Talk:Buddhism

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

Template switcharound

Hi. I looked at the navbox stack and saw three templates - 'Buddhist topics' , 'Gautama Buddha', and 'Religion' - tucked into a hidden navbox list. The exposed templates were the Buddhism-in-(your choice of continent here). So I played with it, brought the templates out of the hidden-box, moved template 'Buddhism topics' to the top template slot, and left Gautama Buddha and Religion where they were. To me it flowed better, got more info near the top, and when I looked at the page it looked very nice - the colors, length of the phrasing, the aesthetics which seem to go well together when something is "right". Just some explanation of the "whys" of the edit. Does it seem okay to the long-time editors? Thanks. Randy Kryn 3:44 6 November, 2014 (UTC)

Later, have made a navbox stack with the title 'Buddhism by country' and put the five continent templates, which are just names of countries anyway, into that stack. Better. Randy Kryn 4:42 6 November, 2014 (UTC)

Nirvana

Nirvana and the cessation of suffering:

1) Although what's written on the Buddhism page about nirvana is probably the standard you would find in many temples of Asia, I respectfully ask that you consider the following, as I feel it will give people who come to this page a much more clear understanding of Buddhism.

2) Nirvana is a state of being, true; but it is also a place (otherwise called Pure Land in some branches) outside of Earth, elsewhere in the Universe where life is much better than here (on Earth)

3) The cessation of suffering in Buddhist terms really means one's soul leaves Earth (due to the good influences and attempts of a person to be good as recommended in Buddhist teachings plus Amitabha's help(or most major religions' holy teachings, for that matter)and is reborn in nirvana or the Pure Land.

4) Amitabha Buddha is the energy and Love that created our Entire Universe, not the person of Shakyamuni Buddha. (Shakyamuni Buddha told his followers NOT to pray to him, as he was only a person, and not the all powerful force that Created Our Universe()

Semi-protected edit request on 15 December 2015

Channasandeepanaperera (talk) 14:52, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 15:14, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 January 2016

In the first sentence, where it says "Sanskrit: dharma", add धर्म​ in front of "dharma". This is the same word written in Devanāgari. 93.136.73.48 (talk) 17:53, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Done --allthefoxes ^(Talk) 22:09, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Related move discussion

FYI Talk:Sigala (musician) In ictu oculi (talk)

Alphabetization and linking in Sources section

I am trying to get the authors in the Sources section linked to their individual articles when such an article exists, and also to clean up the alphabetization by author by surname. However, I am not entirely certain for some of the authors which aspects of their names are actual parts of their individual names as opposed to titles or honorifics (such as Bhikkhu or Ajahn), and/or whether certain aspects of names are surnames or not (due to differences between traditional Western naming conventions and naming conventions from certain other cultures.) So, for anyone who is more familiar with these aspects of this topic, I would welcome your input and/or assistance and/or corrections regarding reviewing the Sources section. Thanks. KConWiki (talk) 14:21, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

I recommend WorldCat in these cases. (example) JimRenge (talk) 21:14, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Pure Theravada as in the Pāli_Canon and derived Mahayana

Dear Jim,

Everyone believe and there are many evidence that the pure Buddha's teaching is the Pāli Canon. Please study the history of Pāli Canon. Any thing doesn't match with the Pāli Canon should not pure Buddhism. Lord Buddha has teach in the Pāli Canon, we have a way to check whether something is a Buddhas word. Match anything with his pure words, if anything doesn't match with it is not a Buddhs's word. So, Mahayana Buddhism is not a teaching of the Buddha. Buddha's never tell to stay in the cycle of rebirth, Please study Lord Buddah's final word. They never magnify the Smasara even a little bit.

What I want to tell you is Mahayana is a derived version of the pure Buddhism. Many Buddhist in the world not following pure Buddhas word what a sad thing. So, please revert my change. It will help many people to understand what is the Buddhism is. I think it is better to maintain separate page for Mahayana.

We pure Buddhist believe that the creator of Mahayana Buddhism should be in a hell, since he created a schism within the pure Buddhism while changing the ultimate reality(Dharma) and prevented many beings reaching eternal happiness Nirvana. It is one of the five Anantarika-karma.

Thanks for your great effort to maintaining the Buddhism page while distributing the true. You may receive many merits in the cycle of rebirth.

