Search For The Panchen Lama

[Abandon]

I just finished this book - the first Dhamma book I have read in years other than the suttas.

The Panchen is Tibet's second highest reincarnating Lama, and will have the job of identifying the Dalai Lama if he becomes reincarnated again (which he raised doubts about). There is a candidate recognised by the Dalai Lama, and another one recognised by Beijing. The first has been abducted and hidden away by the Chinese govt, and the second is also under the direct control of the govt. and is being 'tutored'.

But the issue is far from clear - how safe was the Dalai Lama's candidate - there were several prime prospects, and the final one was apparently born before the death of the old Panchen.

I read it determined to hate the chinese govt for meddling in buddhism, but the author presents the facts very astutely, and leaves many doubts about both sides.

[Neeranam]

Very strange all that Tibetan stuff.

Very different to Thai Buddhism.

Are they in fact the same Religion?

[Nordlys]

and the second is also under the direct control of the govt. and is being 'tutored'.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

while the first one is probably being "tortured"....

[Mr. Farang]

Very strange all that Tibetan stuff.

Very different to Thai Buddhism.

Are they in fact the same Religion?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Does it matter? We are all humans, conditioned to effect individual and social causes...... All human-constructed things are conditioned. Buddhism is no exception. The "puzzle" that obfuscates the Dhamma is ourselves.

Mahayana, Hinayana..... labels constructed by humans, to serve human causes to effect a human cause. Dhamma (and The Dhamma) exists without human constructions - the "Vehicle" is not important. What is important is Dhamma.

I ask you my Brothers and Sisters, Does a Dolphin, swimming deep in the ocean, need to know about "Greater Vehicles" and "Lesser Vehicles" to know Dhamma ?

Edited September 21, 2005 by Mr. Farang

[Neeranam]

I ask you my Brothers and Sisters, Does a Dolphin, swimming deep in the ocean, need to know about "Greater Vehicles" and "Lesser Vehicles" to know Dhamma ?

I guess not.

[Neeranam]

Does it matter? We are all humans, conditioned to effect individual and social causes...... All human-constructed things are conditioned. Buddhism is no exception. The "puzzle" that obfuscates the Dhamma is ourselves.

Mahayana, Hinayana..... labels constructed by humans, to serve human causes to effect a human cause. Dhamma (and The Dhamma) exists without human constructions - the "Vehicle" is not important. What is important is Dhamma.

I ask you my Brothers and Sisters, Does a Dolphin, swimming deep in the ocean, need to know about "Greater Vehicles" and "Lesser Vehicles" to know Dhamma ?

One thing that confuses me is the debating that Mahayana monks do. Is this not debating about certain subjects that we don't need to know about?

I had dinner with a Thai Buddhist last night and he was very nervous talking about things that, as you say, are not neccessary to know. Ghosts for example.

[Mr. Farang]

Does it matter? We are all humans, conditioned to effect individual and social causes...... All human-constructed things are conditioned. Buddhism is no exception. The "puzzle" that obfuscates the Dhamma is ourselves.

Mahayana, Hinayana..... labels constructed by humans, to serve human causes to effect a human cause. Dhamma (and The Dhamma) exists without human constructions - the "Vehicle" is not important. What is important is Dhamma.

I ask you my Brothers and Sisters, Does a Dolphin, swimming deep in the ocean, need to know about "Greater Vehicles" and "Lesser Vehicles" to know Dhamma ?

One thing that confuses me is the debating that Mahayana monks do. Is this not debating about certain subjects that we don't need to know about?

I had dinner with a Thai Buddhist last night and he was very nervous talking about things that, as you say, are not neccessary to know. Ghosts for example.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ghosts, in Thai culture, are acultural artifacts of animism and spirit worship and have zero to do with Threavada Buddhism. Now, you will ask, "Thailand is a Buddhist country, why do so many people believe in ghosts and spirits and why do Monks seemingly support this view, at times?"

The reason can be found in the Dhamma - all worldly things are conditioned. If Thai people want to believe in ghosts then, by conditioning Buddhism with artifacts of animism and spirit worship, people can be "taught" Buddhist ideas, even when their minds and kamma are deeply rooted in animism ( a different culture foundation or artifact).

Also, your words:

.... are not neccessary to know. Ghosts for example.

This statement is not what Thervada teaches (it is a misquote). This type of "idea'" or mental object, (ghosts, for example) is not "Right View" (not useful) on the Eight Fold Path. It is simply a defilement for humans to be fascinated with spirits, ghosts, rituals, etc. This is very clear in Theravada teaching.

PS; Did you ever contempate why, for example, in Cambodia, Hindu gods appeared next to Buddha images in certain periods of art and sculpture?

Yours sincerely, Mr. Farang

[chownah]

Does it matter? We are all humans, conditioned to effect individual and social causes...... All human-constructed things are conditioned. Buddhism is no exception. The "puzzle" that obfuscates the Dhamma is ourselves.

