Talk:Sarvastivada: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 10:56, 22 February 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sarvastivada article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Buddhism Mid‑importance

	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. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more details on the projects.BuddhismWikipedia:WikiProject BuddhismTemplate:WikiProject BuddhismBuddhism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

South Asia Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Asia, which aims to improve the quality and status of all South Asia-related articles. For more information, please visit the Project page.South AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject South AsiaTemplate:WikiProject South AsiaSouth Asia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

India Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article was last assessed in May 2015.

Untitled

Transfered from article : One of only two schools to have their written works survive..[ Which school was the second? ]

Theravadin maybe? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.166.91.92 (talk • contribs) 2006-06-20T20:43:25

This article needs references to clarify

Otherwise, it appears to be the editors interpretations only. Alien666 13:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The second was indeed the Theravada. Huifeng 02:41, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sarvastivada vs. Tibetan Buddhism

I don't think it's appropriate to structure the article around conjecture and an image of Tibetan monks. This clearly associates Tibetan rpactice with the subject of the article whereas it was my impression tha tin reality it seems most evidence linking Sarvastivadin texts exists in Gandhara or north of Tibet in the former Buddhist kingdoms of the Taklamakan. prat (talk) 03:21, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tibetan monks are technically from the Mulasarvastivada Nikaya (they follow the Mulasarvastivada Vinaya), and the Mulasarvastivada Nikaya has its basis in the Sarvastivadins of Mathura, so far as we know. So the Tibetan monks are technically a subdivision of Sarvastivada. The "early Buddhist schools," first and foremost, were basically vinaya lineages. Tengu800 03:41, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Details of Philosophy

This section provides some valuable information, but unfortunately isn't referenced in detail. In particular, one of several theories on the connection between the Sarvastivada and the Mulasarvastivada is being presented as fact without attribution- that the Sauntantrika developed into the Mulasarvastivada. --Spasemunki (talk) 06:27, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Time for research! Ogress _smash! 08:13, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Question

So I was doing some research and on the the German page of the Ritsu school of Buddhism I came across this quote "Im Shingon-Ritsu wurden zusätzlich zum Shibun-ritsu das Bonmōkyō (梵網經, das Brahmajāla-sūtra), das Yugaron (瑜伽論, das Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra), die Regelwerke der Sarvastivada, sowie die drei Hauptschriften von Dao Xuan verwendet." I cannot understand German, the reason why I was on that page is because google translate is relatively competent at translating it into readable English. And in English that passage states that the Shingon-Ritsu school of Japanese Buddhism follows the Sarvastivada vinaya. I was under the impression that no one did because the lineage that followed it went extinct. Could someone look into this or clarify?

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{WikiProject Buddhism}}
+{{Talk header}}
+{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|
+{{WikiProject Buddhism |importance=Mid}}
+{{WikiProject South Asia |importance=Low}}
+{{WikiProject India |importance=Low |assess-date=May 2015}}
+}}
+==Untitled==
 Transfered from article : One of only two schools to have their written works survive..[ Which school was the second? ]
+:Theravadin maybe? <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:218.166.91.92|218.166.91.92]] ([[User talk:218.166.91.92|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/218.166.91.92|contribs]]) 2006-06-20T20:43:25</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
-:Theravadin maybe?
-== This article needs references to clarify ==
+==This article needs references to clarify==
 Otherwise, it appears to be the editors interpretations only.  [[User:Alien666|Alien666]] 13:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
+The second was indeed the Theravada.
+[[User:Huifeng|Huifeng]] 02:41, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
+==Sarvastivada vs. Tibetan Buddhism==
+I don't think it's appropriate to structure the article around conjecture and an image of Tibetan monks. This clearly associates Tibetan rpactice with the subject of the article whereas it was my impression tha tin reality it seems most evidence linking Sarvastivadin texts exists in Gandhara or north of Tibet in the former Buddhist kingdoms of the Taklamakan. [[User:Pratyeka|prat]] ([[User talk:Pratyeka|talk]]) 03:21, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
+:Tibetan monks are technically from the [[Mulasarvastivada]] Nikaya (they follow the Mulasarvastivada Vinaya), and the Mulasarvastivada Nikaya has its basis in the Sarvastivadins of Mathura, so far as we know. So the Tibetan monks are technically a subdivision of Sarvastivada. The "[[early Buddhist schools]]," first and foremost, were basically vinaya lineages. [[User talk:Tengu800|<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif">Tengu800</span>]] 03:41, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
+== Details of Philosophy ==
+This section provides some valuable information, but unfortunately isn't referenced in detail. In particular, one of several theories on the connection between the Sarvastivada and the Mulasarvastivada is being presented as fact without attribution- that the Sauntantrika developed into the Mulasarvastivada. --[[User:Spasemunki|Spasemunki]] ([[User talk:Spasemunki|talk]]) 06:27, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
+:Time for research! [[User:Ogress|'''Ogress''']] [[User_Talk:Ogress|<sub style="color:#BA55D3;">''smash!''</sub>]] 08:13, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
+== Question ==
+So I was doing some research and on the the German page of the [[Ritsu school]] of Buddhism I came across this quote ''"Im Shingon-Ritsu wurden zusätzlich zum Shibun-ritsu das Bonmōkyō (梵網經, das Brahmajāla-sūtra), das Yugaron (瑜伽論, das Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra), '''die Regelwerke der Sarvastivada, sowie die drei Hauptschriften von Dao Xuan verwendet.'''"'' I cannot understand German, the reason why I was on that page is because google translate is relatively competent at translating it into readable English. And in English that passage states that the Shingon-Ritsu school of Japanese Buddhism follows the Sarvastivada vinaya. I was under the impression that no one did because the lineage that followed it went extinct. Could someone look into this or clarify?