challenges of translating tibetan medical texts and medical histories

13
17 Introduction: Challenges of Translating Tibetan Medical Texts and Medical Histories Barbara Gerke Language is a process of free creation; its laws and principles are fixed, but the manner in which the principles of generation are used is free and infinitely varied. Noam Chomsky This publication is a German translation of the first two of the Four Tantras, 1 in Tibetan called Gyüschi (rgyud bzhi). This bi-lingual presentation (Tibetan-German) comprises an important step towards a complete translation of all Four Tantras, which to date has not appeared in any European language, which is surprising. 2 After all, Tibetan medicine is recognised along with Ayurveda and Chinese medicine as one of the semi- nal Asian medical systems with vast amounts of medical literature drawing scholarly interest around the world. Why is the standard work of Tibetan medicine appearing in English and German only at the turn of the twenty-first century, despite Westerners having studied Tibetan medicine since the early nineteenth century (Körös 1835)? In this brief introduction, 3 I want to provide some answers to this question by highlight- ing some of the issues that make its translation a task so daunting that most scholars in the past have avoided it. A few have limited themselves to the translation of the first two tantras or a few chapters. 4 I hope that by providing this introduction the reader will be able to engage adequately with this seminal Tibetan medical treatise, including all its intricacies and at times apparently strange use of language. 1 Gyüschi is also translated as Four Treatises, which avoids misunderstandings on the ‘tantricnature of this medical texts among non-Tibetan readers. Here, in accordance with the rest of the book the translation Four Tantras has been used. 2 The earliest translation of the Four Tantras into Russian by Pyotr Badmaev (Badmaev 1903) does not include the Third Tantra, which Badmaev apparently translated but never published (Aschoff 1996: 30–31). The first complete translation of the Four Tantras was into Chinese (Li Yongnian 李永年 et al. 1983). 3 I want to thank Olaf Czaja, Jude Carroll, Afia Joy Adu-Sanyah, and Dr. Sonam Dolma for their helpful comments. 4 To date, only parts of the Four Tantras have actually been translated into English or German. In the following list, the Roman numeral refers to the four parts of the Four Tantras and the Arabic numeral to the chapter. For example, [III: 49] refers to the 49th chapter of the third Tantra. If no chapter is mentioned, the entire part has been translated: Badaraev et al. 1981 [III: 49]; Clark 1995 [I; II]; Clifford 1984 [III: 77–79]; Donden 1977 [I, II: 1–15]; Donden and Hopkins 1986 [IV: 1–8] (This is not a literal translation, but is based on lectures and translations of various chapters of the Four Tantras, Donden and Hopkins 1986: 9); Dorje and Richards 1981 [I: 1–2]; Emmerick 1975 [I: 3], 1990 [III: 90]; Jäger 1999 [III: 71–72]; Kelsang 1977 [I; II: 1–15]; Meyer 1990 [IV,1]; MTK 2008 [I; II], MTK 2011 [IV]; Seitelberger 2010 [I]. Vaidya Bhagwan Dash reconstructed a Sanskrit version of the Four Tantras, from which he translated and annotated parts I, II and III 1–11 in English (Dash VB. 1994–2001).

Upload: jigdrel77

Post on 25-Oct-2015

32 views

Category:

Documents


3 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Challenges of Translating Tibetan Medical Texts and Medical Histories

17

Introduction: Challenges of Translating

Tibetan Medical Texts and Medical Histories

Barbara Gerke

Language is a process of free creation; its laws and principles are fixed, but the manner in which the principles of generation are used is free and infinitely varied.

Noam Chomsky

This publication is a German translation of the first two of the Four Tantras,1 in Tibetan called Gyüschi (rgyud bzhi). This bi-lingual presentation (Tibetan-German) comprises an important step towards a complete translation of all Four Tantras, which to date has not appeared in any European language, which is surprising.2 After all, Tibetan medicine is recognised along with Ayurveda and Chinese medicine as one of the semi-nal Asian medical systems with vast amounts of medical literature drawing scholarly interest around the world. Why is the standard work of Tibetan medicine appearing in English and German only at the turn of the twenty-first century, despite Westerners having studied Tibetan medicine since the early nineteenth century (Körös 1835)? In this brief introduction,3 I want to provide some answers to this question by highlight-ing some of the issues that make its translation a task so daunting that most scholars in the past have avoided it. A few have limited themselves to the translation of the first two tantras or a few chapters.4 I hope that by providing this introduction the reader will be able to engage adequately with this seminal Tibetan medical treatise, including all its intricacies and at times apparently strange use of language.

1 Gyüschi is also translated as Four Treatises, which avoids misunderstandings on the ‘tantric’ nature of this medical texts among non-Tibetan readers. Here, in accordance with the rest of the book the translation Four Tantras has been used.

2 The earliest translation of the Four Tantras into Russian by Pyotr Badmaev (Badmaev 1903) does not include the Third Tantra, which Badmaev apparently translated but never published (Aschoff 1996: 30–31). The first complete translation of the Four Tantras was into Chinese (Li Yongnian 李永年 et al. 1983).

3 I want to thank Olaf Czaja, Jude Carroll, Afia Joy Adu-Sanyah, and Dr. Sonam Dolma for their helpful comments.

4 To date, only parts of the Four Tantras have actually been translated into English or German. In the following list, the Roman numeral refers to the four parts of the Four Tantras and the Arabic numeral to the chapter. For example, [III: 49] refers to the 49th chapter of the third Tantra. If no chapter is mentioned, the entire part has been translated: Badaraev et al. 1981 [III: 49]; Clark 1995 [I; II]; Clifford 1984 [III: 77–79]; Donden 1977 [I, II: 1–15]; Donden and Hopkins 1986 [IV: 1–8] (This is not a literal translation, but is based on lectures and translations of various chapters of the Four Tantras, Donden and Hopkins 1986: 9); Dorje and Richards 1981 [I: 1–2]; Emmerick 1975 [I: 3], 1990 [III: 90]; Jäger 1999 [III: 71–72]; Kelsang 1977 [I; II: 1–15]; Meyer 1990 [IV,1]; MTK 2008 [I; II], MTK 2011 [IV]; Seitelberger 2010 [I]. Vaidya Bhagwan Dash reconstructed a Sanskrit version of the Four Tantras, from which he translated and annotated parts I, II and III 1–11 in English (Dash VB. 1994–2001).