Mahayana, Hinayana..... labels constructed by humans, to serve human causes to effect a human cause. Dhamma (and The Dhamma) exists without human constructions - the "Vehicle" is not important. What is important is Dhamma.

I ask you my Brothers and Sisters, Does a Dolphin, swimming deep in the ocean, need to know about "Greater Vehicles" and "Lesser Vehicles" to know Dhamma ?

One thing that confuses me is the debating that Mahayana monks do. Is this not debating about certain subjects that we don't need to know about?

I had dinner with a Thai Buddhist last night and he was very nervous talking about things that, as you say, are not neccessary to know. Ghosts for example.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think that dealing with unneccessary concepts (ghosts, spirits, good/bad luck, omens, etc.) is common to all people in the world and Buddhists are no different. I think that monks are people so some of them will dwell needlessly on these topics and in doing so they are perhaps doing a disservice to laypeople in that sometime perhaps they are leading people to continue to cling or even to increase the clinging to these concepts. I think that monks are like plumbers...there are some good ones and there are some bad ones.

My opinion is that monks discussing these topics among themselves is probably a sign that they are diverging from their path and I would hope that some more senior monk would point this out to them. If laypeople should bring up one of these topics to a monk then I would think that a brief discussion could be appropriate but that the monk should point out clearly that these matters were not considered to be important for following the path...or something like that so as to gently direct the persons attention back to the right direction....the fact that some monks sell amulets etc. etc. shows that some monks do indeed actively lead laypeople astray (in my opinion). I am always open to new ideas thats contradict my views or that alter or amplify them....I'm especially interested in hearing about Buddhas thoughts on these issues or related topics. Also, note that my opinions seem to indicate that I should judge a monks actions as if I know better....and I'm just a newbie in Buddhist studies!!!

As for Mahayana and Hinayana, I don't know exactly what they entail but I suppose that discussion of ghosts could be a legitimate part of these depending on how they viewed Buddha's teachings. Strict interpretation vs. Loose interpretation can make all the difference in the world. Some people believe that everything that Buddha said was directed to inhabitants of a gross plane of existence and some people with this belief believe that they are above this gross plane and so they can interpret Buddha's teachings at a different level and thus people like me who try to take Buddha's teachings more directly might not understand their reasoning.

[Mr. Farang]

Also, note that my opinions seem to indicate that I should judge a monks actions as if I know better....and I'm just a newbie in Buddhist studies!!!

Dear Chownah,

Many years ago I was situated in a famous temple in Thailand, but I forget which temple, I can't even recall if it was in the North or in the South.

During that period I saw an older Monk walking around, smoking a big old cigar. I watched him closely and he has some other "strange" actions which were foreign to my view of "how Monks should behave"......

The next day, I approached the elder Abbot of the temple, and asked him about this elder Monk.

The elder Monk (might have been the famous Achan Buddhadasa at Wat Suan Mok, but I can't recall for sure), told me that I should concentrate on my practice and that everyone lives with their own kamma. He explained that it is not for us to judge the Sangha or each other, but to practice based on our own kamma.

My life became much more happy and peaceful when I stopped worrying about, or judging the actions of others, acccepted everyone as situated in their own kamma-moment, and focused on practicing Dhamma in all things for myself, based on my kamma-situation.

Monks are Monks. Dhamma is Dhamma. Monks are conditioned beings, situated by their own kamma. You should develop intuitive knowledge for yourself, Khun Chownah, what is Dhamma and what is not Dhamma. If you see Brothers in the Sangha that wear the orange or yellow robe and their actions seems strange to you, you should love them as your Brother, and see them in their own kamma-situation, and understand why feeling arise of "doubt" and "judgement" and other (mental) objects (of yours) arise and fall.

All things in this worldly life, this kamma-matrix we call "life", are impermanent, conditioned things.

Yours sincerely,

Mr. Farang

Edited September 22, 2005 by Mr. Farang

[Abandon]

Just as many Thais like to speculate and swap stories about ghosts to the disparagement of 'sensible' westerners, I see that also Westerners try to cut out, deny, and rubbish as 'animism' the whole issue of ghosts.

The ghost realms are a genuine part of Buddhism, and were not dismissed by the Buddha. In fact, during the second watch of the night of enlightenment the Buddha's insight was, with mind concentrated:

"I directed it to knowledge of the passing away and reappearance of beings. With the divine eye which is purified and surpasses the human I saw beings passing away and reappearing .... [ in all the various realms of existence ]"

which included perdition, states of woe, and even he11 realms.

Gods, devas, asura (demi gods), ghosts etc.. all play a part in Buddhism. Westerners seem to be very selective about what parts of Buddhism appeal to them and which do not (such as jhana meditation which is often dismissed)

While westerners think about Buddhism very well, these 'animist' 'superstitious' Thais are doing it very well.

