Talk:Zen: Difference between revisions
imported>Russell Potter |
imported>Thomas Mandel |
||
Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
As far as I can tell, the nelow paragraph is all that remains of the Wikipedia article. | As far as I can tell, the nelow paragraph is all that remains of the Wikipedia article. | ||
The emergence of Zen as a distinct school of Buddhism was first documented in China in the 7th century CE. It is thought to have developed as an amalgam of various currents in Mahāyāna Buddhist thought—among them the Yogācāra and Madhyamaka philosophies and the Prajñāpāramitā literature—and of local traditions in China, particularly Daoism and Huáyán Buddhism. From China, Zen subsequently spread southwards to Vietnam and eastwards to Korea and Japan. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Zen also began to establish a notable presence in North America and Europe. | ''The emergence of Zen as a distinct school of Buddhism was first documented in China in the 7th century CE. It is thought to have developed as an amalgam of various currents in Mahāyāna Buddhist thought—among them the Yogācāra and Madhyamaka philosophies and the Prajñāpāramitā literature—and of local traditions in China, particularly Daoism and Huáyán Buddhism. From China, Zen subsequently spread southwards to Vietnam and eastwards to Korea and Japan. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Zen also began to establish a notable presence in North America and Europe.'' | ||
::I don't know about that stuff. My book says it manifesting as two distinct methodologies. (Why was that fact deleted?)I'd like to know who says Zen is an amalgam of various currents (what is currents?) And Zen is absolutely not about any philosophy or thoughts or even literature. My spelling of Daoism is Taoism. I don't mean to be rude but the paragraph is misleading, confusing, and incorrect. And it does not say anything useful. But coming from Wikipedia I am not surprised. It is a good example of editors creating confusion within an article and then proclaiming that it is nonsense. Well, not saying that is happening here, but I can see the last sentence of a wikipedia article - "It is generally agreed that "everyone" (with a few exceptions)ignores Zen." Just joking...[[User:Thomas Mandel|Thomas Mandel]] 20:40, 5 July 2007 (CDT) | ::I don't know about that stuff. My book says it manifesting as two distinct methodologies. (Why was that fact deleted?)I'd like to know who says Zen is an amalgam of various currents (what is currents?) And Zen is absolutely not about any philosophy or thoughts or even literature. My spelling of Daoism is Taoism. I don't mean to be rude but the paragraph is misleading, confusing, and incorrect. And it does not say anything useful. But coming from Wikipedia I am not surprised. It is a good example of editors creating confusion within an article and then proclaiming that it is nonsense. Well, not saying that is happening here, but I can see the last sentence of a wikipedia article - "It is generally agreed that "everyone" (with a few exceptions)ignores Zen." Just joking...[[User:Thomas Mandel|Thomas Mandel]] 20:40, 5 July 2007 (CDT) | ||
:::We must distinguish between Zen as an historical phenomenon, and | :::We must distinguish between Zen as an historical phenomenon, and "Daoism" is the current Pinyin spelling; the older "Taoism" is generally from pre-1958 texts. [[User:Russell Potter|Russell Potter]] 20:44, 5 July 2007 (CDT) | ||
::::That's a lot of original thinking, isn't it Russell? Who says "'''Zen''', about which no article could possibly be written."? What is impossible is the grasping of Zen from the article. So why did you take ZEN out of the article? Hmmmm? Your grasp of history is impressive but ZEN is not the history of Zen. I made the term and entered it here. I know what it means. Why did you have to copy text from Wikipedia? That is, er counterproductive, right? It was not wikipedia to start with, Why did you delete my work without any discussion? That is their Wikiway, I do believe it is not permitted here, of course those are just words. Are you new here? I have never seen Taoism spelled Daoism. Why complicate it? And can you list your sources please? A notable presence in North America? [[User:Thomas Mandel|Thomas Mandel]] 01:03, 6 July 2007 (CDT) |
Revision as of 00:03, 6 July 2007
Workgroup category or categories | Religion Workgroup, Philosophy Workgroup [Editors asked to check categories] |
Article status | External article: from another source, with little change |
Underlinked article? | Yes |
Basic cleanup done? | Yes |
Checklist last edited by | John Stephenson 01:42, 29 June 2007 (CDT) Matt Innis (Talk) 23:26, 28 June 2007 (CDT) |
To learn how to fill out this checklist, please see CZ:The Article Checklist.
