Talk:Bodhi Tree

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

"This tree is a frequent destination for pilgrims, being the most important of the four holy sites for Buddhists." Could we get a link to the other three of the four most holy places in Buddhism? - Heartofgoldfish 03:32, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Reads like religious text[edit]

The entire Historical Events section sounds like an excerpt from the Tripitaka. If anyone is better qualified than I am to make it sound like an encyclopedia article, please, go ahead. Colin 01:57, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I've boldly retitled this section "In Buddhist chronology" which I believe is a more neutral title that neither affirms nor rejects the historicity of the traditional accounts used as sources. I'm also adding language identifying this content as according to traditional Buddhist accounts. WP:NPOV permits reporting the traditional Buddhist point of view (which is clearly a significant one) so long as other viewpoints are not excluded. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 01:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Merged[edit]

Shouldn't this be merged with sacred fig (the exact same tree)? Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 02:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Never mind. This was a tree, while the sacred fig is a kind of tree. Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 02:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Dead Link[edit]

Citation 2 to Hawaii University is situated behind their proxy. I suggest update this citation to something more accessible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.250.5.253 (talk) 20:18, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Additionally, it repeats a tradition and greeting that I believe are specific to Japan as though they were universal to all Buddhists- Bodhi Day, as far as I know, is definitely not celebrated by Theravada Buddhists and is primarily a East Asian Mahayana festival. --108.69.226.112 (talk) 07:54, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Organised and simplifed[edit]

@Dharmalion76: Hello, i have simplified the sentence. Please read it, these were edits in good faith.

  • This article is about Bodhi tree found in the temple. Peepal is generic term for scared fig in South Asia (already mentioned in sacred fig page) but tree found in temple is known as Bodhi/Mahabodhi, not peepal.
  • This article specifically talks about the ancient bodhi tree of bodha gaya and the one found in temple today.
  • I have decluttered, organised and simplified the sentence. 117.192.210.51 (talk) 17:37, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
The given reference states "peepal" and that is more verifiable than the opinion of an IP address. Your "decluttering" moves the references around so they aren't accurate anymore. Dharmalion76 (talk) 20:10, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
This is very silly, Peepal is generic term for sacred fig tree in South Asia, not Bodhi tree found in the temple. It is known as Bodhi or Mahabodhi tree specifically.117.192.210.51 (talk) 23:10, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
You are entitled to your opinion but the lede as written is referenced. Dharmalion76 (talk) 15:51, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
It is not my opinion - Is Bodhi/Mahabodhi tree in Nepal and Bhutan? If this was in reference to "Peepal" then it is wrong. Peepal is generic term in SA, Bodhi/Mahabothi specifically refers to tree at Gaya temple, where people go for pilgrimage. 117.192.202.240 (talk) 18:00, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
The sentence says the term Peepal tree is used in used in Nepal and Bhutan not that the tree itself is in Nepal and Bhutan. Please stop removing referenced material. At this point it is bordering on vandalism. Dharmalion76 (talk) 19:48, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Except, Peepal is used in all south asia not just in Nepal and Bhutan which is inaccurate, the Devanagari sript itself covers it. if you really want to add it then it should be South Asia. It's not vandalism to correct inaccuracies.
  • This is not a accurate sentence "in Nepal and Bhutan, was a large and very old sacred fig tree (Ficus religiosa) located in Bodh Gaya".
  • It should start with "Bodhi tree was a large and very old sacred fig tree located in ancient Bodh Gaya, under which Siddhartha Gautama, the spiritual teacher later became known as the Buddha "
  • If you want me to add sources then i will. 117.192.202.240 (talk) 20:58, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
The sentence isn't "in Nepal and Bhutan, was a large and very old sacred fig tree (Ficus religiosa) located in Bodh Gaya". There is a beginning to that sentence. "The Bodhi Tree (Sanskrit: बोधि) also known as Bo (from Sinhalese: Bo) and "peepal tree" (Devanagari: पीपल)[1] in Nepal and Bhutan, was a large and very old sacred fig tree...." shows that Nepal and Bhutan know it as peepal tree. You are taking it out of context and pretending it says something different so you can delete it. Dharmalion76 (talk) 03:50, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm not taking it out of context.
  • See Peepal terminology in various south asian languages, it's generic term. Like sacred Tulsi for example.
  • In India, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka peepal is generic term for scared fig. Bodhi or Mahabodhi is not generic term for all peepal trees. Peepal trees worshiped by Hindus in Nepal or India is not known as Bodhi tree for example.
  • Peepal in Nepal and Bhutan like in India is a generic term, while term Bodhi or Mahabodhi is used in context of Buddhism.117.192.197.21 (talk) 05:40, 30 August 2016 (UTC)