Talk:Tabon Caves

Journey to the West Cave Paintings

I've noticed that information has been added to this and another article that doesn't have sourcing. Does User:Pbmaise have evidence for the various paintings referencing Journey to the West? Perhaps an expert analysis from a paper? If this is your personal research, Wikipedia has a policy against this. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 00:51, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Good to find someone interested.

Lets begin with a small correction to your profile. Sun Wukong is not from Journey to the West. He is a character in the novel.

The actual story is far older and based on the from the 7th century. Sun Wukong is in temple art long before the novel.

When I say there is a man on a lion with his hair in a bun that is a fact supported with a picture.

When I say Manjusri rides a lion, that is research by others on the page for Manjursi.

When I say and in this photo I can see a pig, turtle, monkey horses...this is a claim backed by photo.

When I say these same characters appear in the Journey West, it is a sourced research on other pages.

So I do not original research.

If I take a picture in a church of the Madonna and Child, it is not original research. I am free to say that to me this looks like a woman and her child.

Can you see a pig, turtle, monkey, horses, a man with his hair in a bun on a lion?

If I presented you with a 1000 year old picture of Madonna and Child would you say...well I cannot clearly see her DNA so how can claim it is that specific woman?

If you doubt my conclusion, do you have another idea why these people built a huge scaffold to paint a pig?

Where are you located? I return to the temple sites soon.

I will give you two contacts

Larry Pronto from National Museum

Maryrose Palanca-Caabay

Palawan Culture and History

Sunday I plan to return to the cave to get a better photo of the characters.

Philip Maise

Happy independence day from the Philippines

Pbmaise (talk) 06:16, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

I am familiar with the narrative and history of the novel. It is only very loosely based on Xuanzang’s travel record, and at no point does Sun Wukong appear in the monk’s account. Therefore, I’m correct in saying that Monkey is from the novel because he isn’t associated with any other story arc. Even the earliest cave paintings of him from the Yulin complex (circa 11th-century) show him with his master and the white horse. The oral tradition that spawned such paintings eventually coalesced into the earliest printed version of the novel during the 13th-century. It differs wildly from the final Ming version. For example, Monkey fights with two different kinds of staves, one of which is a monk’s staff gifted to him by Vaisravana.

The WP:OR page says the following: “The phrase ‘original research’ (OR) is used … to refer to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist.” You are presenting material that has yet to be presented in a reliable publication. This is the very definition of original research. Regarding your pictures, the aforementioned page states: “Original images created by a Wikipedian are not considered original research, so long as they do not illustrate or introduce unpublished ideas or arguments.” You are using the pictures as proof of your “unpublished ideas”. Again, this fits the definition of original research.

The pictures are of such poor quality that it’s impossible to tell what the figures are. You claim to see a pig, turtle, monkey, and some dragons or horses. I see blobs of color. Saying that they are characters from the novel doesn’t make it true. That’s why a published expert analysis with clear pictures of the paintings needs to be cited. If you can’t provide such evidence, then the material needs to be removed. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 05:41, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Exactly! “Original images created by a Wikipedian are not considered original research, so long as they do not illustrate or introduce unpublished ideas or arguments.” You claim I am introducing an unpublished idea or argument....however neglect to state what idea or argument I introduce. I see no new introduced unpublished idea or argument.

If I said these photos are evidence martians riding lions visited the area hundreds of years ago...then that would have introduced something. Wikipedia pages abound with descriptions that Buddhism existed in S.E. Asia. Further that traders operated in the area, and the Philippines had a buddhist population.

Let me ask the question again.

Do you see something that looks like a man with his hair in a bun riding a lion?

I never knew of all of the Buddhist history until I saw what ever one now clearly sees. Are you looking at the highest res version on a computer or low res on a cell phone. It is a pretty high standard you set that 1000+ old cave paintings should be perfect as a modern photo of an actual turtle.

