Talk:Guan Yin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Guan Yin is within the scope of WikiProject Taiwan, a project to improve all Taiwan-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Taiwan-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.

Hong Kong Portal

This article is part of WikiProject Hong Kong, a project to coordinate efforts in improving all Hong Kong-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Hong Kong-related articles, you are invited to join this project!

This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.

Hong Kong To-do:

edit purge

Clean up all MTR station pages. They are literally all over the place. Two model pages are Tsing Yi Station and Sheung Shui Station. They each describe a feature special to the station, Station layout, exit, and connections, as well as neighbouring stations and the station "box".
- We will also need plenty of updated pictures (e.g. removing all KCR-related images except those on the KCR article). Check that all pages have basically the same language structure as Tsing Yi Station and Sheung Shui Station. Links to location maps are good too. (Should also perform these checks on Chinese Wikipedia.)

Clean-up pages that link with TVB, especially its series pages.

	This article falls within the scope 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 Guan Yin, 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
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

This article is part of WikiProject China, a project to improve all China-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other China-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.

This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)

[edit] Opening remarks

Can't we just have a link to Gutenberg instead of copying it here? -- Zoe

gutenburg might not be around forever. if you have a link that dies, what do you do then? i have been using the internet for...over 10 years, and i learned a long time ago not to expect things to be around in one place consistently, certainly not at the exact same link. that is assuming you can find the appropriate footnote when you get to the appropriate link anyway.

We don't normally keep original texts in Wikipedia articles. -- Zoe

fine do whatever you like.

It's not keeping an original text Zoe, it's a citation of a footnote out of an entire book. Did you follow the link? --Brion

No, I didn't, Brion, thanks. It just looked like a long paragraph plopped down in the middle of the article. -- Zoe

Changed the title to standard romanization. (either pinyin or Wades-Giles use Guan)

Are you sure? I have no expertise in these matters myself, but I've only ever seen it written as "Kuan-yin". --Paul A

Wade-Giles uses Kuan-Yin, pinyin uses Guanyin. The most common spelling is Kuan-Yin, with its variant of Kwan. I'd honestly keep it to that, just for the sake of immediate readability. -- Hidoshi 18:31, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Is Kwan-yin the same as Japanese Kannon?

Yes. Jpatokal 12:58, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Please add

From the footnotes of "A RECORD OF BUDDHISTIC KINGDOMS"

Being an Account by the Chinese Monk Fa-Hien of his Travels in India and Ceylon (A.D. 399-414) in Search of the Buddhist Books of Discipline

Translated and annotated with a Corean recension of the Chinese text

By James Legge http://www.ibiblio.org/gutenberg/etext00/rbddh10.txt [out of copyright]

Guan-Yin does not hold the title of 'Goddess of Mercy' in Chinese. Reverse translate 'The Goddess of Mercy' into Chinese, and no Chinese would know who you are talking about. This title was probably 'created' by an English speaking Christian with no regards for accuracy in translation or other people's beliefs. Christians have justified their view that other religions are false on the basis that they are polytheistic. By claiming that Bhuddists worshipped many gods and goddesses, the Christians could justify to themselves that the Bhuddist 'religion' must be false, and thus should be converted to the 'true' religion. However, Guan-Yin and other figures in Chinese beliefs are not gods or goddesses or deities. Neither are there any inherent gods in Bhuddism. The Chinese figures are based on real flesh-and-blood human beings, and as such they are equivalent to 'saints' in the Christian scheme of terminology (although Christians also say their god became flesh), or martyrs in the communist scheme of terminology.

JC-24 Aug 06

Kwan-she-yin and the dogmas about him or her are as great a mystery as Manjusri. The Chinese name is a mistranslation of the Sanskrit name Avalokitesvara, "On-looking Sovereign," or even "Onlooking Self-Existent," and means "Regarding or Looking on the sounds of the world" = "Hearer of Prayer." Originally, and still in Tibet, Avalokitesvara had only male attributes, but in China and Japan (Kwannon), this deity (such popularly she is) is represented as a woman, "Kwan-yin, the greatly gentle, with a thousand arms and a thousand eyes;" and has her principal seat in the island of P'oo-t'oo, on the China coast, which is a regular place of pilgrimage. To the worshippers of whom Fa-hien speaks, Kwan-she-yin would only be Avalokitesvara. How he was converted into the "goddess of mercy," and her worship took the place which it now has in China, is a difficult inquiry, which would take much time and space, and not be brought after all, so far as I see, to a satisfactory conclusion. See Eitel's Handbook, pp. 18-20, and his Three Lectures on Buddhism (third edition), pp. 124-131. I was talking on the subject once with an intelligent Chinese gentleman, when he remarked, "Have you not much the same thing in Europe in the worship of Mary?"

