Talk:Buddhism in the United States

Buddhism High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-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.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 February 2021 and 4 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wellington236.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Geshe Kelsang Gyatso only Western Disciples?

I removed a false statement stating that all of Geshe Kelsang Gyatso's disciples are Westerners. Geshe Kelsang has many disciples in Eastern countries such as Hong Kong and Singapore. If you need evidence of this fact please visit: [The Hong Kong Kadampa Center Page]

I also removed a false statement stating the the NKT is focused primarily on Western needs. Please show evidence that the NKT states this. Visit [kadampa.org] you will see that the NKT is Global Buddhism. Not Western Buddhism and not Tibetan Buddhism. Kadampa Buddhism doesn't belong to any particular culture.

Please try to check your facts before making false statements.

I added the text stating that the NKT has over 50 Centers and branches in the United States. If you would like to check the validity of this statement visit [kadampa.org]

Page Title

Perhaps this article would be better titled "Buddhism in the United States". TheCoffee 08:25, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. (can't login right now)

My main reason for naming the article Buddhism in America rather than Buddhism in the United States was that I didn't necessarily want to exclude information relating to Canada where relevant. A more precise title might be Buddhism in the English- and French-speaking portions of North America, including Hawaii, although, in practice, I have somewhat limited information about the history of Buddhism in Canada and there doesn't seem to be a whole lot to say about it (since North American Buddhist history is kind of concentrated in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and New York). I would appreciate it if someone else would add interesting Canada-related facts when possible. Moreover, I think that it is both un-aesthetic and slightly misleading to use the term "United States" when the subject is purely social or cultural, rather than related to politics or civics. - Nat Kraus e 19:56, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Clarity is what matters. I found this in the Canadian menu and thought it might need retitling Buddhism in the Americas. There is a separate article about Buddhism in Canada. I am going to move this one. CalJW 13:43, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A couple comments about the current state of the article (basically reiterating what I said on Talk:Buddhism last week): first, the article as it stands is not finished. Close, but not quite. I'm sure there is more that can be said about Tibetan Buddhism in America, so it would be good if anybody can help expand on that subject. Also, there are a few more topics that I intend to address briefly under "trends in American Buddhism" when I get a chance. Second, those editors who actually live in North America might have a chance to take some pictures of Buddhist temples there, which we could add to illustrate the article. In the future, if we get a lot of pictures, we might have to select for quality, but, as of right now, there is plenty of empty space to add lots of pictures. Have at it. - Nat Kraus e 05:05, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thoreau and the Lotus Sutra

I was going to edit the page, but since I am rather new to Wikipedia and am still learning protocol, I thought I'd try here first. While it has long been a part of American Buddhist lore that Henry David Thoreau translated a section of the Lotus Sutra, Thomas Tweed, in his book, "The American Encounter With Buddhism," cites evidence that seems to show Thoreau was not the early translator of the sutra. Tweed writes that in citing Thoreau as the translator, he, "coneinuted an interpretative tradition that stretches back to 1885, when an article in the "Journal of Speculative Philosophy" by George Willis Cooke identified Thoreau as the translator." He continues, "In 1993, Wendell Piez, a literary scholar and special collections librarian who had repeated the same mistake in print, began wondering. He did more digging and uncovered the error. Elizabeth Palmer Peabody (1804-94), not the author of "Walden," edited and translated that important selection from Buddhist scriptures in 1844" (Preface to the 1992 edition, xvii). So, rather than Thoreau, according to Tweed's sources, it was a pioneering woman rather than Thoreau who first translated the Lotus Sutra into English. It's still a good story. --Ishinomakiben 02:46, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Ishinomakiben: I see that you haven't made any edits since March, so you probably won't see this. However, if you do return to Wikipedia, feel free to fix this kind of stuff directly—if you break it, I'll fix it, but realistically there are others new editors who are much more likely to be disruptive than you. Anyway, I'll go ahead and make changes to this article as per your comments here. - Nat Kraus e 04:59, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

