According to Bataille, what is the problem of lamaism?
According to Georges Bataille, the "problem" of Lamaism in Tibet was that its absolute pacification left the society utterly defenseless against external military invasion, creating an economic and social system that devoured its own capacity to survive.
In his 1949 work The Accursed Share, Bataille analyzes historical Tibetan society ("Lamaism") through his economic theory of the "general economy". This theory states that all societies produce a surplus of energy (the "accursed share") that they must ultimately waste or destroy. While other societies used this surplus to wage wars or fund military expansion, Tibet used it to sustain a massive, non-productive monastic population.
The systemic issues and ultimate "problem" of this structure include:
1. Total Immobilization of Resources
Demographic Drain: A massive portion of the male population entered monasteries as monks (lamas). This took away vital labor from the economy and froze population growth.
Economic Stagnation: Instead of using wealth to build infrastructure or military strength, the society's surplus was strictly funneled into building monasteries, supporting monks, and buying ritual objects. Wealth was permanently taken out of circulation.
2. The Illusion of Religion-Driven Peace
Bataille points out that while Buddhism strictly forbids killing, religion alone does not make a society peaceful.
“Buddhism forbids its adherents to kill, which is presented as the origin of Tibet's peacefulness. However, the fact that other religions also condemn war, yet their followers still engage in killing, suggests that the relationship between religion and the absence of war is complex.”, as noted in a review of Bataille's analysis.
The true driver of Tibet's peace was an internal economic mechanism that systematically used up all surplus energy inside the borders, leaving absolutely no fuel for external aggression.
3. Absolute Disarmament and Geopolitical Vulnerability
By choosing to expend its "accursed share" strictly on internal religious life rather than external conquest (like historical Islam) or dynamic growth (like capitalism), Tibet became an "unarmed society."
This total pacification meant that the society lacked the physical means, weapons, and organizational power to defend itself against aggressive, military-focused neighbors.
In short, Bataille sees Lamaism as a fascinating, radical solution to the problem of human excess—it successfully ended domestic war and external aggression by turning all surplus energy inward into religious contemplation. However, the fatal flaw of this system was that it rendered the society completely helpless to survive in a hostile world.
If you would like to explore this further, I can break down how Bataille compares Tibet's unarmed society to the conquering expansion of early Islam, or how his ideas on luxury and waste challenge modern economics. Which direction would you prefer?
