Bu ston's History of Buddhism in Tibet, by Janos Szerb
The Journal of the American Oriental Society
Vol.113 No.3
July-Sep 1993
pp.478-479
COPYRIGHT American Oriental Society 1993
This work of Dr. Janos Szerb was prepared, compared, and completed
by Dr. Helmut Krasser after the former's death in 1988.
Szerb had a vision of "critical editions of a number of Tibetan
historical sources that are relevant to our understanding of Tibetan
history and culture in general" (Szerb, addendum 2, p. 125).
Fortunately for scholars, Dr. Krasser also sees the need for such
critical editions.
Bu ston's "History" is one of the most famous Tibetan Buddhist
historical documents. However, in recent years other Tibetan sources
have corroborated, and in some cases supplemented or even
contradicted Bu ston, making Szerb's comparative work a valuable
resource for a clearer, fuller understanding of Tibetan Buddhist
history.
As the introduction states, this text is only a section--the section
on Tibetan Buddhist history--of one of Bu ston's numerous writings.
Though Bu ston's preeminence has been challenged by modern scholars,
his work is still authoritative in many respects. His biography has
been translated into English, his work as the cataloguer of the
Tibetan Buddhist Canon has made him famous, and his writings remain
a valuable resource for Tibetan studies in general. This text (more
precisely this portion of the larger text) has been translated into
English by E. Obermiller. Szerb acknowledges the value and
popularity of Obermiller's English translation(1) but feels
Obermiller should have gone further with comparative text-critical
research, as Szerb certainly does here.
Szerb cites two "outcomes" of this project, but we find much more in
the book. The first is the text edition itself, of which Szerb
wrote: "The present publication is intended to provide the reader
with a critically edited text of Bu ston's chapter on the history of
Tibet. It also includes Bu ston's list of translators. . .".
Szerb mentions the second outcome in addendum 2: ". . . a major
outcome of the project is a cumulative list of the persona,
geographical, etc. names with proper reference to their sources . .
.".
Further, the volume includes a list of all available editions of Bu
ston's writings, and is remarkably well annotated, with many primary
and secondary bibliographical references. Additionally, in the
course of describing his sources, Szerb gives us a valuable list of
important Tibetan historical works. The index gives variant
spellings, common particularly in handwritten Tibetan manuscripts.
Even though it is a short index, because it is drawn from so many
primary sources, it is a useful reference tool.
The value and good points of Szerb's and Krasser's work far outweigh
all criticisms. The volume should however be regarded as a prototype
for a much larger project, which will hopefully include an even
wider reference base of Tibetan historical documents. Szerb himself
notes that there is a "vast storehouse of Tibetan historical
literature." The following comments bring up some points for
clarification and revision. (Perhaps Szerb would have addressed
these questions had he lived--the text is prepared from his notes.)
Szerb's work sometimes includes too much minute detail, usually
textcritical points that will be obvious to scholars able to make
use of the Tibetan materials.(2)
The volume would be easier to use if it were written in Tibetan
script instead of transliteration, keeping Szerb's method of
indicating proper names with bold-face contrast. The transliteration
system Szerb uses bears little resemblance to Wylie's system, which
is gaining popularity among scholars of Tibetan worldwide. One hopes
for standard equivalents in transliteration.
Addendum 1 is rather tangential to the main project; it describes
minor graphic variations common to many texts. Again, since this
book will be used only by scholars learned in Tibetan language, much
of addendum 1 will be of little use. The final section of addendum 2
is misleading, given the previous list of "Primary Sources". The two
lists are different, and some of the texts used for the body of the
work are much earlier than Bu ston's (ca. 1322), contrary to what is
written in addendum 2.
This text is useful as it is, but it would be enhanced by some
discussion of Bu ston's place and role in Tibetan Buddhist history.
Finally, Szerb states his motivation for the project, which serves
as a good description of his work: ". . . one may conclude that the
most urgent task in the field of Tibetan historical studies is to
provide standard editions of texts with complete indexing of proper
names". The book is proof that Szerb succeeded in this important
project; Krasser and his colleagues are to be commended for sharing
it with the world academic community.
The inclusion of Dr. Szerb's bibliography is a testimony to his
devotion to the study of Tibetan history. A useful book.
1 E. Obermiller, History of Buddhism (Chos-'byung) by Buston, part
II: The History of Buddhism in India and Tibet, Materialien zur
Kunde des Buddhismus 19. Heft (Heidelberg, 1932). See idem,
"Bu-ston's History of Buddhism and the Manjusri-mula-tantra," JRAS
1935: 299-306.
2 For example, the data on page p. xvi, n. 37 are very nearly
repeated on the next page, p. xvii, no. 8. Such discrepancies are
often found in Tibetan handwritten and printed texts; the meaning is
obvious to those with reading knowledge of Tibetan.
PAUL NIETUPSKI COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY