Wikipedia talk:Hinduism-related topics notice board

Doleshwar Mahadev

Please look into this article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Doleshwar Mahadev. Thank you for you help Rjthapa (talk) 04:12, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Chitragupta Article

Please improve Chitragupta article. It is a Hinduism related article and needs a lot of improvement and editing.

${\mathfrak {ChitranshGaurav}}$ ^($Talk$) 12:05, 12 December 2024 IST [refresh]

Merging Samvat into Hindu calendar

Merging Samvat into Hindu calendar has been proposed since October 2010, and no objection has been raised to merge the two. I would merge them myself, but I'm not sure what should be kept, and how exactly they should be merged. Could someone with mor expertise in Hinduism look into doing this? Thank you. Trinitresque (talk) 00:43, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Amarnath Temple article title

A single article covers the Amarnath Cave, the Amarnath Temple Pilgrimage, and the Amarnath Temple. What should the article's title be? As of right now, the title is Amarnath Temple, but the WP:LEAD says the title is Amarnath Cave Pilgrimage and the article's infobox says the title is Amarnath Cave. I don't know which title best follows WP:TITLE policy. Could someone familiar with the topic take a look at the article and make it more consistent? Thanks. 67.101.5.239 (talk) 17:51, 13 July 2012 (UTC) P.S. If no one is interested in my question I am happy to assume that the current article title is the consensus and I will change the lead section and the infobox accordingly.

Kaurava article

I wish to propose some changes to the article Kaurava, in view of helping improve the style of narration all in keeping the original story intact. (I come from an English background, and as a dedicated Vaishnava myself. I am fascinated by the Mahabharata and other Vedic literature).

Below, you will find my alterations of wording only. I feel the improvements to the article, told in the Present tense (see sample below), should prove to be a more exciting read. Should you deem my changes worthy, you may of course use them. And if I can be of further assistance with edition / proof-reading, I'd be only too pleased to do so.

NOTE:

• Question marks in parentheses (?) indicate unclear parts that I feel need clarifying,
• (LINK) shows where I feel there could be one,
• Improved punctuation

The Birth of Kaurava(s)

Gandhari offers her marriage vows to Dhritarashtra and at the same time she vows to remain blindfolded throughout her marriage in keeping 'equal status' with her husband's state of cursed blindness from birth. Gandhari's brother Shakuni (LINK) would join them in Hastinapur (LINK) to look after his sister's needs.

At some point (?) Rishi Vyas (LINK) [proclaimed author of the Mahabharata] COMES to Hastinapur to visit Gandhari, who shows the saint great hospitality. In return, Vyas grants Gandhari any boon she wished. Gandhari's wish, however, is to bear one hundred sons who would be as powerful as her husband. So Vyas grants Gandhari this and in due course Gandhari does become pregnant. Regrettably, after two years of child carriage, Gandhari gives birth, only to 'a solid piece of lifeless flesh' (Reference?). Needless to say, that was nowhere near a newborn child.

[Meanwhile, Kunti (LINK) (or Pṛthā) had given birth to her first son Yudhisthira (LINK), who would later lose everything to a chalenge by Shakuni for the Kaurava throne, through a gamble at dice.]

Gandhari is devastated, since she had been relying on the blessings of the rishi Vyas. She is about to get rid of the worthless piece of flesh when Rishi Vyas suddenly appears and assures her that his blessings would not go unfulfilled, and he asks Gandhari to arrange for one hundred jars to be filled with ghee. Then Vyas proceeds to divide up the piece of flesh into hundred pieces and, placing each piece in a jar, he promises her that each will turn into the sons she so desired. Gandhari then told Vyas that she also wished for a daughter. So Vyasadeva simply cuts off yet another piece of flesh from the same piece and places it in yet another jar.

After two years of patiently waiting, all the sealed jars were ready to be opened. And so the first jar was opened, and Gandhari took the first baby out naming him Duryodhana. But alas! As soon as she did, the baby started wailing so that all the beasts of the jungle began to howl, which was considered to be an ill omen (according to Vidura?), and which meant that the baby was inauspicious and could bring about misfortune for the entire clan of the Kauravas. (including the Pandavas)

Everyone was shocked and disappointed. Vidura (LINK), who is actually the son of Vyasa, [and seen as a personification of death because Vyasa was tricked by Ambalika to copulate with his mother Satyavari to bear a son for the kingdom], suggested the child would have to be abandoned (sacrificed?)

"Our Vedic scriptures," he exclaims, "clearly state that for the good of the clan an individual can be sacrificed, and that for the good of the village a whole clan may be sacrificed, just as for the good of a nation a village may be sacrificed and, for that matter, the development of the soul (Atman?), can the earth also be sacrificed. And so, for the good of the clan and of the country and of humanity, please do sacrifice this son of yours." (which part of which scripture is that?)

Both Gandhari and Dhritrashtra, however, were adamant that a baby could cause no harm and so, much against Vidur's cautioning, they kept Duryodhana anyway. [Meanwhile, in the forest, Kunti gives birth to her second son Bheemsen (Bhima) (LINK).]

The other children of Gandhari were born out of the special jars, and now Gandhari did end up having the one hundred sons, as well as a baby daughter they named Duhshala. And all these children grew to be healthy and strong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stjohn1970 (talk • contribs) 13:41, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

RfC on God

There is a request for comment regarding the scope of the article God at Talk:God#Scope of this article. Any and all input is welcome. John Carter (talk) 15:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Proposed changes to WP:NOT

Please see the recent notifications at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts#Proposed changes to WP:NOT and Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Proposed changes to WP:NOT as it effects all religion editors: "There is currently discussion at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Is wikipedia a devotional compendium? regarding a proposed addition to that policy page. As topics of this nature tend to spawn some of the most heated and contested discussions we have, any and all informed, neutral opinions are more than welcome. John Carter (talk) 15:33, 6 August 2012 (UTC)" Thank you, IZAK (talk) 08:19, 8 August 2012 (UTC)