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. |
Propose a merger if you wish. The new article can simply be called "Shugden". VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 18:49, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Please see Prasangika37 here and here on the book Heart Jewel. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 16:38, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
Hello! CFynn,
I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the
Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the
Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!
|
Hi Chris, just a kind reminder that you have a new message at wikt:User talk:Wyang#Dzongkha (རྫོང་ཁ) data. Thanks, Wyang ( talk) 23:56, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
According to Mumford in 1989, Dorje Shugden is "held in awe and feared among Tibetans because he is highly punitive." VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 15:19, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Dorje Shugden Controversy. Thank you. Prasangika37 ( talk) 11:11, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
In the Sakya Pandita article, should we say Shugden is his rebirth? According to Dreyfus, Shugden predates Dragpa Gyaltsen. Thus the 2 only became related in later "terma". VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 16:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
DGG ( talk ) 16:11, 12 August 2014 (UTC)You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
DGG ( talk ) 16:42, 12 August 2014 (UTC)The three 37's put your long onerous intro into the article. Don't you think its full of unsubstantiated allegations like "ban" etc.? Monasteries are private intuitions, just like NKT centers. And the Dalai Lama does not control the government of India. JJ's intro was based on the academic POV, not the NKT POV. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 18:16, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much for responding to my inquiry. I found out about Advisor shares after I read in the news about Phillipe Cousteau Jr. coming to Iceland to film a TV and looked up Phillipe Cousteau's Wikipedia page. UserNameUnderConstruction, the one who I suspect is an employee of Advisor Shares, deleted some information in the section about AdvisorShares and Phillipe Cousteau's partnership. I noticed that this user deleted similar stuff everywhere. I looked at what he was deleting and it was based on reliable legal documents and news article sources. However, the company would have reason to want to hide this because the court cases make the CEO look bad. It seems that UserNameUnderConstruction is edit warring with everyone who tells the truth about what is possibly his company and trying to get them banned from Wikipedia. I don't know how to check his IP address to see if he is a socket puppet, like the comment you responded to alleged.
Just wanted to let you know so that someone else could look into this as well. If it is someone from the company editing away this stuff, I find them to be hypocrites because the company launch a socially responsible investing fund with Phillipe Cousteau and because they claim on their website that one of their main 3 values is transparency. All help in stopping these people from hiding the truth would be really appreciated. Icelandicgolfer ( talk) 22:38, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Can you archive this page, except for the latest section? VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 01:48, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello, CFynn. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 00:13, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Heya Chris. Meant to say on the DS talk page, I don't mean to be antagonistic about the discussion about the expulsion stuff. I really just want to deal with on issue at a time there and its very distracting to take the discussion in different directions. Happy to talk about it here, on my talk page, as a separate issue there, or whatever :) Anyway, I am really curious what you think about this. Hadn't seen this video before and I am pretty confused about what the Dalai Lama is saying between minute 14 to minute 17. Any clarification? @ VictoriaGrayson: What do you think about it too? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUedS5qlWUE . He is talking about whether he is the reincarnation of the 13th DL or not. Prasangika37 ( talk) 18:28, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
@ Prasangika37 and VictoriaGrayson: "Rebirth," like "person" is regarded by most Buddhists scholars as a conceptual fiction, a term of convenience superimposed upon a series of causally connected, transitory, impersonal dharmas. This has been the standard position since at least as early as the Questions of Milinda. So Nagasena says to Milinda that the consciousness that is aware of the ripening of a karma is neither identical to nor entirely different from the consciousness that had the karma in the form of the intention to do something. It is not identical, because the awareness-of-ripening has different features from the awareness-of-intention. But it is not entirely different, because the later awareness is causally connected to the earlier awareness.
Vasubandhu's work on abhidharma makes is clear that the idea of rebirth holds weight only as long as the concept of person is taken seriously, because rebirth is essentially a personal category, whereas the actual causal process is entirely impersonal.
In the video the DL talks about being the one who has the qualities and potential to carry out the tasks begun by, and the intentions of, the previous Dalai Lamas. In other words, he is the one who has the causes and conditions to fulfil the actions and intentions of the previous Dalai Lamas.
