Cuddlemebaby (talk | contribs) →Name change: new section Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit New topic |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Skip to talk}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Hindu Mythology}} |
|||
{{Talk header}} |
|||
{{Indian English}} |
|||
Added on 2 May 02005 to make a ToC by [[User:Imc|Imc]] 15:36, 2 May 2005 (UTC) |
|||
{{ArticleHistory|action1=GAN |
|||
|action1date=13:47, 13 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
|action1link=Talk:Krishna/GA1 |
|||
|action1result=listed |
|||
|action1oldid=244959903 |
|||
|action2=PR |
|||
==Early references== |
|||
|action2date=17:09, 6 November 2008 |
|||
It's impossible for the occurance of Krishna to come in Chandogya, due to anachronistic effects. According to the Hindu timeline Krishna postdates Chandogya Upanishad. The Devaki putra in Chandogya is different. Like we have many Krishnas today, in ancient times the name was just as common. |
|||
|action2link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Krishna/archive1 |
|||
|action2result=reviewed |
|||
|action2oldid=250028576 |
|||
|action3=GAR |
|||
|action3date=02:00, 1 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
|action3link=Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Krishna/1 |
|||
|action3result=delisted |
|||
|action3oldid=540936301 |
|||
|action4=GAN |
|||
---- |
|||
|action4date=18:37, 8 October 2017 (UTC) |
|||
Krishna is not the narrator of the Bhagavad Gita. It is Sanjeya, who reports the words Krishna addresses to Arjuna (and Arjuna's responses) back to Dhritarashtra. [[User:Imc|Imc]] 22:35, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC) |
|||
|action4link=Talk:Krishna/GA2 |
|||
|action4result=listed |
|||
|action4oldid=804392739 |
|||
|topic=philrelig |
|||
|dykdate=21 October 2017 |
|||
|dykentry= ... that '''[[Krishna]]''' is the [[Hindu]] god of compassion, tenderness, and love? |
|||
|currentstatus=GA |
|||
}} |
|||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA|collapsed=yes|vital=yes|living=no|listas=Krishna|1= |
|||
{{WikiProject Biography|musician-work-group=yes|musician-priority=High}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Religion|importance=top}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Hinduism|importance=Top|phil=yes|krishna=yes}} |
|||
{{WikiProject India|importance=Top}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Mythology|importance=top}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors|user=Corinne|date=22 May 2017}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Nepal|importance=Top}} |
|||
}} |
|||
{{Annual readership}} |
|||
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|||
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
|||
|counter = 6 |
|||
|algo = old(90d) |
|||
|archive = Talk:Krishna/Archive %(counter)d |
|||
}} |
|||
== Revert == |
|||
SANJAYA LISTENS TO THE WORDS OF VED VYASA AND VED VYASA ACTUALLY HEARD THE ORIGINAL CONVERSATION BETWEEN KRISHNA AND ARJUNA....GET IT!! |
|||
@[[User:DaxServer|DaxServer]] I assume that your revert is based on the image change, thus I will bring back the informations added excluding the image. Do you approve? —[[User:Krsnaquli|'''<span style="color:#004949">कृष्णकुलि</span><sup><span style="color:#437399">Krsnaquli</span></sup>''']] || [[User talk:Krsnaquli|<span style="color:#5E0000">'''Contact'''</span>]] - 09:19, 10 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
---- |
|||
Major revision of 10 Nov 03. |
|||
I have removed much of the previously existing material for this revision. This is essentially in an effort to create a structured encyclopaedic entry that tries to cover a broad range of the Krishna legends, references, and literature, and not focus on any particular traditions. Some of the previous material may be better placed in different linked articles, such as under an account of some the modern Vaishnava traditions. [[User:Imc|Imc]] 23:28, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC) |
|||
:Various Vaishnava deities are considered Supreme in Vaishnavism - Vishnu, Rama, Krishna, Vithoba. Also, Krishna is pan-Hindu in nature, not a sectarian Vaishnava deity. [[User:Redtigerxyz|<span style="color: red;">Redtigerxyz</span>]] <sup> [[User talk:Redtigerxyz|Talk]] </sup> 12:41, 10 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:And it's beginning to lose structure and focus now. It should now be split into separate articles, especially to take account of differing views and traditions. [[User:Imc|Imc]] 18:04, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC) |
|||
::Vishnu, Rama, Krishna, Vithoba are all considered the same person; even Krishnaists agree that Krishna and Vishnu point out to the same person. Also Krishna himself claims to be the Ultimate Being in every single text he himself talks, so I thought this deserves a greater representation in his own article. But you are a more experienced editor and I guess you'd know better than me, so I will take some time reading more about article priorities and ways of writing a proper article in Wikipedia. Thank you —[[User:Krsnaquli|'''<span style="color:#004949">कृष्णकुलि</span><sup><span style="color:#437399">Krsnaquli</span></sup>''']] || [[User talk:Krsnaquli|<span style="color:#5E0000">'''Contact'''</span>]] - 14:16, 10 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Disagree. [[Krishnaism|Krishnaists]] consider Vishnu as a form of Krishna - the Supreme Being (not the same), [[Sri Vaishnavism|Sri Vaishanavas]] consider Vishnu as the Supreme, Krishna as an avatar of Vishnu. [[Ramanandi Sampradaya]] considers as Rama as the Supreme, Krishna being his avatar. We need to define Krishna in a [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|WP:NEUTRAL]] language as done in various [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|scholarly references]]. [[User:Redtigerxyz|<span style="color: red;">Redtigerxyz</span>]] <sup> [[User talk:Redtigerxyz|Talk]] </sup> 15:50, 11 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::What you just said theoretically means that both Vishnu and Krishna forms indicate the same person, Vaishnavas have consensus on that. —[[User:Krsnaquli|'''<span style="color:#004949">कृष्णकुलि</span><sup><span style="color:#437399">Krsnaquli</span></sup>''']] || [[User talk:Krsnaquli|<span style="color:#5E0000">'''Contact'''</span>]] - 16:54, 11 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Sorry, disagree again. The Sri Vaishnava belief that Krishna is the avatar/ form of Vishnu, but not vice versa. Vishnu is Supreme, not the form of Krishna in this viewpoint. [[User:Redtigerxyz|<span style="color: red;">Redtigerxyz</span>]] <sup> [[User talk:Redtigerxyz|Talk]] </sup> 17:19, 11 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::What I'm trying to say is that both Krishna and Vishnu are forms of Svayam Bhagavan according to Vaishnavism —[[User:Krsnaquli|'''<span style="color:#004949">कृष्णकुलि</span><sup><span style="color:#437399">Krsnaquli</span></sup>''']] || [[User talk:Krsnaquli|<span style="color:#5E0000">'''Contact'''</span>]] - 17:36, 11 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::@[[User:Krsnaquli|Krsnaquli]] I agree with @[[User:Redtigerxyz|Redtigerxyz]]. It is clear that what Redtigerxyz says is correct - e.g. consider Edwin Bryant's [https://ia600100.us.archive.org/29/items/Pushtimarg/Bryant_Edwin_F._%28editor%29_-_Krishna__A_Sourcebook.pdf Krishna: A sourcebook] page 13 "Moving forward to the sixteenth century and the theologies of what are sometimes referred to as the Krishnaite schools, we find the emergence of organized Krishna lineages that reversed the commonly held relationship between Vishnu and Krishna, positing Krishna as the source of Vishnu rather than a derivative incarnation of Vishnu". [[User:Asteramellus|Asteramellus]] ([[User talk:Asteramellus|talk]]) 23:04, 11 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Semi-protected edit request on 26 March 2024 == |
|||
---- |
|||
Regarding the adding again of Krishna meaning 'all attractive'; I would like a reference for this. I cannot find any. |
|||
{{edit semi-protected|Krishna|answered=yes}} |
|||
The reference I have for Arjuna being called Krishna, meaning attractive, actually says (Arjuna speaking) |
|||
Krishna should be changed to Krishn as Krishna is Draupadi's another name [[User:Maskedchocolate|Maskedchocolate]] ([[User talk:Maskedchocolate|talk]]) 12:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
'my father gave me the tenth name of Krishna because I was very attractive' |
|||
:{{notdone}} It is unclear what change you are seeking. If you are referring to a single instance of the usage of Krishna, please specify where and please provide a [[WP:RS|reliable source]]. If you are referring to the article title, please see [[WP:RM]]. [[User:RegentsPark|RegentsPark]] <small>([[User talk:RegentsPark|comment]])</small> 14:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Quoted from Vettam Mani's Puranic encyclopaedia. |
|||
== Infobox Fields == |
|||
My Sanskrit dictionary gives no other meaning for Krishna than black. |
|||
[[User:Imc|Imc]] 18:32, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC) |
|||
Infobox Fields 'birth' and 'death' should be changed to 'avatar_birth' and 'avatar_end' respectively, considering Krishna is worshipped in dual forms—as a Supreme God residing in Goloka, and as an human avatar of his Supreme self or Vishnu depending upon the sect. Therefore, it is much more appropriate to use the suggested fields for his human birth. I did it but was asked for an consensus. [[User:245CMR|<span style="background:maroon;border:solid 1px;border-radius:8px;">.<span style="color:yellow; background:maroon;">''245'''''CMR'''</span>.</span>]]•<sup>[[User talk:245CMR|👥]][[Special:Contributions/245CMR|📜]]</sup> 16:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Just about every single source I've read about Krsna states that the Sanskrit word means "all-attractive". http://www.google.com/search?q=krsna+all-attractive returns 793 hits; http://www.google.com/search?q=krishna+all-attractive another 1,250. AFAIK, painting murtis of Krsna black is only done in the South-Indian tradition (which with I am not so familiar.) [[User:Mkweise|Mkweise]] 19:44, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC) |
|||
== Devki's brother name is wrong with the article == |
|||
:I've read a lot about Krishna as well from earliest childhood, and 'all attractive' was new to me. The number of google hits is not exactly a proof of the meaning, especially since a search on Krishna and black - http://www.google.com/search?q=krishna+black - returned about 147000 results. Since I haven't seen an older origin for this than ISKCON websites (and I have not looked too deep), it may be reasonable to suppose it a interpretation that was originated by Swami Prabhupada and that has spread with ISKCON? [[User:Imc|Imc]] 17:20, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC) |