[edit] Avalokiteshvara

Barring loud objections, I will move this page to its original Sanskrit name Avalokitesvara -- it's the most neutral and accurate way of describing a deity known throughout Asia under an amazing variety of names. Jpatokal 12:58, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

"Developed from Avalokitesvara..." != "...is Avalokitesvara". --Menchi 05:24, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

If they are indeed separate, then they should be on separate pages. However, I don't really see why they should be separated, because Guan Yin/Kannon is how even Buddhist theologians quite familiar with the origin and meaning of the deity address it. The page needs a thorough rewrite to describe the historical evolution though... Jpatokal 06:54, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Avalokitesvara has now been shunted off into a separate article. The mutual content could use a little more rationalization... Jpatokal 14:33, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Guan Yin and Avalokita

Nice new image, I like it. But what's the point of having separate pages for Avalokita and Guan Yin? - Nat Krause 15:37, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)

For the same reason that Yahweh and Allah are separate; the origin may be the same, but Tibetan views of Chenrezig holding a skull while in sexual union with his consort and Chinese Taoists worshopping a white-robed woman are quite far apart in practice... Jpatokal 00:12, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Well, the Yahweh and Allah articles are mostly about the words Yahweh and Allah. So, if I were king, I would not make Avalokiteṣvara and Guan Yin different articles unless they are mostly discussing etymology. However, the current set-up is totally fine, especially insofar as Guan Yin has been incorporated into religions other than Buddhism. I do think the articles should be a little clearer that Guan Yin and Avalokita are basically the same person, because I suspect that most Buddhists think they are; they even talk specifically about her/his ability to manifest in diverse forms. - Nat Krause 04:18, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Samsara

Prat, why "samsara" instead of "(secular) world"? Does 世 gloss as "samsara"? It thought samsara was something like "lianhua". This wouldn't be a problem except that most people who read this probably won't know what "samsara" means. - Nat Kraus e 11:20, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with the particular issue here, but I will say that "secular" is, in an encyclopedic context, a purely sociological term, basically meaning "non-religious". -- कुक्कुरोवाच|Talk‽ 00:12, May 17, 2004 (UTC)

I changed it because it made sense. Reasoning was probably: samsara has an article behind it, which means that "most people who read this" can at least click on through and inform themselves. If we use 'secular world' it might sound to some like it means monks and nuns, which is totally the opposite of Guanyin's popular image (at least in China). I mean, if you call yourself Buddhist I wouldn't start labelling you as "of the secular world"... just sounds better to me to use samsara and have a link. Besides, I think Guanyin is probably supposed to listen to all people, secular or otherwise. Isn't that the whole point of the whole pure land deal? prat 13:36, 2004 May 17 (UTC)

Sorry I was very tired and re-read that post. I sound a bit like an asshole. Oh well. I think an improvement would be "... who listens" (without and 'of the...')" What do you think? prat 23:03, 2004 May 17 (UTC)

Well, I've got no idea who included "secular" in there originally, but it seems to me beside the point. We should probably leave it out. I do think that requiring people to follow a link to understand the definition, especially one in the first line of the article, is not desireable. I may be missing some context here, but it seems to me that guan means "observe", shi means "world", yin means "sound", and pusa, of course, means "bodhisattva." Therefore the most straightforward translation would be "the bodhisattva who observes the sounds of the world". We could make it "... the sounds (of the people in) the world" if that enhances clarity. - Nat Kraus e 08:58, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

The problem may also be influenced by the Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit etymology of Avalokitesvara, but I really don't know what that is; all I can tell you is that it isn't good Sanskrit. -- कुक्कुरोवाच|Talk‽ 19:53, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Split out section on Tie-Guan-Yin (tea)?

I notice a couple articles (Oolong, Chiuchow cuisine) are linking here for the section on the tea variety known as tie-Guan-Yin. Is there any objection to spinning off that section as an article? A-giau 19:23, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Good idea. - Nat Kraus e 03:16, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

OK, done. A-giau 23:35, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Name of article

Wikipedia's policy is most common name. So we have the following Google hits:

"kuan yin" - 78000
"kuanyin" - 9660
"kwan yin" - 65000
"kwanyin" - 6170
"guan yin" - 20600
"guanyin" - 35100
"gwan yin" - 331
"gwanyin" - 199

Hence, I am moving this page to Kuan Yin. —Lowellian (talk)[[]] 06:14, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)

This is faulty logic. First of all searching Google for "Kuan Yin" gives you BOTH "Kuan Yin" and "Kuan-yin." Second Pinyin Guanyin is a close second place with 565,000 sites. --Naus 19:35, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of Chinese characters?

