Talk:Sandokai

Formatting
it reads way better with the extra spacing

as to the title, "translation" doesn't work so i have also reverted it back to "poem"

Osip7315 (talk) 09:58, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I disagree about the spacing, but that's no big deal. The wikiformatting of the spacing may still need some work, though. As to translation vs. poem – What "doesn't work" in your view? This is a translation (one of several I've seen) from the original Chinese. /ninly(talk) 14:25, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

its really is much easier to read without crammed spacing and space is free! if you are going to call it "translation" i think what translation it is needs to be identified Osip7315 (talk) 05:54, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

in my view either the poem is

pseudepigraphical

or the original meaning has been lost through changes in the sense of words, particularly a loss

of

poetic

multilayering

basically

what we read

is

garbage

just

like everything else

in

zen

and

buddhism

Osip7315 (talk) 13:33, 18 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I see no reason to argue about this last bit. As I said, spacing is no big deal to me, though text formatting is loosely formalized on WP; sure, "space is free", but consistency is worth something, too. I will see what has been done with other poetry articles. I fully agree about attributing the translation used; I'm not sure where this translation came from originally, though I have seen it before. I believe that in similar cases poetry/scripture is often presented with a parallel presentation of the original text with an (attributed) translation. /ninly(talk) 17:14, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Text source
A recent edit summary reads "this is White Plum Sangha's translation", and an IP user added a line per a discovery by that institution. However there are minor differences (line breaks, "Patriarch" vs. "Ancestor"), and nothing at the referenced link indicates that the Village Zendo is the source of this translation. On reflection, I'm not convinced that we really ought to have the full text reproduced here. Thoughts? / ninly ( talk ) 00:32, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Title of This Article Should Probably Not Be in Japanese
Although I know this text as the Sandokai and have approached it from a Japanese perpsective, it was written in Chinese. I'm not aware if there is an agreed upon standard, but ancient Chinese Zen teachers with articles on Wikipedia are always named with their Chinese names, even if they are known outside of Asia primarily by the Japanese pronunciations of their names. It seems a bit like cultural imperialism refer to a Chinese work by a Japanese name in an encyclopedia context. It seems this article should either be called titled Cāntóngqì (Buddhism) or by one of its translated titles like "The Harmony of Difference and Equality." DJLayton4 (talk) 20:03, 3 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Good point. Joshua Jonathan  - Let's talk!  04:52, 4 May 2020 (UTC)