(Note: The moderators separated this thread from one about the Beastie Boys’ “Concert for Tibet”.)
I’m not paying to help the Dalai Lama re-enslave his serfs.
“Well, hell, Mr. Dalai Lama, that sure is mighty Buddhist of you.”
That’s just a snippet of the kind of treatment meted out for hundreds of years on the people of Tibet in the name of what is now the Tibetan government-in-exile in Dharamsala fronted by the Dalai Lama. The more you delve into this shocking story, the worse it gets. And while Juba’s link might come from a pro-Chinese commie site, its pretty hard to find any links that dispute the information contained. I’d really like to see some, if anyone can find any. I can’t.
Hell, the Beastie Boys could be trying to promote world peace through unisex foot-binding, female circumcision and Esperanto as the official language of all nations, and I’d still go to hear them! What’s a little enslavement between friends, anyway? Yeesh. Some people are so sensitive! 
Juba, you’re a card. Re-enslaving Tibetan serfs. 
If you click on his link you’ll note that you’ve been directed to the PRC mission to the UN (www.china-un.ch) where one can learn the following tidbits:
Chinese citizens . . . are enjoying broad democratic rights.
The various religions are equal in status and their respective believers are able to join hands in striving for mutual development, and little religious strife has occurred.
China has . . . made breakthrough progress in judicial protection of human rights.
China has . . . established a complete legal system for the protection of women’s rights and promotion of women’s development. . . Women’s rights and interests in work are effectively protected.
China has . . . formed a social environment in which the disabled enjoy understanding, respect, attention and help.
The Chinese government has always attached great importance to protecting the rights of equality of the country’s ethnic minority groups and their rights and interests that are special relative to those of the Han majority.
The state fully respects and protects the freedom of ethnic minority groups to religious beliefs, and protects all legitimate religious activities undertaken by their people.
So? Who’s talking about the Chicoms here? We’re discussing the merits of Tibetan serfdom and the perpetrators of that system.
Erm, well, no we’re not actually, we’re talking about the upcoming Beastie Boys concert. Maybe all these off-topic posts could be moved elsewhere?
Sandman,
You asked for just one link to a site that disputes Juba’s PRC propaganda. True or not, here it is:
Tibet Was Not Liberated: The Tibetan Perspective
Old Tibet was not perfect. The current Dalai Lama has admitted this. However, The 14th Dalai Lama initiated far-reaching reforms in Tibet as soon as He assumed temportal authority. Throughout Tibet’s history, the mistreatment of peasants was forbidden by law and social norms. The largest portion of land in Tibet was held by peasants. Famine and starvation were unheard of in Tibet. The “liberation” [by the PRC] has resulted in the death of over 1.2 million Tibetans and the destruction of over 6,000 Tibetan Monasteries and cultural centers. Before the “liberation” in 1959, the population of Tibet was 6 million. Prior to the invasion, Tibet was a simple and self-reliant nation with a very rich cultural heritage. Tibet
Well, I’m not even going to go near the atrocities committed by the commies on the people of Tibet. I have no love for that regime or any other communist regime. However, you only have to read the first three lines of your link before eyebrows are raised – the DL admits that Tibet was not perfect, so why are such sweeping reforms necessary? The peasants owned most of the land – WTF? this is an outright lie.
Seems to me that both Juba’s link and yours are painting very biased pictures indeed, but I’d like to see some links from a source that could be considered a bit more objective – I have always thought that the conventional wisdom more closely resembled the commie’s version – that Tibet was up until recently no better than the serfdom of medieval Europe.
None of which, of course, alters the incontrovertible FACT that the Beastie Boys such donkey’s balls big time.
We’re talking about 50 years or more here. The current Dalai Lama never really ruled Tibet. He has never advocated reinstating serfdom in Tibet. In fact he is a supporter of democracy. Sure, ancient Tibet was (like most ancient countries) a comparatively brutal country ruled by an aristocracy (of sorts). But like I said, that was over 50 years ago now. I don’t think anybody, and certainly not the Dalai Lama, is advocating going back to that. And why believe anything you read on a PRC site?
