Add your comment by filling out the form below in plain text. Comments are approved by a moderator and can be edited in accordance with RFAs Terms of Use. Comments will not appear in real time. RFA is not responsible for the content of the postings. Please, be respectful of others' point of view and stick to the facts.
Chinese political leadership and the Beijing politburo need the get real about the real Tibetan Panchen Lama. Already they have shot themselves clean in the foot in relation to the Dalai Lama and his future reincarnation.
But i really think his holiness is calling the 'bluff' of the Beijing cabal who rule China.
There is a mistaken belief among the least intelligent of these, that the politburo can determine when and where an incarnate Lama will magically appear.
All the power in the world cannot influence this process.
The Beijing cabal under Jiang Zemin utterly failed to influence the real incarnation of the 16th Karmapa.
Later on they were even more blatant with the Panchen Lama; kidnapping the real one and replacing him with there own, it has not worked.
The process that moves the ''Heavenly Mandate'' Such as the Dalai Lama and all the other incarnate Lamas into re-birthing position Is a determination influenced only by the Bodhisattva code of pure unadulterated conduct.
It is an inviolable affair and cannot be contaminated by criminal henchmen for there own ends..
It is the height of absurdity that the atheistic Chinese cabal would be stupid enough to assume to claim jurisdiction over this closed, refined, personal and very spiritual process. They or anyone else who might hope to influence any of the incarnations are demonstrably arrogant and profoundly ignorant of what is involved.
All the Chinese cabal need do is look to there own failed Panchen Lama choice. He is a failed entity entirly; because the ancient process of identifying the true incarnation was usurped.
Arch bishop Desmond Tutu raised a few eye brows when he asked the Dalai Lama how many battalions of soldiers he had that the Chinese disposition towards him was one of nervousness.
It is evident that the Beijing politburo have ran out of road regarding it's outrageous and nonsensical claim that Tibet was always part of China. A recent publication by a Chinese history professor of some considerable academic status has stated that China's historical connection to Tibet is as recent as the 17th century. It is time for the cabal to fess up: The violent occupation of Tibet in 1959 was an illegal predatory act consonant with the invasion and dominance of one sovereign country IE China, over the smaller independent ancient Buddhist kingdom of Tibet.
Mao Zedong always knew that farcical assertions with regards to Tibet being part of the motherland of China would in time come a cropper.
The people are sovereign. But for Tibetans this kind of acknowledgement from the Beijing politburo is a long time coming. 65 years to be exact.
So Tibetans who risk they're freedom, or worse still they're lives, continue to say to the rabble who have illegally occupied they're country and murdered they're brothers and sisters; for that length of time over one million Tibetans have died.
It is time now for the Cabal of rabble to vacate the Tibetan autonomous Regions of the Plateau.
Very sorry to hear that the Beijing politburo has been singularly unsuccessful in it's varied and very violent attempts to block all information channels carrying up to date news to Tibet regarding the current daily activity of His Holiness The 14th Dalai Lama. Tibet's very own '' Heavenly Mandate ''
Most people who like the Dalai Lama, understand that he is a short term Tibetan gift to the world.
The Tibetans have really only loaned him out to the world, where his presence is badly needed. However his return to his homeland is awaited with much anticipation and his return will be greeted with typical Tibetan eclat. The Tibetan plateau will be awash with multitudes of multi colored gardens, much like the hanging gardens that populated Shambala before the Christen era.
Apr 24, 2015 11:28 AM
Reply to this comment