Demystifying Tibetan vocabularies used by His Holiness
[Update]
During Central Tibetan Administrations inauguration of Lobsang Sangay on Aug. 8th, 2011; there were some new Tibetan words used by His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama. I was able to get help from a friend who helped dispel some of my confusions.
For today’s Lhakar entry, I’d like to share what I learned from this friend.
After the Tsen Joel Bhoe Shung (Tibetan Government in Exile) changed its name to Bhoe Me Drik Tsuk (Central Tibetan Institution/Administration) we saw His Holiness referring to Lobsang Sangay as Si Wang and no longer using the term Kalon Tripa. HH also referred to Tibetans not as Bod-pa but Gangchen Pa.
The meanings behind each word:
Kalon Tripa comes from the word “Kalon” which means “Ka yi Lon po”, the one who follows the orders from a higher authority. Since HH is no longer the political head, Lobsang Sangay is no longer a “Kalon”.
Si Wang means “Political Leader”, the one who holds the ultimate political authority. Reting Rinpoche and Taktra Rinpoche were referred to as “Si Wang” during the absence of the Dalai Lamas.
(Thanks to both Karma and Bhuchung for clarifying. HH actually used the word Si Kyong.)
Si Kyong, Si means “Politics” and Kyong means to “lead/run/administer” and together Si Kyong means “Political Leader”. The one who holds the ultimate political authority. His Holiness used this word to address Lobsang Sangay during the inauguration to acknowledge him as the “Political Leader” of the Central Tibetan Administration/ Institution.
Bod-pa was generally understood to mean those from Utsang. Tibetans from Lhasa are referred to as “Bod-pa” in places like Amdo and Tibetans in Lhasa referred those from Amdo as “Amdowa”. (Please check the comment section for more detailed and changing info on the word “Bod-pa”.
Before China’s invasion of Tibet, the Lhasa admin did not always have control over regions such as Kham. Khampas saw themselves to be distinct, this is a fact. The construction of the 3 regions as a united Tibet under Lhasa Gov. before China’s invasion is assumed, however, an Amdo/Kham historian may tell us a different story. All regions and places within them have their own pre-invasion history, however, in the contemporary context of Tibet, the unity of the 3 regions became solidified and is now true, when all three regions joined forces to fight one common enemy, China.)
Gangchen Pa means “People from the Land of Snow”. His Holiness has been using this terminology in addressing Tibetans.
This is all I have for now. I will update this info if I learn more. Please feel free to correct or share any extra information regarding the new political vocabularies being used. I hope this was helpful to you all as it has been for me. And a special thanks to that friend for helping me with this.
Dawa-la,
it wasn’t SI-WANG it was Si-Kyong.
(SI meaning politics and Kyong meaning to lead/run/administer) Si-Kyong = Political Leader)
This term will be debated in the coming session of the exile parliament. If passed, it will be included in the Charter for Tibetans-in-Exile and henceforth there will be no Kalon Tripa but Si-Kyong.
A new piece of writing.
Please, try to discrib a deeper explanation of Bod pa.
1. According to Amdo Gedun Chöpels Book, name of the Bod comes from Bon.
2. Regarding to 821 stone piller agreement, Bod yul means whole Tibet, no acception Amdo or Khampa.
3. We call Lhasawa, Khampa, Tsangpa, Utsangwa, Amdowa. Bod pa means all Tibetan.
i saw the word Bodpa in Political History of Shakapa. Bodpa also means ‘to run’. During Indian prehistoric, there was a king from Magada( situated in Bihar) who had five princess and between them happened a war and one of his son’s troops(Rupati) were ran away from their land to Himalaya’s region(Yarlung) in the form of lady so they could escaped from the enemies. So,they lived there and their heredity were known as bod as they run away from India and the people were known as Bodpa
This is topical buddhist version of the explanation of Tibetan history mixing with legend.
