Talk:Korean Buddhism

Korean Buddhism received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Korea Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Buddhism Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religion Low‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Blanking

Acmuller, who had originally created this text (which he thereby licensed under the GFDL) now wants this article to be removed. He replaced the article text on September 30, 2004 by the following:

To Wikipedia Editors:

I have removed this entire article, as it is in copyright violation. I am the author of the original article, which is located at

http://www.hm.tyg.jp/~acmuller/kor-bud/korbud-overview.html

I have removed it in the past, and it was returned. Please do not return it. If someone would like to make a link to that article, fine, but do not roll back to this page.

Charles Muller (acmuller@gol.com)

I'd just like to point out that since he licensed his own text under the GFDL, our use of it here on Wikipedia is quite legal, not infringing his copyright, and AFAIK he has no way of revoking that GFDL license.

I have thus reinstantiated the text. Lupo 11:20, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The earliest version of the external web page at the www.archive.org is from February 15, 2004: http://web.archive.org/web/20040215174502/http://www.hm.tyg.jp/~acmuller/kor-bud/korbud-overview.html and has a cc-by-nc-sa (V1.0) license. Lupo 11:20, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The text in our article has been written originally on August 15 and August 19, 2003, i.e. about 6 months before the archiving at www.archive.org took place. Acmuller has contacted Jimbo about this. See also my talk page. Lupo 12:34, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I am an extensive contributor to Wikipedia, including over 200 entries.

A while back, I contributed this lengthy article on Korean Buddhism, but after finding it being copied around the Web without attribution, I decided I was not happy about this, and took the article down (but leaving a link to the original site). The edits done during the interim added nothing to the content, consisting only of the chopping of long paragraphs into little one.

The Wikipedia editors tell me that I have lost my rights to this material by originally posting it under the GFPL. If this is so, it is a sad case, and certainly does not seem reflective of the spirit of cooperation we would expect to see from Wikipedia. Regardless of the legalities of the matter, it seems that out of common decency, as the author of the total piece, I should have the right to decide I don't want it on Wikipedia. This is a special case, and I have not, and do not intend to repeat it with any of the other hundreds of pieces I have contributed.

In any case, it was a bad idea just to re-paste the article from the original site (without the author's permission), because this is legally no longer a document that was originally contained and edited on the Wikipedia site, but an article that was demonstrably copied directly from a copyrighted work. My suggestion is to remove it immediately, to avoid legal problems. (The author)

You had better explain this in more detail. Acmuller uploaded his own text, and has thus re-licensed it under the GFDL. So cut the crap with "copyright violations". This is not a copyright violation at all. Lupo 09:35, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

It's not, if it's a rollback (which it is now), but someone had just gone to my site and copied the present article as is, which would not have been kosher. User:Acmuller

Ah, ok; I had missed that. Lupo 15:17, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

A rewrite

I have done a pretty complete rewrite of this whole text, including the later developments after 1392, which Acmuller simply had cut off without moving them anywhere else (at least I didn't find it anywhere). I have been working from this revision of our text.

Basically, I have tried to:

Remove redundancies and opinions.
Summarized to some extent virtually all sections. I have tried not to drop information in the process, but sometimes I had to try to judge what was important and what was less so. For instance, in the "Unified Silla Period", I cut most of the diuscussion of Weonhyo's work and replaced it with a very brief summary. Most of his achievements are covered in Weonhyo anyway.
I also removed some of the interspersed mini-biographies on various monks: these can go to separate articles on them.
Added some of the Chinese names from the external link given, especially on red links or where they are not prominently given in the article pointed to. (Note: these are names, i.e. facts, i.e. information that cannot be copyrighted — one cannot copyright spelling, and thus this cross-import should be safe.)
Replaced the intro with an abstract of what follows.

The text is now 26KB large, and, in my opinion, still contains most of the relevant facts.

Acmuller, could you please review the article to make sure I didn't inadvertently introduce factual errors or omit important things? After all, you are the expert, not me :-) Lupo 10:45, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

At the risk of missing something obvious: would you care to explain what the abbreviation "fl." is supposed to mean (as in "Beomnang (fl. 632-646)")? Lupo 14:17, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This article could use a "literature references" section. If you could add one or two books (with ISBN, please), preferrably relatively easily accessible and understandable by the laypeople, that'd be great. Lupo 06:52, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Are there any differences in the acceptance and the development of Buddhism since 1945 between North Korea and South Korea, and if so, what's their nature? Lupo 11:24, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Some of the extlinks I added mention that Buddhism in Korea integrated some elements of the Shamanistic beliefs prevalent earlier. I think the article should elaborate a little bit on that topic, too. Lupo 11:32, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Strange sentence

What is this (from the article) supposed to mean:

thus making the influence of Buddhism in Korea steadily into decline, as the number of Christian converts increases.

