Talk:Nyingma

[Untitled]

Dzigar Kongtrul is originally an Kagyupa. You already mentioned Dudjom Rinpoche and Sogyal Rinpoche above. Why not mention Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche here?

Category:Buddhism

Eequor - Why did you removed the Category:Buddhism link? Csbodine 21:38, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Year origin Nyingma

The year of origin in the document was 817 which can't be correct, however I can't find an exact date so it's now around 760, because the lower limit is 755, the year Trisong Detsen became King, and the upper limit is 767, because Padmasambhava's monastry is known to exist in that year. If somebody knows a more correct year, please feel free to change the document. KittenKlub 12:52, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

By what source is Padmasambhava's monastery known to exist in 767?—Nat Krause^(Talk!) 01:26, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

List of teachers

I have removed Khenpo Choga's name from this list because obviously this list is made up of the most famous teachers, and public figures like Khyentse Norbu. Nothing against Khenpo Choga, but not in one line with the great masters, please. Would you agree? Menmo 15:35, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Tantric system

This entry starts with "The structure of tantric teachings of Nyingma is significant aside from the terma-tradition." Could anybody explain what this is to mean? Menmo 19:43, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

'elementally encoded'

While I think I understand the gist of what B9 meant, this terminology is to the best of my knowledge not standard (and if it is, cite it) and does not serve the interest of clarity, particularly to the non-specialist. Zero sharp 05:12, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree. This editor has been making cryptically worded changes to a number of articles. GlassFET 16:46, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Is oral transmission or oral linage a cult or truely authentic....???

I just bring this issue for an open discussion, as it is contradicted with the modern day's practice - Good Documenation Practice or GDP.

I myself have encountered several incidents which were related to oral instructions and which have never been reliable to me recently. Since the detailed stories will be embarrassing some senior officials, they will not be revealed here. I believe that I'm not the only person who are experienced these situations.

To me, any oral teachings can only be used as advice but not as authentic teaching materials, unless they have been electronically recorded and the recording devices or recorded materials have been properly validated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.21.40.253 (talk) 04:00, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

In ancient days, although electonic tech was not available, a witnessing practice has not been obsoleted —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.21.40.253 (talk) 04:15, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Finding a written ref would be helpful here. The question itself is loaded duality. Zulu Papa 5 (talk) 14:01, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

The oral lineage is the ka-ma lineage. "The kama lineage is the source of Nyingma tradition" and "kama is the basis of terma". These quotes are from Palden Sherab, whom Penor Rinpoche considered the most learned living Nyingma scholar ZuluPapa5. I'll look for an easier direct link. Pasdecomplot (talk) 20:41, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

100% jargon, 0% wisdom

For a page that describes a profound philosphy in buddhism, the wiki page should be able to say something besides a string of teachers, jargon with no descriptions, shrines, and all the other meaningless words.

This is a philosophy capable of changing the world. It's more than a string of words. An outsider to Buddhism should be able to approach this philosophy and actually learn something. Give examples. Tell a story. Give a little teaching here for us plebes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.182.1.4 (talk) 16:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Chan influence on the Nyingma is not True

This totally disputes the notion that there was Chan influence on the Nyingma.

http://vajranatha.com/teaching/DzogchenChinese.htmThigle (talk) 20:20, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

He disputes Evans-Wentz's assertions, but Evans-Wentz is way out of date anyway, as his convoluted quote reflects. There has been a lot of scholarship done on the subject since 1954. In any case, Vajranatha disputes Evans-Wentz saying that Dzogchen doctrine was influenced by Chinese scholastic Yogacara doctrine, which is a rather different matter than saying Dzogchen practice was influenced by Chan practice.Sylvain1972 (talk) 18:03, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

How about this sentence? And I quote "Except for a brief flirtation with Ch'an in the early days of Buddhism in Tibet in the eighth century, the Tibetans exhibited almost no interest at all in Chinese Buddhism, except for translating a few Sutras from Chinese for which they did not possess Indian originals." Thigle (talk) 19:39, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

That's an overstatement on his part. The more historians learn about it, the more complex the situation is revealed to be. See [1] for starters. There is a lot of interesting stuff there about Chinese-Tibetan interactions.Sylvain1972 (talk) 01:40, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

