Tibet geographic location throughout history has made it essentially the crossroads of Asia. The Middle Eastern influence from the West, Mongolian influence from the north and of course influence from the two most populous civilization in history: the Indians to the south and Chinese to the East. However Tibet still created and maintained its own distinct culture and language and also influenced these nations themselves and other smaller surrounding nations in return(some more that others). So the question I ask is which people had the largest influence on Tibetans throughout history and why? What examples are there of these peoples influence?

I'm aware that this will probably be like a US election where the Indians and Chinese are going to probably make up the majority of votes and that very few people will choose Middle Easterners and Mongolians. If you do happen to choose the two latter choices please explain.

Here are just a few foreign cultural influences in Tibetan culture, there are many others. Please list any other you can find.


Middle Easterners:
-Tibet has a small minority of Tibetan muslims known as "Kyangsha or Gya Kachee". "Tibetan Muslims...are largely of Kashmiri and Persian/Arab/Turkic descent through the patrilineal lineage and also often descendants of native Tibetans through the matrilineal lineage".


Mongolians:
-Tibetan dress and clothes were adopted from the Mongolians.
-"The actual title [of Dalai Lama] was first bestowed by the Mongolian ruler Altan Khan upon Sonam Gyatso in 1578". Reincarnations of the Dalai Lama were many times supported by Mongol rulers.


Indians:
-"The most important event in Tibetan Buddhist history...was the arrival of the great tantric mystic Padmasambhava in Tibet in 774 at the invitation of King Trisong Detsen. It was Padmasambhava (more commonly known in the region as Guru Rinpoche) who merged tantric Buddhism with the local Bön religion to form what we now recognize as Tibetan Buddhism. In addition to writing a number of important scriptures (some of which he hid for future tertons to find), Padmasambhava established the Nyingma school from which all schools of Tibetan Buddhism are derived".
- Alot of Tibetan scholarly knowledge has been learned from Indians throughout Tibets Buddhist history, "In 1204 he Kashmiri master Shakyashribadhra arrived in Tibet accompanied by an entourage of Indian scholars...Tibetan scholars were inspired by this opportunity to learn directly from knowledgeable Indians". From contacts like this Tibetans applied themselves to mastering Sanskrit grammar and other aspects of Indian linguistic and literary learning, whether Sanskrit was introduced by the Indians I am unsure of though but it seems most likely. Tibetans also learnt and developped much of what they know on Buddhism from the Indians, like most Buddhist states in Asia.
-"The Tibetan writing system was based upon sixth or seventh century North Indian or Central Asian scripts that were derived from the more ancient Brahmi script (which, in an early form, had been used to inscribe many of the edicts of the famous Indian monarch of the third century BCE, Ashoka)".

Chinese:
-"The King of Nepal and the Emperor of China offered their daughters to the Tibetan Emperor in marriage. The wedding to the Nepalese and Chinese princesses were of particular importance, because they played important roles in the spread of Buddhism in Tibet". There is controversy in regards to which princess played a major or predominant role in the spread of Buddhism in Tibet. Chinese sources claim that it was the Chinese princess Wen Cheng whereas Tibetans claim that it was the Nepalese princess and not the Chinese whose influence was greater.
- The Tibetans, like the Japanese, had loaned their pronounciation for numbers from the Middle Chinese pronounciation.


What I think:
In my opinion I think the greatest influence on Tibet is a very close choice between India and China with Mongolia third and the Middle Easterners fourth. I think I would give the slight edge to India since Tibetans seemed to be more accepting of Indian things. I say this because obviously today there is hostility between Tibetans and Chinese but also if you look back in history there was always animosity between Tibet and China for most of the relations between both states. We can see this sentiment in the Tibetan language. The word for China in Tibetan is "Gya-na" which translates into "Black Kingdom", wheras the word for India comparably is "Gya-ga" which translates into "White Kingdom". Also previous to the introduction and spread of Buddhism into Tibet, China and Tibet were in many battles over caravan routes along the tarim basin, thus adding to the hostility. Tibetans seemed to be more accepting of India than China especially later on with the spread of Buddhism since India is the land from where Buddhism originated. Now I know that just because Tibetans were more accepting of India than China historically does not equate to India having more of an influence on Tibet, but it does make it more plausible and likely since obviously culture would be more easily spread where it is eagarly accepted than where it is not. Also in Tibetan history you hear of many Tibetans who sought after Indian religious teaching, scriptures, and Indian scholars, whereas I don't believe Tibetans ever sent emissaries to China, like Japan and Korea had done throughout their histories, to learn Chinese culture and teachings and than bring it back to their native lands to be taught.

