Talk:Tibetan Buddhism/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

External Link Discussion

Does anybody else think the following link is helpful?--FT in Leeds 01:39, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

No. Especially not when you frame it with the accusation that the Chinese government is hiding something. Wikipedia is not a soapbox or a propaganda machine. Whether or not the boy who has disappeared was kidnaped by the Chinese is a matter for discussion elsewhere. Wikipedia deals in facts, and the fact is that no one knows where he is. If you can come up with a link description that meets neutral point of view, you may find more support for the link.—chris.lawson (talk) 01:50, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
Why not? I´m not sure about including that particular link to the bbc article, but the mentioning of the controversy about the 11th Panchen Lama would deinitely fit into this article, because it is quite an important subject among tibetan buddhists (the Panchen Lama is traditionally the second highest spiritual leader after the Dalai Lama). Regarding your concerns about spreading propaganda and keeping NPOV: here is the statement of the chinese official attaining the UN COMMITTEE ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD in May 1996 regarding the disappearance of the boy:
"Mr. WU Jianmin (China) referring to the question of the boy appointed by the Dalai Lama as the reincarnation of the Panchen Lama, said that in May 1995, a statement had been issued declaring that the Dalai Lama had violated traditional practice by appointing the boy abroad. Since separatists were seeking to kidnap the boy, the parents had become fearful for his safety and requested Government protection, which had been provided. The boy was living with his parents in good conditions." (taken from the summary report of the 299th meeting of the UN CRC: http://www.bayefsky.com/summary/china_crc_c_sr.2991996.php )
So there seems to be no question on whether the boy has been taken into chinese custody, only on how to "interpret" that fact.
Here is an amnesty report from that time: http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/ENGASA170071996
here two links to campaign sites for freeing the Panchen Lama: http://www.tibet.ca/panchenlama/ , http://www.panchenlama.info/
213.168.105.222 18:22, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
I think that the question of where the little boy and the new Panchen Lama is should be included in the Panchen Lama article in detail. I agree with HH who the new Panchen Lama is but I would like the article Tibetan Buddhism to stay free from that particular issue. But I don't see a problem with a link? Me 00:11, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Lack of sources

I haved removed faulty information about Srong-brtsan-sgam-po. There is no evidence that he or Wencheng were Buddhists, or indeed that Buddhism was introduced before Khri Srong-lde-brtsan. Also, there is no evidence that Wencheng brought the Jowo to Lhasa. These stories are first mentioned in the Mani-bka'-'bum and the Ka-chems-kha-khol-ma which are 12th century. The inscriptions and historic documents from the time do not mention these facts. Also, the Potala was built by the fifth Dalai Lama not by Srong-rtsan-sgam-po. --Nathan Hill, 17:28 May 23 2005.

Emptiness

This page, or some related page, needs a reference to the doctrine of emptiness or sunnyata. (not sure about the spelling of the latter)

kh7 21:10 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)

Wow that was 3 years ago! Seeing Emptiness/Shunyata directly and understanding it logically should be mentioned in a more detailed description of the actual Buddhist practice as a ultimate goal. I hope it is there somewhere. Me 00:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Unified with Vajrayana

Shouldn't this page be unified with vajrayana? -- Error 00:15 May 10, 2003 (UTC)

An anonymous user had changed the first link to Vajrayana to "Vajrayanalardneo", a non-existing page. "Vajrayanalardneo" turns up exactly one Googlit, which is the wiki page. So I took the liberty to revert that change. However, I'm not too happy with the introductory paragraph now:

"... is the body of religious Buddhist doctrine and institutions the characteristic of Tibet, technically known as Vajrayana or Tantrayana. Tibetan Buddhism includes elements of Theravada, Mahayana and Vajrayana."

First, this has a parse error on "characteristic" — what was meant?

Second, the first sentence now says that tibetan buddhism is technically known as Vajrayana, while the second says it includes elements of ..., and Vajrayana. Which one is true?

And third, what about capitalization? Is it "Tibetan Buddhism" or "tibetan buddhism" within the text according to the WP rules?

