Talk:Hinduism/Archive 7

message: It is me who has made some recent corrections and corrected some fallacies, largely based on my recent Indian Philosophy course in which I got AA grade (yuppeee). The clarifications I want to give are:
*Yoga believes in Sankhya theory of Purusha and Prakrit and seeks their disunion through theistic means.
*Mimamsa firmly believes in Vedic ritualism, and follows the theory of Svatah Pramanyavada of knowledge (knowledge is self proved), but, if there is a doubt, then the authenticity of that knowledge must be proved by reasoning.
*In Advaita, Ishvara is that Brahman whom the man tries to know throgh his mind.
*The true paths for liberation are: Knowledge in Advaita; Karma along with Bhakti in Vishishtadvaita and Bhakti in Dvaita.
*Minor corrections about diacritical marks. I think everyone should give some time to correct the diacritical marks in the Romanized Sanskrit words, to let the article conform to a standard of good quality and uniformity.
Cygnus_hansa 20:02, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent corrections 

message: Brisvegas and I have been creating portals for various significant religions, with your religion being one of the portals. The portals still need work, but most of the groundwork has been done. We need to find people who would like to take responsibility for their faith's portal. Brisvega looks after the Christianity portal, and I look after the Islam portal. You can find your religion's portal by looking at the Religion & Spirituality section on the portal template at Template:Portals. I've been notified that your faith's portal can possibly be deleted if no one looks after the portal. --JuanMuslim  1m 17:50, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New portal on religion 

message: A couple of questions...
Regarding the Hindu Nationalism section: Are we all right-wing Sangh supporters here, or does someone else notice the complete lack of any mention of the Sangh's role in anti-Muslim violence?  Are we really going to believe that the VHP and Bajrang Dal no role in this sort of violence? 
And what evidence (prior to 19th century testimony) is there that the Babri mosque was built atop a Ram temple?  None, to my knowledge. The fact that this article states the Ram temple movement aims to RE-build the temple is not historically grounded, and stating that the Mughal commander "probably" destroyed the temple in his "alleged frenzy of iconoclasm" is just slightly biased, no?
:nope. -- --Dangerous-Boy 00:10, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some problems 

message: I was me who wrote the Babri Mosque lines - and I think I have written it as objectively and neutrally as possible. The words probably, alleged, etc show this (to do it in brief). And what is so wrong in that? Is it not true that it is a sin to worship idols and tolerate idols in Islam? Have early Muslim invaders not broken countless temples? And can you be so sure that there was no temple over Babri mosque? How? Because communist leaders say so? I am neither sure that this was a birthplace of Rama, and hence I have put "alleged" and "believed". What more can I do? As for your anti-Muslim violence of the Sangh (which is true), you are welcome to add ONE line in that section, since the Hinduism article is already very long.
User:Magicalsaumy
221.135.196.50 06:14, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Babri mosque 

message: There is a typo in the caption under the picture of Pashupatinath Temple near Denominations: Shaktism.  You guys spelled Katmandu wrong.  It says, '...Kathmandu...'. I have no idea how to edit that so please do it for me, someone! Asking nicely, Websurfer11 23:13, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anybody notice? Typos that are non-editable. 

message: I think there is a terrible need to delete repititions occuring in all sorts of odd places in this article. In most of the icons, mother goddess, female divine energy, repitition of the characteristics of Brahman, etymology of Hindu, etc etc are repeated. I urge someone to clean up the article and conform it to a good style - in an organized way (already too long!), otherwise I myself will delete repeating sentences in a few days.
Cygnus_hansa 06:32, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: it's a horrible mess. it would be a heroic task cleaning it up, knowing that it will be cluttered again in two weeks :( dab (ᛏ) 19:24, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree. I attempted that a while ago. But with so much traffic on this page, it will be cluttered again. good luck !--Pranathi 19:41, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: consider a deep revert, re-adding anything of substance that may have been added since. Which is your cleaned up version? We need some editors comitted to having a good Hinduism article running a tight ship here. Have a look at how things are going on Islam: That article is in good shape, and essentially stable, since people are required to give good reasons if they add material. Every section has "main" sub-articles, and there is rarely a good reason to add stuff to the central article and not to the sub-articles. I am sure there must be some Hindu editors here who care about having a decent article on Hinduism! dab (ᛏ) 09:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need to delete repititions 