Brian
I believe that H.H. the Dalai Lama’s position is that he recommends a form of government where the PRC government has economic and political control over Tibet, and the Tibetans have cultural and religious freedom. I think he has commented that some of the Chinese reforms were necessary to bring Tibet into the modern world. In the 1980s things had been improving in Tibet, but some frustrated Tibetans tried to rise up (understandable of course, but I think against His Holiness’s policy of reconciliation and non-violent diplomatic work), resulting in a crackdown by the PRC government.
On a wider note, we should not expect Buddhists and Buddhist countries to be perfect. While there are some entirely dubious masters and lamas (particularly in Taiwan!), many are worthy holders of the dharma lineages. H.H. the Dalai Lama is a great teacher who embodies the compassionate principles of Buddhism. Nevertheless, anybody who is serious about finding out about Buddhism should not expect lamas to be ‘Godlike’ in a monotheistic, Judeo-Christian sense, nor pre-PRC Tibet to have been some kind of Utopia. After all, Buddhism teaches that true happiness comes not about trying to change the external world through politics or whatever means to suit ourselves, it’s about realising the enlightened, completely compassionate and wise qualities within ourselves. If there were a perfect country filled with perfect people, perhaps they would not need religion.
There are a couple of books with information about pre-PRC Tibetan justice, customs and everyday life below. Reading between the lines, one can see that life and maybe justice were harsh in some ways, but the interactions between society and religious culture were complex and interesting. By the way, I’m not sure about Rebecca French’s religious affiliations, and I think Rinchen Llamo, like most people in Buddhist countries, practised in a devotional and moral way and did not meditate or study textual teachings. Some of her book (maybe due to translation issues) reflects early 20th-century misconceptions about Buddhism in Tibet - for example I think all lamas, or at least reincarnated ones are referred to as ‘living Buddhas’; this is not a term I’ve heard used by any current teachers or authors.
Rebecca Redwood French, The Golden Yoke: The Legal Cosmology of Buddhist Tibet.
amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de … ce&s=books
Review of above:
historycooperative.org/journ … /br_6.html
We Tibetans by Richen Lhamo:
amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de … ce&s=books
Yes, pre-1950 Tibet was basically a feudal society, similar to medieval Europe or then-contemporary Iran. The nomadic half (Amdo and Kham) was a collection of loose-knit, shifting confederations which depended on settled peoples (whether Tibetan, Chinese, or Muslim) for material goods. The settled half (U and Tsang), like settled societies all over the world, was stratified and corrupt. Actual slavery was practiced, though it was not economically significant. But “feudal” describes it best. The Dalai Lamas were very much like popes or ayatollahs.
But then, most of our societies have similar skeletons in the closet. Should Belgium be destroyed because of Leopold, or America because of the Indian wars?
Look, history can’t tell us what the future ought to be. Rather than arguing about whether Tibet always was (or ever was) a part of China, or how bad Tibetan society was (or Chinese society is), we should focus on what the Tibetans themselves actually want. Let the millions of happy, liberated serfs affirm their love for the Chinese motherland and rejection of the Dalai clique through free and fair elections. Or if…they have some other preference as to their political status, surely this should be respected, regardless of what bad things some of their ancestors did to others of their ancestors.
As for the present Dalai Lama’s role in all this, let’s see: born 1935, recognized about 1940. Given full governmental powers (as opposed to rule by regents) in 1950–age 16, younger than was customary, for the express purpose of dealing with the Chinese invasion. He chose to negotiate rather than flee to India and rebel. The arrangement collapsed in 1959, when the Dalai Lama had to flee and rebel after all. The basic problem was that the Chinese had not been observing the spirit of their end of the agreement; and that the agreement did not apply at all to Amdo or eastern Kham (whose refugees radicalized the population of Lhasa). French thinks the Dalai Lama let slip several opportunities to negotiate in the 1970’s and 1980’s, but it’s hard to second-guess these things.
The Dalai Lama is on record as supporting some form of autonomy short of independence. The meaning of “autonomy” is notoriously vague. Presumably China would at least control foreign policy (as India does with Bhutan). The Dalai Lama has also asked for military withdrawal from theTibetan Plateau, recognition of Amdo and Kham as parts of Tibet, a democractic system of local government, Tibetan as the official language, an end to Chinese settlement of Tibet, etc. But China is hardly likely to agree to such favorable terms. Even a Hong Kong style arrangement would be considered generous. China for its part seems to regard the whole discussion as merely one of allowing the Dalai Lama to return in some formal capacity, his rank superimposed on top of the existing Communist police state. Ironically, to China, the feudal implications of all this is the least objectionable aspect.