[Mr. Farang]

Just as many Thais like to speculate and swap stories about ghosts to the disparagement of 'sensible' westerners, I see that also Westerners try to cut out, deny, and rubbish as 'animism' the whole issue of ghosts.

The ghost realms are a genuine part of Buddhism, and were not dismissed by the Buddha. In fact, during the second watch of the night of enlightenment the Buddha's insight was, with mind concentrated:

"I directed it to knowledge of the passing away and reappearance of beings. With the divine eye which is purified and surpasses the human I saw beings passing away and reappearing .... [ in all the various realms of existence ] "

which included perdition, states of woe, and even he11 realms.

Gods, devas, asura (demi gods), ghosts etc.. all play a part in Buddhism. Westerners seem to be very selective about what parts of Buddhism appeal to them and which do not (such as jhana meditation which is often dismissed)

While westerners think about Buddhism very well, these 'animist' 'superstitious' Thais are doing it very well.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dear Khun Pandit,

In this aspect, Buddhist thought is conditioned by Hindu mythology. You are correctly stating , Khun Pandit, the conditioning of Hindu mythology on Buddhism. I have read, on numerous times, the Bhayabherava Sutta, which I believe you quoted a section:

“When my concentrated mind was purified, bright and so on, I directed it to knowledge of the passing away and rebirth of beings. With the divine eye, which is purified and surpasses the human, I saw beings passing away and being reborn, inferior and superior, bare and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate. I understood how beings pass on according to their actions thus:

“These beings who are ill-conducted in body, speech and mind, revilers of noble ones, wrong in their views, giving effect to wrong view in their actions, with the breakup of the body after death, have reappeared in the plane of misery, in a bad destination, in the lower worlds, even in "h e l l."

“But these worthy beings who were well conducted in body, speech and mind, not revilers of noble ones, right in their views, giving effect to right view in their actions, on the breakup of the body after death, have been reborn in a good destination, even in the heavenly world.

“Thus, with the divine eye I saw beings passing away and being reborn and I understood how beings pass on according to their actions.”

Many people, including some of the most famous and well respected Thai Elder Theravada Monks, have described "rebirth" as the moment-to-moment rising-falling-and-passing away of sensual objects. In addition "h e l l" and "lower world" as describe as mental states, not physical states.

In this aspect, Buddhist thought is conditioned by Hindu mythology, as can be seen in these terms, Khun Pandit:

Gods, devas, asura (demi gods), ghosts etc.

For example:

Asura, from Sanskrit meaning a "power-seeking" and "power-hungry" being, is similar to a Titan, often, but somewhat misleading, described as a "demon"; or anaya (non-Aryan) people of ancient India. The term's derivation is uncertain. Some scholars derive it from Ashur, the Assyrian god, or from the breath (asu) of Prajapati, or from the root as (to be). According to a Hindu myth, a-sura is the negation of sura, an Indo-Aryan liquor, and refers to non-Aryan abstainers. In Hindu mythology sura came to mean a minor godin contrast to a-sura, "not-god" or "demon," but this is believed to be a false etymology.

In this aspect, Buddhist thought is conditioned by Hindu mythology. You are simply stating , Khun Pandit, the conditioning of Hindu mythology on Buddhism.

My experience with Therevada Monks is that they discount Hindu and other mythology in practice. The Four Noble Truths and The Eight Fold Path, considered the foundation of Theravada thinking, has no mythology interwoven.

On othe other hand, Mahayana Buddhism has many concepts of Hindu mythology as part of the core Mahayana school of thought - as I recall, but I can't speak to Mahayana concepts.

Yours sincerely,

Mr. Farang

[chownah]

Mr. Farang...I've looked on my Tipitaka link in search of the Bhayabherava Sutta but did not find it there. I'd like to add this to my collection of Buddhist texts since it deals with a 'popular' and controversial topic and I'd like to understand its origin and context. Do you have a link for it?...or is it in the Tipitaka and for some reason I have overlooked it?

Chownah

[Mr. Farang]

Mr. Farang...I've looked on my Tipitaka link in search of the Bhayabherava Sutta but did not find it there.  I'd like to add this to my collection of Buddhist texts since it deals with a 'popular' and controversial topic and I'd like to understand its origin and context.  Do you have a link for it?...or is it in the Tipitaka and for some reason I have overlooked it?

Chownah

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dear Khun Chownah,

Here is one of the links: '

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta...mn-004-tb0.html (but this might not be the one you are seeking....)

I'll try to post another one.

I think I actually got the quote from here:

http://www.thebuddhadharma.com/issues/2002...anel_fall02.htm

PS: Here is a very good outline-summary:

http://www.buddhanet.net/mulapana.htm

Yours sincerely,

Mr. Farang

Edited September 23, 2005 by Mr. Farang

[camerata]

I read it determined to hate the chinese govt for meddling in buddhism, but the author presents the facts very astutely, and leaves many doubts about both sides.