Good question. It was added on Dec 18, 2004. I've removed it, and corrected the grammar in the first part of the sentence. Lupo 22:59, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I think that person was trying to say something. It is indeed true that Christians made heavy inroads in South Korea after the war. And some of those advances were I think at the expense of Buddhism. So maybe a sentence or so about it would be appropriate, the point is, what to write, and how to write it? --Oleg Alexandrov 23:15, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Oh, I quite agree that somebody was trying to say something. The problem is, I can't figure out what. So I chose removing the incomprehensible bit instead of trying to figure out what could have been meant. (Since you've already put it here on talk, it is preserved for future clarifications.) If Christianism gained at the expense of Buddhism in Korea, I guess somebody better qualified than me will need to write those two sentences. Lupo 23:23, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I left a message on User talk:Chan Han Xiang asking him what he meant with his sentence about Christianity. --Oleg Alexandrov 01:26, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I am not happy with the recent addition by User talk:Chan Han Xiang about Christianity vs. Buddhism. Badly explained. However, something has to be said about this. It is quite true I think that the number of Christians has been increasing, sometimes at the expense of Buddhism.

Christianity vs. Buddhism

Wikipedians, my intention to write this is not to denounce Christianity of whatsoever case or supporting Buddhism just because I am one, but my main intention is just to point out the current status of Buddhism in an more accurate detail. For I, taking me as a neutralist, was unable to elaborate my opinions about the fate of Korean Buddhism, which is in decline. I am not an anti-Christian at all, neither I'm pushing someone's agenda. If anyone is able to improve the content or language of the paragraph:

Today, estimates of the percentage of active Buddhists in the entire Korean peninsula today run around only forty to fifty percent. However, as Buddhism faces an steady decline in its percentage of adherents as active Christian Proselytization upon Koreans in South Korea takes over Buddhism as the country's leading religion in the mid-90's, both Korean Buddhism and Shamanism faces a rather grim future.

But what is written must oblidge to the neutral point of view.

User:Chan Han Xiang

I think we can keep the paragraph -- it just needs to be polished a little and have a slightly less editorial tone. - Nat Kraus e 03:27, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Good. If you can find a way to make it look good and accurate. Oleg Alexandrov 03:54, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Then let's modify it and put it up as soon as possible, guys! User:Chan Han Xiang. 20:42, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Now the holyday season is on, at least in the western world. You might need to have patience for several weeks. Oleg Alexandrov 16:03, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Let's move aside everything. How then, are you going to improvise this paragraph and put it up? It can't stick around here permanently, User:Chan Han Xiang. 16:29, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I made it clear that I can't do it. Let's wait for the maintainers of this article to get to it. If you get tired of waiting, you can insert the paragraph yourself, I will not remove it anymore, but that might not be a good idea, because that paragraph needs cleanup. Oleg Alexandrov 18:01, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

A few points:

We need hard numbers if we're going to state that Christianism was overtaking Buddhism as the prevalent religion in Korea. How many Christians are there in Korea today, 50 years ago, 100 years ago? How many Buddhists? How many (Neo-)Confucians? Other Religions? For current figures, the CIA factbook (last update: Dec 16, 2004) gives "no affiliation 46%, Christian 26%, Buddhist 26%, Confucianist 1%, other 1%" for South Korea; for North Korea, they say "traditionally Buddhist and Confucianist, some Christian and syncretic Chondogyo" [1].
Did the percentage of Buddhists really go down ("dwindle to", as the paragraph claims)? 40 - 50% after 500 years of suppression looks pretty impressive to me...
Anyway, are we talking about South Korea only, or about both states? I already asked before whether there was a difference between the development in the two states. I think that whole section on the time from 1945 on should be rewritten to make clear what it is about.
While Shamanism was an early influence on Korean Buddhism, is it really warranted to mention it in a paragraph on today's situation? Does Shamanism still play a role today at all?
Is the analysis expressed in this paragraph (namely the implication that Christian proselytization was the only cause for a decline of Buddhism in Korea) true, and if so, backed by what external sources? And even if it was not the only cause, what external sources do back this claim at all?

Lupo 08:16, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Remarks about article style

Overall, the wording is a bit dense. It's not very interesting to the nonexpert. Someone should add a paragraph about how Korean Buddhism compares to other traditions in the modern context. Contrasting on points of belief about shunyata and the importance of different texts and practices would be useful. I edited for style. As an article, this is not ready for feature. --Defenestrate 01:26, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Added an introduction piece

In an attempt to address the objections I raised in the peer review page, I added an introduction section. This section should be revised and enlarged, and should explain why anyone would want to read the rest of the article. --Defenestrate 01:46, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

rise of christianity

It's sad that buddhism and shaminism is dying in korea. --Dangerous-Boy

copy edit/NPV?

