Talk:Mahamudra

Removed circularity

The second paragraph in the intro was circular. It said, basically: "[Mahāmudrā] refers to the way one who has realized mahāmudrā experiences reality" and that "by 'one who has realized mahāmudrā' is meant 'one who has succeeded in the practices of mahāmudrā'". I've fixed that, and merged with what was the third paragraph.

Can someone check the following though: Before my edit, it said:

maha refers to the fact that it is beyond concept, imagination, and projection.

The original writer's intended meaning of "it" is potentially ambiguous and still not totally clear to me (so I've not yet tried to make that aspect any clearer). Grammatically it is referring to "each phenomenon". But perhaps the writer was referring to Mahāmudrā as a whole, or to the experience of reality, or to reality itself? Can anyone say for sure? Exactly what is the "it" which "maha" refers to as being "beyond concept, imagination, and projection."?

Further Reading

I added an entry for Reginald Ray 'Indestructable Truth' because I remember reading a very clear explanation of Mahamudra, both from a historical perspective as well as explaining the doctrines and practices of the various traditions. I put it in FR because I have not (yet) put in specific inline citations so I surmised it's not a 'reference'. Zero sharp 05:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Peter Harvey's Introduction to Buddhism has an excellent introduction to Mahamudra meditation starting on page 268. Mitsube (talk) 06:06, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 16:22, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Intro section incomprehensible to non specialist

Hi editors of this page,

which is referred to from section I am working on - yoga asanas. Could someone bold and knowledgeable please condense the intro section, and say what physical manifestations Mahamudra actually takes and allow all the fine print to be dealt with in the sections below? It makes no sense to one directed to there from yoga asanas with little Buddhist background expecting to find an explanation of a physical posture. Alternatively, is this a case of a mistaken redirect in need of alternative titling or content?

Trev M (talk) 15:08, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Mahamudra is not a yoga pose. Mahamudra refers to a type of meditation, as well as the nature of reality, so in Yoga this is known as Jhana, and also as unifying one's Atman with the formless Brahman. makeswell (talk) 00:26, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Mahamudra is a yoga pose, among many other things. Not in the Buddhist tradition though.Sylvain1972 (talk) 03:26, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

using sources from classic and Tibetan sources

This article takes a lot of information from two sources, namely, "Mahāmudrā" by Roger R. Jackson. Encyclopedia of Religion, 2nd edition, and, Reginald Ray, Secret of the Vajra World. Shambhala 2001.

This page is start-class at the moment, so this is not unexpected, and is fine for now.

It also seems that these two books are written by Western authors. Although they may summarize the teachings of the Tibetans from whom this practice and the teachings on this practice, Mahamudra, originally came, I think that it would be advantageous to cite directly these original authors/practitioners.

I have tried to do this, as much as I can, by linking Tilopa's famous Six Words of Advice. The page on Tilopa said that he actually invented the Mahamudra method, so this seems apt.

Sincerely, makeswell (talk) 00:32, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

The Buddhist Mahamudra tradition originally came from Indians. Roger Jackson is a leading scholar of Indo-Tibetan Buddhism. Reginald Ray is . .well, opinions differ there. But more sources are always welcome.Sylvain1972 (talk) 03:28, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Under the section: Practices of Mahamudra meditation - Date Conflict

Please see 2nd paragraph in this section. The sentence starts out, "Before the 1955 Invasion of Tibet ..." Where did this date come from? It is inconsistent with other sources such as Tibet#From_1950_to_present and Lhasa_uprising. If you use "invasion of Tibet" then the date is ~1950; if you use "armed conflict" then the date is 1956; and if you talk about "Tibetan Uprising" then the date is 1959. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pema donzang (talk • contribs) 16:31, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Mahamudra in the tantras

I've removed the whole section: it's a vast amount of WP:OR. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:57, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Is there a Pali term?

Is there a Pali term for Mahamudra?