Excellent book, but very depressing. The real message of the book is that the Chinese see Buddhism as a rival ideology to communism in Tibet, so it has to be erased except for a few model monasteries to bring in the tourists and show the world that religious freedom is permitted. What has happened in Tibet is pretty close to ethnic cleansing.

The process of selecting the 11th Panchen wasn't really that important in the end because whatever happened the Chinese would not allow any choice by the Dalai Lama and were always going to engineer a situation where they took away the candidate to be brought up as a loyal supporter of the Party. The significance of the Panchen Lama being under Chinese control is that he plays a major part in selecting/approving the next Dalai Lama. So it's quite possible there won't be another Dalai Lama.

Anyone know where I can buy a "Free Tibet" T-shirt in Bangkok?

[ColPyat]

Excellent book, but very depressing. The real message of the book is that the Chinese see Buddhism as a rival ideology to communism in Tibet, so it has to be erased except for a few model monasteries to bring in the tourists and show the world that religious freedom is permitted. What has happened in Tibet is pretty close to ethnic cleansing.

Actually, not really.

If you travel through Tibet you will see active monastries in almost every village. If you spend enough time there you can be sure that you will be invited to take part in all sort of large religious festivals that are celebrated openly.

Please don't fall into the propaganda trap of both sides. Both sides have their points, and both made grave mistakes. On the "free Tibet" side i would suggest looking into the Mustang Army issue and CIA involvement starting from the end of WW2.

A good book to read is: "Orphans of the cold war"

Written by a former CIA operative it does explain a lot about the lesser known facts of Tibet's recent history.

[camerata]

It's true that Tibet was far from being a utopian society before the Chinese occupation, but that doesn't excuse or balance out what the Chinese have done to it since. Clearly, moving Han Chinese settlers into Tibet is just a slightly less obvious way (than arrests and starvation) of diluting the ethnic Tibetan population and "splittist" sentiment there.

I wouldn't call this book propaganda, but the facts do tend to make the Chinese look bad. I mentioned the monasteries because in the (pro-Chinese) 10th Panchen's famous petition to the Party he wrote: "Before democratic reform in Tibet, there were over 2,500 large, medium and small temples, but after democratic reform, only 70 were left by the government, a reduction of more than 97%." Same thing with the monks, a reduction from 110,000 to 7,000. The monks and temples remaining now have to toe the party line and are severely punished if they so much as display a picture of the Dalai Lama. Things may look fine to the tourists, but it's like 1984 for the Tibetans.

[ColPyat]

It's true that Tibet was far from being a utopian society before the Chinese occupation, but that doesn't excuse or balance out what the Chinese have done to it since. Clearly, moving Han Chinese settlers into Tibet is just a slightly less obvious way (than arrests and starvation) of diluting the ethnic Tibetan population and "splittist" sentiment there.

I wouldn't call this book propaganda, but the facts do tend to make the Chinese look bad. I mentioned the monasteries because in the (pro-Chinese) 10th Panchen's famous petition to the Party he wrote: "Before democratic reform in Tibet, there were over 2,500 large, medium and small temples, but after democratic reform, only 70 were left by the government, a reduction of more than 97%." Same thing with the monks, a reduction from 110,000 to 7,000. The monks and temples remaining now have to toe the party line and are severely punished if they so much as display a picture of the Dalai Lama. Things may look fine to the tourists, but it's like 1984 for the Tibetans.

The time the monastries were closed was mainly during the cultural revolution. This was not just done in Tibet, but in proper China as well. Things have changed. Monastries have been built up, and in every Tibetan village you have active monastries. And not just for the tourists. Most villages do not ever see tourists.

Things are far from fine, but were they ever in Tibet?

Anyhow, in question of cultural deterioration i would see Tibet more in the larger context of indigenous cultures vs. nation building in Asia. If you look for example to Ladakh, the small tibetan part of Kashmir/India the cultural deterioration has been far worse, even though there never was any religious/cultural oppression as there was in China. The monastries in Ladakh are truly empty and solely supported by tourism, which the monastries in Tibet are not.

It stands also to question how much of the oppression of Tibet was caused by the countless incursions and parachute drops of American supported armies, such as the Mustang Army. Don't forget - since the CIA organised escape of the Dalai Lama until the mid 80s a continous brutal war has been fought in Tibet away from the eyes of the general public.

Even the status of Tibet as an independent nation is by international law not existing. No single country has ever accepted Tibet's declaration of independence in 1911. The UN does not. Even outside the heartland of Tibet, U - Tsang, most Tibetan feudal rulers have not accepted Lhasa rule, but preferred China as overlord, mainly due to taxation reasons. And Beijing was far away...

A complex issue. China has done some truly gruesome things in Tibet, but on the other hand it has freed the countless servs, it does invest a lot of money into Tibetan development. On the question of the Han seddlers i do reserve any judgement. The difference on numbers presented is so huge that i feel it is impossible to come to any impartial, objective result. As usual with issues involving huge, widely differing vested interests.

