Tibet's language, culture under serious threat: Tibetan political leader
Sikyong while recently addressing the residents of Norgyeling Tibetan Settlement in Maharashtra said that safeguarding this identity is a collective responsibility of all Tibetans in exile. While stressing the importance of preserving the Tibetan language and culture, Sikyong Penpa Tsering said that Tibetan is among the world's oldest languages, with a script dating back over a thousand years, and warned that without active use and preservation, it risks extinction like many ancient languages.
Notably, a recent report by CTA said that Chinese authorities have demolished over 300 Buddhist stupas and a revered Guru statue in the Drakgo County, in the traditional Tibet's province of Kham. Citing sources from Tibet, the report stated that the destruction took place in late May or June 2025 at Lungrab Zang-ri near Janggang Monastery, where Chinese forces razed hundreds of medium-sized stupas of Tibetan Buddhism and three larger Buddhist stupas.
'This latest assault represents, what Tibetan sources inside Tibet call 'second phase of Cultural Revolution', a deliberate campaign to 'Sinicise' Tibetan Buddhism and systematically eradicate Tibetan cultural identity. The destruction aligns with China's broader strategy of cultural genocide in Tibet, designed to erase Tibetan culture by forcibly aligning religious practices with the Chinese Communist Party's political agenda,' the report mentioned.
Meanwhile, Sikyong during his address at Norgyeling Tibetan Settlement reiterated that the 16th Kashag (cabinet) continues to seek international support for the Middle Way Approach as a viable solution to the Tibet-China conflict. He encouraged the community to deepen their understanding of Tibetan history and the current situation inside Tibet, and to engage in advocacy through international lobbying efforts.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
United News of India
25 minutes ago
- United News of India
SC issues notice on challenge to section 9 of Citizenship Act over automatic termination of Indian citizenship
New Delhi, Aug 4 (UNI) The Supreme Court today issued notice on a plea challenging the constitutional validity of Section 9 of the Citizenship Act, 1955, which provides for the automatic termination of Indian citizenship upon the voluntary acquisition of foreign citizenship. A Bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi tagged the matter with a pending case, Dr Radhika Thappeta v. Union of India, which raises a similar issue concerning revocation of Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) status. The Court also issued notice on an interim application filed by the petitioner seeking protection from being required to renounce Indian citizenship in order to acquire foreign citizenship, while the constitutional challenge to Section 9 is under consideration. The petition was filed by Sanjay Gundlagutta Reddy, a US-based Economics professor of Indian origin, who, despite living in New York for several years, continues to identify as an Indian citizen. He argues that Section 9(1) is arbitrary, disproportionate, and violates fundamental constitutional rights, particularly the right to equality and personal liberty. During the hearing, Justice Surya Kant initially questioned the petitioner's counsel Advocate Warisha Farasat, asking, 'You are an eminent person. But what grievance is there…if you are so keen for Indian citizenship, you surrender the foreign citizenship and get the Indian one?' However, after hearing her submissions including reference to a previous case where the Supreme Court had granted interim relief on similar grounds the Bench agreed to issue notice and listed the matter for hearing after two weeks. Key arguments in the Petition are that Section 9 imposes a 'Hobson's choice' on Indians abroad, either acquire foreign citizenship and lose Indian nationality or retain Indian citizenship at great personal and professional cost. It fails to consider the global mobility and dual loyalty of Indian-origin individuals who maintain cultural and emotional ties with India The provision does not offer any discretionary or adjudicatory mechanism, resulting in automatic cessation of citizenship. The petitioner highlights that non-citizens globally face precarious legal status, with risks of deportation and limited access to rights. The petition, filed through Advocate-on-Record Yashwant Singh, seeks a reconsideration of India's citizenship framework to better align with contemporary realities of global Indian diaspora. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for Indian-origin individuals across the world, particularly in how India defines and regulates its citizenship laws in a globalized era. UNI SNG RN
Time of India
30 minutes ago
- Time of India
'True Indian wouldn't say so': Supreme Court rebukes Rahul Gandhi over remarks on Army
The Supreme Court on Monday stayed the proceedings in a criminal defamation case before a Lucknow court against leader of Opposition (LoP) in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi , in connection with his alleged remarks about the Indian Army during the 2022 Bharat Jodo Yatra. Targeting the government over Chinese action at the line of actual control, Gandhi had reportedly said that "Chinese soldiers are beating up Indian Army personnel in Arunachal Pradesh". Productivity Tool Zero to Hero in Microsoft Excel: Complete Excel guide By Metla Sudha Sekhar View Program Finance Introduction to Technical Analysis & Candlestick Theory By Dinesh Nagpal View Program Finance Financial Literacy i e Lets Crack the Billionaire Code By CA Rahul Gupta View Program Digital Marketing Digital Marketing Masterclass by Neil Patel By Neil Patel View Program Finance Technical Analysis Demystified- A Complete Guide to Trading By Kunal Patel View Program Productivity Tool Excel Essentials to Expert: Your