Very important questions about Tibet issue for Non Chinese
Hi, All foreigners:If you want to discuss Tibet issue in this forum.
I want to ask you some very important questions about Tibet issue at first.
Especially, if you think that Tibetan should have self-determination,or Tibetan should have freedom to vote for their future.Please read every question below carefully. If you can not answer the questions, I suggest that you go to library to read some professional books about Tibet to find the right answer.
In western countries, as some important information about Tibet were concealed from common people on purpose, it was result in that only a few experts in Tibet can understand Chinese point. As most common people have no idea about below questions,usually, the discussion between them and Chinese has no meaning at all.
So,I suggest again, Please read every question below carefully and find the right answer as you can.
1. Do you know these concepts: "Tibetan Autonomous Region(TAR), QingHai povince,Gansu province,Sichuan province,Yunnan province".
If you have not known above,please find a map of China , point out above regions, it is an easy work.
2. Do you know which region is Tibetan Plateau?
If you have not known above,please find a map of China with differnce colors to show difference landforms,
point out above region, it is an easy work if you are not a colour blindness.
3. Do you know which region is Tibetan inhabited traditional?
4. Do you know these concepts:U-Tsang, Amdo, Kham?
5. Do you know who,when,why decided the border of provinces related to Tibetan Plateau?
It also can be said: who,when,why divided provinces like now or like this but not like that in Tibetan Plateau?
6. How many ethnics lived in the Tibetan Plateau region now? including the edge region of Tibetan Plateau,
7. For every ethnic lived in the Tibetan Plateau region, when did they immigrate to the certain area in history?
8. What's population of every ethnic lived in Tibetan Plateau region in different period?
For example:
How many Tibetan lived Tibetan Plateau region in 1950?and now?
. How many Han lived Tibetan Plateau region in 1950?and now?
.............
etc
9. Is Tibetan a pure-blooded ethnic in his so long history?
If not, which ethnic and when was assimilated by Tibetan?
10.May be you are very familiar with 14th Dalai lama's story , but do you know the whole life story of
9th Panchen lama and 10th Panchen lama?
I can bet with you, if Hollywood made films about the whole life of 9th Panchen lama and 10th Panchen lama.
It would be a wonderful story, much more wonderful than 14th Dalai lama's story.
11.Reting Rinpoche was 14th Dalai lama's teacher, it was just that he found 14th Dalai lama as reincarnation.
Do you know why Reting Rinpoche and 14th Dalai lama'father died nearly at the same time?
what's causes they dead of?
Ok, just here, in fact, real experts in Tibet in western countries knew right answers clearly.
If you don't want to be regarded as primary fan about Tibet issue and always discuss this issue at low level .
Then try your best to find the right answers.
You'd better have some idea about above before you are going to discuss Tibet issue with Chinese.
Otherwise,it will waste your time.and the only result will make you angry,unhappy,misunderstanding,even drive you crazy!!
I don't know how much above were concealed from common person in western countries.
So, if you think you have got answer, please post here, let's look:
Is there any difference between chinese answers and western's answers?
[[i] Last edited by joej2005 at 4-10-2008 00:12 [/i]]
Reply 1# joej2005's post
These are interesting [i]historical[/i] questions, but in order to discuss the human rights situation in Tibet today it is not necessary to know the answers.Anyone can see that people in Burma and Iran should have their [url=http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html]Human Rights[/url] respected, without knowing the details of the history of Burma or Iran.
People rightly criticized the civil rights situation for blacks in the USA in the 1960s, and they didn't need to know the full history of slavery etc in order to see that lynching and discrimination are wrong.
So your questions are interesting, but knowing the answers is not a necessary condition for discussing the human rights situation in Tibet today. Just so you can enjoy correcting/criticising me, here is what I know about your questions.
3. Do you know which region is Tibetan inhabited traditional?
The whole Tibetan Plateau. The earliest records of a Tibetan chieftan (Namri-songsten) go back to AD 570. His son Songsten Gampo unified Tibet. I don't think anyone knows where Tibetans came from before that.
4. U, Tsang, Kham, Amdo, and Nagri are regions of Tibet. I am not sure why you join "U" and "Tsang", or why you left out Nagri.
5. Do you know who,when,why decided the border of provinces related to Tibetan Plateau?
The CCP. Since the invasion in the 1950s, Amdo has been annexed into Gansu, Sichuan and Qinghai.
6. How many ethnics lived in the Tibetan Plateau region now?
This depends on exactly what you mean by "Tibetan Plateau region" and "ethnic". I believe there are about 4.5 millions Tibetans total, of which about 2.6 million are in the TAR.
7. For every ethnic lived in the Tibetan Plateau region, when did they immigrate to the certain area in history?
Again, I am not sure what you mean by "ethnic". Tibetans have lived there since recorded history started, abound AD 500.
8. What's population of every ethnic lived in Tibetan Plateau region in different period?T
The TAR is now 90% Tibetan, and previously it was more than 90% Tibetan. I don't know about the remaining 10%: probably they are mostly Han. Other ethnic groups in Tibet include Menba, Lhoba, Mongols and Hui Chinese.
9. Is Tibetan a pure-blooded ethnic in his so long history?
What does this matter? What does "pure-blooded" mean? (Sounds a bit Nazi..!)
10.May be you are very familiar with 14th Dalai lama's story , but do you know the whole life story of 9th Panchan lama and 10th Panchan lama?
Not the whole story. The 9th Panchen Lama fled to Inner Mongolia after a dispute with the 13th DL. His tomb was destroyed during the Cultural Revolution.
The 10th PL co-operated with the CCP. He delivered a report critical of Chinese methods ('70,000 Character Petition') and the CCP imprisoned him in Beijing for 9 years, then was under house arrest for 14 years. He was finally allowed to return to Tibet in 1982. In 1989, he returned to Shigatse and was welcomed by 30,000 Tibetans. He told the crowd that 'Tibet has paid a price that could never be met by the development achieved over the last 30 years.' Then he died.
11.Reting Rinpoche was 14th Dalai lama's teacher, just he found 14th Dalai lama as reincarnation. Do you know why Reting renpoche and 14th Dalai lama'father died nearly at the same time? what's causes they dead of?
Reting Rinpoche was imprisoned in the Potala palace and died there around 1947. This was part of a civil war between his followers and those of Taktra Rinpoche, who held in to power until the 14th DL took power in 1950. I don't know about the 14th Dalai lama's father.
Is Historian a real historian?
The "Historian" is the last one should care nothing about history. You can claim youself a human right fighter, which could gain you some respect. Please don't pretend to be a histrorian, even if just for the purpose of strenghthen the credibility of your arguments.ethnic cleansing?
[url]http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=13168[/url]Reply 3# alberto's post
Good ! alberto, thank you for your reply.All chinese would like to discuss with the person like you.
There was a huge misunderstanding between Chinese and westerners.
Only take action as you did, the huge ice mountain can be unfroze step by step.
I don't think that history is not a necessary condition for discussing the human rights situation in Tibet today. On the contrary, I thought history is the most importance for discussing anything,including human rights, in Tibet today.
Because, the huge misunderstanding between Chinese and westerners was just based on different views about history.
Just like the core value of Buddhism karma theory:
What form that now life is being, depends on how the person lived their previous life.
What form that next life will be, depends on how the person live their now life
We want to seek the true previous life of Tibet with western friends together but not want to educate anyone.
We want to hear different voice,may be you can tell us something that we don't know ever before.
Thank you again for your answers, alberto.
I will response your answers laterly when I have free time.And if you have more free time.read more books about Tibet continue. In fact, most questions above would be a large book if it would be extended
[[i] Last edited by joej2005 at 25-7-2008 11:34 [/i]]
Reply 3# alberto's post
Hi, alberto, you can find some answers from this book:A BRIEF INTRODUCTION OF TIBET HISTORY AND LAMAISM
[url=http://www.wangyee.net/comp/Tibet2004.htm]http://www.wangyee.net/comp/Tibet2004.htm[/url]
And below is:
Postscript
Two events triggered this project.
During a chat, one of my Singaporean friends challenged me why China occupied Aksai Chin of India since AD1962.
He doesn’t know that, meaning “China’s white sands” in Turki since no later than 7th century, the no man’s land of Aksai Chin was not until AD1950s claimed by India as its territory, who nonetheless never implemented this claim.
A more complicated one took place in the small town of Mahoba in central India. A German musician challenged me why there are so many non-Tibetans, mainly “Han immigrants”, in Tibet.
During our talk I realized that he had little idea of the difference between inner Tibet, Kham and Amdo. He treats all of them as Tibet, and suggests that Tibet should accommodate Tibetans only.
[size=3][b][color=red]He doesn’t know that the relationship between Tibet and Tibetan is far different from Europe and European: European is not an ethnic group while Tibetan is just one of many living in Tibet. [/color][/b][/size]
[size=3][b][color=red][/color][/b][/size]
[size=3][b][color=red]He doesn’t know that Tibetans were actually latecomers to Amdo.[/color][/b][/size]
[size=3][b][color=red]He doesn’t know that Tibetans have been outnumbered by other ethnic groups since centuries ago in both Kham and Amdo.[/color][/b][/size]
[size=3][color=red][b]He doesn’t know that, witnessed by his German compatriot, 14th Dalai Lama who came from Amdo could only spoke Chinese dialect when he first met lamas from Lhasa in 1930s.[/b][/color][/size]
He doesn’t know that in inner Tibet most if not all “Han immigrant” he claimed went there to work or do business on a temporary basis: they are migrants instead of immigrants. He doesn’t know, or rather, doesn’t notice that the “Chinese” buildings that he claims to be ruining Tibetan culture are actually all “Western” buildings, which are ruining not only Tibetan but the whole Oriental culture.
When I further proved to him there couldn’t be many “Han immigrants” since Han women couldn’t give birth in altitude of Tibet, he rapidly changed his topic, charging China government put nuclear waste in Tibet. When I asked him for reference and evidence, he just kept silence. I had to calm myself: he is an artist while I am a researcher. Maybe our ways of reasoning are totally different.
This German musician is kind, humorous and resourceful. He’s like most Westerners I’ve met: their knowledge about the past and reality of Tibet is solely from one side. They obtain and trust each piece of information from Western media that claims itself to be “free media”. Unfortunately, it was illustrated in this booklet to have been interpolating facts of Tibet in political pursuit as well as helping Kashag, representing a group of clergy and feudal lords in exile, to add volume to its propaganda.
[size=3][color=red][b]The Tibet issue is part of the Cold War. It worsened as the Cold War intensified, and will disappear only when the latter really ends.
