Jump to content

Talk:Buddhism

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by VictoriaGrayson (talk | contribs) at 10:57, 1 May 2018 (→‎OR tag: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Former featured articleBuddhism is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 6, 2004.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 24, 2004Featured article candidatePromoted
April 11, 2006Featured article reviewDemoted
July 24, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former featured article

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

Morals and key tenets

To state that there is no morality in Buddhism will need very good sources. And to state that anatta is the "key tenet" of Buddhism also needs much better sources than these two sources. To postulate any key tenet, apart from escape from smasara, will need very good sources. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:30, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Anatta is what separates Buddhism from all other religions. It is the key cause of dukkha as an attachment to the self allows for suffering, and thus it is the reason that one ought to escape samsara. There are no morals in Buddhism as there is no moral authority. The Buddha never said there are thing that you should do no matter would, he just taught how to escape samsara and why that is a good idea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raymond Leonard (talk • contribs) 11:45, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Raymond Leonard:. You specifically made the following changes and additions:
The discussion if Buddhism is a religion or a philosophy has been going on here for I don't know how long; see the archives of this talkpage. The term "dharma" was added as a compromise. Although WP:BOLD is encouraged, in this case discussion before editing is to be preferred. And the source is not good enough for such a statement; please try to find scholarly sources.
  • "observance of moral precepts" - changed into "behavioral precepts", with the following edit-summary: "Improved description of buddhist ethics. There is no morality in Buddhism but rather karmanically skilful or unskilful ways to act". The term links to "Buddhist ethics"; you changed the term without giving any source. So far, it's your personal opinion.

  • The key tennant [sic] of Buddhism is Anatta (not self teaching), which states there is no perminant, unchanging self, soul or essence in living beings.[6][7]

Those sources are not good enough for such a statement. Dana Nourie, If Not-Self Then What?, is a blog, and she doesn't even write that anatta is the key tenet of Buddhism. Narada Thera, Anatta or soul-lessness, also doesn't state that anatta is the key tenet of Buddhism. It may be the view of some specific teacher(s), and it is indeed important in Buddhism, but to present it as the key Buddhist tenet is inappropriate. Actually, to present any teaching as the essence of Buddhism is not in line with mainstream scholarly views, which state that "Buddhism" may as well be seen as "Buddhisms," that is, plural, given the broad range of teachings and specific points.

References

  1. ^ Wells 2008.
  2. ^ Roach 2011.
  3. ^ "Buddhism". (2009). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved November 26, 2009, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online Library Edition.
  4. ^ Lopez 2001, p. 239.
  5. ^ https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2013/oct/07/is-buddhism-a-religion
  6. ^ http://secularbuddhism.org/2012/07/14/if-not-self-then-what/
  7. ^ http://www.buddhanet.net/nutshell09.htm
See also WP:RS. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:38, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much,User:Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk!, for your comments. I must admit my edits were partially affected by my own opinions as well as those of several scholars I know personally. I am studying Buddhism and would be keen to help out with any wikiprojects regarding the topic as I think my knowledge would be somewhat helpful. As you may have noticed I am new to Wikipedia so I am still learning the ropes. Sorry if I have caused you any troble and please do keep me posted if you ever need any help with and Buddhism related topics. Thank you once again, Raymond. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raymond Leonard (talk • contribs)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 January 2018

In the Infobox and in the "Life of the Buddha" sections there are translation errors. "error: [undefined] Error: {{Transliteration}}: missing language / script code (help): unrecognized transliteration standard: IAST (help))" I would remove the attempts at Sanskrit until an editor can make the appropriate tags, the Sanskrit versions are not a requirement for EN pages. Thanks in advance. 2600:1700:1111:5940:A5E7:8C37:782B:AD9 (talk) 19:07, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Bandaged it for now. The root issue is probably some core template somewhere about which I am clueless. Need some coding wizard's help, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 20:00, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Buddhism is Universalizing Religion

"Ethical religions fall into two subcategories. First are the national nomistic (legal) religions that are particularistic, limited to the horizon of one people only and based upon a sacred law drawn from sacred books. Above them are the universalistic religions, qualitatively different in kind, aspiring to be accepted by all men, and based upon abstract principles and maxims. In both subtypes, doctrines and teachings are associated with the careers of distinct personalities who play important roles in their origin and formation. Tiele found only three examples of this highest type of religion: Islam, Christianity, and Buddhism." [1] [2]

Excuse the intrusion but if I'm understading the situation correctly I would encourage everyone to discuss the validity of the universal-ethnic concept on the universalizing religion talk page for the sake of keeping discussion orderly as the term features in multiple articles and it appears concerns of a similar nature have been raised. Thanks. Thrif (talk) 00:34, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Classification of religions". Britannica. 2017–2018. Retrieved 22 January 2018.
  2. ^ "Religion Universalizing vs. Ethnic Religions — Global Distribution of Faith" (PDF). AP Human Geography. 2017–2018. Retrieved 22 January 2018.

