama positions himself not only as a Tibetan addressing a  
+
[[including]] [[ḍākinīs]], [[Dharma protectors]], and lesser [[mundane]] [[gods]] and [[goddesses]]. In [[Buddhist]] [[Tantric]] {{Wiki|theory}}, by using the [[Tantric]] [[yidam]] to harness the power of the [[mind]], one obtains [[spiritual powers]] ([[siddhi]]) to aid others in [[mundane]] matters that include [[healing]], rainmaking, averting {{Wiki|disasters}} and helping others to achieve the [[state of enlightenment]]. All practices, however, first require [[initiation]] by a [[guru]]. The [[guru]] takes on the persona of the [[yidam]]. Acting as the [[yidam]], through a series of [[ritual]] [[empowerments]] they bring [[disciples]] into the [[maṇḍala]] and authorize [[disciples]] to engage in the practices of the [[yidam’s]] [[corresponding]] [[sādhana]]. The current [[Dalai lama’s]] [[Kalachakra initiations]], such as the one held in {{Wiki|ladakh}}, signals important shifts in this particular [[empowerment]]. The [[Dalai lama]] positions himself not only as a [[Tibetan]] addressing a  
 
   
 
   
  
Buddhist community, but also as a member of a broader global humanity (usually a term used in english). This is apparent by the fact that in the context of preliminary teachings for the Kalachakra initiation, he addressed global concerns, such as the limitations of science and modernity, the need for inter-religious harmony and the significance of  
+
[[Buddhist community]], but also as a member of a broader global [[humanity]] (usually a term used in english). This is apparent by the fact that in the context of preliminary teachings for the [[Kalachakra initiation]], he addressed global concerns, such as the limitations of [[science]] and modernity, the need for inter-religious [[harmony]] and the significance of  
  
secular ethics (a term used in the english) (Singh 2016). As a practitioner 154 Gregory Price Grieve et al. of mind science, the Dalai lama positioned himself as a post-secular teacher, and presented Buddhism as fundamentally ecumenical, secular and scientific. everyone, regardless of their religious background, may benefit from the scientific and philosophical aspects of Buddhism, while foregoing what the Dalai lama calls Buddhist religion (a term used in the english). Scientific and philosophical Buddhism offers interreligious and nonreligious audiences with secular means of transforming the mind. For the Dalai lama, Buddhist science (a term used in the english) and Western science thus become mutually enhancing forces for improving modern humanity, the  
+
{{Wiki|secular}} [[ethics]] (a term used in the english) (Singh 2016). As a [[practitioner]] 154 Gregory Price Grieve et al. of [[mind]] [[science]], the [[Dalai lama]] positioned himself as a post-secular [[teacher]], and presented [[Buddhism]] as fundamentally {{Wiki|ecumenical}}, {{Wiki|secular}} and [[scientific]]. everyone, regardless of their [[religious]] background, may [[benefit]] from the [[scientific]] and [[philosophical]] aspects of [[Buddhism]], while foregoing what the [[Dalai lama]] calls [[Buddhist religion]] (a term used in the english). [[Scientific]] and [[philosophical]] [[Buddhism]] offers interreligious and nonreligious audiences with {{Wiki|secular}} means of [[transforming the mind]]. For the [[Dalai lama]], [[Buddhist]] [[science]] (a term used in the english) and [[Western]] [[science]] thus become mutually enhancing forces for improving {{Wiki|modern}} [[humanity]], the  
  
former capable of transforming the mind and the inner capacities of humans, and the latter a medium for material progress and development (Singh 2016). While one could argue that mediatization is occurring, and one could argue for secularization, just the opposite of Hjarvard’s prediction of anomie is occurring. Digitalization is increasing feelings of community and the authority of the central clergy. When the Dalai lama commenced the Kalachakra ceremony, he began by claiming that all religions are ultimately united under the concept of Dharma. Here, he appropriates the concept of Dharma not as  
+
former capable of [[transforming the mind]] and the inner capacities of [[humans]], and the [[latter]] a {{Wiki|medium}} for material progress and [[development]] (Singh 2016). While one could argue that mediatization is occurring, and one could argue for secularization, just the opposite of Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|prediction}} of anomie is occurring. Digitalization is increasing [[feelings]] of {{Wiki|community}} and the authority of the central {{Wiki|clergy}}. When the [[Dalai lama]] commenced the [[Kalachakra]] {{Wiki|ceremony}}, he began by claiming that all [[religions]] are ultimately united under the {{Wiki|concept}} of [[Dharma]]. Here, he appropriates the {{Wiki|concept}} of [[Dharma]] not as  
  
constituting religious values per se, but rather as a source of protection, specifically a defense against negative mental states and immoral actions. For the Dalai lama, this sense of Dharma manifests in all religions and acts as a post-secular moral force for transforming human consciousness (Singh 2016). When all religions find this common post-secular Dharma, they can work together to foster shared human values such as compassion, love and tolerance. In this framework, the Kalachakra initiation in ladakh – like most of the Dalai lama’s large public teachings – is not merely a Buddhist ritual ceremony; it is a period for all people, regardless of religion, to engage in dialogue and reflect upon their shared secular ethics. For the Dalai lama, this secular ethics is both traditional, in that its precepts and ideals, including compassion, love and generosity, manifest in all religions, and modern to the extent  
+
constituting [[religious]] values [[per se]], but rather as a source of [[protection]], specifically a defense against negative [[mental states]] and [[immoral]] [[actions]]. For the [[Dalai lama]], this [[sense]] of [[Dharma]] [[manifests]] in all [[religions]] and acts as a post-secular [[moral]] force for [[transforming]] [[human consciousness]] (Singh 2016). When all [[religions]] find this common post-secular [[Dharma]], they can work together to foster shared [[human]] values such as [[compassion]], [[love]] and [[tolerance]]. In this framework, the [[Kalachakra initiation]] in {{Wiki|ladakh}} – like most of the [[Dalai lama’s]] large public teachings – is not merely a [[Buddhist ritual]] {{Wiki|ceremony}}; it is a period for all [[people]], regardless of [[religion]], to engage in {{Wiki|dialogue}} and reflect upon their shared {{Wiki|secular}} [[ethics]]. For the [[Dalai lama]], this {{Wiki|secular}} [[ethics]] is both [[traditional]], in that its [[precepts]] and ideals, [[including]] [[compassion]], [[love]] and [[generosity]], [[manifest]] in all [[religions]], and {{Wiki|modern}} to the extent  
  
that it provides what he calls an ethics for a new millennium (a term usually used in english).11
+
that it provides what he calls an [[ethics]] for a new millennium (a term usually used in english).11
Conclusion later that evening, after we had left the ceremonial grounds, we analyzed what at first blush appeared the privileging of the digital representations of the ceremony over the ceremony itself. We puzzled over why Tibetans allowed the face-to-face ceremony to be overshadowed by its digitalization. Yet, as the night wore on, and we explored the data more closely, we started to reflect on how images of the Kalachakra are treated by  
+
Conclusion later that evening, after we had left the {{Wiki|ceremonial}} grounds, we analyzed what at first blush appeared the privileging of the digital {{Wiki|representations}} of the {{Wiki|ceremony}} over the {{Wiki|ceremony}} itself. We puzzled over why [[Tibetans]] allowed the face-to-face {{Wiki|ceremony}} to be overshadowed by its digitalization. Yet, as the night wore on, and we explored the {{Wiki|data}} more closely, we started to reflect on how images of the [[Kalachakra]] are treated by  
  
Tibetan Buddhists themselves, and we realized that the fault might lie with our own biases, and not with the use or abuse of digital media technologies. Still, a central question remained. In the rich, dynamic,  
+
[[Tibetan Buddhists]] themselves, and we [[realized]] that the fault might lie with our [[own]] biases, and not with the use or abuse of digital media technologies. Still, a central question remained. In the rich, dynamic,  
  
Digitalizing Tibet 155 hyper-mediatized hubbub of the Kalachakra’s digitalized mediascape, between the face-to-face interactions, enormous video monitors, amplified sound, websites, streamed videos and other social media, as well as radios used for simultaneous translation, printed books, even mass produced sacred images, it became unclear as to where the actual ceremony stopped and its representations began. What was the thin skin between sign and referent? Between the virtual and the actual? Between the object and its mediation, not to mention the effects of its mediatization? To answer this cluster of questions, our chapter has turned to the notion of digitalization, which models not merely the translation of the analogue into the digital, but the  
+
Digitalizing [[Tibet]] 155 hyper-mediatized hubbub of the [[Kalachakra’s]] digitalized mediascape, between the face-to-face interactions, enormous video monitors, amplified [[sound]], websites, streamed videos and other {{Wiki|social}} media, as well as radios used for simultaneous translation, printed [[books]], even {{Wiki|mass}} produced [[sacred]] images, it became unclear as to where the actual {{Wiki|ceremony}} stopped and its {{Wiki|representations}} began. What was the thin {{Wiki|skin}} between sign and referent? Between the virtual and the actual? Between the [[object]] and its [[mediation]], not to mention the effects of its mediatization? To answer this cluster of questions, our [[chapter]] has turned to the notion of digitalization, which models not merely the translation of the analogue into the digital, but the  
  
conditioning of social structures and practices through the process of being digitized. Think, for example, of how Amazon.com has conditioned the economy of local bookstores.12 To build our model, we have relied on Hjarvard and his theory of the mediatization of religion conditioned by Dissanayake’s critical Buddhist theory of communication. For Hjarvard, the mediatization of high- modern society is a “‘Trojan horse’ that challenges the authority of institutionalized religion”, and ultimately Nordic culture (2011, 132). We found just the reverse happening for Tibet. Digitalization increased the Dalia  
+
{{Wiki|conditioning}} of {{Wiki|social}} structures and practices through the process of being digitized. Think, for example, of how Amazon.com has [[conditioned]] the {{Wiki|economy}} of local bookstores.12 [[To build]] our model, we have relied on Hjarvard and his {{Wiki|theory}} of the mediatization of [[religion]] [[conditioned]] by Dissanayake’s critical [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|theory}} of [[communication]]. For Hjarvard, the mediatization of high- {{Wiki|modern}} [[society]] is a “‘Trojan [[horse]]’ that challenges the authority of institutionalized [[religion]]”, and ultimately Nordic {{Wiki|culture}} (2011, 132). We found just the reverse happening for [[Tibet]]. Digitalization increased the Dalia  
  
lama’s authority and charisma, ran against banalization’s anomie, as well as created if not a virtual, at the least an augmented Tibet. Yet, our goal in this chapter has not been mere critique. Instead, we have taken the first steps to recondition Hjarvard’s theory of mediatization so that is productive as a theory by which to analyze Buddhist mediascapes such as the Kalachakra. Conditioning Hjarvard’s theory of mediatization with critical Buddhist communication theory has illustrated how a scholar’s definition of religion affects how they theorize its mediatization. We maintain that since Protestant models of communication remain deeply embedded in how many scholars of communication approach mediatization, if one wants to understand non-Western  
+
[[lama’s]] authority and {{Wiki|charisma}}, ran against banalization’s anomie, as well as created if not a virtual, at the least an augmented [[Tibet]]. Yet, our goal in this [[chapter]] has not been mere critique. Instead, we have taken the first steps to recondition Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|theory}} of mediatization so that is {{Wiki|productive}} as a {{Wiki|theory}} by which to analyze [[Buddhist]] mediascapes such as the [[Kalachakra]]. {{Wiki|Conditioning}} Hjarvard’s {{Wiki|theory}} of mediatization with critical [[Buddhist]] [[communication]] {{Wiki|theory}} has illustrated how a scholar’s [[definition]] of [[religion]] affects how they theorize its mediatization. We maintain that since {{Wiki|Protestant}} models of [[communication]] remain deeply embedded in how many [[scholars]] of [[communication]] approach mediatization, if one wants to understand non-Western  
  
religions, one cannot simply add token Asian content. Instead, one needs to rethink the theories by which we model communication. Our observation and analysis of the Kalachakra ceremony necessitates a theory of mediation not as a one-way transmission of information about an essential referent (svabhāva) from source to destination (A ⇒ B), but as media practices that mutually condition (pratyaya) each other (A ⇔ B). As the chapter’s epigraph hints, while built upon the research of Dissanayake, our model is ultimately indebted to the Indian philosopher Nagarjuna’s ontological viewpoint that maintains that phenomena lack any intrinsic and self-arising nature. Instead, everything conditions everything else, and relies upon numerous causes and conditions. We have spilled much ink illustrating what Nordic theories of mediatization can learn from critical Buddhist theories of communication. In this denouement, we assert that Buddhist communication theory  
+
[[religions]], one cannot simply add token {{Wiki|Asian}} content. Instead, one needs to rethink the theories by which we model [[communication]]. Our observation and analysis of the [[Kalachakra]] {{Wiki|ceremony}} necessitates a {{Wiki|theory}} of [[mediation]] not as a one-way [[transmission]] of [[information]] about an [[essential]] referent ([[svabhāva]]) from source to destination (A ⇒ B), but as media practices that mutually [[condition]] ([[pratyaya]]) each other (A ⇔ B). As the chapter’s {{Wiki|epigraph}} hints, while built upon the research of Dissanayake, our model is ultimately indebted to the [[Indian philosopher]] [[Nagarjuna’s]] [[Wikipedia:Ontology|ontological]] viewpoint that maintains that [[phenomena]] lack any intrinsic and [[self-arising]] [[nature]]. Instead, everything [[conditions]] everything else, and relies upon numerous [[causes and conditions]]. We have spilled much ink illustrating what Nordic theories of mediatization can learn from critical [[Buddhist]] theories of [[communication]]. In this denouement, we assert that [[Buddhist]] [[communication]] {{Wiki|theory}}
  
  
can learn two important lessons from mediatization. First, mediatization models how Buddhist social worlds, like all social worlds, are imagined by their inhabitants through technologies of communication, and that these social worlds are conditioned by these media practices.  
+
can learn two important lessons from mediatization. First, mediatization models how [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|social}} [[worlds]], like all {{Wiki|social}} [[worlds]], are [[imagined]] by their inhabitants through technologies of [[communication]], and that these {{Wiki|social}} [[worlds]] are [[conditioned]] by these media practices.  
 