message: Now that wikiproject Hinduism is pretty much active, I'm trying to get Wikipedia:WikiProject Hindu mythology more active.  If anyone would like to help, the Hindu mythology sections need a lot of organization.  --Dangerous-Boy 22:19, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Hindu mythology]] 

message: Normally the Eurocentric view of Hinduism of only about the notorious caste system. As it was not mentioned anywhere, I have added a section mentioning the reality behind it.Cygnus_hansa 09:17, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: that was a good edit, it seems reference to the castes was missing so far. It is also well that you removed the confused claim of the Gita being "one of three epic books". But please use IAST, i.e. spelling Purāṇa, not Purāņa (just a minor point, of course). dab (ᛏ) 09:43, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I cannot use the ISAT because there is no /n/ with a dot beneath it in the insert box below the editing window; thats why I have to use n with cedilla beneath it.202.68.145.230 22:39, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

text: (1) go to IAST. (2) copy any letter you need into clipboard. (3) paste it into your text. dab (ᛏ) 13:50, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caste 

message: I dont like the drawings that are on the page, most of them seem ocidentalized and not following the "sacred steps" when doing hindu art. 
i'm not fanatical or anything, but i think in the article all the images should reflect more the religion, and less "drawings from mystical magazines". --Ratone 04:07, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, it is Hare Krishna cruft, and shouldn't be sprawling over the general "Hinduism" article. On Krishna, maybe; on ISKCON, certainly (assuming "fair use"), but not here. dab (ᛏ) 13:52, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Drawings 

message: Miracle has almost nothing on Hindu, and I (ignorant as I am) added that - a one-liner plus a brief account of the milk drinking statues, which really ought to be in the Modern miracles section on that page. Would some of you please come over to Miracle long enough to write a brief paragraph (or preferably several on Hindu miracles? Thank you! KillerChihuahua?!? 19:34, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Plea for help

message: Hinduism was known as "Brahmanism", and the term may be mentioned for historical interest, It seems the 1911 Britannica had an article Brahmanism [unsure?], hence our Brahmanism. The point is that this article should be merged here, since it is not acceptable to have a variant article treating exactly the same topic. dab (ᛏ) 14:13, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: See, all these point are Western perceptions of Hinduism. If the Britishers created a religion called Brahmanism, it has nothing to do with us. You may mention in some section that some historians "termed" the early form of Hindu religion, based on its ritualism and Brahmanas' precepts as Brahmanism. The Wbster's dictionary defines Brahmanism as the religious doctrines and system of the Brahmans. But Brahmanism is the term used by Indian communists that there exists nothing as Hinduism and whatever exists is Brahmanism - the religion imposed by Brahmins.Cygnus_hansa 16:32, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: that's what I'm saying, precisely. I am not suggesting we move this article to Brahminism, I am saying we need to do something about the existing Brahminism article. If we redirect, we can mention the term as an outdated synonym here. After all, even "Hinduism" has nothing to do with "you", it is just a convenient umbrella term. dab (ᛏ) 10:32, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: "Brahminism"

message: I think we need to mention ISKCON at least once, which I have done in Vedanta section.Cygnus_hansa 09:15, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: We should remember that Krishnas have said that they are not hindus, something like christians and then muslims. They are taking another road. Aupmanyav 04:18, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ISKCON 

message: Please see this page Advaita Vedanta, mostly made by me, and give your suggestions.Cygnus_hansa 10:37, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Advaita

