Buddhist Sanskrit texts and other Indian dialectical literatures began to be translated into Tibetan1 from seventh century onwards. Since that time, enormous volumes of Buddhist texts were deliberately reconstituted in the native language. The translations include many teachings of the Buddha, commentaries, and other exegetical works of Indian scholars. These texts were translated accurately and with a systematic methodology,2 framed under the luminary Indian Pa]n]ditas such as 'Ac"arya ®S"antarak]sita, D"ana«sila, Surendrabodhi with Tibetan translators Kawa Peltseg, Chogro Lui Gyaltsen, ®Sang Ye«sede, etc. This fine work is unparalleled in the history of scholarship. This is particularly remarkable given the geographical isolation and small population of Tibet. This effort lasted for several generations, and manifests the richness and precision of the Tibetan language, which in modern days too is uniquely suited to the restoration of the original Sanskrit.3 These works form the corpus of the Kangyur (Buddha’s teachings) and Tangyur (treatises) which are familiar to many. These materials, ranging from profound Buddhist philosophy to the science of versification and fine arts, are objects of intensive modern research and scholarship. Works of great siddhas written in doha were also translated into Tibetan.

It was through royal patronage of the translating activities that has stimulated centralization and standardization of these processes. A central committee of translators, consisting of both Indian and Tibetan scholars, was constituted, authorized to revise old and new translations in order to attain uniformity in terminology as well as translation methodology and techniques. This committee is generally referred to as Bcom-ldan-’das-kyi-ring-lugc-kyi-’dun-sa. A major contribution to the standardisation and codification of the translating methods and particularly the terminology employed to translate the host Buddhist terms, are the Sanskrit-Tibetan lexicographical works entitled Mah"avyutpatti and Sgra-sbyor-bam-po-gnis-pa, that were composed during this period by the same central committee. These lexicographical works were intended to standardise and codify the Tibetan terminology used to translate the corpus of Sanskrit Buddhist texts. Under the auspices of king Khri-sde-srong-btsen Sad-na legs and later during king Khri-gtdug-lde-btsan Ral-pa-chen, this process also involved revision of earlier translations and checking of new translations by the central committee of translators, in order to attain uniformity in terminology and translation methodology. Mah"avyutpatti provided the standard lexicon to be adhered to, and Sgra-sbyor-bam-po-gnis-pa, as a handbook for translators, played a crucial role in the creation of the rich Indo-Tibetan translation-literature, which indeed uses a great many set patterns and phrases to translate Sanskrit. Mah"avyutpatti is a systematic Sanskrit-Tibetan dictionary, merely stating the Tibetan equivalents of Sanskrit words and phrases, mainly Buddhist terms, but also terms common to Indian literature and culture in general. No alphabetical or similar ordering has been adopted, but the 9565 entries are arranged on 283 meaning-categories, ranging from ‘names of Buddhas’ to ‘names of diseases’ in accordance with Sakaki’s edition, whereas, Sgra-sbyor-bam-po-gnis-pa, is a commentary on 414 of the entries occurring in Mah"avyutpatti. It states the Sanskrit term and the Tibetan translation, commenting upon and explaining the Tibetan translation chosen for the term in question. As such it gives an important insight into the translation-methodology used in the early period of formation of the Tibetan canonical literature.

These translations carried were superb and owe much to the later development of Tibetan literary works also. The translations of Abhidharmako«sak"arik"a4 translated by 'Ac"arya Jinamitra and dPel rTseg Rak]sita; Madhyamak"avat"ara5 translated by 'Ac"arya Tilakakala«sa and Patshab Nyima grags and re-translated by 'Ac"arya Kanakavarma and Patshab Nyima grags; Bodhisattv"adanakalpalat"a6 translated by 'Ac"arya Lakshmikara and ®Songton, and re-translated by Chokyong Zangpo and Bodhicary"avat"ara7 of 'Ac"arya ®S"antideva translated by 'Ac"arya Sarvajñadeva and dPal rTseg Raksita; re-translated by 'Ac"arya Dharma«sr+ibhadra and Rinchen Zangpo, re-translated by 'Ac"arya Sumatik+irti and Patshab Nyima grags are some of the finest chef-d’oeuvre works. The translations almost are literal and even consisted the same flavour and flow of Sanskrit. Some of the above cited translations even imbibe better rhythms and flow than the original works. Especially, the translation of Bodhisattv"avad"ana-kalpalat"a of 'Ac"arya K]semendra became an outstanding literary piece in the secular field. It came to be known as the ‘king of all literary works’ and was commended by later scholars alike.

