Originally posted by Quincey:
Pat, for your info the past Dalai Lama was the Political Ruler of Tibet during the Mongolian Rule
Dalai Lama was to ensure the stability of the Tibet Region ,due to many fightings among the warriors and the thieves in Tibet Plateau
The Mongolian Rulers conquered many lands from China, Korea, India, Middle East to North-Eastern Europe. In so doing, it cannot administered its rule properly without appointing local submissive, benign principalities.
In any case, the Tibetans (I believe many) can trace their ancestry to Mongolia. The Mongolian inter-married and adopted the religion of its conquered people (to strengthen their stronghold). In the dying days of the Mongolian empire, because of warring and scheming among the royalties, some Mongolian calvaries and hordes returning to the motherland decided not to return to Mongolia but to Tibet.
If he given up the Political status , He will not be able to do much to ensure the stability in the Tibet region.
In the past, some spiritual leaders were also the economic, political and social ruler. In the case of past isolated Tibet, there wasn't much economic, political and social issues to begin with (as compare to now). It was a region closed to the outside world.
No dispute about him being the politcal leader. Reading some books written by him on his struggle to free his people, I dispute his means- better to stick to purely religion struggle or politcal struggle and not both.
Look at Gandhi's struggle to free India from Britain. Gandhi succeeded with politcal struggle. A single mind-over-matter focus - political struggle using civil disobedience. He managed to galvanise the babel of the Indian communities with one simple, easy to follow instruction. And it worked. For a struggle of freedom, focusing on one single but powerful mean would be far more effective, isn't it?
But the most important thing is- Gandhi was able to command the respect and admiration of the diversified Indian communities. In Dalai Lama case, does he has such level of respect and admiration in his own home country that we believe he has? NOT abroad, we all know he has. But in Tibet now and not time-lock in the 1950's when he fled Tibet?
The reallity of today is that China is the politcal ruler of Tibet and it is trying to bring development and prosperity to the region.
