| Revision as of 02:47, 9 October 2006 editBabelfisch (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,193 editsm move; see Misplaced Pages:Talk page guidelines#New topics and headings on talk pages← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 12:24, 12 January 2025 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,303,731 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Dalai Lama/Archive 10) (bot |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
==Reasons for Nobel Prize== |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|blp=other|listas=Lama, Dalai|1= |
|
Why Dalai Lama was awarded a Nobel Prize for Peace? What are the specific things he has done for world peace? Because he did not lauch terrorist attack against China? This article should provide some explanations on that. --] (Pennsylvania State University) 02:39, 20 July 2006 |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Tibet|importance=top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Buddhism|importance=high}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Religion|importance=mid}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 70K |
|
|
|counter = 10 |
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 2 |
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|
|algo = old(90d) |
|
|
|archive = Talk:Dalai Lama/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Top 25 Report|Apr 9 2023}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
==exorcism== |
|
|
The Dalai Lama has a autobiography called freedom in exile. In this books he talks about how he exorcised a spirit. Don't know if it's important. But it maybe added to thearticle what do you think? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== legally returned? == |
|
The dalai lama represents an oppressive and undemocratic regime. The dalai lama being selected by rolling and cutting lumps of dough!!! If the dalai lama and the Tibetan clergy really cared for the Tibetan people in this day and age, they should dismantle their oppressive and undemocratic system, allow Tibetans to choose which religion they want to follow, install democratic processes and allow the freedon of information so individual Tibetans could make informed choices about their lives; just like what Gorbachov did for the USSR. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The article says in lede that DL "legally returned to the secular leadership position of governing Tibet". But under what authority? Tibetan sovereignty isn't recognised by anyone including the United states. They all recognised it as part of China especially during the mid 1900s. Not only is that statement unsourced but it's obviously got no reliable sources to support that statement. ] (]) 00:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
==NPOV of Article== |
|
|
I do not see any mention in the article of the record of oppression that has been associated with Dalai Lama rule in Tibet by scholars of the societies under the rulership of the Dalai Lamas. Nor do I see any reference to the 14th Dalai Lama's ties to Fascism on either this pageor the ] (14th/current Dalai Lama) page. The oppressive and gruesome methods that were used in old Tibet and which have been associated with the rule of Dalai Lamas were in fact condemned by the current Dalai Lama, ]. However, to my knowledge he has never condemned the fascists or admitted public regret in his ties to them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Also previous revision makes it seem like Tibet had an independent leader when technically Tibet was under non Tibetan surzeingty since 13th century. And omitted that Ganden Phodrang government was a protectorate under Qing China rule. You can't omit this context merely because it's not a popular truth. I added in that Ganden Phodrang government functioned as a protectorate under Qing China rule but its leaders disagreed that relationship continued with ROC and declared independence. Tho international law doesn't recognise that independence and that DL despite revoking the agreement with China and supporting independence of Tibet, later moderated his views to not support separatism and agree Tibet was part of China in 2005. I included all sources to support the previously omitted context. Without that context, this article is just pushing a pov and omitting facts that are obviously politically unpopular in the west. ] (]) 01:50, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
Perhaps these elements could be mentioned under the sub heading of '''Controversy''', or another new sub-heading. Ideas? I believe that the lacking of these elements is an '''NPOV issue'''. The article does not give any indication that there was any dissent to the rule of the Dalai Lama line much less any indication that such dissent was based in reasonable reaction to various aspects of oppression. I wish to discuss this. |
|
|
|
::Also, the final paragraph of the lead section presents an oversimplified perspective, aligning primarily with the Tibetan exile government's viewpoint, which is not universally accepted. Historian Sam van Schaik notes that during the Mongol rule, Tibet functioned as a colony. The Bureau of Buddhist and Tibetan Affairs and the Imperial Preceptor, based in Khanbaliq (modern-day Beijing), were officially at the helm of Tibetan administration. However, due to the considerable distance between Mongolia and Tibet, their direct influence on daily governance was minimal. Portraying Tibet as an independent country during this period, free from non-Tibetan suzerainty, lacks support from international law and is not corroborated by historical records from other nations. Notably, during the Qing Dynasty, no country recognized Tibet as an independent state; the relationship was characterized more accurately as a priest-patron dynamic. It should be rewritten to reflect Global consensus and not narrowly to a party in exile unilateral talking point, that's disputed by most western scholars. ] (]) 02:05, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
