Kritik am Buch „The Shadow Of The Dalai Lama ... - Neues von Shi De

The Shadow of the Dalai Lama – Part II – 4. Social Reality in Ancient Tibet
© Victor & Victoria Trimondi
4. SOCIAL REALITY IN ANCIENT TIBET
Just how casual the Tibetans in exile are in dealing with scholarly works on their history and social
reality in ancient Tibet is shown by an example from the Tibetan Review, the English-language
mouthpiece for the exile community. In April 1991, the renowned American historian Melvyn C.
Goldstein could publish an article in which he presented for discussion a picture of Tibetan history
that contradicted the official line from Dharamsala. In the subsequent debate a Tibetan scholar
candidly admitted that Goldstein’s investigations were so well documented „that he is probably
correct in his analysis” — and then the Tibetan continues, „But his presentation has succeeded in
deeply offending most Tibetans” (Tibetan Review, January 1992, p. 18).
Thus, among the exile Tibetan community, historical truths lead not to a self-critical stance towards
their own history, but rather one was insulted and thus believed oneself justified in repudiating
Goldstein’s works and denigrating them as Chinese propaganda. (See above all Phintso Thondon’s
article in the May 1991 issue of Tibetan Review). Goldstein’s reply to the attacks against him
addresses what exactly is to be held of the freedom of opinion among Tibetans in exile: „Mr. Thondon
seems to believe that anything which criticizing or contradicting Tibetan nationalist rhetoric coming
out of Dharamsala and Tibetan Support Groups must be pro-Chinese. His 'rejoinder', therefore, clearly
sets out to discredit - a priori - my findings and observations by creating the impression I have a pro-
Chinese bias. In using tactics resembling those of the McCarthy era in the US, Mr. Thondon takes
sentences out of context, distorts meanings, and worse yet, imputes meanings, that were not there. His
response represents the darkest and most unpleasant side of the Tibetan exile movement” (Tibetan
Review, September 1991, p. 18)
One can safely assume that official statements from Dharamsala will defame as communist
propaganda every historical analysis of Tibet which strives for neutrality. To give a further example,
we quote their reaction to A. Tom Grunfeld‘s well-researched book, The Making of Modern Tibet.
„This book”, a review in the Tibetan Review says, „can only be considered a sophisticated
presentation of Peking’s version of events. Although a lot of material is included in the book which is
often overlooked by pro-Tibetan, and the author has evidently made an attempt to be impartial [!],his
Sinocentric and Marxist seen to be so extreme that he is quite unable to master them” (Tibetan
Review, July 1989, p. 13).
The western image of Tibet
Western observers have in the meantime become more and more blind to the shadowy sides of the
Tibetan monastic state. In countless recent books and publications the Tibet of old is depicted as a
peaceful state, a sanctuary of calm, the heart of compassion, an ecological oasis, an island of wisdom,
a refuge of knowledge, a home of the blissful — in short as a lost earthly paradise, inhabited by
enlightened, peace-loving people and mysterious, shining gods. As early as the 1940s, Marco Pallis