First Buddhist High School in the United States

The first Buddhist high school in the United States is not the Pacific Buddhist Academy, which was founded in 2003. Rather, that disctiction belongs to the Developing Virtue Secondary School, in Ukiah, CA - I should know - I've been attending the school, and I know graduates of the school who graduated in the 1980s - twenty years before the Pacific Buddhist Academy was founded. The website for the school is at www.igdvs.org. The elementary school at the City was founded even earlier, in San Francisco in 1976 and just celebrated their 30th Anniversary last week.

Kungming2 03:33, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, good info. Thanks. - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 19:44, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on racism in American Buddhist community

I found the following rather idiotic:

A variety of ideas have been broached regarding the nature, causes, and significance of this racial uniformity. A key question is the degree of importance ascribed to discrimination, which is suggested to be mostly unconscious, on the part of white converts toward potential minority converts .

Only the most unaware observer of Asians in America, adherents of several religions including Buddhism, could fail to witness a strong strain of tension with African-Americans in whatever community in the US they live in. The argument isn't that it's the fault of Buddhism but other cultural factors that cause this to occur. It isn't always the 'white man' who's at fault.71.50.13.185 17:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, first off, thanks for beginning your comments with personal insults. That's a sure way to get things going right. Anyway, it's not clear to me what you disagree with here. "A key question is the degree of importance ascribed to discrimination ... on the part of white converts toward potential minority converts." Your answer to this is that it isn't always the white man who's at fault. That's a reasonable answer, but the question is still important.—Nat Krause^(Talk!) 22:17, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There was no personal attack on anyone in particular, but the tone was harsh I'll admit. Just angry at yet another silly 'it's the white guys fault' speculation and now in regards to Buddhism! While I have criticisms of European descendents who practice Buddhism, I'd suggest that those same adherents are probably not typically practitioners of racial discrimination. I do stand by the comment that I found the blame to be 'suggest to be mostly unconscious, on the part of the white converts...'. The question is indeed important, but to throw out the 'white man' as villian without mentioning the often observed and commented on Asian-American [including Buddhist adherents] hostility towards African-Americans seems selective and dubious.67.183.67.147 04:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to do some work on, and reorganizing of this section. I'm on the fence about the statement quoted above (I'm an African-American buddhist, just to set the record straight): I think the section is a bit too generalized, with the aforementioned bit a bit more divisive than it needs to be. However, the racial divide issue is coming up with some regularity in western Buddhist thought and discussion, so it is definitely a valid topic for some elaboration here.

It should be noted that SGI is also not without their controversies, so I'd like to get the section as NPOV as possible. I'm pulling source material together, so this may be a gradual and ongoing upgrade.

Davidals 02:04, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Immigrant Buddhist and the Buddhist Churches of America

A couple of things strike me here as particularly relevant:

"The name Buddhist Churches of America was adopted at Topaz Relocation Center in Utah; the use of the word “church”, which normally implies a Christian house of worship, was significant."

First, while it is true that the North American Buddhist Association changed its name to the Buddhist Churches of America while interred during World War II, I think the significance of this is up for debate. Every "temple" that the NABA founded prior to the war was called a "church" because the Hongonji leadership back in Japan would not authorize any building outside of Japan to be called a "temple," (i.e., ji [字]). This has led some scholars who don't hold the views of Prebish, et al, to question where the motivation for the BCA's "Americanization" came from: America? Or Japan? Whose decision was it to call the organization "churches" and why? I think these are important questions that need to be asked when writing about the history of American Buddhism.

"However, since 1980, BCA membership has declined markedly."

Second, in doing research for my dissertation, I've spoken with a handful of BCA ministers who vehemently refute this claim. The reason they believe that members is not declining is because of the manner in which the BCA counts members. Each individual church pays dues to the parent organization based on its number of members. However, very often local churches will undercount their members so as to avoid giving more money to the national organization. Often times, they will refrain from counting senior members who get sizable discounts on membership. So, on paper, it looks like the number of members is declining. But in actuality the number is rather stable, but underreported.

