Talk:Buddhist terms and concepts
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. Please participate by editing the article Buddhist terms and concepts, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
|
Perhaps a pointer to a Pali or Sanskrit dictionary online might be more useful. On the other hand we could start a seperate wiki for this purpose, and include Sanskrit, Tibetan, Burmese, Pali, Thai, Lao, Chinese (trad. & simplified, pinyin). Otherwise this page will end up with two, three, four or more versions of the same term. -- prat
For now it is not so big. I do think it is usefull to have a list of the Buddhist terms we've already covered in wiki. When it gets too big, splitting it up into the languages sounds like a good idea.
kh7 11:50 Mar 28, 2003 (UTC)
When people add new terms, there should be consistency in the use of uppercase and lowercase. According to standard reference works, only proper names, places, texts, temples and so forth should have the first letter capitalized. Terms, such as anicca, nirvana, samsara, etc. should be in lower case. People have apparently been doing it both ways, so I have fixed this User:acmuller 2003.08.26
I think that trying to manually build a page like this is wasted effort, since such a page can be generated automatically by just adding a category link to each of these entries like ((Category:Buddhist terms)). I have already started this category, and I would like to suggest that we devote our energies to seeking out terms and linking them up this way, rather than trying to build a separate list. Also, I think Buddhist terms is good enough. We don't need Buddhist terms and concepts--after all, a term is a concept. User:Acmuller
Here here! But I can't find my article name anymore :( --Vajrabell 05:21, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
Excuse me, but what is "eptymology"? Do you mean "etymology"? Avia 09:34, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
- Sharp eyes! I mistyped and, since kept on cut-and-paste, propagated the mistake!!! Mekong Bluesman 12:31, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Japanese etymology for Chinese characters?
There are many instances in the article of an implied Japanese origin (listed in the tables under "etymology") for terms that were originally Chinese translations using Chinese characters of Buddhist terms that were only later exported to Japan. This seems backwards, and I will be doing some editing accordingly. --Fire Star 19:22, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Raison d'être
To force something that has no form into an arbitrary structure is unattainable, if not mad.
To cram something that is both profound and boundless into a 2-dimensional list is unjust, if not unwise.
To abbreviate the words of the wise into few broken phrases is foolish and very imprudent.
I'll admit to all the above, and more, in my thoughtless way to reformat and re-write this article. My main goal was simply to create a form that would facilitate future additions to the list. That form is a 3-column table such that
- Col. 1 – The phrase (or name) in English and its abbreviated definition; ex. alayavijnana instead of ālayavijñāna
- Col. 2 – The etymological root of the phrase; ex. alayavijnana comes from Pali/Sanskrit's ālayavijñāna; store consciousness - although also means alayavijnana - does not need to cite its root, unless one wants to cite the root for consciousness but that would be a digression
- Col. 3 – The phrase (or name) in other languages. Pali and Sanskrit, if not already mentioned in Col. 2, take the more prominent places for obvious reason; Tibetan is next; the CJKV languages (Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese) are grouped together under the Chinese characters from which they all originate; that grouping means that the Thai language has to come before them, for otherwise it would lead to the misunderstanding that Thai is a CKJV language.
Attributing etymological history to a term of the CJKV languages is a delicate issue. Ultimately, as Fire Star points out above, the true root is the Chinese character(s). I, however, took the liberty to give terms such as gassho a Japanese root -- although its Kanji 合掌 is exactly that of the Chinese characters.
That's about form. About contents, I would like to plead my serious lack of knowledge, in the field of linguistics as in the sea of Buddhist philosophy, and will try to improve this article by doing more research and visit here regularly to fix any of the many errors created by my ignorance.
I would like to hear of your critique and welcome any improvement. After all, isn't it Wikipedia's policy that anyone and everyone can edit any article to improve it?
I also like to thank JALockhart and Baodo for their helps during my last 100, or so, edits.
Mekong Bluesman 22:41, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Three periods
"all sûtras recognize the mappo period as 10 000 years".
Seems to be wrong : the Lotus Sutra teaches mappo as only 500 years... pyl 14:39, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
No, it teaches that Mappo begins 2,000 years (i.e., at the beginning of the fifth five-hundred year period) after the Buddha's passing and lasts for 10,000 years and, I believe, into eternity (the "10,000" is actually not meant as a concrete number, so I'm told). Of course, YMMV depending on whose interpretation of the LS you're following. Jim_Lockhart 16:37, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Absorption
The page entitled religious ecstasy states that "In Buddhism, especially in the Pali Canon, there are 8 states of trance also called absorption." Yet I cannot find the term absorption in reference to Buddhism anywhere, even here where it would belong. If that term is not in fact in use then religious ecstasy needs to be corrected, but if it really does exsist then it would need an article created for it and would belong here. If someone does create an article for the term could they also please update the link on religious ecstasy? --WmRowan 18:39, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