] 15:40, 29 May 2006 (UTC)<sup>] | ]</sup></small> |
|
|
|
|
|
Here are some links to information regarding my point: |
|
|
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
|
|
|
|
(] streams of the broadcasts are available in the link under the date of broadcast beneath the header of each summary on the site pages and can also be found at the ). |
|
|
* |
|
|
* |
|
|
* |
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
''']''' |
|
|
*, (Salon.com July 13, 1998) |
|
|
|
|
|
Furthermore, upon reflection of this research it may be appropriate to start a sub heading called '''Ties to Fascism'''. Ideas? Feedback? Anyone? |
|
|
--] 05:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)<sup>] | ]</sup></small> |
|
|
|
|
|
:The ] page has references to the Parenti and the Hitchens points. I still think some mention should be made in this article concerning the rulership of the Dalai Lamas, and the oppression (ie pulling out of tongues) that had occured. I think that the Fascist ties would be better placed on the 14th Dalai Lama's page but a reference to that might be made here. Ideas, feedback? --] 15:41, 30 May 2006 (UTC)<sup>] | ]</sup></small> |
|
|
|
|
|
::The article currently lacks any description of what sort of government the various Dalai Lamas had in Tibet. This is an interesting subject and I would heartened if someone were to add information about it. It's important, as usual, that anything added be balanced and factual. |
|
|
|
|
|
::Can you elaborate in a quick summary what the claims are that the Dalai Lama has ties to fascists? I haven't had a chance to read all the sources you give yet, and I'd like to know what to focus on. - ]<sup>(])</sup> 21:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
'''RESPONSE:''' |
|
|
The short answer: I would suggest the reading of the and - (scroll down to and read section 9) for an overview of the old Tibet, and I would suggest the following for a quick review of some of the fascist ties of the 14th Dalai Lama: sections 2, 4, 6, 8, & 9. |
|
|
|
|
|
The Michael Perenti article listed above overviews the Old Tibet and demonstrates that it was far from a Shangri-La. The Article is well written and heavily annotated with references to support |
|
|
his statements. The style, form and operation of government, and the life of the people under their rule deserves mention in this Misplaced Pages article. It is a point as I understand it of the ] position that they "freed" the people from the oppression of the religious caste. NPOV would require that this be addressed. |
|
|
|
|
|
Also, that the high priests or other courtiers <u>killed</u> 5 Dalai Lamas during a 170 year span should be mentioned. The article in its present state makes it seem like the successions were always due to the DL dying of natural causes, not even hinting that some were killed by his own people. That such occurred to some 5 DLs is reminiscent of the ] and the ] and should be given at least mention here. Parenti draws info in part from '''' which seems to hold a sympathetic view of the Chinese occupation as mentioned in the off-site link provided. I should like to have confirmation from at least one other source regarding the assassinations of the 5 Dalai Lamas. I am still researching it. |
|
|
|
|
|
The rulership of old Tibet may perhaps better be described as more of an oppressive ] ] than ] in character still, the ties of the 14th Dalai Lama to fascists and fascist organizations prior to and after his exile should also be documented, if not here in detail than mentioned and referenced to a more detailed description on the ] page (were such details would also need to be written). The fascists were attracted to Tibet in part because of the tactics used by the ruling class to keep lower classes in line. That the continued affiliation by the 14th Dalai Lama may possibly be an action in support of his mission to help people towards enlightenment and that he may be trying to guide these people in that regard may also be something worth exploring, but citations would be needed. |
|
|
|
|
|
The following link is a to an off-site page containing a series of links that show some of the difficulties that have been encountered in Buddhist cultures, including Tibet, due to oppression from their rulers and so forth: . This is worth a quick perusal to see the scope of supporting materials available. |
|
|
|
|
|
If I recall correctly, the Emory research (which must be read as well as <u>listened</u> to as he doesn't have everything documented in both medias- though most of it is), during WWII Nazi SS officers made an expedition to Tibet and were impressed with the Tibetan enforcement of rulership. They speculated that the Tibetans were of the Aryan race and proceeded to create a voluminous mass of material to support this. Nazis later convicted of war crimes were associating with the Dalai Lama at this time and later in exile. The DL via direct and circuitous routes has financial and political ties with the Aum Shinrikyo cult, the Hapsburgs, the Uighur rebellion, The Hapsburgs (read ]) and other elements to numerous to go into here but are available via the links provided in this discussion. |
