ISSN 0970-5368 THE Vol. XXX & Vol.XXXI, No.4 & No.1, Winter 2005 & Spring 2006 TIBET JOURNAL a publication for the study of Tibet The Tibet Journal EDITORIAL BOARD Geshe Lhakdor, Gyatsho Tshering, Tashi Tsering, Nathan Katz, Bikkhu Pasadika, Anne-Marie Blondeau, Per Kværne, Toni Huber POLICIES The Tibet Journal is a quarterly publication of the Library of Tibetan Works & Archives (LTWA) devoted to the presentation of scholarly and general interest articles on Tibetan culture and civilization by Tibetans and non-Tibetans. Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Editorial Board of The Tibet Journal or the LTWA. Responsibility for views expressed and the accuracy of articles rests entirely with the authors. EDITORIAL CORRESPONDENCE The Tibet Journal welcomes submission of articles and research papers in English, adequately substantiated or otherwise documented, with Wylie romanisation system. Article should be typed and double-spaced. We request that all contributions sent to the journal have both the print and diskette/CD copy (in MS Word). Contributors will receive a copy of the Journal, and up to 20 offprints of the particular article. Unaccepted articles will be returned upon request. The Journal encourages readers’ comments on articles published in recent issues. Address articles, rejoinders, editorial enquiries, and books for review to: Managing Editor, The Tibet Journal, Library of Tibetan Works & Archives, Gangchen Kyishong, Dharamsala 176 215, H.P., INDIA Tel: +91-1892-222467, 226095, Fax: +91-1892-223723, Email: tjeditor@ltwa.net, visit <www.ltwa.net> PRINT SUBSCRIPTION/DISTRIBUTION We have appointed M/S Biblia Impex Pvt. Ltd. as the sole distributing and selling agent of The Tibet Journal in print form w.e.f. Vol.XII, 1987. Please send all enquiries relating to subscriptions to: Biblia Impex Pvt. Ltd., 2/18, Ansari Road, New Delhi 110 002, INDIA, Email: contact@bibliaimpex.com, Website: <www.bibliaimpex.com> ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION RATES Inland Rs. 350 Single copy Rs. 100 Overseas US $ 45 (Air Mail) Single copy US $ 12 (Air Mail) ELECTRONIC SUBSCRIPTION Following an agreement, we have appointed EBSCO Publishing, USA, our sole distributing and selling agent for electronic publication w.e.f. Vol.XXVII, 2002. For subscription contact EBSCO Publishing, 10 Estes Street, Ipswich, Massachusetts 01938-0682, USA, Email: ep@epnet.com, Website: <www.epnet.com> COPYRIGHT Except where otherwise declared, the entire contents of The Tibet Journal are under the protection of the Indian Copyright Act of 1957, the Berne Convention of 1956, and the Universal Copyright of 1952. In case of reprint usage, the Managing Editor should be informed and source credit given to the authors of the individual articles, as well as to The Tibet Journal. The Tibet Journal A publication for the study of Tibet Contributions to the study of Tibetan medicine Alessandro Boesi & Francesca Cardi GUEST EDITORS Geshe Lhakdor Dhondup Tsering EDITOR-IN-CHIEF MANAGING EDITOR WINTER & SPRING VOL.XXX, NO.4 & VOL.XXXI, NO.1 2005 & 2006 ARTICLES sMan and Glud: Standard Tibetan Medicine and Ritual Medicine in a Bon Medical School and Clinic in Nepal Colin Millard Tibetan Medicine in Gyalthang Denise M. Glover Hybrid Methodologies in the Lhasa Mentsikhang: A Summary of Resources for Teaching about Tibetan Medicine Frances Garrett Plant categories and types in Tibetan materia medica Alessandro Boesi Principles and methods of assembling Tibetan medicaments Francesca Cardi Nyes pa: A brief review of its English translation Yonten Gyatso “An excellent measure”: the battle against smallpox in Tibet, 1904-47 Alex McKay 3 31 55 65 91 109 119 Zurkharwa Lodro Gyalpo (1509-1579) on the Controversy of the Indian Origin of the rGyud bzhi Olaf Czaja A Hitherto Unknown ‘Medical History’ of mTsho smad mkhan chen (b.16th cent.) Olaf Czaja 131 153 BOOK REVIEWS Mahayanasutralamkara, The Universal Vehicle Discourse Literature edited by Prof. Robert Thurman Prof. Parmananda Sharma Britain and Tibet 1765-1947: A select annotated bibliography of British relations with Tibet and the Himalayan states including Nepal, Sikkim and Bhutan by Julie G. Marshall Alex Mckay Exile as Challenge: The Tibetan Diaspora, Bernstorff, Dagmar and Hubertus von Welck (eds.) Feminism, Nationalism and Exiled Tibetan Women by Alex Butler Geoff Childs The Autobiography of Jamgön Kongtrul: A Gem of Many Colors translated by Richard Barron Martin A. Mills The Practice of Dzogchen by Longchen Rabjam translated by Tulku Thondup Georgios Halkias The Life of Buddhism, Frank E. Reynolds and Jason A. Carbine (eds.) The Power of DenialÑBuddhism, Purity and Gender by Bernard Faure D.R. Chaudhry 173 174 174 179 181 182 184 OBITUARIES Heinrich Harrer (1912 - 2006) Henry George Baker (1918 - 2006) Roger Croston 189 193 CONTRIBUTORS 197 Plant categories and types in Tibetan materia medica Alessandro Boesi INTRODUCTION Nowadays as in the past medicinal substances represent an important resource for Tibetan people both for health and wealth. Tibetan medical institutes and independent practitioners carry out activities related to drug identification, collection, and the compounding and administration of remedies. Tibetan communities have been always relying as a source of income on the bartering and selling of several products taken from the natural environment such as rhubarbs, Fritillaria bulbs, caterpillar fungus and musk deer pods, sought after by practitioners of Tibetan, ayurvedic and Chinese medicine and at present also by pharmaceutical and phyto-pharmaceutical companies. The materia medica of Tibetan medicine, significantly influenced by Ayurveda1 (as other aspects of the Tibetan medical science) after the translation into Tibetan language of medical and tantric treatises of Indian origin, has been enriched and modified during the centuries according to the needs of the population and has been adapted to the environmental conditions of Tibetan regions. Even at the present time Tibetan traditional doctors try to find new drugs. In addition, owing to the great extension of the area over which Tibetan medicine is practised, the many substances of mineral, animal, and plant origin of Tibetan pharmacopoeia may vary according to the region, climate and vegetation, medical schools, local traditions, and foreign influences. Fundamental medical treatises, their commentaries, and several texts of materia medica are devoted to describing features, qualities and therapeutic properties, time and methods of collection, and processing of medicinal substances. Yet when I decided to research into Tibetan medicinal plants and in particular on their classification I realised that it was not possible to accomplish this study only through the reading of the written sources because the information on the different categories is for the most part too concise for grasping the criteria upon which they have been devised. The explanation of the master is absolutely crucial to completely understand plant actual features, classifications, properties, and ways of exploitation. Therefore I decided to ask directly to Tibetan traditional doctors about these categorisations. The research fieldwork has been conducted with practitioners from different Tibetan regions focusing on those who collect and process medicinal substances and know fundamental medical texts and pharmacopoeias. Participant observation and open-ended conversations have been mostly used as methods of investigation. Semi-structured interviews have also been conducted with other Tibetan doctors who do not perform the above activities2. Some systems of medicinal substance categorisation are described in classical literary sources. The classification may be devised on the basis of medicinal substance morphological, biological and ecological features (particularly for plants), taste (ro)3, potency (nus pa)4, and on the basis of the disease (nad) cured. For example, medicinal substances may be separated into two groups: the former 66 TIBET JOURNAL includes drugs that cure hot diseases (tsha nad) whereas the latter consists of drugs that cure cold diseases (grang nad). Some classifications are mainly practical such as the one proposed by some practitioners from Baragaon (central Nepal) who distinguish two types of medicinal plants: the ones growing at high altitude, named mtho sa sman, “medicines of high altitude areas”, and the ones growing at low altitude, named dma’ sa sman, “medicines of low altitude areas”. The principal aim of this article is to examine that traditional classification which separates Tibetan medicinal plants into categories, sub-categories and “types”5 and in particular to try to explain the criteria upon which they have been worked out. The analysis does not concern the categories including the medicines of mineral and animal origin. The first part of the article is devoted to introducing the categories of medicinal substances, in the following part the different categories of medicinal plants are thoroughly examined. The last section is devoted to analysing the classification of medicinal plants in “types”. Each category has been examined initially on the basis of the information available on written sources. After I have tried to explain this information according to the elucidations given by the informants, the data concerning the botanical identification of the plant specimens gathered during my fieldwork and the identification proposed in modern pharmacopoeias. The classification of Tibetan materia medica in its entirety has been dealt with by Francesca Cardi6 in her dissertation work on Tibetan pharmacopoeia and preparation of the remedies. Meyer7 in his book devoted to Tibetan medicine has briefly dealt with the categories of medicines. CATEGORIES OF MEDICINES In Tibetan medicine medicinal substances (sman)8, natural and non-natural, are classified in several categories and sub-categories. Although the classical classification described in fundamental treatises is accepted by all practitioners, I emphasise the discrepancy in the conception of certain categories, and in particular of the categories of thang sman, “medicines of the plains”, and sngo sman, “herbaceous medicines”. The cause of this disparity depends on the practitioners’ level of education, and on the influence of the modern treatises of Tibetan medicine, which introduce new concepts and systems of classifying medicinal substances. This recent phenomenon is enhanced also because the traditional classification of medicinal plants in categories, according to fieldwork observations and to the opinion of the informants, has little practical relevance and in this way it may be easily substituted by a simpler one. As far as the level of knowledge of Tibetan materia medica is concerned, the recent standardisation and industrialisation of the process of medicament production in the biggest medical institutes, the specialisation of practitioners and the capillary distribution of the medicines to the dispensaries (for example to the ones which depend on the Tibetan Medical & Astro Institute of Dharamsala, Himachal Pradesh, India) in many regions, imply that only a portion of practitioners has an in-depth knowledge of medicinal substances. In spite of that other traditional doctors in all Tibetan regions have been carrying on practising Tibetan medicine in a traditional way and know very well its pharmacopoeia. The types of substances included in each category may be heterogeneous. As it will be shown in the next sections, some categories consist of medicines coming exclusively from minerals, others include only medicines coming from plants, one PLANT CATEGORIES AND TYPES ... 