[/b][/color][/size]
I could explain all these to my Singaporean and German friends. But I don’t afford to repeat it again and again each time when I meet another Western-educated person. I am essentially fighting a giant bare-fisted.
Therefore, I decided to write it down.
I wrote this booklet to present Western readers with [size=3][color=red][b]historical facts that have been filtered from them by mainstream Western media[/b][/color][/size]. [size=3][color=red][b]I made every effort to have all materials used in this booklet referenced, most from Western publication.[/b][/color][/size] I am not saying non-Western publication has no credibility. But since many, if not most, Westerners feel only their publication represent justice and credibility, let’s cater to this irrational preference.
If you have different knowledge or interpretation of certain historical facts described in this pamphlet, I’ll be grateful to hear from you with decent reference. Please write to [email=Robert.wangyi@Gmail.com]Robert.wangyi@Gmail.com[/email]
If you find this booklet fair-minded, it will be greatly appreciated if you would pass it to your friends who are also interested to obtain broader knowledge about Tibet.
For further reading, I would recommend The Making of Modern Tibet by A. Tom Grunfeld and The Demise of the Lamaist State by Melvyn Goldstein on Tibet modern history, The Shadow of the Dalai Lama: Sexuality, Magic and Politics in Tibetan Buddhism by Victor and Victoria Trimondi on Lamaism, India’s China War by Neville Maxwell on India-China skirmish in AD1962 and The History of Political Relations between the Tang Dynasty, Tibet and Arab in Central Asia by Wang Xiao-Fu on Tibet’s expansion and foreign relation during 7-8th century.
Thank you for reading this book.
Wang Zai-Tian
1st Edition: 3 June 2003, Singapore
2nd Edition: 29 September 2004, Singapore
[[i] Last edited by joej2005 at 25-7-2008 11:37 [/i]] "Han women couldn’t give birth in altitude of Tibet"
Is this true?? is it possible ?
Reply 3# alberto's post
alberto, You said:4. U, Tsang, Kham, Amdo, and Nagri are regions of Tibet. I am not sure why you join "U" and "Tsang", or why you left out Nagri.
Usually, Tibetan divided their traditional inhabited region, just the whole Tibetan Plateau region into three parts by terrain. There is a famous Tibetan saying: " Up Nagri, Middle U-Tsang, Down Kham-Amdo"
It means Nagri is the highest altitude,and then U-Tsang lower, Kham-Amdo is the lowest.
Be contrary to altitude,the lower altitude,the larger population density.
If divided by dialects, they usually divided the whole inhabited region into: U-Tsang, Kham, Amdo
U and Tsang share the same dialect, so, they were joined, Nagri belongs to this region, always was left out
People speaking difference dialects nearly can not talk each other ,however the written Tibetan language is the same throughout Tibet
U-Tsang nearly equals TAR, TAR consists of the whole U-Tsang and a part of Kham. why TAR consists of a part of Kham is another loooong story.
TAR is about about 2.6 million Tibetan lived there.
Tibetan in Kham+Amdo is about 3.4 million, (Dalai lama always claimed total was 6 million)
When westerners talk about Tibet, they usually means TAR,The TAR is now 92% Tibetan.
When Tibetan talk about Tibet, it not only means TAR, but also including Kham, Amdo in QingHai ,Gansu ,Sichuan ,Yunnan provinces, called Greater Tibet, because the proportion of Tibetan in TAR and outter TAR is 2.6m : 3.4m
[[i] Last edited by joej2005 at 2-10-2008 10:18 [/i]] [quote]
Hi, alberto, you can find some answers from this book:
http://www.wangyee.net/comp/Tibet2004.htm
[/quote]
Sorry, the host [url]www.wangyee.net[/url] does not exist. (Or perhaps you are the victim of censorship by the evil Western-controlled internet consortium.)
[quote]
For further reading, I would recommend The Making of Modern Tibet by A. Tom Grunfeld and The Demise of the Lamaist State by Melvyn Goldstein on Tibet modern history,...
[/quote]
I have already read Grunfeld. He shows some clear pro-Chinese-govt bias (all negative statement by Westerners about Old Tibet are presented as true, all positive ones are ignored or he tries to explain them away) but his book is interesting and has lots of useful information. Actually, I used it to answer some of your questions. I have just started reading "History as propaganda, Tibetan exiles vs the PRC" by John Powers.
To broaden your knowledge, perhaps you should try reading "Authenticating Tibet: Answers to China's 100 Questions" by Anne-Marie Blondeau et al.
[quote]
European is not an ethnic group while Tibetan is just one of many living in Tibet.
He doesn’t know that Tibetans were actually latecomers to Amdo.
He doesn’t know that Tibetans have been outnumbered by other ethnic groups since centuries ago in both Kham and Amdo.
He doesn’t know that, witnessed by his German compatriot, 14th Dalai Lama who came from Amdo could only spoke Chinese dialect when he first met lamas from Lhasa in 1930s.
[/quote]
OK this is all very interesting, I have no idea whether it is true. But it has nothing to do with the main point, which is that everyone in Tibet (and in fact in all of China) should have the right to engage in peaceful political activity, including peaceful demonstrations, organizing political societies and parties, and speaking out freely on political topics, including the pros and cons of the current government. These rights are guaranteed by the [url=http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html]UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights[/url] (see articles 19,20,21 in particular).