Accordingly, mediatization theory enables researchers to analyze the effect media have on determining Buddhist content, to map the social worlds held together (√dhṛ) by digital media, and also to illuminate the historic transformations caused by digitalization of Tibetan ceremonies such as the Kalachakra. For example, mediatization theory allows the understanding of the 2014 Kalachakra ceremony’s mediascape and its religious practices, as well as trace a shift by the Dalai lama from media as information, to an increasing use of cyberspace as a place of participatory and interactive media practices. Second, generalizing from the case study of the 2014 Kalachakra, we can now extend our theory of digitalization to understand how  Tibetan Buddhism, in diaspora, uses online religious practices for nation building. A reconditioned mediatization theory gives us the conceptual tools to explain (1) why far more than other religious traditions,  Tibetan
 
 
   
 
   
Buddhism flourishes in digital spaces and affords the use of the Internet not just for the transmission of information but for ceremonial practice, and also (2) how long-distance religious practices afford a diaspora community. Obviously, there are both historical and technological conditions in play. Historically, living in diaspora creates a situation in which long-distance forms of digitally mediated religious practice are not a choice but a necessity. Technologically, digital media allows for the types of interactive, real time communication that ceremonies such as the  Kalachakra require. Beyond the historical and technological, however, a reconditioned mediatization theory reveals that a religion’s ontology also plays a major role in its digitalization. Key to understanding a theory of Buddhist communication is the concept of dependent co- origination (pratītyasamutpāda), which maintains that everything that comes into existence is dependent on something else. As the Dalai lama said on the second day of the Kalachakras teachings, “Nothing exists objectively, nothing exists on its own side.”
+
Accordingly, mediatization {{Wiki|theory}} enables researchers to analyze the effect media have on determining [[Buddhist]] content, to map the {{Wiki|social}} [[worlds]] held together (√dhṛ) by digital media, and also to [[illuminate]] the historic transformations [[caused]] by digitalization of [[Tibetan]] {{Wiki|ceremonies}} such as the [[Kalachakra]]. For example, mediatization {{Wiki|theory}} allows the [[understanding]] of the 2014 [[Kalachakra]] ceremony’s mediascape and its [[religious]] practices, as well as trace a shift by the [[Dalai lama]] from media as [[information]], to an increasing use of cyberspace as a place of participatory and interactive media practices. Second, generalizing from the case study of the 2014 [[Kalachakra]], we can now extend our {{Wiki|theory}} of digitalization to understand how  [[Tibetan Buddhism]], in {{Wiki|diaspora}}, uses online [[religious]] practices for {{Wiki|nation}} building. A reconditioned mediatization {{Wiki|theory}} gives us the {{Wiki|conceptual}} tools to explain (1) why far more than other [[religious]] [[traditions]],  [[Tibetan Buddhism]] flourishes in digital spaces and affords the use of the [[Internet]] not just for the [[transmission]] of [[information]] but for {{Wiki|ceremonial}} practice, and also (2) how long-distance [[religious]] practices afford a {{Wiki|diaspora}} {{Wiki|community}}. Obviously, there are both historical and technological [[conditions]] in play. Historically, living in {{Wiki|diaspora}} creates a situation in which long-distance [[forms]] of digitally mediated [[religious practice]] are not a choice but a necessity. Technologically, digital media allows for the types of interactive, real time [[communication]] that {{Wiki|ceremonies}} such as the  [[Kalachakra]] require. Beyond the historical and technological, however, a reconditioned mediatization {{Wiki|theory}} reveals that a religion’s {{Wiki|ontology}} also plays a major role in its digitalization. Key to [[understanding]] a {{Wiki|theory}} of [[Buddhist]] [[communication]] is the {{Wiki|concept}} of dependent co- origination ([[pratītyasamutpāda]]), which maintains that everything that comes into [[existence]] is dependent on something else. As the [[Dalai lama]] said on the second day of the [[Kalachakras]] teachings, “Nothing [[exists]] objectively, nothing [[exists]] on its [[own]] side.”
  
Notes 1 Nagarjuna, Mūlamadhyamakakārikā [I.1]; for our translation, we use Jay Garfield. 1995. The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way. Oxford:  
+
Notes 1 [[Nagarjuna]], [[Mūlamadhyamakakārikā]] [I.1]; for our translation, we use {{Wiki|Jay Garfield}}. 1995. The [[Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way]]. [[Oxford]]:  
 
   
 
   
Oxford University Press. 2 Cf. 33rd Kalachakra empowerment Preliminary Teachings. 3 Cf. Office of His Holiness the Dalai lama, n.d., Introduction to the Kalachkra. 4 Cf. Office of His Holiness the Dalai lama 2014. Kalachakra Initiation – Part 1 [online video]. 5 A Procrustean bed describes a scheme that produces uniformity by arbitrary, often violent methods. It is named after Procrustes, the villain from  
+
[[Oxford University Press]]. 2 Cf. 33rd [[Kalachakra empowerment]] Preliminary Teachings. 3 Cf. Office of [[His Holiness]] the [[Dalai lama]], n.d., Introduction to the Kalachkra. 4 Cf. Office of [[His Holiness]] the [[Dalai lama]] 2014. [[Kalachakra Initiation]] – Part 1 [online video]. 5 A Procrustean bed describes a scheme that produces uniformity by arbitrary, often [[violent]] [[methods]]. It is named after Procrustes, the villain from  
  
Digitalizing Tibet 157 Greek Mythology who stretched or amputated the limbs of travelers to make them fit to the length of his bed. 6 For a full list of initiations, see www.dalailama.com/teachings/ kalachakrainitiations, accessed 4 October 2017. 7 For more on the rituals of the Kalachakra, see: Dalai lama XIV, 1999a. Kalachakra Tantra: Rite of Initiation 3rd edition. Translated by J.  Hopkins. Boston: Wisdom Publications. See also A. Berzin, 1997. Taking the  
+
Digitalizing [[Tibet]] 157 {{Wiki|Greek}} [[Mythology]] who stretched or amputated the limbs of travelers to make them fit to the length of his bed. 6 For a full list of [[initiations]], see www.dalailama.com/teachings/ kalachakrainitiations, accessed 4 October 2017. 7 For more on the [[rituals]] of the [[Kalachakra]], see: [[Dalai lama]] XIV, 1999a. [[Kalachakra Tantra]]: [[Rite]] of [[Initiation]] 3rd edition. Translated by J.  Hopkins. [[Boston]]: [[Wisdom Publications]]. See also A. [[Berzin]], 1997. Taking the  
 
   
 
   
Kalachakra Initiation. Ithaca: Snow lion Publications. 8 For a nuanced treatment on the themes of selfhood, temporality, and embodiment in the Kālacakra Tanta, see V. A. Wallace, 2001. The Inner Kālacakra: A Buddhist Tantric View of the Individual. New York: Oxford University Press. 9 To examine the 2014 Kalachakra, we draw on three sources: Field notes we wrote while attending the ceremony; news reports of the event by local  ladakhi media outlets and news reports issued by the Office of the Fourteenth Dalai lama; and english translations of the  Dalai lama’s teachings found at the following websites: www.dalailama.com/ webcasts/ post/323-33rd- kalachakra-empowerment-preliminary-teachings, www.dalailama.com/webcasts/post/322-his-holiness-the- dalailamas-79th-birthday-celebration, and www.dalailama.com/webcasts/ post/321-introductory-teaching—kalachakra-in-ladakh-2014. 10 Kalachakra: The Public and The Secret Initiations. 11 For more on the Dalai lama’s take on ethics, religion, secularism and modernism, see Dalai lama XIV, 1999b. Ethics for the New Millennium. New York: Penguin and Dalai lama XIV, 2011. Beyond Religion: Ethics for a Whole World. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 12 Cf. Amazon to Scuppernong Books.
+
[[Kalachakra Initiation]]. [[Ithaca]]: [[Snow lion]] Publications. 8 For a nuanced treatment on the themes of [[selfhood]], temporality, and [[embodiment]] in the [[Kālacakra]] Tanta, see V. [[A. Wallace]], 2001. The [[Inner Kālacakra]]: A [[Buddhist]] [[Tantric]] View of the {{Wiki|Individual}}. [[New York]]: [[Oxford University Press]]. 9 To examine the 2014 [[Kalachakra]], we draw on three sources: Field notes we wrote while attending the {{Wiki|ceremony}}; news reports of the event by local  ladakhi media outlets and news reports issued by the Office of the Fourteenth [[Dalai lama]]; and english translations of the  [[Dalai lama’s]] teachings found at the following websites: www.dalailama.com/ webcasts/ post/323-33rd- kalachakra-empowerment-preliminary-teachings, www.dalailama.com/webcasts/post/322-his-holiness-the- dalailamas-79th-birthday-celebration, and www.dalailama.com/webcasts/ post/321-introductory-teaching—kalachakra-in-ladakh-2014. 10 [[Kalachakra]]: The Public and The Secret [[Initiations]]. 11 For more on the [[Dalai lama’s]] take on [[ethics]], [[religion]], secularism and {{Wiki|modernism}}, see [[Dalai lama]] XIV, 1999b. {{Wiki|Ethics for the New Millennium}}. [[New York]]: Penguin and [[Dalai lama]] XIV, 2011. Beyond [[Religion]]: [[Ethics]] for a Whole [[World]]. [[Boston]]: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 12 Cf. Amazon to Scuppernong [[Books]].
  
References Primary Sources 33rd Kalachakra empowerment Preliminary Teachings, n.d. Available at www.dalailama.com/videos/33rd kalachakra-empowerment-preliminary- teachings, accessed 4 October 2017. Guhyasamājatantra. Translated from Sanskrit by F. Fremantle, 1971. A Critical Study of the Guhyasamājatantra. london: University of london library. Kālacakra Tantra. Translated from Tibetan by J. Hopkins, 1999. Kalachakra Tantra: Rite of Initiation. New York: Wisdom Publications. Kalachakra: The Public and the Secret Initiations. Available at www.trimondi. de/SDle/Part-1-06.htm, accessed 4 October 2017. Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. Translated from Sanskrit by J. Garfield, 1995. Fundamental Wisdom on the Middle Way: Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Office of His Holiness the Dalia lama, 2014a. Kalachakra Initiation – Part 1. [video] Available at www.youtube.com/watch?v=654CdfMeOoc, accessed 4 October 2017. Office of His Holiness the Dalia lama, 2014b. 33rd Kalachakra Empowerment Preliminary Teachings. [video] Available at www.dalailama.com/ videos/33rd-kalachakra-empowerment-preliminary-teachings, accessed 4 October 2017.
+
References Primary Sources 33rd [[Kalachakra empowerment]] Preliminary Teachings, n.d. Available at www.dalailama.com/videos/33rd kalachakra-empowerment-preliminary- teachings, accessed 4 October 2017. [[Guhyasamājatantra]]. Translated from [[Sanskrit]] by F. [[Fremantle]], 1971. A Critical Study of the [[Guhyasamājatantra]]. {{Wiki|london}}: [[University of london]] library. [[Kālacakra Tantra]]. Translated from [[Tibetan]] by J. Hopkins, 1999. [[Kalachakra Tantra]]: [[Rite]] of [[Initiation]]. [[New York]]: [[Wisdom Publications]]. [[Kalachakra]]: The Public and the Secret [[Initiations]]. Available at www.trimondi. de/SDle/Part-1-06.htm, accessed 4 October 2017. [[Mūlamadhyamakakārikā]]. Translated from [[Sanskrit]] by J. Garfield, 1995. [[Fundamental Wisdom]] on the [[Middle Way]]: [[Mūlamadhyamakakārikā]]. [[Oxford]]: [[Oxford University Press]]. Office of [[His Holiness]] the Dalia [[lama]], 2014a. [[Kalachakra Initiation]] – Part 1. [video] Available at www.youtube.com/watch?v=654CdfMeOoc, accessed 4 October 2017. Office of [[His Holiness]] the Dalia [[lama]], 2014b. 33rd [[Kalachakra Empowerment]] Preliminary Teachings. [video] Available at www.dalailama.com/ videos/33rd-kalachakra-empowerment-preliminary-teachings, accessed 4 October 2017.
  