67 category includes medicines from living beings, one category consists of different types of substances, another includes only mineral substances except for one that is a plant. The following categories (rigs) of medicines are described in The Four Tantras (rGyud bzhi) and in its commentary The Blue Beryl (Vaidurya sngon po): rin po che’i sman (precious medicines), rdo’i sman (stone medicines), sa’i sman (earth medicines), rtsi sman9 (essence medicines), shing sman (medicines coming from woody plants), thang sman (medicines of the plains), sngo sman (herbaceous medicines), srog chags sman (medicines coming from living beings), and lo thog gi sman (crop medicines). The expressions properly designating each category are not commonly employed by the practitioners in their practical activities, but only during theoretical discussions on the materia medica. Differently some other categories of medicines are described in the Crystal Rosary (Shel phreng): tshwa sman (salt medicines), chu’i sman (water medicines), me’i sman (fire medicines), and gdus pa’i sman (concentrated medicines). I point out that in The Four Tantras and consequently in The Blue Beryl the different groups of medicinal substances are described in a chapter whose aim is to describe their potencies10. Plants are included in five among the eight categories above mentioned: rdo’i sman (or sa sman according to the text), rtsi sman, shing sman, thang sman, sngo sman, and lo thog gi sman. The three categories that include the majority of medicinal plants (shing sman, thang sman, sngo sman) may be separated into some subgroupings worked out on the basis of the plant organs that are gathered and\or employed as medicines such as leaves, flowers, and stems. According to the The Four Tantras11 and The Blue Beryl12 shing sman and thang sman are divided into sub-groupings whereas the category sngo sman is not. I emphasise that in these texts the drugs that belong to rtsi sman, shing sman, and thang sman are listed together without setting any limit between the categories and between their sub-groupings and, as far as the categories shing sman and thang sman are concerned, their constituents are listed together without any order. Thus it is very difficult to distinguish them. This might suggest that it is not very important to know to which of the above categories a drug belongs probably because this does not have significant implications on its potency. Yet the drugs that belong to the category rtsi sman can be distinguished more easily since they are listed together and because of the indications given in The Blue Beryl, as it will be explained in the section devoted to this category. Differently from the two texts above, the author of The Crystal Rosary describes several sub-groupings also in the category sngo sman and he clearly differentiates the shing sman category by enumerating the constituents according to their subgroupings13. The thang sman medicines are listed without distinguishing their sub-groupings 14 as in The Four Tantras and The Blue Beryl. According to the authors of the two texts above on one side and to De’u dmar dge bshes on the other one, the categories shing sman, thang sman, and sngo sman exhibit a significant disparity in their content. In The Four Tantras and The Blue Beryl many plants included amongst the sngo sman such as thang phrom 15, dres ma (Iris spp.) 16, dwa ba (Arisaema spp.), and mtshe ldum (Ephedra spp.), are considered in the Shel phreng as thang sman. Moreover, according to The Four Tantras and The Blue Beryl, woody plants such as shug pa tsher can (Juniperus spp.), mdzo mo (Caragana spp.), skyi ba (Sophora 68 TIBET JOURNAL moorcroftiana) 17 , dbyi mong, (Clematis spp.), and ba lu (Rhododendron anthopogon)18 are included in the category sngo sman, “herbaceous medicines”. These drugs are considered—probably more correctly considering their biological and morphological features—as shing sman in the Shel phreng. Curiously in The Four Tantras, se rgod (Rosa spp.) and skyer pa (Berberis spp.) are mentioned twice: firstly when the shing sman, rtsi sman, and thang sman medicines are listed and secondly among the sngo sman medicines in the same chapter19. Medicinal salts (tshwa sman), which are placed in a category of its own in the Shel phreng20, in The Four Tantras and The Blue Beryl are listed amongst the shing sman and the thang sman medicines. The author of The Four Tantras describes only a part of the actual plants that belong to each category of medicines probably with the intention of giving some examples. As a matter of fact many other plants (and other medicinal substances of mineral and animal origin) are mentioned in the other parts of The Four Tantras. sDe srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho has systematized these medicines in The Blue Beryl 21 and in the Tibetan Thankas 22 he has commissioned, where they are described as supplementary materia medica (kha skong gras, “supplementary class”). Medicinal substances have been organized more properly in relation to their features in the Shel phreng where the categories and sub-categories (except for the thang sman) are neatly separated and the number of medicinal substances described is exhaustive. I have chosen this text as the main classical reference also because of its frequent use by the informants and the relatively detailed plant descriptions (concerning both morphological and ecological plant features) given by the author and since it constitutes the main reference source for the recently published modern texts of Tibetan materia medica. An interesting aspect of the classification of medicinal plants (and in general of all kinds of medicinal substances) in Tibetan medicine is the disparity in the criteria employed to group the plant together in the different categories. The constituents of the category rtsi sman are assembled on the basis of their peculiar therapeutic properties and fragrance, the category shing sman is worked out on the basis of the plant features from which its components come and the categories thang sman and sngo sman are devised on the basis of plant morphological, biological features, and environment of growth. I note that in The Four Tantras23 the term rtswa is employed to indicate thang and sngo medicinal plants at the same time. Actually several traditional doctors from the regions of Litang, Baragaon, and Ladakh include in a single group called sman rtswa, “medicinal herbaceous plants”, and rtswa sman, “herbaceous medicines”, all medicinal herbaceous plants. This classification is probably used for convenience. In all Tibetan cultural regions the new designations and categorisation systems introduced in the modern Tibetan pharmacopoeias certainly under Chinese influence are seldom used although they are known by the new generations of practitioners and also by some traditional doctors from isolated regions because of the rapid diffusion of the above texts. Karma chos ’phel (1993) presents three new categories of medicinal substances: gter dngos kyi sman rdzas, “mineral medicinal substances”; skye dngos kyi sman rdzas, “medicinal substances which grow”, that includes medicinal plants; srog chags PLANT CATEGORIES AND TYPES ... 69 kyi sman rdzas, “medicinal substances of living beings”. The author’s intention is probably to work out a classification that reflects the one of modern science in three kingdoms: mineral, plant, and animal. Yet it is not possible to adapt the drug traditional classification to the classification system of modern science because the criteria upon which they are based are different. For example, it is doubtful whether the traditional category of the “essence medicines” (rtsi sman) can be included in the so-called skye dngos kyi sman rdzas group, “medicinal substances which grow”, as proposed by Karma chos ’phel, because besides a few medicinal plants some substances of animal and mineral origin such as gla rtsi (musk) and brag zhun (bitumen)24 are also listed in this category. Categories of medicines that include plants STONE MEDICINES AND EARTH MEDICINES The medicine called rdo dreg (Parmelia tinctorum25) is included in the category of stone medicines (rdo’i sman)26 according to the pharmacopoeia Shel phreng27 whereas according to The Four Tantras (bShad rgyud 28) it is included in the category of earth medicines (sa sman)29. The expression rdo dreg may be translated as “stone incrustation”. Although considered as a plant by all informants, it has probably been included among the medicines coming from the stones because it appears to be growing directly from the rocks, as some practitioners from Litang and Baragaon assert. In the modern treatises of Tibetan materia medica, rdo dreg has been included either in a new-devised category including stone medicines and earth medicines, called sa rdo’i sman30, or amongst the herbaceous medicines (sngo sman)31 reflecting a recent adjustment of the classification according to the one of modern botany certainly under Chinese influence. ESSENCE MEDICINES The essence medicines (rtsi sman)32 represent a peculiar category that consists of heterogeneous components. According to written sources, these medicinal substances may come from sentient beings as in the case of gla rtsi (musk)33 and dom mkhris (bear bile)34, from stones as brag zhun (bitumen)35, and from plants (see below). Here follows the description of this category according to The Four Tantras36 (the same is given in the Blue Beryl): “the rtsi sman originate from herbaceous plants (rtswa), woody plants (shing), and sentient beings (srog chags).” Differently, according to the Shel phreng37, the rtsi sman “originate from woody plants (shing), from the plants of ldum type, from the plants of sngo type38, from sentient beings (srog chags), and from stones (rdo)…” Here the essence medicines also include a substance (brag zhun) that comes from the stones and the two distinct expressions ldum and sngo are employed in the place of the term rtswa to indicate herbaceous plants. The author of the rGyud bzhi does not give any indication about which substances belong to the essence medicines: all the substances included in the shing sman, rtsi sman, and thang sman are listed without setting any limit between them. Nonetheless in the Vaidurya sngon po39, when commenting this 70 TIBET JOURNAL category, it is stated that some practitioners affirm that all the medicines listed between gi wang (liver and gall-bladder bezoars) and utpala (Meconopsis spp.) belong to the rtsi sman. The above medicines are gi wang, cu gang, gur gum, sug smel, dzwa ti, li shi, ka ko la40, gla rtsi, dom mkhris, and utpala. Thus in this text, essence medicines consist of ten substances. Differently in the Shel phreng De’u dmar dge bshes41 lists 12 different rtsi medicines: ga bur42, dzwa ti, li shi, sug smel, cu gang, gur kum, gi wang, gla rtsi, dom mkhris, dbang po ril bu (intestinal bezoars), and brag zhun. In this text, among the rtsi sman of plant origin, in the place of utpala, which here is included in the category sngo sman43, there is ga bur, which is assigned to the category shing sman in The Four Tantras. The medicine of animal origin dbang po ril bu and the one of mineral origin brag zhun have been added. In the rGyud bzhi brag zhun is placed in the category of earth medicines (sa sman). As far as utpala44 is concerned, it might be speculated that in ancient times it corresponded to the imported Indian blue lotus (Nymphaea nouchali)45 and therefore was included in the rtsi sman category as described in the Four Tantras owing probably to its fragrant perfume and the lotus being a symbol of purity, perfection, and compassion. Later on, when some species of Himalayan poppy (Meconopsis spp.) were selected as local substitutes, the drug was reallocated in the category of the herbaceous medicines sngo sman, as shown in more recent classical pharmacopoeias as the Shel phreng46 and the materia medica of ’Jam dpal rdo rje47. A few modern Tibetan pharmacopoeias, most probably under Chinese influence, introduce new elements among the essence medicines. In the materia medica of dGa’ ba’i rdo rje dbyar rtswa dgun ’bu (Cordyceps sinensis), a parasite mushroom traditionally considered as a herbaceous plant by Tibetan people48, is included among the rtsi sman and designated with the recentlydevised name rtswa da byid49. Yet another modern pharmacopoeia 50 published at Lhasa regards the same medicine as belonging to the category ldum bu thang sman that mainly includes herbaceous plants. The dbyar rtswa dgun ’bu is not mentioned in the fundamental treatises of Tibetan medicine as rGyud bzhi and Vaidurya sngon po and in the classical pharmacopoeia Shel gong and in its commentary Shel phreng, but it is described in the illustrated materia medica written in the XIX century by ’Jam dpal rdo rje51, a practitioner from Mongolia, where it is included in the category of herbaceous medicine (sngo sman)52. The analysis of the expression rtsi is significant to assess the features of the essence medicines. The Tibetan-English dictionary of Chandra Das 53 proposes the following definitions: “varnish, paint”, “all fluids of a certain consistency, such the juice of some fruits, certain secretions, etc.”