Obviously, I don't have a reference for this as my research is still on-going. But, again, I think when talking about religion in America, and particularly Buddhism, we need to keep in mind how we do the counting. Who's a "Buddhist"? How do we determine membership? And what do these assumption do to the "numbers"? Are the numbers even relevant? and so on.

Djbuddha 21:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Soka Gakkai

The Soka Gakkai section really needs to be cleaned up. Let's start with the first paragraph:

"here is only one Buddhist group in North America which has focused on recruiting converts from among the general public and been successful: Soka Gakkai, a Japan-based society which promotes Nichiren Buddhism."

As an American Buddhist who is not a Soka Gakkai member goes to a pretty much entirely non-Asian temple, I find this to be a bit... shall we say... wrong? In fact, it seems contradictory to the statement in the Tibetan Buddhist section: "Also quite active in the United States is the New Kadampa Tradition (NKT) established by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso. An offshoot of the Gelug school founded in the 1990s in the UK, the NKT has over 50 Kadampa (NKT) Buddhist Centers and branches in the United States. Most members of the organization are Westerners..."

It's not just wrong its tone, it's wrong it its facts. I'm deleting this.

The rest of the paragraph reads more like an advertisement for Soka Gakkai than information. It has cites no sources, for example. I'm going to mark it as unsourced.

--Watchreader (talk) 06:10, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Watchreader. While Most of what's written here re: Soka Gakkai are claims I've seen repeated elsewhere (Buddhadharma or Tricycle magazines, for example) - they still need proper citations for this entry, otherwise, as Watchreader says, this simply reads like an advert for the group. Of course, even when citations are found and added (which I'm sure they will be) - the wording should be changed to reflect that these are "claims" made by S.G. rather than externally verifiable facts. Watchreader makes an excellent point wrt just one of their claims, and how it doesn't quite add up. Jikaku (talk) 12:05, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Citations for SGI are done - all by books whose authors have scholastic credibility and are not Soka Gakkai members —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redcoltken sn (talk • contribs) 10:06, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Soka Gakkai under the immigrant Buddhism section? It should be under an export Buddhism section. It is a form of Buddhism thay grows by conversion rather than immigration and is exported from the Japan branch rather than imported in the rest of the world. 2601:D:3582:2C0:A4D4:DA1E:17AF:EA27 (talk) 03:05, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Buddhist population in US

The intro says "...accounting for 0.9% of the US population making it the fourth largest belief-set behind Christianity, Judaism and Nonreligious". This is clearly wrong, since Islam is certainly ahead of Buddhism - see [1] which claims the US Muslim population at between 2.5 and 7 million. 192.118.32.80 (talk) 12:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- Most Muslims declare their religion. Its very doubtful Islam is undercounted. Muslim organizations tend to overstate their numbers. Actually, Buddhism is undercounted. Most people who practice Buddhism don't declare their religion. Many Buddhist practitioners also practice other faiths or non at all. Many view Buddhism as a philosophy rather than a religion (that's a different issue altogether). Taking these into account, I believe Buddhism is second largest in the US, after Christianity.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.95.243.18 (talk • contribs)

Like it our not that is what the cited survey says, so changing the text to disagree with the source it not a good idea. Especially since this is given further on with the caveat that numbers are hard to get, I will try to put a more general statement in the lead without resorting to weasel words. My guess is that many Muslims would be reluctant to officially declare their religion, given what happened to those who said they were Japanese in 1940, but that is only speculation. Need to apply the usual rules of citing sources. There should be some. Generally this article needs much cleanup, it seems to attracted all sorts of different tidbits. W Nowicki (talk) 23:05, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I did a round of editing, removing many peacock words, redundancies, filled out citations, etc. but there are still many unsourced statements and many sources are self-published web sites. Please work to keep the quality up. It might be a good idea for someone who knows the subject matter better to read through and make sure I did not introduce any inaccuracies. Thanks. W Nowicki (talk) 21:00, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Separate "Zen in the USA" page