Page 2: Challenges of Translating Tibetan Medical Texts and Medical Histories

18

Introduction by Dr. Barbara Gerke (Englisch)

Characteristic ways of learning in Tibet (as in many parts of Asia) included and still include the memorisation of large amounts of texts. Memorisation and the recitation of a ‘root text’ were then elaborated on through oral instructions, as well as through written commentaries. Even today, Tibetan medical students typically spend several years memorising at least three of the Four Tantras, reciting them during oral exams and writing them down from memory along with explanations during written exams. In early Tibet, often only the teacher had a hand-written or printed copy of the text, and the students learnt by memorising the orally transmitted text. Tibetan works have been printed since at least the mid-twelfth century CE (Schaeffer 2009: 9), but the popular technique of wooden block-prints was introduced from China only in the fifteenth century and was expensive. Therefore, along with hand-written copies that were much in use, memorisation was not only a key feature of oral literacy, but also a practical way to carry one’s library in one’s head at all times. Modern Tibetan education and the availability of Tibetan medical texts in print and electronic forms have so far not replaced the oral traditions of memorising the ‘root text’ (see Millard 2002).

The very design of the Four Tantras facilitates their memorisation in several ways, of which I want to point out two.

First, most of the text is written in a poetic meter, largely consisting of lines of nine mono-syllables each. The 5,900 verses are partly encrypted and cannot be understood without explanation by a qualified teacher, who ideally has received oral instructions—some of which are considered secret and never written down. It is also considered ideal for the teacher to embody to a certain extent the medical-religious qualities that are described in the text, such as the compassionate attitude of a physician.5 Moreover, in order to keep with the poetic meter, words are often omitted, or entire medical terms are at times represented by only one syllable. Detailed commentaries and directly re-ceived oral instructions from a lama (spiritual teacher) or a qualified medical teacher are regarded as critical in the understanding of the root text. Even Tibetans with a good knowledge of literary Tibetan have difficulty accessing the full meaning of the Four Tantras independently, despite understanding the literal meaning of each word in the root text. Any reader having seen biomedical literature filled with Latin technical terms can empathise with the students of Tibetan medicine, even more so if Latin terms were to be sometimes presented in one syllable to fit the poetic meter of a sentence.

Second, memorisation is enhanced through having six main organisational frameworks along which the chapters of the Four Tantras are structured. These six frameworks are: ‘four tantras,’ ‘eight branches,’ ‘eleven sections,’ ‘fifteen categories,’ ‘four compendia,’ and ‘156 chapters’ (see Table 1). These frameworks give the text a very clear structure, which helps the students memorise, recite, and understand its content.

5 One entire chapter in the second of the Four Tantras is dedicated to the spiritual qualities a physician should develop, such as love, compassion, joy, and equanimity.

Page 3: Challenges of Translating Tibetan Medical Texts and Medical Histories

19

Introduction by Dr. Barbara Gerke (Englisch)

One can easily imagine that the poetic feature of the Four Tantras makes a translation into a European language a challenging task. Further, the translator has to deal with classical Tibetan—which is quite different from spoken colloquial Tibetan—with tex-tual styles dating as far back as the twelfth century.6 Moreover, the translator also has to make decisions on how to translate the numerous technical terms that, over time, have acquired a technical meaning in Tibetan medical contexts. These terms were often originally taken from colloquial Tibetan, and their literal translations would make no sense to the reader.

To understand this transformation from colloquial to technical meanings, we have to look at how medical terms were (and still are) created in the Tibetan language. Tibetans have a history of adopting and creating technical terms from different languages and cultural backgrounds (Gaffney 2000). The Tibetan language is mono-syllabic in nature, and meaning is basically syllabic. Most of the syllables “have meaning independent of the compound word (morpheme) in which they are found. […] This syllabic structure affords tremendous flexibility with respect to both expression of new ideas and con-cepts and the expression of old ones in new and original ways” (Goldstein 1984: xi). This language characteristic enabled Tibetan and Indian translators to use loan trans-lation words from the Sanskrit. This happened chiefly during the two main historical translation periods (approx. 9th to 10th and 11th to 12th centuries CE), during which it was mainly Buddhist texts that were translated from Sanskrit into Tibetan by teams of translators, editors, and redactors. Soon, dictionaries of uniform Sanskrit and Tibetan terms were created. Such high translation accuracy was achieved that “within 200 years of its creation, the Tibetan language had become the medium for translating some of the most refined and complex concepts and ideas of Indian Buddhism” (Gaffney 2000: 5). This was done by creating a specialised form of Tibetan language, quite different from colloquial Tibetan. According to Gaffney, the methods used were “creating calques, or loan translation words, to convey the precise meaning of the original Indian term without importing any presuppositions or connotations from the Tibetan language” (Gaffney 2000: 11); only for similes and metaphors was some kind of paraphrasing employed. The aim of this method was “to present as accurate and faithful a transla-tion of the original source text as possible” (Gaffney 2000: 11). Tibetans implicitly assumed that “the literal translation of a text will ipso facto be a faithful representa-tion of the original text” (Gaffney 2000: 11). For the most part, their translations were done so accurately that lost Sanskrit versions can be re-constructed from their Tibetan versions. The methods used to translate Sanskrit Indian Buddhist texts were also used to translate medical texts. The Indian Āyurvedic physician Bhagwan Dash spent many years reconstructing what he believes is the ‘lost’ Sanskrit version of the Tibetan Four Tantras (Dash 1994–2001); this re-translation, however, does not prove the historical

6 It is still debated whether the early version of the Four Tantras was compiled in the eighth or twelfth century (e.g. Karmay 1989; Emmerick 1977; Yang Ga 2010, forthcoming) or whether it is even based on a lost Sanskrit original (Dash 1994–2001). The text definitely went through later editions and re-prints; the translation presented in this book is based on a revised edition of 1892 from the Chakpori Medical College in Lhasa.

