It's the Chinese who say this. And at the same time, ignore their own horrific treatment of the Tibetans. The whole thing is highly controversial.
Serfdom in Tibet controversy
It's the Chinese, not the Tibetans who have imprisoned the Panchen Lama chosen by the Dalai Lama
Gedhun Choekyi Nyima
At the time he was the youngest ever political prisoner.
If he is still alive, he is in his mid twenties now. But nobody has heard from him. The Chinese say he is still alive and in good health - but surely he doesn't need to be protected from "separatists" in his mid twenties.
Here is how the BBC (in UK) reported it in May of this year 20 years after he was imprisoned.
China urged to release Panchen Lama after 20 years - BBC News
The Tibetan government in exile don't have any Chinese prisoners who they keep, hidden from the rest of the world, that nobody can ever speak to except themselves.
So who should we best believe when they describe the situation in Tibet before the invasion?
Remember that the Chinese didn't understand Tibetan, which is not related to Chinese. The script especially is a syllabic script, written left to right, and based on Indian scripts. Tibetans couldn't read Chinese characters, or vice versa (while Chinese from many different parts of China even if they can't understand each others' specch can understand the script - that's what helped hold together the vast empire).
And they didn't share their customs. The Tibetans have customs such as sky burial for instance, where for many Tibetans, the most expensive funeral you could have, highest prestige, was to be cut up in pieces and to be fed to vultures, in the midst of much chanting. After you are dead of course. This is a tradition that would be familiar to Indians, who have similar rituals. The idea is both an act of generosity to the vultures, and to help to you to leave your body behind as you go on to your next life. It makes sense if you are brought up in that tradition. But they seem to have come to the conclusion that this was the killing and ritual slaying of serfs, at least hard to see where else they got that idea.
So if they make mistakes like that - how much did they really understand of Tibet? Remember that until the invasion, hardly any Chinese had visited Tibet. And though the Chinese have many Buddhists, the tradition of Buddhism is different, in Tibet it's the tradition that came from India via Padmasambava and later Marpa. While in China it came in a different direction from Bodhidharma.
They killed many monks and nuns, forced them to break their vows, destroyed the monasteries. This is in a country where just about everyone was Buddhist and most families would have one member of the family who was a monk or a nun. They forced nomads to abandon their cattle and stay in fixed dwellings. All of that may seem like progress, if you think that nomads are backward and religion is a superstition. But for the Tibetans it must have seemed rather different. I don't think there were many if any Tibetans supporting the Chinese.
Absolutely, Tibet wasn't perfect back then. But then nowhere was. Back then for instance South Africa was in the depths of Apartheid. And there were many parts of the world that would seem extremely backward to us today.
As others have said here, the Dalai Lama doesn't want Tibet to go back to the state it was in in the 1950s. It was no paradise. But they needed to find their own way forward into the C20. And still do. Because, it seems that the Chinese still continue to have little understanding of the Tibetan people, what their needs are and interests are.
And the Dalai Lama's requests are moderate. He's not an extremist at all. He has throughout tried to restrain Tibetans. Steered them away from military solutions.
Talked about peace and compassion. Talked about showing understanding of the Chinese.
There are Tibetans who want Tibet to be independent. There are Tibetans who have advocated and supported military solutions also.
But the Dalai Lama has never ever advocated violence in Tibet. He has always spoken against this. He is just asking for Tibet to be an autonomous region with religious freedom, able to make decisions about such matters as schooling, policing, and enviromental policies.
It doesn't help matters when the Chinese make him out to be some kind of a demon. He isn't. If only they could show some respect and listen to what he has suggested. And to the Tibetan government in exile also - since the Dalai Lama has now renounced all political authority - not just for himself but for all future Dalai Lamas too, if he does have a successor.
He is and always has been a moderating influence on the Tibetans. If the Chinese could but see that, then there might be some chance of a way forward. And I think clear that it is genuine, that this is him expressing his own views. Following the Buddha's path of the middle way and of peace and compassion. This is not a pretense to try to get the Chinese into some kind of a trap. This is him attempting to influence the Tibetan people into the direction of peace and compassion and away from militarism.
So - the Chinese by denouncing him are denouncing the one person who is in the best position to help towards a peaceful resolution of the situation. No-one else has as tirelessly as the Dalai Lama continually spoken on the need for restraint, understanding, and compassion in the dealings of the Tibetans with the Chinese. And no-one else has such widespread respect amongst the Tibetan people.
I think there is hope for the future. That, slowly, the Chinese may come to see this. As, year after year, he always just advocates peace and never supports any form of violence, continually speaks against it - at some point, hopefully they will realize that he is not a military threat to them and indeed is part of the solution, indeed would go so far as to say, their very best chance f0r a lasting and peaceful solution. I hope so anyway.
Serfdom in Tibet controversy
It's the Chinese, not the Tibetans who have imprisoned the Panchen Lama chosen by the Dalai Lama
At the time he was the youngest ever political prisoner.