Even the Dalai Lama was initially pro Chinese, as China has initiated the reforms he was unsuccessful with, having lost the fight against his own clergy and the feudal rulers.

It is rather clear to all level headed people involved that the future of Tibet is within China, but with true autonomy, and not how it is handled now. The Dalai himself does not demand independence, only autonomy.

[Suthep_Steve]

Excellent book, but very depressing. The real message of the book is that the Chinese see Buddhism as a rival ideology to communism in Tibet, so it has to be erased except for a few model monasteries to bring in the tourists and show the world that religious freedom is permitted. What has happened in Tibet is pretty close to ethnic cleansing.

Actually, not really.

If you travel through Tibet you will see active monastries in almost every village. If you spend enough time there you can be sure that you will be invited to take part in all sort of large religious festivals that are celebrated openly.

Please don't fall into the propaganda trap of both sides. Both sides have their points, and both made grave mistakes. On the "free Tibet" side i would suggest looking into the Mustang Army issue and CIA involvement starting from the end of WW2.

A good book to read is: "Orphans of the cold war"

Written by a former CIA operative it does explain a lot about the lesser known facts of Tibet's recent history.

That wasn't my impression when I spent time there in 2001. There is a thin veneer of religous tolerance but it doesn't take much to see through it.

For example if you arrive at Ganden monastry outside the normal hours you can hear the news being blarred out over load speakers in Mandarain making it hard to do morning prayers or study.

You can also easily spot the plain clothes police on the roof of the Jokhang temple watching out for any one who might start a protest and the "fire engines" with water cannon waiting in the square below.

The monasteries are controlled and the numbers of monks stricktly controlled. I met several guys who wanted to ordain but couldn't find a monastery to take them.

[ColPyat]

That wasn't my impression when I spent time there in 2001. There is a thin veneer of religous tolerance but it doesn't take much to see through it.

For example if you arrive at Ganden monastry outside the normal hours you can hear the news being blarred out over load speakers in Mandarain making it hard to do morning prayers or study.

You can also easily spot the plain clothes police on the roof of the Jokhang temple watching out for any one who might start a protest and the "fire engines" with water cannon waiting in the square below.

The monasteries are controlled and the numbers of monks stricktly controlled. I met several guys who wanted to ordain but couldn't find a monastery to take them.

Well, when i travelled through Amdo in '93 for a few weeks, stayed in monastries and villager's houses, was invited to some astonishing ceremonies and festivals, i had the impression that things were clearly going better. Not perfect, but not as far as dire as i was led to believe before going there. Even the intelligence officer who questioned me let me keep on travelling in a closed area after he made sure that i had very little interest in politics.

And friends who have been in Tibet more recently only confirmed my own impressions.

And given the problematic situation in Tibet it is only understandable that police is watching out for trouble. Demonstrations there have the tendency to go extremely violent. People in Tibet are rather violent, which i have seen first hand during a fight between monks and muslims.

Can't comment on the guys who couldn't find a monastry where they could ordain. Maybe a small village monastry would have taken them? Did you ask them?

[camerata]

The overwhelming impression I got after reading several books (this one, Tibet Tibet, and Dance of the 17 Lives) was that the protests and violence were provoked by Chinese restrictions on freedom of expression and religious persecution. They ban something, the Tibetans protest, the army is called in and inevitablably it turns violent.

I think the key point about the monks and monasteries is not the numbers but the quality. Even back in the 60s, the German-born Lama Govinda wrote that the all-important initiations had become nothing more than "blessings" because there was no one left with the knowledge and experience to perform them properly.

Later the 10th Panchen wrote that the monks that were left were of "low quality." The experienced monks - the repository of the knowledge - were the ones least likely to bow to Chinese demands so they all ended up dead, in exile or incarcerated. The monks remaining sound more like functionaries who perform ceremonies for the people and understand that they are expected to be patriots to the (Chinese) Motherland first, and Buddhists second. This doesn't bode well for the future of the Tibetan Buddhist religion, and I think that is the Dalai Lama's main concern now. He knows independence is impossible, so his focus is now on autonomy and keeping the culture and religion intact.

[ColPyat]

I think the key point about the monks and monasteries is not the numbers but the quality.

Well, if you read Alexandra David Neel's books you get also a rather unfavourable picture of Tibet's Buddhist clergy long before the Chinese invasion. Look at Ladakh - no government opression whatsever, though a more than alarming deterioration in all religious/cultural matters. Read Helena Norberg-Hodge's books, please. Or better, go to both places, and have a look yourself as well. Books are great, but only go that far.

Tibet never was Utopia, far from it, a feudal society with a vast percentage of the population monks (and only a small intellectual elite was what you could call "quality"), another vast percentage indentured servs, lotsa brigands (Joseph Rock's great photos of Tibet's Borderlands..). The whole place seperated in feudal states ruled by autocratic aristocracy and the clergy with brutality reminiscend of mediaeval Europe.

