Talk:Karmapa/archive

Karmapa controversy
There is no controversy... In Asia there simply is no controversy... and the fact that you dont review this and update your article is shameful. Not only do 99% of all monasterys, tulkus, (reincarnate lamas), accept this... even the handful who dispute it still agree that Urgyen Trinley Dorje is the Karmapa (only they insist that there can be more than one at a time). Of course the Karmapa can have more than one emination, but there can only be one enthroned Karmapa at a time. I have been a Kagyu monk since 1981... I was there before, through and after the recognition process, through it all... and I can say clearly that not only has there been no misconduct on the part of the Karmapa's suporters but also that there is simply NO CONTROVERSY in India, Nepal, Bhutan or Tibet... there is no doubt that Urgyen Trinley Dorje is the Karmapa... he has the support of all of the monasterys of all traditions, The Dalai Lama, Sakya Trizin, and the heads of the Nyingmapa lineages too... the only support the other boy has is from one of the Kagyu heads & some his immediate family members & disciples... the fact that they have been very very vocal has 'spun your heads' because there is simply no doubt in the mind of the Tibetans. Yes there is a unresolved dispute in the Indian courts for control of the Karmapa's property (& therefore his relics and the all-important Black Crown), but this court case has been ongoing for over 8 years now and it is well known in Tibetn circles the amount of bribry it has taken to keep the case open... shameful all around... To know the truth just look at the daily activity of the heads of the two sides... the Karmapas supporters build their monastic seats, teach and spread the buddha's teachings... activity suitable of great lamas... the head of the other side lives permanently on the 5th floor of a 5-star hotel in New Delhi busy spreading his smoke & mirrors act on the internet through his disciles... It wouldn't matter that you give any notice to their rantings but it spreads the nonsence to new people who come to your site wanting to find authoratative facts on the Karmapa... Research it please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.74.108 (talk) 19:01, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

This Karmapa controversy is a volatile area. Both sides insist they are right. It is casuing discomfort throughout the Karma Kagyu lineage. A lot of followers on both sides do not understand why high lamas who have done a lot of training seem to be squabbling amongst themselves and not exhibiting the clarity, wisdom and compassion that is expected of them. Interestingly, the Urgyen Trinley Dorje group do not have web sites attacking the other faction but the followers of Thaye Dorje do.

Actually, this last statement is misleading. While it is true that more recently the supporters of Urgyen Trinley have found it advantageous to ignore the controversy altogether on their web sites, attacks from that group on Thaye Dorje's supporters have been historically quite vitriolic. Have a look at older entries at http://www.nalandabodhi.org.

Karmapa Conflict
Can I suggest that we have a section one the historical karmapas, and then a section on the controversy, perhaps starting with the back ground and then both side's point of view? Billlion 18:38, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This is a very good suggestion, especially since current article is moderately biased – it is written from the point of view of Urgyen Trinley Dorje follower. A more objective re-edition of the text would be a good idea. --AndyBrandt 10:12, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * It seems to swing from one camp to the other, as the only people interested in editing it are from one or other of the rival camps. However the swings in bias are getting less it seems (look at the history). Also the controversy spreads to other articles (eg Sharmapa), and I think it would be better on one page, including links to the various news reports, details of the court case etc. I am sure if wikipedia can have a NPOV article on Palestine we can manage it for Karmapa! 13:34, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Done that now. Also added list of Karmapas 1-16. Karmapa controversy needs work ! Billlion 18:41, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

A coment on structure.
This is all very confusing! I do think that at this time this page should reflect the official standpoint about the current Karmapa. Dalai Lama is in this world seen and most often recognized as somewhat of a head of the traditions of Tibetan Buddhism. I know not all are willing to see it this way but nevertheless he is and it is ok to argue against this, but I prefer the structure of an article to mirror the current generally accepted view on a subject. And the Dalai Lama have recognized the Urgyen Thrinley Dorje as the tulku of the six tent Karmapa. He is not alone to do so but the major traditions of Tibetan Buddhism have done the same. Then again the was majority of Kagyu Lamas have done so to along with the senior Lamas of this tradition like Thrangu Rinpoche who was the main tutor of all the four Tulkus of The Kagyu, among them Shamarpa who have presented the rivaling candidate. Keep the section on the controversy and link it as now to the controversy page and on that page link to the opposing candidate. On the main page of the Karmapa links should lead to pages connected to the official Karmapa and on the controversy page link to those pages on the net connected to Shamarpas candidate. So that the two issues are kept separate. The official view on one page and the rival on the other. Don't mix. People get confused, I certainly do! I am new to this so I don't have much of an experience of editing on Wikipedia but I have been a Buddhist for a long time and know my subject, I have lived among the Tibetans and know how political any issues like this can become. Al kind thoughts to all of you and thanks for a wonderful job. --Mitrapa 22:39, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * The links are there mainly as they provide historical information about the previous Karmapas, and come from both camps. As you can see from the discussion, the idea was to isolate the controvesial parts in one article, as otherwise annonymous edits from supporters of both camps were editing this, and various other Kagyu related pages, in ways to reflect their point of view. One thing you might consider is to make a page for Urgyen Thrinley Dorje. This way we can have accurate biographical information, hopefully still keeping the controversy isolated in one page. Billlion 17:02, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Meaning of name
Hey, does "Karmapa" really mean, "the manifestation of the activities of all the Buddhas"? That seems like a lot of idea to pack into three syllables. Really in Sanskrit (I very much doubt that)? - Nat Krause 17:06, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * I pared it down to "the action (of all Buddhas)". It occurred to me that "karma" sure does mean action in Sanskrit, and that the "of Buddhas" part may be implicit. - Nat Krause 17:19, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

That sounds right to me. If you accept "action" as a fair English translation of the word "karma" (though "karma" does seem larger than that mere English word), then the name is correctly translated as "the being who embodies action." The idea that the Karmapa embodies the action of all Buddhas (in fact, all Buddhas throughout space and time) is unstated but implicit. Sandover 05:08, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The meaning given above is probably wrong. Hugh Richardson writes in 'The Karma-pa Sect - A Historical Note' (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 1958-1959) that "a pious explanation of the name Karma-pa is that an assembly of gods (lha) and dakini bestowed on Dus-gsum mkhyen-pa ... knowledge of the past, present and future ... but however early the name Karma-pa came into existence its perpetuation was probably due to the association of Dus-gsum mkhyen-pa with the monastery of Karma Gdan-sa, or Lho Karma'i sgar, which he founded in 1147." The meaning of the name is, therefore, 'One from Karma'. It was, however, certainly interpreted as meaning 'Man of action' very soon.