Can a pacifist religious belief be changed when survival is at stake?

[Yusuf]

I am talking about this topic especially with regards to the Tibetans. They are all from the Buddhist faith which renounces violence. But this has cost them their land and made them refugees with a culture on the brink of extinction because of the systematic effort from the Chinese.

My question, could not have the Dalai Lama as a religious and spiritual head of the Tibetan people issued a reversal of the non violent belief and urged the Tibetans to take up arms and fight for their existence rather than sacrificing it? After so many years, the Dalai Lama as more or less given up on an independent Tibet and resigned to the Chinese being their masters. But if he had 50 years ago in his capacity as the religious head given a change in law as his people were being wiped out, he might have made sure that Tibet survived as an independent country and the world would have supported that.

 

[hit&run]

Proper propaganda, deception, isolation from external influences, not engaging with Dalai Lama directly and espionage has worked well for China. China has always bullied the listener not preacher(DL) i think that has worked well. I don't think Tibetans have that kind of determination to raise an violent offence against Chinese establishment.Gun is mightier then GOD.

 

[Yusuf]

Well thats right, but why didnt the Dalai Lama take steps to preserve his country and its population by way of issuing an edict if you will to overcome what was a hinderance due to the religious beliefs.

 

[Vinod2070]

The same Buddhism didn't prevent Japan from retaining its martial tradition and indulge in massive violence.

On the other hand it made people in India and Tibet pacifist and invited invasions and destruction. There seems to more to it than just religion.

 

[Yusuf]

So what prevented the Tibetans from rising up to the chinese? May be Nehru would not have armed them during his time, but there would have been other countries waiting to pounce on the opportunity to bog china down with Tibet and later on india too could have joined in.

 

[Soham]

Yusuf,

I think its more to do with their way of life. Their religion itself makes it so. From birth to death, a buddhist in Tibet is made aware of the necessity to give up violence, or to suffer lower realms of existence. If Dalai Lama takes a U-turn, he would have contradicted every word he has uttered in his life.
I've read a few of Dalai Lama's books, and he hails Tibet to be that which does not return violence with violence. Their entire religion will fall in shambles.

Secondly, their education is limited to spiritual studies, as everything else is considered a distraction. If Dalai Lama is to be believed, the monks are taught to remain calm and smile, even if a Chinese tank rolls over them. They've been like that for ages. Peace runs in their blood.

I'm not saying their approach to existence is correct, but that's the way it is. For them, religion is everything, therefore you can't compare them to Japs.

 

[Yusuf]

Well, either way no tibet or its culture will remain if the tibetans go on the way they have been going for half a century. It just does not make sense. The chinese are trampling the tibetan culture and they cannot prevent their culture from dying. The tibetans in exile here will not be able to preserve their culture in india for too long.

 

[Soham]

They believe in indifference. They think all this Chinese aggression is just a passing phase. If there is someone who can get them up in arms, its Dalai Lama. But he has his Nobel peace prize to protect and preserve.

 

[Vinod2070]

Unfortunately, the "divine religion" has to be protected by mortal human beings.

Tibetans have shown extraordinary grit against the most terrible odds. It has still not got them justice so far.

The odds are stacked against them at present and for the foreseeable future. It will take a miracle to get them justice or some balls for the rest of the world.

All Tibetans can do is to keep the issue alive peacefully.

 

[MANISH123]

What happened is a thing of the past.If the tibetans were to rise violently now, they would be buthchered by the hans.
I guess they are better left alone now till india develops some B****s

 

[Yusuf]

I am actually talking way back in the time line. He should have done something back then only when the Chinese were steam rolling into tibet. He should have asked his followers to rise. If not that, since he believed in non violence he should have stuck in there with all the tibetans and faced the Chinese in a non violent manner at least. Yes the Chinese would have killed them ruthlessly, but then it would have made a wider world impact and forced international intervention.

By sitting back and doing nothing and expecting the rest of the world to do something for them is foolhardy. Even God helps only those who help themselves.

 

[Yusuf]

Manish why will india take it on itself to do something when the tibetans themselves did nothing and are living in peace in exile. Watch it before you curse india for no reason.

 

[Vinod2070]

Well Yusuf, I also have to agree that India has not done all that we could have done.

India being the immediate neighbor had a responsibility to protect the Tibetans against the Chinese juggernaut. The Tibetans couldn't have done much. The same happened in Xingxiang and they have been taken by China too despite being supposedly warlike.

China was too strong for both these small countries. They stood no chance.

 

[Yusuf]

1950s was a different time, china was not as powerful as it is today, if the tibetans had done something then the US would have used that opportunity to get a grip over China.

I would not blame india for the tibetans mess today. india could have and would have supported them if they had started to do something and not run away to another country. But their lack of action let the chinese to go un opposed.

 

[Yusuf]

Mixing of religion with politics is a recipe for disaster. on one hand we have our neighbor who mixes religion and politics in a violent manner and is set for doom and on the other we have non violent religious beliefs that mixed with politics in tibet has resulted in the political demise of tibet.
I wonder if the tibetans should have thought of a separate political leadership and left the Dalai lama to be its religious and spiritual head. That political leadership should have then acted more doggedly and stubbornly against the chinese aggression.

 

[Soham]

Vinod,

Its not India's responsibility to protect those who don't want to protect themselves. We wouldn't have sacrificed our soldiers while they sat and did nothing.

 

[Vinod2070]

Soham, I don't look at it that way. India has a role and responsibility in the region. We guarantee Bhutan's security. We will intervene if Nepal is attacked for example.

Not saving tibet has made us vulnerable on our Northern frontier in the end. So we are the biggest losers out of the Tibet fiasco.

India was not ready at that time perhaps. We were ruled by idealists at best or fools at worst. People, who had no idea how the world works.

They thought that India doesn't even need an army, that they could manage India's security just by their foreign policy! The same people rejected a P5 seat for China's sake. We can't even begin to calculate the loss because if that ineptitude.

 

[Yusuf]

But the point remains that why the tibetans didn't start a massive uprising? Yes india would have benefited a lot if tibet was there as a buffer for india, but then india was not very powerful in the 50s to take unilateral action on behalf of tibet.

 

[MANISH123]

We should have intervened when the chinese invaded tibet for our own interest.For centuries tibet had been a buffer state between china and india so no invasions from china.Sadly at that time time the british agent JN nehru was the prime minister and he neither understood geopolitics or military strenght.Shameless that he was even after tibet was captured he was chanting hindi chini bhai bhai which led to our defeat in 1962 whereas we had ample time to build our army to repulse chinese attack but he stood deaf dumb and mute and proceeded to humiliate india at the hands of the chinese apart from many brave unequipped soldiers losing their lives. This historical bliunder is not possible if nehru was not a accomplice to all the goings on. That is why I say that insteas of Gora masters we are now ruled by brown masters who take their orders from the Gora masters. Critizing our country is not unpatriotic, I do have a right to express my opinion about the failed indian policy so lessons can be learned.Another point. The worst affected were the tibetans and then us, again if we dont rise for ourselves why does america or any other country help us. I remember the words of Russia's defence minister recently that we cannot be more anti pakistan than india, which goes to show what sort of attitude we have always expecting others to do our dirty work for us.

 

[Vinod2070]

Yusuf, Tibetan have tried armed conflict too in a limited way. That invites mass reprisals from a country where human rights mean nothing. Not even for their own people, let alone the weak and numerically small Tibetans.

They have made enough sacrifices for their country and are doing so now. They brave our police dandas even now whenever they protest any Chinese leader and our government shamelessly tries to get them out of the way.