User talk:Jmlee369

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

Offering (Buddhism)[edit]

Hi Jmlee369 --

Sorry to see no one's welcomed you yet to Wikipedia. Please accept my gratitude and appreciation for the interesting and informative edits you've been making.

If I may ask for some further exposition, I was hoping you could help me understand the basis for your recent additions to the Offering (Buddhism) article. Intuitively, I very much like what you write and it sounds very authentic. I was wondering though if some of it might be particular to a specific Buddhist sect. (My own current practice is Theravada, so my ignorance about other schools is vast. Additionally, I regret that I sometimes write something in a Wikipedia article thinking it is universal and then find it is Theravada-specific.) In particular, I was wondering if the added phrase regarding offerings of flowers ("represents the form of the Buddha with the 32 major and 80 minor signs...") was specific to a Mahayana or Vajrayana practice. (In Theravada Buddhism, I don't know of 32 major and/or 80 minor signs.)

Any additional education you could provide me would be very much appreciated. Thanks and a belated welcome again,
LarryR (talk) 17:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Fantastic! Excellent! Thank you so much for educating me.
After reading the Dharmakaya article to which you pointed me, I did a Google search and found the "32 major marks" referenced in the Digha Nikaya's 30th sutta (D. 30, "Lakkhana Sutta"), which appears to be relatively little known among Western Theravada practitioners (for instance, the ever-popular on-line Theravada resource, "Access to Insight" (ATI), has left this sutta thusfar untranslated). For what it's worth, I've found this Pali sutta translated in Maurice Walshe's "The Long Discourses of the Buddha" (1995), where in an end note (p. 610, note 939) Walshe describes this Pali sutta as "the most uninteresting and unedifying of the entire Nikaya." (This alone, of course, piques my interest ;-) ) While I have householder duties to pursue now, I'll surely pursue this later and perhaps be able to add a pertinent, intelligent end note to the Dharmakaya article.
Thank you so much once again. Thanks again too for adding your invaluable practice wisdom to Wikipedia Buddhism articles. (If I may suggest one article in particular sorely lacking practical knowledge of Mahayana practices, please see the Householder (Buddhism) article, especially in these two subsections: Householder_(Buddhism)#Mahayana_perspectives and Householder_(Buddhism)#Mahayana_practices.)
May you find Wikipedia editing a satisfying tool for your highest aspirations. Best wishes,
LarryR (talk) 17:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
P.S. For what it's worth, I see the impressive PHG already wrote about these 32 major marks based on the Pali canon in the WP article Physical_characteristics_of_the_Buddha. To educate ignoramuses like myself, would it be okay with you if either you or I wikified your Offering (Buddhism) text as follows: "flowers (puppha pūjā) represents the aspiration to acheive the body of the Buddha with the 32 major and 80 minor signs as well as the teaching of impermenance"? Thanks again :-) LarryR (talk)

Of course it's fine, you don't have to ask me anymore. Just edit as you need. Jmlee369 21:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Householder (Buddhism)#Vajrayana perspectives[edit]

Nice additions! You teach me with each of your edits now! Thanks so much again. Best regards, LarryR 22:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

You must teach me how to make an internal link to a destination with a different name like you linked the 32 major and 80 minor signs to the physcial characteristics of a Buddha.

P.S Feel free to point out anything that you want from a Mahayana/Vajrayana perspective. Jmlee369 08:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Jmlee369 -
Thanks so much again for all your good work!
First, to address your question, to have a "wikilink" point to an article with one name while being associated with text with different words, use the following format:
"[[" + article-name + "|" + text-you-desire + "]]"
So, for instance, this text, which points to the article Buddhism, looks like the following when edited:
[[Buddhism|this text]]
(If what I write here is not clear, please "edit" this page and you will see more clearly how these "wikilinks" are formatted. Let me know though if you would like me to try to clarify further -- I'd be happy to do so.)
Also, thank you so much for offering to add Mahayana/Vajrayana perspectives to articles with a disproportionate amount of Theravada (or other) information. If you don't mind, I'd love to take you up on this! In particular, the following articles (which I created or re-wrote based on my Theravada practice and then, for the Mahayana/Vajrayana sections, stuck some words in from books I have access to -- although I don't have the practice wisdom to ensure that the words I used make any sense) come immediately to mind:
Middle Way <= especially needs a lot of work here.
Prostration (Buddhism) - possibly needs help here and there.
Skandha - can you check on this and that?
Also, the following articles I've edited some but think a Mahayana/Vajrayana eye could be of benefit:
Alms#Buddhism - very Theravada-heavy subsection of a pan-religious article. (I actually plan to add a little more Theravada info in a few moments ;-) )
Buddhist chant
Other articles that currently lack sectional divisions for Theravada/Mahayana/Vajrayana but could probably benefit from such (and which I have yet to edit myself but have been pondering doing so for some time) include:
Arhat - may be okay, but this article has had ups & downs lately.
Upasaka - for instance, I've left still-pending questions about this article on its Talk page. Perhaps you could add pertinent Vajrayana information?
Also, the mother lode of Buddhism-articles-awaiting-to-be-born is at:
Wikipedia:WikiProject_Buddhism, especially at Template:buddhismOpenTask.
As always, any information you can share in these articles would be greatly valued! I hope you are doing well! Thanks so much again!
LarryR (talk) 19:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


