Talk:Buddhist calendar

WikiProject Time assessment rating comment

Want to help write or improve articles about Time? Join WikiProject Time or visit the Time Portal for a list of articles that need improving.
—Yamara ✉ 17:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Historical use and eras

Thank you all for the good information ! it was not mentioned in the article that how many years "buddhist countries" have used "huddhist calendar". For example, does any one know did Thailand mark years in B.E. or A.D. at Ayuthaya times ? Somebody told me they have only used B.E. for 60 years or so !! ?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.191.207.104 (talk • contribs) 05:24, 31 August 2007

The last paragraph in the article, beginning "Four eras ...", answers most of your questions. All four eras mentioned, Anchansakarat, Buddhasakarat, Mahasakarat, and Chulasakarat, can be called Buddhist eras because they were all used with the Buddhist calendar. A solar Buddhist era beginning 1 January has only been used in Thailand since 1940. But its original lunisolar form (Buddhasakarat) beginning after our modern April, using the Sanskrit month names given in the article, was used before 1940 (maybe from 1767?). That paragraph states that the Chulasakarat era was adopted in Thailand in the mid-13th century, whereas the Ayutthaya Kingdom began in the mid-14th century, so the Chulasakarat era was used by the Ayutthaya Kingdom during most of its existence. — Joe Kress 21:55, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

In Thailand there have been official four eras, but I never heard Anahansakarat before; I might be wrong. There have been Mahasakarat → Chulasakarat → Rattanakosin era (known as Rattanakosinsok) → Buddhasakarat --Manop - TH (talk) 05:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

When is the beginning of the year?

Does it start near the winter solstice, or the spring equinox (as some other calendars do)? Or does that vary by country? Since it seems that will also vary thru time as the equinoxes process, is there any discussion in any country of amending the rules to adjust back to the tropical year?

Some specific examples, comparing dates in specific countries with the gregorian dates, would help a lot. Also it would be helpful to know who uses the calendars - are they mostly for religious events, or for business, or for birthdays, or what? Thanks! --NealMcB (talk) 16:35, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Rewrite

I've just updated the article. We still need to address, among other things:

• Khmer, Lao and Sinhala names of the Buddhist calendar in lede
• Khmer and Lao month names
• Does the Sinhala calendar use a version of the Metonic cycle like the SEA ones or does it use apparent reckoning like Hindu calendars?
• What is the Sinhala calendar's intercalation method? The previous edit says it is 354, 384, 385 like the Burmese calendar but I can't find any sources to verify that.
• Has the Sinhala calendar ever had the 12-year animal cycle like the SEA ones?
• Why does the Thai Buddhist Era use a 543 offset when its epochal date is 545 BCE?
• New year's day: Is it fixed to the Gregorian calendar in Cambodia and Laos like in Thailand? How about in Sri Lanka?

Hybernator (talk) 02:03, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

lunisolar calender photo

A bookseller in Chaitya Bhoomi peddles Buddhist calendars and books by Ambedkar

This calender picture and Thai calender is lunisolar. But this calender has different dates according to Navayana. So this picture should be included. This photograph is very much relevant to this article. Discuss on talk page. JAIBHIM5 (talk) 06:39, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

JAIBHIM5: The image that you have inserted several times gives no added value to this page. It appears to give WIKIPEDIA: Undue Weight to Ambedkar in the context of this page. I have removed it because WIKIPEDIA follows a neutral point of view policy and does not allow promotion. Please see WP:NOTADVERTISING, WP:UNDUE, WP:NPOV. JimRenge (talk) 13:57, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

I agree with both of you: Neither image is appropriate for this article: As JAIBHIM5 points out, the image is not an image of a Buddhist calendar as described in this article, and as JimRenge points out, the Ambedkar-related image provides "undue weight" to topics other than "Buddhist calendar." In short: It is better to have neither image than either one of these. JimRenge, will you do the honors of removing the image you recently added, or shall I? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:50, 27 May 2014 (UTC) Struck - I misread JAIBHIM5's statement as an argument to remove that image. In retrospect, it is an argument to include the image of a different calendar to show the variety of Buddhist calendars. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:21, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

davidwr: I can`t follow your argument. However, feel free to remove the picture if you believe its not a buddhist calendar as described in this article. JimRenge (talk) 05:42, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

davidwr The picture of Ambedkar is cover of Navyana Buddhist calender and it is relevant. And other hanging piece is date details of calender so this picture is relevant. JAIBHIM5 (talk) 08:06, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

