Interview with Sonam Gyantsen (Sarah College)

Sonam Gyantsen is a Professor of Linguistics and History at Sarah College for Higher Tibetan Studies, Dharamsalahas conducted extensive research on Tibet's historical legal system. His expertise notably influenced his student Tsangtruk Topla's commissioned work for the Central Tibetan Administration's Supreme Justice Commission, "A Critical Analysis of Ancient Tibetan Legal Documents" (Gtsang phrug stobs lags. 2021. Bod kyi sngar srol khrims yig zhib ʼjug. Gangchen Kyishong, Dharamsala: Btsan byol bod miʼi ches mthoʼi khrims zhib khang).

• Prof. Gyantsen traces a clear evolutionary line from the Khrims gnyis gsal ba'i me long to various zhal lce texts, identifying the Khrims yig zhal lce bcu gsum as the authoritative version. He argues this textual development was primarily driven by the need to address immediate geopolitical challenges posed by the Dzungar (sog po) and Yunnan/Dali ('Jang yul) regions.
• The subsequent adaptation by Doring Pandita of the zhal lce bcu gsum represented, in his analysis, a response to growing Manchu influence, developed in consultation with the Lhasa Ambans.
• Asked about secondary reading or commentarial literature from the Tibetan tradition, Prof Gyantsen explained that none of the zhal lce editions needed extensive commentaries. Their language was deliberately crafted to be intelligible to the general public rather than employing the complex literary Tibetan common in scholarly works. He specifically challenges our suggestion that characterizes these texts' style as poetic (snyan ngag). Instead, he argues that their distinctive linguistic features directly reflect the practical mediation and dispute resolution processes of pre-modern Tibet, where clarity and accessibility were paramount for their functional application in legal contexts (although he concedes that many terms are now forgotten and makes the translation more difficult).
• Prof. Gyantsen suggests that the large-format manuscripts (like those in Bailey and the original TLM manuscript collection) were made specifically for archival purposes. According to him, the government's record-keeping system was based on established monastic archives, which explains the particular format of these texts. The manuscripts' physical features - their large size, generous spacing, and big fonts - made them practical for institutional use and preservation. There was also a religious aspect to this: in Tibetan Buddhist practice, copying texts creates merit for both the patron funding the copy and the scribe making it. Using larger fonts and leaving plenty of empty space was thought to increase this merit.

→ When presented with the unique prefaces found in Bailey, LTWA, and LTWA 16-Addon, which were absent from his source materials, notably TAR 01 16, Prof. Gyantsen expressed keen interest in their scholarly examination and urged us to prepare a full study of these first.