Talk:Buddhist cosmology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 WikiProject Religion
Religion Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
This article falls within the scope of the Interfaith work group. If you are interested in Interfaith-related topics, please visit the project page to see how you can help. If you have any comments regarding the appropriateness or positioning of this template, please let us know at our talk page.


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 Buddhist cosmology, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
Start This article has been rated as Start-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.

Contents

[edit] Summary

Could someone knowledgable in this topic provide a summary for the religious cosmology page? Dragons flight 02:51, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] fairly-tales.

I think that addition is a total cultural bias. It's no different If I came in and called Angels, or Jinns Fariy Tale creatures. Zazaban 06:20, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Both occasionally are (and jinn very frequently are), and it's hardly "cultural bias" to say so. That's a matter of fact, not of point-of-view. But imposing your private sense of what is "cultural bias" to censor articles might very well be considered POV, you know. I wonder if you consider the qualifier to be negative or positive -- perhaps you're unaware that "fairy tale" denotes a class of literature and is not a term of opprobrium? RandomCritic 15:07, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure Christians or Muslims would agree that angels are "fairly tale creatures". likewise Buddhists see these beings as levels of reincarnation and not fictional. I don't see people going into the articles mentioned above and condemning their existence. What's there know is better, but could still be improved. Zazaban 19:21, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Your concept that fictionality has been asserted (or denied) or that existence has been "condemned" is false and fallacious. The fairy tale is simply an identifiable body of literature that deals with a wide variety of subjects, which may or may not exist. There are Buddhist fairy tales as well as European, African, Chinese, and Native American ones. And Buddhist fairy tales (and Indian fairy tales in general) typically deal with such beings as yakshas, nagas, and similar creatures, and this is the context in which most people are likely to become aware of them. Regardless of whether you believe in their existence or not, reading or hearing about a yaksha in a fairy tale is surely far more common than meeting one in the wild.
And what is your objection to the term "minor spirits"? From the Buddhist point of view, that is precisely what they are -- supernatural beings whose power and influence is much less than that of the greater devas. What would make you think that a yaksha -- in Buddhist stories, often a kind of troll lurking in lakes in the wilderness, seeking to devour travellers -- is comparable to an angel? RandomCritic 20:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Spirit suggests a ethereal or immortal being. These are mentioned in religious texts and thus calling them fairy-tale is like calling the Bible a fairy-tale. Zazaban 00:26, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Use of Pali

I think the various descriptors used in this item should have Pali equivalences throughout; rather than here and there, it's not consitent. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 143.117.78.169 (talk) 17:23, 6 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Use of Mandarin Chinese

Is the addition of the Mandarin Chinese names for the realms acceptable to everyone? Many Chinese Buddhists don't know the Sanskrit names and only identify the realms through Mandarin Chinese. The addition of Chinese would help greatly. (I can add the names) –- kungming·2 (Talk) 08:28, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

That is what the Chinese Wikipedia is for, I don't suggest to put Dutch words in the English Wikipedia either?rudy 21:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Are these the views of all Buddhists?

According to this source: http://www.buddhistinformation.com/10_worlds.htm , it appears that some Buddhists, such as Nichiren Buddhists, don't believe in these descriptions. For example, they don't believe in "hell" as described in this article. Should this be mentioned? 12.218.153.85 00:50, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of whether this or that group of Buddhists believes literally in this cosmology, it is described in Buddhist scriptures and commentaries, and forms a fundamental background to other types of description; the "10 worlds" analysis could not exist without it. The article doesn't make any claim about the cosmology being true, or being believed in by "all Buddhists", just that this cosmology is set forth in Buddhist scriptures; and that's an historical fact that doesn't change with the beliefs of one group or another. RandomCritic 12:00, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I understand. But the introduction is a little misleading. It doesn't say that all Buddhists believe in this, but it is implied by stating that both major denominations of Buddhism support it. Why not have just a little disclaimer saying in short that these beliefs are not universal, just to make it clear to someone who is unfamiliar with the subject? 12.218.153.85 23:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Map of The cosmos with Sumeru?

I would like to see a map of the buddhist cosmos with mount Sumeru and all the realms. Does anyone have a link? I have googled it myself already, even searching the translations in asian languages with google, but no decent map of it.

It is a bit complicated, as the traditions may vary, and it is a fairly complex 3D image really, not just 2D.rudy 21:48, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Use of language

Can we please remember that this is an English, and not a Sanskrit or Pali encyclopedia? It is simply impossible to read for the non-scholar now. When we follow the normal convention of first using the English terminology, followed by the Sanskrit or Pali terms, it may be turned into a very good and legible article, please?rudy 21:46, 25 October 2007 (UTC)