Why are the original Chinese characters removed? Mandel 07:11, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't scroll down. But those characters ought to be shifted up you know. Mandel 07:13, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)

I agree and have moved the characters table to the top. —Lowellian (talk) 17:19, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

I don't agree with moving the characters table up. They constitute something of an eyesore right at the beginning of the article, as well as duplicating some of the information provided in the opening paragraphs. There's nothing so important about the characters that they need to appear before the TOC. - Nat Kraus e 08:32, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Now there are more than 10 lines of characters with more than five languages. Should I remove those non-Chinese names out? --manop 07:02, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Why? China doesn't have a monopoly or even first invention rights on Avalokiteshvara, she/he/it is also a big deal in Japan, Korea and Vietnam. Jpatokal 09:08, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I did, however, take the liberty of removing some duplicate info: chu nom/hanja are the same thing as Chinese characters, nobody uses Korean Wade-Giles, McCune-Reischauer was incorrect. Jpatokal 09:13, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, I had thought adding Thai name(s) (กวนอิม / Kuan Im) there. But it seemed like Wiktionary to me.--manop 19:47, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Moved from article

This comment was in the References section. The point should probably be addressed. --Jake 08:40, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Kannon and Canon is not accociated with each other AT ALL.Canon is not a religious product. They are pronounced differently too. Canon (like that song by Pachelbel) means "repeat", and the brand Canon means to repeat in life (since it's a camera company).

I agree with Jake's comment. See the image of Kuan Yin in Canon's original logo from the company's official website. Kowloonese 10:58, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Manifestations

This gets into serious theological hair-splitting, but the basic issue is whether Kuan Yin is considered a 'stand-alone' goddess/boddhisattva, or whether s/he's is considered just one of the many manifestations of Avalokiteshvara. Jpatokal 06:49, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Even in China, Kuan yin is not always female. There are some category problems here:

[edit] The Name

Kuan yin is simply the Chinese for Avalokiteśvara, just as John is the English for Johannes, Ioannes, or Yochanan. In any Buddhist sutra, where the Sanskrit has Avalokiteśvara, the Chinese has either guān yīn or guān shì yīn. When Avalokiteśvara is depicted in male form, in earlier Chinese or other Buddhist traditions, the Chinese name is still guān yīn. The same goes, mutatis mutandis, for Kannon and Kwan Um.

[edit] The Gender

While some depictions of Kuan yin may be clearly feminine, for the most part they are not so much female as androgynous (or perhaps gynandrous) -- in pictures, even very recent ones, of Kuan yin one rarely sees more than a hint of breasts or a feminine shape, and the costume tends to cover the form pretty thoroughly. This follows on a long tradition of East Asian depictions of androgynous bodhisattvas, though only in Kuan yin's case has the matter gone far enough that the bodhisattva is generally perceived to be female. The change is not, however, one of "manifestation" and has little to do with Avalokiteśvara's ability to appear in different forms (something that could be said of many buddhas and bodhisattvas); it's more a question of changes in artistic style, and consequent revisions in popular thinking about the bodhisattva, including the thought that it would be more appropriate to pray to a quasi-maternal figure for children.

[edit] The Context

It can also be contended that the character of Kuan yin has, in a way, "jumped the fence" and is no longer a purely Buddhist deity but a fixture in Chinese folk religion. While that is doubtless true, it has little to do with the perceived gender switch and nothing to do with the Chinese name. It is also true of other deities of Buddhist origin. However, it's doubtful that the particularly Chinese developments are such that, from a Chinese point of view, Kuan yin the "goddess" has become a different person from Kuan yin the bodhisattva of the sutras. And some of the most dramatic legendary transformations took place entirely within the Buddhist tradition.

In short, while there are interesting Chinese developments to Avalokiteśvara/Kuan yin, that could justify a separate article, it also seems to me that they could just as well be handled in an article about Avalokiteśvara; it's not as if a legendary figure acquiring local characteristics is anything terribly surprising, and an account of those developments helps in one's understanding of the figure as a whole.RandomCritic 18:03, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kuan Yin? Guan Yin?

