The Tibetan Plateau: A Cultural Analysis

In the Tibetan Plateau, in a region of Asia, reside some of the last nomadic pastoralist families whose rich culture and traditions are beginning to vanish as globalization works its way into some of the most remote areas of the world. Such tribes are collectively known as the Tibetan Tribes or drokpa, the native word they use to describe themselves, which loosely translates to nomads in English (Hoffmann 1970). Tibet is in the Asian continent, precisely in between Asia and India and it is inhabited by hundreds of tribes, each with its own unique culture. Although each family is unique in their own way, because of their location, some can be deeply influenced by either India or Asia, depending on their proximity to each pertaining country,
Hoffman supports such allegations due to the matter and the results of a dispute in between the Indian Pandit Kamalashila and the Chinese monk Hva-shang Mahâyâna, in which of course the Chinese lost and thus the Tibetan people adopted numerous of Indian traditions (Hoffman 1970). Continuing with the history of the Tibetans, Hoffman also mentions that a major reason why the Tibetan people are manly associated with the Chinese rather than the Indian, is due to Indians way of thinking, which is what he calls cyclic, which means that the world consists of four ages, this being the last one (Kali Yuga, the time we live in today) and after it is over, the cycle will start all over again. Because of this logic, the Indians believe it is in vain to change history events and thus do not consider the Tibetan people part of their culture as that would go against their beliefs (Hoffman 1970). However, while Hoffman takes a systematic approach based on evidence and historical events, Robert B. Ekvall (1960), explores the idea of what the Tibetan people think of themselves and how similar and connected they are to the
The previously mentioned authors conducted what seemed like an objective study as they refrained from making any comment that would appear offensive but perhaps this has much to do with the fact that their studies and articles were conducted nearly four to five decades ago, a time in which our own society was not as advanced. In this recent study, Bhat (2013) describes the Tibetans as “economically poor, socially backward but culturally sound.” Although this declaration seems valid describing them as socially backward could be wrongly taken by the Tibetans. Asides from this description, Bhat does state that the Tibetans tribes’ poverty surpasses that of the general population. Furthermore, Tibetans’ “housing, sanitation, electricity and health care facilities are very low sub-standard than other sections of population. The literary rate among schedule tribes of Kashmir is also very low” (Bhat 2013). Although the Tibetans are very rich in culture, they are, in fact, very poor in other aspects—almost every aspect considered of high importance in more industrialized societies—which could lead to a misunderstanding of their culture such as being labeled as socially backward in the eyes of an outsider. Much of the Tibetans current conditions is due to India’s social system which dictates that those of purer