Among the Tibetan scholars, with the emergence of Sakya Pandita Kunga Gyaltsen Pal Sangpo (1181-82 to 1251 A.D.), we see the development of a new phase in the literary tradition of Tibet. Till then Tibetans mostly exerted themselves in the work of translation and their writings were mainly composed in a more freestyle, not based upon particular Kavya rules.8 But Sakya Pandita foresaw the need for a profound literary development on the basis of Sanskrit literary works. He himself wrote many literary texts bearing close affinity with Sanskrit poetry, prosody, etc., in accordance with the Sanskrit rules. He wrote Khespa la jug pai go, (Entrance to Wiseman), forming new rules on discourse, debate and composition. He excerpted profusely from Saraswatika]n_th"abhara]na and Kavy"adar«sa, but excluded the remaining portion, stating "...the Tibetan scholars don’t have interest at all in poetry." His compositions, especially the Entrance to Wiseman, left a great impact on succeeding Tibetan scholars. Later, with the help of the Indian Pandita Lak]smikara, Lotsawa ®Songton Dorjee Gyaltsen translated the entire K"avy"adar«sa with short annotations. Subsequently, Pang Lotsawa Lodoe Tenpa translated portions of 'Ac"arya Ratn"a«sr+i’s commentary on the K"avy"adar«sa and composed his own treatise on it, which paved the ground for the introduction of the study of poetry in Tibet.

Sakya Pandita first composed a treatise on prosody called Debjor Metok Chunpo (Prosody of a Bunch of Flowers), portraying the salient features of the rules of the art of articulation on the basis of the Sanskrit metrics of Chandovicitti, Ratn"akara«s"anti’s Chandoratn"akara, and P"aingala with Jayadeva’s commentary. The Chando-ratnkara9 with auto-commentary10 were translated more than three centuries later by Lochen Jangchub Tsemo and Namkha Sangpo on the basis of Sanskrit mss possessed by Pang Lotsawa Lodoe Tenpa.

S"akya Pandita also initiated the extensive study of the Pram"a]navartik"a along with the Pram"a]nasamuccaya. Earlier, the study on Buddhist logics mainly included Ny"ayabindu, its commentaries, and the Pram"a]navini«scaya lineage, propagated after their translation into Tibetan by Lotsawa Loden Sherab, etc., around the 12th century, and indigenous scholars’ treatises composed by the eight "Sengchen" (Great Lions), viz., Chapa Chokyi Senge, etc. S"akya Pandita received the oral transmission of the Pram"a]nav"arttika and other logic works from ®S"akya«sribhadra of Kashm+ir. The oral11 and literary12 traditions preserved in Tibet reveal that S"akya Pandita composed a treatise in Sanskrit on the logic text Pram"a]nayuktinidhi (Treasure of Reasoning of Valid Cognition) with auto-commentary, for his teacher ®S"akya«sr+ibhadra to appraise his knowledge of logic. This is the first ever known Sanskrit treatise written by a Tibetan scholar.

Under the patronage of the Great Fifth Dalai Lama, Ngawang Lobsang Gyatso (1617-1682 A.D.), the translator Darpa Ngawang Phuntsog Lhundup was sent to India to study Sanskrit. He sat under the feet of Mah"apa]n]dita Balabhadra and Pt. Gokulan"atha Mishra of Kuruk]setra.13 He translated the Prakriy"akaumud+i of Råmacandra into Tibetan. This Sanskrit grammar text belongs to the new school of P"a]nini grammar (Sarvavarman’s Kal"apa was the first such attempt), in which the relevant s"utras of P"a]nini were arranged differently than in the older A]s_t"adhy"ay+i lineage. Thence ushered the lineage and study of P"a]nini grammar in the Land of Snow.

