Jump to content

Talk:Buddhist chant

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

Expert

[edit]

I removed the {{expert}} tag from the article as there was nothing on the talk page to indicate what was wrong with the article or how to improve it. Hyacinth 00:10, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Improve "Adherents" section?

[edit]

If improvement is sought for this article, I'd like to suggest:

  1. deleting the first paragraph of the "Adherents" section
  2. then renaming the remaining paragraphs something like "Non-Buddhist manifestations" (that is, changing the header "Adherents" to "Non-Buddhist manifestations" or whatever).

Here's the current first paragraph of the "Adherents" section:

Chanting plays a more substantial role in Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism than in Theravada, owing largely to the expansive and religious nature of the former pair as well as the simplicity of chants (e.g Namo Amitabha does not require much memory, nor does Om mani padme hum). This does not mean chanting does not occur in Theravada practise. Rather most chanting concerns the Suttas (Skt: Sutras), while the Mahayana schools include sutras, prayers, and Tantric invocations, the latter two of which are not common (if present at all) amongst Theravadins.

Here my reasons for suggesting its deletion:

  1. What's the basis for saying that "Chanting plays a more substantial role in Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism than in Theravada...?" Intuitively, I could think this might be true but, on the other hand, based on my limited and uneven experiences, I've found that Zen practitioners are the least likely of all to chant. Is there a citation for this claim?
  2. "owing largely to ... the simplicity of chants"? The Heart Sutra is way harder to chant than the "Namo Tassa." I doubt this is a real factor. Moreover, in a perverse way, the logic of this statement could be taken to suggest that Mahayana and Vajrayana practitioners have feebler memories than Theravada practitioners. And, again, it has no citation.
  3. "This does not mean chanting does not occur in Theravada practise." This information is already known from this article's prior section where eight Theravada chants are identified.
  4. "Rather most chanting concerns ...." This seems to me to be an another attempt to corroborate the paragraph's initial statement; but, there are at least two problems: (a) I question the first statement's empirical veracity; and, (b) while the textual basis for Mahayana and Vajrayana chants might be greater than that for Theravada chants, it doesn't logically necessitate that Theravada practitioners chant less. (To give a logical counter example, one could conceive of a school that does nothing but recite its one-word chant all day long — thereby having a school with a diminutive repetoire but a huge chanting practice.)
  5. "...while the Mahayana schools include sutras, prayers, and Tantric invocations, the latter two of which are not common (if present at all) amongst Theravadins." Do Mahayana schools use "Tantric invocations" or only Vajrayana schools? (Could we have a citation?) And, no, to the best of my limited and suspect knowledge, Theravada chants do not include what Westerners would call "prayers" or "Tantric invocations." Is this article the best place to equivocate ("if present at all") on this?

Without citations, I think this paragraph could perhaps be stripped down to something like:

While the basis for Theravada chants is the Sutta Pitaka, Mahayana and Vajrayana chants draw from a wider range of sources.

This stripped down paragraph could then be placed as a first or second paragraph under the sectional heading, "Chanting."

While I don't mind, of course, if this suggestion is ignored and regret if it causes anyone any vexation, I was motivated to write this simply because the current "Adherents" section seems to me to be redundant, suspect and confusing. Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 19:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With no contrary view stated after seven weeks, I went ahead and implemented the above today. Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 17:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Waffle

[edit]

"A Buddhist chant is a form of musical verse or incantation, in some ways analogous to Hindu, Christian or Jewish religious recitations." In what ways? Perhaps a comparison with Hindu chants/narda yoga is justified, and maybe Gregorian chants, but hardly "Christian recitations." As for Jewish "recitations" - which do you have in mind? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leegee23 (talk • contribs) 15:57, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Spam?

[edit]

Does anyone think that the first paragraph in the "Traditional chanting" section is biased? The text reads (concerns in bold):

http://www.AmericanGongyo.org is a free site offering a complete true tutorial of all the SGI-USA chants in perfect Japanese pronunciation, rhythm and tone.

Cheers, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.38.33.116 (talk) 16:27, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think, by WP standards, you are correct. And I believe a similar piece of text has been removed from this and/or similar articles in the past. I think the person who placed the text here is probably sincere and what they're advertizing is probably of value to some, but I think it likely crosses WP policy and, just from a style point, seems misplaced.
Given the (at least for me) perceived likely sincerity of the addition and the arguable benefit of the identified cite, I'm going to move it to the "External Links" section; however, more orthodox WP editors will likely (should likely?) delete it.
With metta,
24.225.66.184 (talk) 01:46, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Defense of chanting

[edit]

This defense comes from the Zen page, where it was quite specific. It fits better in this page. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 13:31, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The link in Notes 9 is no longer available: "We apologize. The entry you are looking for is not available. Please check back. " — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.171.140.217 (talk) 09:07, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For the sake of expediency, I replaced the broken link (http://www.abhayagiri.org/index.php/main/medium/379/) with a possible alternative (http://chantpali.org/metta.html -- which may be problemmatic for certain Internet Explorer configurations). Others should feel free, of course, to replace or supplement this new alternative link with superior or comparable ones :-) - 24.225.67.227 (talk) 09:23, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nickelroy is vandalizing by removing Buddhist Chant photograph

[edit]

Nickelroy is constantly vandalizing Wikipedia articles. This user never followed WP:BRD. This user is contentiously Wikipedia:Harassment doing for me. This user never stated particular reasons for removing following photograph which is very much relevant to this article. For removing any information follow WP:BRD because image fulfill wiki policies and very much relevant to this article.Discuss on talk page if image is irreverent for this article.

People paying tribute at the central statue of Bodhisattva Babasaheb Ambedkar, the pioneer on Navayana in Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University in Aurangabad.

JAIBHIM5 (talk) 19:17, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The image that you have inserted several times, appears to give WIKIPEDIA: Undue Weight to "Babasaheb Ambedkar, the pioneer on Navayana in Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University in Aurangabad" in the context of this article. I have removed it because WIKIPEDIA follows a neutral point of view policy and does not allow promotion. Please see: WP:NOTADVERTISING, WP:UNDUE, WP:NPOV. JimRenge (talk) 11:07, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is Buddhist chanting and he is regarded as Bodhisatva so image is relevant. JAIBHIM5 (talk) 06:36, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@JAIBHIM5: The image shows "People paying tribute at the central statue of Bodhisattva Babasaheb Ambedkar", it may be relevant in the article about Babasaheb Ambedkar but it appears to give WIKIPEDIA: Undue Weight to Babasaheb Ambedkar in the context of this article and might be interpreted as a violation of WP:NPOV, WP:NOTADVERTISING, WP:UNDUE. In an attempt to avoid further (slow) edit warring, I have added two images which may conform with WIKIPEDIAs WP:NPOV policy, because they do not promote a specific group or sect. Please do not reinsert this image without WP:Consensus. You might consider utilizing one of Wikipedia's established dispute resolution procedures. Thanks JimRenge (talk) 10:14, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your two images are relevant but Wiki policies are irrelevant. Lets close this discussion now. JAIBHIM5 (talk) 20:23, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What happened here?

[edit]

"numberless major world system dust particle ago." Did the author here have a stroke or something? Or is this supposed to mean something? 173.79.62.148 (talk) 04:58, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Buddhist chant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:17, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Buddhist chant. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 07:03, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Buddhist chant. 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) 05:25, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Buddhist_chant&oldid=1107590473"