Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
You are here: IE »   Story

Why Tibet matters

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • Sonia Jabbar

    Is Tibet a nuisance for India, and when it negotiates with China on the border issue, should India unhesitatingly sacrifice Tibetan interests to secure our own? While there has been much talk about the burden of hosting the Dalai Lama and 1,85,000 Tibetan refugees for 50 years, few have acknowledged India’s debt to them and why repaying that debt is not only a moral imperative but a strategically self-interested one.

    The first is a civilisational debt. When the Dalai Lama teaches from the works of the Vikramshila or Nalanda masters, he always prefaces his teachings with, “these are Indian treasures. We have only been its guardians in Tibet for a thousand years, and now that the teachings have faded in India we have brought them back intact. This is the gift we return to India.” It is no small gift.

    Few will recall the sacking of Nalanda, the destruction of thousands of birch-bark books or the fact that Buddhism itself disappeared from Indian soil after the 13th century. Ask an educated Indian whether Shantideva, Atisha, Nagarjuna, Aryadeva, or Vasubandhu mean anything to them and chances are you’ll draw a blank. Ask a Tibetan teenager and you’re likely to hear the history of the Indian Buddhist masters and the journey of their teachings to Tibet from 7th-11th century AD.

    Ads by Google

    Nalanda, once the greatest centre of Buddhist learning from the 5th to 12th centuries, today lives in spirit not amongst its archaeological remains in Bihar, but in the vibrant Tibetan colleges of Sera, Drepung and Ganden, relocated in Karnataka after the Tibetan exodus of 1959. These are modeled on the Nalanda tradition, transmitting India’s ancient treasures to meritorious students, many of whom are poor Indian Buddhists from the Himalayan belt.

    ... contd.

    Next1234
    Don't agreeBy: Alex | 30-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward Tibet was part of china since Yuan dynasty (13 century) and during Ming dynasty, tibet was administered by the China central government, the religious and military leaders in Tibet all need to be approved by the central gov. and this continued in Qing dynasty. Don't know why the author insist Tibet was independent til 1950, you should check wikipedia at least.
    The author is ignorant in the history of TibetBy: WT | 26-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward People still know Nalanda because of Han-Chinese NOT Tibetans.For a long time, Tibet was not part of China. Only about 300 years ago, China annexed Tibet. In 1793, an edict of Chinese emperor established the selection procedure of Dalai Lama, Panchen Lama and other senior lamas. The selection of 14th Dalai Lama was also approved by Chinese central government.
    Same old Indian mindsetBy: Joe | 23-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward Same old Indian mindset that trying to argue and self-justify for robbing someone else's land and fortune. Pathetic, sad, poor Indians...
    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.