. These definitions cannot be employed for the term rtsi according to its use in Tibetan medicine. Also Meyer54 has stated that the expression rtsi “ne peut pas être traduit par comme cela a été fait dans la table des matières de “An Illustrated Tibeto-Mongolian Materia Medica of Ayurveda”55, car ce groupe de drogues comprend des produits aussi divers que la bile d’ours, le camphre et les clous de girofle”. In order to understand the nature of the essence medicines, I have asked the informants the following questions: what is the reason for assembling together these drugs that apparently seem to be so different? Which are the PLANT CATEGORIES AND TYPES ... 71 parameters that justify this classification? The first answer given by many practitioners from different regions has been that the attribution of the term rtsi to certain substances indicates that they have strong therapeutic properties. In particular the fact that even a small amount (sman nyung nyung) of any rtsi medicine has strong potency (nus pa chen po) has often been emphasized as the fundamental feature. Hence, according to the informants, a little amount of them is enough to prepare medicaments. A traditional doctor from Baragaon states that the presence of fragrance is an important feature of the essence medicines as well: “when fragrance (dri ma) is absent—he says—there is no potency, even if the taste of the plant corresponds to the one described in medical texts.” Actually the majority of informants agree that the drugs included in the category of essence medicines have good fragrance (dri bzang) and that this scent denotes their curative properties 56. Almost all the drugs of this category actually have a strong fragrance and also in the Shel phreng57 the good fragrance dri bzang (and dri zhim) is attributed to the majority of them. A practitioner from Litang assigns to essence medicines the property of being “good medicines” (sman bzang po). He affirms that these drugs possess outstanding and long-lasting therapeutic properties. It may therefore be assumed that the expression rtsi mainly refers to the following conception: good fragrance—strong and concentrated medicine. In this way the definition of rtsi proposed by the Dharma Dictionary58, “essence”, “elixir”, “nectar”, seems more appropriate in Tibetan medicine. The modern pharmacopoeia of dGa’ ba’i rdo rje59 mentions a treatise named g.Yu thog dgongs rgyan where this category of medicines is defined as follows: “name of a class of medicines that are endowed with the essence (rtsi bcud) that provides sustenance to the bodily constituents and defeats the diseases”. After that60 it is also explained that the substances included in the category of rtsi sman have, among the others, the property of “increasing strength” (zungs skyed). Therefore the introduction of the dbyar rtswa dgun ’bu in this group may be ascribed to its properties as a tonic and aphrodisiac and to its great importance in Chinese medicine. Another drug recently introduced among the essence medicines is the horn of rhino (bse ru)61 which, like dbyar rtswa dgun ’bu, is a well-known product in China. Traditionally bSe ru is placed in the medicines of animal origin as reported in the Shel phreng62 and in the rGyud bzhi63. THE MEDICINES COMING FROM WOODY PLANTS The medicines named shing sman consist of drugs which come from woody plants (shing sdong). According to the rGyud bzhi64 the divisions of the shing sman are ten. Each of them is devised by assembling the plants of which the same organs are employed in medicine: fruits and seeds (’bras bu), flowers (me tog), leaves (lo ma), trunks (sdong po), branches (yal ga), skins (shun pa), resins (tshi ba), roots (rtsa ba), shoots (ldum bu) and marrow (rkang). I emphasise that several practitioners from Litang and Baragaon have stated that the meaning of the term ldum bu, usually employed to designate a category of medicines65 or generally herbaceous plants by common people, corresponds here to the expression gsar skyes66: “fresh shoots and leaves”. 72 TIBET JOURNAL Differently in the Shel phreng67 the divisions of the shing sman are eight68, the two divisions shoots (ldum bu) and marrow (rkang) are lacking. Although in the Shel gong69 the division of roots (rtsa ba) is mentioned at the beginning of the section devoted to shing sman, it is omitted in the following pages where the plants that belong to each division are described. The author gives the reason for the omission in the Shel phreng70 where he explains that, even if a group of shing sman designated rtsa ba exists, this division has not been dealt with independently owing to the fact that only the root of bra ma (Caragana spp.) is evocated during practical activities. Bra ma has been placed here in the sub-group of branches71. The same woody plant may be included in more than one division at the same time according to the plant organ used as medicine. For example, according to the Shel phreng, se ba72 (Rosa spp.) belongs to three divisions: 1) fruits and seeds (’bras bu), with the name of se rgod ’bras bu73; 2) flowers (me tog) as se ba’i me tog74; 3) skins (pags pa) as se rgod75. Similarly skyer pa (Berberis spp.) is included in the division of flowers as skyer pa’i me tog76 as well as in the division of skins as skyer pa77. In The Blue Beryl 78 it is stated that some practitioners affirm that all the medicines listed in this text between ga bur and a ga ru are shing sman, particularly ga bur, tsandan dmar po (Santalum album), tsandan dkar po (Pterocarpus santalinus), and a ga ru (Aquilaria sinensis)79. Yet the author also states that there are doubts on the above order because in the category of shing sman there are ten sub-groupings and, according to the above statement, only four examples are given. Actually many plants commonly categorized as shing sman as a ru ra (Terminalia chebula), ba ru ra (Terminalia bellirica), and skyu ru ra (Phyllanthus emblica)80 are listed in the following pages. According to the Shel phreng81, it seems that the sub-groups of shing sman and sngo sman (herbaceous medicines) are not seen by De’u dmar dge bshes exactly in the same way, because in the description of the sub-groups of shing sman he omits the term btu ba, “to gather”, which is employed in reference to sngo sman. The omission might suggest that the medicines coming from woody plants are not gathered locally. This may be explained considering that several of these medicines do not thrive on the Tibetan plateau and are bought on local markets already cut in parts. Nonetheless several medicinal woody plants thrive in the region of origin of the author of this famous treatise (east Tibet) as I could also verify in the Litang County and adjacent regions. De’u dmar dge bshes lists as example of shing sman some plants coming from the tropical and sub-tropical regions of India and China as tsan dan dkar po, tsan dan dmar po, and a ru ra (Terminalia chebula), but he also indicates se ba (Rosa spp.), a woody plant thriving in many Tibetan regions, as several other medicines coming from woody plants that I have gathered for example in the Litang County82. According to the descriptions of each medicine given in The Crystal Rosary, the majority of the plants included in the category shing sman come from the low altitude regions of India, China and Nepal (nearly 40%) and from the deep forested valleys at relatively low altitude (nearly 27 %) located in east, south Tibet, and at the fringe of the Tibetan plateau, which are called rong by Tibetan people. The woody medicines gathered over the high areas of the PLANT CATEGORIES AND TYPES ... 73 Tibetan plateau are fewer (nearly 33%). Although the above percentages are not very indicative since in the Shel phreng the descriptions of the growing areas of each plant are not always precise and sometimes not even existing, they are similar to the data that can be obtained by analysing the plant botanical identifications proposed by Karma chos ’phel: 34.35% of the woody medicines come from tropical and sub-tropical regions, 33.3% from the relatively lower Tibetan regions, and 32.35 % from the proper Tibetan plateau. I note that sometimes in modern pharmacopoeias a medicine included in this category may present some types which are herbaceous plants. For example, although the standard drug that corresponds to khyung sder 83 is a woody plant (Uncaria scandens), there are some types which are herbaceous plants as suggested by the determinant sngo placed at the beginning of their names84: a white type (sngo khyung sder dkar po, Saussurea katochaetoides)85 and a purple-brown type (sngo khyung sder smug po, S. stella)86. THE MEDICINES OF THE PLAINS AND THE HERBACEOUS MEDICINES These two categories of medicines have been dealt with in the same section since their distinction is not clear according to both informants and written sources, and because many practitioners tend to see them as a single group. The category thang sman is commonly designated by employing a few slightly different expressions according to the text considered and the informant. The rGyud bzhi87 mentions the term thang sman, “medicines of the plains”, whereas in the Shel gong88 this category is designated as ldum bu thang sman, “medicines of the plains and of ldum type”. In the Shel phreng89 three similar expressions are mentioned: thang sman, ldum sman, “ldum medicines”, and ldum bu’am thang sman, “medicines of the plains or of ldum type”.90 De’u dmar dge bshes, in a chapter devoted to introducing the different categories of medicines, explains that the expressions thang and ldum are equivalent 91 in the sense that they indicate the same category. Practitioners from all the regions where the fieldwork has been carried out employ the designations thang sman and ldum bu thang sman indifferently. The expression ldum sman has been seldom evoked. The rGyud bzhi 92 and the Shel phreng93 describe some sub-groupings of this category. They are worked out on the basis of the plant part which has to be gathered and therefore that is employed in medicine. In the former text five