Unfortunately the Tibet debate is often clouded by some sort of romantic notion about the land above the clouds. That doesn' mean that the situation is ideal at all - it is still a bit of a mess. But things are improving slowly. They were far worse during the Cultural Revolution. As they were in the rest of China.

Chinese interference in Tibet's religious affairs is nothing new eiher, read up on the history of the Dalai Lamas (one indian writer wrote a very interesting book, sorry forgot his name). It's political games. I believe at one point there were even two Dalai Lamas as well.

I just get allergic reactions when Tibet is only judged by Buddhism, and a completely misunderstood Buddhism. Tibet's problems today should be looked at in the larger context of indigenous cultures vs. nation building in Asia. Can you point out one indigenous culture in the region that has not experienced severe cultural deterioration, and/or brutal wars?

[Suthep_Steve]

Tibet is only judged by Buddhism, and a completely misunderstood Buddhism.

Would you care to enlighten us with the correct view then?

Can you point out one indigenous culture in the region that has not experienced severe cultural deterioration, and/or brutal wars?

Bhutan perhaps?

[camerata]

I have read David-Neel's books and I haven't any romantic notions of what Tibet was like in the past. The reality was pretty grim and that's certainly no secret these days. That other cultures in the region have also fared badly isn't particularly comforting, though. The tragedy of Tibet and Mongolia is that Mao and Stalin had to destroy the people's religion to bring them into the Motherland. As long as there are monks and monasteries to show, the religion will exist in name, but it's hard to see how the original Tibetan Buddhism will surive. Being guru-dependent, once it's gone, it's gone. Religion may be only one aspect of the overall problem, but it's a vital one to Tibetans.

I guess we can agree to disagree as to whether what the Chinese have done to Tibet is ultimately bad or not. If they hadn't wrecked the place, it may well have suffered the same fate as Ladakh in the end, but at least less lives would have been lost.

[Suthep_Steve]

Well, if you read Alexandra David Neel's books you get also a rather unfavourable picture of Tibet's Buddhist clergy long before the Chinese invasion. Look at Ladakh - no government opression whatsever, though a more than alarming deterioration in all religious/cultural matters.

No Tibet was no Utopia but at least it was a Tibetian culture not imposed by outside powers be it Chinese, American or British.

Maybe they would have come to a more harmonious way of living on there own but what exists in Tibet now is not a good way to live. A strong police state with an imposed informer culture, total control of the higher education establishments (namely large monastries) and a program of ethnic dillusion by mass government sponsored imigration by Han Chinese. To name but a few..

Most clergy tend to degenerate over time you only have to look at the Catholic Church to see that but you will find in both Tibetian Buddhism and Catholism good Monks and Nuns.

Could Ladakh have gone into decline due to the ending of the importance of the silk road?

[ColPyat]

No Tibet was no Utopia but at least it was a Tibetian culture not imposed by outside powers be it Chinese, American or British.

Maybe they would have come to a more harmonious way of living on there own but what exists in Tibet now is not a good way to live. A strong police state with an imposed informer culture, total control of the higher education establishments (namely large monastries) and a program of ethnic dillusion by mass government sponsored imigration by Han Chinese. To name but a few..

Most clergy tend to degenerate over time you only have to look at the Catholic Church to see that but you will find in both Tibetian Buddhism and Catholism good Monks and Nuns.

Could Ladakh have gone into decline due to the ending of the importance of the silk road?

Regarding Bhutan - i am not very clued up about that country, but i remember slightly that there are more than a few problems regarding members of the Nepalese ethnic minority there, including matters of personal freedom, speach, media, etc?

Regarding Tibet and "outside powers" you are plain wrong.

If you read up Tibetan history you will see that Tibet and its feudal states were the most part of the last millenum considered part of China. That hasn't changed until today - the UN does not recognise Tibet as an independent nation, and no independent nation in the world does so. The "interference" of China depended mainly on rising or falling power of the different Dynasties. The claims of the exile government are rather dubious as they base their main argument on Tibet's status before the Mongol invasion. That was a while ago.

Fact though is that Tibet never could be defined a nation in the modern sense.

Tibet was an integral part of the "Great Game", very well presented in Hopkirks books, and foreign powers did consistenly interfere (the Younghusband expedition, for example). The Empire and Russia interfered in Tibet's politics constantly.

Even the founder of what we know of Tibetan Buddhism, Padmasambhava, was not ethnic Tibetan.

Yes, things are not exactly good in Tibet. But were they ever? Was Tibet ever a "good" place to live for the average inhabitant? A least now vast percentages of the population are not serfs anymore. Have a look at how the old Tibetan law dealed with the issue of serfs.

