Arguing over the Buddhist Pedigree of Tibetan Medicine: A Case Study of Empirical Observation and Traditional Learning in 16th- and 17th-Century Tibet

This article examines the relationship between the practice and theory of medicine and Buddhism in premodern Tibet. It considers a polemical text composed by the 16th−17th-century Tibetan physician and tantric Buddhist expert Sokdokpa Lodrö Gyeltsen, intending to prove the Buddhis...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: James Duncan Gentry
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2019-09-01
Series:Religions
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/10/9/530
id doaj-82e75038d6164cb395e5155754c7af2c
record_format Article
spelling doaj-82e75038d6164cb395e5155754c7af2c2020-11-25T02:01:02ZengMDPI AGReligions2077-14442019-09-0110953010.3390/rel10090530rel10090530Arguing over the Buddhist Pedigree of Tibetan Medicine: A Case Study of Empirical Observation and Traditional Learning in 16th- and 17th-Century TibetJames Duncan Gentry0Department of Religious Studies, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94306, USAThis article examines the relationship between the practice and theory of medicine and Buddhism in premodern Tibet. It considers a polemical text composed by the 16th−17th-century Tibetan physician and tantric Buddhist expert Sokdokpa Lodrö Gyeltsen, intending to prove the Buddhist canonical status of the Four Medical Tantras, the foundational text of the Tibetan medical tradition. While presenting and analyzing Sokdokpa’s polemical writing in the context of the broader debate over the Buddhist pedigree of the Four Tantras that took place during his time, this discussion situates Sokdokpa’s reflections on the topic in terms of his broader career as both a practicing physician and a tantric Buddhist ritual and contemplative specialist. It suggests that by virtue of Sokdokpa’s tightly interwoven activities in the spheres of medicine and Buddhism, his contribution to this debate gives voice to a sensibility in which empiricist, historicist, and Buddhist ritual and contemplative inflections intermingle in ways that resist easy disentanglement and classification. In this it argues that Sokdokpa’s reflections form an important counterpoint to the perspectives considered thus far in the scholarly study of this debate. It also questions if Sokdokpa’s style of argumentation might call for a recalibration of how scholars currently construe the roles of tantric Buddhist practice in the appeal by premodern Tibetan physicians to critical and probative criteria.https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/10/9/530Buddhism and medicinepremodern TibettantraFour Medical TantraspolemicsapologiaSokdokpargyud bzhi bka’ sgrub
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author James Duncan Gentry
spellingShingle James Duncan Gentry
Arguing over the Buddhist Pedigree of Tibetan Medicine: A Case Study of Empirical Observation and Traditional Learning in 16th- and 17th-Century Tibet
Religions
Buddhism and medicine
premodern Tibet
tantra
Four Medical Tantras
polemics
apologia
Sokdokpa
rgyud bzhi bka’ sgrub
author_facet James Duncan Gentry
author_sort James Duncan Gentry
title Arguing over the Buddhist Pedigree of Tibetan Medicine: A Case Study of Empirical Observation and Traditional Learning in 16th- and 17th-Century Tibet
title_short Arguing over the Buddhist Pedigree of Tibetan Medicine: A Case Study of Empirical Observation and Traditional Learning in 16th- and 17th-Century Tibet
title_full Arguing over the Buddhist Pedigree of Tibetan Medicine: A Case Study of Empirical Observation and Traditional Learning in 16th- and 17th-Century Tibet
title_fullStr Arguing over the Buddhist Pedigree of Tibetan Medicine: A Case Study of Empirical Observation and Traditional Learning in 16th- and 17th-Century Tibet
title_full_unstemmed Arguing over the Buddhist Pedigree of Tibetan Medicine: A Case Study of Empirical Observation and Traditional Learning in 16th- and 17th-Century Tibet
title_sort arguing over the buddhist pedigree of tibetan medicine: a case study of empirical observation and traditional learning in 16th- and 17th-century tibet
publisher MDPI AG
series Religions
issn 2077-1444
publishDate 2019-09-01
description This article examines the relationship between the practice and theory of medicine and Buddhism in premodern Tibet. It considers a polemical text composed by the 16th−17th-century Tibetan physician and tantric Buddhist expert Sokdokpa Lodrö Gyeltsen, intending to prove the Buddhist canonical status of the Four Medical Tantras, the foundational text of the Tibetan medical tradition. While presenting and analyzing Sokdokpa’s polemical writing in the context of the broader debate over the Buddhist pedigree of the Four Tantras that took place during his time, this discussion situates Sokdokpa’s reflections on the topic in terms of his broader career as both a practicing physician and a tantric Buddhist ritual and contemplative specialist. It suggests that by virtue of Sokdokpa’s tightly interwoven activities in the spheres of medicine and Buddhism, his contribution to this debate gives voice to a sensibility in which empiricist, historicist, and Buddhist ritual and contemplative inflections intermingle in ways that resist easy disentanglement and classification. In this it argues that Sokdokpa’s reflections form an important counterpoint to the perspectives considered thus far in the scholarly study of this debate. It also questions if Sokdokpa’s style of argumentation might call for a recalibration of how scholars currently construe the roles of tantric Buddhist practice in the appeal by premodern Tibetan physicians to critical and probative criteria.
topic Buddhism and medicine
premodern Tibet
tantra
Four Medical Tantras
polemics
apologia
Sokdokpa
rgyud bzhi bka’ sgrub
url https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/10/9/530
work_keys_str_mv AT jamesduncangentry arguingoverthebuddhistpedigreeoftibetanmedicineacasestudyofempiricalobservationandtraditionallearningin16thand17thcenturytibet
_version_ 1724959181295845376