See highest res at

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tabon_Cave_2014_03.JPG

By showing this picture I am helping to build content supporting the research and experts that claim Buddhism was present.Pbmaise (talk) 12:47, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

I have already stated what I think is original research: the claim that the images in the cave portray characters from the novel. You have provided your own opinion on the matter instead of citing an expert analysis from a paper. You can't deny that this is original research because throughout the article you wrote: “American tourist named Philip Maise…realized”, “This Buddhist themed mural was found in the cave by Maise in 2013” and “Maise concluded”. You are Philip Maise and this is your discovery; the paintings have not appeared in a published article; therefore, this is original research.

No, I do not see a man riding a lion. Without the crudely drawn lines (made presumably in Windows Paint), I probably wouldn’t even know what the picture was supposed to be. But even if the image was clearer, I’ve seen many images of Manjusri and none of these portray him riding his lion like a horse. Even a quick google image search doesn’t show any paintings or sculptures of the Bodhisattva with arms out holding bridles. At best, the image you are referring to is a warrior riding a horse. A bun is generally a part of the iconography for the Buddha, not a bodhisattva. In Buddhist art, Bodhisattvas are usually depicted with crowns.

I am an anthropologist and art historian with knowledge of cave paintings. I’ve been in the field and seen ancient cave paintings up close. I know the rough kind of condition that such pieces can be in. But I also know what a properly photographed cave painting looks like and the examples you have provided aren’t it. They are poorly lit and shot from a distance. Even the supposedly high definition picture you directed me to isn’t enough to verify whether or not the images are of characters from the novel. I’m looking at it on a 4K screen, which has the best resolution on the market at the moment.

Again, I have already stated what I think is original research: the claim that the images in the cave portray characters from the novel. you can’t provide information from a published paper on the subject, I’m going to remove the material. I’ll gladly contact a Wikipedia mediator about this if you would like. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 14:24, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

You wrote: I have already stated what I think is original research: the claim that the images in the cave portray characters from the novel.

We have made great progress. Are we in both agreement the first "painting" appears to be a man with his hair in a bun riding a lion horse style?

I agree I searched for other images similar, however, the Philippines in 700-900 ad wasnt internet ready and no artist there saw images in other temples. Did Buddhists carry around their digital cameras to show locals how to illogically seat someone sideways on a traveling lion?

It is more credible this is real because it isnt a copy of something the artist couldnt see.

I do want a moderator and will meet again the director of the Palawan Council of Culture on Tuesday. Please provide moderators name.

Lets make sure we both agree on my claim....

I absolutely do not under any circumstance claim they are images from characters in the novel.

These images pre-date the novel. Are you being open about Buddhism and realize it is older than the 17th century novel?

I claim that the images appear to be animals and a man riding a lion...further

A. this combination of animals is supporting evidence that B. other researchers are right about their conclusions C. found in many journals and referenced on many other pages crosslinked to this one D. wherein they claim Buddhism was practiced in the Philippines E. That was before the novel was written F. That was before Kodak pictures showed how other artists protrayed Manjusri

My friend please accept I have an advantage in my conclusion this looks like a man riding a lion. The 10 meter high bust of Manjusri I found at the ruined temple along with a lion dog is very real. I am not willing to release the busts image until the National Museumn and Palawan Council have the site secured.

You will see the scale as I am photographed standing infront.

Question: Would a large troop attack and kill a pig? That is what it sounded like when I was at temple site 3. I travel with armed guard at these sites, but the reason is a different bipedal.

Again, I am trying to get a most special person from the Bishop Museum here to meet my yacht on next trip. He is over 90 and I care more about pre-Buddhist temple areas. The transition between construction technique confirms Faxian's claims to have begun on a Persian ship. Elements in construction match Petra.

Yes there is far far more for me to show the world. Someday, someday I hope to release my most stunning find. However, I will never allow even the name of the Country I found it to be known. That finds location will die with me.

ps Guess who has a Cannon 600 Camera and is headed to shore to get on a 4 hour bus ride because some will not accept the current best image of a pig, a turtle, and a monkey in light green crouched on the neck of a cloud horse. Pbmaise (talk) 22:28, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

I’m not agreeing the image is of a man riding on an animal of any kind. The picture is too degraded to tell what it is. It could just be oxidation stains for all I know. That is why an expert analysis is needed.

I don’t know the mediator by name. The person will be appointed by Wikipedia once they have been contacted about our ongoing conversation. I will contact them shortly.