Page 4: Challenges of Translating Tibetan Medical Texts and Medical Histories

20

existence of an early Sanskrit version of the Four Tantras, which has so far not been found (see Yang Ga, forthcoming).

However, with this general focus on Sanskrit translations we should not forget that in the history of Tibetan medicine, medical texts were apparently also translated from Greco-Arabic, Central Asian, and Chinese sources—albeit none of them survived (see Beckwith 1979; Garrett 2009; Taube 1980, 1981). However, there might be further discoveries from the Dunhuang texts in the future that might help to understand the methods used in early translations.7

What is certain is that the mono-syllabic character of the Tibetan language itself has facilitated both the translation and creation of medical terms. This was the case not only in the past, when Tibetan medicine was enriched by medical knowledge, practices, and texts from neighbouring countries, but it has also been the case recently, facilitating the creation of contemporary medical terms. Since Tibetans have been in contact with Western science and biomedicine, the mono-syllabic language character has offered Tibetan doctors the opportunity to create an array of new scientific and medical terms in modern Tibetan and thus incorporate biomedical concepts into their pool of medical knowledge.8 This mono-syllabic language feature that makes it so easy to create new terms in Tibetan, is also one of the main reasons why translating classical Tibetan medi-cal texts into modern languages is extremely difficult, as the examples below will show.

How exactly were medical words created by compounding monosyllables in Tibe-tan? Let us look at some examples. Me drod, the technical term for ‘digestive heat’ is compounded of the monosyllables me meaning ‘fire’ and drod meaning ‘warmth’ However, the literal translation ‘fire-warmth’ would make little sense in a sentence on the digestive process or a kidney disease involving the digestive heat. In compounding words, Tibetans often used simple colloquial expressions that became technical terms to describe complex therapeutic processes: for example, ‘to press something against’ (dugs pa) became a technical term for a therapeutic method of applying hot compresses; and ‘mild fluid’ (’jam rtsi) received the medical meaning of a purgative.

This problem was already described by Eugène Obermiller in the 1930s. He argued that the underlying epistemologies on which the meaning of Tibetan medical terms are based might get lost in a literal translation process, particularly since a strictly philological approach often fails to include living oral traditions (1989 [1935]: 15). In fact, literal translation efforts have at times resulted in the adoption of terms that make the mean-ing of the original medical Tibetan terms ambiguous (Obermiller 1989 [1935]: 16–17).

7 Tibetan medicine in the Dunhuang manuscripts and links between Tibetan medicine and the Arab world are currently studied by Yoeli-Tlalim (2010, 2011, forthcoming); see also Yoeli-Tlalim et al. 2011.

8 Modern anatomical charts with Tibetan terms for anatomical details previously unknown in Tibetan medicine is an example of this process (Wangdu 1982). For debates on the creation of such new medical terms see, for example, Adams 2007; Czaja 2011; Gerke 2011; Prost 2006.

Introduction by Dr. Barbara Gerke (Englisch)

Page 5: Challenges of Translating Tibetan Medical Texts and Medical Histories

21

This ambiguity is mostly found in complex medical terms. Literal translations of basic medical terms, such as mchin pa for liver, are common and accurate, even though the understanding of the physiology and function of an organ might differ significantly between biomedicine and Tibetan medicine.

Moreover, it is a characteristic of Asian scholarly medical systems that technical terms often have a polysemous nature, i.e. have many meanings. Hsu shows in a Chinese context that the meaning of one and the same medical term can differ in institutional and private clinical settings. She argues that “the meaning of the technical terms that evolved in those scholarly medical traditions9 is notoriously polysemous and dependent on the context in which they occur” (Hsu 2000: 219). A relevant example from Tibetan medicine is the term rtsa. In the context of anatomy, rtsa refers to all kinds of ‘chan-nels’ transporting blood (khrag), wind/respiration (rlung), and water (chu; chu’i rtsa are often translated as ‘nerves’), but also the mind (sems), nutrients, and waste products (Gerke, in press); in pharmacology rtsa refers to the root of a plant; in a diagnostic context rtsa refers to the ‘pulse’ that is being felt at the radial artery. Its meaning also changed during history. The first documented mention of rtsa in a medical context is in the eighth to tenth century Tibetan medical texts from Dunhuang, where rtsa relates mainly to the practice of blood-letting (Yan 2007: 302). Depending on the context, rtsa has to be translated accordingly.

Furthermore, oral traditions change over time. Even for Tibetan doctors themselves, certain aspects of the Four Tantras might not make sense today, since they are not practised anymore, or—in the case of materia medica—are known under a different name and are used differently than they were in early Tibet.

