Talk:Buddhist texts

message: Good show. - NYK 14:24, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: Buddhism:  "Do not go by revelation or tradition, do not go by rumor, or the sacred scriptures, do not go by hearsay or mere logic, do not go by bias towards a notion or by another person's seeming ability and do not go by the idea 'He is our teacher'. But when you yourself know that a thing is good, that it is not blamable, that it is praised by the wise and when practiced and observed that it leads to happiness, then follow that thing."  
it was one of buddha's teachings as well
----
I just noticed that there was a pre-existing Mahayana Sutras page, started a while back by that guy acmuller.  I tried to clean up the format a little, but maybe it should just be merged into this article. - NYK 17:30, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: If there are no objections I think I'll just rediect to[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_texts#Mahayana_texts Buddhist Texts : Mahayana texts section. acmuller was great, wonder what ever happened to him? You can still see external links to his dictionary everywhere - although I tend to delete them. mahābāla 13:17, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You might like to reinstate links for Chuck's dictionary since it is now the on-line combined classical and Buddhist CJKV dictionary.  It provides a major research tool with high standard entries provided by real scholars.--Stephen Hodge 01:00, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: so feel free to add something. Where would they fit do you think? I'm aware that I've only covered the really mainstream stuff here - the Vajrayana section is quite weak, and there are many more non-canonical texts and genres which could well be included. mahābāla 09:42, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  i was wondering if this should be included.

message: This article makes a distinction between canonical and noncanonical, which is not followed in other articles: though the article Pali Canon covers only canonical material, those on Tibetan Buddhist canon and Chinese Buddhist Canon cover noncanonical material as well. See my note on the talk page of the latter. Peter jackson 15:52, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose it depends how you define canonical.  OED, inter alia, has "authoritative, standard, accepted".  In the case of the Tibetan kanjur / Tenjur, the works included are ipso facto canonical.  You may not know much about the compilation of the Tibetan canon, but all the texts included did undergo scrutiny over menay centuries, beginning especially with the redactional work of Buton.  The Chinese Canon is a bit more flexible and the matter is confused somewhat by the range of material included in Taisho.  But there is no reason to query the overall canonicity of these texts -- the Chinese Canon per se (not in nits Taisho incarnation) also underwent considerable scrutiny, with mahy texts excluded precisely because they were not deemed to be canonical.  Or am I missing some arcane point you are trying to make ?--Stephen Hodge 22:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The point I was trying to make was about inconsistency. Firstly, between articles, in that this article uses the same concept of canonicity as the Pali Canon article, while the Chinese & Tibetan ones use a different one. Secondly, that the standard listing of "Buddhist scriptures" found in the appendices of quite a few books (in nearly identical terms, presumably copied from a common source) has no obvious consistent concept of canonicity. Certainly there's a sense in which one can say the Tenjur is canonical. But then why not the Pali commentaries (and subcommentaries)? Peter jackson 15:30, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canon 

message: http://www.dharmanet.org/files.html
Doesn't work.
4.249.198.57 (talk) 01:15, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  take out this link 

message: I've deleted th ereference to these, as the article on them says they're a Hindu idea adopted by theosophists, ie nothing to do with Tibetan Buddhism. Peter jackson (talk) 11:48, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Akashic Records]] 

message: I'm not seeing any mention of the Buddhacarita in this article--am I missing it? Should it be included? ? If so, where should it be mentioned--alongside the Sanskrit texts? Aristophanes68 (talk) 04:20, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I know it's still uncertain which school of Buddhism Asvaghosa belonged to, so it would probably go in the 1st Other texts section. Peter jackson (talk) 18:16, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does the Buddhacarita belong here? 

message: Until now there is no timeline of Buddhist texts here. Anyone? See for a simple example Timeline of Hindu texts. Wiki-uk (talk) 04:33, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timeline of Buddhist texts 

message: The RfC by Dorje108 states that:
"I propose that texts written by Buddhist writers and teachers that explain basic Buddhist concepts should be considered secondary sources as long as they meet the criteria specified in the guidelines (regardless of whether or not the writer has Western academic training). Do you support this?"
Please see: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Buddhism
Robert Walker (talk) 14:55, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: RfC: Are texts written by Buddhist writers and teachers that explain basic Buddhist concepts reliable secondary sources?

message: Is the word redeath (sanskrit punarmrtyu) commonly used in Buddhist texts and teachings, and is it an appropriate word to use in the Four Noble Truths article, and in the statement of Buddha's Four Noble Truths in its lede?
Comments welcome. Please respond on the talk page for the article here:  RfC on use of the word "redeath" in the article and lede for Four Noble Truths
I've posted here since it is closely connected to questions about how to interpret the four noble truths in the Pali Canon. So editors of this article may have a valuable perspective on the debate.
Thanks! Robert Walker (talk) 11:02, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: RfC on use of the word "redeath" in the article and lede for [[Four Noble Truths]]

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Buddhist texts. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040406214720/http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/postcanon.html to http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/postcanon.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:33, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)