Regards, Muditha. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mudithachampika (talk • contribs) 12:11, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

@Mudithachampika: please read Presectarian Buddhism. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:41, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Dear Muditha- this is not the place to proselytize belief. It is the place to discuss editing the article, based on independent source analysis. Cheers.Tao2911 (talk) 21:34, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

@Mudithachampika:, I reverted your edit because it does not appear to conform with wikipedias neutral point of view policy. Feel free to believe "(...) that the creator of Mahayana Buddhism should be in a hell, since he created a schism within the pure Buddhism (...)" but I don´t think it is appropriate to add this sentence/point of view to an article. JimRenge (talk) 00:28, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank You for the comments.
First Buddhist council was held three months after Gautama Lord Buddha's Parinirvana (passed away) with the leadership of Great Arahant Mahakassapa Thero and King Ajātasattu was sponsored to it. All of the 500 members was great Arahant Theros (monks) who don't have any wrong views (frames). It took the monks seven months to recite the whole of the Vinaya and the Dhamma and formulate it to the Tripitaka (Pali Canon). Also the great Theros made the unanimous decision to keep all the rules of the Vinaya, even the lesser and minor rules. But the Lord Buddha has said minor rules of Vinaya can be change. Vinaya are rules which quickly guide to the eternal happiness with fulfilling requirements(Paramita). All second and third also held by great Arahant Theros.
All I want to tell you that current Tripitaka (Pali Canon) is the same Dharma and Vinaya (except some commentaries) as formulated at the First Buddhist council which held three months after Gautama Lord Buddha's Parinirvana(passed away). So, 'Pre-sectarian Buddhism' and the Theravada Buddhism is the same thing. It is true that currently only few follow pure teachings as in Tripitaka. But they are exist. So, the time-line in the page is wrong. Mudithachampika (talk) 02:39, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

See Pre-sectarian B uddhism#Further reading for some informative reading on the early history of Buddhism. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:09, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I haven't read all of Wikipedia policies, but I think an encyclopaedia should only display important things about a subject. minor things should be there as minor. When we find the temple(or the school) which Theravada Buddhism started, it should be the temple which Great Arahant Moggaliputta-Tissa Maha Thera(or Sthavira) lived. He was the leader of third Buddhist council. When we talk about a religion temple is a minor thing. Nikāya of a monk is something like family name. Some Buddhist Nikāya may have different minor Vinaya rules. But it is not so important. We should talk about what they are following in generally. I think there should be two main categories in Buddhism. Which is the pure Buddhism as in the Tripitaka(Pali Canon) which formulated three months after the Gautama Lord Buddha's Parinirvana(passed away). Other derived versions are not teachings of the Buddha. There are some Sūtra which is not preached by the Lord Buddha(not in the Pali Canon). Followers of those Sūtra are not Buddhist. I will tell you something which pure Buddhist believe(so, this cannot put in a encyclopaedia). A Great Arahant(or Anāgāmi,Sakadagami,Sotapanna) being has perfect faith to the lord Buddha. So, they will never make any schism within the Buddhism even if their life is ending. They only teach the pure Buddha's teaching and try to protect the pure Buddha's teaching. An Arahant being has perfect understating about the 'Four Noble Truths'. But they don't have perfect knowledge in every subject like a Lord Buddha has. This is for your reference: 'The Four Noble Truths' by Ven. Professor Rerukane Chamdavimala Maha Nahimai

Mudithachampika (talk) 09:52, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Please DO read the Wikipedia policies. Articles here are preferably based on third party analysis. You have clear personal opinions. These are not what articles are based on. If there is a specific problem with the article, and you wish to propose a factual change to the article, this is the place to discuss it. Simply expressing your fundamentalist religious beliefs here and trying to convince others is not appropriate. Tao2911 (talk) 22:23, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Perfect knowledge

So, where did the Buddha state that he had "perfect knowledge in every subject"? And how do you know that the buddha himself stated that? Where you there? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:03, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Dear Joshua-please don't feed the trolls. : ) Tao2911 (talk) 22:13, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Dear Joshua,

Thank you for the question.

Yes. It is according to the Dharma(Pali Canon). One characteristic of a Lord Buddha’s intelligence is called “Anavarana Gnana(Un-coverable Intelligence)”. Whenever he directs his mind to something, there arises no obstacles to his understanding, to his comprehension, Nothing covers his ability to comprehend the true nature of the thing that he has directed his mind to. Of course the mind has got to be directed, or there has to be mindfulness directed to that object. See sammasambuddha.