Bon, the pre-Buddhist religion of the Tibetans, was inspired by West Asian (Indo-European) spirituality. I also believe that the influences of Indian religion on Tibetans are originally of West Asian (Indo-European) origins.

bon religion is very similar to Shaman which is shared by most of the early east asian civilizations. Today Shamanism still exist in a sense in Korea and Mongolia.

I should have added Indo-European as a choice, I was going to at first but I couldn't find many sources. Many Tibetan modern and classical words also have close similarities to Indo-European word groups like the modern Tibetan term for denoting victory and kingship is "rgyal(reh-gyal)" which resembles the Indo-European word group we find preserved in English words such as 'regal' and 'royal'. For the term 'wheel' in Classical Tibetan we find "khor-lo", which for the Modern Tibetan pronounciation is "kholo". The English word (which in Old English was hweol) is ultimately derived from an Indo-European word reconstruction as "K-w-EK-w-LO". Comparably in Old Slavonic the term for wheel is is 'kolo'.

Wow turns out I was wrong so far, China has no votes so far, and now that I think about it I had quite a hard time trying to find influences of China on Tibetan culture compared India. Also Mongolia is more of contender in this poll than I had thought, but theirs only been 8 votes so far so this might change later. Please post why you voted for the choice you chose, 8 votes yet only 2 replies.

Those Indo-Europeans who (directly and indirectly) influenced Tibetan culture can only have been genetically West Asians or at least mixed with West Asians. So I voted for "Middle Easterners".



Shamanism is not a religion and it dies out whereever it gets into contact with civilisation. The reason is that civilisation changes spirituality and thus the tasks of the people dealing with spirits.

woah, slow down there mate.

First I think west asians is not exactly correct. More like Central Asians or people of Asian Steppes. Which is not the same as "Middle Easterners".

Second what do you mean Shamanism is not a religion? What do you mean it died?

Shamanism is still practiced in Mongolia and Korea. Bon is still a Tibetan religion and it is often refered to as the Black Sect 黑教 as opposed to the Buddhist Yellow Sect and White Sect. There is a leader in Bon religion and I have read letters from him to the Dalai Lama online.

Historically China ( Han Chinese ruler or people) itself had no direct influence on Tibet.
If China had influence on Tibet, it must be only through commerse and through Mongols / Manchus. Of course as neighbouring countries there were quite a few interactions like political marriage, Tibetan incursion into a Chinese Dynasty.
Now since 1950, PRC has real influence on Tibet of course
-------------------------------------------------------
Indian influence on Tibet almost sounds like similar to any other Indian influence on any other country since buddism originated from India. But modern day India could have done more for Tibet or influence more on political situation.
Middle Easterners influence is little too vague.
-------------------------------------------------------

Historical point of view, I have voted for Mongols

Present day Mongolia have no influence in current state of Tibet.

But you can not ignore the historical facts of Mongol and Tibetan relationship which started from the time of Khubilai Khaan, abrupted only in the first half of XX century.

Just simple visible influence of Mongols on Tibetans is
- your clothes,
- name of your leader, Dalai. IV Dalai lama was Mongol which demonstrated how deep Mongol hand reached to Tibetan realm. Ironically, begining of XX century Mongols rallied around a Tibetan (VIII Bogd Gegeen) fought for Independance.
- Buddhism which Mongols adopted from Tibet.
Tibetan influence were tremendous on Mongols through Buddhism.
If you know your buddhist text, there are thousands of books by Mongolian scholars in Tibetan language. Dalai several times mentioned about contribution of Mongolian scholars in Tibetan Buddhism.
-Through the influence of Lamaist Buddhism, Mongols ( specifically Hoshuud Mongols) were main military force behind Dalai Lama
- There many words from Mongolian language too. Mongolian have many Tibetan words too. But those are different language group.