|
|
|
|
|
I also wish to be clear: fascist elements being pointed out in Buddhism or with the DL are not a condemnation of either, but a fact that should not be discounted. That some practitioners of Buddhism may have fascist leanings or ties is not an indictment of Buddhism itself. |
|
|
|
|
|
Please let me know if this answers your question. Thanks for your interest. |
|
|
--] 21:33, 31 May 2006 (UTC)<sup>] | ]</sup></small> |
|
|
|
|
|
:Based on the readings upon, it appears that the Dalai Lamas' fascist links consist of 1) Various Nazi German elements took an interest in Tibet before and during the war; 2) The current Dalai Lama (when he was a child) had a personal friendship with Heinrich Harrer, a minor SS official; 3) The exile government made the distasteful decision to include a Nazi war-criminal/Tibetologist, Bruno Beger, in a panel of Westerners who had visited Tibet before the PRC occupation; 4) The current Dalai Lama had some sort of dealings with Shoko Asahara, the Japanese cult leader whose doomsday visions apparently involved some kind of theocratic government. 5) It's not clear what connection the Habsburgs or the Uighurs might have to the issue of fascism. Is there anything else major that I've missed? - ]<sup>(])</sup> 22:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
: Why even bother with this junk? Comparing HH to Hitler is like comparing a demon with an dakini. I have met the Dalai Lama in person. People are so ignorant and so careless about what they post and lie. It is sick! ] 20:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== External Link : The truth the mainland Chinese government doesn't want you to know == |
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
Does anybody else think the external link above would be helpful? I have posted it to this article, but it was removed by Hottentot. Please give an opinion. I personally, believe that the link is extremely relavent to the article.--] 02:11, 2 September 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::The link is a good one, but it belongs on the ] page as it concerns the 11th Panchen Lama controversy. ] 01:04, 3 September 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Dalai Lama and the HH title== |
|
|
I noted a disagreement between user 207.74.176.221 and ] about the use of the title "His Holiness". The fact is that ] uses this title when refering to the Dalai Lama. However, articles about people in encyclopedias should not use people titles without referencing it. I would suggest to rephrase the intro as the following: |
|
|
|
|
|
'''The Dalai Lama (also known as "His Holiness The Dalai Lama" according to buddhists) belongs to the ] school of ].''' |
|
|
|
|
|
Waiting for your feedback and comments. ] 13:56, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
{{User:SebastianHelm/pilcrow}} That's tough. Your wording is certainly more NPOV. OTOH, as often in such cases, it is more complicated, and the information gained per word is very little. It seems that people who deny the epiteth tend to generally not believe in religious concepts, so it has less meaning for them anyway. |
|
|
|
|
|
We have several precedents where Misplaced Pages or even most of the world adopts the terms used by followers or those close to the subject: |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] – not everyone agrees that this even is a church; yet, in the article it is commonly referred to as "the church" or "The Church". |
|
|
* the title ] does not mean that Misplaced Pages endorses the honour of a thus labelled person. |
|
|
* Democratic People's Republic of ] |
|
|
On the other hand, assume a dictator calls himself "benefactor of mankind" and kills everyone who doesn't pay him this honour then i would strongly oppose this here. |
|
|
|
|
|
So I guess you can find arguments for both sides. Personally, i'd prefer the direct title in this case because most people in the free world would agree that the Dalai Lama is closer to a holy person than to a malevolent dictator. |
|
|
{{User:SebastianHelm/sig}} 02:21, 2005 Apr 23 (UTC) </font> |
|
|
|
|
|
:I totally agree with your comment Sebastian. - ] 18:23, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: Not one of those examples serves as a precedent that could parallel the proposed use in this article of "HH" before "DL" (other than in quotes to show how those who use it do so): |
|
|
:* ] is a short article principally about the distinctions between the RC Archdiocese of Rome and the state of the ]; while it could be argued that ] should be moved to ] (leaving the current title as a redirect), it combines the virtues of brevity and clarity, and is not so prominent an article (less so than ], let alone ]) as to motivate many of us to worry long about it. |
|
|
:* ] is an article about the organization with (not that it matters much) that legal name, separate from the article on ], the belief system that it promotes. The "Church" name is more widely recognized than any other for the organization, and it conforms to the policy that disambiguation of names without using such parenthetic suffixes as (in this case) "(organization)" and "(belief system)" is preferred. (BTW, modern usage is pretty loose about accepting things as churches; the ] ordained ] of ] fame, and included the ] Fellowship, whose sole sacrament, in honor of Shiva the Destroyer, was the destruction of ] in burnt sacrifices.) |
|
|
:* ] is an article that reports on the use of that expression in various settings; it no more advocates anyone by it than the article ] advocates use of that term in place of ]. (IIRC, there are plenty of articles that ''do'' apply titles that are at least similar to "The Honourable", to individuals within the British nobility and officialdom. But the persistence of most of them may well reflect giving lower priority to fixing articles on people less prominent than the DL.) |
|
|
:* ] is a redirect to ], an article that mentions that long name but always refers to the country by the article's (two-word) title. |
|
|
:And tho it ''shouldn't'' need to be said, neither the extremely valid opinion expressed above (viz., that the DL deserves an honorific more than would the hypothetical brutal egomaniacal dictator), nor that opinion's prevalence, is of any interest whatsoever to this discussion. |
|
|
:--]] 04:06, 2005 Apr 24 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
(still on topic within the same section:) |
|
|
...Let me count the ways: ]'s rv of of ''His Holiness'' obviated that item on my to-do list, but more could be said about the insertion's unsuitability. Not only was the reverted edit in violation of NPoV, it also violates the rules of context that apply to such titles. Have you ever heard the expression "Their Majesties, the 98 Kings of England" or "Their Holinesses, the Popes"? Such titles are applied only to a single person (and if i am not mistaken, only to a ''living'' person -- you can't libel a dead person, nor perhaps honor anything but the memory of them), or in a borderline case, to a very specific and small group (i would imagine "Would Your Majesties like a cuppa?" is appropriate to a king and queen) and never to a class of people or to the office itself: e.g. not "and on Tuesday he was crowned His Majesty King of England". <br> |
|
|
] is not about the current DL, whom some refer to (in PoV fashion) as HH or HH the DL. It is about the office and all those who have held it. (-- a fact that i will make less obscure than even the current text does, in the lead 'graph in a moment.)<br> |
|
|
--]] 04:06, 2005 Apr 24 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::See the article on ] to understand why its use does not violate NPOV. It is always proper etiquette to refer to the Pope, the Dalai Lama, various patriarchs, etc., as "His Holiness". This usage in no way implies an endorsement of the respective religion or that particular person's claim to his position. It is merely a term of respect and should be used when refering to the person in a formal context. ] 01:17, 3 September 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:It is not uncommon for a leader of people or the head of a religious organization, to dictate how they are best addressed. Even among the English peerage there is some lattitude as to how they style their name and form of addresss. Though usually, once decided it's a done deal. I have no difficulty with the inclusiion of HH for the Dalai Lama.] 15:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)<sup>] | ]</sup></small> |
|
|
|
|
|
==Lama, Reincarnations, and the Dalai Lama== |
|
|
|
|
|
Rephrased slightly. Lama is someone who teaches, a guru. While those who reincarnate are called tulku. - ExitControl |
|
|
|
|
|
Someone removed the list of previous Dalai Lamas with the argument that it could also be gotten from the Reference. While this is true, it is no reason to remove the information from the Wiki. As can be seen at , Misplaced Pages is not meant to provide links to information, but the information itself. Providing information through links is a very useful thing to do, but it is something that is done on other sites.] |
|
|
|
|
|
HH Dalai Lama is not the leader of the Gelug tradition, this is associated with the so called Ganden Tripa that is usually selected for a 2-4 year position amongst the former abbots of the two Gelug tantric colleges (Gyoto and Gyome). However, HH Dalai Lama is trained under the Gelug tradition, Lharampa Geshe Degree, and also is considered a master of the four main Tibetan Buddhist traditions. ] |
|
|
---- |
|
|
None of the Dalai Lamas seems to have taken over in the same year as the previous one died. This makes me suspicious of the dates -- could we have some explanation of the interregnums? ] 19:48 Mar 18, 2003 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Yes. Just added why there is a gap. |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
:The reincarnation manifests himself by signs such as being familiar with the possessions of the previous Dalai Lama. |
|
|
|
|
|
The above assumes the truth of ]. I'd prefer for the article not to take a stand one way or another on reincarnation. So how about: |
|
|
|
|
|
:''The people searching for the new Dalai Lama believe that the previous one will manifiest himself in the new one...'' |
|
|
|
|
|
Or: |
|
|
|
|
|
:''The searchers consider familiarity with the possesions, etc., as signs of the reincarnation.'' |
|
|
|
|
|
--] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
: I think the existing text has been made neutral enough. |
|
|
|
|
|
: -- ] 19:38, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC) |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
How did the idea of having a Dalai Lama begin? Why is the first one in 1391? Why didn't it begin earlier or later? ] 04:40, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:The fact is that the title "Dalai Lama" was given by third Dalai Lama 's disciple and powerful Mongol ruler Altan Khan in 1578. The third Dalai Lama was the incarnation of the first two Dalai Lama but they weren't called by that title in their time. |
|
|