You do claim the images (if they really are animals) are characters from the novel. You state: “The animals depicted in the paintings match the main fictionalized characters from the tale Journey to the West … The monkey, Sun Wukong, is to the right of the black line. Right of him may be Princess Iron Fan.” You keep saying in our discussion that the images predate the novel, yet you state "these have not yet been dated" on Buddhism in the Philippines. So, in reality, we can't say for sure how old the images are since they haven't been carbon dated yet.

I would also like to add the image of the skull and the elephants are also original research unless they have been published in an article analyzing the cave. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 04:17, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Here is the mediation link. Please follow it and add your name and information at the bottom. Thanks. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 06:07, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

It was a 15.5 hour round trip to the caves and back yesterday. I have machine shop, immigration, and meetings with cultural department and coast guard today. primary concern for us is not posting these images, rather it is digging activities by bipeds at a temple area in a Muslim area. I was pleased to see the National Museum has roped off access to the mold on the gave that is more complete than I have yet shown. Security is also now armed and there are several dogs posted. Further these works are in an upper cave and to get to that a visitor at night also has a new gate to contend with. During the day, no one can get within 1 kilometer of the caves without first going to Museum in town, then clearance and check of bags by coast guard. Incorporation of an armed military check point was a great idea.

The images are far larger than you may have imagined. Further not flat. Monkey is about 3 meters tall.

These are still minor items, if artifacts, compared to what we do not show.

Yes they predate the novel by maybe a full thousand years IF they are Buddhist. We know when Buddhism ended in the area because we known the approximate date of conversion to Muslim when Arab traders took the place of Indonesian.

I will work on text to include 58 may could or might. I also need to incorporate the china.

The Chinese were terrible sailors at this time but made good china. Thank you for moderation. If you really are who you seem to be..the Palau incident. Pbmaise (talk) 23:40, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I can say with complete confidence that, if they do portray characters connected with Journey to the West, the paintings are not 1000 years old. This is because Zhu Bajie and Sha Wujing were later additions to the story line. The oldest known cave paintings (mentioned above) only show Monkey, Xuanzang, and a white horse. None of the 11th and 12th-century references to the story mention either Zhu Bajie or Sha Wujing. Plus, they both don't appear in the 13th-century version of the novel (nor does Manjusri). I've written about the evolution of Sha Wujing here. You should look up English translations of this early version. It can be found in Victor H. Mair, The Columbia Anthology of Traditional Chinese Literature (New York: Columbia University Press, 1994), pp. 1181-1207. The point I'm trying to make here is that you clearly haven't done any background research on the history of the novel, so you can't be claiming undated paintings represent characters from the story line. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 01:31, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Since our request for mediation was denied, I have requested a third party opinion. You can see the request here. By the way, I have added a tag to alert readers that the page may

contain original research. It should stay until the issue is resolved. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 14:32, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:

I am responding to a third opinion request for this page. I have made no previous edits on Tabon Caves and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes.

@Pbmaise and Ghostexorcist: Thank you both for requesting a third opinion. This seems to me like a case where Pbmaise is at these caves, and feels he has made an important discovery. Pbmaise is attempting to insert his photos into the article on Wikipedia and describe the discovery. However, Wikipedia is not the place to report and describe this discovery. This is a case of Pbmaise looking at primary sources and conducting analysis and interpreting them in Wikipedia, which is considered original research, and Wikipedia is the wrong vehicle for that. A much better approach, both for you Pbmaise, and for this discovery, is to prepare a formal paper on your discovery and get it published in a peer-reviewed journal. Once it's been published in a peer-reviewed journal it can then be incorporated into Wikipedia. If you have further questions about original research on Wikipedia and what is considered original research and why it isn't allowed, I suggest you visit the OR noticeboard. If you have questions or need me to clarify anything, I'll have this page on my watchlist. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 18:59, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Reply Maise June 22

I am in full agreement with tag. Further again I appreciate your input. Since we last wrote I introduced a large amount of may and might and appears.

I discussed this with a writer and she encouraged me to do scrappings...which I would never consider.

I also read the page on editor wars and hope this doesn't become one.

