If there is one label that is widely used and yet completely inaccurate, it is that of “Tibetan bowls,” because they are in fact not Tibetan at all! These objects, marketed as “Tibetan singing bowls,” sold as Tibetan ritual instruments, and branded as “dharma products,” are neither ancient, nor of Tibetan origin, nor of ritual use.
As stated by Tenzin Dheden, a York University graduate student, representative of the Canada-Tibet Committee (CTC) in Toronto, and founder of Khapse Conversations, a series of discussions with Tibetan Studies specialists:
“Scholars agree that so-called ‘Tibetan singing bowls’ and ‘Tibetan sound baths’ are entirely Western inventions, and that their alleged Tibetan origin is a modern myth. There is no credible historical evidence whatsoever that Tibetans have ever used singing bowls.”
Although one sometimes reads that “Tibetan singing bowls” trace back to Buddhist or Bon shamanic traditions, the making and use of bowls specifically intended to “sing” (as opposed to bowls made for striking) are considered a modern phenomenon.
“History teaches us that these metal bowls were originally food bowls from northern India or Nepal. Today, the bowl has become an orientalist fetish object and a flagship product of the sound-bath industry.”
Historical records and accounts of Tibetan music are silent about singing bowls. Such bowls are not mentioned by Perceval Landon (a visitor in 1903–1904) in his notes on Tibetan music, nor by any other visitor. Similarly, although missionaries interested in traditional Tibetan healing practices noted resonant sounds, they never mention singing bowls.
Tenzin Dheden stresses the danger of labeling as “Tibetan” something that is not:
“The Tibetan singing bowl does not exist and is not real, but the racist mythologization of the Tibetan people is very real. The singing bowl industry aggressively presents itself as reproducing an ‘ancient Tibetan ritual.’
“This Western practice that essentializes Tibetan culture and profits from this cultural commodification places marginalized Tibetan refugees in a delicate situation—they can make some money by selling a few metal bowls to fascinated Westerners, but at the cost of voluntarily participating in the orientalist fantasy of ‘Tibetanness,’ which inflicts deep cultural trauma and suffering on the Tibetan people.”
She adds:
“Sound-energy enthusiasts tend to mix various New Age beliefs and claim that each so-called ‘Tibetan singing bowl’ has its own ‘frequency,’ its ‘chakra,’ its ‘planet,’ its ‘energy,’ and its ‘psychic history.’ Dedicated collectors scour the globe in search of authentic ancient Tibetan singing bowls, which they believe are infused with ‘ancient sacred sound technology,’ unlike cheap fraudulent ‘modern fakes.’
“When confronted with easily falsifiable claims about Tibetan cultural links, ‘sound healers’ often dismiss the Tibetan people’s rejection of such claims, clinging instead to a conspiracy theory that singing bowls are deliberately kept secret because Tibetans are protecting ancient sound-based spiritual knowledge from outsiders.
“They insist on the existence of a secret lineage of metallurgist ‘shamans’ who transmit ancient mysteries through the centuries. This example of willful Western ignorance is so absurd that I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at the exploitation of my cultural heritage by fanatical Westerners.
“Western bourgeois fantasies about Tibet, and the harmful racial stereotypes they perpetuate, simply have no need for the real Tibet and the suffering my country endures.
“The real Tibet is subordinated to the myth of Tibet. That myth, however, has real power and has become the dominant framework through which the West perceives the Tibetan political struggle. The myth reduces Tibet to a museum exhibit. It reduces Tibetan politics to the question of survival of a dying, one-dimensional civilization. The myth prevents Tibetan political concerns from being taken seriously. The myth invites sentimentality rather than political opportunity. The myth ensures that Tibetans will never receive the institutional and governmental support for which we tirelessly campaign.”
From my own experience, I recall a retreat in Switzerland a few years ago led by a Tibetan monk. The organizers had placed a singing bowl next to the spot where he was about to teach.
When he arrived, he sat down, wrapped himself in his shawl, in silence. Then he leaned over, picked up the bowl, lifted it high, and asked:
“What is this?”
The audience unanimously replied: “A Tibetan bowl!”
To which he responded:
“Here is a Tibetan bowl that is not Tibetan. There are no singing bowls in Tibet, and there never were. Look for them in monasteries in Tibet—you won’t find any! Look for them in rituals—they aren’t there! We use tingshas.”
He then set down the bowl, picked up a pair of small cymbals placed nearby, and rang them. Without another word, he began his teaching.
We therefore invite anyone walking the Buddhist path to adjust their language and respect what truly is Tibetan and what is not, because using the label Tibetan must not become a mere commercial phenomenon. It is about respecting things as they are and honoring Tibetan culture.
And I’ll add one of my own home-made mantras:
“Never forget that the black sheep is the one who sees ultimate reality, and it is not because 99.9% of the population lives in ignorance that the black sheep should turn to ignorance just to fit in.”
— by Val 😀
Ajouter un commentaire
Commentaires