The first comprehensive survey of the important corpus of Indic literature on Sanskrit grammar extant in Tibetan translation in the Buddhist canon. A systematic study of the history of the Tibetans' expertise in this central scholastic discipline in Buddhism.

The first comprehensive survey of the important corpus of Indic literature on Sanskrit grammar, extant in Tibetan translation in the Buddhist canon. Core of the study is the description of the forty-seven Sanskrit grammatical treatises covering some two thousand folios in the canon. The contents of these texts and the historical information regarding their Tibetan translators are examined in detail. Further chapters are devoted to the grammatical analysis in an eighth-century Tibetan handbook for translators, and to data from Tibetan historiography. The book offers the first systematic study of the extent and the historical development of the Tibetan expertise in Sanskrit grammar, a central scholastic discipline in Buddhism. It opens up a section of Tibetan literature essential to the understanding of the Indo-Tibetan indigenous grammatical traditions.

This first, systematic survey of the Tibetan non-canonical literature dealing with Sanskrit grammar, partly consists of translations of Indic works, such as revisions of canonical versions, and translations of works not contained in the canon, and partly of original Tibetan works. In the first chapter of the book a detailed description of these textual materials is presented – sixty-one titles in total – which were produced during all periods of Tibetan literary history, from the ninth to the twentieth centuries. The second chapter discusses one specific effect of the impetus of Indic traditional grammar within Tibetan scholastics, namely the influence of Indic models of linguistic description on Tibetan indigenous grammar. This particular assimilation of an Indic technical discipline into Tibetan scholarship is examined in detail, and it is shown that other segments of Indic Buddhism were sources of inspiration and derivation for the Tibetan grammarians as well.

This systematic survey presents Tibetan non-canonical literature dealing with Sanskrit grammar, including translations of Indic works and original Tibetan works. In the second chapter of the book, the influence of Indic models of linguistic description on Tibetan indigenous grammar is discussed.

The papers in Tibetan Literary Genres, Texts, and Text Types deepen our knowledge of Tibetan literature. They not only examine particular Tibetan genres and texts (pre-modern and contemporary), but also genre classification, transformation, and reception. Despite previous contributions, the systematic analysis of Tibetan textual genres is still a relatively undeveloped field, especially when compared with the sophisticated examinations of other literary traditions. The book is divided into four parts: textual typologies, blurred genre boundaries, specific texts and text types, and genres in transition to modernity. The introduction discusses previous classificatory approaches and concepts of textual linguistics. The text classes that receive individual attention can be summarised as songs and poetry, offering-ritual, hagiography, encyclopaedia, lexicographical texts, trickster narratives, and modern literature. Contributors include: Franz-Karl Ehrhard, Ruth Gamble, Lama Jabb, Roger R. Jackson, Giacomella Orofino, Jim Rheingans, Peter Schwieger, Ekaterina Sobkovyak, Victoria Sujata, and Peter Verhagen.

The history of the book in Tibet involves more than literary trends and trade routes. Functioning as material, intellectual, and symbolic object, the book has been an instrumental tool in the construction of Tibetan power and authority, and its history opens a crucial window onto the cultural, intellectual, and economic life of an immensely influential Buddhist society. Spanning the fourteenth to the eighteenth centuries, Kurtis R. Schaeffer envisions the scholars and hermits, madmen and ministers, kings and queens who produced Tibet's massive canons. He describes how Tibetan scholars edited and printed works of religion, literature, art, and science and what this indicates about the interrelation of material and cultural practices. The Tibetan book is at once the embodiment of the Buddha's voice, a principal means of education, a source of tradition and authority, an economic product, a finely crafted aesthetic object, a medium of Buddhist written culture, and a symbol of the religion itself. Books stood at the center of debates on the role of libraries in religious institutions, the relative merits of oral and written teachings, and the economy of religion in Tibet. A meticulous study that draws on more than 150 understudied Tibetan sources, The Culture of the Book in Tibet is the first volume to trace this singular history. Through a single object, Schaeffer accesses a greater understanding of the cultural and social history of the Tibetan plateau.

The thirty-four essays in this volume follow the particular interests of Leonard van der Kuijp, whose groundbreaking research in Tibetan intellectual and cultural history imbued his students with an abiding sense of curiosity and discovery. As part of Leonard van der Kuijp’s research in Tibetan history, as he patiently and expertly revealed treasures of the Tibetan intellectual tradition in fourteenth-century Tsang, or seventeenth-century Lhasa, or eighteenth-century Amdo, he developed an international community of colleagues and students. The thirty-four essays in this volume follow the particular interests of the honoree and express the comprehensive research that his international cohort have engaged in alongside his generous tutelage over the course of forty years. He imbued his students with the abiding sense of curiosity and discovery that can be experienced through every one of his writings, and that can be found as well in these new essays in intellectual, cultural, and institutional history by Christopher Beckwith, the late Hubert Decleer, Franz-Karl Ehrhard, Jörg Heimbel and David Jackson, Isabelle Henrion-Dourcy, Nathan Hill, Matthew Kapstein, Kurtis Schaeffer, Michael Witzel, Allison Aitken, Yael Bentor, Pieter Verhagen, Todd Lewis, William McGrath, Peter Schwieger, Gray Tuttle, and others.

For three decades, E. Gene Smith ran the Library of Congress's Tibetan Text Publication Project of the United States Public Law 480 (PL480) - an effort to salvage and reprint the Tibetan literature that had been collected by the exile community or by members of the Bhotia communities of Sikkim, Bhutan, India, and Nepal. Smith wrote prefaces to these reprinted books to help clarify and contextualize the particular Tibetan texts: the prefaces served as rough orientations to a poorly understood body of foreign literature. Originally produced in print quantities of twenty, these prefaces quickly became legendary, and soon photocopied collections were handed from scholar to scholar, achieving an almost cult status. These essays are collected here for the first time. The impact of Smith's research on the academic study of Tibetan literature has been tremendous, both for his remarkable ability to synthesize diverse materials into coherent accounts of Tibetan literature, history, and religious thought, and for the exemplary critical scholarship he brought to this field.

The present volume is the outcome of a seminar on the Ideology and Status of Sanskrit held in Leiden under the auspices of the International Institute for Asian Studies. The book contains studies of crucial periods and important areas in the history of the Sanskrit language, from the earliest, Vedic and pre-Vedic periods, through the period in which the (restricted) use of Sanskrit spread over practically all of South (including part of Central) and Southeast Asia (sometimes referred to as the period of "Greater India"), up to the recent history of Sanskrit in India. The contributions of this volume are divided into three sections: (1) Origins and Creation of the "Eternal Language"; (2) Transculturation, Vernacularization, Sanskritization; (3) The Sanskrit Tradition: Continuity from the past or Construction from the present?