On July 21-27, 2013, Ulaanbaatar, the capital of Mongolia, hosted the XIII Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. Despite its modest name, this seminar is the largest and most representative international conference on Tibetology. The uniqueness of the XIII seminar is determined by the fact that it was the first such event in Mongolia - a country that has long been connected with Tibet by historical and religious ties, which created a unique Tibeto-Mongolian civilization.

The International Association for Tibetological Research is a leading international organization in the field of Tibetology. It aims to develop Tibetological research in history, religion, linguistics, art, and other disciplines by organizing forums that allow specialists to share the results of their work. The Association has no political interests and is not politically affiliated. Every three years, it conducts seminars in different countries. More detailed information can be found on its official website on the Internet: http://www.iats.info/.

S. Chulun (Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of Mongolia), U. Bulag (University of Cambridge), D. Bum-Ochir (National University of Mongolia) and W. Rossler (University of Oxford) were members of the commission for the preparation of the XIII seminar. The main monastery of Gandantegchenlin in Mongolia participated in the organization of the seminar. Volunteers from Mongolia and other countries were very helpful. The working languages were English, Tibetan and Mongolian.

According to the organizers, 594 participants from 36 countries took part in the seminar. More applications were submitted, but the organizing committee selected about three-quarters: the rest were rejected based on the results of scientific review. Almost everyone whose applications were approved arrived. Some 20 young Tibetan scientists from China, who were not allowed to fly to Mongolia at the last moment, were among those who were unable to attend.

At the opening of the seminar, the important contribution of Mongolian scientists to Tibetology, the old religious ties between Mongolia and Tibet, and the extensive Tibetan-language literature of Mongolia were discussed, which determined the importance of holding this event in this country. The International Association for Tibetological Research was briefly discussed. Vice-President of the Academy of Sciences of Mongolia T. Dorj, President of the National University of Mongolia A. Galtbayar, Head of Mongolian Buddhists, abbot of Gandantegchenlin Monastery Hambo Lama D. Choizhamts, President of the International Association for Tibetan Studies Ch. Ramble, Professor at the National University of Mongolia Sh. Choima and K. N. Gurung, President of the International Seminar for Young Tibetologists.

Further work of the workshop was organized in 46 panels and 17 sessions (all of them are referred to as "sections" below). The program alone with the list of report titles (without abstracts) was 112 pages long.

The work of the seminar was announced in the following areas (translation of section names in the order of their sequence in the program):: Textology of Tibetan Manuscripts; Tibetan Information Technologies; History of Buddhism in Mongolia; Life in Amdo; Preservation and development of Tibetan medicine; Differences in the bon religion; Tibetan textual research based on materials from Mongolia: terminology and translation; Buddhism, science and Society; History of Tibetan religious practices; Language, linguistics and Education; Study of Tibetan texts.