|||
his name is Kans [[Special:Contributions/2402:8100:26B1:DE2:D09B:1BF1:BD6E:19D6|2402:8100:26B1:DE2:D09B:1BF1:BD6E:19D6]] ([[User talk:2402:8100:26B1:DE2:D09B:1BF1:BD6E:19D6|talk]]) 17:02, 30 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:It may be written as "Kans" in Indian language(s), but the sanskrit word is spelled "''[[Kamsa|Kaṃsa]]''". [[User:Asteramellus|Asteramellus]] ([[User talk:Asteramellus|talk]]) 20:51, 30 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Typo == |
|||
:Krishna has been said to mean black and has been represented as blue for centuries. The internet is a horrible way of finding out about Krishna. Most Krishna worshippers in India have no truck with ISCKON. ISKCON is one small group of Krishna worshippers and don't in any way represent most Hindus. |
|||
:::Krishna means all-attractive : sir you dont have to find a sanskrit dictionary to know that as most of those dictionaries give a objective meaning of a word. You will find the meaning of Krishna as all attractive when you go thru some good Vedic books. Which i am sure you wont fine time for. DONT TRY TO FIND THE MEANING OF GOD IN DICTIONARIS , IF YOU EVEN HAVE A LITTLE COMMON SENSE |
|||
ISCKON should be corrected to ISKCON [[Special:Contributions/203.221.17.46|203.221.17.46]] ([[User talk:203.221.17.46|talk]]) 13:08, 12 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Fixed; thank you for pointing this out. [[User:Certes|Certes]] ([[User talk:Certes|talk]]) 13:25, 12 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I have heard that this ''all-attractive'' comes from sanskrit verb root ''kRs'' or ''karsati'' meaning ''to pull'' or ''to attract someone''. Sankrit words often can be explained in many different ways. [[User:Lonehermit|Lonehermit]] 23:31, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC) |
|||
== |
== Name change == |
||
This page's name should be changed to Krishna (in Hinduism), as a general overview page of Krishna, named [[Vāsudeva|Krishna-Vasudeva]] or historic Krishna is already there. [[User:Cuddlemebaby|Cuddlemebaby]] ([[User talk:Cuddlemebaby|talk]]) 19:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC) |
|||
is there somewhere online where there is a good, detailed, outsider's explanation of the beliefs and principles of the Hare Krishna faith? I am trying to see if they believe in the Christian God, and anything else. What I don't want is a bunch of words that take me ten minutes to pronounce. I just want to know what they stand for, and do not stand for. thanks P.R. |
|||
:Try looking at the Hare Krishna article at [[International_Society_for_Krishna_Consciousness]] |
|||
thank you, i'll check it out |
|||
P.R. |
|||
:THe Christian God? Dude... they believe in Krishna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As Hindus, they believe everyone prays to the same God, though they feel that God is ultimately Krishna. --[[User:LordSuryaofShropshire|LordSuryaofShropshire]] 03:10, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC) |
|||
Technically, the Hare Krishnas are not Hindu--they're followers of the Vaisnava philosophy. The devotees are only interested in satisfying Krishna's (God's) senses. They will only accept food which has first been offered to the Lord. Similarly they are always chanting the Hare Krishna maha-mantra. Ultimately, they are following the teachings of Lord [[Caitanya Mahaprabhu]], who started the Hare Krishna movement. -D. |
|||
Vaishnavism is a VEDIC philosophy and hinduism is psudo name for vedic religion. Vedic religion is very old and is brought forward by aryans. :) |
|||
== Some inconsistencies and outdated material in the article. == |
|||
The article states "Krishna was born in a prison cell at Mathura, in modern day Uttar Pradesh in about 3206 BC.". Subsequently it states "A paper presented recently at a convention in Prabhas Patan near Somnath, concludes that Krishna died at the ripe old age of 125 on February 18, 3102 BC at 14:27:30 hours on the banks of river Hiran in Prabhas Patan. As the report goes, he was 125 years, 7 months and 6 days when he died." |
|||
3206 - 3102 != 125. The numbers don't add up. |
|||
Also "The year 2004 is the year 5105 of the Kali Yuga (which began with a year 0)." seems outdated, maybe it should be replaced by 2005, 5106? |
|||
== added in "Birth" == |
|||
Added that Krishna was born in Mathura, and linked it to the page with a picture of teh temple at Krishnajanmabhoomi |
|||
==Major rewrite 2 May 2005== |
|||
A number of revisions. Included quite a number of removals of redundancies in the encyclopaedia, such as the redundant explanation of where Vidharba is. Also removed a number of other items or paragraphs. |
|||
===Smaller removals=== |
|||
Removed the section on dating from the first paragraph; the information in it is duplicated at the end. |
|||
Removed from the Govinda section. Only specific to Vaishna traditions, and implied in the mention of Gaudiya. |
|||
"He is the Supreme Lord of Hinduism (internally known as Sanatana-dharma, or eternal dharma), and all incarnations of God are said to emanate from him." |
|||
Removed from the Major aspects section, as irrelevant given the later item on the same topic. |
|||
"* Childhood of Krishna is easily identified with Indian country life; concentrating mainly on cattle rearing and cultivation." |
|||
Removed from the cowherd section as being a specific Vaishna telling. |
|||
