Talk:Śruti

message: This is the same Sanskrit word as śruti, right? In that case, they should both use IAST transliteration (the standard on Wikipedia), and there should be a disambiguation page. Comments? —Keenan Pepper 17:05, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, it's been long enough, I'm moving it. —Keenan Pepper 22:04, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transliteration 

message: Its not the same vedas and sruti. Not only that vedas are part of sruti and at the same time sruti refers to an extended vedic knowledge, not just four (or three) vedas.
Wikidās ॐ 07:49, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definitely do not merge with vedas 

message: From my first glance at google.com I could get here. "History of the Dvaita School of Vedanta and Its Literature: From the Earliest Beginnings to Our", By B. N. Krishnamurti, Sharma, Sanskriti
Sharma, 
I see here a list of different Śrutis. 
*Anabhimlana Śruti
*Agnivesya Śruti
and so on. 
BalanceRestored 09:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Various Śrutis 

message: In the list of the vedas Atharva is as ancient as Yajur and Sama, thus it must be respected as such. I am personally offended by the POV insertion that it is not tied directly to the other Vedas. It is up to the persons who read and interpret the scriptures to discover the connections between them, to say that there is none discredits this page in its entirety. There are sects that believe there is not a connection, and they should be allowed to do so but they should not be allowed to dictate that POV in a respectable academic work as if it were fact.
I highly recommend that the 'not tied to vedic sacrifice' be removed from the initial summary as it is misleading, disrespectful and unnecessary. Thank you.
-Anonymous
The meaning as stated is not correct in any sense.
[1.  Sruti means personal knowledge received directly from GOD]
[2.  Sruti was much before written language, hence has no connection with Sanskrit.]
[[[Special:Contributions/122.173.22.231|122.173.22.231]] (talk) 13:34, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sanskrit was the spoken language it was received in. A language is both spoken and written.van Lustig (talk) 20:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Sanskrit was the standardised language for people who could read. Indians spoke Prakrits in their everyday lives. 178.120.59.141 (talk) 02:56, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concerning the Atharva Veda 

message: This statement is erroneous. "The Śruti texts themselves assert that they were skillfully created by Rishis (sages), after inspired creativity, just as a carpenter builds a chariot."
Jiva Gosvami in his Tattva Sandharba states:
"Therefore the eternally existing sound of the Vedas simply enters these various sages, rather than being created by them. And in each day of Brahmā the Vedas appear with such attributes as the names of these various sages because that is how the Vedas eternally are." This is the opposite of "inspired creativity." 
The Govinda Bhasya commentary on the Vedanta Sutra (1.3.29) discusses this topic. 
https://archive.org/details/wYwp_the-vedant-sutras-of-badarayan-with-commentary-of-baldev-translated-by-raj-bahad/page/138/mode/2up
I will remove the statement. van Lustig (talk) 20:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable statement 

message: It is hard but sounds good to your ears. Try your best to do it. 2603:6080:1000:4769:84C5:B85C:C972:694 (talk) 12:58, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carnatic music