How about splitting the Zen-contents to a separate page, akin to Chinese Chán and Japanese Zen, leaving a summary at this page? The Zen-content is disproportionaly large now. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 14:28, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Joshua Jonathan. I find the maze of articles on Buddhism confusing and don't think another fork is absolutely necessary. Also where do you derive the section heading "Native American..."? I come from Minnesota where such a title means American Indian. -SusanLesch (talk) 14:48, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Susan. I already thought that "Native" was not the correct word; I'm Dutch, so there are subtilities which unfortunately are lost on me... As for the "maze of articles": it's not soemthing that I really deem necessary; it's just personal preference. Though, there is a precedence on the general Zen-article, which became sort of a "portal", with Chinese Chán and Japanese Zen as specific articles. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 19:27, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Jonathan, you beat me back here. Sorry about changing my mind. I thought about your suggestion today and decided that you should go for it! "Zen in the USA" seems like a good topic. -SusanLesch (talk) 00:29, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh? I'm surprised! By the way, I like your pictures. Rodin at the zazen-page gave me a good laugh. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 04:38, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you go by the name Joshua? Or something else? -SusanLesch (talk) 15:54, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Jonathan is the nickname. "Jos" once was a nickname at school, and "Jonathan" comes from a comic. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 17:31, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I might call you "Jos" though! The name of a mathematician I used to know. Your page looks done already. -SusanLesch (talk) 21:48, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese Chan

Ven. Hsuan Hua - regarding the photo.. he died in 1995. So the caption in you article reads Ven. Hsuan Hua in 2010. Please change that. ^[1] --VenHongyang (talk) 16:39, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the thumbnail description. Thanks for pointing this out. Best regards. Tengu800 20:11, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "Hsuan Hua".

Charismatic authority

Hi Susan. In inserted the header "charismatic authority" a while ago, to give a more "neutral" header for this section. As far as I know the listing-up of misbehaving teachers has been a point of discussion at other pages. I'm pro mentioning these issues, and even appreciate it that there is a list of misbehaving teachers, but I reckoned that it might be better to have a header which also links this issue to a theoretical background that explains part of the issue. But, of course, that's my opinion, and other views might be acceptable as well. Greetings, Joshua Jonathan (talk) 06:19, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I think it looks fine now. If you like you can reinsert the heading. Sorry I don't have any experience with comments on lists, but as long as we adhere to BLP requirements this should be fine because most historical misbehaving is very well known. -SusanLesch (talk) 20:55, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Buddhism in the United States. 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} 08:18, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on Buddhism in the United States. 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} 19:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Buddhism in the United States/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject matter would typically find nothing wanting. May miss a few relevant points.

Last edited at 01:46, 13 July 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 10:29, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I think the American Buddhist Movement article can be merged into this one. CoolieCoolster (talk) 01:27, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you. JimRenge (talk) 01:31, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 10:50, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Buddhism in the United States. 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) 05:22, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

dashboard.wikiedu.org

Conversion in Buddhism

I have an issue with the statement, 'Buddhism ...does not require any formal "conversion"'. This statement is totally the opposite of the truth.

I have been discussing this on Quora, where I have 850,000 hits. Some ppls, mostly Hindus, are saying you can't convert to Buddhism. On the contrary, out of all major religions, Buddhism has probably the clearest and most definite process of conversion. You become a Buddhist by taking the Three Refuges three times. This was established by the Buddha.

You can do Buddhist PRACTICES without formal conversion, yes.

The Buddha was also at pains to create a Buddhist monastic order that was clearly separate and defined by the colour of robes. He gave very definite instructions on this, and very clear instructions as to how he was to be worshipped and how his relics were to be entombed and treated.

