On October 17, for the ninth time this year, a Tibetan from Ngaba County in Sichuan, this time a Buddhist nun, set herself ablaze. The situation in the region has been especially tense in the past few months with soldiers deployed, roads blocked, Internet access restricted and people arrested.
These tensions are a sign that relations between ethnic Tibetans and Beijing have deteriorated dramatically in recent months. Reports suggest the monks and nuns have killed themselves to protest Beijing's failure to engage meaningfully with the Dalai Lama, Tibetans' spiritual leader. The timing is significant, since this tragedy is unfolding as Beijing steps up its effort to wrest from the Dalai Lama the right to name his next incarnation.
Self-immolations can be seen as the tragic and desperate acts of people who do not know how to go on living. And indeed, the area around Kirti monastery, home to most of the Buddhist monks who have recently set themselves on fire, has been turned into a virtual prison. Its residents are deprived of all freedoms, including the right for the monks to be taught religion.
Agence France-Presse/Getty Images
The wave of self-immolations has come from Tibetan areas of Sichuan.
Restrictions on Tibetan culture, religion and political freedom have led to an erosion of the Tibetan identity, increasing bitterness and periodic outbursts of violence, the most recent of which occurred just prior to the 2008 Beijing Olympics. But these self-immolations have occurred outside the Tibetan geographical area, and are a reminder that ethnic Tibetans living in nearby areas of China also are oppressed.
Self-immolations are also clear acts of political protest. Last December Mohamed Bouazizi, a humble Tunisian street-vendor, set himself on fire to protest the daily harassment inflicted on him by corrupt local officials. His act initiated the demonstrations that eventually led to the fall of Tunisia's authoritarian regime.
So it's notable that before setting themselves ablaze, all of the nine Tibetan victims called for freedom, independence and the return to Lhasa of the Dalai Lama, regarded as the sovereign ruler of an independent Tibet. The timing is significant.
Earlier this year, the Dalai Lama renounced political power within the exiled Tibetan community, and now exercises only his traditional spiritual role. This paved the way for the complete separation of political and religious powers. Lobsang Sangay, 43, born and raised in a Tibetan refugee camp near the Indian city of Darjeeling and a graduate of Harvard University, won the subsequent elections and is now the new prime minister of the Tibetan government in exile.
The Chinese authorities, however, appear to be slow to recognize the significance of this development, which undermines Beijing's longstanding criticism of Buddhist "theocracy" and creates an unfavorable comparison with China's own authoritarian system. Were Beijing serious about reconciliation with Tibetans, it would shift focus to dealing with the new elected government. Instead, China's leadership remains fixated on the Dalai Lama himself.
Aware of the influence the Dalai Lama carries in his role as Tibetans' spiritual leader, Beijing is preparing to interfere in the process of identifying the Dalai Lama's next reincarnation. China's leaders hope that if they can control the somewhat arcane process by which this person is identified they may finally be able to snuff out opposition and consolidate power over Tibet.
It is precisely for this reason that the current Dalai Lama is determined to do whatever he can to prevent the Chinese authorities from choosing his successor. The first shots in this battle were fired almost two decades ago. In 1995, the Dalai Lama recognized Gendhun Choekyi Nyima, then aged 6, as the 11th Panchen Lama, the second ranking authority in Tibetan Buddhism who by tradition plays a major role in identifying the Dalai Lama's successor.
Three days after this announcement, the Chinese authorities arrested the boy and replaced him with their own candidate, Gyaltsen Norbu, now 21 years old and a member of the Chinese people's Political Consultative Conference. Beijing still refuses to provide any information about the fate of the child and his family.
The Dalai Lama has responded to Beijing's actions by repeatedly insisting that he will be the sole master of his reincarnation. He has said that he refuses to reincarnate in a Chinese-controlled Tibet; that he will be reborn a woman or a foreigner, outside of China; and that his reincarnation could even be revealed before his death.