Which brings me to the topic of Buddhism. Not trying to belittle the wisdom of the different Buddhist schools of thought there, but you should know that the Buddhist ideals did have very little in common with how the different feudal states and the clergy ruled Tibet. Please separate Tibet's Buddhist philosophy, and political practice of Tibet's clergy and aristocracy.

Just look at mediaeva Europe - a lot of beauty in Catholicism, and a rather gruesome practical reality for most inhabitants.

The Dalai Lama himself has desperately tried to modernise Tibet, and to clean up the corruption of the clergy and aristocracy. Which he failed to achieve due to the resistence of the clergy and aristocracy.

Yes, Ladakhs decline has a lot to do with the ancient silroute (so has Mustangs), but if you read Helena Norberg-Hodge's books you can see that lots of it has simply to do with the fact that archaic sythems of government have very little chance of survival in the modern world. People do want to have the comfort modern life can give, and see little comfort in living an idealised museum life including all its discomforts, just because it does correspond to some mainly western romantic notion of how Asia should be.

[Suthep_Steve]

Regarding Tibet and "outside powers" you are plain wrong.

If you read up Tibetan history you will see that Tibet and its feudal states were the most part of the last millenum considered part of China. That hasn't changed until today - the UN does not recognise Tibet as an independent nation, and no independent nation in the world does so. The "interference" of China depended mainly on rising or falling power of the different Dynasties. The claims of the exile government are rather dubious as they base their main argument on Tibet's status before the Mongol invasion. That was a while ago.

Fact though is that Tibet never could be defined a nation in the modern sense.

Below is the Tibetan government in exiles argument for the legality of a Tibetan state.

http://www.tibet.com/WhitePaper/white1.html

Basically I believe that if the Chinese had not invaded in 1949 that Tibet would have had to change radically as most Asian countries have, may be it would have changed in the way India has. India has not enjoyed leader ship by an Indian for much of the last millennium as well. However India is generally considered to be a legal nation state by most people. The main thing is the Indians had some form of self determination while the Tibetans have had none.

Anyway I'm going to sign off from this discussion now because I feel it's academic. Tibet will remain a part of China for the foreseeable future maybe for a very long time. The Chinese invasion has had some good effects, one is that Tibetan Buddhism has been made available to the rest of the world but for the ethnic Tibetans it has been a disaster. I'm fairly sure that in a free and fair ballot the majority of ethnic Tibetans would vote to kick the Chinese out. However like the Catholics in Northern Ireland they are not in a majority in Tibet anymore.

Also please don't mistake me as a strong supporter of the Tibetan government in exile. When I visit Tibetan communities both inside and outside of Tibet I have to keep very quiet about my affiliations as I belong to a group that has criticised The Dalai Lama and the government in exile.

The only reason I joined this discussion was because I found your comments about the benefits of the Chinese presence in Tibet distasteful. However on that point we will have to disagree.

[ColPyat]

Anyway I'm going to sign off from this discussion now because I feel it's academic. Tibet will remain a part of China for the foreseeable future maybe for a very long time. The Chinese invasion has had some good effects, one is that Tibetan Buddhism has been made available to the rest of the world but for the ethnic Tibetans it has been a disaster. I'm fairly sure that in a free and fair ballot the majority of ethnic Tibetans would vote to kick the Chinese out. However like the Catholics in Northern Ireland they are not in a majority in Tibet anymore.

Also please don't mistake me as a strong supporter of the Tibetan government in exile. When I visit Tibetan communities both inside and outside of Tibet I have to keep very quiet about my affiliations as I belong to a group that has criticised The Dalai Lama and the government in exile.

The only reason I joined this discussion was because I found your comments about the benefits of the Chinese presence in Tibet distasteful. However on that point we will have to disagree.

The Chinese invasion had one other large advantage apart from bringing Tibetan Buddhism to the world - it freed the countless Tibetan indentured serfs.

If you want to sign off, that is entirely up to you.

I do not belong to any group whatsoever, i am just interested in the topic.

I have started reading the "white paper", will definately finish it later on. Thanks for supplying it. Just one point - the paper referres consistenly to the nationhood of Tibet, based on Lhasa declaration of independence in 1911.

I beg to differ slightly there. Yes, the Tibetan areas have been largely self governed during those years. Nevertheless - many feudal states in Tibet did refuse Lhasa's claim of government. To be fair, this has to be mentioned. Tibet was not a homegenous nationlike state as the paper claims, it was a collection of feudal princely states of similar ethnicy, similar religion, with rather lose relationships between each other, and wars as well. In those days the Dalai Lama was not the universally accepted ruler of Tibet - he was the head of the Gelugpa sect, only one of the four main sects. That, please, does not mean that i do not have the highest regard for the Dalai Lama. Just to be historically correct (or academically, if you want).