After collapse of Qing Dynasty in 1911, Mongolia and Tibet recognised each other as sovereign state and exchanged diplomatic missions. No other country recognised Tibet or Mongolia at that time.
Mongols chose to stay open to any opportunity that grant independance. Tibet closed themselves until Mao "liberated" tibetans.
All is history now

We're communicating in English. In English literature "Middle East" usually refers to Southwest Asia and "Central Asia" (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenia, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzia) refers to Northwest Asia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_East (Iran has steppes, too)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Asia ("common modern definition")



Shamanism is defined by the initiation of individuals chosen by the community, the use of shamanic tools and the mastery of special spirits. It is not defined by any religious beliefs. Therefore, shamanism is not a religion. (Only some religious people claim that shamanism would be a religion. They even claim that atheism would be a religion.)

In shamanism there were never any leaders. There were strong and weak shamans, and the weak ones could be killed by the strong ones. But there were no shamanic leaders. Religious leaders are not called shamans but priests.

Modern people do not practice shamanism because modern people have religions like Buddhism and Christianity. Most of the people who call themselves "shamans" today are self-styled. They did not inherit the original traditions but only imitate them. And even when some guys inherited the shamanic tradition, they added basic concepts from Christian, Buddhist and other beliefs to it. The results are no longer shamanism but folk Buddhism, folk Christianity, "new age" religions and so on.

sorry I don't share you view.

Yes, religions modify itself through ages and contact with foreign concepts and culture.

Christianity and Buddism is far from the way they were when they first began, nor when they were the most popular.

I have a rather loose defination of religion. If you believe something that has super natural powers and is a devine force, I'd call that religion. Like Chinese anchester worship is a religion. By your definition besides Buddism, China has no religion.

Not only do religions modify themselves in accordance with time, but they also adjust themselves to the people's previous belief systems. For example, as you all may know the different Tai peoples of southeast Asia are mostly Thervada Buddhists. However, our form of Buddhism is heavily influenced by the belief in ghosts and spirits. The people are very superstitious and are always afraid of offending spirits even in this modern day and age. Take, for example, the construction of the second Thai-Lao friendship bridge across the Mekong river. When pieces of the portion being built on the Thai side collapsed many people blamed it on the authorities for not being more sensitive by not attempting to appease the local spirits before construction began. There's also the construction of the newer Bangkok airport where people were reporting sightings of ghosts. In many of the communities you'll find a small little platform or miniature house built in the yard. These structures are often called "ghost houses". They are used as a place to give offerings to ancestor spirits and whatnot. I don't believe that this was originally a part of Buddhism, however it is an integral part of the people's belief system within the region. Not only is there a strong belief in such things but witchcraft and sorcery is also very powerfully rooted within most people's beliefs.

I believe this also occurs in many other religions. Religions have their own regional flavors and the attempt to simply lump them all into one category does not do the people justice nor does it accurately delve into the people's mindset.

Incorrect, the Tang dynasty directly influenced the administrative structure of the Yarlong clan of the Tubo empire as well as its etiquette. Certain metallurgy skills, medicine, architecture and clothing were also directly brought to Tibet either through envoys or Tibetan students in China.

considering that the Karmapa at that time was the Emperor's Lama, that is understandable.

I'm not talking about the Qing dynasty, but the earlier Tang, when Tibet has just became a single state. It was a time when Lamas did not exist.

I am sorry, but you are wrong. The Lamas have existed since the 800's CE.

PLus, there have been many misunderstanding in this thread, stated as fact.
The so called "black sect" Bon were kicked out of central Tibet, and the so called "white sect" Bon were the only ones allowed to stay....and this also happened in the 800's CE, during the time of Padmasambhava and His students.

I may be wrong about the Tang emperor....I am checking into that. But the rest that I said in this post is most certainly correct.

If you like to define Lamas as simply monks, then they have existed as soon as Buddhism entered Tibet. But Lamas did not gain any significant power until the 10th century A.D. which is after the Tang dynasty.
Futhermore, thats not even the point, the position of Karmapa was only created in 1645 by Gu Shi Khan. It was not around prior to the Qing dynasty.

"Lama" is the Tbetan equivalent to the skt "Guru", and is basically "teacher".....and that goes back to the 800's. Which is also when they gained significant power, as you put it.

and yes, I found out I was incorrect about the Karmapa. It is fine to be wrong--- that is how we get "right"
But like I said in previous post, the rest I said is correct.

