Talk:Vihāra

Proposed merger with Vihara (monastery)

This article and "Vihara (monastery)" seem to cover the same topic; both describe a type of Buddhist monastery found primarily in S and SE Asia. The page for "Vihara" is much more comprehensive than that of "Vihara (monastery)", but "Vihara (monastery)" does not seem to add anything that could not be added to "Vihara". However, there is some additional information under "Vihara (monastery)" along with some nice images, so a merger is more appropriate than a deletion.

Definitely, this is a no brainer. It seems to be just carelessness that led to the creation of the other page. Sylvain1972 (talk) 13:17, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

 Done. Jafeluv (talk) 06:54, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

HELP PLEASE! The etymology and definition "It originally meant 'a secluded place in which to walk', and referred to 'dwellings' or 'refuges' used by wandering monks during the rainy season" need citation. Where did you get this definition from? Thank you! Igor 18:24, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Vihara. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090809033739/http://www.tathyabangla.org.in:80/public/i_cadeprt/archeology/arch3.asp to http://www.tathyabangla.org.in/public/i_cadeprt/archeology/arch3.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:11, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Wihan not always small

The article says:

• In Thailand and China (called jingshe; Chinese: 精舎), "vihara" has a narrower meaning, and designates a small shrine hall or retreat house.

This is not correct for Thailand. The wihan never is really small. In Northern Thailand it is usually the largest religious building of a wat, larger than the ubosot. In other parts of Thailand the ubosot is the largest religious building and the wihan is smaller, but not a small shrine hall. --FredTC (talk) 12:30, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 14 April 2022

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: Not moved. There is consensus that two separate topics exist, Buddhist monasteries in general and this particular type. Content about Buddhist monasteries in general should be covered at Buddhist monasticism. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 03:51, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

---

Vihāra → Buddhist monastery – Per ngrams the proposed title is the WP:COMMONNAME. BilledMammal (talk) 07:27, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

• comment something weird is going on with the ngrams when Vihāra and Vihara are split 'Vihara' on its own is very close to 'Buddhist monastery' [1]—blindlynx 13:27, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose but we do need a proper article on Buddhist monastery, leaving this to cover the ancient ones in India. Johnbod (talk) 15:47, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Arguably per WP:TIES we should mainly be interested in what Indian English language sources use to refer to this topic. I'm also not convinced the proposed name is directly equivalent to the concept of Vihāra. WP:AT specifically states we should not invent names. AusLondonder (talk) 16:22, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
• Support per WP:COMMONNAME. Rreagan007 (talk) 22:09, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
• Support per WP:COMMONNAME. --evrik ^(talk) 01:05, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
  • But the article is not about "Buddhist monasteries" but about a particular type, in one country (that hasn't been Buddhist for about 1,000 years). There's next to nothing about eg Thai and Japanese monasteries. We do need a Buddhist monastery article, but this isn't it, & renaming it won't make it so. Johnbod (talk) 02:14, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
    • Actually, I now see we have Buddhist monasticism, which is much better. That is where Buddhist monastery should redirect, not this ancient-India-only piece. Johnbod (talk) 02:17, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose As Johnbod points out, Vihāra is a Buddhist monastery with a particular historical, cultural, and architectural context and not a simple synonym. Also, fwiw, per ngrams linked in the proposal, Vihara (with and without the diacritic) is clearly the more common name since one should (roughly speaking) be looking at the area under the two curves and not just the right end-point of the curves. That said, I wouldn't place much weight on the ngram result since Vihara has meanings and uses completely separate from that referring to a monastery; and "Buddhist monastery' can refer to institutions and buildings that are not Viharas. If one wants to make a WP:COMMONNAME-based argument, one would have to carefully go through the best available English-language references on the subject and see what term they prefer. Abecedare (talk) 02:59, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
• Comment While there is SOME material on this page about Buddhist monasteries in general, most of the material seems to be about the specific Indian rock-cut architectural phenomenon and its social paraphenalia, so while it is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC as it stands (and as hard as it is to believe that there isn't already a main page for Buddhist monasteries more generally) it probably shouldn't be. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:55, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for what? As pointed out just above, the "main page for Buddhist monasteries more generally" is Buddhist monasticism, plus we have Gompa for Tibetan Buddhism. You obviously think this proposal a bad idea, so why not oppose? Johnbod (talk) 14:05, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Buddhist monastery currently redirects here. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:00, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, and it shouldn't - see above. I still don't understand your point. Johnbod (talk) 16:28, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm just neutral, as the material on the article is a conflated mixture of two separate subjects: both Buddhist monasteries in general and Indian rock-cut structures. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:43, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

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.

• I've changed the Bm redirect to point to Buddhist monasticism. Johnbod (talk) 14:16, 25 April 2022 (UTC)