"Balarama is his primary svamsa emination, or expansion. " |
|||
Removed the following from the last item of Major aspects. This would be better placed in the Bhagavad Gita article. |
|||
"He teaches [[Arjuna]] several topics, such as [[jnana]], [[dharma]], [[yoga]], kala (time), [[prakriti]] (nature), [[karma]] (action), [[moksa]] (release), tattva (haecceity), [[bhakti]] (devotion), and [[guna]] (qualities) in the [[Bhagavad Gita]], and is known as the greatest Yogin, or Yogesvara. The [[Bhagavad Gita]] is the first true Yoga text in the Yoga tradition. It is also one of the oldest primary texts for Devotional Krishna-[[bhakti]] traditions, and is the most widely read Vedic/Hindu text in print." |
|||
Removed most of the last paragraph in the Texts and literature section. Same reasons as the preceding item. |
|||
"Before the great battle of [[Kurukshetra]] (in present day [[Haryana]]) starts, Arjuna loses heart with the prospect of fighting his cousins and other relatives for the kingdom. Krishna reminds him that he has done everything he could possibly do to avoid the battle, and that his duty (dharma) is serve Him by fighting . Krishna goes on to show why the Gita is known as the first Yoga Scripture, and gives a lengthy [[exegesis]] on the means of fulfilling life's goals through the systems of [[yoga]]. In it, he describes in detail the philosophies of Bhakti (devotional), Karma (selfless action), Jnana (self-transcending knowledge), Astanga (meditational) Yoga and all in the ends connect one to Krishna whose personal form is the highest realization of Absolute Truth (as compared to Brahman and Paramatma). He shows Arjuna how to reconcile his misapprehension about the war with the eternal truths that underlie life through the Vedic doctrine of Yoga. These form the basis of the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita." |
|||
[[User:Imc|Imc]] 15:24, 2 May 2005 (UTC) |
|||
===Larger article chunks removed=== |
|||
Removed most of the content of the sections |
|||
“The birth of Krishna” |
|||
and all of |
|||
“The Appearance of Krishna. “ |
|||
and replaced these with a short section called |
|||
Birth and childhood. |
|||
Reason; This is a selected retelling of the story, and the origin is not given. It does not appear to be a standard text. Also, if continued would cause the article to become too large. I suggest the removed text could be incorporated in new articles on the life of Krishna. |
|||
The text removed was; |
|||
"“Krishna was born in [[Mathura]], and the place of his birth is now known as [[Krishnajanmabhoomi]], where a temple is raised in his memory. Krishna was born in a tense historical period preceding a devastating war. The warring factions built up so many weapons that the burden on the earth became unbearable. Finally the goddess of Earth took the form of a cow and prayed to Lord Brahma for relief. Lord Brahma called all the demigods to the shore of the Milk Ocean to hear Mother Earth and to worship the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Vishnu. Lord Brahma fell into trance reciting the Vedic hymns known as the Purusa-sukta and heard the voice of Lord Vishnu. Then he announced, "O demigods, hear from me the words of God. He is aware of the distress on Earth and wants you demigods to incarnate as sons and daughters in the Yadu dynasty. The Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Krishna, will personally appear as the son of Vasudeva. Therefore you will all have the benediction of joining the eternal pastimes of Lord Krishna." |
|||
Lord Brahma consoled the cow and sent her home, then returned to his planet, Brahmaloka. The demigods then began to take birth in the Yadu dynasty, awaiting the appearance of Lord Krishna. The members of the Yadu dynasty, headed by Vasudeva and Devaki, along with their friends, relatives and well- wishers were all demigods. The residents of Vrindavana, headed by King Nanda, Queen Yasoda and Queen Rohini, were also demigods. |
|||
King Kansa was another relative in the family, however he was not a demigod. He usurped the throne of his father, Ugrasena, and put him in prison. When Devaki, a member of Ugrasena's family, married Vasudeva, she received a large dowry of elephants, horses, chariots and servants. After the wedding, Kansa took the reins of the wedding chariot and started to escort the couple home. Along the way, a voice from the sky addressed him: "You foolish king, the eighth son of Devaki will kill you!" |
|||
Kansa pulled Devaki down by her hair, drew his sword and prepared to kill her on the spot, but Vausdeva begged for his bride's life and promised to let him kill the eighth child, so that the oracle would not be fulfilled. Kansa agreed to spare her life, but locked Vasudeva and Devaki in a stone prison. Thereafter, he mercilessly killed the first six sons of Devaki. Devaki's seventh son miscarried but mystically transferred to the womb of Queen Rohini in [[Vrindavana]]. This became Krishna's older brother, Balarama. Soon thereafter, Devaki became pregnant with her eighth child. |
|||
===The Appearance of Krishna=== |
|||
Krishna was born at the stroke of midnight in His four-armed Vishnu form, dressed in silk and jewels, carrying the four weapons: the conch, disc, club and lotus. His parents prayed for Him to turn Himself into an ordinary baby so they could hide Him from Kansa. The Lord advised Vasudeva to take him to Vrindavana and exchange him with a girl that had just been born there. Then he turned Himself into a baby. |