There is of course the book Dzogchen and Zen by Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche (who besides being a Buddhist teacher was previously quite a respected academic Tibetan historian). There is also some evidence from the Dunhuang manuscript collection. And of course Vairotsana stayed in China. Also try to find out about the Dzogchen tradition of Aro Yeshe Jungne who held both Indian and Chinese transmissions of sems-sde teachings. Other than these things the influences were perhaps not all that great - but they certainly existed. One day there may be some surprises - back in 1974 my own teacher Khunnu Rinpoche told me that there was a Dzogchen tradition still extant in India and that he had translated for some Indian followers of this tradition when he was in Kham. However you will not find any scholar who has ever mentioned this, so we can not say anything about it in Wikipedia. Chris Fynn (talk) 20:23, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

my edits

• draft for the list of 6 main monasteries. pending feedback from others.

Text existing at the time of writing of the draft:

Six mother monasteries

Tradition has held that there are six monasteries known as "mother monasteries" of the Nyingma lineage, although there have been slightly different formulations of the six. At one time they included Dorje Drak, Mindrolling monastery and Palri monastery in Upper Tibet; and Kathok, Palyul and Dzogchen monasteries in Lower Tibet. After the decline of Chongye Palri Thegchog Ling monastery and the flourishing of Shechen, the mother monasteries became Dorje Drak and Mindrolling in the upper region, Shechen and Dzogchen in the center, and Kathok and Palyul in the lower part of Tibet. Dodrubchen is often substituted for Kathok in the list. Out of these "main seats of the Nyingma" developed a large number of Nyingma monasteries throughout Tibet, Bhutan and Nepal.

Also of great importance to the Nyingma lineage is Samye, the first Tibetan monastery, founded by Shantarakshita.

---

My comments: As it is a list that is not constrained by number really, it just happened that the "six" monasteries were very prominent, it would make sense to list current six, then mention other important monasteries in addition. Regions also are not really named well. As well as names them selves can be longer. Names of founders can also be mentioned.

The Six Principal "Mother" Monasteries upholding great many traditions within the Nyingmapa transmission and have largest number of branch monasteries.

• Kathok Dorje Den (founded 1159) in Lower Eastern Tibet.
• Thubten Dorje Drak (founded 1632) in Central Tibet.
• Palyul Namgyal Jangchub Ling (founded 1665) in Lower Easten Tibet.
• Urgyen Mindrolling (founded 1676) in Central Tibet.
• Dzogchen Urgyen Samten Choling (founded 1685) in Easten Tibet.
• Shechen Tennyi Dargye Ling (founded 1735) in Easten Tibet.
  
  

Other Important Monasteries:

• Samye
• Palri
• Dodrupchen
  

(a general outline, not finished)

Sherabgyatso (talk) 07:26, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Those six "mother monasteries" are so-called because each had numerous child branches - and in some cases some of the children grew bigger than the mother and had many branches of their own (e.g. Palyul and Tarthang). BTW Palyul was founded earlier but originally belonged to a small Kagyu subsect and only became Nyingma at the time of Rikzin Kunzang Sherab (17th C) but still retained the old Kagyu lineage as well. OTOH Samye became converted to a Sakya monastery. There were of course many religiously significant monasteries preserving various important Nyingma traditions - but none of these had anything like the number of branches of the six mother monasteries - which of course does not imply that they were unimportant. Chris Fynn (talk) 20:41, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Great Chris Fynn (talk) ! Thank you for the input. Great write up, it looks like I have put it here for update and a couple of years later you talked back. Now maybe it is time to write it into a section and publish it! I like mother / child wording a lot. Sherabgyatso (talk) 20:15, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Sherabgyatso The research seems very good. Please do include the information. Btw, the page need work - lots of random info from a person that seemed to only superficially understand Nyingmapas. Maybe it was changed? I repaired a few of the worst errors, but they're more. Pinging you to see if you're still editing. Pasdecomplot (talk) 20:27, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Pasdecomplot Thank you, I am on and off, will see what can be worked with as it is a bigger page Sherabgyatso (talk) 21:36, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Sherabgyatso Yeah! See the talk discussion on Added dates... for an interesting result of the work here. Best regards.Pasdecomplot (talk) 07:29, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

ALSO @Sherabgyatso is there a source online for the original Palri monastery? Was looking for a date of construction, and I had a hard time locating anything, and it needs a page. Thanks.