Can somebody who knows Tibetan Buddhism check this, please? Lupo 20:26, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

The Vajrayana exists in other places besides Tibet -- Notably in the Esoteric Shingon school in Japan Zero sharp 01:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Vajrayana is the highest form of Buddhism and it is not practiced only by Tibetan Buddhists. Vajra means diamond and yana means wheel or vehicle. Tibetan Buddhism and Vajrayana should be separate pages. Tibetan Buddhism simply talks about the different yanas practiced there where the most attention is paid to Vajrayana. I don't know if this helps anybody. Its common knowledge these days. Me 00:22, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Timing

One paragraph says that it was introduced in 173 AD, the following one says the 7th century. Which one is right? I think so clarification is needed. Bah 21:05, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I tried to make sense out of the first paragraph--want to check? The dates are still in conflict. heidimo 04:06, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I used the date from the Padmasambhava page. Looks like there is controversy about the date of this event, so this may not be the last word on the matter. heidimo 04:18, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Bah -- After some research I think I can answer your questions. The NYT Manual of Style suggests we capitalize religions, thus "Islam", "Jainism", and "Tibetan Buddhism". I don't find an equivalent rule in Wikipedia yet, but we should have one. I'll add a change to Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(capitalization). Tibetan Buddhism is a subset of Vajrayana so the article is (momentarily) goofed up. The various dates mentioned (173 AD, 7th century, 9th century) all refer to valid milestones of some type -- the only answer is to add a "History" section where each date can be matched with its corresponding explanation. I'll start hacking, jump in if the spirit moves you... - technopilgrim 14:57, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)
As a follower of Tibetan Buddhism for some 28 years I find several points in this article problematic. I think it is mis-leading (I wouldn't say incorrect) to say Tibetan Buddhism contains elements of Theravada. What I would say is the Tibetan Buddhist canons contain many texts in common with the Pali canon. Traditionally the Tibetans have referred to these texts as the "Lower Vehicle" (Tibetan: theg dman, Sanscrit: Hinayana)which has derogatory connotations and is offensive to many Theravadans. The Dalai Lama has dropped the term "Hinayana" and now uses "Foundational" or "Basic" Vehicle. The Tibetan Canons also contain most existing Mahayana sutras & Tantric texts. In this way it is unique in the Buddhist world in that it is the only tradition which contains all of the various paths the Buddha taught. Other branches of Vajrayana, for instance, don't hold all the divisions of Tantras. --Bodhirakshita 22:47, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Nice to see you here, Techno! And I do like techno music too! Come back and edit some more! Me 00:28, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Vegetarianism

Are Tibetan Buddhist allowed to eat meat? What about nomadic people who practise Tibetan Buddhism? — Instantood 10:28 Feb 4 2005 (UTC)

Why wouldn't they be? The Buddha didn't teach vegetarianism. He taught equanimity of mind, not aversion or avoidance of certain foods. The vast majority of Buddhists around the world are not vegetarian. They may practise vegetarianism on certain occassions such as special days devoted to specific religious rites or during meditation retreats.

Actually meat & alcohol are used as sacraments in some Vajrayana rituals. --Bodhirakshita 22:54, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

There is a section on Buddhism regarding Vegetarianism in Buddhist history. Csbodine 19:39, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Eating meat and the Tibetans! Yes, they do eat meat and it is OK as long as they do not kill the animal. Most butchers in Tibet were Muslims. The Buddha also ate meat. Infact that is how he died. He had food poisoning (poisoined by some guy who didn't like buddha) after eating some offered spoiled meat (i was sure it was a drink). I personally disagree with eating meat but I guess Tibet is a hard place to be a vegetarian unles you want to eat barley and yak cheese all day long! :) (u have to be crazy to be a vegan) Me 00:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Corrections

notes on Feb 15 2005 copyedits:

  • fixed confusion: terton is the guy who finds termas
  • moved minor practices below major practices (we should describe what serious practitioners do before we describe what non-initiates do)
  • combined cham dance section with Bhutanese dance section.
  • removed quotes from around "pantheon". Pantheon need not imply the Greek or Roman pantheon but can have a wider meaning which is appropriate here
  • moved link to Tibetan Buddhist canon to bottom of the "Schools" section where it makes the most sense
  • consolidated external links, particularly the listing of which countries, states, and cities each center has facilities in.
  • miscellaneous tidying up

technopilgrim 22:15, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Red Hat Sect

