Classifying Literature or Organizing Knowledge?

Tibetan Literary Genres,
Texts, and Text Types

From Genre Classification to Transformation
Edited by
Jim Rheingans
LEIDEN | BOSTON
For use by the Author only | 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV
Contents
Prefaceix
List of Contributorsx
Introduction. Typologies in Tibetan Literature: Genre or Text Type?
Reflections on Previous Approaches and Future Perspectives1
Jim Rheingans
PART 1
Classifying Tibetan Texts and Topoi
1 Classifying Literature or Organizing Knowledge? Some Considerations
on Genre Classifications in Tibetan Literature31
Ulrike Roesler
2 Classifications of the Fields of Knowledge According to One of Klong
rdol bla mas Enumerations of Terms54
Ekaterina Sobkovyak
3 The Long Voyage of a Trickster Story from Ancient Greece to Tibet73
Giacomella Orofino
PART 2
Fluid Genres and Their Reception
4 Borrowed Texts, Fluid Genres, and Performative Licence: Reflections on
a dGe lugs pa Offfering Ritual89
Roger R. Jackson
5 Cosmic Onomatopoeia or the Source of The Waterfall of Youth:
Chgyam Trungpa and Dndrup Gyals Parallel Histories of
Tibetan mGur110
Ruth Gamble
viii
contents
PART 3
Studies of Specific Texts and Genres
6
An Ocean of Marvelous Perfections: A 17th-Century Padma bkai

thang yig from the Sa skya pa School139
Franz-Karl Ehrhard
Tools of the Trade of the Tibetan Translators182

Peter Verhagen
Nyams mgur of Pha bong kha pa bDe chen snying po (18781941): An

Analysis of His Poetic Techniques197
Victoria Sujata
PART 4
Tradition and Modernity: Tibetan Genres in Transition
9
Tibets Critical Tradition and Modern Tibetan Literature231

Lama Jabb
10
From Hagiography to Modern Short Story: How to Get Rid of Old

Social Ideals and Literary Stereotypes270
Peter Schwieger
Index279
CHAPTER 1
Classifying Literature or Organizing Knowledge?

Some Considerations on Genre Classifications in
Tibetan Literature
Ulrike Roesler
Introduction
Literary genre is an awkwardly vague and evasive category, and even within the
limited context of European literature scholars do not agree on the use and the
usefulness of this category. Moreover, even if there were a consensus on how to
define literary genres, European literary criticism and genre designations have
evolved in a European discourse on literature that is obviously diffferent from
discourses in other language communities and cultures. It may therefore seem
fundamentally inappropriate to apply genre categories that originally developed in a European context to literary works from other parts of the world.1
Nevertheless, I believe that there are both pragmatic and theoretical reasons
for investigating the category of genre in Tibetan literature. Pragmatically, we
use classifications of Tibetan literature in various contexts, for instance when
we have to organize a library, or when we want to create a database of Tibetan
language manuscripts and blockprints. On a theoretical level too, we need
to find appropriate ways of looking at Tibetan works as literature, not just as
sources that provide convenient information on other topics such as Tibetan
history, politics, religions, customs, and so forth. Ideally, appropriate genre designations can be a heuristic tool in gaining a more comprehensive picture of
Tibets literary heritage as a whole and a deeper understanding and appreciation of Tibetan literature as a form of art.
Within the Tibetan speaking communities literary theory is a fairly recent
development; however, Tibetan language publications in this field have
increased considerably during the last two decades. Among Western language
1 Cabezn and Jackson in their Editors Introduction to the volume Tibetan Literature:
Studies in Genre have voiced strong reservations about applying such trinitarian, culturally
bound categories as (classically) lyric, epic and drama, or (more recently) poetry, fiction and
dramacategories whose limits have come to be recognised even in the West (Cabezn and
Jackson 1996: 19).
koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2015|doi 10.1163/9789004301153_003
32
roesler
publications, there are some excellent studies of certain segments and aspects
of Tibetan literature, but there have only been very few attempts to describe
Tibetan literature as a whole, or to look at it in terms of literary theory. The only
book in a Western language that directly addresses the topic of Tibetan literary
genres is the volume Tibetan Literature: Studies in Genre, and after its publication in 1996 no large-scale attempts of this sort have followed. Therefore we
must say that in spite of the growing number of Tibetan language books on
literature, Tibetan literary studies are still in their infancy and a general discussion of the genres of Tibetan literature may therefore be useful. The aim of this
article is to give a general survey of some traditional as well as contemporary
typologies, hoping that the material presented here may be useful for future
studies in this field.
In the European context we use the French word genre when referring to
diffferent types of literary works. The notion of genre itself is somewhat evasive,
since it combines diffferent aspects such as (a) the subject-matter of a work,
(b) the style (e.g., prose or verse), (c) length (e.g., novel as opposed to short
story), and (d) pragmatic aspects like performance (drama) and function
(letter, political pamphlet). Literary forms and genres have changed over the
centuries and cannot be defined irrespective of time and context.2 Moreover,
genre classifications themselves have their own history. From ancient Greece
and Rome to 18th century Europe, literary criticism was mainly normative. In
the 19th century, this normative approach was criticised for its lack of acknowledgement of the individual authors autonomy (or genius) and was given up
in favour of a more descriptive approach: literary criticism was replaced by the
history of literature. Since the early 20th century, genre classifications themselves came to be rejected by certain schools of thought, and for various reasons.
Already in the 1920s, Benedetto Croce (18661952) criticised the arbitrariness
of genre definitions and recommended discarding this category altogether as
it seemed inappropriate to capture the true aesthetic value of a literary work.3
During the last few decades, post-modern thinkers have criticised genre categories for their restrictive character.4 Thus the question of literary genre is
2 A good example is the use of the genre designation romance which has shifted from the
medieval notion of a prose narrative of heroic or adventurous deeds to the more recent
notion of a romantic love story. German has undergone a similar, though not identical, shift
from the medieval heroic Roman to the modern Roman in the sense of novel, while a
romantic love story would be called Romanze in German.
3 Croce published his aesthetic theory and literary criticism in various essays from 1910 on and
presented his fully developed theory of literature in La Poesia, published in 1936.
4 Among them Jacques Derrida, see in particular Derrida 1980.
classifying literature or organizing knowledge ?
33
still an open one within the European and American context. In spite of the
ongoing debates, however, the category has never been discarded entirely, and
in a pragmatic way we would not hesitate to use genre designations according
to our intuitive understanding to distinguish, for instance, ballad from ode,
thriller from science fiction, or novel from short story.
Instead of dwelling on these debates further, I shall address some aspects
of the inner-Tibetan discourse on literature, beginning with traditional Indian
and Tibetan scholarship and ending with some recent publications. The material in this article is in part well-known, but the diffferent strands presented
here deserve to be investigated side by side, compared and evaluated regarding
their usefulness in describing Tibetan literature.
Indo-Buddhist Classifications and their Reception in Tibet
First of all it must be kept in mind that a large part of the inner-Tibetan discourse is not purely Tibetan: it is based on Indian typologies that were developed in the context of the Buddhist doctrine and later adopted and modified
in Tibet. The most important ones are, in chronological order, (1) the so-called
limbs or parts of the word of the Buddha, (2) the subdivision of the canonical scriptures into baskets, and (3) the so-called fields of knowledge, including Indian literary arts.
2.1
The Classification of the Buddhist Scriptures into Limbs