Ratnāvalī. Translated from Sanskrit by M. R. Kale, 2002. The Ratnāvalī. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Suhṛllekha. Translated from Sanskrit by B. Dharmamitra, 2008. Letter From a Friend [The Suhṛllekha]. Available at www.kalavinka.org/Jewels/book_ excerpts/letter_excerpts/letter_X-13_X-01.pdf, accessed 4 October 2017.
+
[[Ratnāvalī]]. Translated from [[Sanskrit]] by M. R. Kale, 2002. The [[Ratnāvalī]]. [[Delhi]]: {{Wiki|Motilal Banarsidass}} Publishers. [[Suhṛllekha]]. Translated from [[Sanskrit]] by B. [[Dharmamitra]], 2008. [[Letter]] From a [[Friend]] [The [[Suhṛllekha]]]. Available at www.kalavinka.org/Jewels/book_ excerpts/letter_excerpts/letter_X-13_X-01.pdf, accessed 4 October 2017.
  
Secondary Sources Amazon, 1994–. Available at www.amazon.com, accessed 5 October 2017. Appadurai, A., 1990. Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural economy. Theory Culture Society, 7(2), 1–24. Baudrillard, J., 1995. The Gulf War Did Not Take Place. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Berger, P., 1967. The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion. Garden City: Doubleday. Berger, P., 1999. The Desecularization of the World: Resurgent Religion and World Politics. Grand Rapids: William B. eerdmans Publishing Company. Berzin, A., 1997. Taking the Kalachakra Initiation. Ithaca: Snow lion Publications. Campbell, H., 2010. When Religion Meets New Media. New York: Routledge. Campbell, H. and Grieve, G., 2014. What Playing with Religion Offers Digital Game Studies. In: Campbell, H. and Grieve, G. P., eds. Playing with Religion in Digital Games. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1–21. Chakrabarty, D., 2000. Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and  
+
Secondary Sources Amazon, 1994–. Available at www.amazon.com, accessed 5 October 2017. Appadurai, A., 1990. Disjuncture and Difference in the Global {{Wiki|Cultural}} {{Wiki|economy}}. {{Wiki|Theory}} {{Wiki|Culture}} [[Society]], 7(2), 1–24. Baudrillard, J., 1995. The Gulf [[War]] Did Not Take Place. {{Wiki|Indianapolis}}: [[Indiana University]] Press. Berger, P., 1967. The [[Sacred]] Canopy: [[Elements]] of a Sociological {{Wiki|Theory}} of [[Religion]]. [[Garden]] City: Doubleday. Berger, P., 1999. The Desecularization of the [[World]]: Resurgent [[Religion]] and [[World]] Politics. Grand Rapids: William B. eerdmans Publishing Company. [[Berzin]], A., 1997. Taking the [[Kalachakra Initiation]]. [[Ithaca]]: [[Snow lion]] Publications. Campbell, H., 2010. When [[Religion]] Meets New Media. [[New York]]: Routledge. Campbell, H. and Grieve, G., 2014. What Playing with [[Religion]] Offers Digital Game Studies. In: Campbell, H. and Grieve, G. P., eds. Playing with [[Religion]] in Digital Games. {{Wiki|Indianapolis}}: [[Indiana University]] Press, 1–21. Chakrabarty, D., 2000. Provincializing {{Wiki|Europe}}: Postcolonial [[Thought]] and  
  
Historical Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Couldry, N. and Hepp, A., 2013. Conceptualizing Mediatization: Contexts, Traditions, Arguments. Communication Theory, 23(3), 191–202. Dalai lama, 1999a. Kalachakra Tantra: Rite of Initiation. 3rd ed. Trans. J. Hopkins. Boston: Wisdom Publications. Dalai lama, 1999b. Ethics for the New Millennium. New York: Penguin. Dalai lama, 2011. Beyond Religion: Ethics for a Whole World. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Dalai lama, n.d. 33rd kalachakra Empowerment. Preliminary Teachings. Available at www.dalailama.com/webcasts/post/323-33rd-kalachakra- empowerment-preliminary-teachings, accessed 4 October 2017. Dalai lama, n.d. His Holiness the Dalai Lamas 79th birthday celebration. Available  
+
Historical Difference. [[Princeton]]: [[Princeton University Press]]. Couldry, N. and Hepp, A., 2013. [[Conceptualizing]] Mediatization: Contexts, [[Traditions]], Arguments. [[Communication]] {{Wiki|Theory}}, 23(3), 191–202. [[Dalai lama]], 1999a. [[Kalachakra Tantra]]: [[Rite]] of [[Initiation]]. 3rd ed. Trans. J. Hopkins. [[Boston]]: [[Wisdom Publications]]. [[Dalai lama]], 1999b. {{Wiki|Ethics for the New Millennium}}. [[New York]]: Penguin. [[Dalai lama]], 2011. Beyond [[Religion]]: [[Ethics]] for a Whole [[World]]. [[Boston]]: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. [[Dalai lama]], n.d. 33rd [[kalachakra]] [[Empowerment]]. Preliminary Teachings. Available at www.dalailama.com/webcasts/post/323-33rd-kalachakra- empowerment-preliminary-teachings, accessed 4 October 2017. [[Dalai lama]], n.d. [[His Holiness]] the [[Dalai Lamas]] 79th [[birthday]] celebration. Available  
  
at www.dalailama.com/webcasts/post/322-his-holiness-the- dalailamas-79th-birthday-celebration, accessed 4 October 2017. Dalai lama, n.d. Introductory Teaching. Kalachakra in Ladakh 2014. Available at www.dalailama.com/webcasts/post/321-introductory-teaching— kalachakrain-ladakh-2014, accessed 4 October 2017. Davidson Reynolds, P., 1971. A Primer in Theory Construction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Derrida, J., 1988. Of Grammatology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press (corrected edition). Dissanayake, W., 1983. The Communication Significance of the Buddhist  
+
at www.dalailama.com/webcasts/post/322-his-holiness-the- dalailamas-79th-birthday-celebration, accessed 4 October 2017. [[Dalai lama]], n.d. Introductory [[Teaching]]. [[Kalachakra]] in {{Wiki|Ladakh}} 2014. Available at www.dalailama.com/webcasts/post/321-introductory-teaching— kalachakrain-ladakh-2014, accessed 4 October 2017. Davidson Reynolds, P., 1971. A Primer in {{Wiki|Theory}} Construction. [[Boston]]: Allyn and [[Bacon]]. [[Derrida]], J., 1988. Of Grammatology. [[Baltimore]]: [[Johns Hopkins University Press]] (corrected edition). Dissanayake, W., 1983. The [[Communication]] Significance of the [[Buddhist]]
 
   
 
   
Concept of Dependent Co-Origination. Communication, 8(1), 29–45. Dissanayake, W., 2009a. The Production of Asian Theories of Communication: Contexts and Challenges. Asian Journal of Communication, 19(4), 453–468.
+
{{Wiki|Concept}} of Dependent Co-Origination. [[Communication]], 8(1), 29–45. Dissanayake, W., 2009a. The Production of {{Wiki|Asian}} Theories of [[Communication]]: Contexts and Challenges. {{Wiki|Asian}} Journal of [[Communication]], 19(4), 453–468.
Digitalizing Tibet 159 Dissanayake, W., 2009b. Buddhist Communication Theory. In: littlejohn, S. W.  
+
Digitalizing [[Tibet]] 159 Dissanayake, W., 2009b. [[Buddhist]] [[Communication]] {{Wiki|Theory}}. In: littlejohn, S. W.  
 
   
 
   
and Foss, K. A., eds. Encyclopedia of Communication Theory. Thousand Oaks: SAGe Publications, 84–85. Durkheim, e., 1995. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. New York: The Free Press (Simon & Schuster). eliade, M., 1961. History of Religions and a New Humanism. History of  
+
and Foss, K. A., eds. {{Wiki|Encyclopedia}} of [[Communication]] {{Wiki|Theory}}. Thousand Oaks: SAGe Publications, 84–85. Durkheim, e., 1995. The Elementary [[Forms]] of [[Religious]] [[Life]]. [[New York]]: The Free Press (Simon & Schuster). eliade, M., 1961. History of [[Religions]] and a New {{Wiki|Humanism}}. History of  
 
   
 
   
Religions, 1(1), 1–8. engelke, M., 2012. Angels in Swindon: Public Religion and Ambient Faith in england. American Ethnologist, 39(3), 155–170. ess, C., 1996. The Political Computer: Democracy, CMC, and Habermas. In: ess, C., ed. Philosophical Perspectives on Computer-Mediated Communication. Albany: State University of New York Press. Garfield, J., 1995. The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way. Oxford:  
+
[[Religions]], 1(1), 1–8. engelke, M., 2012. {{Wiki|Angels}} in Swindon: Public [[Religion]] and Ambient [[Faith]] in england. [[American]] Ethnologist, 39(3), 155–170. ess, C., 1996. The {{Wiki|Political}} Computer: {{Wiki|Democracy}}, CMC, and Habermas. In: ess, C., ed. [[Philosophical]] Perspectives on Computer-Mediated [[Communication]]. [[Albany]]: [[State University of New York Press]]. Garfield, J., 1995. The [[Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way]]. [[Oxford]]:  
 
   
 
   
Oxford University Press. Goody, J., 1986. The Logic of Writing and the Organization of Society.  
+
[[Oxford University Press]]. Goody, J., 1986. The [[Logic]] of [[Writing]] and the [[Organization]] of [[Society]].  
 
   
 
   
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Grieve, G., 2006. Retheorizing Religion in Nepal. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Grieve, G., 2017. Mind the Gap: Screens, Ontologies, and the Far Shore. In: Grieve, G., CyberZen: Imagining Authentic Buddhist Identity, Community, and Practices in the Virtual World of Second Life. New York: Routledge, 194–214. Grieve, G. and Veidlinger, D., 2016. Buddhist Media Technologies. In: Jarryson, M., ed. Oxford Handbook of Contemporary Buddhism. london: Oxford University Press, 469–486. Havelock, e., 1986. The Muse Learns to Write: Reflections on Orality and Literacy from Antiquity to the Present. New Haven: Yale University Press. Helland, C., 2016. Digital Religion. In: Yamane, D., ed. Handbook of Religion and Social Institutions. Switzerland: Springer, 177–196. Hjarvard, S., 2008a. The Mediatization of Society. A Theory of the  Media as Agents of Social and Cultural Change. Nordicom Review, 29(2), 105–134. Hjarvard, S., 2008b. A Theory of Media As Agents of Religious Change. Northern Lights, 6(1), 9–26. Hjarvard, S., 2011. The Mediatisation of Religion: Theorising Religion, Media and Social Change. Culture and Religion, 12(2), 119–135. Hjarvard, S., 2013. The Mediatization of Culture and Society. london: Routledge. Hjarvard, S., 2014. From Mediation to Mediatization: The Institutionalization of New Media. In: Hepp, A. and Krotz, F., eds. Mediatized Worlds. Culture and Society in a Media Age. Basingtoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 123–139. Hoover, S., 2006. Religion in the Media Age. New York: Routledge. Innis, H., 1951. The Bias of Communication. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Jenkins, H., 1992. Textual Poachers: Television Fans & Participatory Culture. New York: Routledge. Jennings, R., 1969. Policies and Practices of Selected National Religious Bodies as Related to Broadcasting in the Public Interest. PhD Dissertation, New York University.
+
[[Cambridge]]: {{Wiki|Cambridge University Press}}. Grieve, G., 2006. Retheorizing [[Religion]] in [[Nepal]]. [[New York]]: Palgrave Macmillan. Grieve, G., 2017. [[Mind]] the Gap: Screens, Ontologies, and the Far Shore. In: Grieve, G., CyberZen: [[Imagining]] Authentic [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|Identity}}, {{Wiki|Community}}, and Practices in the Virtual [[World]] of Second [[Life]]. [[New York]]: Routledge, 194–214. Grieve, G. and Veidlinger, D., 2016. [[Buddhist]] Media Technologies. In: Jarryson, M., ed. [[Oxford]] Handbook of Contemporary [[Buddhism]]. {{Wiki|london}}: [[Oxford University Press]], 469–486. Havelock, e., 1986. The Muse Learns to Write: Reflections on Orality and Literacy from Antiquity to the Present. New Haven: {{Wiki|Yale University Press}}. Helland, C., 2016. Digital [[Religion]]. In: Yamane, D., ed. Handbook of [[Religion]] and {{Wiki|Social}} {{Wiki|Institutions}}. [[Switzerland]]: Springer, 177–196. Hjarvard, S., 2008a. The Mediatization of [[Society]]. A {{Wiki|Theory}} of the  Media as Agents of {{Wiki|Social}} and {{Wiki|Cultural}} Change. Nordicom Review, 29(2), 105–134. Hjarvard, S., 2008b. A {{Wiki|Theory}} of Media As Agents of [[Religious]] Change. [[Northern]] Lights, 6(1), 9–26. Hjarvard, S., 2011. The Mediatisation of [[Religion]]: Theorising [[Religion]], Media and {{Wiki|Social}} Change. {{Wiki|Culture}} and [[Religion]], 12(2), 119–135. Hjarvard, S., 2013. The Mediatization of {{Wiki|Culture}} and [[Society]]. {{Wiki|london}}: Routledge. Hjarvard, S., 2014. From [[Mediation]] to Mediatization: The Institutionalization of New Media. In: Hepp, A. and Krotz, F., eds. Mediatized [[Worlds]]. {{Wiki|Culture}} and [[Society]] in a Media Age. Basingtoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 123–139. Hoover, S., 2006. [[Religion]] in the Media Age. [[New York]]: Routledge. Innis, H., 1951. The Bias of [[Communication]]. {{Wiki|Toronto}}: {{Wiki|University}} of {{Wiki|Toronto}} Press. Jenkins, H., 1992. Textual Poachers: Television Fans & Participatory {{Wiki|Culture}}. [[New York]]: Routledge. Jennings, R., 1969. Policies and Practices of Selected National [[Religious]] [[Bodies]] as Related to Broadcasting in the Public [[Interest]]. PhD {{Wiki|Dissertation}}, {{Wiki|New York University}}.
160 Gregory Price Grieve et al. Krotz, F., 2009. Mediatization: A Concept with Which to Grasp Media and Societal Change. In: lundby, K., ed. Mediatization: Concept, Changes, Consequences. New York: Peter lang, 19–38. Krotz, F., 2014. Mediatization As a Mover in Modernity: Social and Cultural Change in the Context of Media Change. In: lundby, K., ed. Handbook  
+
160 Gregory Price Grieve et al. Krotz, F., 2009. Mediatization: A {{Wiki|Concept}} with Which to [[Grasp]] Media and Societal Change. In: lundby, K., ed. Mediatization: {{Wiki|Concept}}, Changes, Consequences. [[New York]]: Peter lang, 19–38. Krotz, F., 2014. Mediatization As a Mover in Modernity: {{Wiki|Social}} and {{Wiki|Cultural}} Change in the Context of Media Change. In: lundby, K., ed. Handbook  
 