Not sure where this goes, but I believe this orphan, Red Hat Sect, belongs here somewhere (or should redirect to an article in this series). --Confuzion 11:07, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

I think it should redirect to Nyingma.--Bodhirakshita 05:18, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

"Lamaism"

Someone recently removed the word "incorrect" from attributing "Lamaism" as another word for Tibetan Buddhism. After doing some searches on Google regarding the specific definition, almost all of them just say "see Tibetan Buddhism". But I did find one article of note: Encyclopædia Britannica. The free entry states "Western usage of “lamaism” and “lamasery” are, in fact, incorrect terms of reference for Tibetan Buddhism..." but ends there. I'm not going to sign up for a free trial of EB today, so I don't know what the rest of the article states. Does someone with an account on EB want to fill us in on why this is incorrect? Csbodine 16:34, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

The word "lamaism" is deriving from misconceptions of past researchers/visitors in Tibet. Because Vajrayana emphasizes much the Guru and he seemed to more important than the Buddha, they named Tibetan Buddhism incorectly as lamaism. Later this term was given up and today it is quite unusual or even a term with a negative taste. Kt66 13:11, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Lamaism is a translation from the Chinese. The Chinese term in Pin Yin is "lama jiao". "Jiao" is the Chinese for a school, as in a school of philosophy. It is commonly translated as "-ism", so we have Daoism for dao jiao, Buddhism for Fo jiao, Legalism for fa jiao, etc. For someone translating from the Chinese it would not be incorrect. --Bodhirakshita 05:03, 25 March 2006 (UTC)--
Lamaism is a communist word for the Buddhist practice which they didn't understand. Guru devotion, which is major part of Tibetan Buddhism, see Milarepa was mistaken as a some sort of control over the poor people that the Lamas had when the chinese invaded. Another example of how different China and Tibet are and how they do not belong in the same state. Bad word in the Tibetan community. Me 00:43, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

"Esoteric" and "Tantric"

Menmo's changes to the reason why Tibetan Buddhism is "Esoteric" and "Tantric" just do not sit well with me. There is no explanation as to what an "empowerment" is (the link definitely provides no clues) or why it is important or what makes it esoteric and "tantric" is simply self referential. While I don't have much to add, I would say that it is esoteric because there are multiple levels of meaning (Outer, Inner, and Secret) to nearly every text that requires special instruction or insight. I don't belive that requiring an empowerment makes something esoteric. Of course, according to the introduction to Tantra, something being tantric is automatically esoteric. Any comments/contributions before I make the changes I've just noted? Csbodine 17:17, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Empowerment: hopefully somebody would extend this entry to include its meaning in Buddhist tantra! Esoteric means that not everybody can just read a book and understand and practice it. The empowerment is something like a key. Menmo 14:48, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Tantric: I am not extremely happy with this anyway, but I wanted to change the previous version as little as possible. Buddhism as practised in Tibet includes (sutric) Mahayana, Tantra and Dzogchen. But Tantra is the most visible and probably distinctive feature if you compare with Buddhism elsewhere. If you feel you can improve the wordings, please do so! Menmo 14:48, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
I would say that Tantra belongs to a category of esoteric teachings. You need initiation from the Tantric master to to read and practice tantric texts or verbal transmitions. Me 00:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Hinayana/Theravada Reverts

In regards to the edit marked: (Theravada is not the Hinayana. Theravada includes also Mahayana Teachings. Mostly Theravada is seen as one of 18 Hinayana Schools.) by user Kt66.