|||
Magically, the guards in Kansa's prison fell asleep, and all the iron shackles, chains and locks automatically opened. Without questioning this, Vasudeva took the child and departed for Vrindavana. Like the story of Moses, the story of Krishna also includes a parting of the waters, allowing Vasudeva to carry Krishna across the Jamuna River to Vrindavana. When Vasudeva reached the house of Nanda, all the cowherds were asleep. Thus he placed his own son on the bed of Yasoda, picked up her newborn girl and returned to the prison of Kansa. |
|||
There was a chance Kansa would spare the child because the omen said it would be the eighth son that would kill him. Devaki pleaded with him, but Kansa pulled the baby girl from her arms and dashed her against a stone. The girl slipped from his hands and rose above his head as the eight-armed form of Goddess Durga, dressed in fine garments and jewels. She said, "The enemy you contemplate is living somewhere else. You are a fool to hurt innocent children. Krishna will kill you." |
|||
Kansa became remorseful and begged Devaki and Vasudeva to forgive him for his sins. He released them from their shackles and fell down on their feet, crying tears of regret. The next day, however, Kansa's ministers advised him to give up his sentimental attitude and take action to kill all newborn children in the region. They also advised him to disturb the demigods and saintly people.” |
|||
[[User:Imc|Imc]] 15:29, 2 May 2005 (UTC) |
|||
===Other changes=== |
|||
Removed reference to dark blue being the colour of the night sky. To most of us the night sky is black and starry? Some more evidence of this being an original meaning would be useful. |
|||
Moved the following text as being out of context in this section, to a new section on other meanings of the name. Deleted the following sentence to this as being out of context. |
|||
"According to [[Vishnu sahasranama]], Krishna, the 57th name, also means the Existence of Knowledge and Bliss. " |
|||
Removed the following texts about the name / colour as questionable and not evidenced. Added a brief note instead on other meanings of the name. |
|||
"This is understood as having come into existence from scriptural allusions to his deep hue. Indeed, he is divine, and being dark-skinned, it deepens so much that it takes on a rich blue tone. |
|||
Krishna's body is the colour of an enchantingly beautiful dark raincloud. The philosophical backdrop for Krishna's dark blue skin is that Vishnu, who is ultimately incarnated as Krishna, is also known as [[Narayana]]. Narayana means "born of water." This is because water, seen as the base principle for life as we know it on earth, the nourisher of plants and animals alike, the very substance of cyclic existence, is essential to preservation. Vishnu, who in avatar form comes down to earth to help preserve dharma, is epitomised by the principle of water, being himself the God of Preservation. As water is commonly seen as being blue, and Vishnu is said to sleep in Yoga Nidra, floating on cosmic waters on Shesha (a snake-god), it is only natural that Vishnu's representations are all blue. By syllogism, it transferred to his great avatar, Krishna. |
|||
Sometimes the term Krishna has been explained as meaning 'attractive'. This is eminently understandable with his mythic allure to women of all kinds (i.e. the gopis). Moreover, he is viewed by his devotees, from ancient times till the present day, as reflecting the intense beauty of God in his physical aspect." |
|||
From the names of Krishna. I've removed Padmanabha. This is as far as I can see, a name of Vishnu rather than Krishna, and there is very little material or explanation about it. |
|||
[[User:Imc|Imc]] 15:32, 2 May 2005 (UTC) |
|||
== announcing a policy proposal of general interest == |
|||
This is just to inform people that I want Wikipedia to accept a general policy that BC and AD represent a Christian Point of View and should be used only when they are appropriate, that is, in the context of expressing or providing an account of a Christian point of view. In other contexts, I argue that they violate our NPOV policy and we should use BCE and CE instead. See [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/BCE-CE Debate]] for the detailed proposal. [[User:Slrubenstein|Slrubenstein]] | [[User talk:Slrubenstein|Talk ]] 22:55, 15 May 2005 (UTC) |
|||
==108 names of Krishna== |
|||
I've replaced this with the previous list. Mainly because this list was incomplete, and the descriptions given of these names seem to specific to a particular Gaudiya interpretation. e.g. Vishnu is a name of Krishna, (only in Gaudiya Vaishna traditions). Also other translations / interpretations are non-standard, e.g. that for Mayur, and they seem to be an odd mix of Sanskrit and Hindi forms. List does not agree with other lists of the 108 names. Complete text follows:- |
|||
Krishna is said to have 108 names. |
|||
NAMES-MEANING |
|||
*Achaia - Still Lord |
|||
*Achyuta - Infallible Lord |
|||
*Adbhutah - Wonderful God |
|||
*Adidev - The Lord Of The Lords |
|||
*Aditya - The Son Of Aditi |
|||
*Ajanma - One Who Is Limitless And Endless |
|||
*Ajaya - The Conqueror Of Life And Death |
|||
*Akshara - Indestructible Lord |
|||
*Amrut - One Who Is Sweet As Nectar |
|||
*Anaadih - One Who Is The First Cause |
|||
*Anandsagar - Compassionate Lord |
|||
*Ananta - The Endless Lord |
|||
*Anantajit - Ever Victorious Lord |
|||
*Anaya - One Who Has No Leader |