How can translators of Tibetan medical texts deal with these issues effectively and sensitively? Apart from the issue of the polysemy of many medical terms, in order to preserve the living oral traditions that might easily be ignored in a literal translation, it is advantageous if the translators are either trained in Tibetan medicine themselves (which is the case with all Tibetan doctors who worked on the translation of this Men-Tsee-Khang publication), or are in constant communication with practising Tibetan doctors (which is the case with the editor and translator of this German edition). To be trained in classical Tibetan and philology as well as in Tibetan medicine is albeit rare, and interdisciplinary team work is necessary, as it was during the centuries of Tibet’s peak translation activities, when the translation team consisted of the Indian panditas (scholars) and ācāryas (teachers) and Tibetan translators (lo tsa ba), editors, and redactors.

9 Here, with ‘scholarly medical traditions’ Hsu refers to Bates 1995. The main Asian medical traditions, including Tibetan medicine, can be considered ‘scholarly medical traditions,’ since they all constitute a literate tradition of medical theory and practice, are mostly taught in institutions, and evolved in highly stratified societies. It is a characteristic of scholarly medical traditions that there are different interpretations of medical terms in texts and in practice (Hsu 2000: 217).

Introduction by Dr. Barbara Gerke (Englisch)

Page 6: Challenges of Translating Tibetan Medical Texts and Medical Histories

22

A simple and common example of how medical meaning can easily get lost in a literal translation are the three nyepa (nyes pa), which have been rendered in Tibetan as loong (rlung = ‘wind’), tripa (mkhris pa = ‘bile’), baekan (bad kan = ‘phlegm’). Their English translations—wind, bile, and phlegm—while apt, cannot be taken literally. The three nyepa are broad concepts that cannot be pinned down by any single word in a Euro-pean language. Phlegm, for example is not the ‘phlegm’ coughed up from the lungs, but a term to denote all aspects of the body that are governed by the elements water and earth, thus having a nature of cooling stickiness, giving the body firmness, as well as moisture. Literal translations of the three nyepa tend to be eurocentric since they miss the polysemous nature of the Tibetan terms and would make readers associate the terms with their own cultural-related medical perceptions and bodily associations that would limit their understanding of the Tibetan meaning. We find that many translators and scholars writing on Tibetan medicine have started developing more nuanced solutions and choose to use the untranslated Tibetan words for technical medical terms and describe their meaning, rather than translate them literally.

A translator of Tibetan medical texts is then confronted with a constant decision-making process, balancing between literally accurate translations and sentences that include some form of commentary (to fill in for missing syllables or words) and thus make sense to the common reader.

Could translations of Tibetan medical texts potentially meet with a similar fate as tech-nical Buddhist texts did over the past few decades? While translating Tibetan Buddhist texts into English, translators employed “an almost artificial use of the English language and newly-created English terminology” (Gaffney 2000: 12). Despite creating good literal translations, the reader has to basically first learn the English Buddhist terminol-ogy to understand the often odd-looking texts. This method, while literally accurate, clearly excludes non-specialist readers. Here, the translators have opted to keep the common reader in mind while at the same time aiming at a correct translation of the meaning—admittedly often at the expense of literal accuracy. This makes this text more readable than what it would be with complete philological and grammatical exactness.

Negotiating the differences between accuracy and readability is not an easy task. The translators working on this project have contributed the best of their abilities. I visited the team at the Translation Department at the Men-Tsee-Khang in Dharamsala several times while they were working on this project. Sometimes, their collective translation erupted into heated debates and discussions over a single word or phrase; whether to keep the Tibetan term as it is or to translate it into English, or even find a biomedical equivalent for it; whether to opt for a literal translation of the term or rather of its medical meaning. It made me aware of the difficulties involved in translation and the necessity of doing this as a team. The result can never be perfect, for it is negotiable; a compromise. Likewise, the rendering of the text into German was not simply an act of translating it from the English, but also required going back to the Tibetan ‘root text’ and comparing and re-translating it with great care, keeping the readers in mind, who

Introduction by Dr. Barbara Gerke (Englisch)

Page 7: Challenges of Translating Tibetan Medical Texts and Medical Histories

23

will largely be from outside the Tibetan cultural area. A translation of the Four Tantras for such a readership is therefore also a translation of medical meanings across different medical epistemologies, different chronological time, and cultures.

In the past, Tibetans have opted for several methods to bridge these epistemological gaps. One recent method has been to find, or even create, biomedical equivalents for Tibetan medical terms. This has been done at times in an effort to show that Tibetan medicine is ‘scientific’ (Adams 2007; Prost 2006). Another move has been to keep Tibetan medical terms in the Tibetan language and even to render English biomedical terms phonetically, transcribing them into the Tibetan script using Sanskritic letters (Men-Tsee-Khang 1998).10 These efforts and debates are different in Tibetan areas in China and in exile, which I describe in another article (Gerke 2011), where I discuss how translations of Tibetan medical texts are not only a matter of vagueness versus accuracy but are also embedded in larger political and economic structures. The issues at stake raise questions of conformity as well as self-confidence: should Tibetan doctors in their translations conform to the requirements of standard biomedical terminology used in clinical trials or should they retain Tibetan terms and express confidence in their own medical system? (Gerke 2011; Prost 2006)

The current translation of the Four Tantras show that there is no single answer when it comes to Tibetan medical translation methodology, and that translation methods fluctuate and are negotiable, even within one translation project. While translating challenging texts, such as the Four Tantras, into modern languages for a Western audi-ence, we might like to consider recent insights from Translation Studies. For example, the term ‘translation’ can also be defined as “a dynamic term of cultural encounter, as a negotiation of differences as well as a difficult process of transformation” (Bachmann-Medick 2006: 33). Perhaps at the cost of some philological accuracy, such negotiations of differences are at the core of this work in an attempt to bring its medical wealth and meaning to a wider audience. It is up to the reader to decide whether this has been a risk worth taking.