I would like to see a reference on this. I have never heard it discussed this way, especially given the connotations of Hinayana as 'smaller', 'lesser', and in rarer uses even 'dirty' or 'garbage'. Theravada is certainly a 'Nikaya' school, but I do not know of any categorisation which places it as a Hinayana school save in a derogatory context. -- Hidoshi 07:12, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Every Tibetan teacher I have seen has stressed that the Hinayana is not to be equated with the Therevada tradition, as the Theravada tradition is broader, as stated. Furthermore, Hinayana is the term that is used exclusively by the Tibetan Buddhist tradition, whether it is derogatory or not, and the article should reflect that. It should stay. Sylvain1972 14:30, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Very well, good enough for me. -- Hidoshi 17:23, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi Hidoshi - within the Tibetan tradition as stemming from some core texts from both the Wisdoms lineage of Nagarjuna/Candrakirti, as well as the Method lineages of Asanga, the term 'hinayana' is NOT used in a derogatory manner - in fact such usage breaks the very ethics of these traditions, as well as that of the Brahma Net Sutra. The standard set of 18 Bodhisattva vows (used by most Tibetan Buddhists, and required as a percursor by all high initiations) used in Tibet has specific reference to NOT denigrate or dismiss the practices, teachings, or practitioners of the Hinayana - indeed, the 18,000 Prajnaparamita Sutra makes it clear that any Mahayana practitioner must also be a Hinayana practitioner - Mahayana is a superset of Hinayana, not a separate path - and it is in this light that most Tibetans use the term. There are some western rationales for the Tibetan interpretation (citing theg-smad as a translation, for instance), but the basis of reasoning for Tibetans is that hina- indicates inferior, but inferior ONLY in one respect - in that the path does not lead to Samyaksambuddhahood - something that is agreed upon by all schools. In the end, the term 'Hinayana' is multi-valent - and is possibly to be deprecated due to the lack of clarity left when attempting to reconcile it's usage across the world of geography, culture, and history. But I guarantee that in a general sense, the term is NOT used in a pejorative or derogatory sense by Tibetan scholars. (20040302)
Evidence-

Lotus Sutra (Ch.14):

A bodhisattva [...] does not hold other Buddhists in contempt, not even those who follow the Hinayana path, nor does he cause them to have doubts or regrets by criticizing their way of practice or making discouraging remarks.

By the 3rd Century CE, in the ethics chapter of Asanga's Bodhisattvabhumi, we find an explicit injunction not to criticise or reject the Hinayana texts or traditions, where Trainee Bodhisattvas are instructed not to "disparage the Hinayana, or over-encourage others to learn Mahayana".

Candragomin wrote a very influential twenty verse summary of Asanga's Ethics, written or summarised as a set of vows to be taken by a trainee Bodhisattve. The 15th Verse (derived from Asanga's chapter on ethics) cites "rejecting the Sravakayana" as a root downfall. Candragomin's vows were adopted by the Indo-Tibetan Mahayana tradition via Atisha, and are still used today by the Gelugpa and Kagyupa schools.

The 18,000 verse perfection of wisdom sutra (an early Madhyamaka Mahayana sutra) states:

Bodhisattvas should practice all paths - whatever is a path of a sravaka, a pratyeka or a Buddha - and should know all paths.

in the opening verses of the Vimalakirti Sutra:

Reverence to all Buddhas, Bodhisattvas, Aryasravakas, and Pratyekabuddhas, in the past, the present, and the future and

[...] Of bhikshus there were eight thousand, all arhats. They were free from impurities and afflictions, and all had attained self-mastery. Their minds were entirely liberated by perfect knowledge [...]


Added note on the possibility of derogatory perception of "Hinayana" to the Schools/Tenets section and that sometimes "Sravakayana" is used instead. I have attended an eight day teaching by His Holiness in Zuerich last summer, where this term was used most of the time (at least by the german translator). -- 81.173.138.109 02:02, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Theravada is just another word to describe the Buddhist practices in certain parts of Asia. It includes some Mahayana and all of Hinayana teachings. It is incorrect to say Theravada is dirty or lesser because it is the basic teachings which could bring you to Buddhahood. In order to become Buddha but come back to help others you need some other practices. Usually a Hinayana person will look for his/her own Buddhahood. A Mahayana person would look for his/hers and others' Buddhahood. Theravada could do both. Me 00:54, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Lamaism is most definantly a derogitory term

The word Lamaism is used as a way to try to seperate Tibetan Buddhism from genuine buddhism. Lamaism was coined to emphasize the diciple's faith to the lama above the faith in the three jewels of Buddhism: Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. But this is a mistaken understanding as those who follow the Tantric system see the three jewels as embodied in the lama, rather than the lama being a substitution for them. Tibetan Buddhism is actually formed from three different but interpenetrating schools: hiniyana, mahayana, and Tantra.