PS The phrase “living Buddha” is from the Chinese. The Tibetan is sprul-sku (phonetically, “tulku”) which means something like “physical basis” (for the reincarnate lama). The Dalai Lama is one of hundreds, if not thousands, of recognized tulkus.
Tibetan people live in annexed regions of China as well, like Sichuan and Yunnan.
In the early 90s I took a trip to far west Sichuan, an area mostly populated by Tibetans. Before I went, I had gone to the Tibetan Culture Center here in Taipei and they gave me a stack of wallet sized Dalai Lama pics to bring there. In my naivate, I ended up getting swarmed by Tibetans begging for the pics. They love their Dalai Lama, but they’re prohibited from expressing this or legally having or seeing images of his holiness. The people who owned shops or worked in the hotels in Litang were mainly Han. The Tibetans were primarily nomadic, farmers, unemployed, or pseudo-lamas.
There was a stark contrast between the races. The saddest thing was that on the back of the Dalai Lama pics was some Tibetan writing. Noone I spoke to there could read it.
That experience alone showed me the importance of returning the rightful territory to the Tibetans.
Even if China did give up Tibet, they would still retain those annexed areas where Tibetans would never be truly free to be ‘Tibetan’. They’re far better off in India and Nepal than they are in China.
And the Dalai Lama is probably the sanest world “leader” of them all.
Juba, your PRC theory is shot to shit here.
By the way–Maoman, what have you got against Esperanto? You seem to be grouping it with foot-binding and other bad things.
The Dalai Lama’s palace in Lhasa had 1,000 rooms; rather a lot for a man who claims to be “a simple Buddhist monk.” Some of the Dalai Lama’s huge wealth was put on exhibition in the Museum of the Tibetan Revolution in 1965. There was gold, silver, jewels and garments valued at 14.4 million pounds sterling. His family owned 6,170 serfs and 102 house slaves. They also had 27 manors, 30 pastures.
(Information garnered indirectly from “Tibet Transformed” by Israel Epstein - unfortunately I left my copy of the book in London and it’s not on sale here.)
When I hear Tenzin Gyatso, the Dalai Lama, make some kind of criticism of Tibet’s former feudal society and some kind of self-criticism for his own role in it, I might start to take his democratic credentials more seriously. Of course it could be that he has made some such criticism, but it hasn’t reached my ears - and it’s not for lack of listening.
Juba,
what tired old arguments. Old Tibet wasn’t a liberal democracy so it had it coming.
Anyway, here’s an excerpt from one DL14’s letters to Deng Xiaoping:
[quote]The Chinese Government has, with great doubt and suspicion, described our struggle as a movement to restore the “old society” and [said] that it was not in the interest of the Tibetan people but for the personal status of the Dalai Lama. Since my youth, I was aware of the many faults of the existing system in Tibet and wanted to improve it. At that time I started the process of reform in Tibet. Soon after our flight to India we introduced democracy in our exile community, step by step. It is impossible for Tibet to ever revert to the old system of government. Whether my efforts for the Tibetan cause are as charged by the Chinese for my personal position and benefit or not is clear from my repeated statements that in a future Tibet I will not assume any governmental responsibility or hold any political position. Furthermore, this is reflected clearly in the charter which governs the Tibetan Administration-in-Exile and in the ‘Guidelines for Future Tibet’s Polity and the Basic Features of its Constitution’, which I announced on 26 February 1992[/quote].
And this paper from the Tibetan Govt-in-Exile counters some of the more extreme claims of China on Tibet’s feudal past.
Cases of mutilation of serfs by landowners as late as the 1950s, e.g. severing the achilles tendon, cutting off arms or gouging out eyes, are well documented in both words and photographs. If Israel Epstein’s book “Tibet Transformed” were available here, you could see them for yourself.