I've done as much proofing as I can but some paragraphs need more than a copy editor. The last 4 paragraphs of "Buddhism as state religion in the Goryeo period (918-1392)" don't seem neutral to me, and even less so is the paragraph in "Turbulence and Decline" dealing with Syngman Rhee. I don't know the facts well enough to even start to fix these. Zagloba 16:11, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Groups of Korean Buddhism not mentioned in this article

The following groups, most of which have at least 1 % of the Korean population as adherents are not mentioned in this article:

Chogyejong
Taigojong
Chontaijong
Mitajong
Chongwhajong
Kwanumjong
Bulgyonwoi
Won
Ilkwando
Hoa Hao
Pophwa
Yongwhagyo

Sarcelles 06:05, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Korean Buddhist God: Music Group

There is an important Japanese punk rock/new wave group named "Korean Buddhist God" that is dedicated to talking about Korean Buddhism in a punk rock format. The group is intellectually oriented. What is the political response of the page's authors to a disambiguation? I am not actually an expert on this band, so I only wrote a sub-stub. I assume that there could be a clash in the tone of the two articles involved. This is mainly just FYI. Tx.--McDogm 16:49, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

I've added an NPOV tag to the Turbulence and Decline (1945-present) section. I feel the section could use a more neutral tone, as well as more citation. Generally, it needs to discuss facts...what has happened, with citation, and discuss opinions in the context of the views of certain groups or individuals, with citation....to say "so and so person feels that such and such is true [cite]" is better than to outright say "some people think such and such is true". I hope that makes sense.EvilPhoenix 01:42, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

I don't know a lot about the facts of the situation, but I tried to make this section be more cogent and less NPOV. It's still NPOV. The problem is that it attributes Buddhism's decline to malintent by Christians. Mr. Tan has an axe to grind with Christians, which is fine, but a bit of balance and fact would make the section more useful. --Defenestrate 1 July 2005 21:49 (UTC)

I took out a lot of the spurious claims, added more information and provided a reference. If/when things are to be added back, the should be done with a reference. uriah923^(talk) 07:33, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What is this supposed to mean?

"led galvanized Koreans to defragmantize the Buddhist powers"??? AnonMoos 02:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Protestant/Catholic distinction

I removed the content recently added that distinguished between Buddhist relations with Protestants and Catholics in Korea as it was completely unsupported and unverifiable. If the content is to be re-added, please do so with a reference. uriah923^(talk) 22:15, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unique traditions and practices of Korean Buddhism

While the article mentions some of the philosophical differences it would be interesting to see some of the practical differences. What practices are unique to Korean Buddhism? Temple design? the practice of bowing, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.39.200.92 (talk) 23:40, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Master Kim, Kim Ho-shang, (Chin ho shang) 金和尚

I would appreciate some help with the Kim Ho-shang article from a specialist. I also request assistance in integrating this key figure in their impact upon Chinese and Tibetan Buddhism.
The Gankyil symbol is a key polysemic teaching tool of the Dzogchenpa, the peak of the Nyingmapa and Bonpo: [2]. I also know that the symbol has cultural relevance to Korea. I would appreciate any iconographic or symbolic assistance with information or citations etc, that anyone may render to progress this matter.
Blessings in the Mindstream
B9 hummingbird hovering^{(talk • contribs)} 08:32, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Editorial Tone in the 'Persecution' section worrying

Protestant antagonism against their Buddhist neighbours in Korea is certainly there, but it's nowhere close to meriting the label 'persecution' as the 'Persecution' paragraph calls it. Besides, the paragraph uses one or two sources that have long been proven to be incorrect - mainly the one with the Korean Christian insulting a Buddhist monk (it was later found that the monk wasn't a Buddhist monk at all, and was a lowlife financing his drink-addled life with alms collected from real, honest Buddhists).

In light of this, I decided to make some changes to the paragraph, and basically make the paragraph less controversial and omit the reference to the source above. If anybody has concerns, they can talk to me. - 1tephania (talk) 00:39, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

inconsistencies

The first sentence suggests that Korean Buddhism is unique among other Buddhist schools in its attempts to resolve internal inconsistencies. I believe this to be inaccurate. There are abundant examples of this in Chinese and Tibet traditions. Even going back into India, one could argue that the evolving schools were precisely formulated around the catalyst of attempting to resolve inconsistencies in philosophical ideas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.46.189.10 (talk) 15:56, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How can President Chun Doo-hwan be described as a Methodist when wiki's article on him lists him as a Buddhist, and he even spent some time between 1988 and 1990 "living" at a Buddhist temple? (I am not saying that bad things did not happen to Buddhism when he was President, but the fact that he was Buddhist himself makes the whole scenario more complicated, and interesting.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.192.21.37 (talk) 12:09, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Influence on Tibetan Buddhism

Recent research has revealed that Korean Buddhism was formative in the development of Tibetan Buddhism, especially during the Tang Dynasty (618–907). See Kapstein, Matthew T. (2002). "From Korea to Tibet: Action at a Distance in the Early Medieval World System" in The Tibetan Assimilation of Buddhism: Conversion, Contestation, and Memory. Oxford University Press. Shrigley (talk) 02:55, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Korean Buddhism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:28, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Korean Buddhism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080914141501/http://www.koreatimes.co.kr:80/www/news/nation/2008/07/117_28491.html to http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2008/07/117_28491.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:40, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Korean Buddhism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160105174035/http://www.buddhapia.com/eng/extensive/index.html to http://www.buddhapia.com/eng/extensive/index.html

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:33, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Korean Buddhism. 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) 21:20, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Korean Buddhism. 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) 17:57, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]