Why is this article at Kuan Yin? I thought Naming conventions would place it at Guan Yin, unless the Buddhistava has a personal preference for WG spelling? --Sumple (Talk) 11:38, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

this issue has already been addressed. Apparently Kuan Yin won much to my dismay. Hanfresco 05:44, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

What you mean the dodgy google poll there? That's full dodgy. --Sumple (Talk) 05:54, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

What naming conventions? My understanding is that "Kuan Yin" is more common, so we should use that. I, personally, prefer Guan Yin as well.—Nat Krause^(Talk!) 22:00, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

If you check "What links here", the majority of internal links actually point to "Guanyin" or "Guan Yin", not "Kuan Yin" or "Kwan Yin". What evidence is there that "Kuan Yin" is more common, beyond the google poll? Your average non-Chinese person probably haven't heard of either. I would suggest that in an ambiguous case like this, we should use the pinyin transliteration, which is the usual standard. --Sumple (Talk) 03:11, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't see what's ambiguous about it. We only have one piece of information, the google test, and it indicates that "Kuan Yin" is more common. If we had two contradictory data points, that would be different.—Nat Krause^(Talk!) 06:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

The contradictory point is the number of internal links to "Guanyin" or "Guan Yin" versus "Kuan Yin" or "Kwan Yin" in Wikipedia. I only called it "ambiguous" to be polite. As far as I have seen, contemporary (academic) works on Buddhist art or Chinese Buddhism almost exclusively use "Guan Yin" or "Guanyin", not "Kuan Yin"; see, for example, (to pull something off the shelf) Jackie, M. (1990), Asian collection: handbook, Art Gallery of New South Wales, Sydney. ISBN 0730574555

Here is a recent study of the deity which uses "Guanyin":

Karetzky, P. (2003), Guanyin, Oxford University Press, Oxford. ISBN 0195930886

While I have no doubt Kuan Yin is also used quite commonly, a Google hits search is simply not nearly reliable enough to hold such sway.

As to your first question, naming conventions as in Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese)#Names. Names should be transliterated into Pinyin unless (1) there is another name more familiar to English speakers, or (2) the person/group involved is more likely to prefer an alternative romanisation. Now, I would contend that Kuan Yin/Guan Yin is not a term so well-known in English as, say, Sun Yat-Sen, and so does not fall within the first exception. (How many non-Chiense English speakers do you know who would know what Kuan Yin/Guan Yin is?) The second exception is self evident. --Sumple (Talk) 11:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I've been thinking about this for a few days. I was never very happy about the move of this page to Kuan Yin, and I'm not going to object much if someone moves it back. However, I don't think I can really endorse such a move. I like pinyin, but what I really like is Wikipedia's policy of using common names. Now, I agree that a Google search is not very reliable. However, I just don't see any reason here to think that any other information we have on the subject is any more reliable. "As far as I have seen, contemporary (academic) works on Buddhist art or Chinese Buddhism almost exclusively use 'Guan Yin' or 'Guanyin', not 'Kuan Yin'" is probably true, but completely anecdotal. The google test is much-maligned, but I've rarely seen a better alternative.—Nat Krause^(Talk!) 03:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC) P.S.: As for how many non-Chinese English speakers I know who would know what Kuan Yin/Guan Yin is, I know more than a few of them, thanks. However, they seem to mostly refer to her as either Kannon or Kwan Um. Go figure.

The Google test is quite irrelevant. Older scholarly literature uses Wade-Giles (Kuan-yin, not "Kuan Yin"), modern sources use Pinyin (Guanyin, not "Guan Yin"). I suggest moving the article to Guanyin, in accordance with the naming convention, recent scientific literature, and the Pīnyīn spelling in the Xiàndài Hànyǔ cídiǎn 现代汉语词典 (Shāngwù yìnshūguǎn 商务印书馆 1996), p. 463. —Babelfisch 07:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Kuan Yin looks awkward too. And yes, the proper Hanyu Pinyin spelling is Guanyin, not Guan Yin. --Naus 19:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Searching on Google for "Kuan Yin" gives you both "Kuan Yin" and "Kuan-yin." So the search results are inflated. The current spelling of "Kuan Yin" is simply wrong. It's not Wade-Giles. It's simply an ignorant spelling. --Naus 19:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Moved it to what I could. Going to have to get an admin to change it to Guanyin as it's currently a redirect. Zazaban 22:55, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Guanyin is one word

According to Hanyu Pinyin orthography standards, Guanyin is one word, not two as used here. --Naus 09:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the whole article is a mess. One of the cases where Wikipedia's weaknesses crowd to the fore.

Bathrobe (talk) 07:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] An actual template?

I am tempted to replace the woefully-customized html table with Template:Chinese since it can handle all the languages. Will people actually be offended by it since this is a religious symbol across many nations? Benjwong 11:19, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

This is an example of a "no-nonsense" template; the "Chinese" template still has the strange yellow "hidden" bar which really seems unnecessary. This template just has the various names in order, without a lot of teminology like "Guan," "Yue," and two lines for each romanization name and romanization. Badagnani 06:17, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Replace it. The current table is ugly as hell, and {{Chinese}} will do the job better and make it look much tidier. PC78 18:25, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] crap

bull crap i need help with mythology —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.117.91.117 (talk) 00:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)