Talk:Rāhula

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quoting Rahula[edit]

  • As instructed, Rahula approached his father and asked for his inheritance. He then looked at his father and said, "Lord, even your shadow is pleasing to me."

This quotation is taken from the book of Radhika Abeysekera. I don't know whether this is common knowledge. Can I put it on the mainpage?

-- 88.72.9.170 19:34, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The passage is a quote from the Vinaya Mahavagga, so, yes, you can put it in. However, it must be said that most of this article does not meet Wikipedia guidelines. It is based entirely on Pali sources, hence is not neautral POV, and ignores important differences between the Pali and other accounts. Further, it repeats traditional claims even when these contradict the old texts themselves; e.g. the idea that Rahula was the first novice, which from the Vinaya Mahavagga is clearly not the case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sujato (talk • contribs) 21:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please add what you know to the article. -- 88.72.13.10 (talk) 14:14, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Therigatha: to be inserted, I think[edit]

Austerlitz -- 88.72.13.10 (talk) 14:14, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Buddha is a bad father[edit]

There are a ton of articles out there saying that Buddha is a bad father - he basically left his wife and son to go on his "enlightened journey" straight after his son was born. Many articles cite this, should be included :) instead of pushing East Asian propaganda 2001:8003:6A23:2C00:51C4:A866:AA91:1610 (talk) 13:03, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This idea should not be included without an independent, reliable, secondary academic source. Blogs are not acceptable sources. JimRenge (talk) 13:13, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I admire your patience, Jim. And I always thought that East Asian propaganda was the statement "religion is poison", used to justify the killing of 1000s of monks in Tibet. I guess we all define "propaganda" differently. Well, enough chat, I'll have to go back to my propaganda, probably Southeast Asian this time...--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:37, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Rāhula/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MX (talk · contribs) 21:53, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Review[edit]

Will review. Stay put! MX (✉ • ✎) 21:53, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, MX!--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 11:23, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Farang Rak Tham: I'm reading over the article and noticed a lot of it is written in present-tense instead of past-tense (i.e. "Rāhula is born on same day Prince Siddhārtha Gautama renounces the throne by leaving the palace", which uses "is" instead of "was"). Since we're covering people and accounts from the past, shouldn't it be written in past tense?
@MX:, I meant to write in historical present tense to keep a skeptical, encyclopedic tone. But I've been told before it doesn't work, so if you want me to change it to past tense, I can do that.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:56, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Farang Rak Tham: Please do. I went to the article about Jesus and noticed they use present tense only when paraphrasing events from the scriptures. Ping me when this is done and I'll start my review. In the meantime, I'll be checking sources and continue reading the article to familiarize with it. It looks ripe for promotion as it stands. Thanks! MX (✉ • ✎) 21:53, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@MX:,  Done.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 13:01, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Accounts[edit]

  • Some early texts such as those of the Pāli tradition do not mention Rāhula at all ... on monastic discipline of the Mūlasarvāstivāda and Mahāsaṇghika traditions – Would it be reasonable to ask when these "early texts" were written? Like the era (example: 4th–5th century CE). It may give readers a bit of context that time.
  • affected the prince on his path to enlightenment. – Question: How is Gautama Buddha usually referred to? Prince Siddhārtha? Prince? Siddhārtha? Or another name? I'm asking because there are instances when you write "Prince Siddhārtha" and sometimes "Prince". I don't know anything about the subject so I want to make sure we're sticking to his most common name.
  • He is most commonly referred to by scholars as "Prince Siddhārtha" before attaining enlightenment, and "the Buddha" after enlightenment. I sometimes switch to the prince for stylistic reasons, to not make the writing stilted.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:31, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pāli tradition[edit]

  • meaning 'A rāhu is born, a fetter has arisen' – I think it should be in "quotations" but please correct me if I'm wrong.
  • Rāhula therefore became Prince Siddhārtha's first, but also last and only son – "... first and only son" is fine since it would imply it was his last.

Other traditions[edit]

  • Great section overall. Excellent explanation of the other versions regarding his birth
  • proves Yaśodharā's innocence: – Virginity?
  • in this version, the Buddha made everyone around him look identical to him, through a supernatural accomplishment. – Back to my original question of using "Prince", "Buddha", etc. Why don't we stick to one?
  • Śuddhodana welcomeed her and her son back into the clan, – Welcomed

Scholarly analysis[edit]

  • Good section here. Just a bit confused on the there would have been no sound reason for him to leave secretly at night. Did Buddha intend to leave secretly at night?
 Fixed Expanded--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:46, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ordination[edit]

  • When Rāhula was seven,[13] nine[39][40] or fifteen[41] years old – Just a suggestion, but instead of doing this why don't you copyedit it to "When Rāhula was between seven and fifteen years old...", and then add a footnote explaining the discrepancy between the sources. It reads smoother and can give readers a better understanding of how the sources may differ.
  • —indologist Bhikkhu Telwatte Rahula argues that the child was conscious of being without father. – IMO, the sentence should end with "...and he was told." And then continue with this, though it naturally flows better as a footnote.
  • In addition, it reads better with "without a father".
  • She told Rāhula that since his father had renounced the palace life and as he was the next royal prince in line, he should ask his father for his inheritance of crown and treasure, for his future sake when his grandfather would no longer rule the kingdom. – Run-on sentence, consider restructuring.
  • Rāhula followed the Buddha, asking him for his inheritance – "Rāhula followed and asked him for his inheritance", or something similar.
  • Rāhula ordained and was the first śrāmaṇera (novice monk) – "Rāhula was ordained and became the first śrāmaṇera (novice monk)"
  • a group of young boys ordained together with him – Should it be "...were ordained together..."?