|||
*Aniruddha - One Who Cannot Be Obstructed |
|||
*Aparajeet - The Lord Who Cannot Be Defeated |
|||
*Avyukta - One Who Is As Clear As Crystal |
|||
*Balgopal - The Child Krishna, The All Attractive |
|||
*Bali - The Lord Of Strength |
|||
*Chaturbhuj - Four-Armed Lord |
|||
*Danavendra - Granter Of Boons |
|||
*Dayalu - Repositiory Of Compassion |
|||
*Dayanidhi - The Compassionate Lord |
|||
*Devadidev - The God Of The Gods |
|||
*Devakinandan - Son Of Mother Devaki |
|||
*Devesh - Lord Of The Lords |
|||
*Dharmadhyaksha - The Lord OF Dharma |
|||
*Dwarkapati - Lord Of Dwarka |
|||
*Gopal - One Who Plays With The Cowherds, The Gopas |
|||
*Gopalpriya - Lover Of Cowherds |
|||
*Govinda - One Who Pleases The Cows, The Land And The Entire Nature |
|||
*Gyaneshwar - The Lord Of Knowledge |
|||
*Hari - The Lord Of Nature |
|||
*Hiranyagarbha - The All Powerful Creator |
|||
*Hrishikesh - The Lord Of All Senses |
|||
*Jagadguru - Preceptor Of The Universe |
|||
*Jagadisha - Protector Of All |
|||
*Jagannath - Lord Of The Universe |
|||
*Janardhana - One Who Bestows Boons On One And All |
|||
*Jayantah - Conqueror Of All Enemies |
|||
*Jyotiraaditya - The Resplendence Of The Sun |
|||
*Kamalnath - The Lord Of Goddess Lakshmi |
|||
*Kamalnayan - The Lord With Lotus Shaped Eyes |
|||
*Kamsantak - Slayer Of Kamsa |
|||
*Kanjalochana - The Lotus-Eyed God |
|||
*Keshava - One Who Has Long, Black Matted Locks |
|||
*Krishna - Dark-Complexioned Lord |
|||
*Lakshmikantam - The Lord Of Goddess Lakshmi |
|||
*Lokadhyaksha - Lord Of All The Three Lokas (Worlds) |
|||
*Madan - The Lord Of Love |
|||
*Madhava - Knowledge Filled God |
|||
*Madhusudan - Slayer Of Demon Madhu |
|||
*Mahendra - Lord Of Indra |
|||
*Manmohan - All Pleasing Lord |
|||
*Manohar - Beautiful Lord |
|||
*Mayur - The Lord Who Has A Peacock Feathered-Crest |
|||
*Mohan - All Attractive God |
|||
*Murali - The Flute Playing Lord |
|||
*Murlidhar - One Who Holds The Flute |
|||
*Murlimanohar - The Flute Playing God |
|||
*Nandgopala - The Son Of Nand |
|||
*Narayana - The Refuge Of Everyone |
|||
*Niranjana - The Unblemished Lord |
|||
*Nirguna - Without Any Properties |
|||
*Padmahasta - One Who Has Hands Like Lotus |
|||
*Padmanabha - The Lord Who Has A Lotus Shaped Navel |
|||
*Parabrahmana - The Supreme Absolute Truth |
|||
*Paramatma - Lord Of All Beings |
|||
*Parampurush - Supreme Personality |
|||
*Parthasarthi - Charioteer Of Partha - Arjuna |
|||
*Prajapati - Lord Of All Creatures |
|||
*Punyah - Supremely Pure |
|||
*Purshottam - The Supreme Soul |
|||
*Ravilochana - One Who Eye Is The Sun |
|||
*Sahasraakash - Thousand-Eyed Lord |
|||
*Sahasrajit - One Who Vanquishes Thousands |
|||
*Sahasrapaat - Thousand-Footed Lord |
|||
*Sakshi - All Witnessing Lord |
|||
*Sanatana - The Eternal Lord |
|||
*Sarvajana - Omniscient Lord |
|||
*Sarvapalaka - Protector Of All |
|||
*Sarveshwar - Lord Of All Gods |
|||
*Satyavachana - One Who Speaks Only The Truth |
|||
*Satyavrata - The Truth Dedicated Lord |
|||
*Shantah - Peaceful Lord |
|||
*Shreshta - The Most Glorious Lord |
|||
*Shrikanta - Beautiful Lord |
|||
*Shyam - Dark-Complexioned Lord |
|||
*Shyamsundara - Lord Of The Beautiful Evenings |
|||
*Sudarshana - Handsome Lord |
|||
*Sumedha - Intelligent Lord |
|||
*Suresham - Lord Of All Demi-Gods |
|||
*Swargapati - Lord Of Heavens |
|||
*Trivikrama - Conqueror Of All The Three Worlds |
|||
*Upendra - Brother Of Indra |
|||
*Vaikunthanatha - Lord Of Vaikuntha, The Heavenly Abode |
|||
*Vardhamaanah - The Formless Lord |
|||
*Vasudev - All Prevailing Lord |
|||
*Vishnu-All Prevailing Lord |
|||
*Vishwadakshinah - Skilfull And Efficient Lord |
|||
*Vishwakarma - Creator Of The Universe |
|||
*Vishwamurti - Of The Form Of The Entire Universe |
|||
*Vishwarupa - One Who Displays The Universal Form |
|||
*Vishwatma - Soul Of The Universe |
|||
*Vrishaparvaa - Lord Of Dharma |
|||
*Yadavendra - King Of The Yadav Clan |
|||
*Yogi - The Supreme Master |
|||
*Yoginampati - Lord Of The Yogis" |
|||
change - removed this link [http://www.SUNNWEB.com The Johnny (Straws) Experience Y2k05] |
|||
why is this appearing in this article |
|||
== Krishna a Scythian == |
|||
I think Krishna was among indo scythian (Ahir,Abhir or Aver)who overthrew Kamsa and the story about being swapped with a girl child when Yasoda was asleep and Kamsa trying to kill that and all the divine play are mere subterfuge implanted by brahmanas of which we have many in our scriptures.Another one is the story of YAyati,Progenetor of all the vedic Kshatriya tribes like puru ,Yadu etc in which it is said Puru the youngest son offered his youth to his father for 1000years in lieu of succession to the throne and yadu was cursed along with his sons not being able to rule.This seem to be a legend rather than true story.It tries to justify why Yadavs should not rule who were facing stiff opposition during that time.Yadavs were next to come in india after purus and were called lunar dynasty on the pretext of purus being called solar. |
|||
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yadav" |
|||
We need this link he is one of our biggest supporters. |
|||
[http://www.sunnweb.com The Johnny (Straws) Experience]The Johnny (Straws) Experience |
|||
== Krishn not son of devaki == |
|||