manuscripts: towards a Guide to Tibetan Codification; Doctrines and Philosophy; New Studies of Tibetan Folk Literature and Folk Poetic Language; Greater Tibet: Exploring Borders, Ethnic Divisions, and Cultural Areas; Bhutanese Buddhism and its Culture; Tsardom and Religion in Tibet; Living conditions on the Tibetan Plateau: Vulnerability and Sustainable Use of Resources; Norms, reform and regulations: new perspectives in Tibetan social history; Cross-cultural contacts in the Eastern Himalayas; Tibetan literary Exchanges: mutual influences of genres and related literatures; Language, linguistics and education; Non-monastic layers in Tibet and Mongolia; In Memory of Andre Alexander; Round table: Heritage preservation; Ethnography and Cartography as ways to represent Tibet; New research based on the epic "Geser" in Tibet; The Exegetical Imperative of Tantra; Mongolian Buddhist Art; Tibet in a Changing World: Responses to the Collapse of the Qing Empire and the Formation of the National state; Tibeto-Mongolian Ritual Dance; Bodhicharyavatara: the Mongolian-Tibetan Tradition of Commentary; Tibetan Literary Exchanges: Mutual Influences of Genres and Related Literatures; Research Sakya; Tantric (ngagpa) communities and their links to monastic institutions in Amdo; Tibetan Art and Archaeology; In Memory of Luciano Petek; Bhutan-Sikkim; Climate Change in the Tibetan Plateau; Nyingma Studies; Old Tibetan Studies; Territories, Communities, and Exchanges in Kama; The Transformation of Tibetan and Mongolian Buddhism: Interethnic networks and exchanges. local communities; On the history of Tibetan Mahamudra traditions; Medicine and astrology in Tibet, Mongolia, and China, late 17th and early 20th centuries.; Great Lives and Works; Folk Religion and Local Traditions; Sacred and Secular Geographies; Architecture and its Preservation; Amdo and Mongols; Lineage Innovations and Tradition: Contemporary Historical Links between Mongolian and Tibetan Buddhism; Tibetology in Gyaltang; Tibetan Buddhist Women; Interethnic Tibetan Identities; Modern Political History of Tibet; Early Dzogchen; Post-revolutionary narratives, or how to tell about the early encounters of Tibetans with Chinese Communists; The religious life of nomads; The new urbanization of Mongolia and Tibet and its impact on the family and society; The development of Buddhist philosophy by Tibetans in the early centuries of the later spread of Tibetan Buddhism; Buddhist astronomy and astrology in Mongolia and Tibet; The transmission of Buddhist epistemology to Tibet and Mongolia; Tibetan stories; Traditions of theatrical and musical performances; Medical traditions of Mongolia; Relations between Tibet and Mongolia: history and documents.

As can be seen from this list, the set of topics covered almost all aspects of modern research concerning Tibet and Tibetans. The breadth of topics can be seen in the example of several reports.

Prominent American Buddhist scholar R. Thurman (Columbia University, USA) devoted his report to the translation and interpretation of the canonical Tibetan text "Guhyasamajatantra". The study of this basic text is part of the mandatory curriculum of educational institutions in the tradition of the Galug school, in particular tantric faculties such as Gyume and Gyuto. The teaching of Guhyasamaja Tantra is still widely practiced today. R. Thurman's report, based on a detailed study of the Tibetan text of various publications and a thorough study of special technical terms, introduced a lot of new things for an adequate understanding of this text.

Many reports were devoted to Buddhism in Mongolia and Mongolian-Tibetan interactions throughout history. For example, the Mongolian scholar O. Batsaikhan (Institute of International Relations, Ulaanbaatar) made a detailed report on the last great Khan of Mongolia, Bogdo-gegen VIII Dzhebtsundamba-khutukhta. The speaker showed that thanks to this Tibetan lama, Mongolia gained independence in 1911, and elaborated on the legitimation of his power, which combined the Mongolian monarchical tradition with the Buddhist one. P. Bayartsetseg's report (Ulaanbaatar) based on the materials of Tibetan and Mongolian sources discussed the interaction of Mongolia and Tibet in the XVIII-XIX centuries. Report of Ts. Shakya (University of British Columbia, Canada) was dedicated to the relationship between Dalai Lama XIII and Bogdo-gegen VIII.

The situation of Buddhism in the former Soviet Union was discussed in detail in the report of the head of Buddhists of Kalmykia, Telo Tulku Rinpoche (Elista). He spoke about the restoration and development of Buddhism, about the dialogue with representatives of other faiths (especially with the Russian Orthodox Church), and noted the opportunity for Buddhists in Russia to practice their religion in peace. S. Nesterkin's report (IMBT SB RAS, Ulan-Ude) was devoted to the main directions of the revival of Buddhism in Russia at the beginning of the XX century.

According to Tsongkhapa and Pabonka Rinpoche, Lam-rim as a system of Buddhist philosophy and meditation was the subject of a report by I. S. Urbanaeva (IMBT SB RAS), which caused a lively discussion. The problem of true existence, considered in the soteriological aspect of the late Mahayana sutras, was discussed in the report of L. T. Yangutov (Ulan-Ude), made at the section "Transmission of Buddhist epistemology in Tibet and Mongolia". At the same section, S. Y. Lepekhov (IMBT SB RAS) presented a report on the comparative analysis of the terms "rupasharira", "dharmasharira", "prajna" and "tathagata-dhatu-garbha". The audience was very interested in X's report. Cabezona (University of California, Santa Barbara, USA), dedicated to Dzogchen philosophy.