:This may not anser you, but the idea of incarnation was not so old. The Geluk school borrowed this idea from another sect. That new school needed a strong leader. The Geluk school actively preached their ideas to the Mongols and reunified Tibet by their force.--] 00:36, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
The word "passing" in reference to what I will call the "death" of the Dalai Lama seems needlessly euphamistic to my western eyes. Would it be acceptable to use the word "death" to describe the future state of the current Dalai Lama? It would make the article clearer to me. -- ] 16:26, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I couldn't agree more. :) Since no-one objected, I've gone ahead and changed it. ] 08:58, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
*Every other Buddhist sect in Tibet recognises the Dalai Lama as the religious ... leader of all Tibet. |
|
|
*In fact, the Panchen Lama has a higher religious status than the Dalai Lama |
|
|
|
|
|
I don't quite see how these can both be right. ] 06:58, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*I suggest replace "in Tibet" with "Tibetan". That's because in Chinese Tibet no Budhist sect recognizes Dalai Lama, at least officially (there is risk of getting a lengthy prison term for this offence). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The dalai lama represents an oppressive and undemocratic regime. The dalai lama being selected by rolling and cutting lumps of dough!!! If the dalai lama and the Tibetan clergy really cared for the Tibetan people in this day and age, they should dismantle their oppressive and undemocratic system, allow Tibetans to choose which religion they want to follow, install democratic processes and allow the freedon of information so individual Tibetans could make informed choices about their lives; just like what Gorbachov did for the USSR. |
|
|
|
|
|
==Enlightenment== |
|
|
|
|
|
I deleted "Bodhisattvas are enlightened beings who have postponed their own nirvana and chosen to take rebirth to serve humanity" and linked the previous sentence to "Bodhisattva" instead. Quite apart from the contradiction (surely enlightened beings are those who have attained nirvana?) the whole idea of postponement is fraught with problems. See e.g. Paul Williams, Mahayana Buddhism, pp.52-3 ] 08:01, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
The fact is that there are different levels of Enlightenment. So there are Enlightened beings who can reach Nirvana after death, reach Nirvana after several lives, those who reached "Nirvana in this life". As to boddhisattvas, they are not necessarily enlightened. Boddhisattva is the one that helps others at the expense of his own enlightenment, so he may not achieve it in one life. You may read about it in jatakas: Shakyamuni reincarnating as rabbit and in hell. What distinguishes Boddhisattva is his desire to help the others, so he practices for others, not himselt and did not achieve Enlightenment yet. |
|
|
|
|
|
There are no "levels of Enlightenment" in Buddhism. Perhaps anon is thinking of the bhumis? ] 11:22, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I removed the phrase: |
|
|
<br>'''''...,though Tenzin Gyatso (brtan 'dzin rgya mtsho) denies claims of his Buddhahood.''''' |
|
|
<br>As the Dalai Lama is believed to be the incarnation of a Bodhisattva, I would think he has no right to claim any buddhahood? If you want to put the sentence back in, please add on what grounds he can claim. |
|
|
<br>BTW: I feel "incarnation" might be a better word instead of "manifestation", but I'll leave the verdict to the experts. |
|
|
<br>This is quite a large discussion. With so many active writers interested in the subject, maybe the articles for ] and for ] could be improved. |
|
|
<br>--] 09:32, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
What does ''Gyatso'' mean? It appeared in most of the Dalai Lamas' names. --] 08:06, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Ocean. ] 08:09, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I thought it was ''Dalai'' that means "ocean". --] 08:38, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Dalai in Mongolian. Gyato in Tibetan. Different languages, different words. ;-) ] 01:54, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:: That makes sense! --] 01:55, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== China's Cancer Religion. == |
|
|
|
|
|
If Buddhism isn't a religion then why can't the followers of the knowledge of Buddhism exist in proper Chinese society? If Buddhism isn't a religion, then why do they have monks? Are Buddhist monks, greedy? Monks are using others' donations and work so as to have more time for the seeking enlightenment? Workers can't afford to pray all day if they want to eat, so are monks in bad karma if they are leeching off others? Tibet region is racially Chinese, so way are some westerners causing China strife by supporting a Tibetan Government? Does Buddhism make people into zombies, tolerant of anything. The teaching of weakness? If so then China has a right to squash this religion that is a cancer of the mind. As far as I can see, Buddism is a religon and it's trying to be too political. |
|
|
|
|
|
:If this is how react to ] I can only imagine what ] must do to your blood pressure. Calm down, everything is going to be OK. ] 01:35, 3 September 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dalai, gyatso, ocean- whatever, but Tibet is land locked, so how would the Tibetans of bygone age imagine what this title meant? |
|
|
|
|
|