It seems like the baby swapping story is fabricated one by brahmanas.Locks opened on their own all guards laid asleep,Vasudeva not only swapped the child without Yashoda noticing it (How can't a mother know sex of her child)he returns too and the story breaks after he Kills Kamsa and snatches the royal throne of mathura .Great story a similar subterfuge was implanted by Shivaji during coronation,of having traced his root to sishodia Rajputs to cool the dirty heads of brahmanas.Karnas recognition as Kshatriya after his death is well known to all of us.It seems our society had a culture of lying to masses through all the ages to protect the myth that kshatriya alone could rule.Another subterfuge story in medieval era is the story of Kabirdas who was traced to brahmin mother to protect the myth that brahmin alone could learn.What is wrong with these celebrities was that they never challenged these beliefs rather they succumbed to it.Great was Chandragupta Maurya who never vied for these titles and ruled whole of south asia and changed the conception of people through Buddhism |
|||
"It seems"? This is speculation. It clearly states in the Bhagavatam that Devaki is the mother of Krishna. You question why Mother Yasoda doesn't notice the sex change - you forget this this is an arrangement of the supreme will. [[User:Dwayne Kirkwood|Dwayne Kirkwood]] |
|||
== Meaning of Vaasudeva == |
|||
Vasudeva is derived from two words vasumeaning snake and deva meaning god.To become bhoj(Head of Kings) one needed to be son of this mythical character.Yadavas(gwals) who identified themselves with snakes gave this title to their bhoj,thats why Krishna was called vaasudeva meaning son of vasudeva and her mythical wife deviki.The story of child swapping has many flaws just as the story of yayati.Krishna's clash with another king who himself had declared vaasudeva is recorded in puranas itself.It proves beyond doubt that this title was merely honorary and had nothing to do with the birth of Krisna as a human being.Kshatriya used to give this title to their king like son of sun, moon etc which was all honorary.The story of child swapping seems to be added later on,by brahmanas, with a motive to alienate Krishna from gwals and create distinction between the two terms but has been poorly done.Brahmans wrote some books(in modern age) later on trying to declare krishna as brahman and the fabricated story tries to prove that Krishna who was acatually the son of vasudeva(the story takes refuge in same child swapping theory) was a brahmin . |
|||
Yadvas lost their glory many times and regained it.Both the great dynasties Maurya and Gupta belongs to yadava . Gupta is synonym of gope both words mean same in fact gupta in egyptian indeed mean cowherd.People who say why yadvas don't write gupta as their surname they should look at the development in recent past the surnames mahato and mandal too belonged to yadvas but they gave up writing this surname when many kurmis and other castes adopted it.(would Late Shri B P Mandal of Mandal Comission be considered a Kurmi?) |
|||
Kshatriyas were supposed to be preserver and owner of cows.In ancient times Cows(a divine creature should we call it animal?) were the wealth of people and yadavas have the distiction of bringing the concept of cow worship in the land of cow eaters aryans.Royal family of Nepal still call themselves Gurkha meaning preserver of cows. |
|||
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yadav" |
|||
== Krishna was not chandravanshi == |
|||
Against the popular belief generally due to ignorance,Krishna has never been called Chandravanshi.Actually Chandravanshis were purus(kauravs and pandavas),Yadus and krishna were Nagvamshi and hence he held the title Vaasudeva or Devikiputra(meaning son of God vasuki and deviki)this title has nothing to do with his physical birth.Nagvamshis and chandravamshis were together referred to as somvamshis.Symbol sun or suryavamshi had been ascribed to raghukul (of lord Rama) |
|||
Because Krishna held the title vaasudeva a story of child swapping had been deliberately fabricated.Actually these two people vasudeva and deviki does not find any reference anywhere thereafter.However same Krishna has been found to be challenged for this title by another king who too claimed to be vaasudeva and humbled by krishna (recorded in the same puranas).This makes mockery of child swapping story |
|||
:Lets stick to facts. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and there is no place for speculative stuffs here. Its the job historians and religious scholars to figure out whether Krishna was a Chandravanshi or not. --[[User:Deepak gupta|Deepak]]|[[User talk:Deepak gupta|वार्ता]] 00:30, 11 November 2005 (UTC) |
|||
LET US STICK TO '''lOGIC''' |
|||
Mr Gupta I don't know whether You have the ability of arriving at conclusions or not.You wilfuly deleted the material added perhaps without much thinking because people like you lack courage to accept facts.It is a fact known to every Hindu that our scriptures has been doctored to suit some sections of the society.And you call it speculations.One must answer these illogical insertions and if you don't have answers you should accept these are errors which need to be rectified .People like you i think better not come on encyclopidea because it is not merely for accumulation of facts(as known to you )but also forum to discuss anamolies and sort them out.I had inserted it in main article because these anamolies need to be answered .I hope some logic will pass through your brain and if it fails you better leave this forum and stick to whatever orthodox believes are. |
|||