message: Mount Kailash and  Lake Manasarowar near it are considered as MOST sacred and spiritual places on Earth by Hnduism and some other religions. These are also MOST sacred shrines of Hinduism along with Buddhism, Jainism and Tibet Bompo Faith. I think these two articles needs more attention and they should be linked at appropriate places with main article.--Holy Ganga 22:20, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the Vaishno Devi and Amarnath shrines are equally important --Deepak|वार्ता 
15:00, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: See, you cannot start describing important shrines, because for each Hindu, his important shrine is unique. I had added the four holies Mathas only in order to make a passing reference to the Shankaracharyas. Another wonderful idea is to make a section at the bottom entitiles "List of important pilgrimage centres in Hinduism", and give ONLY the list of some important ones (not only in India but Nepal, Pakistan too.).Cygnus_hansa 19:04, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

text: According to me making a List of sacred Hindu shrines, adding its link in the See also section and expanding the concerned articles is the best solution. --Deepak|वार्ता 13:12, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  MOST sacred shrine of Hinduism needs attention. 

message: Meditation is currently a nominee on WP:IDRIVE. If you would like to see this article improved vote for it on WP:IDRIVE.--Fenice 15:33, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement Drive

message: There a re a lot of Pakistanis making huge claims about being Rajputs and being descended from Pandavas of the Mahabharat. If anyone has a speciality or cares to help could they please come over and help fix this situation. SOS, thanks.
Gorkhali 11:53, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Need help in the Rajput article

message: I have added a ा mark to reflect the correct case (called Apaadan in Sanskrit - I cant remember its english eqv - to reflect the sense of from), since the litt meaning of the word is Song from (the mouth of) Bhagvan. Had it been Song of Bhagvan (Dative case), the word would have been Bhagvasya Gita!!!
I have included some mild grammar and punctuation, but one major point is that the Bhagvad Gita is the most popular text of Hinduism - being the core is debateable since there are several Shaivaites who will beg to differ, though they themselves shall agree that it is popular. Moreover, it is a summary and not a summation of all the diff philosophies - its a (pretty lengthy!!!) gist, but is not the sum-total.
Pizzadeliveryboy 20:21, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  spelling of Bhagvad Gita and other points 

message: Not adding a refernce to the fact that the Babri Masjid is essentially a dispute, with a section of people claiming an opposing view puts a mild POV tone. Hence I removed the prev edit in that para. The rest of the edits remain.
Pizzadeliveryboy 01:00, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  mild POV 

message: I have changed ref. of "adherents of Abrahamic Religions" to just Westerners - better to have a social classification rather than a narrower religious one since the criticism stems out of ignorance in a social context, rather than because some perceived sense of religious superiority. Moeover several critics in the past have been agnostics/atheists and not staunch Christians or Jews or Muslims.
Pizzadeliveryboy 14:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crititicism section 

message: What's up with Talk:Hinduism/temp? It's barely been edited in months. Is it still an active page or should it be deleted? -Will Beback 22:07, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Talk:Hinduism/temp]] 

message: We also need a mention of the Shivalinga in this section.
Pizzadeliveryboy 15:37, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: there's already an article on it --Dangerous-Boy 05:48, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hindu symbolism 

message: Please remember that bindi is essentially a tattoo.
Also teep is used almost exclusively in Bangla!!!
Pizzadeliveryboy 00:12, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  bindi 

message: I am yet again on an offensive drive to convert all Sanskrit words into proper IAST translierations (except for the fact that sh I am using for both ś and ṣ, as sh and ṣh for modernity, and vowel ṛ as ri--because modern Hindu do not use IAST, and it must not be that they find their own words in a new script as completely foreign!). As per the recommendation of Webster's dictionalry for writing English, I am also italicizing all Sanskrit words as they are foreign to English. I am splitting the God section into two for clarity and viwes on the so-called polytheism.Cygnus_hansa 16:49, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I still see squares.--Dangerous-Boy 04:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its only the first section, beliefs and practices that I have amended as of yet. I hope u dont see squares in that!Cygnus_hansa 20:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No squares in the first section.  Now if only you could fix the mantra section. --Dangerous-Boy 00:54, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Offensive Drive

