From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Tibetan Buddhism (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Tibet:Tibetan Buddhism, an attempt to improve content and create better coordination between articles related to traditional religion, cultural practices and customs in Tibet. Please participate in improvement by editing Ngagpa and related pages, or visit the WikiProject Tibet main page for more details on the projects. WikiProject icon
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Buddhism (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

good start; doesn't the ngagpa lineage come from the time when Buddhism was persecuted by Langdarma -- I seem to remember (and will look up) a story that he left the Tantrikas alone after Sangye Yeshe of Yub scared the pants off of him with a giant Scorpion... Zero sharp 02:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Refence to Hansard[edit]

There are very serious questions regarding Mr.Hansard and his claims. For more information please visit: , it is quite questionable if his quotes should be in the article.rudy 12:03, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Did he say the things that the article says that he says? There's nothing wrong with stating that he's said something. Perhaps the way that his quotes are currently used aren't the best, but I'm sure there is a to include his statements, even if others disagree. Sancho (talk) 17:26, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
I don't think it is relevant what he writes or not, as it apears questionable info from an unreliable source - not exactly what you want in an encyclopedia... rudy 21:12, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Mr.Hansard has made numerous claims, all of which are subjct to serious question, not least of all his crass and cynical misrepresentation and exploitation of the Tibetan Bon tradition. For the record the quotes atributed to him in the article 'Dur-Bon Dur Con?' are authentic. He did indeed assert that the Dalai Lama recognized and valued his 'work', which was of course completely untrue. Perhaps people may choose to believe in Hansard the fact remains he is a fake!

Removed "indeed, the Mahasidda may be correctly referred to as Ngagpa": no. Some mahasiddhas were monks; a ngakpa cannot be a monk. MrDemeanour (talk) 14:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)


Are there lay practitioners among the Gelugpas?

Austerlitz -- (talk) 23:09, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Although the Geluk encouraged a sort of "mass-monasticism" and the majority of their lamas have been monks there have been a fair number of important lamas in the Gelug tradition (including the 6th Dalai Lama) who were not monks. Today there are of course quite a number of Gelug tulkus and geshes who have given up their monastic ordination but still continue to practice and teach - some giving vajrayana empowerments as well. Presumably they still maintain their Bodhisttva and tantric vows (ordination). Even the present Trijang Rinpoche is not a monk. BTW The term "lay" actually means "non professional". Clearly full time ("professional") married lamas who have done years of study and meditation practice are not properly speaking "lay lamas". Also the term "ngagpa" although now most often applied to householder tantric priests, can also applies to monks whose main practice is Vajrayana ("tantric specialists"). Strictly speaking the term means mantrin or one who keeps the vows and does the practices of the Mantrayana - which includes many monks. Labrang Monastery and Sera Monastery both had Ngapa Tratsangs (Ngagpa monastic colleges). The proper (full) Tibetan term for a married (householder) ngagpa is khyim pa sngags pa.
There are also of course many devoted followers of the Gelug tradition who are married and are farmers, tradesmen or have some other profession, who do a lot of practice - including sometimes lengthy retreats. Often when they retire they will spend nearly all their time doing religious practice.
Chris Fynn (talk) 10:06, 22 January 2015 (UTC)


"Translator’s Footnotes: 1 sngags pa General name for ordained Tantric practitioners who are neither monastic, nor lay." —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:43, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Austerlitz -- (talk) 16:37, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Austerlitz -- (talk) 22:05, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Uncited material[edit]

The uncited material was tagged in October - by ME - after being uncited for many years. I checked and could not find cites for the claims, and some of them were unclear (ngakpa = the mahasiddha?). Feel free to rewrite with cite; I have no bias against the information, I just try to adhere to the "verifiable" part of Wiki etiquette. Ogress smash! 17:00, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, when I added the {{citation needed}} tag, the paragraph - naturally - was still not tagged yet. However, just like Ogress I tried to find some sources that could verify the text, but I found none. Perhaps the tag was removed a bit rapidly, but I agree that the text shall go unless someone manages to find some material to verify it =P ... Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 11:03, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
@Ogress: @Jayaguru-Shishya: "ngakma" / "ngakmo" (for female ngagpa) is an example of this. These terms occur nowhere in the 3 volume (3,000+ page) Great Tibetan Dictionary or, as far as I have been able to determine, in any traditional or academic source. In Tibetan, just like in English, the apparent masculine form of a noun is often the gender neutral form and generally applied to both male and female. My guess is that "ngakma" / "ngakmo" may have been coined by some westerner trying to be PC - or by some lama trying to please western students. Of course a Tibetan would understand this as meaning "female ngagpa" - but would think the usage rather odd. Chris Fynn (talk) 10:35, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
I am not sure, I am examining cites, but my understanding is that the female form is khandro (Wylie: mkha’ ’gro), whether the sngagspa's consort is referred to as a dakini or yogini: there are many examples of this, most notably in my mind the gcod teachers and lineage founders Niguma, Magcig Labsgron, and Yeshes Mtshorgyal. Ogress smash! 23:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
@Ogress:Khandro is not the female form of Ngakpa - they are different words, though sometimes used similarly. Khandro (or Sangyum) is the respectful term for a lama's wife / consort. But then female ngakpa / gomchen aren't necessarily married. Advanced unmarried female practitioners are sometimes also called khandro (one of my own teachers was Drikung Khandro (Nene Rinpoche), and she was never married). But, depending on the context, a female practitioner could sometimes be called a ngakpa / gomchen and at other times khandro (one term does not exclude the other) - though khandro may be more frequently used to address someone in speech as it sounds more respectful. See Khenpo Phuntsok Tashi's article - linked from the Wikipedia article - where he uses "female gomchen". Chris Fynn (talk) 13:27, 23 January 2015 (UTC)