:: Buddhism is officially sanctioned by the Chinese government as one of the five approved faith groups (2 Christian groups, Islam, Daoism, Buddhim). Beijing itself says that Buddhism is OK and that the quest for enlightenment is suitable for the Chinese people. |
|
|
|
|
|
::] 14:55, 22 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Dalai Lama as reincarnates== |
|
|
|
|
|
Are the Dalai Lamas believed to be reincarnates of ]? If so, why no mention in the article proper? ] 07:02, July 21, 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Yes, this definitely is important. I've added it to the first paragraph. ] 01:50, 3 September 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== The start could be better == |
|
|
|
|
|
I think the first sentence and paragraph here could be improved. It's quite technical, invoking 2 specialist terms (tulku and Gelugpa). For the average reader who knows nothing about Buddhism, it could be a little off-putting. Maybe there could be a sentence before it saying something about the Dalai Lama being the traditional spiritual leader of the Tibetan people. Just a suggestion. ] 09:21, 14 October 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Dalai Lama translation == |
|
|
|
|
|
Would be good to put the two translations together, "Ocean (of) wisdom", or something like that, instead of completely leaving the reader in the dark. Just a thought... |
|
|
|
|
|
== Links to CIA == |
|
|
|
|
|
Someone has added notes about CIA links back in late 1950's. I guess I don't see the point. Does it really belong? ] 08:35, 24 November 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:It's not about the Dalai Lama as an office, so no. ]] 14:05, 24 November 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Hi, I added the CIA info, why was it taken out? I see it as a relevant point and even an historical info, and as something that could add more that one dimension about political/terrenal issues about the Dalai Lama/Tibet . |
|
|
] 01:39, 26 November 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:This article is about the office of the Dalai Lama, not what the government led by a particular Dalai Lama did in the 1950s. ]] 02:16, 26 November 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
::I think the CIA links are quite properly placed on the page of the 14th/current Dalai Lama article but may also be something that should be placed here perhaps in a new sub-heading called Controversy or some such (see the NPOV concern which I will be placing above). Tenzin Gyatso has admitted to receiving money from the US through the CIA and the training of resistance fighters in a Colorado facility all taking place back in the 1960's. See the article on ] as well as the links in that article for further details regarding the CIA connection. |
|
|
] 15:27, 29 May 2006 (UTC)<sup>] | ]</sup></small> |
|
|
|
|
|
== CIA Links? == |
|
|
|
|
|
OH, great. Now this article just went into the CIA leaks. Who do we think we are, detectives? Please remove this article. |
|
|
|
|
|
:Please sign articles in the future as it helps to follow the flow of dialogue. You can do this easily by adding 4 tildas <nowiki>(~~~~)</nowiki> after your comment on the edit screen. Thanks. |
|
|
:See my entry above in "'''Links to CIA'''" regarding this. It is not a matter of personal knowledge from playing detective in the bushes (which would be a violation of Misplaced Pages content guidelines). Such a connection between the ] and the 14th Dalai Lama having occurred is not in dispute as it has been admitted to by the 14th Dalai Lama. The question is where that factual information should be placed. Not including it would likely violate the NPOV as it has probable bearing on some of the ] position as regards the Dalai Lama and Tibet. Hope that clarifies it. --] 08:06, 30 May 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Dalai Lama and Panchen Lama == |
|
|
Can someone please explain the relationship between Dalai Lama and Panchen Lama? |
|
|
Also, as for the lottery selection system in front of the Chinese Emperor, does it only apply to Panchen Lama? or it applies to Dalai Lama as well? |
|
|
Every new Panchen/Dalai Lama must be officially recognized by current Chinese Emperor? When did this tradition begin?<br> |
|
|
thanks<small>—''The preceding ] comment was added by'' ] (] • ]) 00:29, 22 December 2005.</small><!--Inserted with Template:Unsigned--> |
|
|
|
|
|
: The Imperial Ordinance promulgated by Qianlong Emperor in 1793 stated that the selection of the Dalai Lama, the Panchen Lama and other high-rank lamas shall be made by means of the Golden Urn lottery.--] 02:16, 8 February 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Can any one tell me how Dalai gains the power to select Panchen? == |
|
|
|
|
|
So far as I know they are the leaders of different branches of Lamaism. And why can I see Tibet as part of China on maps published by the government of ROC on Taiwan? My friend told me Buddhists are not allow to kill, but why can lamas kill slaves? Ain't they Buddhists? Or their religion is quite different from other Buddhisms? <small>—''The preceding ] comment was added by'' ] (] • ]) 15:32, 28 December 2005.</small><!--Inserted with Template:Unsigned--> |
|
|
|
|
|
