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.
I added a clean up tag. This article obviously needs some work, but in particular the section listing details of books by volumes is almost like a contents table, and not really encyclopedic. Some have not even been published! The article also needs proper references. Billlion (talk) 15:48, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
His Treasury of Knowledge, published in Tibetan in the 19th century, is renowned. It's also huge, each part is a major book in its own right. And the translation effort has been part by part so far because each part is a book on its own. The Treasury of Knowledge is more like an encyclopedia in a way. Do you have any suggestions though for how to better present the information? I'm not sure you could remove the subpart details for each book without losing useful information and also then lacking a way of connecting which English translation (by Snow Lion and others) has been completed since they're publishing full books one part at a time. - Owlmonkey (talk) 18:48, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
I didn't realis it was that important. Maybe the Treasury of Knowledge should have its own article in which the contents are described in more detail?Billlion (talk) 05:30, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Good idea. I think it definitely should long term, I'm not sure we have all the details about each part yet (and I don't read Tibetan). But the translation effort is full swing, shouldn't be much longer. There has been tremendous progress over the last five years. As it concludes we can summarize what is included in each part, that would be useful. Or I guess we could start now. The same thing is probably needed for Ju Mipham's corpus as well, in 27 (plus four restricted) volumes. - Owlmonkey (talk) 05:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
I've moved this to talk, because as it stands now it is just a huge quote introduced by a sentence fragment and not integrated into the article at all.
Important for the esoteric Dzogchen doctrine of "sound, light and rays" and the 'mantra' of the Mantrayana tradition in particular, Kongtrul, et. al. (2005: p.431) identifies the “primordial sound” (nāda) and its semantic field:
The primordial indestructible great vital essence (gdod ma'i mi shigs pa'i thig le chen po), which is the root or ground of all of cyclic life [samsara] and perfect peace [nirvana], is known as primordial (gdod ma) because it has no beginning or end; as indestructible (mi shigs pa) because it is indivisible; as vital essence (thig le) because it pervades the various appearances; and as great (chen po) because there is nothing that it does not encompass.
There are countless synonyms for the primordial indestructible great vital essence, such as "great seal" (phyag rgya chen po, mahāmudrā), "great bliss" (bde ba chen po, mahāsukha), "primordial sound" (nāda), "all-pervading vajra of space" (mkha' khyab nam mkha'i rdo rje), "ordinary awareness" (tha mal shes pa), "pristine awareness channel" (ye shes kyi rtsa), "pristine awareness wind" (ye she kyi rlung), "invincible ham" (gzhom med kyi ham), "invincible vital essence" (gzhom med kyi thig le), "essence of enlightenment" (sugatagarbha), and "transcendent wisdom" (she rab phar phyin, prajnā-pāramitā) (CPR, f. 29a3-b2).
B9, I did not understand your response, but I did understand Sylvain's explanation of why this text should be removed, so I am going to remove it again. Please rephrase your objection.—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 03:44, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I am the first person to qualitatively iterate this article with a citation and it is being removed. That is just not cricket, not just.
The passage can be restored, but the way it is now it is just dropped into the article with no context, apropos of nothing. It needs to be better integrated or else it is not clear why it is there.Sylvain1972 (talk) 13:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Well Sylvain, do something constructive and creative and frame an introduction to the quotation. You can write can't you? While we're having this polite conversation do you have any constructive criticism for Sheja Dzö? That is among the thousands of Wikipedia articles I have iterated which are mostly oriented towards Mantrayana and Dharmic Traditions, though not only.
You are the one who feels it is relevant, you frame it. I personally don't see how isolating one aspect of his thought about one very particular subject and dedicating a whole section to it is appropriate for a bio page.Sylvain1972 (talk) 17:14, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I changed the verb "tonsured" to "installed". Tonsure is solely an (archaic) Christian admission of Holy Orders wherby one recieves a tonsure hairstyle. "Installed" is perhaps more appropriate in that it doesn't use the additional conotations of the specific rite. Sean --18.104.22.168 (talk) 02:40, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
^Jamgön Kongtrul Lodrö Tayé (author, compiler); Elio Guarisco (translator); Ingrid McLeon (translator, editor) (2005). The treasury of knowledge: book six, part four: Systems of Buddhist Tantra. Ithaca, New York, USA: Snow Lion Publications. ISBN 1-559939-210-x