Even in the 9th century, the lamas were not in power. After the last king of the Yarlong royal clan was killed, Tibet fragmented under military warlords. It was only in the 10th century that feudalism rose with the lamas coming in as a major player.

you have to understand how the power worked.
And even when King Langdharma tried his best to wipe out Buddhism in Tibet, he would not touch the Ngakpas....their power scared him. And many of them were Lamas as well.

Now granted, I will concede that Lamas didn't officially head the gov't till later, but there is more than one type of power. ANd the Lamas were a "major player" starting with King Trisong Deutsen.

The buddhist monks under Deutsen were hardly major players. They were brought to high status by him due to his love of the religion, and he had the power to take it away at his will.

The monks had a certain standing during Lang Dharma's time, but after his persecution of them, buddhism declined for several decades. The country was divided by warlords.

the monks weren't, but the Lamas were. Not all monks are Lamas, and not all Lamas are monks.

here is an example of power--
When Padmasambhava was invited at the suggestion of Shantarakshita (my spelling is probably "off"). King Trisong D had the thought that since he was king, Padmasambhava should prostrate to him first. Well, things did not happen that way, and King TD prostrated to Padmasambhava first.

Where the main "power" was, was/is in the Guru/disciple relationship. During the time of the Kings and after, the Lamas had great influence (and therefore major players) over their disciples (the leaders of the gov't).
During the couple hundred years that Buddhism appeared to decline (and this what is refered to as central Tibet...although, really, that was Tibet. Kham, Amdo, ect were basically their own countries), the Ngakpa Lamas made certain it survived......still having powerful influence, although not as much.
Then the second "influx" began in the 10 hundreds, being the beginning of the Sarma schools.

Tibet and Oirats or Western Mongols

Already in the XIII century during the times of conquering crusades of Chengis-Khan and his sons Mongols ancestors, Oirats (or Western Mongols), got acquainted with Buddhism. However, this world religion did not become widespread among them up until the last third of the XVI century; before it was preserved just among the close circle of nomadic elite. The masses remained faithful to the traditional religion of their ancestors – shamanism.

Gelug-pa, the second conversion of Mongols into Buddhism
In the second half of the XVI century, revival of the cultural life of Mongols and Oirats, which was related to the final victory of feudal relations in the country, is notable. Aspiration to restore political unity needed ideological support. Nomadic rulers again turned to Tibet and its ideology. In the last third of the XVI century the so-called “second conversion of Mongols into Buddhism� took place. It was officially arranged at the Kukunor gathering of the South-Mongolian khans with Altan-khan Tumet as a leader. At it relationship principles between Mongolian secular arm and Buddhist centre were formed and legalized.

At that time, Altan-khan granted to the leader of the “yellow-hatâ€� sect (Gelug-pa school) of Tibetan Buddhism, Sodnam-Chzhamtso, who was spreading Buddhism among Mongols, the title of Dalai-Lama (“the Great Lama). That was supposed to testify the depth and endlessness of his teaching, wisdom, and holiness, comparable only to the ocean. Gelug-pa sect represented reformed and centralized Buddhist Church and was formed in the beginning of the XV century by the outstanding reformer and thinker Tsongkapa (1357-1419). Tsongkapa chose Lhasa as his place of being. There in 1409 he formed first monastery of Gelug-pa sect called Galdan; he developed for it monastic regulations and introduced celibacy for lamas. He also established complex system of church hierarchy and introduced magnificent rituals. Tsongkapa’s reforms facilitated consolidation of the political position of the new sect and the growth in the number of its followers.

Soon after the death of the “founder of Lamaismâ€� new highest unit was gradually formed in the upper lamaist hierarchy of the “yellow-hatâ€� sect. According to the legend, Tsongkapa allegedly prophesied during his lifetime, that two of his prominent students will constantly reincarnate into two highest hierarchs of the Lamaist school. One of this reincarnations later received a title of Dalai-Lama, the other – Panchen-rimpoche ( in Tibetan “the great treasure of the teachingâ€�), or shortly Panchen Lama. First Dalai-Lamas were only successors of Tsongkapa in the leading position of Gelug-pa sect. After the death of the first one, the principle of “reincarnationâ€� was formulated, i.e. re-birth of the dead leader of the sect into newly-born baby. This guaranteed succession of Gelug-pa sect’s administration that was consistent with celibacy.