:Well, just for clarity for anyone else who might be reading this, the Panchen Lama is not the leader of a different branch of Tibetan Buddhism. Rather the Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama are both part of the Gelug sect, and they are traditionally involved in finding the replacement for the other. You might be thinking of the controversy over the recognition of the ], who is the leader of a different sect, and which the Dalai Lama has involved himself in. However, note that, in that case, the Dalai Lama and the Chinese government are on the same side. - ]<sup>(])</sup> 03:17, 11 April 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Your comments are just stupid! Do some research before spitting stuff out. All gossips are not true! Tibetan Buddhism is not Lamaism, Tibetan BUDDHISM is part of the greater mahayana tradition or the northern Buddhism, in fact, Tibetan tulkus are expounding the pure Nalanda tradition. |
|
|
|
|
|
I think you are worry too much for yourself. It is ok to have a different Buddhism as long as it is beneficial to the people who practice it. However, in Tibetan case, it is not a LAMAISM, rather a PURE NALANDA TRADITION. |
|
|
|
|
|
Regarding killing slaves, which slaves are talking about? Be clear! It sounds like PRC propaganda which even CCP today disclaims those old-propaganda of theirs. |
|
|
|
|
|
pk |
|
|
|
|
|
== Protected with vandalism == |
|
|
|
|
|
Please note that this protected page still shows traces of vandalism. ] 20:33, 11 January 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Just took out some vandalism - "doosh bag" was found at the end of the list of lamas. ] 23:21, 8 February 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since the dalai lamas are reincarnations of previous dl's should living dl's be charged with the crimes they committed in their previous lifes? |
|
|
|
|
|
:: International law is secular and so does not recognize reincarnation, and neither do the laws of most modern countries, so the answer would be no. The current and previous Lama are counted as seperate individuals in law regardless of their status within Buddhism. |
|
|
|
|
|
:: The Office of the Lama however could probably be found culpable of certain crimes, but this would most likely be done by making it responsible for the actions of its members in the same way that a company can be held responsible for the action of a past chairman. |
|
|
|
|
|
::] 15:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Very interesting legal position. Does it mean that legally speaking, the claim of reincarnation made by the dl and adherents are unlawful, and as such, false and misleading? As the dl claims reincarnation, could the dl be brought before a Court and made to prove his claim, or otherwise to stop misleading others? Is such legal protection enshrined in for example the UK's Trade Description Act? |
|
|
|
|
|
== Unqualified Use of "incarnation" == |
|
|
|
|
|
It seems to me that use of the word "incarnation" without qualification creates some major baggage. When we say that the current Dalai Lama is an "incarnation" of past Dalai Lamas, we're making some pretty specific metaphysical claims, are we not? |
|
|
|
|
|
== where to add this article link ? == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
] 11:31, 20 March 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Tibet was conquered my the Mongols, Not the PRC== |
|
|
It was conquered by the mongol empire, not a recent conquest of PRC, Tibet was then integrated with the Ming Dynansty. There was never a question of the PRC "invading" Tibet As it was stated int he article. You would think the United States would have acted, seeing all the fancy stuff they're doing with Taiwan. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 02:46, 11 April 2006.</small><!-- --> |
|
|
:Yeah, well, according to the government-in-exile, Tibet was a sovereign state prior 1951, which had a very close diplomatic relationship to Qing China as well as a traditional religious relationship between the successive Dalai Lamas and the successive Aisin-Gioro emperors. The fact that the U.S. acted in the case of Taiwan but not Tibet probably has a lot to do with their capabilities: the U.S. is a major naval power, but Tibet is a landlocked place. In any event, Misplaced Pages is not a debate site. You may wish to take this sort of argumentation to www.politicalcrossfire.com or some similar site. - ]<sup>(])</sup> 02:57, 11 April 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Nat Krause was the one treating this site as a debate site. The previous person was merely stating a fact. |
|
|
|
|
|
:: Tibet became independent from China, and was then reconqured by the PRC. As the PRC and the ofrmer government are two different entities and two seperate armies were used, they count as seperate invasions. |
|
|
|
|
|
:: Taiwan was accessible and strategically important, Tibet wasn't. America did try to act through the CIA, but that came to very little in the end. |
|
|
|
|
|
::] 15:05, 22 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==link== |
|
|
:'']•] 11:33, 15 April 2006 (UTC)]''<br> |
|
|
::Please see the incident report linked to below for explanation of why this link has been removed. --]:] 21:02, 15 April 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
Hi, I would like to add an external link to the World of Biography entry |
|
|
probably the most famous portal of biography to this article. Does anybody have any objections?<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) Revision as of 09:16, 15 April 2006 (UTC{{{3|}}})</small><!-- --> |
|
|
] please do not add this to the article, and please read the ] before giving the go-ahead. This is spam and not link-worthy under ]; the articles contain many distortions, lack citations, and contain nothing that wouldn't fit directly in the wiki article. a link to worldofbiography has been placed on over 70 talk pages by ]. thanks. --]:] 21:02, 15 April 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Spelling of the names of the Dalai Lamas == |