(Sanskrit/Pli aga)
As Oskar von Hinber5 has shown, early Buddhism used a subdivision into
limbs or parts even before the word of the Buddha was arranged in the
form of the three baskets (Stra, Vinaya, and finally Abhidharma). The earliest classification consisted of only four or even three limbs or parts, which
are (in Pli):
1.
2.
3.
4.
sutta, in this context referring to the Ptimokkhasutta, i.e., the Vinaya

rules
geyya verses
veyykaraa suttanta or discourses of the Buddha, corresponding to
Sanskrit Stra
abbhutadhamma wonderful events [in the life of the Buddha]
5 Von Hinber 1994.
34
roesler
Soon, individual names of texts were added and the list of limbs started to
grow until it comprised nine or even twelve types.6 This extended list has been
adopted by the Tibetans. It is found in the Mahvyutpatti, and the sGra sbyor
bam po gnyis pa explains how the individual limbs can be defined.7 Bu ston
quotes these explanations in his chos byung.8 The Tibetan terms used there are
yan lag limb and sde group. The names and definitions given are (in Sanskrit
and Tibetan):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
stra (mdo): subject-matter presented concisely

geya (dbyangs) song: stanzas within or at the end of a Stra that render
the contents
vykaraa (lung ston pa) prophesy: prophesies about the death and
birth of persons
gth (tshigs su bcad pa) verses: sayings in verse
udna (ched du brjod pa) solemn utterance: utterances of joy or praise,
spoken in the interest of maintaining the doctrine
nidna (gleng gzhi) origin, causes (Tib. literally: basis / foundation of
what is said): spoken for the sake of specific individuals; explanation of
religious discipline, connected with a tale
avadna (rtogs pa brjod pa) parables that elucidate the meaning of the
Stras
itivttaka (de lta bu byung pa) reports, legends about former events
jtaka (skyes rabs) birth stories
vaipulya (shin tu rgyas pa) long scriptures, referring to Mahynastras
adbhtadharma (rmad du byung ba) wonderful events, referring to
miraculous deeds of the Buddha, Bodhisattvas, or disciples of the Buddha
upadea (gtan la phab pa) instruction, i.e., an explication of the phenomenal world, the essence of the Stras
6 Seyfort Ruegg (1999: 200206) discusses how these literary forms are defined.
7 See Mahvyutpatti, crit. ed. 1989, nos 127283 under the heading dam pai chos kyi rnam
grangs kyi ming la. The twelve limbs open a longer list of designations for the Buddhist
doctrine. sGra sbyor bam po gnyis pa ed. Ishikawa 1990, no. 13 (pp. 52fff.).
8 Bu ston explains the limbs in his long exposition of the word of the Buddha. He quotes the
list of limbs from Ratnkarantis commentary on the Aashasrikprajpramit, the
Sarottam and then proceeds with a definition of the individual limbs, see rDo rje rgyal po
1988: 17f. and Obermiller [1931] 1987: 3133.
35
The definitions given here refer to (a) the subject-matter (for instance no. 9,
birth stories), (b) the form (for instance no. 2, song), (c) the extent (for instance
nos 1 and 10, stra and vaipulya) and (d) the purpose (for instance nos 5 and 6,
utterance for the sake of the doctrine or for the sake of an individual person).
This multi-dimensional classification comes very close to what we call genres.
We could therefore regard this list as a kind of Buddhist counterpart to our
notion of literary genre.
In Tibet, this list has never been applied to new compositions and in that
sense has not been productive. It is solely applied to the word of the Buddha,
and Bu ston presents it in the context of his long explication of what the doctrine of the Buddha is. Contrary to the Jains, who used the same word limb
aga for the sections of their canonical scriptures, the Buddhists have not even
applied the concept of agas to create subdivisions of the word of the Buddha
within the canon. We can therefore regard this classification as a closed typology of genres, applicable only to the utterances of the Buddha, and not used
actively for organizing the corpus of Buddhist literature.
2.2
The Classification of the Buddhist Scriptures into Baskets

(Sanskrit Tripiaka)
Another South Asian classification system is the one into three baskets of
scriptures, again referring to the word of the Buddha alone. Although there is
a Tibetan expression for the three baskets, sde snod gsum, this subdivision
has not been adopted to organize the Tibetan bKa gyur. The structure of the
Tibetan canon could perhaps be interpreted as an update of the three basket
scheme, integrating Mahynastras and Tantra.9
9 The classification of works in the mainstream editions of the Tibetan Buddhist canon has
a precursor in the early imperial Tibetan catalogues of works translated, the lDan dkar
ma and Phang thang ma, which list the titles in the following order: (1) Mahynastras,
(2) Hnaynastras, (3) Tantra, (4) eulogies and prayers, (5) Vinaya, followed by material that
does not belong to the word of the Buddha and most of which was later assembled in the
bsTan gyur: commentaries, works by Tibetan authors, unrevised translations, commentaries
and treatises that were currently being translated. The blockprint editions of the bKa gyur
have arranged these main sections in diffferent ways: While the Beijing blockprint edition of
the bKa gyur (Q, produced in 1717/20) has the order (1) Tantra, (2) various classes of Stras,
(3) Vinaya, the Derge blockprint edition (D, produced in 1733) has the sequence (1) Vinaya,
(2) various classes of Stras, (3) various classes of Tantras. However, both the Derge and the
Beijing edition of the bsTan gyur place the commentaries on Tantra before the Stra and
Vinaya sections, which may therefore be considered the more common arrangement.
36
roesler
Indian Tripiaka
Stra
Vinaya
Abhidharma
Tibetan bKa gyur

mDo (including sub-groups of Mahyna Stras)
Dul ba
rGyud
What we are dealing with here is not a classification of literary genres because
the subdivision concerns nothing but the subject-matter, while aspects such
as literary form are irrelevant. Contrary to the genre classification into limbs,
this system has remained in use in Tibet and forms the core structure not only
of the bKa gyur and bsTan gyur, but also of many collected works (gsung
bum) of individual authors. Insofar we can say that what remained in use in
Tibet is a way of organizing knowledge, with a focus on the Buddhist doctrine.
2.3
The Five or Ten Fields of Knowledge
The categories mentioned so far are related to Buddhism and were used by
Buddhist monk-scholars of India and Tibet. At the same time, an entirely different discourse on literature was led among the educated elite and at the
royal courts of ancient India: the discourse on literary criticism of Sanskrit
poetry. Part of this scholarship was adapted by Indian Mahyna Buddhists
and integrated into the set of five so-called fields of knowledge or disciplines
of scholarship, the vidysthna that a Bodhisattva should study.10 This list was
adopted early on in Tibet and was expanded to comprise five additional minor
disciplines:11
10
11
The locus classicus is Mahynastrlakra 11,60. An excellent survey of the five fields
of knowledge and the relationship between religious and secular scholarship is given in
Ruegg 1995. The traditional view is summarised, for instance, in Sangye Tender Naga 2006.
This extended list was developed by Sa skya Paita and his school and became the most
influential scheme of scholarly disciplines in Tibet.
The concept of the five fields of knowledge was prominent enough to be even
employed in the Bon tradition: The Bon sgo gsal byed integrates the rig pai gnas lnga into
its first vehicle, the phya gshen theg pa (vehicle of the gshen of prediction). It lists phyi
rig pa, nang rig pa, sgra rig pa, bzo rig pa and gso rig pa. It turns out that the definitions of
these sciences are truly Bon po since all of them mention Bon scriptures on the respective
topics, and outer science refers mainly to ritual (srid pai gto bum nag po) and astrology
(rin chen gyi rtsis bum khra bo) and the inner science refers to the Klu bum. Linguistic
science is subdivided into sgra language and tshad logic, thus re-integrating the discipline of logical reasoning that would otherwise be missing. See Mimaki and Karmay 2009:
3847.
Indian vidysthnas
adhytmavidy inner science, Buddhism

