英文摘要 |
The extant literature in Himalayan Tibetan studies describes a highly unified Tibetan culture. Through this literature we can observe that Tibetans living in the western and central parts of the Himalayas present a high degree of homogeneity in history, social organization and kinship. In contrast, Tibetan communities in the eastern part display a broad heterogeneity in all these areas. In addition to Tibetan Buddhism—which produces a homogeneity that spreads from a center to the periphery in a top-down direction—another regime that produces homogeneity is the grouping strategy of Tibetan societies, whose direction is bottom-up and diffuse from periphery to center. This includes the systems of patrilineal lineage, polyandry, matrilineal cross-cousin marriage and the concepts of “flesh” and “bone”. In recent years, studies have begun to emerge that explore the diversity of the Tibetan culture circle's eastern regions. The diversity of religion in the Amdo Tibetan area has been systematically and comparatively discussed by Mona Schrempf (1999, 2006). And while research mentions that there is also great variation in both social organization and kinship in Eastern Khamba (Zhang Jianshi 2000), there has yet to be research that has explored this region in comparison with Tibet in a holistic way. In this paper, through a comparison between Zhuokeji rGyalrong people in the Eastern edge of the Himalayas and the Sherpa occupied Western edge. I will focus on analysis of the differences in social organization and kinship to emphasize the uniqueness of the Eastern Himalayan region. Building on the works of Paul Benedict (1942) and Claude Lévi-Strauss (1969[1949]) whose research through the perspectives of language and culture lead them to conclude social groupings in Asia presented a particular “mind of Asiatic grouping,” I will demonstrate that not only have the Eastern Himalayan areas constituted an absent presence in the entirety of the Tibetan Himalayas, but that the East also presents a distinct area with its own historical, social, linguistic and cultural characteristics. |