This escalating tussle is the backdrop for this year's immolations. In addition to its religious significance the battle for the control of the Dalai Lama's reincarnation is also a strategic issue that will help to determine whether China can further tighten its stranglehold over Tibet. Recent events in Ngaba suggest this is a high-stakes game for all concerned: In particular, should Beijing misstep, it could face escalating unrest within China beyond the borders of Tibet.
Ms. Rolland is a writer in Paris.
----------------------------
Commenter 1, I have idea whether it is accurate or not:
To understand these suicides , you have to understand Tibetan Buddhism, which is really not what the buddha taught, but an amalgam of Hidustani priestly brahmanism, shamanism, and deity worship where its followers believe that the Dalai lama is a 'living deity" and enlightened being.
These lamas have used this status, given by the Mongols , to enthrall and enslave their people for hundreds of years.
When the Dalai Lama did not immediately condemn these suicides, and is now "honoring them" he is ensuring there will be more for one reason: to keep his political cause in the limelight. Sacrificing a few monks and nuns IS nothing in this age old repressive feudal theocracy, that was brutal and violent. The world is seeing just the tip of the iceberg of how these old monks operate to keep their own people trapped and enslaved in an atavistic feudal mindset...
Comments
InannaWhimsey
Posted on: 10/20/2011 15:25
It's simple, really: the burnings got your attention, right? :3
EasternOrthodox
Posted on: 10/20/2011 15:40
Not so. I am older than you and remember the time of the war in Vietnam. It (burning) was quite common then and was part of the "background" of that era.
What led me post the thread was:
- I know China is being repressive about religion
- I am genuinely interested in how "Lama Buddhism" differs from the standard fare. The history book I read made it seem violent, with hideous images (granted, it was from the early 20th century and I did say things can easily move with the times). Certainly, the current Dalai Lama does not seem violent at all.
I was hoping someone on WC might know more about the topic. I suppose I could look into myself, but I think it is also appropriate to post on WC because of the way China treats the Tibetans and Uighurs of Xiang.
("Uighurs of Xiang" might be kind of like mentioning "Uzbekistan" however. Eyes glaze over and stop reading.)
Just doing my bit to try to get people more aware of these odd parts of the world, and maybe learn something into the bargain (like, who is "Gautama"?)
Mendalla
Posted on: 10/20/2011 16:05
- I know China is being repressive about religion
Tibet is NOT about religion. Lama Buddhism is quite legal in China as is any other religious group with state approval (my mother-in-law is a practicing Christian in a state-approved church). It is very much about politics, with some ethnic conflict mixed in. The perspective of the ordinary Han Chinese is actually quite like that of some Canadians towards Quebec - the Tibetans (and Uighurs) have benefited heavily from economic development that the Han have paid for and are just trying to get more out of them. They actually see the Tibetans as privileged (e.g. Tibetans and Uighurs are exempt from the one child policy). Even many Tibetans don't want out of China, just more protection for their culture within China. Tibetans living outside Tibet (e.g. the ones in Jiuzhaigou where I visited last year) sometimes don't even want that. The ones in Jiuzhaigou are living comfortably off of the tourist trade from the national park there and the compensation they receive from Beijing for losing their ability to farm the valley; they follow pre-Buddhist Tibetan religion so aren't followers of the Dalai Lama; in the end they want no part of the "Tibetan" cause since they aren't suffering any hardships under the system as it is.
That's not to say the Tibetans cause is wrong. Certainly, Beijing has committed atrocities. Certainly, there has been a concerted effort at assimilation not unlike what we did to our First Nations (in fact, Beijing knows the similarity and doesn't miss an opportunity to use it against us). The Tibetans are right to be worried about protecting their culture. However, even the Dalai Lama acknowledges China's role in helping Tibet develop economically and culturally and wants autonomy within China, not separation (though his influence appears to be waning among the more radical elements of the Tibetans).
It must also be made clear that there have been wrongs committed by elements in the Tibetan side. Not all the Han Chinese who died in riots have been police or military. Businessmen, many of whom were giving employment to Tibetans, were victims as were their families. So, the more extreme elements of the Tibetan cause are also guilty of atrocities. Unless you accept that the end justifies the means, this must also be condemned.
