This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Pali Canon article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 20 August 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved from Pāli Canon to Pali Canon. The result of the discussion was moved. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
I have removed the following text;
References
This is not what Cousins says. He writes about Anderson interpretation of a comment by Norman:
This is what Cousins further writes (I'll leave out the elaborate argumentation):
Nothing about the statement in the first sentence that I removed. The criticism of Cousins is about Anderson's interpretation of Norman's argumentation about the four truths as a later interpolation into the Dhammacakkapavattana-sutta. And even if Cousins is correct here, he still states "I do not think that this misunderstanding of Norman's position critically affects Anderson's thesis." And, remarkably, Cousins also states that the whole Dhammacakkapavattana-sutta could be from a later date. This far removed from the second sentence that I removed. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 11:00, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
In the section, it claims that Buddha 'praised' agnihotra. That is completely false. This article refutes such claims : https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/23839/why-did-buddha-praise-the-vedic-agnihotra-as-the-foremost-sacrifice Bodhiupasaka ( talk) 13:05, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Why not rename the section as "repurposing of Brahmanical language " ? Is this section even necessary ? I believe someone with vested interests tacitly added that section, claiming that Buddha 'praised' Vedic rituals such as Agnihotra, when in fact Buddha rejected them as stated in Sundarika Sutta of Pali Canon which is the same Buddhist text that this article ironically covers. Bodhiupasaka ( talk) 06:27, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 12:09, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Pāli Canon → Pali Canon – Per WP:CONSUB, to be consistent with Pali language, which gives its name to the canon. Vpab15 ( talk) 09:54, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Pali Canon article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 20 August 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved from Pāli Canon to Pali Canon. The result of the discussion was moved. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
I have removed the following text;
References
This is not what Cousins says. He writes about Anderson interpretation of a comment by Norman:
This is what Cousins further writes (I'll leave out the elaborate argumentation):
Nothing about the statement in the first sentence that I removed. The criticism of Cousins is about Anderson's interpretation of Norman's argumentation about the four truths as a later interpolation into the Dhammacakkapavattana-sutta. And even if Cousins is correct here, he still states "I do not think that this misunderstanding of Norman's position critically affects Anderson's thesis." And, remarkably, Cousins also states that the whole Dhammacakkapavattana-sutta could be from a later date. This far removed from the second sentence that I removed. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 11:00, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
In the section, it claims that Buddha 'praised' agnihotra. That is completely false. This article refutes such claims : https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/23839/why-did-buddha-praise-the-vedic-agnihotra-as-the-foremost-sacrifice Bodhiupasaka ( talk) 13:05, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Why not rename the section as "repurposing of Brahmanical language " ? Is this section even necessary ? I believe someone with vested interests tacitly added that section, claiming that Buddha 'praised' Vedic rituals such as Agnihotra, when in fact Buddha rejected them as stated in Sundarika Sutta of Pali Canon which is the same Buddhist text that this article ironically covers. Bodhiupasaka ( talk) 06:27, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 12:09, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Pāli Canon → Pali Canon – Per WP:CONSUB, to be consistent with Pali language, which gives its name to the canon. Vpab15 ( talk) 09:54, 20 August 2022 (UTC)