Hi Jmlee369 -

I see you tried to add your name to the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Buddhism#Participants list. Given your interests and knowledge, I'd encourage you to do so. I was wondering if maybe you decided to remove your name because, when you added it (User:Jmlee369), it showed up in red. If so, I just wanted to explain that it showed up in red simply because you currently do not have anything added to your User page.

To add something to your User page, simply click on your red User:Jmlee369, add something to the provided text box and then "Save Page." If you have trouble adding something but know what you would like to add, please let me know and I'd be happy to get you started. Some general help regarding User pages can be found at Wikipedia:User page. In addtion, by clicking on the names of some users already identified on the WikiProject_Buddhism page, you might get some good examples for how you might want to format and fill your user page.

Please feel free to let me know if you'd like some help by adding a note to the bottom of my Talk page. May you be happy & well,
LarryR (talk) 07:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

P.S. For what it's worth, in case you haven't come across this information before, here are some additional pages that users have frequently found to be helpful:

I've seen it said that, if you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone should show up to answer your questions. I hope this might help. Best wishes.

I can't thank you enough for all your help. I have been through some of the mentioned pages before but found them slightly difficult to digest in a short amount of time. You're right, I did try to add my name but deleted it because came up in red. I was wondering if all Buddhist articles were listed on the Project Buddhism page. Thanks again for your welcome and help on Wikipedia. Jmlee369 19:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Jmlee396 -
In short, I'm not sure if there is a single place where all Buddhism-related articles are definitely listed. I think, in theory, one can click on the categories identified at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Buddhism#Categories and see all self-labeled Buddhist articles, but such requires:
  1. all articles be correctly self-labeled in a Buddhist category.
  2. the categories listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Buddhism#Categories (and those categories' sub-categories and sub-sub-categories, etc.) include all existing Wikipedia (WP) Buddhism categories.
Based on my relatively limited experience on WP, I think #1 above is true for 95 percent of WP articles. A gut level guess tells me that #2 is likely completely true (for it would be foolish of an editor to create a Buddhism-related category and not, at least, stick it in [[Category:Buddhism]]).
For what it's worth, in case you might not be familiar with this, to include an article in the Buddhism category, add the following code to the article (typically at the article's end):
I've seen lately someone (or some people) have made an attempt to move articles from the Buddhism category to subcategories, so I've tried to comply with such an effort. Thus, for instance, the Offering (Buddhism) article is labeled with:
[[Category: Buddhist practices]]
Also, for what it's worth, if you want to check out Buddhism articles that have recently been changed then you can use the "Related changes" feature of a "Project" or "Category" page. For instance, check out these pages: Special:Recentchangeslinked/Portal:Buddhism and Special:Recentchangeslinked/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Buddhism. Checking out these pages might show you interesting articles that are evolving (or, in some cases, falling apart). (In addition, when you have free moments, this is a good way to catch vandalism of articles you might care about.)
I hope this helps. Thanks for you kindness and continued sharing. I wish you well, LarryR 00:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Aahh, one more tidbit that I would like to share, if I may. I've found it helpful to create a personal "sandbox." It took me months to appreciate this. A sandbox is a WP space that you can use to test your edits in. This way, you can try something out before saving it (and having it show up) on a main article. You can use your sandbox to test out some simple things (such as WP markup language). You can also use it to create paragraphs that you want to play with or to research a topic before adding your thoughts to an article. (For instance, I'm currently using my sandox to more thoroughly examine ideas for Householder (Buddhism).) If you wanted to create a personal sandbox, you could create one here, User:Jmlee369/sandbox (off your User page), or here, User_talk:Jmlee369/sandbox (off your Talk page), for instance.
And, while we're on the topic of useful tidbits, a lot people find keeping a personal "to do list" on their User page helpful. (Again, as an example, here's my to-do list.) I find it useful for different reasons such as: writing down some place an idea you want to revisit at a future date for some reason; and, giving you a sense of accomplishment (especially if you include a "date done" column to note when you've completed a to-do list item). Just FYI. Regards!

