Jump to content

Talk:Anagarika Dharmapala

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

His nationalist racialist orientation

[edit]

This article does not include information about his nationalist and racialist view points which were contraversial even then but still have repucussions in the countries politics.Such speeches and letters are documented.12:26, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Sign ur edits, or shut the hell up!123.255.55.140 14:19, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Needs a discussion Ethno-Nationalism

[edit]

This article ignores his contributions to the formation of the Sinhalese Buddhist nationalism that lead to independence, as well as the ongoing problems on the island. I don't think that Dharmapala would want his work in this area to be ignored, I imagine he was rather proud of it. This material is easily available, I'll try to add something when I have time, but I might not get to it.

edit: I added a brief section in this area. Someone could add some more if they wanted, just try to keep it NPOV. Joechip123 20:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"He once praised the normal Tamil vadai seller for his courage and blamed the Sinhalese people who were lazy and called upon them to rise. He strongly protested against the killing of cattle and eating of beef." Where is the reference for this quote? Interesting that whenever someone puts in something a Sinhalese nationalist doesn't like, it requires detailed references. When it suits their purposes, the same stringency is not required. This quote is unreferenced, poorly written, and has nothing to do with the section. Any objections to it being taken down? Joechip123 08:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV edits

[edit]

Iwazaki: Don't go taking out parts that don't suit your ideology - I'm quoting one of the most reputable scholars on Sri Lanka in the world. My information is referenced. Saying that he promoted this ideology is a matter of public record. Do you want me to quote him directly? I can do that if you want me to.

Do you know what a POV article is? One that only tells the warm fuzzy parts about a controversial character. That's not the point of Wikipedia. Go start your own website for personal projects like that.

And finally, when you do a major edit like that, you need to provide a REALL good explanation in the talk page. --Joechip123 04:44, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure what ideology you are talking about.What i removed is a POV fork ..I have studied about the life of Anagarika Dharmapala and I have a enormous respect to his ideology..SO if anything I was removing some misleading facts from this article. And I am not sure who thinks he is a controversial character ? Just because Mr Devotta thinks he is controversial ,doesn't make him Controversial..Except for the LTTE sympathizers who like anything BUT Sinhalese, no one consider him as a controversial figure in my country. And regarding four points, I would appreciate it,if you can quote him directly about the second point.This gives an impression to the reader that he is a tamil hater when he was absolutely not..And please stick to the point next time, otherwise i am not going to entertain you here..Asking me start my own web site and bla bla, will certainly not going to help you.Iwazaki 会話。討論 09:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your ideological bias is obvious in your comments here: "Except for the LTTE sympathizers who like anything BUT Sinhalese, no one consider him as a controversial figure in my country". Correct me if I am wrong, but this statement could be restated as "except for a sizable number of Tamils [i.e. LTTE sympathizers] in Sri Lanka, no one thinks he is controversial in my country". Well, guess what? That makes him a controversial character! If we can safely say that several hundred-thousand, if not several million Tamils don't think of his legacy as being so positive, then he is a controversial character.Furthermore, DeVotta is a widely respected scholar so it does matter what he thinks. If Wikipedia is going to start ignoring prominent scholars, then it might as well stop including references at all. However, to indulge you, I will put back my section, but reinforce it with direct quotes from Dharmapala himself. I hope that will satisfy you. Joechip123 18:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have inserted a direct quote from Anagarike Dharmapala himself from a book published by your Sinhalese government which was already cited in the references. I have also explained that he is controversial primarily in the Tamil community. I'm hoping that this should settle our argument. Joechip123 19:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't know wikipedia is a place for fairy tale allegations..I didn't know terrorists have a moral ethics to condemn other people..If you don't have any substantial evidence please refrain from adding unjust criticism here..I am not going to waste my time replying for some one who seems to looking to settle a score here.Iwazaki 会話。討論 15:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, I should reference someone saying he is disliked by a significant number of Tamils. I'll put one in. The appropriate thing to do is not taking out the comment altogether, but asking me for a reference, which I am able to provide for you. The conflict in SL has two sides, and every article that involves it in any significant way should tell sides, with an explicit reference to their views as opinions, not empirical fact. That was what I was attempting to do by attributing that opinion to a portion of the Tamil population. It's not an allegation, but a statement of fact.
I have no personal involvement in the SL conflict. I am of European descent, from Canada, have never been to SL, and don't even know anyone from the country. My interest is purely scholarly. I have no score to settle here Iwazaki, I just want this article to tell both sides of the story. It is very clear from your comments that you have a great deal of personal involvement in the content of this article. You need to do some personal evaluation of your own biases and how they are driving your actions and comments. I'm not denying that I have a bias in the conflict, but you can't see it in my writing. You should do the same. Joechip123 17:57, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a reference showing a Tamil perspective, as well as one presenting a Sinhalese one. Feel free to find better examples, or to fine tune the wording. I do feel that it is important to show both sides of the argument with controversial people. Maybe this requires a new section? I may put more in on his thought on war and so forth once I'm done my papers in a few weeks. Joechip123 00:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Needs more on his life in Sri Lanka