Hi again @Sherabgyatso. While looking for more information on Palri, I've found an alternate phonetic spelling of Pelri Tekchok Ling, founded by Sherab Ozer in Chonggye. Does the alternate spelling make sense to you? Thanks. Pasdecomplot (talk) 13:24, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://www.nyingma.nl/

  Triggered by \bnyingma\.nl\b on the local blacklist

• http://www.nyingmainstitute.com/

  Triggered by \bnyingmainstitute\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 17:14, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Provoked

[2] Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 01:56, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

I have no idea what this means. Ogress 03:31, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Myth OR for VG [3] Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 03:53, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

I STILL HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THAT MEANS. We talk on the talk page, not utter single syllables. Ogress 03:57, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Who puts comments in when removing content? Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 04:14, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

ZP what u no.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 04:20, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks VG, I no see your edit comments supporting a valid removal. Please now correct yourself. Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 14:11, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Why do you keep inserting Jigme Lingpa and Longchen Nyingthig? There is nothing special about this late terma.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 02:06, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

What sources say ... "nothing special"? Google scholar comes up with 81 [4] specifically spelled results. It's probably the most internationally translated cycle by Amazon rankings. Why wouldn't you give it weight? Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 04:40, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Jigme Lingpa is a late figure. There is nothing fundamentally new about Longchen Nyingthig.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 13:06, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

I see nothing in this, so what's your point? Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 02:21, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

It is undue to mention him.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 02:57, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Yet another unsupported claim VG, why do you say this? Listen to Ann Carolyn Klein's version. Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 14:34, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Heart essence remains a living tradition, Jigme Lingpa incarnated in Adzome Rinpoche made the famous text into a condensed audio CD version. [5] Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 14:45, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

There are countless living terma traditions. There is nothing special about Longchen Nyingthig.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 19:49, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Please, then do nothing about it, except of course [blank]. Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 04:49, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

[6] unexplained revert. Please re-revert. The article can be improved with the most widespread terton/terma Jigme Lingpa content. Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 05:19, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

The Longchen Nyingthig is considered very special by masters and scholars, VictoriaGrayson. Nyingma is a living tradition, 'late figures' are also important. ZuluPapa5 is correct. Pasdecomplot (talk) 20:55, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Added dates to the "Six Mother Monasteries"

Hi.

• Sourced the dates of the monasteries from their Wikipedia pages, but Palri doesn't have a page and I haven't found a date for the original construction. Likewise Dorje Drak' s date is entered as a relationship to it's founder's lifespan (14th c., relocated 1632)
• While I was there, I corrected the text which stated Shechen is (present tense) in Tibet, since it was destroyed then rebuilt in Nepal.
• Also Shechen Rabjam Rinpoche doesn't have a page, nor the 4th Katok Rinpoche. Both are notable for lots of reasons, including being asked to serve or actually serving as head of Nyingma school. Have there already been discussions on nominating them for pages? (This could be a separate discussion topic.) Thanks. Pasdecomplot (talk) 16:01, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Interesting to see during research that numerous travel guides to Tibet were listing the same monasteries-with seemingly identical text. Kudos to the section's author @Sherabgyatso it seems! Pasdecomplot (talk) 16:10, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Added date of 1571 to Palri/Pelri; and 1610 is the rigpawiki date for Dorje Drak, but waiting on CON for founder - sources and book RS differ. Pasdecomplot (talk) 13:33, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

MOS:DOCTCAPS

The article itself says "nyingma" means "ancient." That's not a proper noun. MOS:DOCTCAPS has Wikipedia not capitalizing a vast amount of terms that are routinely capitalized in their respective literatures. I personally don't agree with this style directive, but that's what the directive says. Those caps need to go from this article.Teishin (talk) 19:07, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Nyingma is the proper name of a school of Tibetan Buddhism. It also means ancient. In this article, it's used in the former sense. This is not just a "school of thought", it's an organization with a hierarchical structure with an elected head, ownership of monasteries, etc. Please desist from applying MOS:DOCTCAPS to cultures which you don't understand. Thanks. Skyerise (talk) 18:38, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Nyingma does not translate as Ancient. Ancient is routinely used to describe the school, as in "the ancient ones".