The preface to the first English edition, translated here into German, offers a sum-mary of key Tibetan medical historical narratives from the perspective of a Tibetan medical historian (Tsomdrig Yuyon Lhankhang 1990). Along with quotations from other sources (for example, Sangye Gyatso 1994), Lhankhang’s text was translated and summarised by the translation department team at the Men-Tsee-Khang in Dharamsla (MTK 2008). This preface is an example of cultural encounters in translation. Academic scholarship of Tibetan medical history continues to develop from its relatively recent beginnings and is not yet at a stage to verify the historic accuracy of most of what Ti-betans accept as their authentic medical history, described in the preface of this book. The sources used in writing the Four Tantras and its commentaries are just beginning

10 I describe this in detail in another paper using the example of diabetes, transcribed as D’a ya sbe T’is, which is linked to the Tibetan term gcin snyi’i nad (lit. “the disease of urinating profusely”), and cancer, transcribed as kan sar, which is related to the Tibetan term ’bras nad (Gerke 2011: 137).

Introduction by Dr. Barbara Gerke (Englisch)

Page 8: Challenges of Translating Tibetan Medical Texts and Medical Histories

24

to be critically analysed (Czaja 2007; Emmerick 1977; Gyatso 2004; Karmay 1989; Yang Ga 2010, forthcoming). We know little about the importance held by the Four Tantras throughout Tibetan history in its various regions of practice.

Contrary to the common assumption that the Four Tantras have been the most repre-sentative key medical compendium since the twelfth century, we know, for example, that the eleventh century Tibetan translation of the Aṣṭāṅgahṛidayasaṃhitā was the most influential medical text until the Four Tantras took prominence during the course of the thirteenth century (Martin 2007: 312). The Tibetan physician and scholar Yan Ga, in fact, convincingly argues that the Four Tantras were written only after the Aṣṭāṅgahṛidayasaṃhitā was translated into Tibetan in the eleventh century, but that approximately only fifteen percent of the Explanatory Tantra, seven percent of the Oral Instruction Tantra, and three percent of the Subsequent Tantra are based on this āyurvedic compendium (Yang Ga, forthcoming). Western scholars in the past have assumed that this āyurvedic work had a much greater influence on the compilation of the Four Tantras (Emmerick 1977).

There is little doubt that the Four Tantras have remained the most influential medi-cal text among contemporary Tibetans to date, but there are regional variations. For example, Garrett’s study (forthcoming) of the Situ Panchen (1700–1774) tradition of medicine in eastern Tibet in the eighteenth century questions the dominant role of the Four Tantras. Garrett emphasises “the need to understand Tibetan medical knowledge and practice as being as widely diverse as we know religious traditions in Tibet to be” (Garrett, forthcoming), which points to the heterogeneous nature of Tibetan medicine. This heterogeneity of Tibetan medical histories and practices is only slowly emerging (see also Gerke 2012: 89 and Hofer 2012).

To contextualise existing Tibetan medical histories written in Tibetan and/or by Tibe-tans, it is important to understand the background from which many Tibetans write and understand history.11 Apart from conveying specialised knowledge, Tibetan histories often acquire additional meanings involving ideas of authority, which influence their contemporary use and interpretations. Writing Tibetan histories involves certain ideas of authority and texts, often linked to Buddhism. Large compendia, such as the Four Tantras, were compiled in an attempt to structure, codify, and standardise medical knowledge of that time. The result is often a unified and authoritative system, which is anchored so deeply in tradition that it becomes difficult to introduce innovations. In Tibet, historical questioning has often been met with resentment, since “innovation if not actual deviation from the authoritative was always a risky business in Tibetan literary culture” (Gyatso 2004: 86). The way innovations were introduced into existing texts was often by simply copying and inserting entire sections from older texts.

11 One of these medical histories has recently been translated into English and provides accessible mate-rial for further analysis (Kilty 2009). See Czaja 2005/2006 for an analysis of a Tibetan perspective on medical history.

Introduction by Dr. Barbara Gerke (Englisch)

Page 9: Challenges of Translating Tibetan Medical Texts and Medical Histories

25

Both in Āyurvedic and Tibetan medical texts we find quotations or passages from older works, often without any source mentioned. This was done quite often “to introduce innovations not as something new but as part of the already existing” (Das 1993: 67). Quite contrary to contemporary understanding, Tibetan authors had no intention to take the work of others without sufficient acknowledgment, an act which currently is called plagiarism, but were only “passing on existing knowledge” following Tibetan “traditional literary norms” (Mayer 2010).

It does not come as a surprise then that we find two ways of writing history, especially in the context of Tibetan Buddhist literature:

[…] the ‘objective’ histories of the archaeologist and secular historian on one hand; and the interpretative histories of Buddhist self-representation on the other. Generally, these two are seen as at odds, with the former acting to progressively deconstruct and disprove the pious and post hoc reconstructions of the latter, unearthing the ‘true’ history of Buddhism to its (presumably conservative and indignant, but ultimately ‘enlightened’) proponents (Mills 2003: 7).

These two approaches to history are also found in Tibetan medical contexts. We should keep in mind here that medicine is not free from religious interpretation. Since from its beginning literacy in Tibet was associated with ideas of spiritual enlightenment, these notions pervaded other areas of textual scholarship, including medicine (Schaef-fer 2003). Several Tibetan medical histories are found to “display an explicit concern to show medicine to be part of Buddhist history” (Garrett 2006: 204; see also Czaja 2005/2006).

Rather than outright condemning ‘interpretive’ histories of Tibetan medicine, we might like to look at medical histories oscillating between ‘secular’ and ‘interpretive’ ap-proaches as examples of varied cultural translation processes—as acts of “negotiating differences.” We could learn to appreciate the ‘interpretive’ histories for what they are: conscious attempts to set a medical tradition within specific political and religious contexts of their time, communicating how medical historians viewed Tibetan medical identities in relation to their imperial past and fragmented present. The often-occurring lists of physicians in Tibetan medical histories, the narratives of their greatness in terms of Buddhist and medical ethics and achievements, the importance of a continuing line-age, can all be seen—and here I agree with Garrett—as attempts by Tibetan medical historians to portray a certain image of Tibetan medicine that they considered authori-tative and representative (Garrett 2007).