[edit]

This article (which comes, in large part, from a weak source) does not have nearly enough on his life and work in in Sri Lanka and in their Buddhist revival. If someone else wants to add this information, that would be awesome. If not, I'll get to it eventually. Joechip123 08:10, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Major additions and edits 5 May 2009

[edit]

Added new sections on "Dharmapala, Science, and Protestant Buddhism" and "Survey of Writings."

Added paragraphs on the Mahabodhi society and racist language.

Changed section title from "Early life" to "Biography," and added three paragraphs to this section.

Combined all information about his name change and meaning of his new title and name in one paragraph under "Biography."

Added 10 print sources.

Please note that I have NOT DELETED a single word.

Pilgrim144 (talk) 02:33, 6 May 2009 (UTC)pilgrim144[reply]

Remove or rewrite Personal Life section

[edit]

personal life section should be removed entirely. I dispute the validity of the source cited.

"Dharmapala has a close identification with his mother" and "Dharmapala was a homosexual" are both wrong statements.

"Perhaps we are not reading too much into this incident if we infer that the strong impression of the brahmachariya vow on the child was due to his identification with his mother".

Author's inference is not the same as "has a close identification with his mother"

"Much later the british noted in their confidential files that dharmapala was a homosexual. While there is no independant evidence of this, it is likely that he was alt least latently homosexual. he was found of keeping young boys around him as disciples or acolytes. In his adolescence, he was closely associated with the English theosophist leadbeater who, it was later discovered, was homosexual".

homosexuality? there is no clear evidence for this. "Having male disciples", a common practice among Buddhist schools and Hindu asrams (roughly equivalent to apprenticeship) is given as proof. These are not proofs for homosexuality. The citation is filled with such psychoanalytical conjunctures. imho, it's not a well researched article. Bijupunalor (talk) 14:22, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

this research article was written by well known Anthropologist Gananath Obeyesekere (Emeritus Professor of Anthropology at Princeton University). So you can't simply dismiss it. And this is a known fact among monks who has close relationship with dharmapala. (although it's not possible to cite in an encyclopedia ) Nidahasa (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:10, 30 June 2011 (UTC).[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Anagarika Dharmapala. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:53, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

"The above was adapted from Sangharakshita, Great Buddhists of the Twentieth Century, Windhorse Publications 1996, with permission."

This sentence was moved from the article, section "Religious contribution". I am not certain whether this is the correct procedure for copyright purposes, but it certainly belongs more on the talk page than in the article. Please note that i was not the person who posted this statement on the article.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 18:46, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That appears to date back to the creation of this article in 2004. The article creator, Shantavira, claims to have been an editor with Windhorse Publications for 25 years. The content of the original article is not the same as what is in the "religious contribution" section so I think it is fine that you removed that note. Dammitkevin (talk) 12:16, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Anagarika Dharmapala. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:35, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Anagarika Dharmapala. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:23, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In order for this to be a non biased page this needs to be addressed

[edit]

There needs to be more discussion of colonial (European) sentiments of racial purity during that time, and Dharmapala's place in such a society. There are clearly angry Tamils and Sinhalese on this page battling it out and editing over each other. Dharmapala was a product of his time, and probably was racist, because Europeans, his subjugaters, were racist as well. No where in this article is this addressed. Dillmon (talk) 00:59, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Feel free to edit yourself, using reliable sources.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 13:28, 21 July 2018 (UTC) pinging.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 13:29, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was at Anagariaka Dharmapala's house today (Carnival Ice Cream) after a long time and was taken down memory lane (by a person) and came to this page... Sadly, there are many 'editors' on Wikipedia who have 'agendas'. I have brought it to the notice of Wikipedia... Wikipedia is an anti-Sinhalese/Sri Lankan web site as there are many people with 'vested interest' who like to use the Wikipedia as a tool to discredit Sri Lanka (especially the Sinhalese). There are many pages on Wikipedia which is G7 (White) biased or other 'special interest' biased (opinion).

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anagarika_Dharmapala&oldid=1206957540"