It would be great if the upper two possible images were not Buddist. That likely makes them older.

This is largey a uncommonly visited cave and the traffic on wiki reflects that. Before adding links and pictures within the cave traffic was around 10-20 per day. The cave to the North with zero evidence any human habitation at all has about 250 page reads a day. It has a nice river. I checked, nothing looks painted on the massive walls.

To any third party let me be clear we are not debating a tiny faded photograph. These are huge works standing meters tall. Further many features are 3-D in the form of a relief or carving into the cave wall.

I am going back to the cave again and again taking photos. Looking at photos they must appear to be proportional, have arms, heads, eyes where they should be, or, something must show it was broken away. Any statement based on the photo can only lend support to existing ideas for the area. We know the Philippines changed from primarily animalists, to buddhists, to Islam, then Catholic.

Looking closely at my recent photos I can see breaks in the cave wall left of man on lion and right of monkey on horse heads. To me this is a clear sign the images used to be more complete and a wall used to bridge the gap. I am looking for photos now how cave was when originally found. Pbmaise (talk) 06:19, 22 June 2015 (UTC) I returned to the caves this week and sat in front of Tabon Caves. There is a really big problem if we do not ascribe these huge images to be man-made. That implies they are natural. From one spot on the bench looking into the cave that is exactly what these look like to me. A pig, turtle, monkey, on horse heads, Chinese man riding on a lion.

This time I was permitted past the rope area and will confess the closer you get to the images and more you change your angle of site the less they look like these subjects.

I located an article on the web about images created that can only be best seen from one angle. Anything but that angle they don't appear like much. I have not found a name for this type of artwork. But the examples were all intentional. The problem with this cave is all the images are clearly what I say from one angle.

This also helps account why others have not seen them before. They do not sit and stare into the cave at this same spot as I do. I toned down the claims again and simply say they look like what they look like. Comments please. http://themetapicture.com/incredible-art-that-can-only-be-viewed-from-one-angle/124.104.165.62

I also conducted a review of caves outside the complex and was shown the diggings. Some as recent as 2 months ago. All of the history is being destroyed which means showing the giant Buddhist images and their location because more difficult. Pbmaise (talk) 09:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

ps I met yesterday with the Mayor of the area and the Council. Tomorrow I meet with the Palawan council. Pbmaise (talk) 09:09, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

@Pbmaise: please see my response to the third opinion request above. Everything you have said is the very definition of original research, which is better published in peer-reviewed journals, and which Wikipedia doesn't allow until it has been published elsewhere. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 15:22, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Can people see photos?

I firmly disagree. Wikipedia specifically allows an editor to take photos and post them provided they do not introduce a new concept.

Buddhism in the area is not a new concept and I have attempted to now remove attempts to explain what the photos are. Dark blotches if acceptable to you only greatly increase speculation that the images are magical.

Is this lion dog found outside the cave on a rock magical? I placed this onto a blog spot before posting here. May I describe this image appears to be a dog because four paws, body, head, and it is scratching itself for fleas? http://tabonman.blogspot.com/2015/06/find-ancient-image-challenge-1.html Pbmaise (talk) 00:25, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Is it necessary to make any commentary on the findings aside from very basic ID? Should there be more emphasis on dating and type of artifact or on the meaning instead?

Jack DiasJacktdias (talk) 17:12, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Original Research removed.

I became concerned because conversation on this topic seems to have died over the last few months. I went ahead and removed what appeared to be original research from the article. At this point I am acting as an editor; no longer as a WP:3O volunteer. If anyone has further concerns or wants to dispute my actions, feel free to take it to the OR noticeboard. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 20:06, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Tabon Caves Garuda Gold Pendant

Does anyone have further info/source material/ images of the Garuda Gold Pendant? I would like to research it further. Many thanksElla Dawn 15:13, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

I removed the Garuda Gold Pendant in the section of the Tabon Caves because this artifact was not found in the Tabon cave complex. They are acquired from Uring-Uring (not excavated) in Brooke's Point Ngiping kidlat (talk) 08:12, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

discoveries found in the Tabon Cave

You discoveries 49.145.42.191 (talk) 00:58, 10 October 2024 (UTC)