Enlightenment and death[edit]

  • Great section here, no issues found. This section is a bit long so I'll give it a second read later.

Previous lives[edit]

  • Short and good section.

Legacy[edit]

  • Tradition states therefore that Rāhula is still alive – Is this true now, or was it true some time in the past? I just want to make sure this info isn't written in present-tense when it shouldn't be, since info in Wikipedia can easily be outdated.
  •  Fixed. He is stated to be alive until the next Buddha will arise, so yes, that would mean he is still alive now. But i have rephrased it to sound more encyclopedic.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:38, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Childhood in Buddhism[edit]

  • were sophisticated for the time period – What does this mean? Further explanation would help readers understand a bit more.

Notes[edit]

  • Footnotes are cited appropriately.

Citations[edit]

  • Great use of reliable sources. All citations link to their respective books. Pages are added when needed.

References[edit]

  • Per above. Great use of sources.

Further reading[edit]

  • Great book and explanation of its included (the name of the section or pages where Rahula is mentioned could help as part of the explanation)
 Done. Also corrected the url. It was the wrong book.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 21:09, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

External links[edit]

  • This source here doesn't work for me. Says "You're offline". Is that because the link is dead or does it require log-in credentials?
  •  Fixed. No, they changed the url by removing an author from the url. I have no idea why. Archiving this time.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 21:20, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019[edit]

Thanks for your review, MX. Much appreciated!--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:55, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by 97198 (talk) 13:23, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
A 16th-century Tibetan depiction of Rāhula
A 16th-century Tibetan depiction of Rāhula
  • ... that according to Buddhist texts, Rāhula (pictured), the son of the Buddha, threw a handful of sand in the air every morning, and made the wish that good teachers gave him counsel as much as that sand? Source: "Rāhula himself was eager to receive instruction from the Buddha and his teachers and would rise early in the morning and take a handful of sand, saying: "May I have today as many words of counsel from my teachers as there are here grains of sand!" (Malalasekera 1960)
    • ALT1:... that a discourse given by the Buddha to his one and only son (pictured) became one of the seven Buddhist texts recommended for study in the inscriptions of the Emperor Aśoka? Source: "The Ambalatthika-Rāhulovāda Sutta is among the portions of scripture mentioned in the Bhābrā Edict of Asoka as being essentially worthy of study by all monks"(Malalasekera 1960); "Asoka's contact with the Buddhist Sangha no doubt gave him some knowledge of Buddhist texts. In order to help the Buddhist monks and the lay disciples he recommended several Buddhist texts for the purpose of their constant study, for their daily practices and for the development of Buddhism. The Bhabru or Bairiit Edict says: ... (vii) The sermon to Rahula beginning with the Sermon on Falsehood as delivered by the Lord Buddha ..." (Hazzra 1995, p.38.)

Improved to Good Article status by Farang Rak Tham (talk) and Santhapriya (talk). Nominated by Farang Rak Tham (talk) at 21:45, 22 September 2019 (UTC).[reply]

  • Nice work! This new GA is long enough, neutral, and well referenced. ALT0 appears to be more legendary than historical, and I think it's unsuitable to be presented as fact. ALT1, on the other hand, appears historical and is supported by sources. QPQ is done, AGF on copyvio as Earwig is down right now and there are too many sources to check manually. No image to review, but I think this featured picture would be nice for the main page. Do you want to add it to the nomination? Good to go. -Zanhe (talk) 00:29, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Zanhe: Good idea. I am afraid I will mess up the markup when I add the picture now, so if you could help me with that, that would be much appreciated. Since you have not crossed out the main hook yet, I have expanded on it, to show that it's a traditional account. Thanks, --Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 21:25, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Farang Rak Tham: I've added the picture, and I hope it will be used as we don't often have the chance to have a featured image to accompany a DYK. ALT0 is fine now that attribution has been added. -Zanhe (talk) 21:40, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Earwig is working again. No copyvio found. Good to go. -Zanhe (talk) 06:42, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please add a birth religion[edit]

According to Jacob Kinnard's book. Buddhism emerged from Sanātana Dharma. [1] But according to Levman Shakyas & Koliyas had no religion. So, it's better to leave the religion section in the info box blank. And Rahula didn't become Buddhist after birth. Also Gautama didn't become Buddha before Rahula's birth. Usoejw9 (talk) 16:34, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Kinnard, Jacob N. (1 October 2010). The Emergence of Buddhism: Classical Traditions in Contemporary Perspective. Fortress Press. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-8006-9748-8.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:10, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rāhula&oldid=1209949962"