Lamaist chief priests of the “yellow-hat� sect start carrying the title of Dalai-Lama since the times of the third Dalai-Lama, Sodnam-Chzhamtso (1543-1588). Along with his title he also received from Altan-khan golden seal with the dragon image. This acknowledgement by the newly-converted Mongol khan that Dalai-Lama had the leading position in Tibetan Buddhist world had far-reaching consequences. From then on, Dalai-Lamas started to lay claims to their leading position not only in the religious affairs, but also in the matters of secular governance.

Famous Dalai-Lama V Svgan Lubsan-Chshamtso (1617-1682) played prominent role in the establishment of theocracy in Tibet. Theocracy (from Greek “the rule of God�) is “the form of government with which management of the state is performed mainly by priesthood and clergy, and the head of the church hierarchy has the ultimate religious and secular power�. Worship of the source of power and the personality of Dalai-Lama, the embodiment of boddhisatva (the future Buddha) Avalokiteshvara, served as an ideological basis to the theocracy in Tibet and state-management was seen as one of his religiously-prophetic functions.

After Altan-khan Tumed, other Mongolian and Oirat rulers start spreading Buddhism in their domains. Expansion of Buddhism among Oirats is tied to the name of Torgout ruler Mergen-Tumen, who in 1604 invited prominent missioner-preacher of Lamaism and official representative of Dalai-Lama, Tsagan Nomin-khan, for teachings of new religion.

In Mongolia, translation of Buddhist canonic works into Mongolian language restarted, old manuscripts and printed editions were searched for. Educated lamas start coming from Tibet to Mongolian and Oirat pasturelands, while young Mongols and Oirats, followers of the new religion, were studying in Tibet. Often, they were from noble families. Two persons from these Oirat monks of noble origin should be mentioned. They were studying in Tibet and were known later in their motherland as the preachers of the «yellow religion». The eldest one is Naidjin-Toiin (1557-1653), the son of the mentioned-above Torgout nobleman Mergen-Tumen and Panchen-Lama's student, who became the first teacher of the new religion among Mongolian khanates. Another Oirat monk is the famous enlightener and religious figure Zaya-Pandita Ogtorghyiin Dalai (1599-1662), the creator of the written language «Todo Bichg». After studying for over twenty years in Tibet and «achieving the limits of knowledge», Zaya Pandita enjoyed such a great prestige that he taught dogma on religious faculties of the largest Tibetan monasteries. His biographer Ratnabhadra said that when His Holiness Dalai-lama turned 19 years and Holiest Panchen-lama took his monks vow of gelung, Zai-pandita was one of a dozen gelloungs present at the ceremony. In 1639 taught by life experiences scientists, as an educated Lama he returns home to Dzhungaria "in order to benefit religion, and human beings, speaking Mongolian, through the translation of the holy books “.

With preaching mission Zaya-Pandita traveled all around Oirat land from the Yellow river to Yaik and from Altai to Himalayas. Also twice in 1645 and 1655, he visited Volga Kalmyks, who in the middle of the XVII century finally accepted Russian citizenship. During it, he was trying to achieve not only missioner’s goals, but also political ones. As a representative of Dalai-Lama, Zaya Pandita was called upon to establish close contact between Tibet and Kalmyk rulers which converted to Buddhist in their old motherland, Dzhungaria. They, however, continued to head for Lhasa in the bigger religion matters. Tibet continued to be religious and spiritual centre, in a way Tibetan was Vatican for Oirats and Mongols.
Protectors of the “yellow religion�.

Consolidation of their influence in Mongolia, and in Dzhungaria, in particular, was a large victory for the “yellow-hat� sect headed by Dalai-Lama. Its position in Tibet itself was, however, not so successful. In XIV-first half of XVII century feudal division and constant struggle for power between different religious sects (monasteries) and secular feudals prevailed there. All secular and spiritual feudals of Tibet gradually got sucked into internal fights, and their struggle for power took form of a religious warfare between “red-hat� (Karma-pa) and “yellow-hat� (Gelug-pa) sects of Tibetan Buddhism. By the 1730s position of the “yellow-hat� sect had deteriorated extensively. It seemed like its downfall was inescapable.