message: Does anyone object to removing that pic?  The whole temple and geographic distribution part of the looks to squished with the images.  The Neasden Temple is already on Hinduism in the United Kingdom.  --Dangerous-Boy 00:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So no one objects?--Dangerous-Boy 08:53, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing the Neasden Temple pic 

message: It says it will be deleted soon.  Does anyone know the proper tag?--Dangerous-Boy 00:58, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Image:YoungBrahminBoy.jpg]] not tagged properly! 

message: Hallo! Please dont waste your time to create a spoken article out of Hinduism, because I have already started this spoken article in my own voice! I have already made one complete recording of this article (around 28th Feb, 06) for 93 min, 54 MB. But my institute's servers do not allow me to upload any file greater than 10 MB. So I have started it in parts. I have rerecorded the first section, but still its 15 MB! I mean that I am already in the process of the spoken article. The accent is Indo-British English, and the Sanskrit words have original Sanskrit pronunciation. (So kindly don't make very heavy changes in the content for a few days). Cygnus_hansa 16:38, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Spoken article completed by me. I have successfully uploaded the sound files and associated them with this article. Hinduism is now a spoken article. Cygnus_hansa 01:55, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I appreciate your effort, Cygnus. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 04:37, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Spoken article

message: I have been working on the Forgiveness article. Would someone be willing to take a stab at adding a Hinduism heading under the "Religious and spiritual views of forgiveness" heading in that article and trying to concisely state Hinduism's view on forgiveness?  Any help would be appreciated.  --speet 01:37, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forgiveness article help requested 

message: There is a temporary page at Talk:Hinduism/temp that hasn't been edited in almost two weeks. Someone should see if there is anything worth saving and then tag the article with this ()tag. Pepsidrinka 20:54, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Aupmanyav, I personally don't like the new intro. It is making specific claims - 
* Hinduism makes belief about what God/Gods to worship a personal matter. the variations on who to worship depends on denomination. For the general populace that don't belong to any denomination it may be true. But it is not true for all of Hinduism. I think a more appropriate statement is something on the lines of 'belief in some core concepts such as Dharma, Karma etc tie the religion together rather than belief in the same God'. 
* It gives more importance to a person's duty to the family and the society. Vaishnavism gives more importance to God for example. I think the sentence is just another point of view.
* In the Hindu synthesis, place was found for all beliefs or traditions and nothing was ever thrown away. Where does that leave Buddhism and Jainism - part of Hinduism? I don't consider Hinduism to be a free for all.
* This is why it has so many traditions, major and minor Gods, even regional and village deities, and an equal number of philosophies. Many village dieties may be local tradition but most of the devas and concepts of Ishwar (Shiva or Vishnu) stem from the Puranas and scriptures. All major philosophies are based on the scriptures and can be validated by different interpretations of the scriptures. Again I don't think it's a free for all. I think the original sentence -  It encompasses many religious rituals that widely vary in practice, as well as many diverse sects and philosophies.  spells out the differences without trying to explain them. This sentence was also in the Christianity article a while ago.
There may be some POV in the old version that is being discussed but I don't think this parah fixes the issues.  --Pranathi 19:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I am reverting the new edits on the introduction and in Basic beliefs for a foreigner's conversion. These new edits are unencyclopedic, written with a personal bias and not with NPOV, and are the views of only a minority. There earlier paras were more well-thought of and better written.
Cygnus_hansa 19:25, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Temp page 

message: This article, as a featured article of one of the worlds great religions, needs many more references than it has right now. Unless some get added, I think it should be nominated for downgrading. Judgesurreal777 23:41, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added few more references.Cygnus_hansa 04:52, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Featured Article Removal Candidacy

