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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Religious textsWikipedia:WikiProject Religious textsTemplate:WikiProject Religious textsReligious texts articles
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 articles
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Under "Themes" we find: "The Drataljur states that the theoretical view of Ati Yoga coincides with the Madhyamaka Prasangika and that there is no contradiction between them."
This leads us to a footnote referencing Capriles' article, which itself turns out to only further reference Norbu's book which is both a restricted purchase title, and written in Italian to boot!
Given that Sri Singha was said to have transmitted the Dra Taljur to Padmasambhava at least before Padmasambhava came to Tibet and consecrated Samye (~780 C.E.), and given that the term "Prasangika" is a back-formation of a Tibetan convention (thal 'gyur ba), coined in the early- to mid- twelfth century, it seems highly unlikely that the Dr Taljur did even mention "prasangika" madhyamaka.
This statement and its citation should be removed, or else a proper citation from Norbu's text should replace it.
Yonga (talk) 06:12, 23 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
.svg){kind=small}