Without the power of legend, mere mortal history lacks inspiration, any struggle could loose steam due to lack of historical, spiritual, religious, and lengendary sources. Every race on this earth, has idea of their own belongingness, separateness, and uniquesness. Such as Promised-Lang-by-God for the Jews, Holy Mecca for the Muslims and so forth. If we start saying this is Buddhist Legend and that is Buddhist Legend, then there is nothing Tibetan Uniqueness as such. Maybe someone would argue Bonpo is the real and authentic Tibetan, the fact of matter is, even Bonpos believe their {rather our ancestors’s tradition} religious source is from Yul-Olmo located in Takzig land, which is kind of holy land located in present Iran. Thus, we are reducing ourselves as nothingness. Instead of spending time and energy in disproving that is fictional legend because of your shallow grade one scientific knowledge, we need to utilize the power of legend that forebears passed down which is the most effective way in unifying power for the struggle. Here I by no means arguing everyone has to believe in it as real and take it as facts rather than fiction. Far from it, I am arguing the usefulness of it because no one can create legends overnight, it happens through human cultural evolutions and expansion of human imagination. Legends are fictional, but it makes everything real, but unrealistically hard to achieve. Due to its down-to-earth closeness to human consciiousness, and remoteness of its meaning, magnifies its fames and give anchors to mortal beings. I dont think neither the mythology of Greek nor the mythology of Indian Mahabaratha is real and existed, but simply it gives people of the land a direction in their cultural development and historical richness, and it gives a sense of self-significance.
I think it’s better to use Si Kyong Wa, instead of Si wang. Prof. Samdhong Ripoche used term Si Kyong wa.
བཀའ་བཤག་གི་མཐའ་མའི་གསུང་བཤད་ནང་དུ་༼སྲིད་སྐྱོང་བ་༽བེད་སྤྱོད་གཏོང་ཡོད་པ་ལས། སྲིད་དབང་གཅིག་པུར་བེད་སྤྱད་མེད། སྲིད་དབང་ཟེར་ན་ Political power ལས་སྲིད་སྐྱོང་བའམ་སྲིད་དབང་བ་ political leader དེ་ལ་གོ་བ་མིན།
དེར་བརྟེན་སྲིད་སྐྱོང་བ་བེད་སྤྱད་ན་ལེགས་པར་མཐོང།
ངས་དབྱིན་ཡིག་ནང་བོད་པ་དང་འབྲེལ་བའི་གོང་གི་འབྲེལ་བཤད་བྱས་ཡོད་པ་དེར་བསམ་ཚུལ་ཞིག་བཤད་པ་ཡིན། འོན་ཀྱང་མཐོང་རྒྱུ་མེད་པ་ཆགས་འདུག།
སླར་ཡང་ནན་གྱིས་བརྗོད་འདོད་བྱུང་།
༡༽ མཁས་དབང་དགེ་འདུན་ཆོས་འཕེལ་གྱིས་དཔྱད་རྩོམ་ལས། བོད་ནི་བོན་གྱི་ཆོས་ལས་ཟུར་ཆགས་པའི་ཐ་སྙད་ཞིག་ཡིན་པ་གསུངས་འདུག་པས་ཨ་མདོ་བ་་དང་། ལྷ་ས་བ་སོགས་ཁྱད་པར་མེད་པར་མཐོང་།
༢༽ ༨༢༡ ལོར་འོན་ཞང་རྡོ་རིང་ལས་བོད་བོད་ཡུལ་དུ་སྐྱིད་རྒྱ་རྒྱ་ཡུལ་དུ་སྐྱིད་ཞེས་པ་ལས་སྐབས་དེའི་བོད་ནི་ད་ལྟའི་་བོད་ཆོལ་ཁ་གསུམ་གྱི་ས་ཆ་ཆ་ཚང་ལ་གོ་ཐུབ་ལ། སྲིད་དབང་གིས་དབང་སྒྱུང་བྱ་ཕྱོགས་ཀྱང་དེ་ལྷར་རེད།
༣༽དབུས་གཙང་གི་མི་ལ་དབུས་གཙང་ཟེར། ཁམས་ནས་ཡོངས་བའི་མི་ལ་ཁམས་པ་ཟེར། ཨ་མདོ་ནས་ཡོངས་བའི་མི་ལ་ཨ་མདོ་བ་ཟེར། ལྷ་ས་ནས་ཡོངས་བའི་མི་ལ་ལྷ་ས་བ་ཟེར། གཙང་ནས་ཡོངས་བའི་མི་ལ་གཙང་པ་ཟེར།
དེར་བརྟེན་བོད་པ་ཟེར་ན་དབུས་གཙང་ཁོ་ནར་གོ་དགོས་པ་དེ་མི་འགྲིག་པར་མཐོང་བས་ན། དྲྭ་རྒྱའི་ཐོག་མ་བཞག་ན་དགེ་མཚན་ཆེ་བར་མཐོང་། དེ་མིན་གཏིང་ཟབ་པའི་བོད་ཀྱི་ཤེས་བྱ་མི་རྟོགས་པར་འབྲེལ་བཤད་བྱ་བ་དང་གཅིག བོད་མིའི་གཅིག་སྒྲིལ་གྱི་འདུ་ཤེས་ལ་དོ་ཕོག་གཏོང་བ་དང་གཉིས། མ་ཤེས་ཤེས་ཁུལ་བྱེད་པ་དང་གསུམ། དེ་དོན་དགོངས་འཇགས་ཡོད་པ་མཁྱེན།།།
Thanks Bhuchung la and Karma la. I’ve made the following edits. Feel free to point out any other mistakes or misunderstandings and add information.
Thank you again!
Dawa
Even before the increased inter-province unity that followed 2008, everyone I met in Amdo was referring to themselves as bod-pa, but they usually pronounce it as wö-pa or even wot-pa (the Amdo pronunciation of the same spelling) instead of bhö-pa. In some places people also used the central Tibetan pronunciation to refer distinctly to people from central Tibet/the TAR.
Thanks for clarifying that Rich. But I’d like to point out the quick def. i put up is in the context of why HH chose to use “Gangchen Pa” instead of Bod-pa.
Also, before Chinese invasion. Tibetan administration power and authority in Kham and Amdo were questionable and is the cause of many studies and debate. But one thing that did become clear during Chinese invasion and in exile was the united consciousnesses of the 3 provinces as “Bod-pa” pushed forward, but not limited to, by the common enemy.
Before China’s invasion, the word “Bod-pa” def included Utsangpa’s but it is not so clear in referencing Amdowa’s and Khampa’s.
There is some misunderstanding regarding the term “bod-pa”. There is no doubt that it includes all Tibetans from the 3 provinces. Amdowa or Khampa is a secondary identity.
Amdowas and Khampas proudly call them as ‘bod-pa’ pronounced as ‘wod-pa’.
HHDL use terms like “Bod-pa” and “Gangchen pa” interchangeably and Those who are familiar with Tibetan literary world knows that these two terms are synonymous.
He he he
Bodpa referring to people from U-Tsang is totally wrong, because it does not matter where one from in the all Tibetans regions, everyone addresses himself or herself as Bodpa, in English it means Tibetan and in Chinese it means Zangzu. U-Tsang people refer to people from Amdo as amdowa, it does not mean they are not Tibetans, rather it could be U-Tsangpas bias against people from outside U-Tsang and also a sense of separateness which is the source of regionalism, it could have origin in political administration of Tibetan Government before 1959 too. If you are talking about Tibet as a physical land, then people from outside TAR or those beyond the administration of Gangden Podrang usually refers Tibet as TAR region because of historical reasons, none-the-less, they don’t take away their identity as Tibetans. Regarding Gangchen pa, it is not a recent phenomenon that HHDL used Gangchen pa for the first time, he has been using it for a long time because it is more inclusive politically. Most of the time, the terminology GANGCHENPA is used by Tibetan poets and writers who writes in Tibetans because the meaning is deeper than using the mere word “Tibetan”. General public is totally ignorant about the deep meaning and its implication.
NG
Additional+
The word Gangchenpa is neither a newly constructed word by HHDL of the 14th in line nor the first time that This HHDL used it, Tibetan as language is very rich, usually we say we have rich language, but we seldom know the richness. If we start writing like this, then it is quite embarrasing for the language. So in order to know it, probably I need to remind the author of this piece that in Tibetan poetry world, there is something called Thun-jig-ming-kyi-nam-drang or Same meaning with multiple words, kind of Tibetan analogy. All these words are mastered by Tibetan poets and writers in their literary master pieces which is quite different from layman’s language. Tibet is direct and simple layman’s language, Genchenpa is a literary word, Gangchen means Snowy or rather Gang means snow and Chen means have or there is or belongs to something, Pa means the person when used in combination, singularly used got no specific meaning. So gangchenpa’s means goes something like peopel who are from or live in a place where is a snow, generally it is termed as Tibetan as a whole because the general perception and practical reason is that Tibetan Plateau is encircled by snow mountains except from the east. Also read HHDL’s earlier speeches since exile, the word Gangchenpa is extensively used.
སྲིད་དབང་ is a noun, it means political power. Obviously it does not refer to any persons who hold the power. It describes political authority.
སྲིད་སྐྱོང་པ་ also is a noun. It means holder of the political power or person who administers political administration or weilds political power. So in this case, Lobsang Sangay is the person who weilds political authority.