If you want to get Westerners to agree with you then you will have to address this question.
Reply 9# Lyosalfe's post
"Han women couldn’t give birth in altitude of Tibet"Is this true?? is it possible ?
Some facts, that nearly everyone have known in China, would be unthinkable in western. Just this caused huge ice mountain between them.
"Han women couldn’t give birth in altitude of Tibet"
It should be said like this: if women, who came from lower altitude region, would give birth in altitude of Tibet,
she would take a high risk both for her and her baby's life.The average altitude of Tibet (TAR) is 4000m. Oxygenous density is only 70% of lower altitude region. If women live her pregnancy period and give birth in this situation.Death rate for mother and baby will high.Even if baby can live,some inborn disease would be possibility happen.
Imagining what would happen when a Holland women spend her pregnancy period and give birth nearly peak of Chamonix Mont-Blanc
Tibetans have adjusted after many generations of living in the area. It doesn't bother them.Tibetan have very different haematic physiology from others.This is an example of Darwinism.
BTW, 3# alberto's post,about 10th Panchen Lama.
"In 1989, he returned to Shigatse and was welcomed by 30,000 Tibetans. He told the crowd that 'Tibet has paid a price that could never be met by the development achieved over the last 30 years.' Then he died."
It implied that his death has some relationship with his criticizing words.
The facts is, altitude sickness worsend his heart disease since he has lived in Beijing for nearly 30 years.
If Dalai lama will return to Tibet some day in future.He should be cautioned for same case since he had left Tibet for nearly 60 years and he was not a young man.
Perhaps,only one choice can be chosen by Tibetan-in-exile : Long Live Dalai lama or Dalai lama return to Tibet
Lyosalfe,you'd better read more books like alberto did, otherwise, you will never understand The facts of Tibet
[[i] Last edited by joej2005 at 26-7-2008 00:31 [/i]]
Reply 11# alberto's post
Yes, the link [url=http://www.wangyee.net/comp/Tibet2004.htm]http://www.wangyee.net/comp/Tibet2004.htm[/url] does not exist.When I found this link by google on 2008-7-22. It existed indeed, and I picked up the Postscript from inside.
I have wrote a email to the author and ask his to check. After I read this book, I did not found new theory about Tibet in it
Just like the author said : "I made every effort to have all materials used in this booklet referenced, most from Western publication"
He listed a very long lists which Western publication he referenced, lists in Postscript (The Making of Modern Tibet...The Shadow of the Dalai Lama: Sexuality, Magic and Politics in Tibetan Buddhism) were a little of them.
About this question:
5. Do you know who,when,why decided the border of provinces related to Tibetan Plateau?
The CCP. Since the invasion in the 1950s, Amdo has been annexed into Gansu, Sichuan and Qinghai.
I recommend you this book:"The Snow Lion and the Dragon" by Melvyn C. Goldstein
[url=http://www.escholarship.org/editions/view?docId=ft2199n7f4&brand=ucpress]http://www.escholarship.org/edit ... 9n7f4&brand=ucpress[/url]
Please read Page 16:
[color=red][size=3][b]The Qing[/b] also weakened Tibet by substantially reducing its territories in the border area between Tibet and China.
[b]In 1728 three large ethnic Tibetan areas in Kham were placed under the jurisdiction of Sichuan and three others[/b] [b]under the jurisdiction of Yunnan province[/b].[11] Amdo or Kokonor had already been placed under the jurisdiction of Xining in [b]1724[/b] after a revolt by the Mongol khans ruling there. [color=black]The emperor tried to further fragment Tibet in 1728 by offering the Yellow Hat sect's second greatest incarnation, the Panchen Lama, administrative control over all of southwest (Tsang) and western Tibet. The Panchen Lama refused this offer, but ultimately accepted control over three large districts in Tsang. The Lhasa government, therefore, now ruled a substantially scaled-down political entity.[/color][/size][/color][color=black]
[/color](Xining is the capital of Qinghai province, at that time, Xining was the name of this province, it changed from Xining to Qinghai later)
About this issue:
European is not an ethnic group while Tibetan is just one of many living in Tibet.
He doesn’t know that Tibetans were actually latecomers to Amdo.
He doesn’t know that Tibetans have been outnumbered by other ethnic groups since centuries ago in both Kham and Amdo.
There are much materials to prove it, [url=http://www.wangyee.net/]http://www.wangyee.net[/url] listed some of them. but it is a pity that link has not existed.
I recommend you an interesting book to prove it: "Freedom In Exile" by 14th Dalai Lama
There were so many lies in this book, however, some facts he can not avoid yet.
When he introduced his hometown in this book, he mentioned:
During the period he was born, a Muslin warlord Ma Pu-fang ruled Amdo,Ma Pu-fang did fealty to Repubic of China.
In fact, Ma Pu-fang seized the whole Qinghai Province by his Hui(Muslin) troops, his formal title was the Chairman of Qinghai.So, if Tibet was an independence state, why did 14th Dalai lama born in a region where a Muslin warlord of China ruled.
This information also implied that there were much Hui(Muslin) ethnic lived in Qinghai in 1930's.
As I can only get Chinese version of this book,published by Taiwan publisher. So, please find exactly words in English version.Do me a favor to post those words from English version if you can
If you visited northwest of Yunnan province, you will find many villages in which multi ethnic groups lived together.