On Quora you also find ridiculous statements such as 'the Buddha said he was just a man'. On the contrary, Buddha denied being a human being. The process of becoming a Buddha completely changes the body. For example, Buddha specified that the remains of his meals were to be thrown into water without any life, so that animals, birds and fish could not eat it. This is because such remnants would be fatal to them. When his leftovers were thrown into water, it was said to have bubbled and hissed. This is in the most original, early texts. Does this sound like a human being?

I don't see any way that I can edit the introduction. I suggest the following change:

___________

Out of all religions, Buddhism has perhaps the clearest process of formal conversion, established directly by the Buddha. To become a Buddhist, one takes the Three Refuges three times from a member of the monastic sangha or a senior layperson.

But one does not have to be a Buddhist to do Buddhist practices, such as meditation and chanting. In fact, Buddhism encourages people, whatever their faith, culture, or background, to do Buddhist practices. Therefore, American Buddhists can easily incorporate Dharma practice into their normal routines and traditions.

____________

Please excuse me not adding this to the Contents index. I don't know how to do so.

LATER EDIT: I now see how to change the introduction, and have made the change I suggested.

LATER EDIT: Joshua Jonathan, you have undone my edit to both the Buddhism in the USA and the Buddhism page, but you haven't discussed it or said why.

I am an authorised teacher in the Theravada, Mahayana, Vajrayana and Western academic traditions. Ven. Abbot Chao Khun Suviraya authorised me for Theravada, Ven. Abbot Tan authorised me for Mahayana, Ven. Changling Rinpoche authorised me for Vajrayana, and Dr. Peter Masefield MPTS authorised me for academia; I am also a personal friend of the noted Buddhist academic Professor Geoffrey Samuel, Professor Emeritis of Religious Studies at Cardiff University. I have studied for more than fifty years under more than eighty of the most respected and revered teachers in the world, of the Theravada, Vajrayana, Dzogs-chen and Academic traditions, and respected national teachers from Mahayana - Tien Tai and Zen. My Buddhist knowledge is taken very seriously by internationally respected teachers such as Sogyal Rinpoche, Namkhai Nortbu Rinpoche, and Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche. I have also guest-lectured in Buddhism for the Religious Studies Department at Sydney University.

The fact is that it is just plain wrong to say that Buddhism doesn't have a formal conversion process. It very much does. If you have taken the refuges you are Buddhist; if you haven't taken them, you are not.

I have restored my edits and if you want to change them back, I'd appreciate discussion, please.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Indigocat (talk • contribs) 15:48, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're surely an unique phonomenon with so many authorisations, but here at Wikipedia you'll have to stick to WP:VERIFIABILITY and WP:RS. And the WP:LEAD summarizes the article. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 03:32, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Abbott of EVERY traditional Buddhist Temple worldwide would agree that Taking Refuge constitutes conversion to Buddhism, Joshua. That you do not know this gives some indication of how little, if any, actual face-to-face teaching you have had on Buddhism. In the Pali Canon there are literally THOUSANDS of such instances. For example you may check the Kalama Sutta: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.065.than.html

'"Magnificent, lord! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has the Blessed One — through many lines of reasoning — made the Dhamma clear. We go to the Blessed One for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Sangha of monks. May the Blessed One remember us as lay followers who have gone to him for refuge, from this day forward, for life."

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.31.0.nara.html

Or the Sigalovadda Sutta https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.31.0.nara.html:

"I take refuge, Lord, in the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha. May the Exalted One receive me as a lay follower; as one who has taken refuge from this very day to life's end."

Scholars consider these two texts to be among the most authentic in the Pali Canon. Although others schools highlight later texts, they all agree on the authenticity of the Pali Canon.