Hand amputated for stealing a bag of barley
Tuto, a herdsman whose left foot was cut off by the head of his tribe
More examples: http://www.china.org.cn/ch-xizang/tibet/historical_status/english/e0801.html
Too bad nobody told the monks and nuns about that:
[quote=“Tsering Shakya”]In 1969 there was widespread rebellion throughout Tibet, eventually crushed by the PLA. The best-documented episode is the revolt led by Thrinley Chodron, a young nun from the xian (county) of Nyemo, who marched her followers
Juba, in the Dalai Lama’s defense we should note that he HAS admitted the problem of feudalism in Tibet, and the necessity for “modernization.” Most Tibetans would probably wish for some other way to accomplish this, than for the Chinese to come in and marginalize them. Alas, they were never given that option.
The Potala palace was expanded to its present form by the Fifth Dalai Lama. The one we see on TV is number fourteen. Nobody asked him how many rooms he wanted (well, except he commissioned Heinrich Harrer to build him a movie theater) or how much treasure it should contain. Remember, he was about five years old when they moved him in.
It’s not easy making reforms when you’re being invaded by a foreign power, when your own power has to work through an uncooperative bureaucracy, and when you are between the ages of 16 (in 1950) and 25 (1959). Given the resources available to him, I’d say the Dalai Lama has done remarkably well for a people who might otherwise be forgotten as well as outgunned.
Juba, your comments are very typical of those “lefties” who have romanticised ideas about Communist China and swallow its propaganda hook, line and sinker. Whatever terrible things you can manage to dig up I am sure it is not difficult to respond with many times more terrible things that have taken place in China under the rule of the Communist Party. Need I mention the Great Leap Forward or the Cultural Revolution.
In no way am I trying to say historical Tibet was a Shangri-la as many of those on the Free Tibet bandwagon like to think, but nor was it hell on earth and it is unlikely that social conditions in Tibet were any better or worse than in China at the same time. I think Tibet suffers as much from the “Shangri-la” view as it does from the ignorant views of people like yourself.
The present day campaign for a free Tibet is based on coming to terms with the present realities of the Tibetan people. There are two key issues: self-determination and human rights.
Tibet was an independent country prior to the Chinese invasion in 1949/50. The Tibetans have never had the opportunity to decide the future status of their country as they have been continually under the control of the Chinese government since 1959 and that control has largely been maintained via military occupation.
Freedom of religion continues to be a major human rights issue in Tibet (and China also). The destruction of monasteries and prohibition of religious teaching is not just something that happened in the Cultural Revolution, but is still going on today. If you doubt this just search Google for some information about the destruction of the Serthar Buddhist Institute.
You might also be interested to know that the Dalai Lama wrote a new constitution for a democratic Tibet soon after going into exile. This was published in 1963. This was long before anyone in the west began to take an interest in Tibet.
The 13th Dalai Lama had plans for the reform of Tibet to bring it into the modern world but these were stalled by his death in 1933. The 14th Dalai Lama also had his own plans for reform, but unfortunately he was never able to realise them as the Chinese invaded his country when he was just 15 years old and ten years later he was forced into exile.
for some more information have a look at these books or links:
What the Chinese scholars say about Tibet
International Campaign for Tibet
Tibet Information Network
The Dragon in the Land of Snows: A History of Modern Tibet Since 1947
by Tsering Shakya
Seven Years in Tibet and Return to Tibet
by Heinrich Harrer
In Exile from the Land of Snows
by John F. Avedon
Chizuo Matsumoto, alias Shoko Asahara (right) won’t make it to the concert. The convicted con man and self-proclaimed savior has been on trial for seven years for (allegedly) sending his followers into the Tokyo subways during morning rush hour March 20, 1995, with bags of deadly nerve gas and orders to kill. 12 people died. The Dalai Lama recalled that when he first met the secretive cult’s leader Shoko Asahara he was impressed by what appeared to be Asahara’s seriousness and spirituality. “I consider him (Asahara) as my friend, but not necessarily a perfect one,” he said. Aides to the Nobel Peace Prize winner say he first met Asahara in 1987 and has met the Aum leader four or five times since then.
For a bit of perspective you on Juba’s post you might have a look at these articles:
Dalai Lama discusses subway attack, friendship with Asahara
The Dalai Lama criticizes Aum Supreme Truth
Dalai Lama says Aum leader not his disciple