A problem is western concepts of "soul" inevitably get superimposed when people talk or think about things like Buddhist "rebirth" as we have been programmed to think that way, and the words in our western languages have all those associations. Much clearer when these things are explained in Tibetan - the Dalai Lama is also much clearer when he speaks in Tibetan. Chris Fynn ( talk) 10:48, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Being a contributer to the German WP, I prepared a german version of Tibet (1912–51). My Question: Was there an "official" name besides "Tibet" on governmen documents?-- Antemister ( talk) 10:39, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
@ Antemister:I think most Government documents would say something like "Ganden Photrang Zhung" or "Government of the Ganden Palace". Really few Tibetans had anything like the modern notion of country or nation state. Not surprising since it could often take many months to communicate from one part of Tibet to another and for most there was no contact with or knowledge of the outside world consequently the government had little day to day control outside of Lhasa (and Chinese control pre-1950 was just a fictional notion). I suspect the only government documents that might have said Tibet or bod-yul (or Tibetan Governmet or Bod Zhung) were treaties with other nations particularly Britain. Anyway I'm not an expert in this matter so don't take this as fact. Someone in Germany who would know is Gregor Verhufen <G.Verhufen@t-online.de> who has spent a few years studying Tibetan government archives in Lhasa. He would surely be a far better source on this particular matter. Chris Fynn ( talk) 23:20, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Chendebji Chorten may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 20:59, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Should you make a Wikipedia article for Bultrini? VictoriaGrayson Talk 22:37, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
see here. VictoriaGrayson Talk 21:32, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Any Dzogchen in India, would be in the "Tibetanized" portions of India such as Sikkhim and Ladakh or Indians who received the transmissions from Tibetan lamas. VictoriaGrayson Talk 19:22, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
I understand you live in Bhutan. Do you speak Dzongkha? I had understood that while there is significant influence from Chöke that it does not actually normally have the dental-final vowel shift of Central and Western Tibetan dialects - hence Dzongkha, not Tshongke, and khö versus ghô. This also leads to the shift of "borrowed" Chöke forms like ä > i, ö > e. Can you tell me a little more about this? I know you changed Könchogsum Lhakhang - is that ö actually an ö in colloquial Dzongkha? I dislike the Chöke "educated" forms being accepted as more correct. Ogress smash! 06:39, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
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. |
Propose a merger if you wish. The new article can simply be called "Shugden". VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 18:49, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Please see Prasangika37 here and here on the book Heart Jewel. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 16:38, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
Hello! CFynn,
I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the
Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the
Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!
|
Hi Chris, just a kind reminder that you have a new message at wikt:User talk:Wyang#Dzongkha (རྫོང་ཁ) data. Thanks, Wyang ( talk) 23:56, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
According to Mumford in 1989, Dorje Shugden is "held in awe and feared among Tibetans because he is highly punitive." VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 15:19, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Dorje Shugden Controversy. Thank you. Prasangika37 ( talk) 11:11, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
In the Sakya Pandita article, should we say Shugden is his rebirth? According to Dreyfus, Shugden predates Dragpa Gyaltsen. Thus the 2 only became related in later "terma". VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 16:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
DGG ( talk ) 16:11, 12 August 2014 (UTC)You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
DGG ( talk ) 16:42, 12 August 2014 (UTC)The three 37's put your long onerous intro into the article. Don't you think its full of unsubstantiated allegations like "ban" etc.? Monasteries are private intuitions, just like NKT centers. And the Dalai Lama does not control the government of India. JJ's intro was based on the academic POV, not the NKT POV. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 18:16, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much for responding to my inquiry. I found out about Advisor shares after I read in the news about Phillipe Cousteau Jr. coming to Iceland to film a TV and looked up Phillipe Cousteau's Wikipedia page. UserNameUnderConstruction, the one who I suspect is an employee of Advisor Shares, deleted some information in the section about AdvisorShares and Phillipe Cousteau's partnership. I noticed that this user deleted similar stuff everywhere. I looked at what he was deleting and it was based on reliable legal documents and news article sources. However, the company would have reason to want to hide this because the court cases make the CEO look bad. It seems that UserNameUnderConstruction is edit warring with everyone who tells the truth about what is possibly his company and trying to get them banned from Wikipedia. I don't know how to check his IP address to see if he is a socket puppet, like the comment you responded to alleged.
Just wanted to let you know so that someone else could look into this as well. If it is someone from the company editing away this stuff, I find them to be hypocrites because the company launch a socially responsible investing fund with Phillipe Cousteau and because they claim on their website that one of their main 3 values is transparency. All help in stopping these people from hiding the truth would be really appreciated. Icelandicgolfer ( talk) 22:38, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Can you archive this page, except for the latest section? VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 01:48, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello, CFynn. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 00:13, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Heya Chris. Meant to say on the DS talk page, I don't mean to be antagonistic about the discussion about the expulsion stuff. I really just want to deal with on issue at a time there and its very distracting to take the discussion in different directions. Happy to talk about it here, on my talk page, as a separate issue there, or whatever :) Anyway, I am really curious what you think about this. Hadn't seen this video before and I am pretty confused about what the Dalai Lama is saying between minute 14 to minute 17. Any clarification? @ VictoriaGrayson: What do you think about it too? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUedS5qlWUE . He is talking about whether he is the reincarnation of the 13th DL or not. Prasangika37 ( talk) 18:28, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
@ Prasangika37 and VictoriaGrayson: "Rebirth," like "person" is regarded by most Buddhists scholars as a conceptual fiction, a term of convenience superimposed upon a series of causally connected, transitory, impersonal dharmas. This has been the standard position since at least as early as the Questions of Milinda. So Nagasena says to Milinda that the consciousness that is aware of the ripening of a karma is neither identical to nor entirely different from the consciousness that had the karma in the form of the intention to do something. It is not identical, because the awareness-of-ripening has different features from the awareness-of-intention. But it is not entirely different, because the later awareness is causally connected to the earlier awareness.
Vasubandhu's work on abhidharma makes is clear that the idea of rebirth holds weight only as long as the concept of person is taken seriously, because rebirth is essentially a personal category, whereas the actual causal process is entirely impersonal.
In the video the DL talks about being the one who has the qualities and potential to carry out the tasks begun by, and the intentions of, the previous Dalai Lamas. In other words, he is the one who has the causes and conditions to fulfil the actions and intentions of the previous Dalai Lamas.
A problem is western concepts of "soul" inevitably get superimposed when people talk or think about things like Buddhist "rebirth" as we have been programmed to think that way, and the words in our western languages have all those associations. Much clearer when these things are explained in Tibetan - the Dalai Lama is also much clearer when he speaks in Tibetan. Chris Fynn ( talk) 10:48, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Being a contributer to the German WP, I prepared a german version of Tibet (1912–51). My Question: Was there an "official" name besides "Tibet" on governmen documents?-- Antemister ( talk) 10:39, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
@ Antemister:I think most Government documents would say something like "Ganden Photrang Zhung" or "Government of the Ganden Palace". Really few Tibetans had anything like the modern notion of country or nation state. Not surprising since it could often take many months to communicate from one part of Tibet to another and for most there was no contact with or knowledge of the outside world consequently the government had little day to day control outside of Lhasa (and Chinese control pre-1950 was just a fictional notion). I suspect the only government documents that might have said Tibet or bod-yul (or Tibetan Governmet or Bod Zhung) were treaties with other nations particularly Britain. Anyway I'm not an expert in this matter so don't take this as fact. Someone in Germany who would know is Gregor Verhufen <G.Verhufen@t-online.de> who has spent a few years studying Tibetan government archives in Lhasa. He would surely be a far better source on this particular matter. Chris Fynn ( talk) 23:20, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Chendebji Chorten may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 20:59, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Should you make a Wikipedia article for Bultrini? VictoriaGrayson Talk 22:37, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
see here. VictoriaGrayson Talk 21:32, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Any Dzogchen in India, would be in the "Tibetanized" portions of India such as Sikkhim and Ladakh or Indians who received the transmissions from Tibetan lamas. VictoriaGrayson Talk 19:22, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
I understand you live in Bhutan. Do you speak Dzongkha? I had understood that while there is significant influence from Chöke that it does not actually normally have the dental-final vowel shift of Central and Western Tibetan dialects - hence Dzongkha, not Tshongke, and khö versus ghô. This also leads to the shift of "borrowed" Chöke forms like ä > i, ö > e. Can you tell me a little more about this? I know you changed Könchogsum Lhakhang - is that ö actually an ö in colloquial Dzongkha? I dislike the Chöke "educated" forms being accepted as more correct. Ogress smash! 06:39, 17 November 2014 (UTC)