hetuvidy logic, dialectics
abdavidy science of language
cikitsvidy medicine
ilpakarmasthna handicrafts
37
Tibetan rig gnas

(a) rig gnas che ba
nang rig pa Buddhism
gtan tshigs rig pa
sgra rig pa
gso bai rig pa
bzo rig pa
Interestingly, the Tibetan minor sciences have certain parallels in the

Brahmanical tradition of India, which has a list of six ancillary Vedic sciences
(vedgas):
Indian Vedic tradition: vedgas
(b) rig gnas chung ba

snyan ngag poetry
chandas metrical composition
sdeb sbyor metrical composition
nirukta etymology, lexicography mngon brjod etymology, lexicography
zlos gar drama
jyotia astrology
skar rtsis astrology
ik phonetics
(part of sgra rig pa, see above)
vykaraa grammar
(part of sgra rig pa, see above)
kalpa ritual
The rig gnas chung ba seem to correspond to general Indian disciplines of

scholarship that were not specifically Buddhist. Again, the focus is on organizing knowledge, not on classifying literature as such. The Indian science of composing ornate poetry (kvya) is part of this general scholarship and has had
strong repercussions in scholarly circles in Tibet, although its style was alien
to indigenous Tibetan literature. The introduction of Indian poetry and poetics through Sa skya Paita and his tradition marks the introduction of both a
new form of Indian style composition and of theoretical reflections on poetry,
and this step has been so significant that it is usually regarded as a hallmark in
Tibetan literary history.12
12
A concise overview of the Tibetan exegesis of Dains Kvydara is given in van der
Kuijp 1996: 393400. The importance attributed to the introduction of Indian poetics also
becomes clear from some recent Tibetan publications. dGe dun rab gsal (2001, table of
contents) subdivides the history of Tibetan literature into (1) ancient Tibet (indigenous
compositions and translations of Buddhist works), (2) the period of fragmentation,
(3) the introduction of the ten fields of knowledge (rig gnas bcu), and (4) the spread of
poetry (snyan ngag) in Tibet. gSang bdag rdo rjes Mig yid rna bai dga ston legs bshad gter
38
roesler
2.4
The Adoption of These Categories in Tibet
In Tibet, the arrangement of the canonical scriptures together with the five
fields of knowledge became a kind of matrix of Buddhist literature as a whole.
It has been applied in various contexts and forms the underlying structure of,
for instance, the Mahvyutpatti, the canonical collections of the bKa gyur and
bsTan gyur, and a considerable number of collected writings (gsung bum)
of Tibetan Buddhist scholars.13 They present the Buddhist doctrine and its
sub-categories, followed by various disciplines of knowledge or scholarship.
However, even before the doctrine itself, there is usually an initial section that
deals with the teachers: the Buddha and/or the transmission lineage of these
doctrines. Beginning a work with the lineage of the teachers is both an auspicious opening and a way of authenticating what is to follow. Only then, these
works move on to the Buddhist doctrine with its subdivisions, which at the
same time corresponds to the first of the five major fields of knowledge, and
close with a section on sciences and knowledge of the world in general, which
corresponds more or less to the remaining fields of knowledge. The structure of
many gsung bums can be understood as a variation of these themes, adapted
to the specific interests of the individual author. This basic structure is shown
in a slightly simplified and prototypical way in the following table:
Mahvyutpatti
The teachers (Buddha and Bodhisattvas)
The Buddha and his qualities
bsTan gyur (Q)

Praise (of the Buddha and
Bodhisattvas)
The Bodhisattvas and their qualities

The rvakas and their qualities
The doctrine
and its parts
13
The doctrine
Tantra commentaries
Stra commentaries
Vinaya commentaries
gyi bum bzang, a study of ornate poetry (snyan ngag), identifies Indian style ornaments
or figures of speech even in poetry from the time of the Tibetan empire (gSang bdag rdo
rje 1994: 1319). This shows on the one hand how powerful the Indian paradigm was and
still is in the perception of Tibetan literature, and at the same time that it is not felt to be
too alien to be meaningfully applied to indigenous Tibetan poetry.
Cabezn and Jackson give an overview of the structure of selected gsung bum, see
Cabezn and Jackson 1996: 2325. This overview shows the similarities, but also the variation in the way the basic categories are employed to structure the collections of the
respective authors.
The world
sentient beings and
other elements of the world
(not arranged according
to the five fields of knowledge)
Vinaya
39
Fields of knowledge
legends, drama
logic
grammar
lexicography
poetics
medicine
alchemy
miscellaneous
I would argue that this arrangement mirrors the Tibetan Buddhist understanding of what should be known, and the topics are roughly, though not exclusively, arranged according to the importance or status that was attributed to
them (in descending order).
To sum up, the classifications introduced so far are based on Indian concepts, were not created to suit Tibetan literary forms, and certainly do not comprise the full range of Tibetan literature since they mainly concern topics of
Buddhist monastic scholarship.14 The agas can be understood as a genre classification that did not become productive in Tibet, while the Tibetan modified
versions of the baskets and the fields of knowledge were actively used to
structure Tibetan Buddhist works and anthologies. They are systems of managing knowledge, not attempts to classify literature as such.
Indigenous Categories
Given that the categories discussed so far have been introduced from India
and are mainly suited to classify Buddhist literature, one may wonder whether
there are any indigenous Tibetan classifications and whether there are typologies that comprise literature as a whole, beyond the confines of Buddhist doctrine and scholarship. An implicit understanding of literature and its types
seems to be embedded in Tibetan work titles, which often contain a generic
14
Gene Smiths introduction to Don dam smra bai seng ges bShad mdzod yid bzhin nor
bu contains an interesting discussion of compendia of knowledge (bshad mdzod) that
were not meant for a monastic readership, but are often compiled for pious laymen
(Smith 1959: 6). Interestingly, the world, geography, and royal lineages make up a large
part of Don dam smra bai seng ges work, and also religions, astrology and medicine are
dealt with in some detail. Literature, on the other hand, plays a much less prominent role:
grammar and rhetorics are discussed briefly towards the end of the work, while snyan
ngag and literary composition dont feature at all.
40
roesler
term. Moreover, lists, collections, and catalogues of literary works such as gsan
yig, gsung bum, and dkar chag seem to mirror indigenous ways of classifying
or structuring larger amounts of literature, although again the purpose here
seems rather to organize knowledge systems, not to classify literature in terms
of genre or literary qualities.
3.1
Tibetan Lists of Literary Works
Out of the three types of works mentioned above, gsan yig would demand an
extensive study in their own right, which is beyond the scope of this article.15
The structure of some gsung bum collections has been addressed elsewhere.16
Tibetan dkar chags (inventories), as is well-known, have various subject-matters: some are inventories of places and their holy objects such as statues or
mchod rten,17 and others are concerned with literary works.18 Among the latter,
the most important types are
1.
2.
3.
4.
catalogues of the Buddhist scriptures,

catalogues of collected writings (gsung bum) and anthologies,
catalogues of printing houses (par tho), and
bibliographies (dpe tho).
Such catalogues prove the enormous interest in written sources of both

