Talk:Tashi Lhunpo Monastery

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tashi Lhunpo Monastery article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Tibet Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tibet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Tibet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TibetWikipedia:WikiProject TibetTemplate:WikiProject TibetTibet
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Buddhism Low‑importance

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more details on the projects.BuddhismWikipedia:WikiProject BuddhismTemplate:WikiProject BuddhismBuddhism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I don't get this

"The late Panchen Lama did not leave Tibet and consequently many of the senior lamas from Tashilhunpo Monastery remained inside Tibet. Therefore, while other monasteries-in-exile have expanded and developed under the guidance of senior lamas, Tashilhunpo has remained at a disadvantage, although in 1972 a new campus of Tashilhunpo Monastery was built by Tibetan exiles at a settlement in Bylakuppe, Karnātakā in southern India."

I don't get this section. If the senior lamas from Tashilhunpo remained within Tibet while those from other monasteries fled, doesn't that mean that Tashilhumpo is at a distinct advantage because it does have the guidance of senior lamas whereas other monasteries didn't? --Sumple (Talk) 04:35, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, two things. The article specifies monasteries-in-exile. The wellbeing of the campus of the monastery of India doesn't necessarily follow the same curve as does that of the one in Tibet. Second, this passage doesn't mention it, but the senior lams from Tashilhunpo Monastery remained inside Tibet in 1959 and then they were purged along with the 10th Panchen Lama in 1964. A lot of them were imprisoned and they were all forced to leave the monastery. So, no, neither branch of Tashilhunpo ended up benefitting from the senior lamas.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 02:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The model of this monastery in China

Tibetan sources describing the Panchen Lama's visit to the Qinglong emperor in 1780 speak of a model (Zheho Trashi Lhünpo (Shakabpa 2010 pp.497, p.500 = the Tashilhunpo at Jehol (Chinese Chéngdé 承德) near Beijing of this monastery. I presume the reference is to one of the buildings at Qinglong's summer retreat Nishidani (talk) 10:55, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

more clarification needed.

"but the rooms are more modest and humane" If anyone who has been to this place could provide further clarification, I beleive it would be helpful. This appears to be a mistranslation, or a cultural difference. "Modest", in English, implies a simple way of life, (spartan). Humane means "having or showing compassion or benevolence." in western culture, these are nearly opposite words. Well , maybe not opposite words, but, it would be highly unusual to use them to describe the same sleeping place. When the article mentions being "/more/modest and humane" (emphasise added) what are the other sleeping quarters like that are neither modest (which implies luxurious) but are also not humane?

Clarification needed.

Tothmetres (talk) 01:52, 24 December 2015 (UTC)tothmetres[reply]

Possible copyright problem

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk🌴Help out at CCI!} 03:57, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]