Marc-Henri Deroche, “On Being ‘Impartial’ (ris med): From Non-Sectarianism to the Great Perfection”, Revue d’Etudes Tibétaines, no. 44, Mars 2018, pp. 129–158. On Being ‘Impartial’ (ris med): From Non-Sectarianism to the Great Perfection * Marc-Henri Deroche (Kyōto University) Introduction: Impartiality and the History of Buddhism The Terms phyogs/ris med in the History of Tibetan Buddhism he Tibetan expression phyogs ris su med pa (including abbre- viations or variations like: phyogs ris med, phyogs med, ris med, etc.) has come to describe an important Buddhist contempla- tive revival in 19th century Khams. In a famous article, the late E. Gene Smith (1970, 2001) introduced scholars to what he termed the “nonsectarian movement,” with its great saints and cultural heroes. “Nonsectarian” was Smith’s translation of ris med, while other schol- ars have used also a variety of terms like “ecumenical,” “eclectic,” or even “universalist,” the latter describing the intent to encompass all Buddhist lineages or teachings. More generally, phyogs/ris med can be translated as “impartial,” the most literal and inclusive translation. This rendition has also the advantage to highlight the fundamental Buddhist notion behind –and beyond– the so-called ris med move- ment: the virtue of impartiality. In previous works, I have made my own modest contribution to the political and religious history of the so-called ris med approach in Tibet, focusing on the period of the intensification of sectarianism, the 16th century. Here, the intent of this paper is rather to illuminate this external history by focusing on the transformative power of ide- als and related praxis, as well as the symbolic web of resources for the making of meaning and guidelines for action. Rather than etic, * Among many mentors, I am especially grateful to Samten Gyaltsen Karmay for encouraging me first to look back in India about the concept of ris med; to Nobu- mi Iyanaga for our many discussions over many years about Buddhist forms of universalism, eclecticism or (non-)sectarianism, from India to Japan; as well as to Jean-Noël Robert, Akihiko Akamatsu, Peter Skilling, Matthew T. Kapstein and all participants of the conference on “Bouddhisme et universalisme” (bukkyō to fuhenshugiࠕ仏教と普遍主義), held in Kyōto, 3-5 October 2014, during which an earlier version of this article was presented. Many thanks also to Kazuo Kanō for his kind help in order to identify some Sanskrit materials and to Jeremy Rappleye for kindly checking my English. T