Buddhist and non-Buddhist knowledge and reveal a stunningly systematic way
of keeping record, categorising literature, and applying critical methods and
historical reflection to the literary heritage of Tibet. As Kurtis Schaefffer has
shown, Tibet had a highly developed culture of the book,19 and books and
writing form an essential part of the Tibetan scholarly world (despite the reservations against the written word that was voiced in some Buddhist circles).
(1.2.) The early catalogues of the Buddhist scriptures that were translated into Tibetan during the imperial period20 bear witness to the process
of translating and classifying Buddhist literature. Their structure seems to be
an antecedent to the arrangement of the later editions of the Tibetan canon,
in the sense that they are arranged thematically and are based on a typology
15
16
17
18
19
20
A good starting point can be found in Sobisch 2002.

See Cabezn and Jackson 1996: 2325 and above in this article.
See Martin 1996.
A highly informative resource not only on dkar chags, but also on Tibetan book culture in
general, is Dung dkar Blo bzang phrin lass Bod kyi dkar chag rig pa (2004).
Schaefffer 2009.
See above note 9.
41
of the Buddhist scriptures as outlined above. Catalogues to the printed editions of the bKa gyur and bsTan gyur are usually accompanied by histories
of the Buddhist doctrine, and even of the world as a whole. Bu stons famous
chos byung, for instance, was not composed as a separate chos byung, but is
part of his dkar chag to the canon. Most catalogues are, like the canon itself,
arranged by subject matter, but some apply chronological criteria too, which
makes them resemble a history of Buddhist literature rather than a mere
table of contents. One example is the catalogue by bCom ldan rig pai ral gri.21
A similar system can already be found in the early imperial catalogues, the
lDan dkar ma and the Phang thang ma: after the thematically structured lists
of translations, they append a list of Tibetan works on Buddhism in chronological order.22 Thus we can say that in addition to giving a systematic typology,
the catalogues of the Buddhist scriptures also have a historical or chronological dimension from the very inception of the genre.
(3.) Par tho, the lists issued by printing houses, are a special case since they
serve diffferent pragmatic purposes and are structured accordingly. We may
distinguish between the following types:
(a) Lists that are structured according to subject matter, like for instance the
dkar chag of the printing house of dGa ldan phun tshogs gling,23 which
is structured according to authors and subject-matter, similar to the
systematic catalogue of a library. The order of the sections is: (1) Stra,
(2) Tantra, (3) Indian works, (4) Tibetan works, (5) miscellaneous,
(6) depictions (of deities and the like).
(b) Lists that are structured according to the place where the printing blocks
are kept. For instance, the par tho of Bras spungs24 lists the book titles
according to the room in which the printing blocks were kept; it looks like
a hand list for locating the respective blocks when a new print was made.
(c) Lists that are structured according to the format of the printing blocks.
Manfred Taube has described them as publishers catalogues that contain the details a potential customer needs to know, namely, the size and
the number of folios, which determined the price of the book.25 Such
21
22
23
24
25
See Schaefffer and van der Kuijp 2009.