sub-groupings are described (rtsa ba, underground organs; ngar pa, stalk; lo ma, leaves; me tog, flowers; ’bras bu, fruits and seeds) whilst in the latter only four, the sub-group ngar pa not being mentioned. Curiously De’u dmar dge bshes does not list the medicines included in this category according to their sub-groupings, as he does with the other main categories of medicinal plants (shing sman et sngo sman), but all the medicines of the plains are presented together as it happens in the Four Tantras. As we have already explained in the section devoted to essence medicines, in the Four Tantras and in The Blue Beryl it is not possible to discern the drugs included in the category thang sman clearly, since all the shing sman, rtsi sman, and thang sman medicines are listed without setting any limit between them. 74 TIBET JOURNAL As concerns the category sngo sman, “herbaceous medicines”, it is also categorised in several sub-groupings devised on the basis of the plant part which has to be collected, as it is explained in the Shel phreng 94 where six subgroupings are described: the one whose underground organs (rtsa ba) are collected, the one whose leaves (lo ma) are gathered, the one whose flowers (me tog) are collected, the one whose fruits and seeds (bras ’bu) are collected, the one whose aerial portion of the plant along with fruits (lo sdong me ’bras) are gathered, and the one whose the entire plant without the stalk (rtsa lo me ’bras) is collected. This distinction is not mentioned in The Four Tantras and in The Blue Beryl. Most informants from different regions do not have precise ideas of what the real nature of the medicines that belong to the thang sman and sngo sman categories is and even learned practitioners do not clearly elucidate the differences between them. This phenomenon might be explained considering that the classification of medicinal plants in thang sman and sngo sman does not seem to have any practical utility according to informants. Actually a practitioner from Dhorpatan and some practitioners from Litang have affirmed that the plants included in these two categories share the same characteristics (mtshan nyid), the same particular qualities (khyad chos) and the same mode of use (lag len). Traditional classification may therefore be substituted, as we have shown in the above sections, with other usually simpler classification systems. This phenomenon is very common and many traditional doctors in different regions adopt a classification which does not differentiate thang sman and sngo sman, but they consider a category seen as including medicinal herbaceous plants. Other than using the term rtswa sman (herbaceous medicines), the tendency towards employing the expression sngo ldum sman (sngo and ldum medicines), as proposed by the authors of some modern treatises of Tibetan materia medica95 that have been recently spreading over all Tibetan regions, is not so common. This expression connotes medicinal herbaceous plants. Other practitioners employ the term sngo sman to indicate all medicinal herbaceous plants. In order to explain the real nature of the plants included in the category thang sman, the term thang will be analysed below. The common sense of this word is “plain”, “flatlands” 96. However in Tibetan medicine it may also designate a type of medicinal preparation, notably decoctions. Actually many informants from different regions have wrongly affirmed that the term thang 97 sman exclusively indicates decoctions and not also a category of medicinal substances. A few other informants have also incorrectly asserted that the thang sman include drugs of plant origin, which are used to prepare decoctions. Meyer98 has given similar explanations in his book devoted to Tibetan medicine. A small number of practitioners from different regions have suggested more interesting definitions of the thang sman. They affirm that the medicines of the plains grow on flatlands (thang) in opposition to the herbaceous medicines (sngo sman) which thrive on the mountains (ri la). However it is important to point out what is here the meaning of the expression thang according to the informants: it does not generally specify the flatlands located at low altitudes as the ones of India and China, but it also designates the localities of Tibetan regions that are endowed with bde mo and snyoms po99 qualities. The attribute PLANT CATEGORIES AND TYPES ... 75 bde mo is assigned to comfortable and pleasant areas and the attribute snyoms po to the localities that are uniform and evenly balanced as far as altitude, climate, and conformation of the ground are concerned. These features may certainly be ascribed to some Tibetan localities. In particular the informants have mentioned flatlands and valleys which are not situated at high altitudes. Tibetan people see high altitude areas as uninhabited high mountains, and as plateaus where, owing to the harsh climate, there are no villages and only nomads can live. A few traditional doctors from Baragaon, Litang, and Dharamsala have suggested a definition of the category thang sman, which is also mentioned in the medical dictionary gSo ba rig pa’i tshig mdzod g.yu thog dgongs rgyan 100, that describes the ecological setting of the plants belonging to this category: “Category of medicines that thrive in the flatlands and not in the elevated areas as stony mountains, slate mountains101 and snowy mountains”. The same source also mentions a commentary to the rGyud bzhi written by dPal spungs dbon Karma bstan ’dzin ’phrin las rab rgyas where it is stated that “As with the thang sman, they are medicines that do not grow in high areas and grow in flatlands like tig ta and ba sha ka.” Tig ta (Swertia chirayita)102 mostly grows on the southern slopes of the Himalayan Range between 1,000 and 2,500 metres and ba sha ka (Adhatoda vasica)103 thrives until 1,500 metres for example in India and in the Chinese province of Yunnan. The term thang is here employed with a sense that is opposite to the one of the term mtho sar and indicates relatively low and low altitude mountains areas. The two above definitions are similar to the ones given by our informants: the thang sman category consists of medicinal plants that do not thrive over high mountains and plateaus, but in low flatlands and in low and relatively low mountain areas. Therefore the translation “plateau medicines” of the expression thang sman given by some authors104 does not seem to be very accurate because the term plateau may connote either the entire Tibetan plateau or the high-cold flatlands of Tibet. According to practitioners and written sources, the herbaceous medicines (sngo sman) and not the medicines of the plains (thang sman) thrive in these areas. De’u dmar dge bshes105 has described the medicines of the plains according to their morphological and biological features: “Thang sman represent the plants whose underground organs are developed and whose aerial organs grow each year as the ones of woody plants, but which, except for the underground organs, perish in winter as the plants of the sngo type, and therefore are replaced each year. For example ma nu (Inula racemosa)106, lcum (Rheum palmatum)107, and according to The Four Tantras, the main thang sman are: tig ta (Swertia chirayita) and ba sha ka (Adhatoda vasica). Their underground organs have the essential nature of woody plants (shing), their stalks the one of the ldum type, their leaves and flowers the “green and tender” (sngo) one of herbaceous plants.”108 According to my fieldwork data and the botanical identifications of modern Tibetan materia medica109, the underground organs of the majority of thang sman are stout and thick, just as stated in the definition and in line with the examples proposed by De’u dmar dge bshes. 76 TIBET JOURNAL In the definition above, the three expressions shing, ldum and sngo are employed to describe the essential nature (rang bzhin) of the three different organs of plants belonging to the thang sman group and they clearly point out to different morphological traits. The only difficulty consists in the interpretation of the term ldum110 which indicates the features of stalks that are neither like the ones of woody plants (shing) nor as the ones of green-tender herbaceous plants (sngo). The examination of features and vegetative cycle of the plants taken as example by De’u dmar dge bshes may help us to ascertain to which kind of plant and plant traits the term ldum refers. Inula racemosa and Rheum palmatum are herbaceous plants that have a stout herbaceous stalk. The Indian tig ta 111 seems, according to De’u dmar dge bshes 112, a small woody plant (shing phran). Actually it is a robust herbaceous plant. Interestingly some practitioners from Litang designate ldum the stalk of some types of rhubarbs as lcum (Rheum palmatum) and chu skyur (Rheum alexandrae) in the same way as in the example proposed by the author of the Shel phreng. According to the informants, these two plants have a hard-rigid (’khregs pa) green stalk, which is endowed neither with an essential nature of sngo type nor of shing type. Ba sha ka (Adhatoda vasica) is a woody plant, according to the Shel phreng113. It should therefore not be included in the thang sman category also because its aerial organs survive in winter. Yet this plant, being imported from the hot regions of India, Nepal, and China and sold on local markets, might have not been observed directly on the field by Tibetan doctors who therefore do not know its vegetative cycle and have only seen stems and branches. In this reference some traditional doctors from Baragaon and Dharamsala have stated that some medicines of the plains may have a woody stem, but that it dries up at the beginning of the cold season. I will now examine the meaning of the term ldum bu which, according to the medical dictionary gSo ba rig pa’i tshig mdzod g.yu thog dgongs rgyan, is the following: “name of the herbaceous plants (sngo) that, as re ral114, dwa ba (Arisaema spp), and snya lo (Polygonum polystachyum)115, are not cultivated plants, naturally grown green grass (rtswa) and flowers planted in a garden, but that grow together with these.”116 The same source also mentions an almost identical definition ascribed to De’u dmar dge bshes117: “lDum bu are not cultivated plants, green grass and garden flowers, but the name of the herbaceous plants that grow together with these.” The three plants taken as examples in the above definitions are included in the category thang sman in the Shel phreng118. They exhibit morphological and ecological features that correspond to the ones described by De’u dmar dge bshes for the thang sman. Re ral, a stout plant having robust underground organs, and dwa ba with tuberous roots mostly grow in forests. sNya lo is a shrubby herbaceous plant which thrives between 2,000 and 4,000 metres. We may therefore put forward that the plants designated ldum mainly include herbaceous plants having robust underground organs and\or stout herbaceous stems. Only in some cases they are tiny shrubs. Thus thang medicines are also named ldum medicines because they may exhibit the above morphological features. This assumption is supported by the data reported by informants and written sources which attribute the category of herbaceous medicines (sngo sman) a PLANT CATEGORIES AND TYPES ... 