In the Tangyur set of Indian master’s work the R"ajan+iti or N+iti is categorised under the heading of Thunmon ba lugs kyi btan bcos or Common Treatises on Ethics. In this category there are eight different texts translated in different periods. Most of these texts are translated during the ‘early period of translation’, and few in the later ‘era of new translation’. The Catalogue of Tohoku Imperial University of Japan also includes these texts in a consecutive sequence. Among them three texts authored by 'Ac"arya N"ag"arjuna viz., Prajñ"ashataka-n"ama-prakara]na14 was translated into Tibetan by the Indian Pa]n]dita Sarvajñadeva and the Tibetan translator (Lotsawa) dPal bTsegs; N+iti«s"astraprajñ"adan]da-n"am15 was translated into Tibetan by the Indian Pandita Surendrabodhi and the Tibetan translator (Lotsawa) Yeshes sDe and N+iti«sastraj±nanosanabindu-n"ama16 was translated into Tibetan by the Indian Pa<ndita Sh+ilendrabodhi and the Tibetan translator (Lotsawa) Yeshes sDe. Thereafter, G"ath"ako]sa-n"ama17 by 'Ac"arya Ravigupta was translated into Tibetan by the Indian Pandita Jñ"anash"anti and the Tibetan translator (Lotsawa) dPal gyi lhunpo sDe; Shatag"ath"a18 of 'Ac"arya Vararuci was translated into Tibetan by the Indian Pa]n]dita Vinayacandra and the Tibetan translator (Lotsawa) Choskyi ®Sesrab; Vimalaprasnottaram"al"a19 by 'Ac"arya Amoghavar]sa was translated into Tibetan by the Indian Pandita Kamalagupta and the Tibetan translator (Lotsawa) Rinchen bSangpo; C"anakyar"ajan+iti«s"astra20 by C"anakya was translated into Tibetan by the Indian Pandita Prabh"akara«sr+imitra and the Tibetan translator (Lotsawa) Rinchen bSangpo; N+iti«s"atra21 by Masurak]sa was translated into Tibetan by Dharma«sr+ibhadra and ®S"akya blo-gros. On the basis of the colophonic references of texts, it can be said that the first six texts were translated during the 8th and 9th century i.e. earlier period of translation, whereas the later two texts were translated in the 11th century i.e., during the era of new translation.

In short, except for Nepal, Tibet is the only country where for centuries ties were kept with India through a harmonious relationship terms in the annals of history as a "Guru-«si]sya," "teacher-pupil" relationship.22 Indian pandits crossed the impenetrable mighty Himalayas, sacrificing their own lives on the initiation of the Tibetan kings. Similarly, the Tibetan kings sent brilliant students to India for study in the unbearable heat of the Indian sub-continent. Despite undergoing these hardships of geography, customs, habits, and cultural ties were maintained until around the 17th century when Buddhism became extinct in its birth place itself.

Through these connections, spanning centuries, a breakthrough dimension of Tibetan literary development, both in religion as well as in secular art, was ushered in. The Tibetans even closely followed the compositional framework of g"ath"a, Tri]s_tubha style formulations. Even the usage of every Upasarga (Nye gyur), Nip"ata (Tsig tÙad), and Avyaya (Mizadpa) have their equivalents in Tibetan. Thus we can feel a Sanskrit touch in every literary compositional work.23 With the translation of the Sanskrit works into Tibetan carried for centuries, it has left a deep impact on the Tibetan literary works to such a close affinity next to only Sanskrit. Not only that, the Indian cultural impact is so pristine in the living tradition of Tibetan Buddhism today that when HH the Dalai Lama’s K"alacakra Initiation was in progress at Tabo recently, one of the Indian journalist covering the Bh"umi puj"a ceremony led by the Namgyal monks reported as—chanting G"ayatr+i mantras!