On the lDan dkar ma see Lalou 1953 and Herrmann-Pfandt 2002. A detailed study of the
Phang thang ma can be found in Halkias 2005. Dotson 2007 discusses the Phan thang ma
as a source for the chronology of the royal lineage in late imperial Tibet.
See Eimer 2005.
See Eimer 199293.
See Taube 1968.
42
roesler
hand lists had to be kept up to date and were therefore valid only for a
certain period. Bethlenfalvy considers this to be the reasons why so few
of these lists have survived and found their way into Western collections
of Tibetan works.26
A study of the contents and use of these diffferent types of par tho would certainly yield important information on religious and political developments in
the diffferent regions of Tibet. For the study of literature as such, they are only
helpful insofar as they give an overview of the books that were available in
a certain place at a certain time and contain bibliographical information on
works that are otherwise unknown to us. They do not contribute much to the
topic of literary genres.
(4.) Finally, an interesting type of catalogues are the dpe tho book lists some
of which are devoted to specific topics (for instance texts concerning specific
religious practices or traditions) and give interesting insights into certain segments of Tibetan literature. The most well-known published example is probably the list of rare books by A khu rin po che Shes rab rgya mtsho (180375).
It begins with historical and biographical literature, thus showing the prominence of these genres both in importance and in number. It then moves on to
Stra and Tantra related works, comprising the inner science or Buddhism. It
continues with works on the other fields of knowledge and closes with a list
of rare gsung bums. Its structure is therefore similar to the arrangement of the
Mahvyutpatti, the bsTan gyur, and some gsung bums as outlined above and
confirms that this order of topics can be considered a standard list of things to
be known. Another well-known dpe tho is the bKa gdams pa dang dge lugs pai
bla ma rags rim gyi gsung bum mtshan tho by Klong rdol bla ma Ngag dbang
blo bzang which focuses on works from the bKa gdams and dGe lugs tradition
and thus deals with a specific segment of Buddhist literature.
All the approaches introduced so far have one serious limitation: they
record literature that was produced in Tibetan monasteries, often with special
prominence given to those works that were printed. Thus, an enormous range
of non-clerical literature is missing altogether. Some works have been transmitted locally in the form of manuscripts, but were never printed and didnt
find their way into any book list. Others types of texts are purely oral, a form of
transmission that plays an important role within the literary heritage of Tibet,
but has only poorly been documented so far. In order to avoid an overly clerical outlook on Tibetan literature, it may be useful to look at Tibetan literature
from yet another angle: the genre designations that are contained in the titles
of Tibetan works.
26
Bethlenfalvy 1972.
43
3.2
Tibetan Work Titles
Many work titles consist of at least two or three elements: a specification of
the topic or the author of a work, a genre designation (like rgyal rabs royal
genealogy, rnam thar biography, gsol debs supplication prayer, and so on),
and an ornamental title (like me tog phreng ba flower garland, rin chen spungs
pa heap of jewels and so on, which tend to become more and more elaborate over the centuries). Thus it seems possible to extract text types, or genres,
from these titles by focusing on the recurring generic elements. Through this
method we arrive at a list of text types such as chos byung, rgyal rabs, rnam
thar, zhus lan, glu, gtam rgyud, sgrung and can then try to describe the features
of the respective genres. Since this approach can be applied to the whole range
of Tibetan literatureat least to any text that has a titleit would provide a
useful addition to the typologies of Buddhist works outline above.
However, a note of caution seems to be in place. Not everything that looks
like a genre designation can be taken literally, as two simple examples from
Europe demonstrates: Dantes Divina commedia is not, as the name suggests, a
comedy, and the genre designation romance has diffferent meanings depending on the respective culture, language and period (see note 2 above). Similarly,
Tibetan work titles are not always unequivocal.
One famous example is the word rnam thar. Within the Tibetan context it
typically designates a written life-story of a Buddhist master. However, it also
designates legendary life stories that are performed on stage, something that
in a European context would be considered a diffferent literary genre. Here, the
title refers to the subject matter and does not indicate the performative aspect
of the work. The case becomes even more complex when we consider the origin of the word: rnam thar translates the Sanskrit word vimoka liberation, a
word that in the Indian context was not related to biographies at all. Peter Alan
Roberts has demonstrated that this created some confusion in the Tibetan
exegetical tradition: the expression occurs in a much-quoted stanza from the
Bodhicaryvatra that mentions a rnam thar of rsambhava. Tibetan exegesis has taken this stanza as referring to a biography. What it actually refers to,
however, is a chapter of the Gaavyhastra, where a legendary rsambhava
teaches a liberation technique, vimoka (rnam thar).27 Thus, genre designations must be viewed within their context and we cannot rely blindly on the
label alone.
As long as we bear this in mind, work titles can help to enlarge our understanding of literary categories and provide a fairly good overview of diffferent types of Tibetan literature. In fact, Tibetan sources encourage us to take
work titles seriously since they demonstrate that work titles were not chosen
27
Roberts 2010: 180f.
44
roesler
randomly, but with great care and deliberation. During the early phyi dar,
Tibetan teachers began on a large scale to compose Buddhist treatises in order
to spread the Buddhist doctrine among the growing Buddhist communities.
Thus, they had to develop new ways of writing, suited for their local audiences,
and they had to create titles for their works. I have selected two episodes that
illustrate the importance of naming literary works.
The first episode is from the rNam thar rgyas pa, a biography of Atia
Dpakararjna (9821054) that was compiled in the 12th century by the
disciples of Atias student Lag sor pa based on the account of Nag tsho lo tsa
ba Tshul khrims rgyal ba (101164).28 The rNam thar rgyas pa relates how Atia
was staying in Western Tibet and had composed his famous compendium of
Mahyna Buddhism, the Bodhipathapradpa (Byang chub lam sgron) according to the wish of his royal patron Byang chub od, but the work still needed to
be named.
When the Jo bo had composed the Byang chub lam gyi sgron ma, he
asked: What ways of naming do you Tibetans have? The Tibetan teachers said: We name (works) according to the contents, the examples, the
place, the one who asked (for the instruction) and so on. He said: Well,
in Tibet you have many stories that do not exist in India. He told them
the stories about the killing of the Yaka A sha pa and the abduction of
St, and then he said: All Buddhist teachings are named according to the
contents, and named his work.29
The second episode is from the chos byung of Yar klungs jo bo Rin chen sde
composed in 1376. It deals with the creation of the famous Mind training in
seven points, the Blo sbyong don bdun ma by the bKa gdams pa teacher Chad
kha ba (110175):
When he (Chad kha ba) was staying in Gres phu, he wondered whether
it was right to teach this doctrine in public or not, and he intended to
teach it secretly to selected persons. However, he was not sure for whom
this might be beneficial. So he said to those who were there: If you have
butter, invite the meditation masters. Let us perform a name giving ceremony for my teaching. At this time, he had subdivided his doctrine into
28
29
Eimer 1979 contains the Tibetan text and a German translation or paraphrase based on
two closely related versions of the Atia biography, the rNam thar rgyas pa and the rNam
thar yongs grags.
Eimer 1979, episode no. 267.
45
seven sections and written it down, and therefore it became known as

don bdun ma. From then on, he taught it in Gres phu to the public. From
then on it became the custom to teach it in public.30
This is an interesting account of the origin of both a written composition and
the naming of the new literary work, and the episode suggests that putting
instructions down in writing and giving them work titlesboth still relatively
new activities for Buddhist teachers of Central Tibet during that periodwent
hand in hand.31 It would certainly be naive to take such accounts as historical
facts, but they show that naming a work was perceived as an important issue
and was done with a certain degree of reflection. In this example, however,
the criteria for naming the work are the topic (in this case: blo sbyong) and the
structure (don bdun ma), not the literary genre, which shows that not all work
titles are helpful in this respect.
Some work titles contain more information than their literal meaning
betrays. For instance, they can be related to the community in which these
works were composed. The designations for short Buddhist handbooks from
the phyi dar period are a case in point. In the first half of the 12th century,
several bKa gdams pa teachers compiled short but comprehensive handbooks
of Buddhist instructions which they labelled beu bum,32 combined with a
colour designation. There is a Beu bum sngon po by Dol pa Shes rab rgya mtsho
(10591131), a Beu bum dmar po (also known as the short handbook, Beu bum
chung ngu) by Sha ra ba Yon tan grags (10701141), and a Beu bum khra bo by
Shwa bo sgang pa Padma byang chub (10671131), all related to the lam rim and
blo sbyong instructions of the bKa gdams pa and dating from the first part
of the 12th century.33 In the 13th and 14th centuries, teachers of the Sa skya
lam bras tradition also compiled handbooks of Buddhist instructions, but they
30
31
32
33
Yar lung jo boi chos byung ed. 1987: 103.

On the transition from oral instructions to written works in the early bKa gdams pa tradition see Roesler 2011: 12631. In short, I see a correlation between (a) the rapid growth of
the bKa gdams pa communities in Central Tibet, (b) the move from small remote monasteries in the mountains to bigger institutions in the valleys, (c) the transition from secret
(lkog) to public teaching (tshogs chos), and (d) the transition from oral instructions to
written works on Buddhism.
On beu bum in the sense of handbook or compendium see Cuevas 2010.
The designation by a generic term and a colour looks very similar to Mongolian habits.
While the names of later historical works (deb ther combined with a colour term) are
clearly inspired by Mongolian conventions, as the word deb ther itself shows, it is remarkable that the bKa gdams pas seem to have used this system even before the period of
Mongol influence. In this context it should also be remembered that colour terms play an
46
roesler
called them pod or pusti, a word derived from the Indian word pustaka book.
There were, for instance, a Pod ser, a Pod nag, and a Pusti dmar chung.34 The
diffference between these work titles does not seem to point to a diffference in
genre, but to the contents and the context in which these works originated: in
the first case the blo sbyong tradition of the early bKa gdams pa school, in the
second case the Sa skya lam bras tradition. It seems that during this period
these generic terms were used like a tag that identified the provenance of the
work (compendium from the bKa gdams tradition or compendium from the
lam bras tradition). Therefore work titles can contain more information than
their literal meaning betrays, for instance they may hint at the community in
which they were created.
To sum up, indigenous lists of books, printing blocks, and literary works give
important insights into the way the literary heritage was perceived and organized. A major limitation lies in the fact that they are mostly related to monastic writing and scholarship and do not represent the whole range of Tibetan
literature. Work titles, on the other hand, cover a much wider range, but not all
of them are related to the literary genre of the work, and even if they are, the
title may be ambiguous. Moreover, work titles mirror an intuitive understanding of the nature of these works, but they do not represent a systematic classification of Tibetan literature. They provide valuable information and should
certainly be taken into account, but they need to be combined with other context information.
Recent Publications on Tibetan Literary Genres
I will therefore close this survey by briefly introducing some contemporary