They were Tibetan, Han, Yi, Hui, Naxi......., they lived together peacefull for several centuries.
Non-Tibetan lived in Kham and Amdo are composed of more than 20 ethnic groups.
And the total number of non-Tibetan in Kham and Amdo much more than total number of Tibetan in China(Including TAR)
So, westerners such as de_guo_ren,historian...always said: Tibetan should have self-determination,or Tibetan should have freedom to vote for their future
Then,why didn't they care about the rights of those Non-Tibetan in Kham and Amdo? They are much more than Tibetan and lived there earlier than tibetan. Is it fair??
If tibetan has unlimited rights, what's about others ethnic groups?
[[i] Last edited by joej2005 at 30-11-2008 18:49 [/i]] joej2005,
Give birth on altitude
I think is more a problem of acclimatization. Sportler do their training on altitude, so they will have more power in a sportevent. So if a woman live for a while in these regions, they can give birth without a high risk to her or her child.
--
The Tibeter are also outnumbered (or at least in danger of to be outnumbered) in TAR. According to some journalists, the Tibetean population of Lhasa is allready outnumbered by other non-Tibetean groups.
I know the official data doesn´t show that. But they do only count the registered ones.
--
Registered or not
According to official data, there about 1.3 Billion with chinese citizenship
But some scientists guess, that there are between 1.4 - 1.5 Billion there. Because of the One-Child-Policy the people hide the first born one or pay bribes, so they are not count.
Same to Shanghai. The population, differs from author to author from 15 mio. to 30 mio people.
So I do not think, that anybody really know, how many people live in Tibet.
--
Birthplace of the Dalai Lama - ruled by a Muslin warlord of China
Compare this with the pope. He only have to be a male catholic. The predecessor of the actual pope came from Poland, at this time a atheist country. And the pope rule the vatican, an independent country.
So I do not think, that the birthplace shows anything, if Tibet was independent or not.
--
Self determination
This works for all the people there. Self-determination applies to all, without exceptions
Reply 14# de_guo_ren's post
de_guo_renGermany is a super power on sports.Please ask specialist in Germany, How high altitude is suitable for sporter do their training? East Germany is especially good at altitude training
I searched and result is 1800m—2300m, but not on 4000m.
On the contrary, training at about 4000m will do a great harm to sporter
The pope had never said which region should independence or not independence. He is a religionist.
14th Dalai lama was both a religionist and a politician,
There never was an actor in Buddha like pope in catholic.
[[i] Last edited by joej2005 at 27-7-2008 23:28 [/i]] [b]joej2005[/b]
[quote]I recommendyou this book:"The Snow Lion and the Dragon" by Melvyn C. Goldstein
[url=http://www.escholarship.org/editions/view?docId=ft2199n7f4&brand=ucpress]http://www.escholarship.org/edit... 9n7f4&brand=ucpress[/url][/quote]
[size=12pt][font=Arial]Thank you very much indeed for this link. I wanted to start a new topic about European & American scientists opinion, concerning Kham and Amdo status before 1951. Valuable info, I’ll use it in possible discussions at our forums. That means, in fact, 3 quazi-states may be spoken of. I'll now try to find personal impressions by a French Alexandra David-Neel, she told something about Mongolian dialects domination in Amdo. I have her book, but in Russian. Now I'll try to find its English translation. [/font]
[/size]
[[i] Last edited by reddawn at 27-7-2008 23:58 [/i]] Altitude training (from wikipedia)
[b]"Altitude training[/b] traditionally referred to as [b]altitude camp[/b], is the practice by some [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endurance]endurance[/url] [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sportsperson]athletes[/url] of training for several weeks at high [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altitude]altitude[/url], preferably over [b][u]2,500 m[/u][/b] (8,000 ft) above [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level]sea level[/url]"
And this is only for a short time: 2 - 4 weeks
--
So I think, if a women stay one or two years in Tibet, even if she comes from lower altitude can give birth there.
--
There are popes who were also political leaders. They owned great parts of Itatly. The pope fought against the emporer and kings there, with his own sword. It was sometimes very bloody.
He was at that time something like a Godking. He still have the absolut power in the vatican. This is the relict of that periode.
Walk to Canossa = The repent of an Emperor shows the popes´ power against political leader
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walk_to_Canossa]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walk_to_Canossa[/url]
History of the Papal States
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_States]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_States[/url]
one war
The [b]War of the Eight Saints[/b] (1375-1378) was a war between [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Gregory_XI]Pope Gregory XI[/url] and a coalition of Italian city-states led by [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florence]Florence[/url], which contributed to the end of the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avignon_Papacy]Avignon Papacy[/url].
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Eight_Saints]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Eight_Saints[/url]
[[i] Last edited by de_guo_ren at 28-7-2008 00:09 [/i]]
Reply 16# reddawn's post
I hope the link of "The Snow Lion and the Dragon" can be existed for a long time.After I posted [url=http://www.wangyee.net/comp/Tibet2004.htm]http://www.wangyee.net/comp/Tibet2004.htm[/url] to this forum two days.
this link does not exist, It was very strange!!
I have wrote email to the author and had not got reply.
[url=http://www.wangyee.net/]http://www.wangyee.net[/url] was much more valuable than "The Snow Lion and the Dragon" , because it referenced a large number of books. The author did a great works!!
"Mongolian dialects domination in Amdo" is an interesting topic.
But I have more interesting in that Mongol were assimilated by Tibetan in U-Tsang.
I found some resouces which said that Ngapoi Ngawang Jigme was offspring of Mongol.Is it true?
[[i] Last edited by joej2005 at 28-7-2008 01:12 [/i]] [quote]Is this true?[/quote]
I'm not a specialist in Tibetan studies. Earlier I studied Hindi & English, but have never worked even as a translator (though I have such a perk).
Now let's return to ADN. Altavista search has given no results, but hardcopies. This book: “Initiations and Initiates in Tibet”, an original is in French, so who speaks it, trysearching [i][color=black]"Initiations Lamaïques".[/color][/i]
I’ll have to translate this passage from Russian, so sorry for inevitable double distortions.
All fromthe chapter 12, an appendix: “Notes on Dalai-lama & Panchen-lama currentstatus”.
[b]About Mongolian dialects’ domination:[/b]
“A youngman (he is 21 yo only), determined by his miraculous fate to be a sovereign in Lhasa, is a descendant of a poor family, residing in the Amdo province boundary areas, populated by mixed Chinese-Mongolian origin people, bearing almost no resemblance with the central provinces inhabitants. Many Amdo residents speak Chinese fromthe very childhood and start studying Tibetan later only and in fact an overwhelming majority of a famous Kumbum monastery dwellers don’t know Tibetan at all”.
[color=Red]That's about the present DL![/color]
But let’s see, what is written on a neighboring page – that’s much more interesting forthe so-called “Free Tibet movement” votaries:
“…Great Sakya-lamas were deprived of their temporal power, entrusted by the Mongolian Gushi-khan to Ngavang Lobsang, but over Ui & Tsang provinces only. At thesame time Khan & Amdo were separated from the personal possessions of the Great Lhasa Lama, also, in fact, both these provinces had never been in a complete subordination to Lhasa, and till our days have retained their half-autonomous status, being governed by local rulers, more or less dependent on a central Chinese govt.
China hasnever refused from its role of a suzerain and restored their supremacy even when Tibetans used to evict Chinese troops from the central provinces for awhile. Now Tibet, named “Tibetan autonomous region”, has returned to its former vassal status…”
The book was written in 1930 and corrected in 1956.
Glitches... Why must I edit my messages 3 times?
[[i] Last edited by reddawn at 28-7-2008 01:28 [/i]]
In response to Tony Martin (in relation to the Tibet issue)
This forum is at much higher level than ours[url=http://discussions.pbs.org/viewtopic.pbs?p=496347#496347]http://discussions.pbs.org/viewtopic.pbs?p=496347#496347[/url]
Dear David - I have now settled back into Shenzhen, where I will stay for the next few weeks, and so I am now in a position to be able to respond to your last comment in the detail that it deserves. Thanks for being so patient with me.
Let me begin by addressing your argument that “from 1911 until the arrival of Chinese troops in Tibet in 1950, Tibet exercised effective control over its territory and engaged in international relations.”
You are overstating your case here a little I think. For starters, you say that “the last Qing Emperor had garrisoned troops in Tibet”, but that the Tibetans “formally expelled them in 1911.” This alone is factually incorrect – a clever distortion of the historical facts by those sympathetic to the Tibetan independence cause. You say that you have read Feigon’s book, so you should know that the account that he provides differs from the one you have just given here – and Feigon himself of course, as you would know, is himself quite biased in the way that he presents information in favour of the Tibetan independence movement. Nevertheless, he does provide a reasonably honest account in most areas, and every history book that I have read on this particular historical matter corresponds to the account provided by Feigon, which reads like this:
The Tibetans did not rise up and expel Chinese troops in an aggressive “assertion of sovereignty” as you have claimed. Rather, in 1911, a rebellion overthrew the Qing dynasty and established a Chinese republic. The Chinese-Manchu army in Tibet consequently “dissolved”. (Feigon, p.114) It was not “expelled”, although this was the case in eastern Tibet (in the areas that are now a part of Yunnan and Sichuan provinces). The Khampas won back some territory against the Chinese warlord who competed with them for territory, using weapons supplied to them by the Russians, incidentally. But fighting over control of Khamdo had been taking place on and off for centuries, and in the same way that warlords throughout the rest of China were always fighting with one another over territorial control.
In 1912 the new President of China, Yuan Shikai, as you said, issued a proclamation claiming Tibet to be an integral part of China.
But you then go on to claim that this same new Chinese Republic “conceded the independence of Tibet and invited Tibet to join the new Republic, thereby acknowledging that Tibet was not as such a part of the Republic.”
This too is factually incorrect. As Feigon and so many others have pointed out, “after the establishment of the Chinese republic, China divided into separate warlord states. Chinese unity was so tenuous that the government feared that granting autonomy to Tibet or any other part of China might set off a chain reaction that would imperil the republic.” (Feigon, p.116) The new Chinese republic did not concede independence to Tibet, as you claim. It merely issued the so-called Manchu-Mongol-Uigur-Tibetan Articles of Favourable Treatment, which guaranteed the four non-Han peoples equality with the Han, and thus a degree of self-government. This is a far cry from granting them independence.
