User talk:Admin

From Wikivinaya

Revision as of 08:58, 3 July 2006

Dear Dhjt, I would also like to suggest rephrasing these major categories below too:

• Background - fine
• Structure - not quite sure what this means?

This is short for 'Structure of the Vinaya' - the scripture.

• Patimokkha - use diacrticals in all articles and headings, only never mind in Talk pages and behind the scenes, so Pātimokkha. (I'll send you a handy Paali scratch pad that allows you to type in velthius code and it converts to UTF-8 or VRI.)

I am busy trying to get the Wikipedia diacriticals (see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Buddha_%28disambiguation%29&action=edit - bottom of page) into WikiVinaya, but it's proving a bit harder than I suspected. I requested help from editthis.info but they didn't reply yet.

• Mahavagga - better to use non-sectarian terminology, just 'Khandhakas' for both Mahaavagga ("The Big Book") and Cuulavagga (the "Small Book"). 'Khandhaka' or 'Vastu' would be recognised by Vinaya scholars of other traditions too. I should add this as a point in the Standardising the Structure page (always include which Khandhaka when citing the Mv and Cv).
• Culavagga

OK by me

• Sutta Pitaka - maybe a section in 'Background' called "Dhamma & Vinaya" would be better for this, or a mention in the main page that leads to a little article?

Here I actually mean Vinaya-related parts of the Sutta-Pitaka, I know there are a few which are quite interesting, like the time when Buddha went into a three-month retreat, and the Sangha adpoted a new pacittiya, isn't that one in the Sutta-pitaka somewhere?

• Commentaries - Have a look in the "Texts and Structure of Vinaya texts" that I sent you, you might find the sections on the commentaries in there useful.
• Monastery rules - I wouldn't include this controversial topic as a category. The nature of 'Kor Wat' in terms of Vinaya, what 'Kor Wat' means in various Thai monasteries and in WPN is a complex and controversial area.

Many people are confused about kor wat and vinaya and mix it, that's why I feel it does need a place in WikiVinaya, I think not to include all the kor watta - it's just to varied and uncertain, but still good to have a link to it from the main page I think. What's the Vinaya perspective on Kor wat is a good one for WV I think. The individual rules can have some info on some kor wat in the commentaries section maybe?

• Categories

I hope you like the editing I did on the main page, if not it's all saved I think. BFN, Santi. Bhikkhu Santi 01:39, 1 July 2006 (EDT)

Yes it's true all old versions can be easily get back. Sometimes I think your language is a bit difficult, I prefer easier terms myself, but it's basically ok I think. I am going to move some parts of it to the relevant pages; I believe the part on Fundamental Guidelines belongs with the Guideniles on discussion - I will integrate it there. By the way, WikiVinaya is not a forum so the discussion element will, I hope, not be too big here. But it's true, guidelines are definately needed. Also try not to use 'I' on the main page, it's supposed to represent WikiVinaya or WikiVinaya Guidelines, not the personal opinions of contributors. When discussing these guidelines it's ok to use I but not in the actual document. I will also move 'Goal and Contents' to a seperate page, and make the part that appears on the front page just an introduction. I turned your piece on the 7 vinayarecencions into an actual article, so now we have 4 already! ;-) BTW I also left it on the Vinaya section, so it's here two times now. greetings DJti 03:51, 1 July 2006 (EDT)

P.S. I don't think the Abhidhamma said much on Vinaya, so it doesn't have too much to do with WikiVinaya, no?

     Sort of, but I really was thinking of the kind of people who are obsessed with commentaries and abhidhamma and would become a major headache if they turn up here. If they see Gavesako and my names then they'll probably know this is a hopeless case from their point of view and leave us alone. The Esangha Theravada forum fell apart - the non-Abhidhammikas went to websangha and the Abhidhammikas set up their own 'Abhidhamma-Vipassana' forum, which is a good name - at least it makes it clear to people what to expect before getting involved.

Bhikkhu Santi 04:40, 3 July 2006 (EDT) P.S. 2 The main page shouldn't mention 'internal wikivinaya' isues, it's a place for readers mainly, 'Community portal' is the place for editors.

Hi Dhjt, I really anumodana with your idea and I would like to help a lot if the human lifespan were just a few decades longer, but even though I think this is a totally wonderful project and I'd be willing to help in principle, I've just got too many other worthwhile projects going already (leading the Vinaya classes here, new Chanting book/ encyclopedia (!), major Vinaya/ early Buddhist monastic culture research essay that turned into a book and then I realised the scope is much too narrow and I really have to rewrite most of it after doing several years more reading around! etc. etc. plus office work here at Santi, extraordinary impulsive projects from BS gallore, oh, and I remember reading somewhere that I ought to find some time for meditation too! I'm going to be putting my laptop away for Vassa soon, well maybe a couple of weeks into Vassa when I've got to the point where I plan to stop in the Vinaya classes. I hope you won't see me online for 3 months, if you do, tell me to go back to my hut! Several years ago I started thinking about the intrinsic inadequacies of BMC, and then I saw Aj. MahaVirapong and T. Kevali's Ariya-Vinaya, and I thought that one day that would be a great thing to do in English. BS and I also discussed how I should keep all the notes from the classes and improve on them for several rounds. (I expect it to take me a couple of years to get through the whole Vinaya in the classes here since I'm determined to include all the communal side of the Vinaya which I feel is normally left out because it would conflict with 'the way things are' (!). In future rounds I plan to try to include more comparative analysis with the other recensions.) until they might be ready to make into something like Ariya-Vinaya for publication. So I'd be very happy to send you the notes I make for the Vinaya classes here, and if you ever want clarification on "does this come from the Vinaya or the comy. ?" or any other smallish, manageable questions I'd be very happy to help, but as much as part of me would love to I just do not have enough hours in the day, years in my life, to get majorly involved with another worthwhile Dhamma project. If you want it to work I think you will have to be prepared to do most of the work yourself, at least until it takes off, which could be years. You could also look around for another helper who doesn't necessarily need to be extremely knowledgeable about Vinaya but can proofread your Dutch-English - it's almost always clear what you mean but it often doesn't sound totally fluent, especially in writing. Maybe one of the native English monks at Amaravati would be willing and able to help? I can also check single points in the other Vinaya recensions if you have specific questions, I'm not very familiar with how to do it but BS will help me learn. You could get the Chinese Tipitaka yourself for free: there is an online version at http://www.cbeta.org/index.htm and the CD they send out for free has much more user friendly software, then you need "Dr.Eye" Chinese reading software with the special ancient Chinese vocab. Then you need a copy of "Survey of Vinaya Literature" by Prebish for the correspondence tables, and after that it's just a matter of patience and time. Bhikkhu Santi 04:40, 3 July 2006 (EDT)

I just added the Mahasanghika-Lokuttaravada to the "Extant Vinaya recensions page". Also, I just thought, do you want to copy all the useful Vinaya related text files from the Mulesika group files section to here? I ought to remove the PTS Patimokkha edition I put up there, I got it from WPN computer and there is no copyright notice on it but I think it probably is. They probably sent it to Aj. Yatiko for his wide-version. Bhikkhu Santi 04:58, 3 July 2006 (EDT)