Talk:Buddhist art

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Buddhist art article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and the next release version of Wikipedia. This Arts article has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale.

Buddhist art is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do.

Buddhist art appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 6, 2005.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
More information about this article... ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. This article is a selected article on the India portal, which means that it was selected as a high quality India-related article.

Buddhist art is a selected article on the India Portal, which means that it was selected as a high quality India-related article.

This article is a former featured article removal candidate. Please see the archive to see why its featured status was upheld.

Added some content User:PHG 21 Aug 2004

Contents 1 Request for admin assistance: Currently featured article moved inappropriately 2 Portable Shrine 3 Buddhist sculpture 4 Ashoka Column picture removed 5 Contemporary Buddhist Art

[edit] Request for admin assistance: Currently featured article moved inappropriately

This is the currently featured aricle on the main page, and it has been moved without any discussion here from Buddhist art to Buddhist decorative art. If you read Decorative art, it is quite clear that the forms of art here are not decorative art "furniture, furnishings, interior design, and architecture" etc. as defined therein. The move back is complicated though, and an admin will have to fix it.--Pharos 05:11, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hyacinth moved it while it was on the main page (a terrible idea, and he should have known better.) I fixed it and did a page history merge. →Raul654 19:08, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

Actually, "Buddhist art, defined as the figurative and decorative arts linked to the Buddhist religion" ([1]). Hyacinth 23:53, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

How would I have known? Perhaps such an inappropriate titled article should not be a featured article. Hyacinth 23:37, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Don't get me wrong - I don't know enough to judge whether or not the name should be changed, and you could very well be right. On the other hand, the problem was not pressing, so you should have waited 24 hours and then moved it instead of while it was on the main page. . →Raul654 23:57, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

• Actually, per my comments above, decorative art is one form of visual art that is not described by this article. Literally "decorative" art not directly related to religion, as well as religious architecture don't really belong here, but there is an unfortunate absence of some furnishing-type religious art forms.--Pharos 00:08, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I entirely agree with Raul654. One of the most annoying things around here is when people move pages without discussion: quite apart from the fact that the move may be ill-advised (as I think this one was) it's downright discourteous. The move should usually be discussed on the talk pages of any relevant articles first, particularly where a page move may be controversial [2]. I was very surprised when I saw this one, and had it been by anyone else I'd have moved it straight back. Mark¹ 05:30, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Okay then, you all will need to create a warning that goes on the featured article saying it is featured and on the main page and requesting that users not be bold for a day. Hyacinth 23:04, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Has this been done? Hyacinth 18:56, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Buddha teaches us to not care about how something looks and his teachings don't encourage anything related to attachment to things, such as art. Buddhist art is more inspired by the countries' culture and way of life rather than religion. Buddhist art is based on where it is created and there is no such thing as decorative art. Art is just art. Buddhism is Buddhism.

[edit] Portable Shrine

Is there a reason why portable shrine is a subsection of the Japan section? Only Tibet is mentioned in the subsection, so I suspect this is a mistake.--Malcohol 12:38, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Buddhist sculpture

There are 13 images of sculptures and 2 which are not. Is Buddhist art predominately (1:7.5) sculpture, or is the page misrepresentative. Hyacinth 19:02, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Buddhist art isn't necessarily predominantly sculpture. However, since much of Buddhist art comes from ancient history, we are left with mostly sculpture as evidence. Songs are forgotten, paper rots, musical instruments get broken, but giant pieces of stone stay giant pieces of stone for a long time. I would like to see more photos of art that isn't sculpture, but I'm not surprised that Buddhist art pages, much like any page on the art of ancient people, includes mostly sculpture (and modern Buddhist art isn't public domain yet). Phidauex 05:15, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I think the page is missing some most vital facts about buddhist arts. As far as I know Sri Lanka is one of the countries which has influvenced dy and influvensed on the buddhism and buddhist art and I strongly suggest somebody should add a section on Sri Lanka also.

Sri Lankan Buddhism remains insular and has never been "influential" per se. The form practised on the island is known as "Theraveda" or "Hinayana," (Small Vehicle). It relies heavily on an individual approach, in contrast to Mayahana (Great Vehicle) which relies on a more collective approach. The former belief is that one has to find the motivation to pursue enlightment on one's own. The latter belief is that a truly enlightened person, or at least a sincere pursuit of enlightment involves compassion and the desire to share the knowledge that one has with one's fellow being. Hinayana died out for the most part, as a result of this belief, except in isolated areas, such as Sri Lanka. Mahayana, on the other hand, owing to it's more social nature and malleable belief structure, continues to thrive throughout Asia and has spread to Europe and the Americas, albeit in small numbers, from its humble beginnings in the Himalayas. This is not to say that Mahayana is better; on the contrary, there are many who believe that Theraveda better represents Buddhism's original form, as it is older and more conservative. On the other hand, there are those who believe that Buddhism must adapt itself to the culture and epoch in which it finds itself in order to best serve the needs of the people.

[edit] Ashoka Column picture removed

This picture was removed because of possible copyright violation. The copyright notice on Wikipedia incorrectly stated that the picture is from buddha101.com and used with the permission of the author of that site. The picture is not on buddha101.com and no permission was given.

[edit] Contemporary Buddhist Art

This page looks like it should be called 'Past Buddhist Art'. Art is part of contemporary Buddhist practice in all of the cultures mentioned and yet there are no examples of it, and no discussion of it. In addition Buddhism has been transmitted to Europe, Africa, the Americas, and Australasia, in which places there is at least a fledgling Buddhist art practice, if only because there are Buddhists there who make art. Let's look to bring the page up to date by featuring some contemporary Buddhist artists, and discuss some of the contemporary issues in Buddhist art. mahābāla 19:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the article could use a 'modern buddhist art' section. I'll help research it and improve the article, but since I'm no art scholar, I'm not sure where to start looking. Do you have any recommendations of influential modern buddhist artists I could read about to start my research? We may also need to do some extra hunting for free images. The more modern the art, the harder it can be to find free-licensed images, which would be critical for a featured article like this one. Phidauex 15:04, 23 June 2006 (UTC)