In these conditions Dalai-Lama and Panchen-Lama in 1637 made a decision to send ambassadors to the rulers of Dorben-Oirats (fours Oirats) for help. With this mission, a monk by the name Garulozava left for Dzhungaria. Upon his arrival he “reported to the khan and high officials that Tsan emperor and others have a desire to ruin yellow religion and that they hate yellow-hatters and exert violence towards them…â€� Oirats rulers happily received Dalai-Lama’s messenger and after discussion of the appeal for help from Lamaist hierarchs at their gathering – chuulgan – stated to send to Tibet united army of all Dorben-Oirats. Khoshuut ruler Tooru-Baikhu, known historically under the name of Gushi-khan ( 1582-1654), took command of the army. Rulers of all Oirat ethno-political confederations took part in this military campaign of 1637: from Khoshuuts came Gushi-khan and Duurgechi-noyon, from Eeuts (Dzhungars) – Khara-Khula, Baatur-khuntaidji and Mergen-Daichin, from Torgouts -- Merget-Tumen, Mergen-Dzhinon, and Gombo-Ieldeng, from Khoits -- Sultan-taishi and Sumer-taishi, from Derbets -- Dalai-taishi, Bumbu-Ieldeng and others. On the outskirts of Kukunor, the immediate threshold into Tibet, Oirat army in the bloody battle destroyed the 30-thousand army of the “red-hatâ€� sect’s ally, important East-Mongolian Tsoktu-Taiji. Oirat army had a following formation: Khoshuuts in the centre, on the left flank were fighting the troops of Eelets, which were called the “Dzhungarin tseregâ€�, or the army of the left wing, “Dzhungar armyâ€�. On the right flank stood the Torgout warriors, and in the rear guard were Derbets and Khoits. As the Oirat historical document “History of Kho-Orlukâ€� says from that time Eelets were referred to as “Dzhungarâ€�.

Gushi-Khan and theocracy in Tibet
Gushi-Khan managed to establish his control in Kukunor, and there emerged new Oirat khanate – Khoshut Khanate- that lasted until 1723. In 1637-1638 main part of his Khoshuut subjects moved there from Dzhungaria. Kukunor could serve as a good bridgehead for entering into inner regions of Tibet and establishing there a personal influence. In 1638, Gushi-khan makes a personal pilgrimage to Tibet, to Dalai-Lama Agoan-Lubstanchzhamtso. Dalai-Lama V granted him a title of “Danzin-Choidzhalâ€� (“King of laws and the supporter of religionâ€�). In his turn, Gushi-khan gave to the dignitaries of Dalai-Lama’s retinue Mongolian titles of dalama, taidzhi, dayan etc. which Tibetan officials of high ranks carried up until the middle of the XX century.
During the following three years Oirat armies defeated troops of Dalai-Lama’s opponents from the camp of the “red-hatâ€� sect and their secular allies. After that, Gushi-Khan established his power over all regions of Tibet and took “the high throne of Tibetan kingsâ€�. However, beware of uprisings of Tibetans against foreign rulers, he, in 1642, passed on the supreme power over all of Tibet to Dalai-Lama V, Avgan Lusan-Chzhamtso. This step of the Oirat ruler received enormous approval from the lamaist hierarchs. It was depicted in the visual art of Tibet. A large painting in one of the major temples in Lhasa portrays Gushi-khan bended on his knees and passing on to Dalai-Lama and the Regent the symbols of secular power. In works of Tibetan authors, Gushi-khan appears as a powerful protector and defender of the religion, who defeated and annihilated all enemies of Dalai-Lama, and “made the yellow religion shine like a sunâ€�.

Lhasa was officially announced the capital of the united Tibet, and the residence of Dalai-Lama and his government. The beginning of Dalai-Lama’s palace erection, Potala, outstanding monument of Tibetan architecture, also refers to these years.
Gushi-khan died in 1654 at the age of 74. His victory over the enemies of the “yellow hat� sect had important consequences for the history of Tibet. It facilitated the unification, as well as the final establishment of theocracy in this country along with absolute prevalence of Gelug-pa school. This reflected on the political structure of Tibet. Dalai-Lamas started to head Tibetan government and they had supreme secular and religious authority. Dalai-Lama V became known in the history under the name of “the Great Fifth�.

---------------------------

Translated by Danara Dourdoussova. Original can be found on www.hamagmongol.narod.ru