attempts to classify Tibetan literature. The notion of rtsom rig, literature, is
relatively recent in Tibetan, but has quickly gained popularity, and during the
last two decades Tibet has seen a growing number of books on this topic. Most
of these books acknowledge a lack of traditional Tibetan theories of literature
(apart from Indian style poetics) and discuss Indian and Western theories
alongside Tibetan approaches, some of them with a strong emphasis on the
Indic tradition of snyan ngag.35 In publications from Tibet, Western literary
34
35
important role in classifying and naming rituals of both the Buddhist and the Bon tradition. It might therefore have an indigenous Tibetan background.
Stearns 2001: 32f., 36, and 38. See also Roesler 2011: 155.
An interesting exception is Kun dga 1999. In his introductory section he stresses the enormous importance of indigenous forms, especially glu, which he regards as the origin of
47
criticism usually seems to be mediated through Chinese language publications, as becomes obvious from the Chinese name forms of Western scholars
referred to as well as the bibliographies (as far as these are provided). These
publications show that intellectual globalisation also afffects the scholarly discourse on literature, and it would not make much sense nowadays to distinguish between Western and Tibetan literary criticism. I will introduce three
diffferent recent classifications of Tibetan literature: one that gives a rather
detailed catalogue of text types based on their Tibetan names, one that gives a
broader classification of genres according to their main features and is similar
to, but not identical with the Aristotelian subdivision of literature, and one
that approaches Tibetan literature from the angle of textual linguistics and
classifies it according to its pragmatic contexts.
The first example is the book Bod kyi rtsom lus rnam bshad by Go shul Grags
pa byung gnas, published in 1996. The author applies a twofold distinction:
one by form (tshigs lus), the other one by contents (don lus). The distinction by
form is derived from Indian poetics in the tradition of Dain, which distinguishes between verse, prose, and a mixture of the two, and introduces further
sub-types of verse based on its length.
The section on don lus divides literature into fiction and non-fiction and lists
the respective sub-categories, using indigenous designations. It arrives at ten
sub-categories for non-fiction: several historical genres and letters, legs bshad,
instructions, discussions, and pillar inscriptions.36 Fiction is subdivided into
seventeen diffferent kinds beginning with novel, poetry, drama and songs, and
ending with riddles, proverbs and wedding songs.37 This list of genres gives a
highly useful survey of both scholarly and folk literature from Tibet. Categories
applying to monastic scholarly literature are conspicuously rare.
One of the great merits of this book lies in the fact that it avoids an overly
clerical outlook and provides a detailed classification and discussion of
important indigenous types of Tibetan literature. It does not provide much of
a general theoretical framework.
36
37
poetical composition in general. He then lists glu, snyan ngag, mgur ma, bslab bya, legs
bshad, rnam thar, rtogs brjod, zlos gar, and brtsams sgrung as major traditional forms
of Tibetan literature (Kun dga 1999: 2fff. and 6). Further classifications are provided in
chapter 4 (sa bcad bzhi pa) of his book.
He discusses lo rgyus, rnam thar, rtogs brjod, gdung rabs, gdan rabs, spring yig, legs bshad,
bslab bya, bel gtam and rdo ring (Go shul Grags pa byung gnas 1996: 96139).
He distinguishes rtsom sgrung, snyan ngag, zlos gar, mgur ma, bstod tshogs, gtam tshogs,
gnas bstod, gsol debs, gdung dbyangs, snyan lhug, bras dkar, kha shags, skyes rabs rnam
thar, dmangs glu, ldeu, gtam dpe and gnyen bshad (Go shul Grags pa byung gnas 1996:
139205).
48
roesler
A much broader typology has been proposed by rGya ye pa bKra shis phun
tshogs in his study of forms of early Tibetan literature published in 2005. The
book deals exclusively with fiction. The author begins with a discussion of
Western genre theories and Chinese classifications of literature.38 He explains
that neither of these divisions is totally adequate for Tibet. Instead, he suggests
a subdivision into three basic types:
1.
2.
3.
yid kyi gyur ba mtshon pai rigs with the subdivisions