   
 
   
Mediatization. Berlin: de Gruyter, 131–161. Krotz, F. and Hepp, A., 2011. A Concretization Of Mediatization: How ‘ Mediatization Works’ And Why Mediatized Worlds Are A Helpful Concept For empirical Mediatization Research. Empedocles: European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication, 3(2), 137–152. lash, S., 2005. Intensive media—Modernity and Algorithm. Available at http:// roundtable.kein.org, accessed 4 October 2017. levinas, e., 1985. Ethics and Infinity. New York: Duquesne University Press. livingstone, S., 2009. On the Mediation of everything. Journal of Communication, 59(1), 1–18. lopez, D., 2001. The Story of Buddhism. New York: HarperCollins. lövheim, M., 2011. Mediatisation of Religion: A Critical Appraisal. Culture and Religion, 12(2), 153–166. lundby, K., 2014. Mediatization of Communication. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Martín-Barbero, J., 2003. La Educación Desde la Comunicación. Bogotá: Grupo editorial Norma. Matsunaga, Daigan and Alicia, 1974. The Concept of Upāya in Mahāyāna  
+
Mediatization. [[Berlin]]: de Gruyter, 131–161. Krotz, F. and Hepp, A., 2011. A Concretization Of Mediatization: How ‘ Mediatization Works’ And Why Mediatized [[Worlds]] Are A Helpful {{Wiki|Concept}} For [[empirical]] Mediatization Research. {{Wiki|Empedocles}}: {{Wiki|European}} Journal for the [[Philosophy]] of [[Communication]], 3(2), 137–152. lash, S., 2005. Intensive media—Modernity and Algorithm. Available at http:// roundtable.kein.org, accessed 4 October 2017. levinas, e., 1985. [[Ethics]] and [[Infinity]]. [[New York]]: Duquesne {{Wiki|University}} Press. livingstone, S., 2009. On the [[Mediation]] of everything. Journal of [[Communication]], 59(1), 1–18. lopez, D., 2001. The Story of [[Buddhism]]. [[New York]]: HarperCollins. lövheim, M., 2011. Mediatisation of [[Religion]]: A Critical Appraisal. {{Wiki|Culture}} and [[Religion]], 12(2), 153–166. lundby, K., 2014. Mediatization of [[Communication]]. [[Berlin]]: De Gruyter Mouton. Martín-Barbero, J., 2003. La Educación Desde la Comunicación. Bogotá: Grupo editorial Norma. Matsunaga, Daigan and Alicia, 1974. The {{Wiki|Concept}} of [[Upāya]] in [[Mahāyāna]]
 
   
 
   
Buddhist Philosophy. Japanese Journal of Buddhist Studies, 1(1), 51–72. Available at https://web.archive.org/web/20140608152609/, http://nirc. nanzan-u. ac.jp/nfile/2297, accessed 4 October 2017. McChesney, R., 2013. Digital Disconnect: How Capitalism is Turning the  
+
[[Buddhist Philosophy]]. [[Japanese]] Journal of [[Buddhist Studies]], 1(1), 51–72. Available at https://web.archive.org/web/20140608152609/, http://nirc. nanzan-u. ac.jp/nfile/2297, accessed 4 October 2017. McChesney, R., 2013. Digital Disconnect: How [[Capitalism]] is Turning the  
 
   
 
   
Internet Against Democracy. New York: New Press. Mcluhan, M., 1964. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man.  
+
[[Internet]] Against {{Wiki|Democracy}}. [[New York]]: New Press. Mcluhan, M., 1964. [[Understanding]] Media: The Extensions of Man.  
 
   
 
   
Cambridge: MIT Press. Morton, A., 1980. Frames of Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Office of His Holiness the Dalai lama, n.d. Introduction to the Kalachkra. Available at www.dalailama.com/teachings/kalachakra-initiations, accessed 4 October 2017. Office of His Holiness the Dalia lama, 2014. Kalachakra: The Public and the Secret Initiations. Available at www.trimondi.de/SDle/Part-1-06.htm, accessed 4 October 2017. Ong, W., 1967. The Presence of the Word: Some Prolegomena for Cultural and Religious History. New Haven: Yale University Press. Postman, N., 1985. Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. New York: Penguin Books. Preiss, R. W., et al., 2007. Mass Media Effects Research: Advances through Meta-Analysis. Mahwah: lawrence erlbaum. de Saussure, F., 1916. Course in General Linguistics. Chicago: Open Court. Schulz, W., 2004. Reconstructing Mediatization as an Analytical Concept.  
+
[[Cambridge]]: MIT Press. Morton, A., 1980. Frames of [[Mind]]. [[Oxford]]: [[Oxford University Press]]. Office of [[His Holiness]] the [[Dalai lama]], n.d. Introduction to the Kalachkra. Available at www.dalailama.com/teachings/kalachakra-initiations, accessed 4 October 2017. Office of [[His Holiness]] the Dalia [[lama]], 2014. [[Kalachakra]]: The Public and the Secret [[Initiations]]. Available at www.trimondi.de/SDle/Part-1-06.htm, accessed 4 October 2017. Ong, W., 1967. The Presence of the [[Word]]: Some {{Wiki|Prolegomena}} for {{Wiki|Cultural}} and [[Religious]] History. New Haven: {{Wiki|Yale University Press}}. Postman, N., 1985. Amusing Ourselves to [[Death]]: Public [[Discourse]] in the Age of Show Business. [[New York]]: Penguin [[Books]]. Preiss, R. W., et al., 2007. Mass Media Effects Research: Advances through Meta-Analysis. Mahwah: lawrence erlbaum. de Saussure, F., 1916. Course in General {{Wiki|Linguistics}}. {{Wiki|Chicago}}: Open Court. Schulz, W., 2004. Reconstructing Mediatization as an Analytical {{Wiki|Concept}}.  
 
   
 
   
  
European Journal of Communication, 19(1), 87–101. Scuppernong Books, 2014–. Available at www.scuppernongbooks.com/,  
+
{{Wiki|European}} Journal of [[Communication]], 19(1), 87–101. Scuppernong [[Books]], 2014–. Available at www.scuppernongbooks.com/,  
accessed 5 October 2017. Shannon, C., 1948. A Mathematical Theory of Communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27(3), 379–423.
+
accessed 5 October 2017. Shannon, C., 1948. A {{Wiki|Mathematical}} {{Wiki|Theory}} of [[Communication]]. [[Bell]] System Technical Journal, 27(3), 379–423.
Digitalizing Tibet 161 Shannon, C. and Weaver, W., 1949. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Chicago: University of Illinois Press. Singh, R., 2016. Buddhists and Muslims in ladakh: Negotiating Tradition and Modernity. PhD Dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara. Sorokin, P., 1947. Society, Culture, and Personality. New York: Harper & Brothers. Thompson, J. B., 1995. The Media and Modernity. A Social Theory of the  
+
Digitalizing [[Tibet]] 161 Shannon, C. and [[Weaver]], W., 1949. The {{Wiki|Mathematical}} {{Wiki|Theory}} of [[Communication]]. {{Wiki|Chicago}}: {{Wiki|University}} of Illinois Press. Singh, R., 2016. [[Buddhists]] and {{Wiki|Muslims}} in {{Wiki|ladakh}}: Negotiating [[Tradition]] and Modernity. PhD {{Wiki|Dissertation}}, {{Wiki|University of California}}, {{Wiki|Santa Barbara}}. Sorokin, P., 1947. [[Society]], {{Wiki|Culture}}, and [[Personality]]. [[New York]]: Harper & Brothers. Thompson, J. B., 1995. The Media and Modernity. A {{Wiki|Social}} {{Wiki|Theory}} of the  
 
Media. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Veidlinger, D., 2006. Spreading the Dhamma: Writing, Orality and Textual Transmission in Buddhist Northern Thailand. Honolulu: University of
 
 
   
 
   
 
+
Media. [[Cambridge]]: {{Wiki|Cambridge University Press}}. Veidlinger, D., 2006. Spreading the [[Dhamma]]: [[Writing]], Orality and Textual [[Transmission]] in [[Buddhist]] [[Northern]] [[Thailand]]. [[Honolulu]]: {{Wiki|University of Hawaii Press}}. Wallace, V. A., 2001. The [[Inner Kālacakra]]: A [[Buddhist]] [[Tantric]] View of the {{Wiki|Individual}}. [[New York]]: [[Oxford University Press]]. Weinelt, B., 2016. Digital [[Transformation]] of Industries (White Paper).  Cologny: [[World]] economic Forum.
Hawaii Press. Wallace, V. A., 2001. The Inner Kālacakra: A Buddhist Tantric View of the Individual. New York: Oxford University Press. Weinelt, B., 2016. Digital Transformation of Industries (White Paper).  Cologny: World economic Forum.
 