The claim that Tibet might have developed as India without foreign inteference i feel highly dubious. India has a tradition of rather advanced forms of government that Tibet never had. A large part of the tragedy of Tibet was exactly that it had very little exposure to the outside world, and was pushed into the games of modernity very sudden. Most of the exposure to the outside world was not of a friendly nature as well. An archaic society vs. nation building. Of course Tibet had to lose.

The question of if there would be a vote Tibetans would vote the Chinese out. Academic, but quite possible. But things are rarely that simple, unfortunately.

Who then would take over?

The old aristocracy that does not really have the best track record in what we treasure today as human rights. The same people who have kept vast percentages of Tibetans in indentured servitude.

What to do then with the then rightful claims of former independent rulers of the feudal states that have rejected Lhasa rule? Are they going to be forced into the new nation of Tibet or are they permitted to hold similar referendums?

You may call my questions as academic, but i personally feel that historical facts have to be taken into consideration when discussing the tragedy of Tibet, one of the many tragedies of indigeneous cultures.

And don't get me wrong here please - i do not agree with the Chinese occupation, i do not agree with the present state of affairs. I just try to look at the issue not in an emotionally charged manner.

And i definately do not agree with single minded activism. I am too old for that.

One edit i would like to make:

On the future of Tibet, i believe that within a few years we might see huge changes. I do believe that China will experience a terrible economical collapse, and subsequent social unrest. This might easily force China into giving Tibet at least full atonomy, if not independence. I do not think that China can keep on with its radical capitalism without a sythem of checks and balances, and without freedom of speach.

Lets wait and see...

Edited February 23, 2006 by ColPyat

[camerata]

There were a couple of excellent books mentioned in this topic which I eventually got to read. Trespassers on the Roof of the World is about all the arrogant farang explorers who tried to reach the forbidden city of Lhasa towards the end of the 19th century, most for the glory of it (a gold medal from the Royal Geographic Society or a bestselling book) and a few to spread the word of the Lord. All were incredibly courageous, a few died, and the first to reach Lhasa did so at the head of an army that slaughtered 700 Tibetan conscript soldiers in a scene that could have come straight from the final battle in The Last Samurai.

Orphans of the Cold War is about the CIA's part in the Tibetan resistance from the late 50s onwards, which was a dismal failure. The CIA trained some Tibetans in guerilla warfare but the resistance fighters tended to stick together in groups of several thousand with dependents and animals that made them easy targets for the Chinese. The Tibetans either couldn't or wouldn't split up into small guerilla teams and the weapons drops by the CIA tended to attract Chinese attention and hasten their demise.

The author echoes the sentiments of my earlier post exactly when he writes: "The Chinese brought in reinforcements and increased their air and ground operations against their unruly Khampa subjects in a punitive campaign, committing the classic acts of a rampaging and vengeful army: torture, barbarous executions, public acts of degredation, forced labor, the seizure of private property, the desecration of monasteries, the deportation of men and boys, and finally taking children from their homes for reeduction in China. Chinese settlers took over the property of those who fled this campaign of what would now be called ethnic cleansing."

There is some good political detail in Orphans. The Dalai Lama seems to have been the only one who never condoned violence. He knew what was going on, but he didn't approve the weapons drops or resistance. Another interesting point is that in the movie Kundun the Dalai Lama says something like, "The thing is, we would have carried out reforms on our own," but from this book it is clear that reform was attempted by the Dalai Lama's brother only after the Chinese invasion began and it was strongly resisted by the Tibetan elite, who had the most to lose.

Having said that, I still think Kundun is a great movie. It would have been dreary as a documentary and I think its main purpose was to bring the general plight of the Tibetans and their religion to the attention of Western audiences.

[robitusson]

Very strange all that Tibetan stuff.

Very different to Thai Buddhism.

Are they in fact the same Religion?

Short answer. Yes. The historical Buddha is the central figure of both religions. Although their are very significant differences and they are almost unrecognisable now. The most important difference, aside from the differing rituals, prayers, rites and beliefs, is that the Tibetans practise their religion in a very earnest and profound way unlike the Thais unfortunately.

[khall64au]

I just finished this book - the first Dhamma book I have read in years other than the suttas.

The Panchen is Tibet's second highest reincarnating Lama, and will have the job of identifying the Dalai Lama if he becomes reincarnated again (which he raised doubts about). There is a candidate recognised by the Dalai Lama, and another one recognised by Beijing. The first has been abducted and hidden away by the Chinese govt, and the second is also under the direct control of the govt. and is being 'tutored'.

But the issue is far from clear - how safe was the Dalai Lama's candidate - there were several prime prospects, and the final one was apparently born before the death of the old Panchen.

I read it determined to hate the chinese govt for meddling in buddhism, but the author presents the facts very astutely, and leaves many doubts about both sides.

What IF neither of the candidates were the real incarnation? What if - the real Panchen Lama incarnate was an extra-ordinary boy living an extra-ordinary life outside of the Tibetan/ Chinese realm?

This is more than possible... in today's world. Too bad for mankind, if they don't find him!