The Thirteenth Dalai Lama did, soon after returning from exile, refer to Tibet as a “small, religious, and independent nation” which he said had driven the Chinese out (an interesting spin of his, since the Tibetans hadn’t driven the Chinese out at all – as I said, the Chinese forces stationed in Tibet had dissolved as a consequence of the Qing overthrow, although the Dalai Lama did seize on this opportunity to formally expel the Residential Commissioner and his entourage.) Nevertheless, the Dalai Lama didn’t enjoy very much support for his assertions of Tibetan independence, not even from among his fellow Tibetans. As Feigon points out, when the Dalai Lama then went on to attempt to regulate some of the monasteries, “the Panchen Lama, the monks of the Drepung monastery, and other prominent members of the religious aristocracy refused to cooperate”, siding instead with the Chinese. (Feigon, p.117)
David, you then try to argue that because border violations occurred between China and Tibet which resulted in Tibet retaining “control of all areas it occupied” and with China having to pay Tibet an indemnity,” that this somehow constitutes evidence of Tibetan independence. None of this implies Tibetan independence.
You are, I assume, referring here to the dividing of Tibet into two zones: Outer and Inner Tibet. Outer Tibet, under the agreement, was to enjoy self-governance, whilst Inner Tibet (now a part of Yunnan and Sichuan and Qinghai provinces) was to be governed by the Chinese. This division was actually proposed by the British, who were out to turn Tibet into a de facto British protectorate in order to prevent Tibet from developing closer ties with Russia. (Feigon, pp.118-119)
The fighting you referred to that took place in the early 1930s once again occurred in the Khamdo region, and you neglect to mention the fact that most of this conflict was sparked by the rivalry that existed among Tibetans themselves. The Beri and Dargyas monasteries fell into conflict in 1931, and some of the Khampas (those of the Beri monastery) sought the support of the Chinese warlord Liu Wenhui, whereas the local Tibetan regiment came to the support of the Dargyas monastery. The Chinese troops fighting on behalf of the Beri monastery had managed to push the Tibetans back as far west as the Yangzi River.
The relationship between Tibet and China looks messy throughout this period, I know, but that’s because both were in turmoil dew largely to the impacts of foreign influence – China was fractured everywhere, and it wasn’t unified until Mao came to power. When we talk of conflict in this region with the “Chinese” we are very often referring to conflicts that occurred between Tibetan factions, where one faction was supported by a Chinese warlord. Such conflicts had little to do with the Chinese republican rulers.
Nevertheless, the fact is David, that even during this messy period, China exercised sovereignty over Tibet, and at no time did China ever give up its sovereign claims. Never. Period.
What matters more today though, as I keep trying to emphasise, is the fact that every single country on earth (except for Britain) recognises China's sovereignty over Tibet, and not one single country (including Britain) recognises Tibet as an independent nation.
This alone legitimises China’s claim to sovereignty over Tibet in international law. Once again, if you doubt me, ask any professional lawyer who specialises in international law. Even during the period that you are referring to, between 1911 and 1950, most of the world, including all of China’s neighbours, regarded China as having sovereignty over Tibet – even the United States, as I pointed out in an earlier comment, remember.
Let us move on now to your next line of contention. You claim to “see some very healthy signs of new order and emerging democracy within the exile community and the government.” Details please? What evidence can you provide to support this?
“Given a gradual transition to some level of self-government, possibly short of full independence,” you say, “I believe that a balanced, open democracy would emerge within Tibet.”
I think you are being way too optimistic and naïve here. As I argued in my earlier comment, there are requisites to the successful dormation of institutions like democracy and the rule of law, and Tibet is seriously lacking in all such requisites – far more so than the rest of China.
As a matter of fact, I have good reason to believe that Tibet, should it today be granted full independence or even self-governance, would very quickly resort back to being an undemocratic theocracy.
Ask yourself this simple question David: what headway has secularisation so far made in twenty-first century Tibet?
[[i] Last edited by joej2005 at 1-8-2008 09:19 [/i]] Writing back in 2002 for the New Left Review, Wang Lixiong pointed out that only “a tiny minority - mainly younger urban people with higher education - view the Dalai Lama in a more detached way, as a human being rather than as a god, and embody the attractions of Western liberalism and capitalist prosperity rather than reincarnated divinity. But within the TAR, those with college education comprised only 0.57 per cent of the population in 1990. The overwhelming majority of Tibetans are peasants, nomads and poorly educated town-dwellers who have never heard of the Nobel Prize or Hollywood. They worship the Dalai Lama with the same awe as they do the gods whom they would never be lucky enough to meet. It is common enough in Tibet today to see a crowd form and bow down to worship a little boy, merely because he is a reincarnated Buddha.”
Under the Dalai Lama’s government, 92 per cent of the budget was devoted to religious expenditure, and as Wang notes, “even today, according to some estimates, the Tibetans pay about a third of their annual income to the monasteries. This is money that will not be transformed into productive investment nor used to improve the people’s lives.”
Indeed, “the Deng era renounced the class line, restored traditional Tibetan religion, and re-engaged the upper classes in a ‘united front.’” Melvyn Goldstein and Cynthia Beall have also discussed this at length – the old religious aristocracy had already, by the late 1980s, been largely restored to economic power in the TAR, though not to complete autonomous political power of course. Goldstein and Beall spent sixteen months living in Tibet documenting this very phenomenon, pointing out that “all the former wealthy theocratic households are [again] among those with the largest herds and most secure income. On the other hand, all of today’s poor are from households that were very poor in the old society.” (see Melvyn Goldstein and Cynthia Beall, “The Impact of China’s Reform Policy on the Nomads of Western Tibet’” Asian Survey, vol. 29, no. 6, 1989, pp. 637–8, 640–1.)