Complete Guide By Study at home View Program Artificial Intelligence AI For Business Professionals Batch 2 By Ansh Mehra View Program Before granting him interim relief, a division bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih, strongly disapproved of Gandhi's remarks. "Why don't you say this in Parliament? Why do you have to say this on social media posts? How do you get to know when 2,000 sq km was acquired by China? Were you there? Do you have any credible evidence?" Justice Datta verbally remarked. Further cornering Gandhi for his remarks, Justice Datta orally observed: "If you were a true Indian you would not have said this. When there is a cross-border conflict, can you say all this? Why can't you ask these questions in Parliament? ...Being a responsible leader of the Opposition, you cannot say because you have 19(1)(a) [freedom of speech] you cannot say anything". Live Events Appearing on behalf of Gandhi, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that Gandhi's remarks cannot be a ground for a third party to file a defamation suit. "But you cannot harass somebody like this with defamation charges. The high court says he (complainant) was not a person aggrieved but defamed. The high court's reasoning was not correct," Singhvi argued. Issuing a notice on Gandhi's plea, the bench stayed proceedings pending before a Lucknow magistrate. The matter will come up for resumed hearing after three weeks. The development took place during the resumed hearing of an appeal filed by Gandhi against an Allahabad High Court ruling which had upheld the summons issued by a Lucknow court to Gandhi in connection with the case. The case originated from a complaint filed by lawyer Vivek Tiwari on behalf of Uday Shankar Srivastava, a former director of the Border Roads Organisation with a rank equivalent to an Army Colonel. Tiwari alleged that Gandhi's remarks on December 16, 2022, regarding the December 9, 2022 clash between the Indian and Chinese armies were derogatory and defamatory towards the Indian military forces. A Lucknow magistrate had directed Gandhi to appear on March 24. Aggrieved, Gandhi had petitioned the Allahabad High Court. While dismissing Gandhi's plea against the magistrate's order, the Allahabad High Court had, on June 4, observed that under Section 199(1) of the CrPC, an individual who is not the direct victim of an offence can still be regarded as an "aggrieved person" if the offence has caused them harm or adversely affected them.
The Print
an hour ago
- The Print
TMC mudslinging hits boiling point: Kalyan Banerjee steps down as party whip in LS, slams Mahua Moitra
He also expressed disappointment with the lack of action against party MP Mahua Moitra, with whom he had publicly clashed in April during the visit of a TMC delegation to the Election Commission of India. Since then, the two leaders have clashed several times, leaving the party red-faced. He announced his decision minutes after a meeting of the party's Lok Sabha MPs chaired by West Bengal Chief Minister and TMC supremo Mamata Banerjee, who joined it virtually from Kolkata. New Delhi: The Trinamool Congress found itself in a spot Monday after party MP Kalyan Banerjee announced his decision to step down as the chief whip in Lok Sabha and lashed out at his party colleagues for their absence from the House, 'session after session'. At the meeting, Mamata also announced her decision to appoint nephew Abhishek Banerjee as the party's leader in the Lok Sabha, replacing Sudip Bandopadhyay. Sources told ThePrint that she also expressed her displeasure with the performance of the TMC Lok Sabha contingent. In the absence of Sudip, who has been unwell, it was Kalyan who was looking after the coordination of the TMC MPs in the Lok Sabha. There were indications in the lead up to Monday's meeting held at the party's office on Rajendra Prasad Road that there may be mudslinging. Just as Kalyan was entering the meeting, he spotted Moitra ahead of him and bitterly remarked to the assembled reporters that 'my day is ruined now'. After the meeting, in which he announced his decision to resign, he came out and said, 'Did not I tell you that this was going to be a bad day for me?' Later, he had an angry outburst while speaking to Kolkata-based television channels. 'She (Mamata) feels there is a lack of coordination in Lok Sabha, that's why I resigned. But is she aware of the situation? Most party MPs never even show up. And it is supposed to be my fault? Sudip (Bandopadhyay) never comes. Kakoli (Ghosh Dastidar) drops by occasionally. Can you believe that the south Kolkata MP is always absent? Only around 11 of our 29 MPs attend the House,' Kalyan said. He also expressed disappointment over the lack of disciplinary action against Moitra, alleging that she compared him to a 'pig' and called him 'sexually frustrated'. Earlier, he had also made personal remarks against Moitra, referring to her recent wedding with former BJD MP Pinaki Misra. 'Labeling a male colleague as 'sexually frustrated' isn't boldness — it's outright abuse. If such language were directed at a woman, there would be nationwide outrage, and rightly so. But when a man is the target, it's dismissed or even applauded. Let's be clear: abuse is abuse — regardless of gender. Such remarks are not just indecent, they reinforce a toxic double standard where men are expected to silently endure what would never be tolerated if roles were reversed. 'If Ms. Moitra thinks that flinging gutter insults will mask her own failures or distract from serious questions about her record, she is deluding herself. Those who rely on abuse instead of answers are not champions of democracy – they are its embarrassment, and the people of this country can see through that act,' he posted on X Monday. (Edited by Gitanjali Das) Also Read: TMC to lead language movement against BJP's 'linguistic terrorism' as Mamata sets tone for 2026
