Talk:Empowerment

Adam, I think the subcategories should go first for the reasons I indicated in my email. Also a "subcategory" section might not be so relevant since there are so many of them, including in the ways to explain causal, path and resultant empowerment. I put them here to stress the point.

I think we are just beginning here to produce something complete and thorough. In time, we will have to add much more material, including the futher subcategories you mention. I agree that there are currently some misunderstandings which need to be clarified, and that will be achieved if people read the whole article. We can not logically mention the subcategories of empowerment before first introducing empowerment in the context of wang, lung and tri. We should be aiming to produce a thorough, comprehensive article rather than to stress specific points. It is fine, however, to include a subsection called 'Clarifying Misunderstandings' or something like that.

--Adam 10:42, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

I understand. Yet I still have one doubt as to why not have the subcategories before. Actually if you look at any traditional presentation of empowerment such as Jikmé Tenpa Nyinma in the Dzöder it is one of the function of the empowerment, and the different functions and benefit are presented after the subcategories. And actually this point on wang, lung and tri don't really belong to this article (although if you were to ask me where to put it instead I couldn't say) and should be actually more a kind of clarification appended to the text, but its presence as the main development in the article is supportive of the misconceptions we are trying to dispell. Anyway, it's more for the discussion, I'll go with whatever you feel is appropriate.

--Gyurme

Hi, I added a lot more material to this article because I felt the material there was missing crucial elements, and we have some pretty clear sources available. I tried to source every single point I brought in. I mention a few sources needed in the notes; it would be great if you (Adam and/or Gyurme) could add those references.

In the intro, I tried to gather the most important elements, in an essential way. In the following sections there might be some repetition, but it expands what was touched in the intro.

The first sentence is still problematic, and was penned by Gyurme: "...which awakens primordial wisdom (Tib. yeshe), the power or realization in the mind of the disciple." Did you mean "awakens 1. primordial wisdom, 2. the power, or 3. the realization in the mind...". Or did you mean: "which awakens primordial wisdom (Tib. yeshe), the power of realization in the mind of the disciple"? Or "which awakens the power or realization of primordial wisdom (Tib. yeshe) in the mind of the disciple"? Or something else?

--Sébastien (talk) 00:02, 25 March 2015 (CET)