  
  

Latest revision as of 21:54, 2 February 2020




Gregory Price Grieve, Christopher Helland and Rohit Singh


Na svato nāpi parato na dvābhyāṃ nāpy ahetutaḥ utpannā jātu vidyante bhāvāḥ kvacana kecana.1


On 7 July 2014, on day two of the Preliminary Teachings of the 33rd Kalachakra, we observed his Holiness the Dalai lama read from the 2nd century Indian Buddhist philosopher, Nagarjuna’s Precious Garland (Ratnāvalī) and Letter to a Friend (Suhṛllekha). We were participating in the 33rd Kalachakra ceremony, which was an esoteric Tantric empowerment centered on the Kālachakra Tantra, held in leh, ladakh, India, between 3 and 14 July 2014, and led by the 14th Dalai lama, Tenzin Gyatso. The immediacy of the Dalai lama’s charisma was palpable. Ironically, however, what drew us three to this remote

Himalayan location was that the ceremony was being digitalized – tweeted, blogged, Facebooked and video-streamed over cyberspace and across the globe (Figure 9.1). Moreover, we found that the digitalization of the Kalachakra, and the Dalai lama’s charisma, were not an afterthought, but had been calculated in advance and had been incorporated into the ceremony’s discussions, community building and symbolism. For example, as the teachings began that day, the Dalia lama thanked “those who are here physically, and those who are not.”2 Because of the assumption that Buddhism concentrates on a mindful awareness of the body, digitalization might seem antithetical to authentic practice (Grieve 2017). As the oldest proselytizing religion, however, Buddhism has always had a penchant for utilizing the latest developments (Grieve and Veidlinger 2016). One might assume, mutatis

mutandis, that the 2014 ceremony was merely transmitting the same old analogue dharma in new digitized bottles. Does not all communication, even the spoken word, rely on physical vehicles that extend communication practices (cf. Grieve 2006, Krotz and Hepp 2011, 143, Sorokin 1947, 51–52)? History shows, however, that the Buddhist use of different media technologies is not a neutral transmission of content, but

conditions how the teachings (dharma) are communicated (Grieve 2017, Grieve and Veidlinger 2016, Veidlinger 2006). For example, dharma screened on a television would not be received the same as read in a book, which in turn would not be the same as played in a video game (Campbell and Grieve 2014, 1–21, Grieve 2017). This is not simply the assertion that active media determine and penetrate passive religious messages (Goody 1986, Havelock 1986, cf. Innis 1951, Mcluhan 1964, Ong 1967, Postman 1985). We found that the Kalachakra and digital technologies mutually conditioned one another (Campbell 2010, Grieve 2006, Hoover 2006). In this chapter, to analyze the mutual conditioning of the Kalachakra and digital media technologies, we theorize the distinction between digitization and digitalization. What does the small grammatical difference of the al add to our analysis (Derrida 1988)? As opposed to analogue media, such as films and newspapers, which use a physical or chemical property to communicate, digital media consist of electronic, programmable bits (Grieve 2017, 217). Digitization refers to creating a digital copy of a physical phenomenon or an analogue object. For example, one can click on www.dalailama.com/teachings/kalachakra-initiations and see a digital image of the Dalai lama.3 Digitalization, on the other hand, is not the mere translation of the analogue into the digital but is furthermore the conditioning of social structures and practices through

Figure 9.1 Geshe lobzang Samstan reviewing live broadcast at the HHDl media center in leh, ladak (photograph by Christopher Helland, July 2014). Digitalizing Tibet 141 the process of being digitized. Usually, digitalization is used to describe the disruption to economies by digital media (McChesney 2013, Weinelt 2016). We extend the term to also refer to other social fields, particularly religion. For example, in the 2014 ceremony, the placing of colored grains of sand by the Dalai lama to begin the construction of the


Kalachakra’s maṇḍala was scripted to allow for its video-streaming to a global audience.4 This chapter chronicles our first steps toward creating a theory to describe, analyze and understand Tibet’s digitalization. To begin the process we undertake a critical reconditioning of the work of the Danish scholar, Hjarvard (2011), who describes mediatization as a long-term process by which media transform society and culture. We maintain that Hjarvard’s overemphasis on secularization occurs because of his reliance on a Protestant understanding of religion as a more or less reliable communication with the supernatural. Our chapter is not a rejection of Hjarvard’s theory, per se, but rather a Buddhist reconditioning (cf.

Dissanayake 2009b, 453). A critical Buddhist reconditioning of Hjarvard’s theory of the mediatization of religion is significant for two reasons. First, it affords the tools to understand the digitalization of the Dalai lama’s charisma, and thereby to understand the Tibetan diaspora’s contemporary multimedia, multifaceted, and multi-situational virtual conditions. Despite geographical Tibet being subsumed under the Chinese State, these conditions have allowed the Tibetan government in exile, official religious organizations, and politically and religiously motivated individuals to imagine a nation. Second, a Buddhist reconditioning expands Hjarvard’s theory beyond the Procrustean bed of its Protestant normative framework and affords a theory of mediatization for analyzing Asian religions.5 Reconditioning Hjarvard’s theory illustrates how scholarsown religious backgrounds shape research not only by affording particular content and symbolic forms, but also by privileging particular types of theorization (Grieve 2006, 11–13). Being aware of the second order categories through which we interpret religious phenomena allows researchers to be conscious not only of how society and culture shape religion but also of how religious media contribute to social change. Furthermore, it addresses how local theories of religion and media affect the understanding of the category of religion itself.

the Kalachakra’s Digitized Mediascape A Tibetan Buddhist (Vajrayāna) ceremony, the word Kalachakra means cycles of time, and involves practices of purification, teachings and

Tantric empowerment. During the 33rd Kalachakra, the Dalai lama spoke in person to an estimated 150,000 participants consisting of local ladakhis, Tibetan refugees, Indian nationals and international

142 Gregory Price Grieve et al. spectators. The 2014 ceremony was also digitalized and disseminated across the globe. Since 1954, either in India or abroad, the Dalai lama has conducted the Kalachakra teaching, usually every year or every other year, with the 2014 ceremony in ladakh being his 33rd initiation.6 The event in 2014 lasted 12 days, commencing on 3 July and concluding on 14 July, and consisted of three main components: ritual performances by monks, public teachings and the Dalai lama initiating disciples into the Tantric traditions. Monks performed numerous rituals associated with Kalachakra

including the earth-offering dance, the construction of a sand maṇḍala, apotropaic rites to ward off evil spirits, the production of talismans and offerings to deities associated with the Tantra.7 The initiated disciples gained authorization from the Dalai lama to practice and study the rituals and traditions of the Kālachakra Tantra, specifically under the guidance of gurus within the Kalachakra lineage. In 2014, between the Tantric ritual ceremonies, the Dalai lama also gave a series of teachings on Buddhist philosophy, aimed at the global audience, that emphasized Buddhism as a universal mind science (a term used in english) (Singh 2016). Time is a key aspect of the ceremony. The Kālachakra centers on a deity and maṇḍala that are replete

with temporal significance and present a cosmology based on three connected temporal frameworks: inner cycles of time, outer cycles of time and the alternate cycles of time (Singh 2016). The inner cycle refers to internal states of the body including energy points (chakras) and channels. The outer cycles of time are associated with the movement of astrological entities like the sun, moon and stars. The alternate cycles of time are associated with Tantric meditations aimed at enabling practitioners to obtain enlightenment. These three cycles are unified within the cosmic body of the tutelary deity (yidam) of Kalachakra.8 During the Kalachakra initiation, the consecrated grounds for the empowerment ceremony are ritually generated as the universe or

maṇḍala of Kalachakra. The audience present become enveloped into the deity’s sacred space. In the course of the rituals, the Dalai lama, as Vajra Guru, assumes the identity of Kalachakra at the maṇḍala’s center. The ceremony concludes after he invites disciples to become symbolically reborn into the Kālachakra maṇḍala through a series of seven initiations, after which the Dalai lama authorizes the initiates to practice traditions connected with the Kālachakra Tantra, such as the six-session Guru Yoga, and generation and completion stage rituals. Besides offering a fascinating mythological drama, what drew us to the ceremony was that it took place not only in physical and mythical locations, but also in a digitalized mediascape, a term that describes the virtual environments created by digitized global media flows ( Appadurai 1990, Helland 2016, cf. Baudrillard 1995).9 Although ladakh is a remote and isolated community in the Himalaya Mountains, network connectivity with the event was prioritized by the Indian


AU: This part of the sentence seems abrupt and incomplete. Please consider revising this sentence for clarity and readability. Digitalizing Tibet 143 Government and an enormous effort was made to allow the live web streaming of the ritual. A dedicated team of people working for the Office of His Holiness the Dalai Lama ensured that the ritual practices were beautifully presented online for anyone to witness. This included the several rituals associated with preparing the site, the preliminary teachings, empowerments and a special camera above the Kalachakra sand maṇḍala so people could see its construction and development as the ritual progressed. By allowing for this form of intimate connection to occur through the Internet, new media

allowed new observers to participate in fundamentally new ways. Because Tibet’s mediascape no longer merely augments actual geographic locations and physical events, and is not limited to synchronous time, but holds together and maintains (dhṛ) a global community (sangha) of practitioners, it can neither be understood through the categories of center and periphery, nor referent and represented (Appadurai 1990, de Saussure 1916). Yet, as we argue below, this is not merely the transmission of content, but the conditioning of distinct practices. For example, on that same day, a deeply devoted

practitioner from the USA rested in a hotel room in leh, located about eight kilometers from the teaching site. She had been lying in bed, exhausted, watching the Dalai lama’s teachings live on her computer. She held her prayer beads and a book of teachings on Nagarjuna’s texts that had been handed out during the first day of teachings. At the same time, she was online and supplementing the live teachings with additional materials, looking up terms and concepts and even posting information to her friends. That afternoon she told us that she was deeply grateful for the live webcasting of the teachings and that her exhaustion had not caused her to miss any of the day’s important events. When we asked her if she felt part of the ceremony, she answered with no hesitation: “Oh yes, I was definitely there with you” (personal communication).


Hjarvard’s theory of the Mediatization of Religion In order to analyze the Kalachakra’s digitalization, our chapter aims to recondition Hjarvard’s theory of the mediatization. Our first step is to describe it straightforwardly in this section, and critically recondition it in the following section. At its core, mediatization argues that media plays a part in the shaping of society and analyzes the long-term effects that media have on human life worlds (Hjarvard 2014, Krotz 2009, 2014, 137–139, Krotz and Hepp 2011, lundby 2014, 7, Martín-Barbero 2003, 88, Schulz 2004). The driving purpose of Hjarvard’s particular theory of mediatization, however, is to describe and analyze the role that religion and media play in what he calls high-modern societies – the current globalized, highly mediated, and neoliberal consumeristic world (passim. Hjarvard 2008a, 2011, 124).


144 Gregory Price Grieve et al. Hjarvard’s theory of the mediatization of religion can be analyzed through two propositions and three outcomes. He builds his theory of mediatization of religion upon an analytic and a synthetic proposition. The analytic proposition is the distinction he makes between the merely descriptive term mediation and the transformative mediatization (Couldry and Hepp 2013, 191, livingston 2009, 6–7). As a theory, the descriptive term mediation analyzes how different types of media influence the content of their message. As Hjarvard writes, “mediation refers to the act of mediation via a medium, the intervention of which can affect both the message and the relationship between sender and receiver” (2011, 123). For example, in politics, mediation describes when a Tweet’s 140-character limit changes the message that politicians deliver. For Hjarvard, mediatization is analytically different because it evaluates the transformative effect that media have on society and culture, and how media colonize other institutions. As Hjarvard writes:

While the study of mediation pays attention to specific instances of communication situated in time and space (e.g., the communication of politics in blogs during a presidential campaign), mediatization studies are concerned with the long-term structural change in the role of the media in culture and society. (2013, 2–3 [italics in original])

These transformations allow media to dominate other social fields. As he writes: “mediatization denotes the social and cultural process through which a field or institution to some extent becomes dependent on the logic of the media” (2011, 119; cf. Hjarvard 2008b). In this case, Twitter and other social media become a “part of the very fabric” of life, not just on an individual political message, but on the field of politics more generally (ess 1996, 9). While analytic propositions point to a theory’s internal logic, synthetic propositions refer to how the theory interprets the world. Hjarvard’s synthetic proposition is that media and religion are similar because they play a part in constructing the reality of lived social worlds. This synthetic framework reflects early theories concerning the social construction of reality of the sociologist of religion Peter Berger (1967, 3–28; cf. lövheim 2011, Schulz 2004). Citing Berger, Hjarvard maintains that “‘religion has been the historically most widespread and effective instrumentality of legitimation’ of socially defined reality’” (citing Berger 1967, 32, Hjarvard 2011, 130). Relying primarily on european survey data, Hjarvard posits that media, like a secular canopy, has taken over this role as a modern commercial version of the traditional religious world-constructing “sacred canopy” (cf. Berger 1967, Couldry and Hepp 2013, lövheim 2011, 155–156).

