User talk:Sujato/Buddhist mythology

Start & help needed
I have long felt the lack of a proper page on Wikipedia that deals with Buddhist mythology, and have proposed deleting the current article and writing a new one along these lines. (See the talk page for that article)

Here is my first draft. Obviously it is very deficient.


 * There are almost no references.
 * There is a bias towards early and Indian Buddhism, which are my fields of interest.
 * I write from my own perspective on mythology, and refer to my own books.
 * Writing style is too personal.
 * Virtually every item needs expansion.
 * There's no images or other supporting media.

However, I feel it is a strong start for a good article.


 * It covers the field with reasonable breadth.
 * It deals with actual mythology in a way that makes sense and someone can learn from.
 * It acknowledges the complexities and richness of the subject.
 * It begins to deal with Buddhist mythology within the wider context of studies of mythology, and hence brings this article closer in line to comparable Wikipedia articles on Christian mythology, etc.

I have limited time, and no resources here apart from the internet. And of course my learning is limited. I'd appreciate any help to edit this article into a usable form. Sujato (talk) 02:07, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

I'd just like to add to what I've said earlier, and clarify my position. Essentially I wanted to start writing this article because I feel that mythology is badly neglected in modern Buddhism. I have done considerable research, and published several times on the topic, but I have often felt like I am working in a vacuum. The poor state of the current Wikipedia article on Buddhist mythology is, I think, just a reflection on this. There is a very real sense in which modern Buddhists simply don't know what mythology is, although they are surrounded by it. And in academic studies, discussion of mythic motifs is often limited to the dismissal of Buddhist history, especially the historicity of the life of the Buddha, by pointing out the self-evident fact that there are mythic motifs in the texts. In my view, such scholars understand neither myth nor history.

All this is just winging, sorry for that! But I am trying to explain something about why this article is the way it is. There are many things in here that I know or think are true, based on my own research and understanding. However, many of them probably can't be backed up by third party references. And that is kind of the point.

Here's just one example. I mention King Bhumipol's use of Jatakas for teaching. There are a few references online to his publication of the Mahajanaka (http://nepalitimes.com/news.php?id=3595), which I read when I was in Thailand. From other sources, I've been told that the king often relates Jatakas on the radio, somewhat in the manner of FDR's fireside chats. He slips political messages in them, which are of course eagerly listened to and debated. Now, it seems to me that this is an important and interesting use of myth in modern Buddhist culture. The politicizing of Buddhist myth is no innovation, it underlies nationalist myth from the time of the Dipavamsa at least. So this is continuing an important strand of mythic storytelling, as way of uniting people around a story with an ideological purpose. Yet I can find no real reference to or discussion of this.

Now, ultimately, if we can't reference it we shouldn't include it. But I put it in there in the hope that we can uncover something. For now, anyway, I'd appreciate it if we could try to fill out the article, and consider waiting before chopping out the unsourcable bits until we're ready to promote it to be a "real article". Sujato (talk) 01:21, 20 January 2016 (UTC)