Talk:Relic of the tooth of the Buddha

Untitled
What would Buddha have thought of the attachment of people to an object like a tooth, even to the point of fighting wars over it? :S
 * Zing. Shii (tock) formerly Ashibaka 00:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't get it either - but the Maha-parinibbana Sutta records that his remains were venerated as relics, and he seems to have said it would be appropriate to erect a Stupa for him. - Paul (talk) 03:44, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Re "importance" of article: Whatever the importance of relics in Buddhism, and the importance of this relic in particular to the wider Buddhist world, this is also an article about Sri Lankan history, where the relic played a significant symbolic role.

The article needs some work. I'll do a dot-and-comma sort of edit, and leave the facts to someone more expert. - Paul (talk) 01:39, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I removed "They set sail in a ship called 'Lankapattana' and... finally arrived in Sri Lanka" because all other sources I could find name Lankapattana as their port of arrival, rather than the ship. Feel free to reinstate if you find a source. - Paul (talk) 03:34, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Could DNA be extracted from the tooth or similar relics? 192.122.237.11 (talk)

"it is well known that no human mouth could ever have contained it, for it is two inches long, and an inch in thickness, being, apparently, a piece of ivory from an elephant's tusk." John L. Stoddards Lectures, India, p. 35 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greg.collver (talk • contribs) 10:52, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Belongs to China
Do you know Zheng He? He was the world's most famous navigator, and a patriot of China. In those times, Sri Lanka dared to disrespect the Chinese culture, and Zheng He was forced to teach them a lesson, and take the tooth to China, where is belongs. China has a long history of Buddhism. Why does Sri Lanka continue to disrespect Chinese culture? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:C5F7:EB00:A02B:1D26:626B:680C (talk) 18:33, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Please keep this nationalistic nonsense to yourself - the article talk page isn't the place for it. 148.64.26.126 (talk) 17:29, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Relic of the tooth of the Buddha. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130130004249/http://www.fgs.org.tw/english/orgainzations/history/history.html to http://www.fgs.org.tw/english/orgainzations/history/history.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:44, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

The links and sources to this page are terrible and contain false information or are dead
None of the links to this page are reliable or available, and the main source for this article is written by a westerner who is an expert in zen Buddhism, not Sri Lanka, or Theravada Buddhism. This entire article needs to be redone. The article that is used as the main source for this article also contradicts itself.

While some people may believe or not believe that this is the real tooth of the Buddha, it is important to recognize that this relic has been extensively been written about, just not in english.

The most comprehensive history of this tooth is in a book called Dalada Sirita, written in Pali. I think the only way to give this article credence is to use sources like thisDillmon (talk) 23:54, 2 June 2020 (UTC).
 * Pali sources about the history of the Tooth Relic are generally primary sources and can't be relied upon extensively for a Wikipedia article because of the policy on original research. A summary of that work might be acceptable. There may be some sources at Dāṭhavaṃsa that you could use- I'm assuming Dalada Sirita is another title for that work? --Spasemunki (talk) 01:29, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Historical authenticity?
It would be good if we could add information on any corroborating or contradictory scientific evidence supporting the authenticity of the relic - a la the Shroud of Turin. Have there been any scientific analyses of the tooth, such as an attempt to date it? 148.64.26.126 (talk) 17:35, 25 November 2022 (UTC)