Translations have drawn fire for heavy Theosophical and Christian filters, most famously in W.Y. Evans-Wentz’s 1927 edition. That version stitched together various manuscripts, promoted an 8th-century origin, and sprinkles in Western mystical jargon—leading traditional Tibetan scholars to quip that it’s a bit like serving sushi with ketchup. In reality, the text evolved over centuries, and its “Bardo Thodol” section wasn’t meant to stand alone but to accompany ritual instruction from qualified lamas.

Another hot button: cultural appropriation. Hippie-era fascination turned the Book into a counterculture talisman—psychedelic gurus urged readers to “trip through the bardos.” Today’s mindfulness apps sometimes borrow snippets as snappy death-anxiety relief, sparking worries that sacred rites are being repackaged as self-help snacks. Tibetan teachers caution that unfolding the journey of dying without proper guidance risks misunderstanding or even psychological distress.

Scholars debate authenticity too. Some argue “Tibetan Book of the Dead” is a Western invention—there’s no Tibetan title matching that label, and bardo-literature spans dozens of works. This marketing shortcut smoothed sales but flattened nuance. More recent critical editions, like those by Pema Losang Chökyi Gyaltsen, peel back editorial layers and reinsert chapters on living meditation practices that Evans-Wentz omitted.

A modern controversy swirls around psychedelic research. Neuroscientists at institutions like Johns Hopkins draw parallels between bardo visions and DMT-induced states, but critics insist this risks reducing profound spiritual maps to mere chemical byproducts. Meanwhile, some mental-health professionals worry that preaching literal afterlife stages could clash with evidence-based therapy models.

Ultimately, debate hinges on respect: treating the Book as a dynamic tradition rather than a one-size-fits-all blueprint. When ritual context, lineage and rigorous translation collide with pop-culture hunger, the result is admittedly messy—but conversation continues to evolve.