Digitalizing Tibet 145 From his analytic and synthetic propositions, Hjarvard delivers three outcomes, the first of which is disciplinary. He maintains that media theory about religion has been dominated by two major paradigms. On the one hand are those effect-paradigm frameworks concerned with how people are affected by exposure to various media, while on the other, the audience centered framework explores how people make use of media for their own purposes (passim. Hjarvard 2011, 121, 2013, 2, cf. Jenkins 1992, Preiss et al. 2007). Skeptical of these approaches, Hjarvard posits mediatization as a third approach, which stresses the interaction and transaction of actors and structures. “According to mediatization theory, media are not outside society, but part of its very social fabric” (2011, 121, cf. 2013, 3). As such, “mediatization studies move the focus of interest from the particular instances of

mediated communication to the structural transformations of the media in contemporary society” (2013, 2). Hjarvard’s second outcome is that mediatization leads to secularization by colonizing many of the cultural and social functions that organized religious institutions traditionally held. Citing Berger, Hjarvard defines secularization as “the process by which sectors of society are removed from the domination of religious institutions and symbols” (citing Berger 1967, 107, Hjarvard 2011, 130). Hjarvard maintains that in high-modern societies media are an all-embracing force ( Hjarvard 2008b, lövheim 2011). Yet, the problem is not less religious content in the media (cf. lash 2005). As Hjarvard writes, “with the help of the most sophisticated media technology,

supernatural phenomena have acquired an unmatched presence in modern societies” (Hjarvard 2013, 78). Rather than less content, secularization occurs because “a series of structural transformations of religion in the modern world, including a decline in the authority of religious institutions in society, together with the development of more individualized forms of religious beliefs and practices” (2013, 79). Hjarvard knowingly sidesteps Berger’s later work in which the American sociologist denounces his earlier secularization thesis (cf. Berger 1999, 2, Hjarvard 2011, 130). Hjarvard supports Berger’s original secularization hypothesis by arguing that “increased public visibility is not to be equated with a growing support for religion, or involvement in religion” and that “secularization is still an important component of the modernization process of contemporary societies in Western europe, USA and elsewhere” (2011, 131). Hjarvard argues that secularization leads to an increase of what he terms banal religion – that process by which religious practices become loosed from the authority of organized religion, and become more and more individualized and subjective because they are guided by the logic of a commercialized media. “Banal religion is banal in the sense,”


146 Gregory Price Grieve et al. that it is unnoticeable and does not constitute a highly structured proposition about the metaphysical order or the meaning of life, and it is religion in the sense that it evokes cognitions, emotions or actions that imply the existence of supernatural agency. (2011, 128) Hjarvard argues that banalization occurs because “media may not only provide information about religion but also create narratives and virtual worlds that invite people to have experiences of a religious-like character … and community-building among people with similar religious orientation” (2011, 126). For Hjarvard, banalization occurs in a three-step process. First, he argues that data shows that banal religions serve media logics and not religious logics. As Hjarvard writes, popular culture’s “religious representations serve the particular media genre in question and the religious meanings are not to be taken too literally” (2011, 129). Second, Hjarvard maintains that because they are not meant to be taken literally, banal religions are inauthentic. As he writes, “despite their pervasiveness and very explicit nature, the religious representations do not constitute a coherent religious narrative, nor are we, as an audience, to take them seriously as real religious symbols, practices or meanings” (2011, 129). Third, banal religious practices are anomic because, they “challenge the authority of existing religious institutions by disembedding specific religious meanings from their original context and rearticulating them in new ways” (2011, 129).

A Necessary Provincializing of Hjarvard’s Mediatization theory like a lens that focuses on a particular phenomenon, social scientific theories are second-order semiotic, analytic, synthetic frameworks that abstract, organize and interpret lived worlds in order to rationally explain, understand and predict types of human behavior (Morton 1980). At its core, Hjarvard’s theory seems straightforward. “Our inquiry takes its point of departure in the classical question in the sociology of the media, namely, how the media come to influence the wider culture and society” (Hjarvard 2013, 1). This would seem to be the perfect tool to understand the digitalization of the Kalachakra. Theories, however, are not free-floating principles that exist untethered to the problems of human lifeworlds (Davidson Reynolds 1971). Theories of religion, no less than the religious phenomena they are theorizing, are bound by, entangled with and constituted by their historic-geographic location (Grieve 2006). Hjarvard’s theory is limited for understanding Asian religion because it was fabricated in, and built to analyze, as Hjarvard himself writes, the “historical developments in the north-western part of europe” (2013, 27). Digitalizing Tibet 147 He understands the mediatization of religion, both as phenomenon and sociological theory, as stemming from and defining of modern Northern european society (2013, 5–7, cf. Thompson 1995). As Hjarvard writes, “the theoretical framework and analytic outline presented (…) may be more suitable to describe developments in north- western europe than elsewhere in the world” (2013, 80). Hjarvard maintains that “media are not a unitary phenomenon” and he argues that “the mediatization of religion may take different forms and generate different outcome in, for example, the USA, Brazil, or India, depending on religious, social and media context” (2013, 81, cf. Hoover 2006). Hjarvard is pushing in two directions. Mostly he wants to differentiate the Nordic experience from that which appears in North America (2013, 81). Hjarvard, however, also sees the Western experience as unique, and implies that if mediatization appears in the developing world, it is a product of european culture being exported through globalization (2013, 18). Because of its unabashed eurocentrism, to be useful for analyzing

Tibetan Dharma, and Asian religion more generally, Hjarvard’s theory requires provincialization, a term which recognizes the limitations of using Western social sciences to explain and understand modern Asia (Chakrabarty 2000, cf. eliade 1961). Provincialization, however, does not reject european thought out of hand, but rather reconditions it, as the anthropologist Chakrabarty, writes “from and for the margins” (2000, 16). Provincialization is not antithetical to Hjarvard’s understanding of mediatization as a “meso-theory” (2013, 3–5). His “ambition is not to build a ‘grand theory’ in order to establish universal definition” (2013, 3, Hjarvard 2011, 124, cf. Krotz and Hepp 2011, 137–138). As he writes: “By considering mediatization theory as a middle-range theory, we have sought to avoid the pitfalls of both the grand claims typical of macro-level theorizing and the celebration of heterogeneity typical of certain micro-level analysis” (2013, 153). Hjarvard is skeptical about making broad meta-theories, because he is conscious that media’s influence on religion will differ depending on historical and geographic location. “For instance,” he writes, “mediatization may imply something rather different if we compare the use of media by Pentecostal movements in India” (2011, 120). Hjarvard’s theory, even for its stated awareness of its own limited nature, needs provincializing because it naturalizes a Protestant framework, which occurs because of the dominance of european survey data in his case studies, but also because of a crypto-Protestantism that informs and has shaped social thought since the late 19th century (engelke 2012, Grieve 2006). Hjarvard defines religion as the “human ability to ascribe intentional agency to unexplainable occurrences, to make anthropological projections into a metaphysical world” (2011, 129). His substantive definition implies a transmission theory of communication that of AU: Please confirm whether the edits made to the sentence retains the intended meaning.

148 Gregory Price Grieve et al. content being transmitted more or less reliably through different media (Shannon 1948, Shannon and Weaver 1949). The substantive definition forces him to make a distinction between banal and institutional religion, between the small folk practices of a “common religion” and the greater institutionalized orders of “official religion” (Hjarvard 2011, 129–130). He defines banal religion as “the beliefs and practices held by ordinary people,” and institutionalized religion as that which reflects “official religious texts and practices advanced by the priesthood” (2011, 130). Because his theory necessitates a church, Hjarvard’s institutional understanding of media needs to be provincialized as well. True, he poses his theory as pure social science. “Mediatization is, in our understanding, a non-normative concept” (2013, 18 [italics in original]). In the end, however, his use of mediatized religion is not a neutral sociological category. It is normative, because, as Hjarvard writes, “media are not in the business to preach” and “media’s representation of religion does not originate from the institutionalized religion or have close resemblance with religious texts” (2011, 126, 132,

cf. 120–121, cf. Grieve 2017, 79–87, Hjarvard 2013, 9–10). Hjarvard wants to understand media’s effect on institutions, which he describes as social fields which organize “a number of very central aspects of life,” and allocate both material resources and authority (2013: 21, 22, 43–44). This concentration on church reflects the strong role that organized institutions, such as the National (Peoples’) Church of Denmark (Den Danske Folkekirke), have played in Nordic countries. One can also see the role emile Durkheim has had in Hjarvard’s sociological understanding of religion. As Durkheim writes, “the idea of religion is inseparable from the idea of a church, it conveys the notion that religion must be an eminently collective thing” (1995, 44). A Buddhist theory of Religious Mediatization To recondition Hjarvard’s theory of mediatization so that it is usable for understanding the Kalachakra’s digitalization, we need to pry apart his core insight from his theory of religious communication. Hjarvard’s core insight is that media influence society because their affordances “make certain actions possible, exclude others and structure the interactions between actor and object” (2013, 27). In fact, Hjarvard “recognize[s] the media as technologies, each of which has a set of affordances that facilitate, limit, and structure communication and action

(2013, 28 [italics in original]; cf. Grieve 2017, 48–50). While his overall theory focuses on the functions of religion, his model of religion is a normative one that requires a substantive or transmission theory of religious communication often assumed by many Protestants (Jennings 1969). In the postwar period, communication models have been dominated by the transmission theory of communication, pioneered in 1948 in an Digitalizing Tibet 149 influential article by the American Claude e. Shannon. A transmission theory of communication describes the communication of a message as a unidirectional signal from an informational source, through a transmitter, and noise source, picked up by a receiver and finally decoded at its destination (A ⇒ B) (Table 9.1). A transmission theory of communication is unidirectional, has one outcome, is causal, has discrete variables, transmits information, is message centered, has a fixed sequence and communicates separate events. A transmission theory leads to the analysis of communication either as a more or less reliable transmission, or as an ideological distortion from the information source. AU: The sentence seemed incomplete and from the context, to be in sync with the chosen field of Claude E. Shannon, the word ‘electrical engineer’ has been added.


Table 9.1 A Mathematical Theory of Communication (after Shannon 1949)

Information Source

=> Transmitter => Medium as Noise
=> Receiver => Destination
Table 9.2 A Buddhist Theory of Communication

Medium as Affordance
Acceleration +
Retardance ~
Stoppage
=>Condition (Pratyaya) 1
Condition (Pratyaya) 2

Painting with a broad brush, we describe what we call a Buddhist theory of communication as bidirectional, processional, reciprocal, continuous, meaning- and actor-centered, with flexible sequences and inseparable events (Table 9.2). Buddhist communication is distinct from a transmission theory, because it employs media practices to spread the Dharma through mutual conditioning. Rather than being a transmission theory of communication that models communication as the unidirectional transmission of data from source to destination, a Buddhist theory of communication models mediatization as the mutually dependent relationship between two different conditions (A ⇔ B) (pratayaya). In a transmission theory of communication media are neutral conveyers of information whose presence must be figured out as noise (A = m ⇒ B). In a Buddhist theory of media practice, media must be approached mindfully (smṛti) because they afford different types of interactions, which, depending on the mediascape, allow for the skillful teaching (upāya) of different types of Dharmic messages (A ⇐ m ⇒ B) (Table 9.3). AU: Please review and confirm the edits made to this sentence for coherence and clarity.


The difficulty with modeling the Kalachakra through a transmission theory is that rather than clarifying the ceremony, it further mystifies the highly digitalized mediascape that we encountered. During the

Kalachakra, the Dalai lama often referred to the religion (dharma) as a shield, and that its effectiveness depended on the context in which it was delivered. In Buddhism, dharma usually refers to the Buddha’s teachings, which indicates not simply the transmitting of information, but also, with varying degrees of skill, the creation of efficient conditions that lessen suffering. Dharmic messages are not perceived by Buddhists as universal, but are dependent on the skill and means (upāya-kauśalya) of those that deliver them (Matsunaga and Matsunaga 1974). A transmission theory of religion leads to an interpretation of the Kalachakra’s mediascape as a loss of fidelity to the essential teachings. Yet, while there was contention over the digital broadcast of the ceremony, the arguments given by the officials assembled were not about a loss of fidelity to the original sources, but about the dangers that the teaching might offer to those unprepared for the initiation (personal communication). The concern was not about the corruption of the message, but that the message might cause harm (duhhka) to the untrained (personal communication). While the aim of Protestant communication is the transmission of symbols of belief about the supernatural, the aim of Buddhist communication is not merely to transmit content, but to create conditions which lessen suffering (Dissanayake 2009a). Because the Kalachakra did not just communicate information, but was aimed at lessening the suffering of its audiences, what we found was a complex relationship between event and digital communication. The communication was not the transmission of a passive referent (svabhāva) that was projected through the media, but rather a mutual conditioning (pratyaya) in which the ceremony and its mediascape were dependent on one and other (pratītyasamutpāda). With this in mind, to analyze the Kalachakra, we turned to a Buddhist model of communication that emerged from the ceremony.

Table 9.3 A Mathematical Theory of Communication compared to a Buddhist Theory of Communication (after Dissanayake 1983)

A Mathematical Theory of Communication

A Buddhist Theory of Communication

Unidirectional Bidirectional Outcome Process Causality Reciprocity Discrete variables Continuous variables Meaning transferred Meaning created Message-centered Actor-centered Fixed sequence Flexible sequence events separable events inseparable

Digitalizing Tibet 151 Following the groundbreaking work of the media scholar Dissanayake, we assemble a Buddhist Theory of Communication by focusing on the work of the 2nd-century Buddhist philosopher, Nagarjuna (Dissanayake 1983, 2009b). Nagarjuna is the founder of the Mādhyamika (Middle-way) school of Mahayana Buddhism, and we are particularly interested in Chapter 1, Examination of the Conditions, from his magnum opus, the Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā). In this treatise, Nāgārjuna makes a distinction between causes (hetu) and conditions (pratyaya). By cause (hetu) he means that something has as an essential quality of its nature to bring about an effect on something else. For example, one might argue that in high-modern

societies media have caused (hetu) changes to religion. By condition (pratyaya), on the other hand, he indicates that phenomena are not essential, but that different phenomena bring about each other’s state of existence. In this case, while distinct, religion and media would not be essential separate phenomena, but would mutually determine each other. Key to understanding a theory of Buddhist communication is the concept of dependent co-origination (pratītyasamutpāda). Pratitya translates as “having depended” and samutpada as “arising”, and is the notion that everything that comes into existence is dependent on something else ( lopez 2001, 29). Often argued to be the defining ontological heart of Buddhism, dependent co-origination states that all phenomena (dharmas) arise only in relationship to other phenomena, nothing exists on its own (Majjhima Nikaya 1.90). Rather than causing data, information that can be stored and transmitted, to be sent from a source to receiver, a Buddhist theory understands communication as mutual conditioning. While distinct, poles in a communicative act are not different. Conditioning indicates how person, event or process plays a role in generating, and being generated by, another person, state or process.

