Talk:Hindu mythology

message: the :Hindu synthesis emerged only after ca. 500-300 BCE. To state that  diff needs more than an unspecified, unaccessible review (). Please refer to the original source (George M. Williams (2008), Handbook of Hindu Mythology), with pagenumbers. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:41, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hindu synthesis 

message: NB: your copying of text from Williams is a WP:COPYVIO.  could you take a look here? Thanks, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:53, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Copyright text removed. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa (talk) 15:49, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Copy-vio

message: It is NOT a mythology, Ramayana, Mahabharata and the puranas are NOT MYTHS, it is our history, it ACTUALLY did happen, so please remove the word MYTHOLOGY or MYTH from all your sites 103.252.27.196 (talk) 08:02, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  HINDU MYTHOLOGY 

message: I know many arguments above are highlighting the same issue but please take the time to read and understand my take on this. 
While I understand that this well-written article was created with good intentions, the phrase "Hindu Mythology" has erupted throughout all Wikipedia articles about Hinduism- or Hindu-related gods and can be interpreted as disrespectful. Hinduism is a religion, a way of life, and the 1 billion people who follow this way of life hold its "myths" in high regard. The phrase "Hindu mythology" has been incorrectly used synonymously with the religion for many years, which is understandable, but perhaps it is time to modify that. It is disturbing to simply dismiss the religion as "mythology" given that it is still practiced by a significant portion of the world's population (about 15%). Additionally, as a Hindu myself, I believe it to be quite disrespectful to both my existence and my beliefs, and I have no doubt that other Hindus will share this opinion. This religion, our way of life, is a reality for many, so please refrain from dismissing it as a myth. I humbly request that the use of mythology in this article should be corrected. 
I also noticed above that the argument presented was that Christian mythology, Jewish mythology, and Islamic mythology are also articles on Wikipedia. Should these religions be degraded with the term mythology as well? Isn't it disrespectful to those who practice those religions? These "myths", "legends", and "stories" from all these religions are not simply "myths", "legends", and "stories." They serve as a reality to many people in today's world.  
The definition of a myth: A traditional story, typically involving supernatural beings or forces, which embodies and provides an explanation, etiology, or justification for something such as the early history of a society, a religious belief or ritual, or a natural phenomenon. Well, this term does appear to be more respectful than most people are giving it credit for. However, note that the word "story" appears as the third word in this definition. This word carries a connotation that this "narrative" is fictional. Furthermore, for a long time in our society, the terms "story" and "myth" were mistakenly used interchangeably. The point I'm trying to make is that there are more respectful terms out there to use in place of this derogatory term.
I believe the article (linked below) put it best...although the words myth or mythology itself do not mean fiction, they certainly imply it. Perhaps using the phrase "Hindu epics" or "Hinduism" itself is a start. 
https://bookriot.com/hindu-epics-are-they-myths/
Thank you for understanding and hope to see some changes! :) OtherstuffWP (talk) 21:36, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The use of the phrase "Hindu Mythology" 

message: Please do not use the word ‘Mythology’. Hinduism is not a ‘myth’. It is our history.
We don’t say islamic mythology or Christian mythology right? Please use the word Hindu Theology. 103.89.235.102 (talk) 01:45, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. Heart (talk) 01:48, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes we do: :Christian mythology. And: :Christ myth theory. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:25, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It's worth mentioning that even mainstream scholars think that the stories in the Gospels are mostly fictional and do not treat them as historical sources anymore, or at least consider them unreliable. In any case, they are not critical biographies or historical accounts in the modern sense (they may be biographies as a genre, but in antiquity, fictional biographies written about both historical and mythological figures were common). Even far more recent characters have had legends develop around them. Hebrew scripture is full of unverifiable legends, too. All parts of the Bible are far more problematic and difficult to use as sources for history than scholars used to assume because they are full of symbolism, propaganda and hagiography and are extremely biased. (Even in antiquity there were relatively critical historians such as Arrian.) Critical, secular scholars do not treat the Abrahamic religions, and especially Christianity, any differently from Eastern religions now. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 00:49, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 20 May 2023 

message: — Assignment last updated by BlueMichaela (talk) 21:31, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Mythology