Zen
Very easy to say, very hard to do... Thomas Mandel 22:42, 28 June 2007 (CDT)
- Why did someone add stuff from WIkipedia? The idea is to create our own writing as best we can. The article did not start with anything from wikipedia, is there a compelling reason to add it now? Did you just copy stuff over to here? We are trying to be different/better, as it is wht you authored is a Westernized explanation and not quite correct.
- What happened to the koans? I hope this isn't a case of "Oh I didn't understand them so I deleted them." I put them back in. It isn't helpful to have a good grasp on the history at the expense of missing the point,
Thomas Mandel 00:50, 5 July 2007 (CDT)
I think I am going to delete everything that might have come from Wikipedia and start from scratch. I didn't realize that one could come into an article out of the blue and delete everything the author had created. Thomas Mandel 08:18, 5 July 2007 (CDT)
Thomas Mandel 08:18, 5 July 2007 (CDT)
deleting Wikistuff=
As far as I can tell, the nelow paragraph is all that remains of the Wikipedia article.
The emergence of Zen as a distinct school of Buddhism was first documented in China in the 7th century CE. It is thought to have developed as an amalgam of various currents in Mahāyāna Buddhist thought—among them the Yogācāra and Madhyamaka philosophies and the Prajñāpāramitā literature—and of local traditions in China, particularly Daoism and Huáyán Buddhism. From China, Zen subsequently spread southwards to Vietnam and eastwards to Korea and Japan. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Zen also began to establish a notable presence in North America and Europe.
- I don't know about that stuff. My book says it manifesting as two distinct methodologies. (Why was that fact deleted?)I'd like to know who says Zen is an amalgam of various currents (what is currents?) And Zen is absolutely not about any philosophy or thoughts or even literature. My spelling of Daoism is Taoism. I don't mean to be rude but the paragraph is misleading, confusing, and incorrect. And it does not say anything useful. But coming from Wikipedia I am not surprised. It is a good example of editors creating confusion within an article and then proclaiming that it is nonsense. Well, not saying that is happening here, but I can see the last sentence of a wikipedia article - "It is generally agreed that "everyone" (with a few exceptions)ignores Zen." Just joking...Thomas Mandel 20:40, 5 July 2007 (CDT)
- We must distinguish between Zen as an historical phenomenon, and "Daoism" is the current Pinyin spelling; the older "Taoism" is generally from pre-1958 texts. Russell Potter 20:44, 5 July 2007 (CDT)
- That's a lot of original thinking, isn't it Russell? Who says "Zen, about which no article could possibly be written."? What is impossible is the grasping of Zen from the article. So why did you take ZEN out of the article? Hmmmm? Your grasp of history is impressive but ZEN is not the history of Zen. I made the term and entered it here. I know what it means. Why did you have to copy text from Wikipedia? That is, er counterproductive, right? It was not wikipedia to start with, Why did you delete my work without any discussion? That is their Wikiway, I do believe it is not permitted here, of course those are just words. Are you new here? I have never seen Taoism spelled Daoism. Why complicate it? And can you list your sources please? A notable presence in North America? Thomas Mandel 01:03, 6 July 2007 (CDT)
- We must distinguish between Zen as an historical phenomenon, and "Daoism" is the current Pinyin spelling; the older "Taoism" is generally from pre-1958 texts. Russell Potter 20:44, 5 July 2007 (CDT)
- Religion Category Check
- General Category Check
- Philosophy Category Check
- Category Check
- Advanced Articles
- Nonstub Articles
- Internal Articles
- Religion Advanced Articles
- Religion Nonstub Articles
- Religion Internal Articles
- Philosophy Advanced Articles
- Philosophy Nonstub Articles
- Philosophy Internal Articles
- Developed Articles
- Religion Developed Articles
- Philosophy Developed Articles
- Developing Articles
- Religion Developing Articles
- Philosophy Developing Articles
- Stub Articles
- Religion Stub Articles
- Philosophy Stub Articles
- External Articles
- Religion External Articles
- Philosophy External Articles
- Religion Underlinked Articles
- Underlinked Articles
- Philosophy Underlinked Articles
- Religion Cleanup
- General Cleanup
- Philosophy Cleanup
- Cleanup