Talk:Shantideva

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Buddhism 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 Shantideva, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-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 within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Socrates
Philosophy Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.

page says...

--- Contrary to Tibetan biographies written about him, Shantideva became a king in southeastern Bangladesh, which has been shown through archaeological discoveries that record him not only as the first in a line of "Deva" kings who recognized the Bodhisattva ideal as the highest Dharma (or truth).

I am confused. Are Tibetan biographies contrary to the idea of Shantideva recognizing the Bodhisattva ideal as truth? What does Tibetan biographies say that is contrary? This should be provided on page.

I don't claim to know too much about Shantideva history, not very concerned with it. I came here to learn more, and was confused by the statement about being "contrary to Tibetan". What are these discoveries, what do they show that is contrary? All this needs to be made more clear or just taken off, as it is it does not seem to be that informative.

Thank you for you time, and all the best.

Clavio

[edit] Contrary... Bangladeshi King

I deleted this para, because it's the first time heard it, and there's no citation or anything. And I've just been through the newbie's guide to NPOV (heavy going), and I think it's inappropriate to be saying "contrary to X's view", without saying what X's view is. ---MrDemeanour 00:24, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] External links

The link to Shantideva.net hast nothing to do with Shantideva himself nor with Tibetan Buddhism either. His webmaster, aka himself Shan Chien Da Shi, lives in Spain and has been tagged as a pretender a year ago. Five years ago he started to prey, calling himself then Thera Karavika.

Shantideva.net offers information from the Shantideva Project _a charity orphan based, as if it was part of the NGO in question, although it's a way to promote a monastery in the U.S. devoted to Shan Jian himself.

I practice Buddhism and live in Spain, and also have relations with american buddhists, and there is no link at all of this website with any other order neither with the Ecumenical Buddhism. The called "avaivartika" order simply doesn't exist.

Please remove the site. I usually contribute in the spanish Wikipedia and don't dare to do it myself until anybody check my information. Erein

I followed the link, and it makes a lot of fuss about the supposed bengali origins of Shantideva, and the claim that the author of the Bodhicharyavatara wasn't the Shantideva from Nalanda. I can't verify these claims, and they certainly don't belong in the article; but it's wrong to say that the linked site has nothing to do with Shantideva. The track-record of the webmaster, it seems to me, is his own business.

I don't see any harm in the link, which is, after all, an external link. Accordingly I've left it in-place. MrDemeanour 16:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] External links removed because "controversial"

On 13 March 2007 196.44.16.10 removed external links with the note "removed controversial external link".

I'm not sure that "controversial" is in and of itself a sufficient reason to delete external links. I'm going to archive them here in case we decide that they should be restored. -- Thanks Writtenonsand 15:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)