I wrote this above but I think it bears repeating here. Lamaism is a translation from the Chinese. The Chinese term in Pin Yin is "lama jiao". "Jiao" is the Chinese for a school, as in a school of philosophy. It is commonly translated as "-ism", so we have Daoism for dao jiao, Buddhism for Fo jiao, Legalism for fa jiao, etc. For someone translating from the Chinese it would not be incorrect. --Bodhirakshita 05:22, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Distinguishing characteristics

I find that the present formulation

   * belief in reincarnation lineages of certain lamas (known as tulkus) ...
   * a practice wherein lost or hidden ancient scriptures (termas) ...
   * belief that a Buddha can be manifest in human form, ...

is not very satisfactory: Recognition of tulku lineages was introduced quite late into Tibetan Buddhism. Termas are not important in most of the new translation period (Sarma) lineages. And that a Buddha can be a human being is common to Buddhism as a whole (cf. Shakyamuni). I hope that somebody can rewrite this. The main point is, to my opinion, Tantra (and Dzogchen) as well as all that which came from the contact with preexisting Tibetan culture including Bon (all the "shamanistic" aspects). Menmo 14:48, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I also thought it is strange to say that a Buddha can come as a human and it is a characteristic of Tibetan Buddhism. I would say that it is not. You could say that a Buddha can come in any living form and that is characteristic. I agree hiding teachings may not appear important or happening now days but it is characteristic. Plus we don't know if the Teachers are not doing it. The tulku is a sure characteristic. It is one of the most unique features. Me 01:01, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Debate in Tibetan Tradition

There is no mention of the unique debate culture within monasteries

"The Tibetan & Himalayan Digital Library" is a good source

Wikiproject?

I propose that we form a wikiproject for Tibetan Buddhism. Would anyone be interested? Sylvain1972 17:05, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

what exactly is a Wikiproject (pardon my igs) and what would it entail ? Zero sharp 08:04, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
It is basically just a point of organization for users who edit Tibetan Buddhism articles. If the community of knowledgable wikipedians has a focal point I think it will be easier to focus our efforts, maintain standards of quality and resolve disputes. I've started the page, so please add your name to the list if you are interested: WikiProject Tibetan Buddhism Sylvain1972 16:57, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
I've joined your project. Good idea. I hope you don't mind. Peace. ॐ Metta Bubble puff 12:28, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Butter lamps

Hello I've just recently visited a beautiful temple in Scotland. While I was there I visited the Butter lamp house. There was some info about why the lamps are lit etc. It said that 108 lamps are lit, but 1008 on auspicious days. I meant to find out before I left what the significance of the numbers is, but never did find out. Can somebody please tell me the significance of 108 and 1008? NeilEvans 23:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

108 is a 'sacred' number, like how u have 13 and 7 and other stuff, u know pentagrams and other weird geometry, shapes and numbers. for example, there are 108 beads in a buddhist rosary (prayer beads). i forgot the real significance of it, but it has to do someting with praying.
Yeah I thought it must be a sacred number, but I wonder what the significance is, I mean why 108??--NeilEvans 17:00, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
A little research on Wiki provides Why 108 ? and 108 (number). Csbodine 18:21, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

what Buddhists call themselves: 'Nangpa'

I think its and important bit and found this paragraph:

We call our religion 'Nangpai chhoe'. 'Nang' in Tibetan or Bhutanese (including almost all dialects) means 'Inside' or 'within'. 'Pa' indicate the followers. 'Chhoe' means dharma, and in Tibetan it also carries the meaning 'to reform'. "We are called 'Nangpa' because we search within our own minds, rather than outside for the truth" ... - I know for sure that the quote of Sogyal Rinpoche is exact.

Source: http://www.kuzuzangpo.com/index.php?subaction=showfull&id=1147516594&archive=&start_from=&ucat=&

I don't know yet as how to properly insert into the article Walter Hartmann 05:49, 30 August 2006 (UTC)