Nice addition to Alms article[edit]

Hi Jmlee369 --

Nice additions to the Alms#Buddhism article. I never knew the reason why almsgiving seems to emphasized by Theravadans but by not other schools. Very interesting. Also, I like your quote from Lama Tsong Khapa.

FYI, I see User:AQu01rius made use of an interesting template, Template:User, on the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Buddhism#Participants page and I thought you might like to do likewise. For instance, you could add the following text:

* {{User|Jmlee369}}

And it would look like:

Just FYI. And thanks again for the Alms edit!
LarryR 17:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Kudos on Upsaksa addition[edit]

Hi Jmlee369 -- just wanted to applaud your addition to the Upasaka article -- I never knew about Upasaka Dharmatala before. Well done! LarryR (talk) 17:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Deleted image from lama[edit]

Hi, I noticed you deleted the lamas debating image from the article Lama, but with no explanation. I had wondered if they actually were lamas or just monks, but I'd like to hear your reasons for the deletion. Billlion 16:36, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

The image was deleted due to the fact they they weren't lamas, just monks. As I haven't much experience, please advise me on the proper method and procedures. Jmlee369 06:54, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Ordination NKT[edit]

Thank you for your comments. Please take a look once more if it is fairly presented as it is now and according to the facts and maybe give some futher detailled suggestions on improving the section, what should be written instead of what? I would also like to hear if you feel the NKT article is at the whole fairly, NPOV, unbiased and informative or not, and what should be improved / corrected / excluded / included? Maye you can go through the whole article expelling garmmar and other errors and improve the style/language/NPOV of the article, because I am not a native English speaker and most of my time I used to discuss extensively with the NKT editors and adding appropriate WP:reliable sources. Thanks a lot. kt66


You said: "What does sex have to do with tsog? I perform tsog regularly, there is no 'symbolic coitus'!."

There are many confluent and divergent traditions of Ganachakra... remember as a meme it entered into Vajrayana from Tantric Hinduism as well as from other traditions and was informed by Bon and Himalayan animism...your historical understanding and insight into the practice is cursory if you do not have an understanding of Yab-yum in relation to Ganachakra. I am more than happy to enter into dialogue and collaboration with you.

Namaste in agape
Walking my talk in Beauty

B9 hummingbird hovering (talkcontribs) 10:54, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

B9 hummingbird hovering (talkcontribs) 20:49, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


Hi, What's the reason that the mantra shouldn't be publicly displayed? It is published in books. People should learn it. Gantuya eng (talk) 07:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

We have the mantra in the Vajrapani article. Is that improper too? Gantuya eng (talk) 08:48, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Substantial edits at the Dorje Shugden article[edit]

Dear editor I like to draw your attention to that specific article, Dorje Shugden, which was substantially changed by a group of three new editors, without any discussion on the talk page. Rather one of the new editor revealed: "Many of these changes were discussed between at least three of the editors." which must have happened outside of WP, because there is no discussion on the talk page or their WP-accounts. One of the new editors claimed: "You seem to be the only person who accepted this article as it was. If you check you will see that the changes made make this article more neutral and unbiased then it was before previous edits." If I check I see the article omitted different POV's, deleted verified passages, included passages from anonymous websites and turned the article to a more bias Pro-Shugden POV. I'd like to ask you to check that and to give your opinion or to collaborate if there is a need for improving the article, so that we can have an unbiased, neutral, well-informed article which fairly presents all POV's. Thank you very much, --Kt66 (talk) 19:38, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

The never-ending story about Shugden[edit]

Hi, I'm just starting another attempt to stop the NKT people from 'taking over' the Wikipedia with their continuous edit-war to promote the Shugden practice. If you agree, please leave a note at Administrators noticeboard. rudy (talk) 13:43, 4 April 2009 (UTC)