Talk:Four Buddhist Persecutions in China

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 Four Buddhist Persecutions in China, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. Guidelines: Chinese Manual of Style - Naming conventions Indic Manual of Style - Naming conventions Japanese Manual of Style Korean Manual of Style - Naming conventions Tibetan Proposed naming conventions

[edit] POVness

I believe that the article's description of the fourth "persecution" showed an anti-Taoism bias, as there is no real evidence to support the idea that Taoists drove that persecution (which largely involved only the destruction of Buddhist statues, not disapproval of Buddhist beliefs themselves). --Nlu (talk) 05:52, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I originally wrote this page. Firstly, I am in no way attacking Taoism. What is not NPOV about it? I’m just going off the material from the original source. It’s not like I put “Taoism Sucks”. Plus, if you look at the paragraph you will see that is says nothing about suppressing Buddhism as a religion. It just states how over half the Buddhist temples were destroyed and many monks and nun were killed and or returned to lay life. Secondly, your “neutrality tag” makes the page look horrible! It creates a HUGE gap between the header and the first paragraph. I moved it to the top of the page so it fills in the gap.

What can I do to improve the article and get the tag taken off the page? I will not remove any Taoism info since it in no way verbally attacks the religion. And the “‘moral decline’ of the clergy” comment was about Buddhism, not Taoism. Again, this info came from the original source. These are not my own words. (!Mi luchador nombre es amoladora de la carne y traigo el dolor! 12:38, 6 October 2006 (UTC))

I don't know what your original source is, but it clearly doesn't fit with historical accuracy from actual history. If you can read Chinese, take a look at s:zh:資治通鑑's chronicle of Later Zhou. I am not suggesting you introduced the POV, but it's still POV. --Nlu (talk) 17:02, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

My Chinese is very poor. I went to the page and even with an internet translator; I couldn't find the info that pertained to this issue. My source is the Soka Gakkai Dictionary of Buddhism (LINK) or for the actual page I got the info, (LINK). Everything I’ve read points to the fact that Buddhism and Taoism were knocking heads starting it the earlier centuries. When Buddhism came to China, Taoism had a firm hold on the Southern and Northern Dynasties. But Buddhism eventually found a place in the north, while the elite in the south stuck to Taoism. Then Buddhism slowly dispersed itself into the south because of a break down of the elite class caused by various rebellions (SEE Buddhism gains political traction in the north). And for centuries, it was a juggling game between Buddhism and Taoism being the state religion.

I do not doubt the validity of your information. I propose a compromise here. How about I put “According to the ‘Soka Gakkai Dictionary of Buddhism,’ the persecutions were caused by the conflict between Taoists and Buddhists, and the moral decline of the clergy…”? Or something to that effect. Then you can add your material. I suggest you copy and paste the section of the Later Zhou Chronicles that shows Buddhism and Taoism were not fighting into the article. Then give an english translation of the text. What do you think? (!Mi luchador nombre es amoladora de la carne y traigo el dolor! 19:56, 6 October 2006 (UTC))

Also, if you look at the new formatting of the page, I put the material in the context it was originally intended for. The info about the "conflict between Taoists and Buddhists" was an overall generalization for the whole of the persecutions and was not meant to be centered on just the 4th one. (!Mi luchador nombre es amoladora de la carne y traigo el dolor! 22:35, 6 October 2006 (UTC))

I would not object to changing it to "according to" the dictionary. However, the text that I am thinking of, specifically, is below:

帝以縣官久不鑄錢，而民間多銷錢為器皿及佛像，錢益少，九月，丙寅朔，敕始立監採銅鑄錢，自非縣官法物、軍器及寺觀鐘磐鈸鐸之類聽留外，自餘民間銅器、佛像，五十日內悉令輸官，給其直；過期隱匿不輸，五斤以上其罪死，不及者論刑有差。上謂侍臣曰：「卿輩勿以毀佛為疑。夫佛以善道化人，苟志於善，斯奉佛矣。彼銅像豈所謂佛邪！且吾聞佛志在利人，雖頭目猶捨以佈施，若朕身可以濟民，亦非所惜也。」

It came from Volume 294 of the Zizhi Tongjian, happening in 955. I would translate it as:

The Emperor was concerned that, because county magistrates were not minting coins, and the people were often melting coin to make vessels and Buddha statues, the supply of coins was decreasing. In the ninth month, he issued an edict creating a bureau to mint coins. Other than official vessels, weapons, and temple bells and cimbals, the other civilian copper vessels and Buddha statues must be submitted to officials within 50 days, and compensation would be given. Those who hid the items, if the items weighed more than five jin ([Chinese weight measurement]) would be punished by death, and if the items weighed less than five jin would be punished in accordance with the weight. He told his attendants, "Do not worry for me for destroying Buddhas. The Buddha used his kind acts to bring people to him; therefore, if you do good things, you are serving the Buddha. Are those statues Buddhas? And I heard that the Buddha sought to benefit people and was willing to even give his head. If my body can be used to benefit the people, I do not hold it back.

Basically, there is nothing in historical records that suggested any inkling of Taoist involvement in this; the consideration was completely practical -- the need for copper. --Nlu (talk) 01:31, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

That is some very good material that I think would add some historical weight to this article! Anyway, after a second reading of the original source material, I've found that the "Taoist" comments were in regards to the persecution of 845 (or at least I think they are). The text from the source read as such:

"In addition to the conflict between Taoists and Buddhists, moral decline in the clergy also contributed to the persecutions. Moreover, from around the time of Emperor Wu-tsung of the T'ang dynasty, the increase in the number of temples and priests and nuns put financial pressure on the state, which prompted the successive dynasties to regulate Buddhism. Finally Emperor Shih-tsung of the Later Chou dynasty carried out one of the greatest destructions."[1]

Prior to this, the paragraph had already described the persecution of Emperor Shih-tsung. What do you pull from this statement? Do you think it is saying the whole of the persecutions (barring the one in 955) was apart of the conflict between Buddhists and Taoists. Or is this in reference to the fact that Emperor Wuzong was a Taoist and he wanted to purge Buddhism from China? I have changed the page to reflect the Wuzong possibility. Please feel free to change the page and or add your own material to the "4th Persecution" section.(!Mi luchador nombre es amoladora de la carne y traigo el dolor! 10:53, 7 October 2006 (UTC))

-----------------------------------------------------

The Taoism material was in reference to the 3rd persecution. There is nothing in the 4th persecution section that mentions Taoists, having changed it a long while ago. So it is no longer neccessary to have the dispute tag. (!Mi luchador nombre es amoladora de la carne y traigo el dolor! 20:07, 29 October 2006 (UTC))