Talk:Majjhima Nikāya

Requested move 9 December 2019

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 04:15, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Majjhima Nikaya → Majjhima Nikāya – cf. Dīgha Nikāya, Saṃyutta Nikāya, Aṅguttara Nikāya, Khuddaka Nikāya Khiikiat (talk) 20:13, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Support per customary spelling in scholarly publications and Pali-English Dictionaries.-- Farang Rak Tham   (Talk) 09:47, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Support per nom and Farang Rak Tham . --Less Unless (talk) 22:16, 10 December 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Dating
The first paragraph includes the following statement: "Composed between 3rd century BCE and 2nd century CE.", with a reference to Singh, Upinder. A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century. Pearson. p. 25.

However, looking into the mentioned place one reads: "For instance, the Sutta Pitaka consists of five Nikayas—the Digha, Majjhima, Samyutta, Anguttara, and Khuddaka Nikayas. The Jatakas—stories of the previous births of the Buddha—are one of the 15 books of the Khuddaka Nikaya, and their composition can be placed between the 3rd century BCE and the 2nd century CE.", i.e. the referred author clearly talks about the estimated dating of Jatakas, a part of Khuddaka Nikaya, not Majjhima Nikaya.

I won't make any changes to the texts on my own, but this is an error worth pointing out. Karlo Mikić 90.137.137.210 (talk) 15:14, 7 May 2020 (UTC)