There were six presentations on Tibetan medical culture and astrology. The report of T. Phuntsok (Department of Tibetology, Center of the University of National Minorities in Beijing, China) was devoted to the topical topic "On the difference between Tibetan and Chinese medicine". Using a large amount of obscure text material from original Tibetan and Chinese sources, the speaker reviewed the key provisions of the theory and practice of both medical systems and outlined the main conclusions about the specifics of Tibetan medicine. He showed that the use of medicinal raw materials of natural origin, determination of methods and terms of their collection, drying, storage, processing, manufacturing technology of multicomponent Tibetan drugs allow us to speak of Tibetan medicine as an independent medical system that has passed a long way of formation and systematization.

L. Yenten (China) considered the issues of European calendar mathematics and cosmology in the Amdo (XVIII-XIX centuries), determined the role of the context and structure of basic Tibetan texts created by Buddhist masters of north-eastern Tibet. He identified the dominant categories and methods of mathematical calculations in the compilation of calendars and a system of concepts related to the development and evolution of the universe. Amdo analysts of the XVIII-XIX centuries, who created perfect works on chronology and cosmology, separated them into special groups or subgroups. The speaker drew attention to the fact that the Tibetan texts, which apply the principles of European calendar mathematics, are written with a wide use of special terminology, which is difficult to translate and modern interpretation, due to the symbolism of the language presentation. The speaker expressed his opinion on the modification and modernization of certain mathematical calculations in the compilation of annual astrological almanacs and technical terms, taking into account the achievements of natural sciences and humanities in a rapidly changing world.

With. Wang Fleet (USA) made a presentation on "Medicine in Tibet, Mongolia and China: Historical notes on the illustrative, four-language medical compendium of the 19th century called "Dzeyzhar Migzhang". The treatise was written by a traditional Mongolian physician, pharmacognost and pharmacologist Zhambaldorzhi in Tibetan.

K.'s report Sabernig (Austria)" The number of bones and moving joints " was devoted to a topical topic of practical Tibetan medicine. It was accompanied by a presentation and was the first in a series of special studies related to such a complex branch of Tibetan healing science as anatomy. At the end of the 17th century, the outstanding Tibetan doctor Darmo menramba Lobsang Choydag outlined the contents of the fourth chapter of the Tantra of Explanations in the second volume of the Chud-shi treatise and presented it in the form of an expanded tree. Unfortunately, his concept was not reflected in Lhasa, but was put into practice as beautifully executed wall paintings in the manba datsan of the Lavran Buddhist monastery of Tashikyil, known among the Mongols and Buryats under the short name Lavran (Amdo, north-eastern Tibet). One of the most elaborate creations is the body painting, which reflects the content of the fourth chapter of the second volume of the Zhud-shi. Such paintings serve as visual aids for studying the anatomy of Tibetan medicine. Using extensive illustrative material, the speaker showed that the pictorial rows of wall drawings are arranged in harmony with the description of the text part of the body structure in the corresponding chapter of the illustrated source. Based on his extensive research and textual description of macroanatomic body parts, images of the tables of the "Tibetan Medical Tanok" arch, made under the guidance of the medieval Tibetan scientist Desi Sangye Gyatso (1653-1705), are constructed.

N. D. Bolsokhoeva's report "Ringzin Sambu Danzhinov (1826-1923) - Buryat emchi and astrologer from the Aginsky manba datsan" was connected with the fruitful activity of P. C. Danzhinov, the founder of the manba datsan (medical faculty) of the Aginsky datsan-

on (Aginsky Buryat district, Trans-Baikal Territory), opened in 1884. He put a lot of effort into the development and establishment of Tibetan medical culture in the territory of ethnic Buryatia and for the introduction of classical medical education. Excellent knowledge of the Tibetan, Mongolian and Buryat languages opened up opportunities for P. C. Danzhinov to use original written sources in his work. The speaker identified the role of P. C. Danzhinov in creating a prescription handbook written in the Tibetan language, which was of great importance for compiling multicomponent Tibetan medicines for subsequent generations of traditional Buryat doctors.