In this historical portrait sketched by Garrett, the emphasis on international exchange that influenced the development of Tibetan medicine stands out. Garrett argues that “the possession of medical knowledge from surrounding regions during the imperial period became an important aspect of the identity of Tibetan medicine” (Garrett 2007:

Introduction by Dr. Barbara Gerke (Englisch)

Page 10: Challenges of Translating Tibetan Medical Texts and Medical Histories

26

382). Today, contemporary Tibetan physicians often point out this early ‘imperial inter-nationalism’ when introducing Tibetan medicine to a global audience at international conferences. The often-claimed isolation of Tibet on the ‘Roof of the World’ has defini-tely not been characteristic of the development and spread of Tibetan medicine, which benefitted from international relations and exchange since the early Tibetan empire. It is the growing popularity of Tibetan medicine that has sparked this current translation process in the twenty-first century, this time not to bring medical knowledge to Tibet, but to make existing Tibetan medical knowledge available to the wider world.

Dr. Barbara GerkeHumboldt University of Berlin Department of Asian and African StudiesCentral Asian Seminar Unter den Linden 6 10099 Berlin

References

Adams V. 2007. Integrating abstraction: modernising medicine at Lhasa’s Mentsikhang. In Soundings in Tibetan Medicine. Anthropological and Historical Perspectives. Proceedings of the 10th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies (IATS) Oxford 2003, ed. M Schrempf, pp. 29–43. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers.

Aschoff JC. 1996. Annotated Bibliography of Tibetan Medicine (1789–1995) – Kommentierte Bibliographie zur Tibetischen Medizin (1789–1995). Ulm, Dietikon: Fabri-Verlag, Garuda Verlag.

Bachmann-Medick D. 2006. Meanings of translation in cultural anthropology. In Translating Others (Vol. 1), ed. T Hermans, pp. 33–42. Manchester, UK & Kinderhook, USA: St. Jermome Publishing.

Badaraev BD, Bazaron EG, Dashiev MD, Aseeva TA, Batorova SM. 1981. Glang thabs (Acute diseases of the organs of the abdominal cavity) and their correction in Tibetan medicine: Translation into Russian from the third section of the Rgyud bzhi and the Vaidurya sngon po, translated from the Russian by Dr. Stanley Frye. Tibetan Medicine 4: 5–116.

Badmayev PA. 1903. Glavnoe rukovodstvo po vrachebnoy nauke Tibeta Zhud-shi v novom perevode P.A. Badmayeva s ego vvedeniem, raz’yasnyajuscim osnovy tibetskoy vracebnoy nauki [Das Lehrbuch für die ärztliche Wissenschaft Tibets, rGyud-bzhi, in neuer Übersetzung von P. A. Badmayev, mit seiner Einfüh-rung, die Grundlagen der tibetischen ärztlichen Wissenschaft erläuternd]. St. Petersburg: Tip [Printing House]. A. S. Suvorina.

Bates D. 1995. Knowledge and the Scholarly Medical Traditions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Beckwith CI. 1979. The introduction of Greek medicine into Tibet in the seventh and eighth centuries. Jour-

nal of the American Oriental Society 99: 297–313.Csoma de Körös A. January 1835. Analysis of a Tibetan medical work. Journal of the Asiatic Society 37:

1–20.Clark B. 1995. The Quintessence Tantras of Tibetan Medicine. Ithaca, N.Y., USA: Snow Lion Publications.Clifford T. 1984. Tibetan Buddhist Medicine and Psychiatry: The Diamond Healing. Wellingborough:

Aquarian.Czaja O. Winter 2005 & Spring 2006. Zurkharwa Lodro Gyalpo (1509–1579) on the Controversy of the

Indian Origin of the rGyud bzhi. The Tibet Journal Vol. XXX, No. 4 & Vol. XXXI, No. 1: 131–52. – 2007. The Making of the Blue Beryl – Some Remarks on the Textual Sources of the Famous Commentary

Introduction by Dr. Barbara Gerke (Englisch)

Page 11: Challenges of Translating Tibetan Medical Texts and Medical Histories

27

of Sangye Gyatsho. In Soundings in Tibetan Medicine. Anthropological and Historical Perspectives. Pro-ceedings of the 10th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies (IATS) Oxford 2003, ed. M Schrempf, pp. 345-71. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers.

– 2011. The Four Tantras and the global market: changing epistemologies of drä (’bras) versus cancer. In Medicine Between Science and Religion: Explorations on Tibetan Grounds, ed. V Adams, M Schrempf, S Craig, pp. 265–95. London: Berghahn.

Das RP. 1993. On the nature and development of ‘Traditional Indian Medicine.’ Journal of the European Ayurvedic Society 3: 56–71.

Dash VB, transl. and ed. 1994–2001. Encyclopaedia of Tibetan Medicine: being the Tibetan Text of Rgyud Bzhi and Sanskrit Restoration of Amṛta Hṛdaya Aṣṭāṅga Guhyopadeśa Tantra and Expository Translati-on in English, Vol 1–7. Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications.

Donden Y. 1977. The Ambrosia Heart Tantra – The Secret Oral Teaching on the Eight Branches of the Science of Healing. Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives.

Donden Y, Hopkins J. 1986. Health Through Balance: An Introduction to Tibetan Medicine. Ithaca, N.Y., USA: Snow Lion Publications.