message: Please remove Samskaras. Its not followed uniformly by all Hindus, rather, only by Brahmin caste. It is not followed by all regions. And in the modern world it is not practiced by even most Brahmins! It is a long section which just eats up space.Cygnus_hansa 04:54, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  Looks out place.--Dangerous-Boy 17:37, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Samskaras

message: the Wikipedia:WikiProject Hinduism/Peer review is now online.  Would anyone like to start to make a request?  This will help articles with no references. --Dangerous-Boy 19:38, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Hinduism/Peer review]] 

message: Although some simple math can *almost* prove this, do we really need to keep this sentence?  I am wondering if replacing it with "vast majority" would not work just as well.  I have not been able to find a citation for that exact figure.  We need it or do some simple math using the following data:
80% of India = Hindus = ? & World population of Hindus - and then put a note at the bottom.  Either way, whoever is associated with the project more than me should get on it right away.
: The best way to avoid overedited wars on the subject is to generalize it. I've taken care of that now. AreJay 03:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  98% of hindus are in india claim

message: In order to ward off the article from losing its feature status, we need more sources.  This should not be tough as the article is pretty high quality.  However, I am more used to scientific papers and it is not clear cut to me what are the things that require referencing.  So, plesae lets make a list of things that we should find sources for.  Also, if the original writers are still around they can provide some inline citations from the material they had used originally.  I will start the list with few things I think probably need references:
*1) Under origins of hinduism, we can probably use some references for all the dates.
*2) Also, references for people who reject the dates in the same section.
*3) Stuff in etymology section needs references, especially the statement that starts with "According to Historical linguists."
*4) "Altogether, bhakti resulted in a mass of devotional literature, music and art that has enriched the world and given India renewed spiritual impetus, one eschewing elaborate rituals."
Please, cross out the lines when you find proper references and add things that you feel need referencing.  Please, try to abstain from doing a google search and using the first random website that supports any of these.  We have like two weeks to fix this.  Lets get on it!!--Blacksun 07:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: List of points that need referencing

message: We really need to get the article to atleast 60kb, in order to not lose the FA tag.  The original FA was around 35kb.  Unfortunately, over time, people have been adding more and more information.
I think that this two section need to be kept in summary form with the details shipped out to a main article.  Denomination already has a main article which is simply a copy and paste of the current section in Hinduism.  I am going to go ahead and chop out the specific subsections for each denomination.--Blacksun 07:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Murti + denomination section

message: since Blacksun is making an active effort to improve the referencing situation, I think we should give the article some time before revoking its featured status. It should just be very clear that in its present shape, it would stand no chance on FAC by Wikipedia's present FA standards. I suggest the FA removal request should be put on hold for two weeks or so, but I would support re-submitting it if that means that improvement efforts cease. Now, concerning the references, there are a couple of footnotes now, but they are far from satisfactory. Fn 1 is already misquoting its source. The statement "generally regarded as the oldest major religion still practiced in the world today" is backed up by a source stating that "Judaism ... shares with Hinduism the distinction of being the oldest of the major religious traditions." That's hardly equivalent. Fn 2 is supposed to source the rather tall claim that Hinduism evolved from a "monolithic religion into a multitude of traditions over a period of the last 4000 years". The reference for this is a random pdf document found on the internet? Very little is known about the predecessors of Hinduism 4000 years ago*. There is a reasonably certain knowledge for times 3000 years ago, hardly supporting anything like a "monolithic" nature. I would avoid making controversial statements in the lead section, and if you do, you should source them much better than what we have now. 
:* For such early, Proto-Indo-Iranian, times, we are reduced to compare the Rigvedic testimony with evidence from Mitanni and Avestan sources. We can confidently say that there was a Soma cult and horse sacrifice, and likely the gods Mitra, Varuna and Nasatya in 2000 BC, but that's about it.
dab (ᛏ) 12:00, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: referencing effort