O. Sazha (University of Leipzig, Germany) presented a report on "Healing the eyes of Avalokiteshvara: History, Art and Medicine". Based on written Tibetan sources, the author analyzed in detail the history of the cult of this aspect of Avalokiteshvara in various schools of Tibetan Mahayana Buddhism and expressed the opinion that its transformation by the Galug school began only in the XIX century. The speaker showed that this practice goes back to ancient times and its roots should be sought in central Tibet. The cult of the healing eye of Avalokiteshvara was incorporated into the cult practice in Amdo, from where it spread to Mongolia through Buddhism. The statue of Magjid-Zhanraiseg, which was discussed in the report, is the central figure of the temple of the same name of the Gandantegchenlin Monastery, built at the behest of Bogdo-gegen VIII (1870-1924) in 1911-1913.Zhanraiseg is the Mongolized Tibetan name of Avalokiteshvara - Bodhisattva, who cures eye diseases and restores sight to the blind. The statue's height reaches 26.5 m. In this form, the Bodhisattva of Mercy is depicted as four-armed, holding an eye in one hand. The speaker reviewed the medical basis of this form of Avalokiteshvara and focused on the treatment of the eyes with visual aids and repeated recitation of mantras. He gave a set of mantras to be recited, and listed a large number of visualization techniques recommended for healing by Tibetan authors dating back to the fourteenth century.

Researcher from Australia K. Schuitze made a presentation on the topic "From zoo therapy to medicine "Ahimsa" - changing attitude to animals". Based on the methods of social history research, the author considered the attitude to animals in Tibetan medicine, focusing on the conflict between the pragmatic use of animals (more correctly, animal organs) as ingredients (in the author's terminology, zootherapy) and the Buddhist ideology of compassion, non-harm to living beings. The author analyzes these relationships through the prism of the social breakdown of the tradition in Tibetan medicine and adaptation to the new socio-political environmental conditions of India, where Tibetans have been living in exile for more than fifty years. As a result of textual analysis of Tibetan written sources related to the genre of medical literature, extensive involvement of research by foreign scientists, as well as reliable materials recorded during interviews with traditional Tibetan doctors living in exile, the speaker came to the conclusion that the production of modern Ahimsa products occupies a worthy place in the Institute of Tibetan Medicine and Astrology in Moscow. India.

At the section devoted to literary contacts between Tibet and Mongolia, we listened to the reports of researchers from St. Petersburg I. S. Yakhontova and N. V. Yampolskaya. N. S. Yakhontova made a report "Tibetan dictionaries of the mngon brjod type and their Mongolian translations", and N. V. Yampolskaya considered the issues of early Tibetan translation "Ashtasahasrika-prajnaparamita" based on reading and comparing Mongolian colophons.

N. Damdinsuren (Mongolia) presented an interesting report on "Historical development of traditional Mongolian medicine" at the section "Medical Traditions of Mongolia". The rich material of long-term research of monuments of material culture and various written sources in the Mongolian language, written by medical authorities, allowed the speaker to compile a table reflecting the sequence of stages of the historical development of medicine in Mongolia. He identified six stages:: 1. Traditional Mongolian medicine B.C.; 2. Traditional Mongolian medicine before the 12th century; 3. Traditional Mongolian medicine from the 12th to the middle of the 16th century; 4. Traditional Mongolian Medicine from the 16th to the 20th centuries; 5. Traditional Mongolian Medicine from 1937 to 1990; and 6. Traditional Mongolian medicine after 1990 city of According to the speaker, Mongolian medicine has gone through a long path of development and adaptation in various political associations of the Mongols and reached its peak in the Middle Ages due to the widespread spread of Buddhism and Buddhist sciences, including the Tibetan science of healing. The author described the distinctive features

At each stage in the history of medicine in Mongolia, he presented an overall picture of the contribution of Mongols to Tibetan medical culture.