Semi-protected edit request on 27 January 2018

please correct the fact that buddhishm is not an indian religion. it is completely wrong. buddha was born in nepal and he was the creater of buddhism not an indian religion. 2600:8802:2200:EC00:E850:481C:2B8E:AA7 (talk) 07:35, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To be helpful, there is no scholarly consensus on whether Kapilavastu (ancient_city) was in present day India or Nepal. This scholarly article has good background information.[1] 2600:1700:1111:5940:D9F6:63D1:857A:104 (talk) 22:41, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:58, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.ancient.eu/Kapilavastu/

Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2018

A historical map was added, but was unsourced and reverted. I believe a historical map would be helpful to show how various schools of Buddhism spread and I found a map from Cornell[1] which lines up with the previously added map. I don't have a preference for the specific map used, but I think adding an appropriate map would make the article more scholarly.

If no other preference is determined, I would add this map

Map showing the spread and major divisions of Buddhism

from this edit [2] back to the top of the "Historical Roots" section. Thanks in advance! 2600:1700:1111:5940:D9F6:63D1:857A:104 (talk) 22:27, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. feminist (talk) 08:14, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://asia.library.cornell.edu/collections/southasia/bridging-worlds
  2. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Buddhism&diff=819319415&oldid=818940707
Why would this need consensus as a scholarly historical map in the historical section of the article? A very similar map appears in the lede of History of Buddhism article, use that one if you prefer. 2600:1700:1111:5940:D9F6:63D1:857A:104 (talk) 02:02, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
2600:1700:1111:5940:D9F6:63D1:857A:104 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), They want you to talk about it first with others. I don't usually add maps to articles, but don't you need a map which is not copyrighted? Or are you going to ask the website for permission?--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 09:24, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that consensus needs to be reached before this image is used. ToThAc (talk) 17:22, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ToThAc, that is actually not open for discussion here. The discussion is about whether the image should be added. I don't object to it, provided it doesn't violate copyright policy.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 21:34, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am certainly not in favor of adding a copyrighted map without permission. I actually noted that there is a map on History of Buddhism and that map or could just as easily be used, assuming it does not have a copyright issue. To come full circle, the edit that added the map was not questioned for copyright or consensus, it was reverted as WP:OR which it is clearly not. The argument has morphed a bit, I am not sure why there would be an issue with consensus on a scholarly map, but my goal is to improve the encyclopedia, not cause any disruption. If people feel a map hinders the article rather than improving it, then I don't have much to add. Thanks for the discussion either way. 2600:1700:1111:5940:D9F6:63D1:857A:104 (talk) 04:22, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
2600:1700:1111:5940:D9F6:63D1:857A:104 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), as I said, for me, the issue is just the copyright. If you have the permission of the website, you have mine. I don't know why you got reverted either.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 08:25, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

Revert back to 22 February version. Additions by user Realphi fall in a pattern of POV pushing by that user and are not included anywhere else in the article, therefore have absolutely no good reason to be in the first sentence of the lead. (i.e. see revert rationale by FyzixFighter on Jan. 26) 198.84.253.202 (talk) 14:46, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, 198.84.253.202. JimRenge (talk) 15:01, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 April 2018

76.64.52.157 (talk) 22:17, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is no time line called BCE. The time line is BC (Before Christ) as per the current calendar. Please make the correction.

 Not done: actually, yes there is. See Common Era. NiciVampireHeart 22:24, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Need to have a Buddha image in meditation pose on top or prominent part

Most Buddhist temples have the Buddha sitting in a meditative pose, therefore it is appropriate to have a image of a Sitting Buddha in meditative pose on top, instead of the present image of the Standing buddha from the Tokyo Museum, as it does not correctly represent buddhism. The suggested images are one that is used on top of the wiki Buddha page A statue of the Buddha from Sarnath, Uttar Pradesh, India, 4th century CE https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Buddha_in_Sarnath_Museum_(Dhammajak_Mutra).jpg#/media/File:Buddha_in_Sarnath_Museum_(Dhammajak_Mutra).jpg

Another similar (Dharamchakra pose), which is the most popular pose in Buddhist temples. Buddha's statue located near Belum Caves, Andhra Pradesh, India https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Buddha%27s_statue_near_Belum_Caves_Andhra_Pradesh_India.jpg#/media/File:Buddha%27s_statue_near_Belum_Caves_Andhra_Pradesh_India.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajiv.dhy (talk • contribs) 11:37, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose, though I agree that an image in a more meditative posture is more iconic, it appears the current image is one of the oldest. So there are good reasons for either image on top, and I don't think change is necessary.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 17:15, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OR tag

HERE MSW says "should not be seen as a social reformer" is a direct quote of Richard Gombrich. I checked the source and its a quote of Christopher Queen describing Richard Gombrich's position. There are also numerous other errors like incorrect page numbers. Lastly, the section is just OR. As was pointed out by others at ANI, MSW's edits don't actually match the sources.VictoriaGrayson (talk) 10:57, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Buddhism&oldid=839116854"