Or, in fact, Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refuge_in_Buddhism

'Taking refuge is a form of aspiration to lead a life with the Triple Gem at its core... taking refuge is an expression of determination to follow the Buddha's path...Refuge is common to all major schools of Buddhism.'

'In 1880, Henry Steel Olcott and Helena Blavatsky became the first known Westerners of the modern era to receive the Three Refuges and Five Precepts, which is the ceremony by which one traditionally become Buddhist.'(reference given)

You will note that this page includes no edits whatsoever by me.

I don't give references to books ABOUT Buddhism as all of my teaching has been oral. Sogyal Rinpoche told me not to read such books. The content of his own book, 'The Tibetan book of Living and dying', the best-selling book about Buddhism ever written, with 2 1/2 million sales, I received personally in lectures from him for three weeks a year for twelve years. In fact I was one of the transcribers of these lectures, used in the book! But you could try:

https://www.amazon.com/Refuge-Vow-Sakyong-Mipham-Rinpoche/dp/1550550217:

The Refuge Vow: A Sourcebook by Chögyam Trungpa (this name is from Goodreads, but it's the same book)

'The Refuge Vow: A Sourcebook is a compilation of commentaries and traditional text excerpts on the Buddhist Refuge Vow by various teachers including Chögyam Trungpa, Sakyong Mipham, Tsoknyi Rinpoche and Thrangu Rinpoche, among others. A valuable resource for both those preparing to take the vow, and for teachers of Buddhism.'

I have read this and it does fully confirm what I say.

Yes, it is unusual for a person to have such wide variety of Buddhist Education. This is why I have mentioned names with whom you may check personally: Ven. Chao Khun Suviraya, Dr. Geoffrey Samuel, and Changling Rinpoche. Probably easiest for you to check would be Dr. Minh Li, the Australian Contact for Changling Rinpoche: minlchong@yahoo.com.au. If you want to check that this is really her email, you can look up Dr. Min Li Chong in the Melbourne Directory and call her at her surgery. Ven. Phuoc Tan Thich, Abbott of Quang Minh Temple, Melbourne, knows my history not too badly, wants me to teach Advanced Buddhism at his temple and to his students, and may be contacted at phuoctan@gmail.com. If you want to verify that this really is Ven. Tan's email, I suggest you call Quang Minh Temple during business hours, whose number appears on their Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/quangminhtemplemelbourne/ and can be verified in the Melbourne Phone Book.

It is on my mind to ask, 'What are your qualifications? Who has authorised you as a qualified Buddhist teacher? Please give your references (multiple) for your statement that Buddhism has no conversion process, which is in clear contradiction to the quotes I have given above?'

In talking to trolls and others who disseminate ignorance and disinformation, I have found them all too anxious to question my qualifications and references, and all too unwilling to give their own. 122.148.209.16 (talk) 11:29, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. They know me not under my pen name, Thomas Kent, but my real name, Geoff Byng. If you want to check this, I suggest you message me on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thomas.kent1/ 122.148.209.16 (talk) 11:40, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Asian Religions in America

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 September 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jlharry12345 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: SChapter, Natanxoza.

— Assignment last updated by Ziegenbalg66 (talk) 00:35, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox adding

I want to add a infobox in the article. Can I add a infobox? Rojer Aurther (talk) 18:12, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Soka Gakkai ?

The paragraph about the Soka Gakkai - which is not considered as buddhist by many buddhist in the world - reads like an advertisement. Same problem was pointed out in 2009 but not corrected. Quoting it's famous members and adding a link to its Youtube channel seems to be propaganda more than information... I will cancel those but it would be nice to talk with people interested in this page about it, thanks. Raoul mishima (talk) 17:31, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As Soka Gakkai was previously under the Nichiren Buddhism umbrella and is present in the United States, it should be mentioned on this page, as you have edited. I agree the YouTube information is not needed here, but I have added some details on how/when Soka Gakkai came to the United States. Zenith4151 (talk) 22:56, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] "Hsuan Hua".

[1]