M. van Walt van Praag (University of San Francisco, USA) and S. L. Kuzmin (Institute of History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow) co-chaired the section "Tibet in a Changing World: Responses to the Collapse of the Qing Empire and the Formation of the National State". S. L. Kuzmin's report "Tibet as a State: Historical facts and International Law" examined the historical and legal aspects of Tibetan statehood. The speaker analyzed documents describing the general geopolitical situation on the eve and during the collapse of the Qing Empire, the actions of the great powers, their diplomatic game and political motives. Based on this, it was shown that after the collapse of the Qing Empire, Tibet was a de facto and de jure state.

M. Report van Walt van Praag's "The Surrender of the Qing Empire's Mandate and Entering the Historical Arena of the Nation-state: Transformations in Tibet, Mongolia, and China" was devoted to analyzing not so much external as internal events that took place in these territories.

The report of M. Tachibana (Shimonoseki University, Japan)" The Mongol-Tibetan Treaty and internal policy in Mongolia " discussed the background to the conclusion of the Mongol-Tibetan Mutual Recognition Treaty of 1913 and the consequences of its adoption on internal Mongolian affairs. The author also drew on Russian publications, in particular "Russia and Tibet: a Collection of Russian archival documents of 1900-1914", and the diary of the Russian commissioner in Mongolia I. Ya. Korostovets. According to M. Tachibana, the Mongol-Tibetan Treaty was of great internal political significance for Mongolia, as it served as a powerful factor in strengthening the authority of Jebtsundamba-Hutukhta VIII, the head of Mongolia, and created prerequisites for the revival of the autocratic khan's power in all of Mongolia.

Various aspects of Agvan Dorzhiev's multi-faceted religious, political and diplomatic activities during that period were discussed in the report of N. V. Tsyrempilov (Institute of Information Technology of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Ulan-Ude) " Russian spy, Tibetan emissary, double agent or Pan-Buddhist dreamer? A. Dorzhiev and the revision of his historical mission". The report was based on a number of new materials, the introduction of which sheds light on the events of that period.

The opportunity to freely exchange views between participants on any issues related to Tibet was very valuable. At the seminar, presentations were made that expressed both the PRC's point of view on the Tibetan issue and alternative ones. There were frank discussions on these issues in the sections and on the sidelines. They were always conducted in a spirit of goodwill and mutual respect, allowing each side to learn the opponent's point of view in detail.

At the final plenary session, the results of the work were summed up, and two applications from France and Norway were submitted to the participants of the seminar for the next, XIV seminar. At the end of the seminar, the election of the President of the International Association for Tibetan Studies was held. Completed its activity Ch. Rambla was replaced by Ts. Shakya.

During the seminar, the Mongolian side organized a number of cultural events , including visits to the Gandantegchenlin Monastery, several museums in Ulaanbaatar, and several concerts of national music, song and dance. The Mongolian side organized exhibitions of Mongolian Tibetan-language books and old photographs of monasteries in Mongolia (most of these monasteries have not survived to this day). In addition, there were presentations of collections of Tibetan manuscripts and woodcuts from the Ts Museum. Damdinsuren in Ulaanbaatar (conducted by A.D. Tsendina), and Tibetan collections from Buryatia (organized by N. V. Tsyrempilov).

We must pay tribute to the organizers, support staff and volunteers: they worked very efficiently, information was perfectly delivered, participants were promptly notified of any changes in the work of the sections, received the necessary equipment for reports on time, access to computers and the Internet, etc.

The seminar showed the growing interest in Tibetological research, its expanding geography, and increased international cooperation in conducting many projects. The seminar held in Ulaanbaatar witnessed the revival of historical ties between Mongolia and Tibet, which were disrupted by the dramatic events of the 20th century.

Permanent link to this publication: