Talk:Karmapa

ATTENTION NEW CONTRIBUTORS
'''Please do not alter this article until you have some sense of what NPOV entails. It is not constructive to have a endless cycle of edits (kind of like samsara, no?). If you want to make a substantive change that might be controversial, explain it first on this page so that a civil discussion can ensue. Otherwise, it's just going to get reverted.~Sylvain 11/16/05'''
 * In particular, please keep links to websites discussing the controversy over the recognition of the 17th Karmapa to Karmapa controversy Billlion 21:42, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It seems I need to say it again. PLEASE KEEP ALL DISCUSION OF THE CONTROVERSY OVER THE 17 KARMAPA ON the Talk page of Karmapa controversy. THIS ARTICLE IS ON ALL OTHER ASPECTS.  We would welcome contributions to the articles on the various holders of this title before the 17th that do not have articles on the,. There is plenty to do without continually rehearsing the debate over the 17th here. If you want to argues start a blog. This is an encyclopedia. Billlion 13:39, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Archive
For older discussions see Talk:Karmapa/archive

Ken Holmes reference

 * Dear Billion: In fact, your endless trying to keep the reference to Ken Holmes, and only this reference in the article about Karmapa gives neutral readers the feeling, that Ken's POV ist the neutral one, which is indeed not. The link to his web site is very POV-ish. Yes, this is an encyclopedia. When you want to state references, than find more, and include those form the other sides of the controversy. If this is not possible, than leave it as it is. User:FernandoSchlottmann
 * If you have another scholarly reference that gives more details of the history of the Karmapa lineage please feel free to add this information to the article and then quote the source. This is the book where I got the information and I have respect for Holmes as a scholar. In particular it is a cited source. This article is not about the controversy, and the information is the names and dates of the previous Karmapas. There is nothing controversial about that as far as I know. Do other authors differ on these facts? If so please add to the references. I have worked hard to isolate edit wars about who is the 17 Karmapa to the talk page of Karmapa controversy. There is no place for it here. Billlion 22:23, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
 * By the way the Ken Holmes link points to a wrestler. Pretty sure that's not the right one!Billlion 22:25, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Picture of 16th
Note as above this article is about the whole Karmapa lineage and specifically anot about the controversy over the 17. That is why I started the karmapa controversy article. There is a good reason why why stuck with the picture of the 16th -- he was the alst one everyone agrees he was a Karmapa. If we have photos of the rival 17th people will keep arguing over whihc is first and so on. Keep the controversy on the controversy page.!Billlion (talk) 10:36, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I think we are all open to discussion about this, but please dont just keep changing it baack until we have had the debate.Billlion (talk) 20:05, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree.&mdash;Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 00:24, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Lead image shows the 17th Karmapas as that presents the answer to the natural query about who the living enthroned Karmapas are. The image of the 16th Karmapa is useful for the historical section. If sufficient space, if may befit to also place images of his forebears there.Sacerdote (talk) 03:17, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, the 16th Karmapa was a very influential and important person in recent history. I don't see the downside to presenting his image in the lead.&mdash;Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 03:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm with Nat on this one. The presentation of 16th Karmapa's pic (a historical Karmapa) on the page which discusses the history of the Karmapa's is far more appropriate than a picture of either of the two claimants.  There are not two Karmapas currently.  High tulku "protocol" usually tends to dictate informing ones followers that from hence one will manifest in multiple forms (like Jamyang Khyentse Wangpo did near do his death).  The 2nd Karmapa is the only Karmapa who said he would manifest in multiple forms, a black hat and a red hat.  The controversy is still on and followers of both sides are holding out for their Karmapa to stand the test of time as the true one.--Changchub (talk) 03:33, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * P.S. I really would be two-thumbs-up about a reversion to a pre-Sacerdote state for this page. I'd do it tonight, but I'm busy beyond belief.  I think the place for pictures of both candidates is on the controversy page.  The 16th Karmapa's pic (as Nat mentions) is very appropriate due to his profound effect on the spread of Vajrayana Buddhism in the west (not to mention the fact that there is no controversy surrounding his inclusion on an entry about Karmapas)--Changchub (talk) 06:11, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

17th KARMAPA - - in U.S.A. (NPR coverage)
MAY 27 feature story detailed information shared about the young Buddhist leader: Morning Edition, May 27, 2008 · The Karmapa, one of the most important leaders in Tibetan Buddhism, is visiting the United States. Some think the young lama will succeed the Dalai Lama as the next spokesman for Tibetan Buddhism and Tibet. Co-host Renee Montagne talks to Robert Thurman, professor of Buddhist studies at Columbia University, about the 22-year-old Karmapa. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90840967 This deserves coverage here in WIKIPEDIA, in my opinion. Timothyjshaw (talk) 13:47, 27 May 2008 (UTC)timothyjshaw
 * Well yes perhaps, but on the article Ogyen Trinley Dorje. A trip to the US by one out of 17 Karmapas is not likely to make it in this article, nor are rumours and speculation encyclopedic. My feeling at the moment it should be on wikinews . Billlion (talk) 18:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Names of the articles on the Karmapas
After a recent discussion at Talk:14th Dalai Lama, all of the articles on the individual Dalai Lamas were moved from the format "Personal Name, Xth Dalai Lama" to simply "Xth Dalai Lama". I think this is the right format. When referring to a Dalai Lama in English, if it's necessary to differentiate between more than one of them, I think that "Xth Dalai Lama" is much more common than using the personal name. I would suggest following the same pattern for the Karmapas, whose articles currently all are titled simply by the personal name. So, Rangjung Rigpe Dorje would move to 16th Karmapa. I think we should make an exception for Düsum Khyenpa and Karma Pakshi, and leave those articles at the personal names, but I'm not sure about that. Also, it would not be possible to have an article titled 17th Karmapa, since the controversy over his identity is ongoing. Any ideas?&mdash;Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 01:54, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * As long as the lamas are all consistent, I am fine with moving. Gryffindor (talk) 08:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "as long as the lamas are all consistent". Do you mean that you object to making an exception for Düsum Khyenpaand Karma Pakshi?&mdash;Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 01:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Either go with numbers for all the major lamas, or use just names, or a combination of both. Maybe only in exceptional circumstances can we deviate from the form. Gryffindor (talk) 10:51, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Hierarchy of Tibetan Buddhism
I have some concerns about the "Hierarchy of Tibetan Buddhism" section, which was added to several articles. Please see my comments at Talk:Tibetan Buddhism.&mdash;Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 01:08, 4 January 2009 (UTC) I have discarded this section because the style and hierarchical order of the Lamas of the Tibetan Buddhism must be a view of a Gelug pupil. The Karmapa lineage is the oldest lineage of reincarnate Lamas in Tibet and the 1st Dalai Lama was in fact a disciple of a disciple of the 3rd Karmapa. The four large lineages of Tibetan Buddhism are independent traditions with slightly different views of the Dharma. It might be interesting to add more about the historical aspect. FeSc January 11th, 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by FeSc (talk • contribs) 07:48, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Karmapa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060113184106/http://www.buddhistinformation.com/lankavatara_sutra.htm to http://www.buddhistinformation.com/lankavatara_sutra.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:56, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Karmapa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041205072856/http://www.personal.u-net.com/~samye/karmapa.htm to http://www.personal.u-net.com/~samye/karmapa.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:25, 6 December 2017 (UTC)