kalden yungdrung wrote:Tashi delek,
Bon has so its own sources for their Tibetan Medicine.
Undermentioned link is written by Colin Millard, with whom i came recently in contact.
- Key points are here the rGyud-bzhi' and the Bon Zhang Zhung Bumshi
http://www.bodyhealthreligion.org.uk/BA ... ition.html
In all likelyhood, the 'Bum bzhi is later than the rgyud bzhi and derives from it.
orgyen jigmed wrote:In all likelyhood, the 'Bum bzhi is later than the rgyud bzhi and derives from it.
This appears to be another controversial 'historical' topic, and in all likelihood it seems that it shall always remain an open one.
Going by the conclusions of Dr. Tsering Thakchoe Drungtso, in his book 'Tibetan Medicine: The healing science of Tibet (2008) it seems thats he does not share your entire opinion.
- Code: Select all
Although he is in agreement that it is almost impossible to credit the orignin of Tibetan Medicine to any one particular source, he notes that while the authorship of the present version of rGyud-bZhi remains highly contraversial, he nevertheless brings scriptural evidence to support his claims, that the Last Tantra of the present version of the rGyud-bZhi are derived from the Bon Zhang Zhung texts, such as the sMan-'Bum-dKar-Po, sMan-'Bum-Nag-Po and sMan-'Bum-Khra Bo (p.32).
both Tibetan versions of the Man-ngag-rgyud expands them to eighteen.
From this we can conclude that not all medical knowledge originates from Indian sources, but that some must have been inherited from the old shamanic Bon.
While summarizing the origin and historical development of Tibetan Medicine, Drungtso (2008) argues: "it can be concluded that the Tibetan Medical system has an indigenous origin and, over time, shared knowledge with many neighbouring cultures and kingdoms, which culminated in the compilations of sMan-'Bum-dkar-Nag-Khra-gSum and the two versions of rGyud-bZhi by Yuthok Yonten Gonpo the Elder and Younger, which reflected medical knowledge of the first millennium BCE, the 8th and 12th centuries of the modern era" (p.32).
kalden yungdrung wrote:Tashi delek,
There is in the Tibetan Medicine like the Gyud gzhi a colection of foreign elements like allready is mentioned:
Indian, Greece, Chinese and Bon.
All those elements have / own also a whole medical system Like the Chinese have with their TCM and Bon their own medical sources.
But slowly we get some standards in Tibet which results in the TTM we know today.
If the Gyud gzhi would be a copy of the Bum Gzhi that is not true what is true imo would be that the Gyud gzhi contains certain Bon medical texts.
But if that would be like with the Medical Bon Texts, that is what i doubt (If they would contain Aryuvedic elements etc . But i am not sure and will ask this to some Bon Medicine Geshelas.
"orgyen jigmedThis appears to be another controversial 'historical' topic, and in all likelihood it seems that it shall always remain an open one.Not really."Namdrol
orgyen jigmed wrote:
Although I find your arguments plausible, nevertheless the Bon maintains a different position as to the origin of the rGyud bzhi.
For example, in contrast to your argument in favour that the rGyud bzhi being a translation of an Indian work,
the Bonpo Ga-rgya Khyung-sprul 'Jigs-med namkha'i rdorje (1897-1957) claims that the rGyud bzhi was written in the Zhang Zhung language. Whatever your opionion may be to his claim, what is known for certain is that medical texts believed to be of Zhang-zhung origin have been found among the Dunhuang manuscripts (PT 127), which asserts that it was based on the Zhang-Zhung medical tradition (Karmay, 2009).
To reach an understanding how the Bon could have come to such a conclusion, one must consult with the Zhiji...
What I do find interesting according to this account, is not only that the doctrine of Tonpa Shenrab was spread by "six-great translators" to adjacent countries which included: Zhang-Zhung, Sum-pa (East of Zhang-Zhung), Phrom (Mongolia) China, Kashmir, India and finally Tibet, but that these teachings have also spread to India by Lha-bdags sNgags-grol ; pressumably these included medical knowledge, considering that all cultures have shared ideas of what makes people sick, what makes well and how people can maintain good health through time, and therefore may have also included the Variegated Collections of Therapies (dPyad 'bum Khra bo) and the White and Black Collection of Medicines (sMan 'bum dkar nag), although I must concur that I do not have any evidence in favour or against to further support these claims.
But on the other hand, if this hypothesis is correct, it is not so difficult to understand how traditional medical knowledge and practices could have also entered India from the North (something the proud Indians would not so easily submit), as well as other neighbouring countries.
This migration could have been part of pastoral adaptation in search of subsistence in different ecological environments. As a result of this process of syncretism with the multi-Hindu cultures and worldviews, Aryuveda, may have evolved as its own tradition. Thus, one must take into consideration this dynamic circular process instead of a static one way process.
[/quote]Another divergance in opinion held by the Bon is that g.Yu-thog Yon-tan mgon-po is considered to be not other then the Bonpo gter ston Khu-tsha Zla-'od (Karmay, 2009). However, as I am neither a scholar nor can I claim any competence in Tibetan Medicine and its history I must remain open to more expert views.
Users browsing this forum: kalden yungdrung and 8 guests