Template talk:Zen Buddhism

Naming convention: Japanese vs Chinese vs Sanskrit

Is it appropriate for this template to be referred to by the Japanese name? Chan was a chinese concept before it was transmitted to japan. It is commonly called zen in the US and other english-speaking countries, but does that mean that the Wikipedia template should reflect this bias towards japanese language?

It would probably be most appropriate to refer to it as Dhyāna and then link to Zen and Chan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mualphachi (talk • contribs) 16:14, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Enlightenment

'Enlightenment' is used to translate several terms, not just bodhi. This ambiguation may cause misinterpretation, since bodhi often refers to sambodhi, perfect insight, where kensho refers to a first insight. The use of the common term enlightenment suggests that people all at once can be perfected - which seems basically a western dream, not a Buddhist doctrine, though the emphasis on kensho in certain traditions comes close. by linking to this page, with several meanings, readers at least can become aware of this ambiguity, and investigate it further. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 15:17, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Zen Buddhism

the bottom of the template links to Category:Zen Buddhism, but this is an empty page, with another link. Shouldn't the category be Category:Zen ? Joshua Jonathan (talk) 12:46, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

USA Zen

I'm wrestling with the list of USA Zen: how to order it? Now I'm using lineages, but that's arbitrary. and I'm listing persons and main-centers/temples, to provides entries to interested readers. But other ways of categorizing might be possible as well. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 07:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excessively detailed template

These side templates are just meant for quick links to the most essential pages. When a template like this has a hundred links on it, even the collapsible version is unmanageably large. These templates (as well as Wikipedia pages in general), should follow well established precedents for high quality Wikipedia material. Tengu800 21:06, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay... I'll shrink them down. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 19:52, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to make these changes. The new revision looks much more succinct and easy to navigate. Tengu800 02:51, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

wrong kanji

it should be 禅

PadmaPhala (talk) 02:34, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is just a simplified variant of the character, and it is not the traditional character. The original Chinese character is 禪. The simplified variant, which is widely used in Japan, is 禅. The character 禪 is the most traditional and correct Hanzi for Zen (Chan). Tengu800 00:15, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The character you are advocating is a Shinjitai form, and is not the traditional character. Tengu800 00:30, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bidirectional use

User talk:Yworo#Zen-Buddhism templates pointed out that templates should be bidirectional, and should have a restricted use. Therefore I'm adding some links, and will remove some others, to have the main articles listed in this template. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 07:24, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

False attribution

Why is the Vajrasamadhi Sutra attributed to "Chinese texts" under the section "Zen scripture"? The article for that sutra states that it was composed and produced in Korea. Thus it has nothing to do with either "Indian Mahayana texts" or "Chinese texts". It is a Korean product and should be excluded from the section. Please check and clarify. StanleyRS (talk) 12:28, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]