A Buddhist theory of communication, then, analyzes media practices not as the broadcasting of data between sender and receiver (A ⇒ B), but rather as the mutual conditioning of two or more communicators (A ⇔ B).

Digitalizing the Kalachakra The Kalachakra’s digitalization creates an oscillation between the desire for transparent immediacy, the experience of what it was like sitting at the Dalai lama’s feet, and the opaque hyper-mediation of multiple media that highlighted mediatization. Rather than being transmitted as information from source to destination, the ceremony made visible how media condition each other by commenting on, reproducing and replacing one another. Kalachakra practitioners wanted to both multiply media sources – printed books, the use of translation radios, large television screens and the Internet – but at the same time to erase all apparent mediation, and experience the Dalai lama’s teachings directly AU: Nagarjuna is also given as Nāgārjuna. Please confirm which one would be the preferred form for consistency.

152 Gregory Price Grieve et al. in all their charismatic immediacy. What holds the Kalachakra’s knot of media together is the Dalai lama, who stands at its center? Yet, rather than acting like a broadcast tower, which unidirectionally transmits a single message, the Dalai lama conditions between distinct audiences using distinct media channels. This mediation is interactive, flexible and between two or more people, and is not merely the one-way exchange of information but rather conversely, is a bidirectional exchange in which the message conditions both the sender and receiver. On 10 July, after days of teaching, the first day of the actual initiation began. Around noon, The Dalai lama explained that these were an engagement between master and disciple, in which he becomes the deity at the center of the Kalachakra. The Kalachakra’s immediacy arises (samutpada) from the Tantric empowerment that emerges between the ceremony’s physically assembled audience and the Dalai lama as a

Buddhist protector deity. Immediacy refers to a feeling of being with the Dalai lama. As Ong writes, immediacy “the existential relationship of person to person (I am in your presence; you are present to me), with the concept of present time (as against past and future)” (1967, 101). As the French moral philosopher levinas (1985) theorizes, in such face-to-face encounters, people are responsible to one and other as people rather than because of roles, institutions or other social structures. In other words, the immediacy of Tantric empowerment functions because, as the Dalai lama said, on 7 July, during the second day of teachings, he looked straight at the camera and pointing to his eyes and then to the assembled initiates, “You see me. I see you.” (personal communication). Transmission theories of communication are complicated by secrecy. The Kalachakra was described by the Dalai lama as secret.10 The use of secrecy in the ceremony indicates the difference between a Protestant influenced transmission theory of communication and a Buddhist influenced

conditioning theory of communication (cf. Guhyasamājatantra). In a transmission religious model, secrecy would indicate when content was not delivered. This model does not work for the Kalachakra for two reasons. First, there were over 150,000 people assembled for the Kalachakra. In fact, because of the large numbers, the ceremony was televised on enormous monitors to the assembled crowd. Second, the ceremony was broadcast and simultaneously translated into a number of languages that could be listened to over small transistor radios. In other words, even the face-to-face immediacy was always already mediatized. In a Buddhist conditioning model of communication, secrecy is not merely the stoppage of content, but the blockage of media affordances in

order to influence and affect the mediatization. For example, on 3 July, from our position just outside the main stage, we could see movement and hear chanting from the inner sanctum. The chanting was being broadcast over the radios, and the large monitors displayed close up, Digitalizing Tibet 153 televised images of the Dalai lama and his senior monks. A transmission theory of communication could only describe this as a loss of signal. A conditioning model of communication could indicate how such secrecy was used to heighten immediacy. Many of the people in the crowd that we spoke to, felt as if they were having a direct and personal, even secret, conversation with the Dalai lama. Many people said that they felt as if the Dalai lama were speaking directly to them, and many claimed that the Dalai lama had made eye contact just with them. For example, a German woman sitting next to

us, thought at this point that the Dalai lama had invited to her to the stage, and pushed through the crowd until stopped by security. The Dalai lama was both very intimate and at the same time unreachable. For example, when the Dalai lama spoke with the chief oracle, he leaned in close and pulled a curtain-like cloth over his head and around the two of them, but at the same time there was an extreme close up of the event that was broadcasted on the big screens. Conditioning is key for the Kalachakra, because the ceremony was not merely the conveying of information but (ideally) a transformative,

empowering and salvific Tantric ritual. Tantric rituals feature practices associated with specific classes of Tantric deities: tutelary deities (yidam), ḍākinīs (khandroma), and various types of Dharma protectors (dharmapāla). These invocations and use of these deities are ideally aimed toward soteriological ends, specifically, ultimately transforming the practitioner into the enlightened tutelary deity (yidam) residing at the center of its particular universe (maṇḍala). The Tantric specialist visualizes himself as the yidam residing in a maṇḍala surrounded by retinues of other deities

including ḍākinīs, Dharma protectors, and lesser mundane gods and goddesses. In Buddhist Tantric theory, by using the Tantric yidam to harness the power of the mind, one obtains spiritual powers (siddhi) to aid others in mundane matters that include healing, rainmaking, averting disasters and helping others to achieve the state of enlightenment. All practices, however, first require initiation by a guru. The guru takes on the persona of the yidam. Acting as the yidam, through a series of ritual empowerments they bring disciples into the maṇḍala and authorize disciples to engage in the practices of the yidam’s corresponding sādhana. The current Dalai lama’s Kalachakra initiations, such as the one held in ladakh, signals important shifts in this particular empowerment. The Dalai lama positions himself not only as a Tibetan addressing a


Buddhist community, but also as a member of a broader global humanity (usually a term used in english). This is apparent by the fact that in the context of preliminary teachings for the Kalachakra initiation, he addressed global concerns, such as the limitations of science and modernity, the need for inter-religious harmony and the significance of

secular ethics (a term used in the english) (Singh 2016). As a practitioner 154 Gregory Price Grieve et al. of mind science, the Dalai lama positioned himself as a post-secular teacher, and presented Buddhism as fundamentally ecumenical, secular and scientific. everyone, regardless of their religious background, may benefit from the scientific and philosophical aspects of Buddhism, while foregoing what the Dalai lama calls Buddhist religion (a term used in the english). Scientific and philosophical Buddhism offers interreligious and nonreligious audiences with secular means of transforming the mind. For the Dalai lama, Buddhist science (a term used in the english) and Western science thus become mutually enhancing forces for improving modern humanity, the

former capable of transforming the mind and the inner capacities of humans, and the latter a medium for material progress and development (Singh 2016). While one could argue that mediatization is occurring, and one could argue for secularization, just the opposite of Hjarvard’s prediction of anomie is occurring. Digitalization is increasing feelings of community and the authority of the central clergy. When the Dalai lama commenced the Kalachakra ceremony, he began by claiming that all religions are ultimately united under the concept of Dharma. Here, he appropriates the concept of Dharma not as

constituting religious values per se, but rather as a source of protection, specifically a defense against negative mental states and immoral actions. For the Dalai lama, this sense of Dharma manifests in all religions and acts as a post-secular moral force for transforming human consciousness (Singh 2016). When all religions find this common post-secular Dharma, they can work together to foster shared human values such as compassion, love and tolerance. In this framework, the Kalachakra initiation in ladakh – like most of the Dalai lama’s large public teachings – is not merely a Buddhist ritual ceremony; it is a period for all people, regardless of religion, to engage in dialogue and reflect upon their shared secular ethics. For the Dalai lama, this secular ethics is both traditional, in that its precepts and ideals, including compassion, love and generosity, manifest in all religions, and modern to the extent

that it provides what he calls an ethics for a new millennium (a term usually used in english).11 Conclusion later that evening, after we had left the ceremonial grounds, we analyzed what at first blush appeared the privileging of the digital representations of the ceremony over the ceremony itself. We puzzled over why Tibetans allowed the face-to-face ceremony to be overshadowed by its digitalization. Yet, as the night wore on, and we explored the data more closely, we started to reflect on how images of the Kalachakra are treated by

Tibetan Buddhists themselves, and we realized that the fault might lie with our own biases, and not with the use or abuse of digital media technologies. Still, a central question remained. In the rich, dynamic,

Digitalizing Tibet 155 hyper-mediatized hubbub of the Kalachakra’s digitalized mediascape, between the face-to-face interactions, enormous video monitors, amplified sound, websites, streamed videos and other social media, as well as radios used for simultaneous translation, printed books, even mass produced sacred images, it became unclear as to where the actual ceremony stopped and its representations began. What was the thin skin between sign and referent? Between the virtual and the actual? Between the object and its mediation, not to mention the effects of its mediatization? To answer this cluster of questions, our chapter has turned to the notion of digitalization, which models not merely the translation of the analogue into the digital, but the

conditioning of social structures and practices through the process of being digitized. Think, for example, of how Amazon.com has conditioned the economy of local bookstores.12 To build our model, we have relied on Hjarvard and his theory of the mediatization of religion conditioned by Dissanayake’s critical Buddhist theory of communication. For Hjarvard, the mediatization of high- modern society is a “‘Trojan horse’ that challenges the authority of institutionalized religion”, and ultimately Nordic culture (2011, 132). We found just the reverse happening for Tibet. Digitalization increased the Dalia

lama’s authority and charisma, ran against banalization’s anomie, as well as created if not a virtual, at the least an augmented Tibet. Yet, our goal in this chapter has not been mere critique. Instead, we have taken the first steps to recondition Hjarvard’s theory of mediatization so that is productive as a theory by which to analyze Buddhist mediascapes such as the Kalachakra. Conditioning Hjarvard’s theory of mediatization with critical Buddhist communication theory has illustrated how a scholar’s definition of religion affects how they theorize its mediatization. We maintain that since Protestant models of communication remain deeply embedded in how many scholars of communication approach mediatization, if one wants to understand non-Western

religions, one cannot simply add token Asian content. Instead, one needs to rethink the theories by which we model communication. Our observation and analysis of the Kalachakra ceremony necessitates a theory of mediation not as a one-way transmission of information about an essential referent (svabhāva) from source to destination (A ⇒ B), but as media practices that mutually condition (pratyaya) each other (A ⇔ B). As the chapter’s epigraph hints, while built upon the research of Dissanayake, our model is ultimately indebted to the Indian philosopher Nagarjuna’s ontological viewpoint that maintains that phenomena lack any intrinsic and self-arising nature. Instead, everything conditions everything else, and relies upon numerous causes and conditions. We have spilled much ink illustrating what Nordic theories of mediatization can learn from critical Buddhist theories of communication. In this denouement, we assert that Buddhist communication theory


can learn two important lessons from mediatization. First, mediatization models how Buddhist social worlds, like all social worlds, are imagined by their inhabitants through technologies of communication, and that these social worlds are conditioned by these media practices.

Accordingly, mediatization theory enables researchers to analyze the effect media have on determining Buddhist content, to map the social worlds held together (√dhṛ) by digital media, and also to illuminate the historic transformations caused by digitalization of Tibetan ceremonies such as the Kalachakra. For example, mediatization theory allows the understanding of the 2014 Kalachakra ceremony’s mediascape and its religious practices, as well as trace a shift by the Dalai lama from media as information, to an increasing use of cyberspace as a place of participatory and interactive media practices. Second, generalizing from the case study of the 2014 Kalachakra, we can now extend our theory of digitalization to understand how Tibetan Buddhism, in diaspora, uses online religious practices for nation building. A reconditioned mediatization theory gives us the conceptual tools to explain (1) why far more than other religious traditions, Tibetan Buddhism flourishes in digital spaces and affords the use of the Internet not just for the transmission of information but for ceremonial practice, and also (2) how long-distance religious practices afford a diaspora community. Obviously, there are both historical and technological conditions in play. Historically, living in diaspora creates a situation in which long-distance forms of digitally mediated religious practice are not a choice but a necessity. Technologically, digital media allows for the types of interactive, real time communication that ceremonies such as the Kalachakra require. Beyond the historical and technological, however, a reconditioned mediatization theory reveals that a religion’s ontology also plays a major role in its digitalization. Key to understanding a theory of Buddhist communication is the concept of dependent co- origination (pratītyasamutpāda), which maintains that everything that comes into existence is dependent on something else. As the Dalai lama said on the second day of the Kalachakras teachings, “Nothing exists objectively, nothing exists on its own side.”

