Jump to content

Talk:Mahayana

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hayashihouyi (talk | contribs) at 18:31, 14 December 2021. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Other main existing branches of Buddhism?

The article mentions that "Mahāyāna is one of two (or three, under some classifications) main existing branches of Buddhism". What are the other two main existing branches of Buddhism? Vajrayana seems to be one of them, according to this article, although I'm not sure; then there is one more. I think it should be made clear in the lead of the article what these other two main branches are. —Kri (talk) 19:12, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The other is Therevada. I think that this should be noted in the first sentence, in parentheses as: (the other being Therevada). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.173.72.231 (talk) 01:09, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mahayana. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:51, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Origins section

The origins section was pretty problematic, so I've taken it on to make some changes there especially. It was giving way too much weight to the Mahasamghika origin hypothesis, which is definitely one theory out there, but has with time become less important. I've been using Drewes' two recent papers especially, and also Walser's Nagarjuna in context. I also merged the section on earliest Mahayana sutras with it, because it was just repeating a lot of the same information (Mahasamgika origins, Lokaksema corpus). Other theories that I've added to the section include Schopen's cult of the book theory and Drewes dharmabhanaka theory as well as making more explicit the "forest hypothesis" theory. This is still a work in progress at the moment. Javierfv1212 16:24, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]


No reason for using Devanagari in Buddhist articles

It seems there are certain users that want to add Devanagari script renditions of terms in numerous articles about Buddhism on Wikipedia. There seems to be no good reason for this, other than perhaps nationalistic or revsionist ones.

Devanagari does not come from the time of the Buddha or from the time of Ashoka (from which date the first Buddhist related inscriptions), as the wki article says it reached regular use by the 7th century CE.

None of the major Buddhist canons (Tibetan, Chinese, Pali) are recorded in Devanagari, they use Chinese, Tibetan script and various South Asian scripts like Sinhala or Burmese. None of the major publications of these canons use Devanagari. Even the Sanskrit Buddhist texts are mostly not published in Devanagari, but use IAST instead. None of the main scholarly publications on Sanskritic Buddhism use Devanagari either, they all use IAST (for example: Siderits and Katsura 's "Nagarjuna's Middle Way: Mulamadhyamakakarika").

It makes absolutely no sense to put Devanagari in Buddhist articles. For these reasons, I am removing any instance of these that I see. Javierfv1212 15:30, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Geo dissemination of Buddhism

When buddhism moves through a culture it transforms normally with its folk religion. To say that Buddhism comes from India and that is it is a gross injustice to the nature of the philosophy it's self. Change, impermanence is the way. We will need to move the position of some of the country's successions after China I did not have time. Amituofo 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼 Shenqijing (talk) 12:55, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:36, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is it originally Indian?

Mahayana Buddhism is East Asian, and from historical records we can conclude that Mahayana primarily developed from and in China, and then spread to the rest of the sinosphere. Surely it can not be said that Mahayana is Indian? From what I can see this wiki also doesn’t state in the history that it originated in ancient India. Yet clearly in all Mahayana traditions it clearly states that it traces its origins to China.

Please elaborate. Hayashihouyi (talk) 01:43, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:15, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you going to provide an argument or are just claiming “nonsense”. Hayashihouyi (talk) 18:24, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me, do Indians know what Mahayana is? Mahayana is nonexistent in India. Proof me wrong. Since you seem to be an Indian professor. Hayashihouyi (talk) 18:31, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]