In the end, this situation is not a simple "evil Commies versus nice Buddhists" situation. It is a very complex political situation with roots going back hundreds of years in Chinese and Tibetan history. For us to try to reduce it to a simple matter of evil Chinese oppressing poor Tibetans is for us to totally misunderstand the situation. Western governments who get involved in the situation need to acknowledge and understand this, not simply blunder in with a bunch of rhetoric about human rights. Consider how we would react if China started speaking out on the First Nations or Quebec issues without acknowledging all the complexities of those situations.
Mendalla
EasternOrthodox
Posted on: 10/20/2011 17:21
Thanks for the information and insights, Mendalla.
I do know there has been a lot of development in Tibet and Xiang due to Han initiatives. But the media always does take the simplistic viewpoint, so I am interested to hear from someone who has actually been there of a different take. (I emphasize, I have not followed the specialized sources on the area).
Good to know. This was the type of thing I was hoping might come out this thread (i.e. information about an area of the world I know little about).
Arminius
Posted on: 10/20/2011 18:43
who is "Gautama"?
For some Buddhists, Gautama is the Buddha, or one of the Buddhas. For others, Siddartha is the Buddha, or a Buddha. For yet others, Siddartha and Gautama are the same person. Some Buddhists believe that there were five Buddhas, others believe that Buddhahood slumbers in everyone, waiting to be awakened. Similar to some of us Christians (I among them) who believe that Christhood slumbers in innately in everyone, ready to be awakened.
Hermann Hesse, in his novel Siddartha, did an interesting take on the two Buddhas. In the novel Siddartha, Siddartha meets Gautama, and Gautama warns Siddartha: "You are a clever man, Siddartha, beware of too much cleverness."
One Buddha teaching the other. Interesting concept.
EasternOrthodox
Posted on: 10/20/2011 18:58
Ah. So Gautama/Siddartha are the "standard" Buddha's. I guess that is what the commenter meant:
Reading this article one can immediately see that the author is totally clueless as to what Buddhism as taught by Gautama is about and the difference with Tibetan Buddhism which does not even come close to what the Gautama taught.
But I remember reading an article of a hysterically positive reaction the Dalai Lama received in Taiwan not long ago, so I can only conclude things have changed. I think Buddhism is more fluid than the "revealed" religions with their holy books, would you agree?
Arminius
Posted on: 10/20/2011 19:18
Yes, I think that Buddhism, as a mystical religion, has always been more fluid than doctrinal and dogmatic Christianity.
Although the Dalai Lama is revered by some Buddhists as the xxth incarnation of one of the ancient Buddhas, he himself does nor regard himself as a deity.
I think that early Christianity also was a mystical religion, which later fell from mysticism to dogmatism. This, I think, was a "Fall from Grace."
EasternOrthodox
Posted on: 10/21/2011 03:42
Eastern Orthodoxy still has a much more mystical, even irrational, feel to it then Roman Catholicism or -- worst of all -- Protestantism.
Orthodoxy crystallized early on, being standardized by the Council of Nicea, 325 AD. There was not much in the way of modern thought at that time (!) and Orthodoxy has been quite stable. (For example, "original sin"--not a concept, "faith vs works"--never heard of it).
(And except for the split in 451--the Oriential Orthodox: Coptic, Ethiopian, Syriac, Armenian and Malankara (India), split off over a dispute I don't quite understand about the divine/human nature of Christ). But I digress.
Still, I would expect that Buddhism more fluid. And thus even the Lama Buddhism was violent at one time (as the commenters on that original article suggest), it does not seem to be like that now. Unless someone else has some other information. I could research the topic myself but my "books waiting to be read" pile is already too high!
WaterBuoy
Posted on: 10/21/2011 08:35
Is love in thought a sort of reflective fluid emote I've got buried here?
All things are becoming from what's being or been ... is that the process Arm ...?
Imagine that Lam is a symbol for light in many tongues ... Love being a Shadow that fogs up the process ... where the light must dally for a bit of time in the heating ... arresting buddy? Interred power of Lambda ... that's de chi -ite on what's unseen!
Some digging required ...