David, you argue that while I can “catalogue a number of instances of torture, etc. perpetrated within Lamaist Tibet” that “worse followed from 1950.” This is debatable, though what you also need to remember is the fact that many of the abuses that occurred between 1950 and 1979 were carried out by Tibetans themselves. The Government in Exile and the pro-Tibetan lobby in the West are continuously accusing the CCP of having instigated a policy of “cultural genocide” during this period, which of course they define as constituting a serious violation of human rights. But the vast bulk of the destruction that occurred in Tibet during the Cultural Revolution was carried out not by Han Chinese but by hundreds of thousands of Tibetans themselves. So the obvious question then, is why? Why did so many Tibetans destroy their own monasteries?
It is worth quoting Wang Lixiong at length here, from his essay titled “Reflections on Tibet”, published in New Left Review, March-April, 2002:
[color=red][color=black]“The Dalai camp and Western public opinion have always attributed all of this destruction to Han Red Guards coming in from China proper, after the Cultural Revolution was launched in 1966. [size=4][color=red][b]The truth is that, because of poor transportation and the huge distances involved, only a limited number of Han Red Guards actually reached Tibet. Even if some of them did participate in pulling down the temples, their action could only have been symbolic. Hundreds of shrines were scattered in villages, pastures and on rugged mountainsides: no one would have been capable of destroying them without the participation of the local people[/b][/color][/size]. [/color][/color]
[color=red][color=black] Furthermore, most of the Red Guards who did reach the TAR were Tibetan students, returning from universities elsewhere. The fact that they often retained their organizations’ original names - Capital Red Guards, for instance - is one reason for the confusion over this. With the gradual return of these Tibetan Red Guards - who often combined their revolutionary work with visits to their families - the sparks of the Cultural Revolution spread across villages and pastures over the entire Tibetan plateau; followed by the rampage of destruction. It is true that tension at the time was so high that no one dared voice any dissent; nevertheless, the rulers alone could not have created the sort of social atmosphere that then prevailed without the participation of the masses, who sometimes played a leading role. The authorities in Tibet often tried to restrain radical actions, with the PLA, for example, consistently supporting the more conservative factions against the rebels. Temples and monasteries survived best in the central cities and areas where the authorities could still exercise some control. In contrast, the Gandan Monastery, some 60 kilometres outside Lhasa and one of the three major centres of the Yellow Hat sect, was reduced to ruins....
[/color][/color]
....[size=4][color=red][b]To point out that it was largely the Tibetans themselves who destroyed the monasteries and temples is not to exonerate the Han[/b][/color][/size]; but it does raise broader questions, beyond the issue of responsibility. [size=4][color=red][b]Why did the Tibetans, who for centuries had regarded religion as the centre of their lives, smash the Buddhist statues with their own hands? How did they dare pull down the temples and use the timbers for their own homes? Why did they ravage the religious artefacts so recklessly, and why were they not afraid of retribution when they denounced the deities at the tops of their voices and abused the lamas they had so long obeyed?[/b][/color][/size] Surely these actions are evidence that, once they realised they could control their own fate, the Tibetan peasantry, in an unequivocally liberating gesture, cast off the spectre of the afterlife that had hung over them for so long and forcefully asserted that they would rather be men in this life than souls in the next.”
[size=4][color=red][b]The Tibetan historian in exile, Tsering Shakya, agrees, saying that “it is true that Tibetans played an active part in the Cultural Revolution,”[/b][/color][/size] but rightly points out that “the destruction of religious sites in Eastern Tibet - outside the TAR - had begun before the Cultural Revolution, as far back as 1956, under the guise of suppressing local uprisings in Gansu, Qinghai, Yunnan and Sichuan.” (see “Blood in the Snows”, also published in New Left Review). [size=4][color=red][b]Nevertheless, most of the destruction that took place within the TAR occurred at the hands of the Tibetan peasantry.
[/b][/color][/size]
Wang Lixiong, along with the American historian A.Tom Grunfeld, depict the traditional society of Tibet as dark and corrupt, with the common people living on the brink of a precipice. This was also the perception of the CCP. “Yet,” says Tsering Shakya, “their response to the situation when, in 1959, they seized the reins for themselves, was to plunge Tibet into depths of misery it had never known before. The economic and living conditions of the people plummeted sharply between 1960 and 1979; in many areas people were forced to live on a single meal a day. It was not until the 1980s that living conditions began to improve, under the new leadership of Hu Yaobang.”
Wang Lixiong certainly doesn’t dispute this. “The organisation of the People’s Communes killed off any enthusiasm for production,” he says. “In conjunction with the political assaults of the Cultural Revolution this led to a stagnation of living standards, especially among the farmers and herdsmen. Although the suffering could be temporarily concealed by the high revolutionary energy of the time and by the introduction of other benefits, such as medical care and social promotion, according to the 1980 figures half a million of the already impoverished Tibetans - over a quarter of the population - were worse off after the mutual-aid groups were communized, and about 200,000 were rendered destitute.”
[[i] Last edited by joej2005 at 3-8-2008 10:18 [/i]]
Page:
[1]
2