a)snyan ngag
b) mgur ma
don gyi byung ba brjod pai rigs with the subdivisions
a) brtsams sgrung
b) rnam thar
c) zlos gar
blang dor gyi gnas doms pai rigs with the subdivisions
a) legs bshad
b) bslab bya
What rGya ye pa bKra shis phun tshogs suggests here is a broad typology of
macro-forms with more specific sub-types. It resonates with the Aristotelian
subdivision of literature into lyric, epic, and dramatic forms, but introduces
the category of didactic literature (blang dor gyi gnas doms pai rigs) instead
of drama (zlos gar, which is here subsumed under the epic category). This
seems very adequate, considering the enormous prominence and popularity
of didactic stanzas and narratives in Tibet.
Interestingly, this classification seems to correspond to the functions of language as they have been defined in Karl Bhlers Organon-Modell: language
is symptom, since it expresses the intentions of the sender, it is symbol,
since it refers to entities in the world, and it is signal, since it appeals to the
recipient.39 The first type (yid kyi gyur ba mtshon pai rigs) which expresses
inner experiences could be regarded as corresponding to language as symptom.
38
39
rGya ye pa bKra shis phun tshogs refers to Aristotles subdivision into lyric (yid kyi gyur
ba mtshon pai rigs), epic (don gyi byung ba brjod pai rigs) and dramatic (zlos gar) forms
of literature. He subdivides Chinese literature into four categories: snyan ngag (poetry),
brtsams sgrung (novel), lhug rtsom (prose) and zlos gar (stage play), a subdivision that
does not correspond to the four early traditional Chinese categories of the classics, histories, philosophers and literary collections (see Idema and Haft 1997: 5260) but seems
applicable to the Chinese literature of later centuries. I thank Marc Winter and Justin
Winslett for their helpful comments on this topic.
Bhler 1934. Bhler takes the designation organon from Plato, who had described language as a tool (rganon).
49
The second type (don gyi byung ba brjod pai rigs) that renders things that have
happened would then correspond to language as symbol, and the third type
(blang dor gyi gnas doms pai rigs) which instructs what to do and what to
avoid to language as signal.
Both classifications introduced here can meaningfully be applied to Tibetan
literature and provide useful tools for understanding it. At the same time, none
of them seems so exclusively compelling that it would make the other one
superfluous.
In their practical application, we may often find that a text or work belongs
to several of the above categories at the same time. A religious song (mgur
ma), for instance, can express emotions (yid kyi gyur ba mtshon pai rigs) while
at the same time giving instructions and advice (blang dor gyi gnas doms pai
rigs). Similarly, a rnam thar describes events that have happened (don gyi
byung ba brjod pai rigs), but by providing a model of an ideal Buddhist life
equally elicits a corresponding behaviour on the side of the audience (blang
dor gyi gnas doms pai rigs). Thus, classifications such as the one proposed by
rGya ye pa bKra shis phun tshogs will normally have to be based on the general
character of the work, not excluding other less dominant features or functions.
Go shul Grags pa byung gnas classification, too, has to allow for overlaps
between the diffferent genres. For example, the genres rnam thar life story
and bstod pa eulogy are closely related: like a rnam thar, a bstod pa may speak
about the qualities and activities of its subject, and in some cases rnam thar
collections form the commentary on the bstod pa of the lineage of the teachers,
thus combining both types. Equally, rnam thar and mgur ma can be combined
in one and the same work. However, although some genres share certain features and single works combine diffferent genres, we will usually not hesitate
to classify a given work based on our general understanding of what is typical.
Thus, it seems most appropriate to regard these classifications as prototypes
that capture the main characteristics of a given work and operate similar to the
family resemblances (Familienhnlichkeiten) in the sense of Wittgenstein.40
A fundamentally diffferent approach has been suggested by Peter Schwieger.41
He has classified Tibetan literature according to the pragmatic context of the
respective works. This approach is based on the methods of textual linguistics (German Textlinguistik) and is concerned with text types (German
Textsorten) rather than literary genres. Schwieger suggests a subdivision into
three main types of Tibetan texts:
40
41
The idea of prototypes has been introduced in the 1970s by Eleanor Rosch and her team
in the context of cognitive sciences to explain how semantic categories are formed and
applied, and has since then been elaborated further.
Schwieger 2011.
50
roesler
(1)
texts that are related to politics and administration, like edicts, letters,
records, and so forth;
(2) works that originate in a religious or monastic environment; and
(3) folklore that is mainly transmitted orally, like songs, proverbs and stories.
The great advantage of this classification is that its categories seem much more
clear-cut than a genre classification could ever be. It provides a broad and fairly
unambiguous framework for placing single works and texts within the larger
context of Tibetan literature. However, it does not capture more nuanced literary qualities and therefore does not fully replace the category of genre.
Conclusion
To conclude, this survey suggests that traditional Tibetan scholarship on literature is strongly shaped by Indian concepts and has a clear focus on monastic
learning and literature. The categories provided concern knowledge systems,
not literature as such.
Recent classifications of Tibetan literature provide useful theoretical tools
by creating new classification systems, addressing the literary character as well
as the pragmatic context of Tibetan works, and enlarging the range of works
considered by including literature from outside the monastic context. Each of
the approaches introduced here has its advantages and disadvantages, and it
may be advisable to combine them in order to arrive at a comprehensive picture. For instance, Go shul Grags pa byung gnass detailed list of genres could
be integrated as sub-categories within the macro-structures suggested by rGya
ye pa bKra shis phun tshogs or Peter Schwieger.
As mentioned in the beginning, it would be inappropriate to expect an ultimate classification of genres that will be valid irrespective of time. However, the
concept of literary genres may provide a useful tool when we try to read Tibetan
works not merely as historical testimonies or as sources on history, religion and
philosophy, but as art forms in their own right. Finding an adequate vocabulary
and appropriate theoretical frameworks that will enable us to speak about Tibetan
literature as such, that is, as literature, is what this article would like to advocate.
Bibliography
A khu Rin po che Shes rab rgya mtsho (180375) 1963. dPe rgyun dkon pa ga zhig gi tho
yig. In Lokesh Chandra (ed.) Materials for a History of Tibetan Literature, Part 3. atapiaka Series 30. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture.
51
Bethlenfalvy, G. 1972. A Tibetan catalogue of the blocks of the Lamaist printing house
in Aginsk. Acta Orientalia Hungarica XXV, 5375.
Bhler, K. 1934. Sprachtheorie. Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. Jena: G. Fischer.
Cabezn, J.I. and R.R. Jackson (eds) 1996. Tibetan Literature: Studies in Genre. Ithaka,
N.Y.: Snow Lion.
Cuevas, B. 2010. The calfs nipple (beu bum) of Ju Mipam (Ju Mi pham): a handbook
of Tibetan ritual magic. In J.I. Cabezn (ed.) Tibetan Ritual, 16586. Oxford and New
York: Oxford University Press.
dGe dun rab gsal 2001. Bod kyi rtsom rig gi byung ba brjod pa rab gsal me long. Sarnath,
Varanasi: Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies.
Derrida, J. 1980. The law of genre. (English tr. by Avital Ronell.) Critical Inquiry 7(1): On
Narrative, 5581.
Dotson, B. 2007. Emperor Mu rug btsan and the Phang thang ma catalogue. JIATS 3,
December 2007, 125.