If he is still alive, he is in his mid twenties now. But nobody has heard from him. The Chinese say he is still alive and in good health - but surely he doesn't need to be protected from "separatists" in his mid twenties.
Here is how the BBC (in UK) reported it in May of this year 20 years after he was imprisoned.
China urged to release Panchen Lama after 20 years - BBC News
The Tibetan government in exile don't have any Chinese prisoners who they keep, hidden from the rest of the world, that nobody can ever speak to except themselves.
So who should we best believe when they describe the situation in Tibet before the invasion?
Remember that the Chinese didn't understand Tibetan, which is not related to Chinese. The script especially is a syllabic script, written left to right, and based on Indian scripts. Tibetans couldn't read Chinese characters, or vice versa (while Chinese from many different parts of China even if they can't understand each others' specch can understand the script - that's what helped hold together the vast empire).
And they didn't share their customs. The Tibetans have customs such as sky burial for instance, where for many Tibetans, the most expensive funeral you could have, highest prestige, was to be cut up in pieces and to be fed to vultures, in the midst of much chanting. After you are dead of course. This is a tradition that would be familiar to Indians, who have similar rituals. The idea is both an act of generosity to the vultures, and to help to you to leave your body behind as you go on to your next life. It makes sense if you are brought up in that tradition. But they seem to have come to the conclusion that this was the killing and ritual slaying of serfs, at least hard to see where else they got that idea.
So if they make mistakes like that - how much did they really understand of Tibet? Remember that until the invasion, hardly any Chinese had visited Tibet. And though the Chinese have many Buddhists, the tradition of Buddhism is different, in Tibet it's the tradition that came from India via Padmasambava and later Marpa. While in China it came in a different direction from Bodhidharma.
They killed many monks and nuns, forced them to break their vows, destroyed the monasteries. This is in a country where just about everyone was Buddhist and most families would have one member of the family who was a monk or a nun. They forced nomads to abandon their cattle and stay in fixed dwellings. All of that may seem like progress, if you think that nomads are backward and religion is a superstition. But for the Tibetans it must have seemed rather different. I don't think there were many if any Tibetans supporting the Chinese.
Absolutely, Tibet wasn't perfect back then. But then nowhere was. Back then for instance South Africa was in the depths of Apartheid. And there were many parts of the world that would seem extremely backward to us today.
As others have said here, the Dalai Lama doesn't want Tibet to go back to the state it was in in the 1950s. It was no paradise. But they needed to find their own way forward into the C20. And still do. Because, it seems that the Chinese still continue to have little understanding of the Tibetan people, what their needs are and interests are.
And the Dalai Lama's requests are moderate. He's not an extremist at all. He has throughout tried to restrain Tibetans. Steered them away from military solutions.
Talked about peace and compassion. Talked about showing understanding of the Chinese.
There are Tibetans who want Tibet to be independent. There are Tibetans who have advocated and supported military solutions also.
But the Dalai Lama has never ever advocated violence in Tibet. He has always spoken against this. He is just asking for Tibet to be an autonomous region with religious freedom, able to make decisions about such matters as schooling, policing, and enviromental policies.
It doesn't help matters when the Chinese make him out to be some kind of a demon. He isn't. If only they could show some respect and listen to what he has suggested. And to the Tibetan government in exile also - since the Dalai Lama has now renounced all political authority - not just for himself but for all future Dalai Lamas too, if he does have a successor.
He is and always has been a moderating influence on the Tibetans. If the Chinese could but see that, then there might be some chance of a way forward. And I think clear that it is genuine, that this is him expressing his own views. Following the Buddha's path of the middle way and of peace and compassion. This is not a pretense to try to get the Chinese into some kind of a trap. This is him attempting to influence the Tibetan people into the direction of peace and compassion and away from militarism.
So - the Chinese by denouncing him are denouncing the one person who is in the best position to help towards a peaceful resolution of the situation. No-one else has as tirelessly as the Dalai Lama continually spoken on the need for restraint, understanding, and compassion in the dealings of the Tibetans with the Chinese. And no-one else has such widespread respect amongst the Tibetan people.
I think there is hope for the future. That, slowly, the Chinese may come to see this. As, year after year, he always just advocates peace and never supports any form of violence, continually speaks against it - at some point, hopefully they will realize that he is not a military threat to them and indeed is part of the solution, indeed would go so far as to say, their very best chance f0r a lasting and peaceful solution. I hope so anyway.
About the Author
Robert Walker
Writer of articles on Mars and Space issues - Software Developer of Tune Smithy, Bounce Metronome etc.Studied at Wolfson College, Oxford
Lives in Isle of Mull
4.8m answer views110.3k this month
Top Writer2017, 2016, and 2015
Published WriterHuffPost, Slate, and 4 moreHuffPost, Slate, Forbes, Newsweek, Business Insider, and Science 2.0