The primary objection is WP:Undue weight. No matter how relevant an image may be, if it gives undue weight to other topics that is grounds to prefer other images. In cases where the undue weight is high enough - including, in my opinion, this case - it is grounds to prefer no image at all if this were the only image available. Think of it this way: If there was a photograph of President Barack Obama holding the same calendar that is in this image, or if the books and posters displayed in this image depicted President Obama, that would give undue weight to the him, making it a less-than-suitable or more likely totally-unsuitable image for this article. There is also another objection to this image: The portion of the image which constitutes the calendar is of a low resolution and odd angle (not "straight on") making it hard (not impossible, just hard) to see the features which demonstrate that this is indeed a Buddhist calendar and not some other form of calendar. Although it is hard to see in the thumbnail, any reader who expands the thumbnail of File:August2004rs.png will see an image that is clear enough that anyone who can read the languages used in the calendar will know what type of calendar it is (I don't read those languages, so don't ask me to verify it's what the page description says it is). If you have a clear, readable image of this calendar which is not encumbered by copyrights, AND for which the "calendar" part - the part that shows the dates - does not give undue weight to other topics, consider cropping the image to show just the calendar portion. I suspect that such an image would be just as suitable as File:August2004rs.png. 00:21, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

@JimRenge: regarding the August2004rs image: I have stricken my comments related to that image. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:21, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Above example is funny. JimRenge Do you have something to say? JAIBHIM5 (talk) 12:17, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

I agree with davidwr. He also explained in detail what may be considered as giving Undue Weight in this article. The image that you have inserted several times appears to give WIKIPEDIA: Undue Weight to B. R. Ambedkar in the context of this article. Wikipedia is not a soapbox, a battleground, or a vehicle for propaganda, promotion and showcasing. Please read WP:NOTADVERTISING, WP:UNDUE, WP:NPOV and please do not reinsert this image (Chaitya Bhoomi.png) without trying to reach a WP:Consensus. JimRenge (talk) 13:08, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

lets close this discussion. JAIBHIM5 (talk) 09:00, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

No formal action is required for a discussion to "close" - it de facto closes when people stop editing in that section. I would make one request regarding the image at the top of this secton though: Either 1) take out the "center" parameter and reduce the "thumb" of the image above to something well under 200px (or just take out the "1000px" parameter entirely), OR 2) replace the line

• [[File:A book and calender seller at Chaitya Bhoomi.png|alt=|thumb|center|1000px|A bookseller in Chaitya Bhoomi peddles [[Buddhist calendar]]s and books by Ambedkar]]

with

• [[:File:A book and calender seller at Chaitya Bhoomi.png]]

so it appears as a text-link rather than an image-link. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:20, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes, the picture looks oversized. I would prefer the " unsized, non-centered image". Thanks JimRenge (talk) 21:04, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Proposed move

As this article is only about *one* particular Buddhist calendar, and the are hundreds of millions using other Buddhist calendars, I propose that it be moved to Theravāda Buddhist calendar. Sylvain1972 (talk) 15:03, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Buddhist calendar. 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/20140116215240/http://www.royin.go.th/upload/61/FileUpload/33_8433.pdf to http://www.royin.go.th/upload/61/FileUpload/33_8433.pdf

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:25, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

New Year section is for 2013

The New Year section needs to be updated, annually, perhaps even showing the previous and next New Years, as well. Skaizun (talk) 03:21, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Names

Would someone closer to the subject please add (or create a new article) that explains the ancestry of these calendars, since we seem to get fairly regular interventions (from Sri Lanka?) objecting to any suggestion of a Hindu origin.

As far as I can tell just from reading the articles, we have:

• Surya Siddhanta, the original Hindu calendar
• Burmese calendar is listed in this article as an antecedent of the Buddhist calendar. That article says "The Burmese chronicles trace the origin of the Burmese calendar to ancient India with the introduction of the Kali Yuga Era in 3102 BCE." and the Kali Yuga article says "According to the Surya Siddhanta, Kali Yuga began at midnight (00:00) on 18 February 3102 BCE", which might seem to suggest that the Burmese Calendar and the Surya Siddhanta evolved in parallel, not one from the other?
  • Chula Sakarat (alias Jolak Sakaraj), the article for which says that it is descended from (this?) Buddhist calendar
• Busyakul (2004: 476), cited in this article says (in the English abstract) "... the luni-solar calendar, based on Suriyayatra text ..." From that link we reach Thai lunar calendar which says that it is "based on the SuriyaYatra with likely influence from the traditional Hindu Surya Siddhanta" but gives no information about this SuriyaYatra. (I have asked at the talk page for clarification).

So it is a bit of a mess and an invitation to nationalistic disruption. Can anyone pull it together? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:55, 25 October 2021 (UTC)