Dung dkar Blo bzang phrin las 2004. Bod kyi dkar chag rig pa. mKhas dbang dung dkar
blo bzang phrin las kyi gsung bum, vol. kha. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang.
Eimer, H. 1979. Rnam thar rgyas pa. Materialien zu einer Biographie des Atia
(Dpakararjna). 1. Teil: Einfhrung, Inhaltsbersicht, Namensglossar. 2. Teil:
Textmaterialien. Asiatische Forschungen 67. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
199293. Der Katalog des Groen Druckhauses von Bras-spus aus dem Jahre
1920. Studies in Central & East Asian Religions 5/6, 144.
2005. Die Liste der Druckplatten in dGa ldan phun tshogs gling aus dem Jahre
1694. Zentralasiatische Studien des Seminars fr Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaft
Zentralasiens der Universitt Bonn 34 (Festschrift Rudolf Kaschewsky), 2954.
Go shul Grags pa byung gnas 1996. Bod kyi rtsom lus rnam bshad. General Forms of
Tibetan Literature. Lanzhou: Kan suu mi rigs dpe skrun khang.
gSang bdag rdo rje 1994. Mig yid rna bai dga ston legs bshad gter gyi bum bzang. Lhasa:
Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang.
Halkias, G. 2005. Tibetan Buddhism registered: An imperial catalogue from the palace
temple of Phang thang. The Eastern Buddhist XXXVI(12), 2004, 46105.
Hermann-Pfandt, A. 2002. The Lhan kar ma as a source for the history of Tantric
Buddhism. In H. Eimer and D. Germano (eds) The Many Canons of Buddhism.
Proceedings of the 9th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies,
Leiden 2000, 12949. Leiden: Brill.
von Hinber, O. 1994. Die neun Agas. Ein frher Versuch zur Einteilung buddhistischer
Texte. Wiener Zeitschrift fr die Kunde Sdasiens 38 (Festschrift G. Oberhammer),
12135.
Idema, W. and L. Haft 1997. A Guide to Chinese Literature. Michigan Monographs in Chinese
Studies 74. Ann Arbor: Center for Chinese Studies, The University of Michigan.
Klong rdol bla ma Ngag dbang blo bzang (171994/95) 1963. bKa gdams pa dang dge
lugs pai bla ma rags rim gyi gsung bum mtshan tho. In L. Chandra (ed.) Materials
52
roesler
for a History of Tibetan Literature, vol. 3, 603696. ata-piaka Series 30. New Delhi:
International Academy of Indian Culture.
van der Kuijp, L.W.J. 1996. Tibetan Belles-Lettres: The influence of Dain and
Kememdra. In J.I. Cabezn and R.R. Jackson (eds) Tibetan Literature: Studies in
Genre, 393410. Ithaka, N.Y.: Snow Lion.
Kun dga 1999. Bod kyi rtsom rig gzhung lugs skor gyi rnam bshad. Lhasa: Bod ljongs mi
dmangs dpe skrun khang.
Lalou, M. 1953. Les textes bouddhiques au temps de Khri-sro-lde-bcan. Journal
Asiatique (1953), 31353.
Lamping, D. (ed.) 2009. Handbuch der literarischen Gattungen. Stuttgart: Krner Verlag.
Lokesh Chandra 1958. The Authors of Sungbums. Indo-Iranian Journal 2, 110127.
1959. Tibetan Works Printed by the Shoparkhang of the Potala. In C. Vogel
(ed.) Jnamuktval: Commemoration Volume in Honour of Johannes Nobel. On
the Occasion of his 70th Birthday offfered by Pupils and Colleagues, 12032. SarasvatiVihra Series 38. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture.
1961. Les imprimeries tibtaines de Drepung, Derge et Pepung. Journal
Asiatique 249, 50317.
196364. Tibetan Buddhist texts printed by the Mdzod-dge-sgar-gsar monastery. Indo-Irandian Journal 7, 298306.
Mahvyutpatti: A New Critical Edition of the Mahvyutpatti: Sanskrit-Tibetan-Mongolian
dictionary of Buddhist terminology. Materials for Tibetan-Mongolian Dictionaries,
vol. 1. Edited by Yumiko Ishihama and Yoichi Fukuda 1989. Tokyo: The Toyo Bunko.
Martin, D. 1996. Tables of Contents (dKar chag). In J.I. Cabezn and R.R. Jackson (eds)
Tibetan Literature: Studies in Genre, 50014. Ithaka, N.Y.: Snow Lion.
Mimaki, K. and S. Karmay 2009. Nince Vehicles of the Southern Treasury (lho gter gyi
theg pa dgu) as presented in the Bon sgo gsal byed of Tre ston rGyal mtshan dpal,
Part One: First Four Vehicles. Memoirs of the Faculty of Letters 48. Kyoto: Kyoto
University.
Ngawang Tsepag 2005. Traditional cataloguing and classifications of Tibetan literature.
The Tibet Journal XXX(2), 4960.
Obermiller, E. [1931] 1987. The History of Buddhism in India and Tibet, part I: The Jewelry
of Scripture. Translated from Tibetan by E. Obermiller, with an Introduction by Prof.
Th. Stcherbatsky. Second edition Delhi 1987, reprint 1998: Sri Satguru Publications.
rDo rje rgyal po (ed.) 1988. Bu ston chos byung gsung rab rin po chei mdzod. Xining:
Krung go bod kyi shes rig dpe skrun khang.
rGya ye pa bKra shis phun tshogs 2005. Bod kyi gna rabs rtsom rig gi rigs dang lus kyi
rnam bzhag tshangs pai tshad yig. Xining: mTsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang.
Roberts, P.A. 2010. The evolution of the biographies of Milrepa and Rechungpa. In
L. Covill, U. Roesler, and S. Shaw (eds) Lives Lived, Lives Imagined: Biography in the
Buddhist Traditions, 181203. Boston: Wisdom Publications.
53
Roesler, U. 2011. Frhe Quellen zum buddhistischen Stufenweg in Tibet: Indische und
tibetische Traditionen im dPe chos des Po-to-ba Rin-chen-gsal. Wiesbaden: Reichert
Verlag.
Sangye Tender Naga 2006. Aspects of traditional Tibetan learning. The Tibet Journal
XXXI(3), 316.
Schaefffer, K.R. 2009. The Culture of the Book in Tibet. New York: Columbia University
Press.
Schaefffer, K.R. and L.W.J. van der Kuijp (eds) 2009. An Early Tibetan Survey of Buddhist
Literature: The Bstan pa rgyas pa rgyan gyi nyi od of Bcom ldan ral gri. Cambridge,
Mass. and London, England: Harvard University Press.
Schwieger, P. 2011. Traditionelle tibetische Textsorten. Bestimmungskriterien und
Kommunikationszusammenhang. In S. Conermann and A. El Hawary (eds) Was
sind Genres?Nicht-abendlndische Kategorisierungen von Gattungen, 26075.
Narratio Aliena: Studien des Bonner Zentrums fr Transkulturelle Narratologie,
Band 1. Berlin: EB-Verlag.
Seyfort Ruegg, D. 1999. Remarks on the place of narrative in the Buddhist literatures
of India and Tibet. In A. Cadonna (ed.) India, Tibet, China: Genesis and Aspects of
Traditional Narrative, 193227. Orientalia Venetiana VII. Firenze: Leo S. Olschki
Editore.
sGra sbyor bam po gnyis pa: A Critical Edition of the Sgra sbyor bam po gnyis pa: An
Old and Basic Commenatry on the Mahvyutpatti. Edited by Mie Ishikawa 1990.
Materials for Tibetan-Mongolian Dictionaries, vol. 2. Studia Tibetica No. 18. Tokyo:
The Toyo Bunko.
Smith, E.G. 1969. Introduction. In A 15th Century Tibetan compendium of Knowledge:
The bshad mdzod yid bzhin nor bu by Don-dam-smra-bai-sege, 532. Edited by
Lokesh Chandra with an introduction by E.G. Smith. ata-piaka Series. New Delhi.
Sobisch, J.-U. 2002. The Records of Techings Received in the Collected Works of A
mes Zhabs: an untapped source for the study of Sa skya pa biographies. In H. Blezer
(ed.) Tibet, Past and Present. Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the Ninth Seminar of the
International Association for Tibetan Studies, Leiden 2000, 161181. Leiden etc.: Brill.
Stearns, C. 2001. Luminous Lives: The Story of the Early Masters of the Lam bras Tradition
in Tibet. Boston: Wisdom Publications.
Taube, M. 1968. Die Bedeutung einheimischer Bibliographien fr die Erforschung der
tibetischen Literatur. Studia Asiae. Johannes Schubert, dem Lehrer und Freund
in dankbarer Verehrung von seinen Freunden und Schlern zum 70. Geburtstage
gewidmet. Buddhist Yearly 1968, Supplement, 27799.
Yar lung jo bo Shkya rin chen sde 1987. Yar lung jo boi chos byung. Chengdu: Si khron
mi rigs dpe skrun khang.

Classifying Literature or Organizing Knowledge?

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Classifying Literature or Organizing Knowledge?

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Tibetan Literary Genres,

Texts, and Text Types

For use by the Author only | 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV

For use by the Author only | 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV

An Ocean of Marvelous Perfections: A 17th-Century Padma bkai

Tools of the Trade of the Tibetan Translators182

Nyams mgur of Pha bong kha pa bDe chen snying po (18781941): An

Tibets Critical Tradition and Modern Tibetan Literature231

From Hagiography to Modern Short Story: How to Get Rid of Old

For use by the Author only | 2015 Koninklijke Brill NV