Skyerise, please also see an attempt to add a topic to the Talk page, discussing your very recent mass deletion of my "good" edits. 103.146.218.84 (talk) 11:48, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Your edits were only partially good. They had grammatical errors including changing tenses to be erroneous. You also wrote "The Nyingmas" when Nyingma is already plural, etc. I am allowed to revert your edits when they contain errors. If you want to be taken more seriously, create an account. Skyerise (talk) 12:03, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Also, all new talk page posts go at the bottom with a heading. Skyerise (talk) 12:05, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Untitled post

Mass deletes by Skyerise

It appears, to me, to be some kind of misplaced territorial war. The edits you then decided were "good" you re-added, thankfully, but other just as "good" edits were not re-added.

I must correct you about these "good" edits : Yogins/yoginis are not always Ngakmapas. Ngakmapas are necessarily vow holders, while yogis and yoginis are not necessarily vow holders, and are often just laypeople that are serious practicioners.

The language concerning "Political Power" and the Nyingma school is not sourced, and reads to me as opinion with a definite political agenda. That's why I edited it. Its language completely misunderstands Tibet's history. The "good" edits, in contrast, are based on historical facts - read Tibet's history: Throughout history its Kagyu/Sakya/Gelug spiritual leaders were also spiritual leaders of their school and secular/political leaders of the country in specific eras. They were simultaneously both spiritual and secular leaders, not just "political power" obsessives - which is a point the language wholly fails to embrace. And, the Nyingma school never vied for these leadership roles, and remains studiously independent and non-political - that is its nature. Thus, language that pushes the opinion that the Nyingma school was/is somehow secretly obsessed about political power is not at all supported by historical fact nor by modern practices.

"...at the Nyingma Monlam..." is much more specific and more correct than "...when necessary..."

What else? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.146.218.84 (talk) 11:37, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Re "vow-holders" - the vows referred to are the samayas given during any empowerment. Any practitioner who has received empowerment but does not hold monastic vows is ngagmapa, this includes yogins and yoginis, many of whom are also householders. There is really no distinction there. Please create an account so you can be addressed using something other than IP addresses, since you likely use multiple IPs. Skyerise (talk) 12:11, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Re:vow holders and Ngakmapas:

You are incorrect, and confusing vow ceremonies with teaching empowerments.

I just came across this topic, and hope to provide assistance.

Any person receiving an empowerment makes commitments to uphold/practice that specific teaching which protects the specific lineage from which the teaching was derived. That is the samaya.

No one automatically becomes a vow holding Ngakmapa after receiving a teaching.

To become Ngakmas (female) and Ngakpas (male), people take individual vows in a ceremony while wearing specific robes (usually white), and the zen (red, white, black) can be placed on the body by the qualified teacher.

As The History of the Nyingma School makes clear, these vow-holding Nyingma tradition practitioners are called the white sangha, while the ordained monks and nuns are called the red sangha. Both the red and white sanghas of Tibetan Buddhism date to the founding of the Vajrayana in Tibet, and followed the ordaining of the first 7 monks after Samye Monastery was completed c. 760.

Now, a layperson is not a vow holder at either of these two levels. If they have taken refuge with a qualified teacher, samaya commitments can also be included at that time but the layperson is still just a layperson in the sangha until additional vow ceremonies are performed.

I hope this clarifies your confusion. Metokpema (talk) 17:14, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Re: also, Yogis (male) and Yoginis (female)

These terms really refers to the lifestyle of a practitioner more than anything else.

A yogi/yogini is usually a serious practitioner that often practices and lives in relative solitude, or in retreat, or in a monastic center. Ordained or not, vow-holder or not, layperson or not, all of these practitioners might be considered yoginis/yogis.

A serious practitioner of Tibetan Buddhism has a qualified teacher, and their teachings are practiced by the yogis/yoginis.

I hope this also helps resolve the confusion. Metokpema (talk) 17:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

The political section was completely unsourced; when you make changes to either sourced or unsourced material you must provide citations to support your changes. I have completely removed the section. Per WP:BURDEN, if you restore it you must cite it. Skyerise (talk) 12:18, 26 March 2024 (UTC)