|
|
|
|
|
Note that the spellings on the list of previous and currents Dalais Lama was recently changed; the new spelling is according to the official PRC romanisation of Tibetan. The matter is being discussed at ], because it relates directly to the recently proposals for ]. - ]<sup>(])</sup> 23:18, 16 April 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: The changes by the anonymous user ] (]) didn't make sense. He/she should have looked at the column headings. But I've changed the table again. I've removed the links from the official spellings and put them into the right column. —] 01:54, 18 April 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
==Chinese== |
|
|
I just want to say, the openning page of this site. The name of "Dalai Lama" written in Chinese two times, one in simplied Chinese and the other is traditional Chinese. I think it is irrelevant to write his name in Chinese. The original name is conferred on by Mongolian Altan Khan and it was in Mongolian. It is more suitable to write "Dalai Lama" in Mongolian language than in Chinese. The Chinese word "Dalai Lama" does not reflect anything and it does not have actual meaning of the title itself. I think this online database is invaded by colonial terms. -- ] 22:18, 5 June 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
:You make a reasonable point. I'm not sure why the Chinese should be included. - ]<sup>(])</sup> 17:59, 6 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::It makes sense to include the Chinese because Tibet is today ''de facto'' a part of China and it is a useful piece of information. —] 07:44, 8 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Writing in Mongolian is making much more sense than in Chinese because Tibet-Mongolian relation which was termed as "Priest-Pratron Relation" or "Choe-Yon-Dral-Wa" is still alive since Mongolian kings and public adopted Buddhism as way of life. For example, Even before China occupied Tibet, there were Mongolian monks studying in the three great monateries of Tibet. Upon completion of study, they go back home and preach to the public. Even, today Mongolian public and monasteries have been sending monks to study in the replicas of three great monasteries of Tibet which are in India. Dalai Lama has been invited and greeted with much devotion as Tibetans have devotion in him. In this context, where does Chinese name fit? Isn't mongolian more suitable than Chinese? |
|
|
|
|
|
Palden Kyab |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In which case don't write it in English either because Dalai Lama has no meaning in English. |
|
|
JC 8 Sep 06 |
|
|
|
|
|
== Selecting the new Dalai Lama == |
|
|
|
|
|
What happens if the declared Dalai Lama's parents do not wish to let their child become Dalai Lama? Or this has never happened? --] 01:10, 25 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I don't know the details, but I doubt this has ever happened. Generally, the search party would research all the details of the child's life, including his family, and so they would know if the family is religious. From a secular perspective, it would be foolish for them to choose a child whose parents would resist the idea. From a religious perspective, I imagine that it is assumed that the deceased lama will himself choose to be born into a family that believes in reincarnated lamas.—]<sup>(])</sup> 07:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Died Young == |
|
|
Why did so many of the Dalai Lamas die young? Is the spirit of Dalai Lama suicidal? |
|
|
|
|
|
== Vegetarian == |
|
|
|
|
|
Is the Dalai Lama a vegetarian? |
|
|
|
|
|
:No.—]<sup>(])</sup> 07:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Many lines == |
|
|
|
|
|
The article should mention that there are other similar reincarnating lines of boddhisatvas around (Panchen, karmapa, and I presume others). |
|
|
I guess that there is an article with such a list. |
|
|
Maybe the article already mentions that using Buddhist technical terms. |
|
|
If so, it should be rephrased easierly. |
|
|
|
|
|
==Insult Of Dalai Lama== |
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Buddhist friends on the article ] discussion page the anit-Buddhist active Hindu users are insulting His Holiness Dalai Lama as ] wadi. These Hindutvawadis laid riots in ] as well as Hindu Castiesm and Hindu Untouchability has destroyed the peace in whole India. Need explanation from the Buddhist world as the Hindu especially ] Brahmins are destorting the Buddhist History as well as now they are also insulting Dalai Lama. |
|
|
Dalai Lama has participated in INEB Buddhist Conference in Nagpur in 2005. ] |
|
|
The users primarily involved are vandalism on the article ] are ] and ]. These are branding Dalai Lama as Hindutva supporter and anti Indian Buddhist. |
|
|
] 14:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
The Dalai Lama has a autobiography called freedom in exile. In this books he talks about how he exorcised a spirit. Don't know if it's important. But it maybe added to thearticle what do you think?
The article says in lede that DL "legally returned to the secular leadership position of governing Tibet". But under what authority? Tibetan sovereignty isn't recognised by anyone including the United states. They all recognised it as part of China especially during the mid 1900s. Not only is that statement unsourced but it's obviously got no reliable sources to support that statement. 49.180.4.243 (talk) 00:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