Dorjee P, Richards E. 1981. Cures and concepts of Tibetan medicine. Tibetan Medicine 2: 1–83.Emmerick RE. 1975. A Chapter from the rGyud-bzhi. Asia Major, Third Series XIX(2): 141–62.– 1977. Sources of the rGyud-bzhi. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft sup 1.III, 2:

1135–42.– 1990. rGas-pa gso-ba. Buddhica Britannica Series Continua II – Indo-Tibetan Studies: 89–99.Gaffney S. 2000. Do the Tibetan translations of Indian Buddhist texts provide guidelines for contemporary

translators? SOAS Literary Review 2 (July): 1–15.Garrett F. 2006. Buddhism and the historicizing of medicine in thirteenth century Tibet. Asian Medicine:

Tradition and Modernity 2: 204–24.– 2007. Critical methods in the Tibetan medical histories. Journal of Asian Studies 66: 363–87.– forthcoming. Mercury, mad dogs and smallpox: Medicine in the Si tu paN chen tradition.Gerke B. 2011. Correlating biomedical and Tibetan medical terms in amchi medical practice. In Medicine

Between Science and Religion: Explorations on Tibetan Grounds, ed. V Adams, M Schrempf, S Craig, pp. 127–52. Oxford, New York: Berghahn Books.

– 2012. Long Lives and Untimely Deaths: Life-span Concepts and Longevity Practices among Tibetans in the Darjeeling Hills, India. Leiden, Boston: Brill.

– in press. What is subtle about the medical body in Tibet? In Between Mind and Body: Subtle Body Prac-tices in Asia and the West, ed. G Samuel, J Johnston. London and New York: Routledge.

Goldstein MC. 1984. English-Tibetan Dictionary of Modern Tibetan. Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives.

Gyatso J. 2004. The authority of empiricism and the empiricism of authority: Medicine and Buddhism in Tibet on the eve of modernity. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 24: 83–96.

Hofer T. 2012. The Inheritance of Change: The Transmission and Practice of Tibetan Medicine in Ngam-ring. Vienna: Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde.

Hsu E. 2000. The spiritual (shen), styles of knowing, and authority in contemporary Chinese medicine. Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry 24: 197–229.

Jäger K. 1999. “Nektar der Unsterblichkeit” Zwei Kapitel aus der Tibetischen Kinderheilkunde: Überset-zung aus dem tibetischen Originalwerk und Kommentar. Engelsbach/ Frankfurt a.M./München/New York.: Hänsel-Hohenhausen.

Karmay S. 1989. Vairocana and the rGyud-bzhi. Tibetan Medicine 12: 19–31.Kelsang J. 1977. The Ambrosia Heart Tantra: The Secret Oral Teaching on the Eight Branches of the Sci-

ence of Healing. Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives.Kilty G. (transl.), Sangye Gyatso D. 2009. A Mirror of Beryl: Historical Introduction to Tibetan Medicine.

Boston MA: Wisdom Publications.Li Yongnian 李永年 et al. (transl.) 1983. Yutuo Yuandan gongbu 宇妥.元丹贡布 (G.yu thog Yon tan mgon

po). Sibu yidian 四部医典 (Rgyud bzhi). Beijing: Renmin weisheng chubanshe.Martin D. 2007. An early Tibetan history of Indian medicine. In Soundings in Tibetan Medicine. Anthro-

Introduction by Dr. Barbara Gerke (Englisch)

Page 12: Challenges of Translating Tibetan Medical Texts and Medical Histories

28

pological and Historical Perspectives. Proceedings of the 10th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies (IATS) Oxford 2003, ed. M Schrempf, pp. 307–25. Leiden, Boston: Brill Academic Publishers.

Mayer R. 2010. “Authors, plagiarists, or tradents?” Blog posted on October 9, 2010 by Robert Mayer at Kili kilaya: Discoveries and research hypotheses in Tibetan Buddhism from the Oriental Institute, Oxford University http://blogs.orient.ox.ac.uk/kila/2010/10/09/authors-plagiarists-or-tradents/. Last accessed on January 9, 2012.

Men-Tsee-Khang (eds.). 1998. Conference Proceedings on Clinical Research in Tibetan Medicine. Panel Discussions, Lectures, Papers. Dharamsala: Men-Tsee-Khang.

– (transl.). 2008. The Basic Tantra and The Explanatory Tantra from the Secret Quintessential Instruc-tions on the Eight Branches of the Ambrosia Essence Tantra. Dharamsala: Men-Tsee-Khang.

– (transl.). 2011. The Subsequent Tantra from the Four Tantras of Tibetan Medicine. Dharamsala: Men-Tsee-Khang.

Meyer F. 1990. Théorie et pratique de l’examen des pouls dans un chapitre du rGyud-bzhi. In Indo-Tibetan Studies: Papers in Honour and Appreciation of Professor David L. Snellgrove’s Contribution to Indo-Tibetan Studies, ed. T Skorupski, pp. 209–56. Tring: The Institute of Buddhist Studies.

Millard C. 2002. Learning Processes in a Tibetan Medical School. PhD thesis. University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh.

Mills MA. 2003. Identity, Ritual and State in Tibetan Buddhism: The Foundations of Authority in Gelukpa Monasticism. London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon.

Prost AG. 2006. Gained in translation: Tibetan science between Dharamsala and Lhasa. In Translating Others: Translations and Translation Theories East and West, ed. T Hermans, pp. 132–44. Manchester: St. Jerome Press.

Sangye Gyatso, D. 1994. Gso rig sman gyi khog ’bugs. Dharamsala: Bod gzhung sman rtsis khang.Schaeffer KR. 2003. Textual scholarship, medical tradition, and Mahayana Buddhist ideals in Tibet. Journal

of Indian Philosophy 31: 621–41.– .2009. The Culture of the Book in Tibet. New York: Columbia University Press.Seitelberger S. 2010. Therapie in der Tibetischen Medizin. Eine medizingeschichtliche und sozialanthropo-

logische Studie anhand ausgewählter Kapitel des tibetisch-medizinischen Basiswerkes rGyud bzhi. Mag.phil. (Diplomarbeit). University of Vienna, Vienna.