Notes 1 Nagarjuna, Mūlamadhyamakakārikā [I.1]; for our translation, we use Jay Garfield. 1995. The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way. Oxford:

Oxford University Press. 2 Cf. 33rd Kalachakra empowerment Preliminary Teachings. 3 Cf. Office of His Holiness the Dalai lama, n.d., Introduction to the Kalachkra. 4 Cf. Office of His Holiness the Dalai lama 2014. Kalachakra Initiation – Part 1 [online video]. 5 A Procrustean bed describes a scheme that produces uniformity by arbitrary, often violent methods. It is named after Procrustes, the villain from

Digitalizing Tibet 157 Greek Mythology who stretched or amputated the limbs of travelers to make them fit to the length of his bed. 6 For a full list of initiations, see www.dalailama.com/teachings/ kalachakrainitiations, accessed 4 October 2017. 7 For more on the rituals of the Kalachakra, see: Dalai lama XIV, 1999a. Kalachakra Tantra: Rite of Initiation 3rd edition. Translated by J.  Hopkins. Boston: Wisdom Publications. See also A. Berzin, 1997. Taking the

Kalachakra Initiation. Ithaca: Snow lion Publications. 8 For a nuanced treatment on the themes of selfhood, temporality, and embodiment in the Kālacakra Tanta, see V. A. Wallace, 2001. The Inner Kālacakra: A Buddhist Tantric View of the Individual. New York: Oxford University Press. 9 To examine the 2014 Kalachakra, we draw on three sources: Field notes we wrote while attending the ceremony; news reports of the event by local ladakhi media outlets and news reports issued by the Office of the Fourteenth Dalai lama; and english translations of the Dalai lama’s teachings found at the following websites: www.dalailama.com/ webcasts/ post/323-33rd- kalachakra-empowerment-preliminary-teachings, www.dalailama.com/webcasts/post/322-his-holiness-the- dalailamas-79th-birthday-celebration, and www.dalailama.com/webcasts/ post/321-introductory-teaching—kalachakra-in-ladakh-2014. 10 Kalachakra: The Public and The Secret Initiations. 11 For more on the Dalai lama’s take on ethics, religion, secularism and modernism, see Dalai lama XIV, 1999b. Ethics for the New Millennium. New York: Penguin and Dalai lama XIV, 2011. Beyond Religion: Ethics for a Whole World. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 12 Cf. Amazon to Scuppernong Books.

References Primary Sources 33rd Kalachakra empowerment Preliminary Teachings, n.d. Available at www.dalailama.com/videos/33rd kalachakra-empowerment-preliminary- teachings, accessed 4 October 2017. Guhyasamājatantra. Translated from Sanskrit by F. Fremantle, 1971. A Critical Study of the Guhyasamājatantra. london: University of london library. Kālacakra Tantra. Translated from Tibetan by J. Hopkins, 1999. Kalachakra Tantra: Rite of Initiation. New York: Wisdom Publications. Kalachakra: The Public and the Secret Initiations. Available at www.trimondi. de/SDle/Part-1-06.htm, accessed 4 October 2017. Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. Translated from Sanskrit by J. Garfield, 1995. Fundamental Wisdom on the Middle Way: Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Office of His Holiness the Dalia lama, 2014a. Kalachakra Initiation – Part 1. [video] Available at www.youtube.com/watch?v=654CdfMeOoc, accessed 4 October 2017. Office of His Holiness the Dalia lama, 2014b. 33rd Kalachakra Empowerment Preliminary Teachings. [video] Available at www.dalailama.com/ videos/33rd-kalachakra-empowerment-preliminary-teachings, accessed 4 October 2017.

Ratnāvalī. Translated from Sanskrit by M. R. Kale, 2002. The Ratnāvalī. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Suhṛllekha. Translated from Sanskrit by B. Dharmamitra, 2008. Letter From a Friend [The Suhṛllekha]. Available at www.kalavinka.org/Jewels/book_ excerpts/letter_excerpts/letter_X-13_X-01.pdf, accessed 4 October 2017.

Secondary Sources Amazon, 1994–. Available at www.amazon.com, accessed 5 October 2017. Appadurai, A., 1990. Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural economy. Theory Culture Society, 7(2), 1–24. Baudrillard, J., 1995. The Gulf War Did Not Take Place. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Berger, P., 1967. The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion. Garden City: Doubleday. Berger, P., 1999. The Desecularization of the World: Resurgent Religion and World Politics. Grand Rapids: William B. eerdmans Publishing Company. Berzin, A., 1997. Taking the Kalachakra Initiation. Ithaca: Snow lion Publications. Campbell, H., 2010. When Religion Meets New Media. New York: Routledge. Campbell, H. and Grieve, G., 2014. What Playing with Religion Offers Digital Game Studies. In: Campbell, H. and Grieve, G. P., eds. Playing with Religion in Digital Games. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1–21. Chakrabarty, D., 2000. Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and

Historical Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Couldry, N. and Hepp, A., 2013. Conceptualizing Mediatization: Contexts, Traditions, Arguments. Communication Theory, 23(3), 191–202. Dalai lama, 1999a. Kalachakra Tantra: Rite of Initiation. 3rd ed. Trans. J. Hopkins. Boston: Wisdom Publications. Dalai lama, 1999b. Ethics for the New Millennium. New York: Penguin. Dalai lama, 2011. Beyond Religion: Ethics for a Whole World. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Dalai lama, n.d. 33rd kalachakra Empowerment. Preliminary Teachings. Available at www.dalailama.com/webcasts/post/323-33rd-kalachakra- empowerment-preliminary-teachings, accessed 4 October 2017. Dalai lama, n.d. His Holiness the Dalai Lamas 79th birthday celebration. Available

at www.dalailama.com/webcasts/post/322-his-holiness-the- dalailamas-79th-birthday-celebration, accessed 4 October 2017. Dalai lama, n.d. Introductory Teaching. Kalachakra in Ladakh 2014. Available at www.dalailama.com/webcasts/post/321-introductory-teaching— kalachakrain-ladakh-2014, accessed 4 October 2017. Davidson Reynolds, P., 1971. A Primer in Theory Construction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Derrida, J., 1988. Of Grammatology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press (corrected edition). Dissanayake, W., 1983. The Communication Significance of the Buddhist

Concept of Dependent Co-Origination. Communication, 8(1), 29–45. Dissanayake, W., 2009a. The Production of Asian Theories of Communication: Contexts and Challenges. Asian Journal of Communication, 19(4), 453–468. Digitalizing Tibet 159 Dissanayake, W., 2009b. Buddhist Communication Theory. In: littlejohn, S. W.

and Foss, K. A., eds. Encyclopedia of Communication Theory. Thousand Oaks: SAGe Publications, 84–85. Durkheim, e., 1995. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. New York: The Free Press (Simon & Schuster). eliade, M., 1961. History of Religions and a New Humanism. History of

Religions, 1(1), 1–8. engelke, M., 2012. Angels in Swindon: Public Religion and Ambient Faith in england. American Ethnologist, 39(3), 155–170. ess, C., 1996. The Political Computer: Democracy, CMC, and Habermas. In: ess, C., ed. Philosophical Perspectives on Computer-Mediated Communication. Albany: State University of New York Press. Garfield, J., 1995. The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way. Oxford:

Oxford University Press. Goody, J., 1986. The Logic of Writing and the Organization of Society.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Grieve, G., 2006. Retheorizing Religion in Nepal. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Grieve, G., 2017. Mind the Gap: Screens, Ontologies, and the Far Shore. In: Grieve, G., CyberZen: Imagining Authentic Buddhist Identity, Community, and Practices in the Virtual World of Second Life. New York: Routledge, 194–214. Grieve, G. and Veidlinger, D., 2016. Buddhist Media Technologies. In: Jarryson, M., ed. Oxford Handbook of Contemporary Buddhism. london: Oxford University Press, 469–486. Havelock, e., 1986. The Muse Learns to Write: Reflections on Orality and Literacy from Antiquity to the Present. New Haven: Yale University Press. Helland, C., 2016. Digital Religion. In: Yamane, D., ed. Handbook of Religion and Social Institutions. Switzerland: Springer, 177–196. Hjarvard, S., 2008a. The Mediatization of Society. A Theory of the Media as Agents of Social and Cultural Change. Nordicom Review, 29(2), 105–134. Hjarvard, S., 2008b. A Theory of Media As Agents of Religious Change. Northern Lights, 6(1), 9–26. Hjarvard, S., 2011. The Mediatisation of Religion: Theorising Religion, Media and Social Change. Culture and Religion, 12(2), 119–135. Hjarvard, S., 2013. The Mediatization of Culture and Society. london: Routledge. Hjarvard, S., 2014. From Mediation to Mediatization: The Institutionalization of New Media. In: Hepp, A. and Krotz, F., eds. Mediatized Worlds. Culture and Society in a Media Age. Basingtoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 123–139. Hoover, S., 2006. Religion in the Media Age. New York: Routledge. Innis, H., 1951. The Bias of Communication. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Jenkins, H., 1992. Textual Poachers: Television Fans & Participatory Culture. New York: Routledge. Jennings, R., 1969. Policies and Practices of Selected National Religious Bodies as Related to Broadcasting in the Public Interest. PhD Dissertation, New York University. 160 Gregory Price Grieve et al. Krotz, F., 2009. Mediatization: A Concept with Which to Grasp Media and Societal Change. In: lundby, K., ed. Mediatization: Concept, Changes, Consequences. New York: Peter lang, 19–38. Krotz, F., 2014. Mediatization As a Mover in Modernity: Social and Cultural Change in the Context of Media Change. In: lundby, K., ed. Handbook

Mediatization. Berlin: de Gruyter, 131–161. Krotz, F. and Hepp, A., 2011. A Concretization Of Mediatization: How ‘ Mediatization Works’ And Why Mediatized Worlds Are A Helpful Concept For empirical Mediatization Research. Empedocles: European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication, 3(2), 137–152. lash, S., 2005. Intensive media—Modernity and Algorithm. Available at http:// roundtable.kein.org, accessed 4 October 2017. levinas, e., 1985. Ethics and Infinity. New York: Duquesne University Press. livingstone, S., 2009. On the Mediation of everything. Journal of Communication, 59(1), 1–18. lopez, D., 2001. The Story of Buddhism. New York: HarperCollins. lövheim, M., 2011. Mediatisation of Religion: A Critical Appraisal. Culture and Religion, 12(2), 153–166. lundby, K., 2014. Mediatization of Communication. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Martín-Barbero, J., 2003. La Educación Desde la Comunicación. Bogotá: Grupo editorial Norma. Matsunaga, Daigan and Alicia, 1974. The Concept of Upāya in Mahāyāna

Buddhist Philosophy. Japanese Journal of Buddhist Studies, 1(1), 51–72. Available at https://web.archive.org/web/20140608152609/, http://nirc. nanzan-u. ac.jp/nfile/2297, accessed 4 October 2017. McChesney, R., 2013. Digital Disconnect: How Capitalism is Turning the

Internet Against Democracy. New York: New Press. Mcluhan, M., 1964. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man.

Cambridge: MIT Press. Morton, A., 1980. Frames of Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Office of His Holiness the Dalai lama, n.d. Introduction to the Kalachkra. Available at www.dalailama.com/teachings/kalachakra-initiations, accessed 4 October 2017. Office of His Holiness the Dalia lama, 2014. Kalachakra: The Public and the Secret Initiations. Available at www.trimondi.de/SDle/Part-1-06.htm, accessed 4 October 2017. Ong, W., 1967. The Presence of the Word: Some Prolegomena for Cultural and Religious History. New Haven: Yale University Press. Postman, N., 1985. Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. New York: Penguin Books. Preiss, R. W., et al., 2007. Mass Media Effects Research: Advances through Meta-Analysis. Mahwah: lawrence erlbaum. de Saussure, F., 1916. Course in General Linguistics. Chicago: Open Court. Schulz, W., 2004. Reconstructing Mediatization as an Analytical Concept.


European Journal of Communication, 19(1), 87–101. Scuppernong Books, 2014–. Available at www.scuppernongbooks.com/, accessed 5 October 2017. Shannon, C., 1948. A Mathematical Theory of Communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27(3), 379–423. Digitalizing Tibet 161 Shannon, C. and Weaver, W., 1949. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Chicago: University of Illinois Press. Singh, R., 2016. Buddhists and Muslims in ladakh: Negotiating Tradition and Modernity. PhD Dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara. Sorokin, P., 1947. Society, Culture, and Personality. New York: Harper & Brothers. Thompson, J. B., 1995. The Media and Modernity. A Social Theory of the

Media. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Veidlinger, D., 2006. Spreading the Dhamma: Writing, Orality and Textual Transmission in Buddhist Northern Thailand. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Wallace, V. A., 2001. The Inner Kālacakra: A Buddhist Tantric View of the Individual. New York: Oxford University Press. Weinelt, B., 2016. Digital Transformation of Industries (White Paper). Cologny: World economic Forum.



Source