Psychology or Religion? Bridge-Building in the Translation History of The Tibetan Book of the Dead

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Erin Prophet
{"title":"Psychology or Religion? Bridge-Building in the Translation History of The Tibetan Book of the Dead","authors":"Erin Prophet","doi":"10.24972/ijts.2023.42.2.47","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Tibetan Book of the Dead is one of the most popular Eastern scriptures in the West, in part because it has been framed outside of religion, as a kind of psychology. And yet its translators have also used it to stake claims in the debate about the relationship between psychology and religion, generally Buddhism, but also Theosophy, a religious and philosophical system founded in 1875, which tried to unify all religions. The first major English translation of the Book of the Dead was published in 1927, by W. Y. Evans-Wentz, who was a Theosophist, with the assistance of Kazi Dawa-Samdup. Evans-Wentz framed the text as supporting the existence of a universal religion grounded in science, altered terms to support Theosophical beliefs, and also opened the way to psychologized interpretations. Carl Jung’s 1937 introduction to the Evans- Wentz-Samdup translation solidified a psychologized reading. In 1975, Francesca Fremantle and Chogyam Trungpa produced a more accurate translation, which continued the psychologizing trend. The 2005 translation by Gyurme Dorje, with Graham Coleman and Thupten Junpa, is the most traditional and technically accurate, yet also shades meaning towards universal appeal. My evaluation of the orientation of these three translations—Theosophical (Evans-Wentz, 1927), psychological (Fremantle-Trungpa, 1975) and traditional (Dorje, 2005)—highlights the difficulty of translating religious terms. The translation history also sheds light on the ongoing debate about the compatibility of the aims of psychology (self-development) and Buddhism (self-eradication) and provides a foundation for my argument that psychologized renderings are simply a part of theological drift, a process that is continual and ongoing in religious traditions.","PeriodicalId":38668,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Transpersonal Studies","volume":"92 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Transpersonal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24972/ijts.2023.42.2.47","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Tibetan Book of the Dead is one of the most popular Eastern scriptures in the West, in part because it has been framed outside of religion, as a kind of psychology. And yet its translators have also used it to stake claims in the debate about the relationship between psychology and religion, generally Buddhism, but also Theosophy, a religious and philosophical system founded in 1875, which tried to unify all religions. The first major English translation of the Book of the Dead was published in 1927, by W. Y. Evans-Wentz, who was a Theosophist, with the assistance of Kazi Dawa-Samdup. Evans-Wentz framed the text as supporting the existence of a universal religion grounded in science, altered terms to support Theosophical beliefs, and also opened the way to psychologized interpretations. Carl Jung’s 1937 introduction to the Evans- Wentz-Samdup translation solidified a psychologized reading. In 1975, Francesca Fremantle and Chogyam Trungpa produced a more accurate translation, which continued the psychologizing trend. The 2005 translation by Gyurme Dorje, with Graham Coleman and Thupten Junpa, is the most traditional and technically accurate, yet also shades meaning towards universal appeal. My evaluation of the orientation of these three translations—Theosophical (Evans-Wentz, 1927), psychological (Fremantle-Trungpa, 1975) and traditional (Dorje, 2005)—highlights the difficulty of translating religious terms. The translation history also sheds light on the ongoing debate about the compatibility of the aims of psychology (self-development) and Buddhism (self-eradication) and provides a foundation for my argument that psychologized renderings are simply a part of theological drift, a process that is continual and ongoing in religious traditions.
心理学还是宗教?在《西藏度亡经》翻译史上架设桥梁
西藏度亡经》是西方最受欢迎的东方经书之一,部分原因是它被定位于宗教之外,是一种心理学。然而,它的译者也利用它在有关心理学与宗教(一般是佛教,也包括创立于 1875 年、试图统一所有宗教的宗教和哲学体系--神哲学)之间关系的辩论中提出主张。亡灵书》的第一个重要英译本于 1927 年出版,由神智论者 W. Y. 埃文斯-温茨翻译,卡兹-达瓦-萨姆杜普协助翻译。埃文斯-温茨将该书定位于支持以科学为基础的普世宗教的存在,修改了一些术语以支持神智学派的信仰,同时也为心理学化的解释开辟了道路。卡尔-荣格 1937 年为埃文斯-温茨-萨姆杜普译本所做的导言巩固了心理学化的解读。1975 年,弗朗西斯卡-弗里曼特尔和确吉坚赞-宗巴编写了更准确的译本,延续了心理学化的趋势。2005 年,久美多杰与格雷厄姆-科尔曼(Graham Coleman)和图登-俊巴(Thupten Junpa)合作翻译的译本是最传统、技术上最准确的译本,但也在意义上具有普遍吸引力。我对这三种译本的取向进行了评估--哲学译本(埃文斯-温茨,1927 年)、心理学译本(弗里曼特尔-创巴,1975 年)和传统译本(多杰,2005 年)--突出了翻译宗教术语的难度。翻译史还揭示了心理学(自我发展)和佛教(自我解脱)目标兼容性的持续辩论,并为我的论点提供了基础,即心理学化的翻译只是神学漂移的一部分,而这一过程在宗教传统中是持续不断的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Transpersonal Studies
International Journal of Transpersonal Studies Arts and Humanities-Religious Studies
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信