77 few distinctive morphological and ecological features opposite to the ones of thang sman. Actually the majority of practitioners from different regions associate the expression sngo sman to medicinal herbaceous plants that are tiny, tender, that have small roots and grow mostly on the mountains (ri la). De’u dmar dge bshes corroborates these statements when in the Shel phreng119 writes that “the sngo [sman] are a type of herbaceous plants that have a type of tiny underground organs.” The analysis of the botanical identification of the plants belonging to this category, for example in the materia medica of Karma chos ’phel120, has shown that most botanical species consist of tiny herbaceous plants with slender underground organs. In the same treatise121 it is affirmed that sngo sman are plants which grow anew each year but the plants included in the thang sman category also share this feature. Thus the parameters of distinction between the categories thang sman and sngo sman may be the following: as concerns the underground organs, the size is tiny and slender in the ngo sman and big and robust in the thang sman; as concerns the stem, it is thin and green-tender in the former, stout and hardrigid in the latter; as concerns the environment of growth, the sngo sman thrive on high mountains and plateaus and the thang sman at lower altitude. According to some traditional doctors from Baragaon all these parameters need not to be present at the same time. After examining the plants included in the two categories it seems that morphological features, in particular underground organ size, are more important than the environmental ones in defining the medicines of the thang sman category. For example, chu rtsa is a stout herbaceous plant with a thick root, which grows at high altitude (4,100-5,200 m.). According to the descriptions given in The Crystal Rosary most of the sngo sman (nearly 90%) and the majority (roughly 75%) of thang sman come from Tibetan regions. These data are corroborated by the modern materia medica of Karma chos ’phel122 that presents the plant botanical identifications. According to it, the 68.75% of the thang sman come directly from proper Tibetan plateau areas while the 18.75% from the Tibetan regions called rong, which are relatively low forested river valleys. The 12.5% come from abroad, particularly from the sub-tropical and tropical regions of India, Nepal, and China. As to the sngo sman medicines, 78.41% come from proper Tibetan plateau regions, 15.41% from rong areas, and 6.18% from sub-tropical and tropical regions. THE CROP MEDICINES Several Tibetan pharmacopoeias as the Shel phreng123 describe a category including some vegetables and cereals and give it the name of lo tog gi sman, “crop medicines”, among which we find ’bras (Oriza sativa), sre da (Avena sativa), rgya sran (Vicia faba), yungs dkar (Brassica alba), la phug (Raphanus sativus), and a sho pa tra (Zea mays)124. This group is not described in The Four Tantras, where edible plants are dealt with in the three chapters devoted to dietetics125. In a modern Tibetan pharmacopoeia126 this category is designated ’bru’i sman, “grain medicines”. Although the meaning of the term ’bru is “a grain of anything”127, vegetables such as turnips (nyung ma, Brassica rapa) 128 and radish (la phug) are included in it. 78 TIBET JOURNAL THE TYPES Each medicinal substance, notwithstanding the category to which it belongs, may exhibit some types (rigs). Relatively detailed descriptions of them are presented in the Vaidurya sngon po129 and, furnishing interesting information as concerns plant morphological and ecological features, in the Shel phreng. Modern Tibetan medical texts give in-depth descriptions of the different plant types as well, most of which are based on the above classical treatises. The plant classification in types as reported in written sources is probably the most common categorisation, which however may not be accepted by all practitioners. Since Tibetan medicine is practised over a huge area throughout several countries130, its materia medica may show differences according to local vegetation, traditions, and foreign influences. All these factors may affect plant traditional identification and classification as our field data have shown. Thus Tibetan materia medica, as Tibetan medicine in general, is not to be considered as standard and static both in time and space, but as a tradition that has been constantly evolving. Plant types are usually differentiated and categorized on the basis of a small number of features, whose recognition may be crucial because each plant type may have peculiar therapeutic properties, a different time and method of gathering, drying, and a dissimilar use. Some plant types may belong to different plant forms 131 as in the case of khyung sder, a woody plant that has two herbaceous types: sngo khyung sder dkar po, and sngo khyung sder smug po132. Here follow the most frequent classification criteria. Some plant may be categorised on the basis of their therapeutic properties in three (or two) types. In this case the following determinants are added to the name of the plant: mchog, “superior”, which indicates the type having the best therapeutic properties; ’bring, “intermediate”, which specifies intermediate therapeutic properties; dman, “inferior”, designating the types having weak potency 133. Several types of well-known medicinal plants are categorized according to the above criterion as below: hong len mchog (Picrorhiza scrophulariiflora)134, hong len dman pa (Lagotis glauca)135; klu bdud rdo rje mchog (Codonopsis mollis) 136 , klu bdud rdo rje dman pa (Adenophora liliifolia)137; ug chos mchog (Incarvillea grandiflora)138, ug chos dman pa (Incarvillea arguta)139; spra thog (Leontopodium dedekensii) and spra ga dman pa (Gnaphalium strackeyi)140. I met a traditional doctor from Litang that was used to distinguishing subtypes (or varieties) of a plant type on the basis of the same criterion, each subtype having different therapeutic properties determined by the features of its environment of growth. This practical classification has been worked out by the practitioner for the area where he carries out the plant gathering. This is the case of the well-known medicinal plant bong nga that consists of four types141: amongst these, the type named bong nga nag po (Aconitum spp.), “black bong nga”, is a plant that has cold potency (nus pa bsil). Three subtypes of it are distinguished by the informant, each one having a different potency in relation to altitude and aspect142: bong nag143 mchog, “superior bong nag”, which thrives at high altitude on the shady side of the mountains and whose cold potency is particularly strong; bong nag ’bring, “intermediate bong PLANT CATEGORIES AND TYPES ... 79 nag”, which also grows on shady mountainsides, but at lower altitude, and that is why its potency is less strong; bong nag dman, “inferior bong nag”, which thrives on the sunny mountainsides. In this case the power of the sun decreases the cold potency of the plant, which is gathered only in case of lack in the other sub-types. The flower colour is a parameter frequently employed to distinguish and categorise the different types of a plant, for example, as concerns shang shang dril bu, “bell of shang shang” 144, a plant that belongs to the herbaceous medicines (sngo sman). Traditional doctors from different regions describe several types (they all belong to the botanical genus Primula) of this medicinal plant, which are distinguished from their flower colour. A practitioner from Baragaon recognizes three types: shang dril ser po (“yellow shang dril”, Primula sikkimensis), shang dril dkar po (“white shang dril”, P. atrodentata) and shang dril smug po (“purple-brown shang dril”, P. atrodentata) 145. Practitioners from Litang County distinguish the following types: shang dril ser po (P. sikkimensis), shang dril smug po (Primula sp.) and shang dril dmar po (“red shang dril”, P. secundiflora). A Tibetan doctor from Khyungpo (east Tibet) has reported that there are five types of this plant: shang dril dkar po, shang dril dmar po, shang dril ser po (P. sikkimensis), shang dril smug po, and shang dril nag po (“black shang dril, P. atrodentata). The informant has affirmed that the designation shang dril nag po, only used in Khyungpo and in few other Tibetan regions, is a synonym for the more common shang dril sngon po, “blue shang dril”. The name shang dril nag po is not mentioned in the classical and modern pharmacopoeias examined. Similarly, traditional doctors from the region of Dolpo use the expression shang dril sngon po as a synonym of shang dril nag po (Primula macrophylla)146, thus corroborating the information reported by the informant from Khyungpo. De’u dmar dge bshes147 describes three different classifications: 1) in three types: dmar po, dkar po, ser po; 2) in four types: dkar po, dmar po, sngon po, ser po; 3) in four types: dkar po, dmar po, smug po148, ser po. In the last classification model the author presents the classification parameters: the principal is the flower colour, but it is also stated that the red and the yellow types thrive on wet soils (chu las skye, “to be born from water”) whereas white and purple-brown types “grow on dry soils” (skam sar skye). The disparities between the classifications reported can be explained referring to changing ecological conditions and local traditions in the different Himalayan and Tibetan regions. Some classifications are devised according to the size of the plant or of some of its organs. In this case the determinant chen (big) may be added to the big type and the determinant chung (small) to the small type. For example, thar nu includes two types that exhibit similar morphological features and that are classified on the basis of the size of some of their organs: thar chen, “big thar nu” (Euphorbia wallichii), has larger and thicker leaves and a stouter stalk than the type named thar chung, “small thar nu” (Euphorbia longifolia)149. Three types of star bu (Hippophae spp.) are distinguished according to their height: star bu gnam star, star bu bar star, star bu sa star. For each type a determinant which points out to the height of the plant is employed: gnam, 80 TIBET JOURNAL “sky”, bar “intermediate space”, and sa, “ground”. The first designates the highest type, the last the lowest one150. Feminine (mo), masculine (pho) and, if necessary, hermaphrodite (ma ning) types of a plant may be distinguished in Tibetan medicine. The classification is usually worked out on the basis of the following parameters: plant general aspect, size of the entire plant or of one of its organs (usually flowers), other minute morphological features. Plant size is the most frequent parameter of classification: masculine types usually have a big size while feminine ones are small. Hermaphrodite types may exhibit intermediate size between masculine and feminine plants or simultaneous masculine and feminine features. This classification may also imply some inferences on the modalities of administration of each type. For example in the case of me tog glang sna151 masculine plants (pho glang, Pedicularis integrifolia) have to be administered to feminine patients and feminine plants (mo glang, Pedicularis anas)152 to male patients whereas hermaphrodite plants (ma ning glang) may be administered to both. Some plants are separated into types according to their environment of growth. Medicinal plant types may thrive in the meadows (spang), between rocks (brag), and in forests (nags). A traditional doctor from Baragaon categorises three types of mtshe ldum: brag mtshe, spang mtshe, and chu (water) mtshe, the last type thrives near streams and on wet grounds153. A few plants are separated into two types: the former, designated g.yung (domestic), usually grows in areas that are not located at high altitude as in forested valleys (rong) and near villages and sometimes even in house gardens (ldum ra); the latter, named rgod (wild), usually thrives on the mountains (ri la) at high altitude (sa cha mtho po) where the climate is harsh154. For example, De’u dmar dge bshes 155 describes two types of dwa ba: the type designated dwa rgod grows on the mountains, the one named dwa g.yung thrives in the cultivated fields. The classification may depend on the medical traditions Byang and Zur. At the end of the XV century two schools of Tibetan medicine were established by two famous traditional doctors: Byang pa, descendant of the king of Minyak (a region located in eastern Tibet), Se’u rgyal po, and Zur mkhar ba mNyam nyid rdo rje. The former established the Byang lugs medical tradition, the latter the Zur lugs one. These traditions, which exhibit little differences 156, formally survived until the reign of the Fifth Dalai Lama (1617-1682) in the seventeenth century. Some practitioners have stated that they may follow one of the two medical schools in the case of the classification and identification of certain medicinal plants. For example according to two informants from Khyungpo and Baragaon there is a type of dug mo nyung (Holarrhena antidysenterica) designated sngo dug mo nyung (Cynanchum vincetoxicum)157 that has been categorized and identified by the Byang school. Similarly they have affirmed that the identification of ut pal sngon po differs in relation to Byang and Zur schools: the former recognises it as an aster (Aster tricephalus)158, the latter as a blue poppy (Meconopsis spp.). The majority of practitioners over Tibetan regions adhere to the identification of the Zur tradition. PLANT CATEGORIES AND TYPES ... 81 CONCLUSION The classification of medicinal plants dealt with in this article is constant among traditional doctors from different Tibetan regions and almost corresponds to the one described on classical texts of Tibetan materia medica. Yet I emphasise the existence of a significant disparity of knowledge owing to the recent modern standardisation of Tibetan medicine. Many practitioners practising in dispensaries and clinics which depend on important medical institutes and who do not carry out any more the gathering of medicinal plants and do not make the remedies have an imprecise knowledge of the materia medica, of its classification and identification and of the criteria of attribution of curative properties to substances. Only a moderate number of informants, particularly independent practitioners, have a deep knowledge of medicinal plants and their use, based on a detailed knowledge of medical texts, an education with a learned master, and a great field experience. The recent introduction under Chinese influence of a new terminology and the attempt of devising a new classification reflecting the one of modern science so far has had a slight impact on traditional classification. Few medicinal substances have been shifted from one category to another owing either to their importance in Chinese medicine or to the attempt of reallocating them according to the classification of modern science. The classification of medicinal plants in types, although based on the same criteria such as plant morphological traits, place of growth, and quality, may vary significantly according to climatic conditions, local traditions and medical schools. That is why the same Tibetan plant designation may correspond to different botanical species. The peculiar botanical and medical knowledge of independent practitioners, in particular of the ones of family lineage, might disappear in the near future because of the standardisation and modernisation of Tibetan medicine. Notes 1. 2. And probably to a lesser extent also by the pharmacopoeia of Chinese medicine. The data have been obtained during a research project on the ethnobotany of Tibetan speaking populations, undertaken by the author from 1998 to 2002 in different regions of the Tibetan cultural area: the Litang County (Sichuan, China), the region of Baragaon (Mustang District, Central Nepal), Dhorpatan (Baglung District, Central Nepal), and Ladakh (Jammu & Kashmir, India). Medicinal plant specimens gathered on the field have been identified in collaboration with professor J. F. Dobremez (Laboratoire d’Ecologie Alpine, Université de Savoie, France) and have been deposited at the Herbarium of the Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle de Paris, France. Classical texts of Tibetan medicine and some traditional and modern treatises of Tibetan materia medica have been employed to analyse medicinal plant classification: “The Four Tantras” (rGyud bzhi), the fundamental text of Tibetan medicine (g.Yu thog Yon tan mgon po, 1992), probably composed between the VIII and the XII century; its famous commentary “The Blue Beryl” (Vaidurya sngon po), written by the Regent sDe srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho (1982) in the XVII century; “The Crystal Block” (Shel gong) and the commentary to it “The Crystal Rosary” (Shel phreng) (De’u dmar dge bshes bsTan ’dzin phun tshogs, 1994), two of the most important classical texts of Tibetan materia medica, both written in the first half of the XVIII century; two modern Tibetan pharmacopoeias published at Lhasa (Karma chos ’phel, 82 TIBET JOURNAL 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 1993) and Chamdo (dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1998). I am grateful to the Museum of Archaeology of the University of Cambridge (Frederick Williamson Memorial Fund) and Padma A. G. (Switzerland) for supporting part of the fieldwork. Proper Tibetan spellings are given according to the Wylie (1959) system of transliteration (minus the hyphen in between syllables). The term “potency” (nus pa) points out to the action that a substance may originate by means of its features and qualities. In Tibetan medicine this expression designates both particular qualities of medicinal substances, which constitute their therapeutic properties (the eight nus pa), and their therapeutic effect (Boesi, 2004: 48-50). From the ethnobiological perspective the so-called plant “types” (rigs) correspond here to the taxa designated by Berlin (1992: 22) “specific”, and “varietal”. Although the meaning of the term rigs may be “type”, “class”, “category”, and “kind”, it is mainly used by Tibetan practitioners to indicate plant types and varieties. They usually share their primary name (Ibidem: 27) (also designated “basic name” according to Conklin, 1954) and are differentiated by adding a specific (or two in the case of varieties) determinant. Cardi, 2004. Meyer, 1983: 71. The commonly employed expression sman, “medicine”, designates all substances that have therapeutic properties and includes both medicinal plants and the other medicinal substances of mineral and animal origin. This term also indicates medicinal preparations. Also written rtsi’i sman. sMan gyi nus pa bstan pa /, “Explanation of the medicine potency”. g.Yu thog Yon tan mgon po, 1992, bShad pa’i rgyud (Explanatory Tantra), Chapter 20: 75. Ibidem: 68, 70. sDe srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho, 1982, Commentary to the Explanatory Tantra (bShad pa’i rgyud kyi rnam bshad), Chapter 20: 262. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 180-255, 305-395. Ibidem: 255-304. Over the Tibetan cultural regions, thang phrom exhibits some types that correspond to several species of the botanical family of Solanaceae. For example, according to my field data from the Litang County the white type (thang phrom dkar po) corresponds to Hyoscyamus niger whereas the black type (thang phrom nag po) corresponds to Anisodus tanguticus. The botanical identifications presented in this article are mainly the ones reported in modern Tibetan materia medica and the ones related to the specimens gathered on the field by the author. I would like to point out that, because the botanical identification of Tibetan materia medica may vary according to several factors as explained in the article, the identification presented may represent only one of the possible botanical species to which a Tibetan designation corresponds. Specimen gathered in the region of Baragaon. Specimen gathered in the region of Dhorpatan. The same botanical identification is mentioned in the two modern pharmacopoeias used as reference (see note 4). g.Yu thog Yon tan mgon po, 1992, Explanatory Tantra (bShad pa’i rgyud), Chapter 20. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 396-409. sDe srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho: 1982, Commentary to the Explanatory Tantra (bShad pa’i rgyud kyi rnam bshad), Chapter 20: 322. Parfionovich et al., 1992: 73. g.Yu thog Yon tan mgon po, 1992, Explanatory Tantra (bShad pa’i rgyud), Chapter 20: 68. PLANT CATEGORIES AND TYPES ... 83 24. See the section devoted to essence medicines for the identification of these medicinal substances according to modern science. 25. dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1998: 66. Parmelia tinctorum is a lichen that grows in crust like form on rocks and trees. 26. This category includes mineral substances such as hematite, calcite, and a few fossils. 27. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 144. 28. g.Yu thog Yon tan mgon po, 1992, Explanatory Tantra (bShad pa’i rgyud), Chapter 20: 67. 29. This category consists of two groups of substances of mineral origin: natural (rang byung pa, “self originated”) and non-natural (las kyi bcos bas gtsang par byas pa, “that have been purified with an artifical intervention”). 30. dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1998: 66. 31. Karma chos ’phel, 1993: 303. 32. Another suitable translation of the expression rtsi sman may be “nectarous medicines” as proposed by Parfionovich et al. (1992: 63). 33. The musk deer is well-known because of his musk pod, a small sac (6 cm. long) situated in the inguinal region. The glands inside the pod produce the musk, a substance with a very strong scent that is secreted by the males during the rut season. Several species of musk deer exists over Tibetan regions: Moschus sifanicus lives in alpine areas, Moschus berezovskii in subalpine regions (Schaller G., personal communication, 2001) whilst Moschus chrysogaster is common in Himalayan regions. In the region of Khams (east Tibet) I have observed Tibetan people trying to sell the musk to Tibetan medical institutes as the one in Dar rtse mdo, and to traders of medicinal plants. 34. According to the recent pharmacopoeias edited at Lhasa and Chamdo, this substance corresponds to the bile of Selenarctos thibetanus. Karma chos ’phel, 1992: 19; dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1998: 104. 35. Some informants from Ladakh affirm that this drug is an animal substance coming from the excreta of a bra (Ochotona spp.). 36. g.Yu thog Yon tan mgon po, 1992, Explanatory Tantra (bShad pa’i rgyud), Chapter 20: 68. 37. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 154-155. 38. The meaning of the expressions thang and sngo will be examined in the section devoted to thang sman and sngo sman. 39. sDe srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho, 1982, Commentary to the Explanatory Tantra (bShad pa’i rgyud kyi rnam bshad), Chapter 20: 262. 40. According to dGa’ ba’i rdo rje (1998: 96-112), cu gang corresponds to silica secretion from the stem of Schizostachyum chinense and Bambusa textilis; gur gum to Crocus sativus; sug smel to Amomum compactum and to Elettaria cardamomum; dzwa ti to Myristica fragrans; li shi to Eugenia aromatica; ka ko la to Amomum tsao and to A. subulatum. According to Karma chos ’phel (1992: 5-16), cu gang corresponds to silica secretion from the stem of Schizostachyum chinense; gur gum corresponds to Crocus sativus (kha che gur gum); sug smel to Elettaria cardamomum; dzwa ti to Myristica fragrans; li shi to Eugenia caryophyllata; ka ko la to Amomum tsao and to A. subulatum. 41. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 154-179. 42. According to dGa’ ba’i rdo rje (1998: 97-98) and Karma chos ’phel (1993: 3) it corresponds to Dryobalanops aromatica, Blumea balsamifera, and Cinammomum camphora. 43. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 326. 44. The Tibetan expression utpala is the transliteration of the Sanskrit word utpala that points out to the blue lotus. Some plants thriving in Tibetan regions are the substitutes 84 TIBET JOURNAL 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. for plants that once were imported from India. Some of them have maintained their original Sanskrit designation as in this case. See Sharma et al., 1993: 430-431; Nadkarni, 1999: 859-860. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 326. ’Jam dpal rdo rje, 1971: folio 173. “All Tibetans believe that during winter the dbyar rtswa dgun ’bu, “summer-grass winter-worm”, lives as a worm and that, after a metamorphosis occurring at the beginning of spring, it changes into a kind of grass (rtswa).” Boesi, 2003: 32. dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1998: 109. Karma chos ’phel, 1993: 177. ’Jam dpal rdo rje, 1971: folio 168. To my knowledge, the oldest treatise of Tibetan medicine where dbyar rtswa dgun ’bu is mentioned is the Bye ba ring bsrel (Relics Empowered by Millions of Oral Instructions), composed in the XV century by Zur mkhar mNyam nyid rdo rje (14391475) (Zur mkhar mNyam nyid rdo rje, 1985) (Acknowledgment to Olaf Czaja for indicating me this). Chandra Das, 1992: 1010. Meyer, 1983: 171. The translation of the term rtsi sman in this text is “Exudates and secretions”. ’Jam dpal rdo rje, 1971: 6. The potency (nus pa) of some drugs is determined by the presence and strength of their fragrance. This property is designated dri’i nus pa “the potency of fragrance”. The presence of scent is also a crucial parameter for the attribution of curative properties in the case of some plants included in other categories. For example, tsan dan dmar po (Pterocarpus santalinus) and tsan dan dkar po (Santalum album) that belong to the medicines coming from woody plants (shing sman) and spang spos (Nardostachys grandiflora) that is included in the category of herbaceous medicines (sngo sman). De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 154-179. Kunsang, 1996. dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1998: 96. Ibidem. Ibidem: 112. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 410. g.Yu thog Yon tan mgon po, 1992, Explanatory Tantra (bShad pa’i rgyud), Chapter 20: 73. Ibidem: 68. See the next section: ldum bu thang sman, ldum sman. Literally “new born”. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 180, 250. The author employs the term tshi ba as synonym of thang chu. In the Shel phreng (Ibidem) the group including plant skins is named pags pa, the one including branches yal phran and the one of plant exudates tshi ba thang chu. Ibidem: 10. Ibidem: 180. Ibidem: 245. I point out that De’u dmar dge bshes (1994: 226, 248) describes two types of se ba: a wild type, se rgod, and a domestic one se g.yung, which are mainly distinguished according to morphological features. Ibidem: 215. Ibidem: 226. Ibidem: 248. Ibidem: 227. PLANT CATEGORIES AND TYPES ... 85 77. Ibidem: 247. 78. sDe srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho, 1982, Commentary to the Explanatory Tantra (bShad pa’i rgyud kyi rnam bshad), chapter 20: 262. 79. For the botanical identification of the three last plants see dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1988: 148, 149, 164. 80. For the botanical identification of the three last plants see Karma chos ’phel, 1993: 23-27. 81. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 74-75. 82. For example, khyi shing (Lonicera thibetica); dzo mo shing (Caragana ericacea); sur dkar (Rhododendron sp.), sur nag (Rhododendron sp.); skyer pa (Berberis sp.); spen nag (Dasiphora fruticosa). 83. dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1988: 119. 84. Differently, according to the Shel phreng (De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 278), khyung sder belongs to the category of thang sman (medicines of the plains), which, as it will be shown in the next section, includes the herbaceous plants and a few tiny woody plants. 85. dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1988: 119. 86. Ibidem. 87. g.Yu thog Yon tan mgon po, 1992, Explanatory Tantra (bShad pa’i rgyud), Chapter 20: 68. 88. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 15. 89. Ibidem: 72-75, 255. 90. It is quite difficult to work out an appropriate translation in English of the Tibetan term ldum according to its use in Tibetan medicine. 91. Thang zhes pa dang ldum bu ni don gcig /. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 75. 92. g.Yu thog Yon tan mgon po, 1992, Explanatory Tantra (bShad pa’i rgyud), Chapter 20: 68. 93. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 255. 94. Ibidem: 75. 95. I point out to dGa’ ba’i rdo rje (1998). 96. Chandra Das, 1992: 568; Krang dbyi sun, 1998: 1140. 97. The term thang (soup) comes in this case from Chinese language and, in particular, from the thang preparations of Chinese medicine. 98. As far as the category thang sman is concerned Meyer maintains: “Il ne s’agit pas de “médecine préparée par décoction à partir de différentes parties de plantes” comme on le trouve dans la table des matières de “An Illustrated Tibeto-Mongolian Materia Medica of Ayurveda” [’Jam dpal rdo rje, 1971], mais du nom générique d’un groupe de drogues végétales qui ne préjuge pas de leur technique de préparation. A l’école de médecine de Dharamsala, le terme thang sman est interprété comme “médecines de plaine”. En réalité ce groupe contient des plantes aux habitats très divers et non limités aux plaines” (Meyer, 1983: 171). The same incorrect interpretation of the expression thang sman occurring in the edition of the materia medica of ’Jam dpal rdo rje has also been put forward by Dash (1994: XXIV). 99. Tibetan practitioners also employ the term snyoms po to designate the nature of a medicinal plant when it is neither hot nor cold. 100. rDza ri g.ya’ ri gangs ri lta bu mtho sar skyes pa ma yin par bde thang du skye ba’i sman gyi rigs ming ste /. Byangs pa ’Phrin las, 1983: 216. The same definition is proposed in the dictionary Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo (Krang dbyi sun, 1998: 1142-1143). 101. Most educated and non-educated informants from different regions have affirmed that the expression g.ya’ ri connotes the mountains whose ground consists of many flat stones (rdo leb) and earth (sa) and where to slide is easy. The dictionary Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo (Krang dbyi sun, 1998: 2617) proposes the following definition 86 TIBET JOURNAL for the term g.ya’ ri: “mountains that consists of small flat stones and of stones of bluish colour”. 102. Karma chos ’phel, 1993: 132. 103. Ibidem: 143. The latest Latin binomial of this plant is Justicia adhatoda (Hara and Williams, 1979: 141). It is a woody plant imported from sub-tropical regions of India and Nepal. Yet there is also a type of this plant directly gathered in Tibetan regions, which is considered inferior (dman) as its quality is concerned. Three practitioners from Khyungbo, Baragaon, and Litang designate this plant sngo ba sha ka, “herbaceous ba sha ka”. Its botanical identification corresponds at Dhorpatan to Corydalis longipes, a herbaceous plant. dGa’ ba’i rdo rje (1998: 142) mentions a type named ldum ba sha ka, whose botanical identification correspond to Corydalis impatiens. 104. See for example, Parfionovich et al., 1992: 63. 105. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 75. 106. dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1998: 260; Karma chos ’phel, 1993: 145. 107. Botanical identification of the specimen gathered by the author in the Litang County. According to dGa’ ba’i rdo rje (1998: 198) lcum corresponds to Rheum officinale. 108. rTsa ba rgyas shing lo sdong sogs lo rer shing ltar skye yang dgun nas rtsa ba ma gtogs sngo ltar rgas nas lo re bzhin brje bas ma nu dang lcum lta bu’i rigs la / rgyud las / thang gi gtso bo tig ta ba sha ka / gsungs pas rtsa ba shing la sdong po ldum lo me sngo’i rang bzhin can…/. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 75. 109. Karma chos ’phel, 1993; dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1998. 110. The term ldum may be generally employed in the common language with a sense similar to the one of the term sngo. Le dictionary Tshig mdzod chen mo (Krang dbyi sun, 1998 : 1454) proposes the following definition: “general term equivalent to sngo.” 111. In Tibetan materia medica several type of tig ta are described. The standard tig ta also called rgya tig (rgya gar gyi tig ta, “Indian tig ta”) is the one which mainly thrives to the south of the Himalayan chain. This plant has been identified as Swertia chirayita (dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1998: 205; Karma chos ’phel, 1993: 132). 112. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 255. 113. Ibidem: 258. 114. Some types of re ral (or ldum bu re ral) have been described by my informants and in written sources. For example, De’u dmar dge bshes (1994: 276) states that it may be classified in three types: 1) rgyal po (king) re ral, 2) blon po (minister) re ral, 3) btsun mo (queen) re ral. He also quotes a text (‘khrung dpe) where three types of this drug are distinguished according to their place of growth: ldum bu re ral, be ljang re ral, and g.yu ’brug ’khyil ba. Most informants report the latter classification. In modern Tibetan materia medica botanical identification of this plant may vary: according to dGa’ ba’i rdo rje (1998: 223) rgyal po re ral corresponds to Drynaria sinica, be ljang re ral to D. propinqua, and g.yu ’brug ’khyil ba to Polystichum squarrosum. According to Karma chos ‘phel (1993: 184-186) the above drugs respectively correspond to Polistychum squarrosum, Drynaria baronii, and D. propinqua. According to the same author (1993: 187-189), blon po re ral is a synonym for brag spos (Lepisorus waltonii), btsun mo re ral corresponds to Aleuritopteris argentea or it is a synonym for brag skya ha po (Corallodiscus kingianus). 115. I have collected this plant in the Litang County. Its botanical identification corresponds to the one reported in the materia medica of dGa’ ba’i rdo rje (1988: 203) and Karma chos ’phel (1993: 201). 116. Byangs pa ’phrin las, 1983: 277. So nam byas pa’i lo thog dang / rang bzhin skyes pa’i rtswa ljang / ldum rar btsugs pa’i me tog bcas ma yin pa de dag dang mnyam du skyes pa’i re ral dang / dwa ba / snya lo lta bu sngo’i ming ste /. 117. Ibidem. lDum bu lo thog rtswa ljang dang / ldum ra’i me tog ma yin pa’i / de dag mnyam skyes sngo yi ming /. The dictionary quotes as source of this definition a PLANT CATEGORIES AND TYPES ... 87 medical text composed by De’u dmar dge bshes: gSo rig skor gyi ming tshig nyer mkho’i don gsal. 118. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 276, 283, 284. 119. Ibidem: 75. sNgo ni rtsa ba phra ba’i rigs kyi rtswa’i rigs so /. 120. Karma chos ’phel, 1993: 255-473. We have chosen this text because it is the only modern pharmacopoeia that presents the drug botanical identification and maintains the correct traditional classification in categories. 121. Ibidem: 1993: 255. 122. Karma chos ’phel, 1993. 123. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 458. The complete name is zhing gi lo tog las byung ba’i sman. 124. As far as the botanical identification of these plants is concerned, see Karma chos ’phel, 1993: 474-491. 125. g.Yu thog Yon tan mgon po, 1992, Explanatory Tantra (bShad pa’i rgyud), Chapters 16, 17, 18. 126. dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1998: 323-331. 127. Chandra Das, 1992: 931. 128. dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1998: 325. According to Karma chos ’phel (1993: 487) this plant corresponds to Raphanus sp. 129. sDe srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho, 1982, Commentary to the Explanatory Tantra (bShad pa’i rgyud kyi rnam bshad), Chapter 20: 249-350. 130. Tibetan medicine is practised over a vast area which covers all the regions inhabited by populations of Tibetan language and culture and other areas: the northern states of India (Jammu & Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, West Bengal, and Sikkim); Bhutan; a large part of the northern regions of Nepal; the following Chinese Provinces: Tibetan Autonomous Region, Qinghai, Gansu, Sichuan and Yunnan; Mongolia; Buryat (Russia); and other many countries where Tibetans have settled. 131. As Berlin (1992: 166-167) reports “...such broadly inclusive classes [plant forms] generally occur as the first major groupings within each ethnobiological classification kingdom, forming a contrastive group of a small number of taxa of plants and animals...While some groupings correspond rather closely to recognized scientific higher-order taxa, most life-form taxa do not reflect biologically natural classes of organisms....In the plant world, the focus of major differences based on stem habit, probably one of the primary perceptual features leading to the recognition of the most common major life-form taxa found in folk systems of ethnobiological classification (e.g. “tree”, “vine”, “herbaceous plant”), leads to grouping that often violate natural biological taxa at the family level”. Tibetan people recognize five or four plant forms, listed according to two different models. 1) The five plant forms are mushrooms (sha mo), grasses (rtswa), flowers (me tog), woody plants (shing sdong), and woody climbers (’khri shing). 2) In the second model plant forms consist of four taxa: mushrooms (sha mo), herbaceous plants (rtswa), woody plants (shing sdong), and woody climbers (’khri shing). In this model the categories rtswa (herbs) and me tog (flowers) of the first model are included in a single taxon named rtswa (Boesi, 2005: 45-46). 132. See the section devoted to shing sman for the identification of these two drugs according to modern botany. 133. Sometimes, in particular on written sources, the following determinants are also employed: rab “excellent”, bzang “good”; dma’ “inferior”, ngan “bad”. 134. Karma chos ’phel, 1993: 255. The specimen gathered in the region of Baragaon corresponds to the same botanical species. 135. Ibidem: 257. 136. Ibidem: 396. 137. Ibidem: 398. 88 TIBET JOURNAL 138. Specimen gathered in the Litang County. 139. Specimen gathered in the region of Baragaon. 140. The two last specimens have been gathered in the Litang County. 141. The four types are the following: black (bong nga nag po), white (bong nga dkar po), red (bong nga dmar po), and yellow (bong nga ser po). 142. As it is described in the rGyud bzhi (g.Yu thog Yon tan mgon po, 1992, Explanatory Tantra (bShad pa’i rgyud), Chapter 20: 65): “the snowy mountain and the ’bigs byed mountain, having [respectively] the power of the moon and of the sun, possess a power which becomes increasingly cold or hot”. In particular, the hot (tsha) power (stobs) of the sun dominates on the sunny slopes (nyin), whilst the cold (bsil) power of the moon prevails on the shady ones (srib). 143. Abbreviation of bong nga nag po. 144. “Shang shang”: a mythological bird similar to a Garuda. 145. Primula atrodentata has flowers whose colour may vary from purple to mauve-blue or white. In this case, the two types “white” and “purple-brown” correspond to the same botanical species. 146. Lama, Ghimire, Thomas, 2001: 106. 147. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 338-339. 148. De’u dmar dge bshes also states that the expressions shang dril smug po and shang dril sngon po are synonyms. Thus the two classifications that differentiate four types are equivalent. 149. The botanical identification of the two types refers to the specimens that have been gathered in the region of Dhorpatan. 150. As far as the three types of star bu are concerned, it is difficult to find the exact correspondence between their Tibetan designations and the botanical species. The data given by the informants are often inconsistent. The cause of these differences is determined by the difference of height that this plants may attain in ecological settings that are sometimes contrasting. In particular, several informants have pointed out to Hippophae rhamnoides subsp. turkestanica both as star bu sa star and star bu bar star in the Indian region of Ladakh. The same appellations might be valid with H. salicifolia whose size may also vary in relation to climatic conditions. It might also be suggested that the latter plant, attaining nearly the height of 5 metres in very favourable ecological conditions, is also designated star bu gnam star, as it has been shown with the Nepalese regions of Dolpo (Lama, Ghimire, Thomas, 2001: 79). The type star bu gnam star is usually described by the informants as a woody plant of big size thriving at relatively low altitude in the so-called rong forested deep valleys. In a recent Tibetan pharmacopoeia (dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1998: 131) star bu gnam star is identified as Hippophae rhamnoides and star bu bar star as Hippophae neurocarpa. According to my fieldwork data, in the region of Baragaon the type named star bu sa star corresponds to H. tibetana. The same identification is given in the two above quoted texts. 151. Me tog glang sna includes several types belonging to the botanical genus Pedicularis. 152. I have gathered these two medicinal plants in the Litang County. 153. Brag mtshe (Ephedra gerardiana) is the type observed in the region of Baragaon. dGa’ ba’i rdo rje (1998: 269) describes three types of this plant two of which correspond to Ephedra: mtshe ldum (E. equisetina) and spang mtshe (“meadow mtshe”) (E. gerardiana, E. minuta). Yet the third type, named chu mtshe (“water mtshe”), corresponds to a species (Equisetum diffusum) that belongs to a different botanical division and interestingly has different healing properties from the other two. 154. The two determinants do not always imply this difference of growing area as in the case of se rgod and se g.yung, as shown in the section devoted to describing medicines coming from woody plants (shing sman). PLANT CATEGORIES AND TYPES ... 89 155. De’u dmar dge bshes, 1994: 283-284. Dwa ba dag la rigs gnyis te / ri las skyes pa dwa rgod yin / zhing las skyes pa dwa g.yung te /. 156. The difference concerns the localisation of some vital points, the identification of some drugs and the preparation of some formulas. Meyer (1983: 81) affirms that these differences also reflect dissimilar ecological and epidemiological conditions. 157. Holarrhena antidysenterica is a plant that thrives in the low regions of India, Nepal and China. (dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1998: 219). In the same text (ibidem) the botanical identification of sngo dug mo nyung corresponds to Cynanchum vincetoxicum. Also the specimen sngo dug mo nyung collected in Litang County corresponds to the genus Cynanchum and is the Tibetan substitute to H. antidysenterica. 158. Specimen gathered in the region of Dhorpatan. References Berlin B., 1992. Ethnobiological classification. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Boesi A., 2003. The dByar rtswa dgun ’bu (Cordyceps sinensis Berk.): An Important Trade Item for the Tibetan Population of the Li thang District, Sichuan Province, China. The Tibet Journal, 28 (3): 29-42. Boesi A., 2004. Le savoir botanique des Tibétains: perception, classification et exploitation des plantes sauvages. Thèse de Doctorat, Unité d’Anthropologie et Adaptabilité Biologique, UMR 6578, CNRS-Université de la Méditerranée, Faculté de Médecine de Marseille. Unpublished Boesi A., 2005. Plant knowledge among Tibetan populations. In A. Boesi, F. Cardi Wildlife and plants in traditional and modern Tibet: conceptions, exploitation, and conservation, Memorie della Società Italiana di Scienze Naturali e del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Milano, 33 (1): 33-48. Byangs pa ’phrin las, 1983. gSo ba rig pa’i tshig mdzod g.yu thog dgongs rgyan. Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, Beijing. Cardi F., 2004. De l’approvisionnement des substances médicinales à la production des médicaments: l’évolution contemporaine de la pharmacopée tibétaine. Thèse de Doctorat, Unité d’Anthropologie et Adaptabilité Biologique, UMR 6578, CNRSUniversité de la Méditerranée, Faculté de Médecine de Marseille. Unpublished Conklin H. C., 1954. The relation of Hanunóo culture to the plant world. Thesis Anthropology, Yale University, USA. Das C., 1992. A Tibetan-English Dictionary. Book Faith India, Delhi. Dash B., 1994. Pharmacopoeia of Tibetan Medicine. Sri Satguru Publication, Delhi. sDe srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho, 1982. gSo ba rig pa’i bstan bcos sman bla’i dgongs rgyan rgyud bzhi’i gsal byed be daura sngon po’i malila ka. Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, Lhasa (this text is known as Vaidurya sngon po). De’u dmar dge bshes bsTan ’dzin phun tshogs, 1994. Shel gong shel phreng. Tibetan Medical & Astro Institute, Dharamsala. dGa’ ba’i rdo rje, 1998. ’Khrungs dpe dri med shel gyi me long. Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, Beijing. Hara H., Williams L.H.J., 1979. An Enumeration of the Flowering Plants of Nepal. Trustees of British Museum (Natural History), London. ’Jam dpal rdo rje, 1971. An Illustrated Tibeto-Mongolian Materia Medica of Ayurveda. Lokesh Chandra (ed.), International Academy of Indian Culture, New Delhi. Karma chos ’phel, 1993. bDud rtsi sman gyi ’khrungs dpe legs bshad nor bu’i phreng mdzes. Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, Lhasa. Krang dbyi sun (ed.), 1998. Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo. Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, Beijing. 90 TIBET JOURNAL Kunsang E. P., 1996. The Dharma Dictionary. Tibetan-English Dictionary of Buddhist Teachings & Practice. Rangjung Yeshe Translations & Publications, KathmanduBoulder. Lama Y.C., Ghimire S.K., Thomas Y.A., 2001. Medicinal Plants of Dolpo. Amchis’ Knowledge and Conservation. People and Plants Initiative, WWF Nepal Program, Kathmandu. Meyer F., 1983. Gso-ba rig-pa, Le système médical tibétain. C.N.R.S., Paris. Nadkarni K. M. (ed.), 1999. Indian Materia Medica. Popular Prakashan, Bombay. Parfionovitch Y., Gyurme D., Meyer F., 1992. Tibetan medical paintings, illustrations of the Blue Beryl of Sangye Gyamtso. Serindia Publications, London. Sharma B. D., Balakrishnan N. P., Rao R.R., and Hajra P.K., 1993. Flora of India. Volume 1. Botanical Survey of India, Calcutta. Wylie T. V., 1959. A Standard System of Tibetan Transcription. Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 2: 261-67. g.Yu thog Yon tan mgon po, 1992. bDud rtsi snying po yan lag brgyad pa gsang ba man ngag gi rgyud. Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, Lhasa (This text is commonly known as “rGyud bzhi”, “The Four Tantras”). Zur mkhar ba mNyam nyid rdo rje, 1985. Bye ba ring bsrel. Tibet House, Delhi.