Talk:Mahasiddha

message: I vote YES. Sure, the articles should be merged.--Klimov 09:47, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mahasidda: merge with Mahasiddha

message: I feel this article should be merged with Siddha, as both of these articles have dealt with basically same subject matter.Joy1963 09:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I vote NO. There seems to be a qualitative difference between the terms Siddha and Mahasiddha. E.g. terms Raja (prince) and Maharaja (king) seem different. They denote different concepts. --Klimov 14:34, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger with [[Siddha]]

message: I couldn't help but notice that Marpa and Milarepa, while mentioned in the article, are not actually on the list of mahasiddhas.  I question the validity of that whole paragraph, for that reason (I also didn't think that they were technically part of the 84 mahasiddhas, regardless of their realisation), and also because I have heard that Milarepa has his hand to his ear in order to listen out and hear the suffering of those still stuck in samsara.
Does anyone know more about this?  If no one does, I think I will add at least a disclaimer.
66.222.49.191 23:28, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, as far as I know, Marpa and Milarepa were not part of the 84 mahasiddhas. The 84 were all from India, AFAIK. Marpa and Milarepa were Tibetans. Victor Klimov 12:49, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marpa/Milarepa 

message: 32.97.110.142 (Talk)  (remove long quote from lead, summary of essential points would be sufficient) 
There is simply now way that the lead "summery of essential points" is sufficient. The quote contains a great deal if useful infomation. Frankly, it seems pointless to even include the so-called "summary" if the quote is not included, as it contains no real information. I feel strongly that the quote should be reinstated.
Series editor Robert A.F. Thurman, in the preface to Gray (2007: ix-x), contrasts the Tantric communities which subsumed the coteries of Mahasidda with universities such as Nalanda and mentions saiñnyãsin (Sanskrit) and sadhu (Sanskrit):
The Tantric communities of India in the latter half of the first Common Era millennium (and perhaps even earlier) were something like “Institutes of Advanced Studies” in relation to the great Buddhist monastic “Universities.” They were research centers for highly cultivated, successfully graduated experts in various branches of Inner Science (adhyatmavidya), some of whom were still monastics and could move back and forth from university (vidyalaya) to “site” (pitha), and many of whom had resigned vows of poverty, celibacy, and so forth, and were living in the classical Indian saiñnyãsin or sãdhu style. I call them the "psychonauts" of the tradition, in parallel with our “astronauts,” the materialist scientist-adventurers whom we admire for their courageous explorations of the “outer space” which we consider the matrix of material reality. Inverse astronauts, the psychonauts voyaged deep into “inner space,” encountering and conquering angels and demons in the depths of their subconscious minds.Thecontemplative (talk) 15:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thurman quote should be put back. 

message: Is Dampa Sangye included in the list of 84 Mahasiddhas? If yes, why it is not in the list in this article? If no, why has he been called Mahasiddha in the article about him? Need some clarification. Thanks. -- 49.136.245.25 (talk) 10:45, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dampa Sanggye 

message: Hello folks. I just added the tags for a Buddhism box on the article page. Best, AD64 (talk) 01:14, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added tags for Buddhism box on article page 

message: I also added tags for Wikiproject Biographies and WikiProject Indian to the talk page. Best, AD64 (talk) 01:19, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added tags for WikiProjects to talk page. 

message: I removed the wikilink to Manibhadra in the list of the 84 Mahasiddhas as it directs readers to a page on the yaksha Manibhadra, not the female Mahasiddha Manibhadra.
Anyone up for creating an article on Manibhadra? I'd be willing to collaborate. Best, AD64 (talk) 01:25, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manibhadra 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mahasiddha. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130201193403/http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/lamdre.pdf to http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/lamdre.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:29, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I think this section should be removed. 
Tibetans certainly revere the Indian mahasiddhas; but they don't group this list of Tibetan masters with the mahasiddhas. Also, if you're going to put a terton in there as a mahasiddha, then where are all the other tertons?
The section is uncited, so I'm free to remove it without notice; but I'll give people a few days to come up with citations for these masters being equivalent to mahasiddhas.
MrDemeanour (talk) 16:33, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean you're unable to find sources? Or that you can't be bothered to look? Skyerise (talk) 16:48, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tibetan Mahasiddhas