Taube M. 1980. Tibetischen Autoren zur Geschichte der rGyud bzi. Acta Orientalia Hungaricae 34: 297–304.

– 1981. Beiträge zur Geschichte der medizinischen Literatur Tibets. Sankt Augustin: VGH Wissenschafts-verlag.

Tsomdrig Yuyon Lhankhang (rtsom sgrig yu yon lhan khang). 1990. Krung go’i gso rig kun ’dus las bod kyi gso ba rig pa. Lhasa: Bod ljong mi dmangs dpe skrun khang.

Wangdu (dbang ’dus). 1982. Gso ba rig pa’i tshig mdzod g.yu thog dgongs rgyan. Lhasa: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang.

Yan Z. 2007. rTsa in the Tibetan manuscripts from Dunhuang. Asian Medicine 3: 296–307(12). Yang Ga. 2010. The Sources for the Writing of the Rgyud bzhi, Tibetan Medical Classic. PhD. thesis. Har-

vard University, Cambridge MA.– forthcoming. The Sources for the Writing of the Four Tantras and the Life of Yuthog Yontan Gonpo. In

The Art of Tibetan Medicine, ed. T Hofer. New York: Rubin Foundation.Yoeli-Tlalim R. 2010. On urine analysis and Tibetan medicine’s connections with the West. In Studies of

Medical Pluralism in Tibetan History and Society. PIATS 2006: Proceedings of the 11th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Königswinter 2006, ed. M Schrempf, S Craig, F Garrett, M Cuomo, pp. 195–211. Andiast, Switzerland: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH.

– forthcoming. Medical Mélange: Ancient Tibetan Medicine from Dunhuang.

Yoeli-Tlalim R, Akasoy A, Burnett C. (eds.) 2011. Islam and Tibet: Interactions along the Musk Routes. Farnham: Ashgate.

Introduction by Dr. Barbara Gerke (Englisch)

Page 13: Challenges of Translating Tibetan Medical Texts and Medical Histories

Table 1: The six organisational frameworks of the Four Tantras

The lists should be read vertically along the separate columns. Note that the ‘8 Branches’ (see second column) are explained further in the 92 chapters

of the Oral Instruction Tantra (see fourth column).

The 4 Tantras(rgyud bzhi)

The 8 Branches(yan lag brgyad)

Discussed mainly in the Oral Instruction

Tantra

The 11 Sections(gnas bcu gcig)

discussed in 31 chapters of the Explanatory Tantra

The 15 Categories(skabs bco lnga)

discussed in 92 chapters of the

Oral Instruction Tantra

The 4 Compendia(mdo bzhi)discussed in

25 chapters1 of theSubsequent Tantra

The 156 Chapters(le’u ༡༥༦)

6 chaptersRoot Tantra

70 chaptersDiseases of the Body

1 chapter (1)Basic Summary

1 chapter (1)Requesting the

Teachings

2 chapters (1–2)Examination of Pulse

and Urine

6 chapters Covering the Principles

of the Root Tantra

31 chaptersExplanatory Tantra

3 chaptersChildren’s Diseases

6 chapters (2–7)Formation of the Body

4 chapters (2–5)Healing the Three

nyes pa

10 chapters (3–12)Pacifying Medications

31 chaptersCovering the‘11 Sections’

92 chaptersOral Instruction Tantra

3 chaptersWomen’s Diseases

5 chapters (8–12)Diseases

6 chapters (6–11)Healing Internal

Disorders

7 chapters (13–19)Evacuative Therapy

92 chaptersCovering the

‘15 Categories’

25 + 2 chaptersSubsequent Tantra

5 chaptersSpirit Diseases

3 chapters (13–15)Behavioral Regimens

16 chapters (12–27) Healing Hot Disorders

6 chapters (20–25)External Therapies

25+2 chapters Covering the

‘4 Compendia’

5 chaptersInjuries Caused by

Weapons

3 chapters (16–18)Diet

6 chapters (28–33)Healing Diseases of the Upper Part of the Body

1 chapter (26)Concluding Chapter

3 chaptersDisorders Caused by

Toxic Substances

3 chapters (19–21)Pharmacology

8 chapters (34–41)Healing Diseases in Vital

and Vessel Organs

1 chapter (27)Chapter on the Student to whom Teachings may

be Entrusted

1 chapterHealing the Aged with

Elixirs and Rejuvenation

1 chapter (22) Surgical Instruments

2 chapters (42–43)Healing Disorders of the

Genitals

2 chaptersRestoring Virility and

Healing Infertility

1 chapter (23)Maintenance of Health

19 chapters (44–62)Healing Miscellaneous

Disorders

3 chapters (24–26)Diagnostic Approaches

8 chapters (63–70)Healing Simultaneously

Arising Wounds

4 chapters (27–30)Methods of Healing

3 chapters (71–73)Healing Children’s

Diseases

1 chapter (31)Qualities of the

Physician

3 chapters (74–76)Healing Women’s

Diseases

5 chapters (77–81)Healing Spirit Diseases

5 chapters (82–86)Healing Injuries Caused

by Weapons

3 chapters (87–89)Healing Disorders Caused by Toxic

Substances

1 chapter (90)Healing the Aged with

Elixirs and Rejuvenation

2 chapters (91–92)Restoring Virility and

Healing Infertility

1 Note that the Subsequent Tantra has an additional two chapters (26–27) that are not covered by the ‘4 Compendia’ but are included in the ‘156 Chapters.’