Below are two Suttas from the Pali Canon which describe Lord Buddha's ability:

• 'Maha-sihanada Sutta'
• Another one is 'Cūlanikāsuttaṃ –– The thousandfold world system'. But I could not find any good translation for this Sutta. This one has some mistakes but you can get the idea. Please read the last Sutta: Anandavaggo sutta

Any way I don't know whether I was there at the Buddha's time as a human. I don't have any Jatismarana Jnana (ability to remind my several previous lives, may be Atma_Siddhi) received with Karma or any super-normal intelligence(Ṛddhi) gained with higher meditation. :Any way, definitely I(my generation of mind) was in the Samsara at the Buddha's time. But there is no permanent material(Rupa) or nun-material(Nama) thing as I. I is just a combination of material(Rupa) and nun-material(Nama) things. Hope I answered to your questions within the Pali Canon. Thank You again. --Mudithachampika (talk) 12:16, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

@Mudithachampika: thank you for your answer; good answer for the second part ("where you there?")! Regarding the first part: yes, okay, they do say that the buddha says that he's all-knowing et cetera. Toucher. Nevertheless, it's still not a guarantee that the Buddha himself said this. And even if he did so, it does not necessarily mean that he really was all-knowing, only that he stated to be so. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:55, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Mudithachampika (talk) 15:59, 12 February 2016 (UTC) Thank you for your comments and arrangements. We believe noble people(Ariya-puggala) never tell lies in any case. But it may not a reason for others to believe it. I think I did a mistake in some point. I think(only a my personal idea) a Lord Buddha may not have all knowledge in all subjects with the Buddhahood(they should have perfect knowledge about 'Four Nobel Truths' with the Buddhahood), but they have ability to know anything they want with their supreme intelligent and super-normal abilities without any obstacles. So, Lord Buddha's are capable of knowing any subject in the universe. I think there was a Sutta describe this. But I forgot the name.

Your doubt is reasonable as a non Ariya(noble) being(Prutakjana). It is not possible to scientifically prove these facts. But there is a way to verify 'Four Nobel Truths'. But it is just for you(or the specific person). If there are things which is ultimate right and if any one follow these right, then he should be purify to a noble being. So, right can be verify by following. Ultimate right is the 'Nobel Eightfold Path'. If any one follow 'Nobel Eightfold Path' he should gradually getting the perfect knowledge about 'Four Nobel Truths'. Finally he will become a noble being and he will tell that I don't have any doubt about 'Four Nobel Truths' now, but it is only for him. --Mudithachampika (talk) 15:59, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Ten Meritorious Deeds are acts which Buddhist follow in everyday life

It is widely known that Ten Meritorious Deeds are acts which pure Buddhist(who follow Pali Canon) practice in everyday life. I am going to stop editing Buddhism page I think. As every edit is reverting. Dear Wikipedia please distribute only the truth. --Mudithachampika (talk) 14:33, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 March 2016

71.59.151.232 (talk) 02:19, 4 March 2016 (UTC) may I edit I Have some facts with Hinduism also

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Datbubblegumdoe^{[talk – contribs]} 02:48, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 March 2016

In the second sentence of introductory paragraph it states "According to Buddhist tradition, the Buddha lived and taught in the eastern part of the Indian subcontinent, present-day Nepal sometime between the 6th and 4th centuries BCE". I would like to point out that the historical Buddha lived and traveled across lands which are Present day Nepal and India. He would most likely have spent his first 29 years in Kapilavastu which happens to be located in present day Nepal. For the 51 years of his later life, he lived and traveled across lands which are all located in modern day India. His Enlightenment took place in Bodhgaya, India. His first Sermon took place in Sarnath, India. Finally, he died in Kushinagar, India. He also spent most of his time in cities such as Rajgir and Sravasti, which are all located in mordern day India. Please edit that particular sentence to "According to Buddhist tradition, the Buddha lived and taught in the eastern part of the Indian subcontinent, present-day Nepal and India sometime between the 6th and 4th centuries BCE" Vamar123 (talk) 01:01, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

I made a change.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 01:13, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Neither India or Nepal existed back then, Indian subcontinent is appropriate term to use here and it will also stop constant edit warring by nationalists. You can see in Buddha's page where Shakya republic and Malla republic is mentioned in historic context regarding birth/death place of Buddha instead of Nepal/India.

• Regarding birth of Buddhism as religion - Magadha is where the first Buddhist council was founded where its objective was to preserve the Buddha's sayings (suttas) and the monastic discipline or rules (Vinaya), after the death of Buddha. Therefore, it would be appropriate to use Magadha as birth place of Buddhism in historic context. Pebble101 (talk) 20:17, 6 March 2016 (UTC)