: To the anonymous editor at 210.214.82.22 who inserted the above comment. |
|||
: * Please refrain from personal attacks. |
|||
: * Please obtain a log in, and sign your entries. |
|||
: * Please do not insert preformatted text (enclosed in pre tags) into talk pages, or anywhere else here for that matter, it makes it difficult or impossible to read. |
|||
: * User Deepak Gupta's point could be put another way; that Wikipedia is not the place for original research, which is what you seem to be proposing. As an alternative, perhaps you could write your points in a separate article. The Krishna article is already moderately long, and it will probably need breaking up further in time. Some material, such as [[List of titles and names of Krishna]] is already separate. It will often be material that is not of mainstream interest that will go into separate pages. |
|||
: [[User:Imc|Imc]] 10:06, 13 November 2005 (UTC) |
|||
==Formatting page, images, and boxes== |
|||
I've rearranged the large uppermost image, and the Indic text box. Together in their original position they occupied the width of the page and either pushed the text off the bottom of the screen, or into a very narrow column. (on low res browsers (800 x 600 px), of which there are still a few about. ) The large image may be more suited to the Gita page. |
|||
Also teh Indic text box may be better replaced by ''help'' link after each instance of Indic text. This would stop it being intrusive, and many users will have no idea what 'Indic script' means. |
|||
[[User:Imc|Imc]] 09:43, 26 November 2005 (UTC) |
|||
== Accuracy... == |
|||
This article says at the very top that it is about the Hindu deity, rather than a possible historical figure on whom he was based. Sinced the bulk of the historical evidence indicates that he did not in fact exist, should the article not focus on the way he is described in the sacred texts? I mean, I approve wholeheartedly of reverting POV vandals and not simply changing "dies there" to "returns to brindavan in the heavens" (for one think, that should be a wikilink with a capital "B"), but the article seems to be treating him more in the section entitled "Summary of the story of Krishna" as a rational historical figure, rather than as an incarnation of Brahman supreme. Anyone else agree? [[User:Elvenscout742|elvenscout742]] 12:31, 27 December 2005 (UTC) |
|||
:There's actually no mention of a possible historical figure at the start of the article. The summary of the story of Krishna in the article now is explicitly that story that is told in the Mahabharata. This makes perfect sense when looking at the place of Krishna in Hinduism as a whole. There is a problem here; should descriptions attempt to be 'scholarly' and impersonal, or should the descriptions be of the deity, as seen by devotees, when these views may not be universal? It is particularly a problem with Krishna and associated figures such as Radha, Balarama, because of a preponderance (or so it seems to me anyway) of ISKCON and other Vaishnava devotees in Wikipedia. The language for instance of these devotees contains such terms as appearance for birth, disappearance for death, pastimes for activities. These terms are not generally used or understood by those who have not read that specific literature, and it is probably in English only. These terms were, I imagine (and stand to be corrected), introduced by Swami Prabhupada, in his relatively recent works. |
|||
:[[User:Imc|Imc]] 14:24, 27 December 2005 (UTC) |
|||
Hello Elvenscout - How about 'leaves this world' as a compromise between the two views? I agree with you changing of the picture, it is much more appropriate. |
|||
[[User:86.136.7.74|86.136.7.74]] 13:56, 27 December 2005 (UTC) |
|||
:No, it's not a question of points of view, and your solution does not solve anything. My suggestion would be to say he "died", and is viewed by Vaishnavas as having returned to his abode in the heavens. |
|||
==External links== |
|||
There has been a lot of outside links collecting at the base of this article, some duplicated within the list. I've removed superflous ones again in line with Wikipedia policy on [[External links]]. |
|||
Some websites have little to do with Krishna; for instance the ISKCON website , which is better linked in the [[ISKCON]] article. No doubt there is content on this website that is specifically about Krishna, and is relevant to this article. This should be provided as a direct link. Similarly |
|||
http://www.wva-vvrs.org/ |
|||
http://www.sreecgmath.org/ |
|||
http://www.vina.cc/ |
|||
http://www.jkp.org/ |
|||
http://veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/index.htm#8 |
|||
are about the movements, not about Krishna. |
|||
Krishna temples (e.g. http://www.parthasaradhi.org/ ) are numerous across the world and again it does not make sense for them to be listed here, unless again there is useful content. |
|||
Krishna's teachings in the Gita |
|||
http://www.harekrishna.com/~ara/col/books/BG/tsem1.html |
|||
http://bhagavadgita.swami-center.org/page_21.shtml |
|||
http://www.gitamrta.org/ |
|||
would be better in the [[Bhagavad Gita]] article. |
|||
ISKCON and related movements are already heavily represented in Wikipedia (and on the internet)., with their own articles. Having multiple websites of it may be justifiable in the ISKCON article, but probably not necessarily here, unless they add to the article. See, among others. |
|||
http://www.krishna.com/ |
|||
http://www.iskcon.com/ |
|||
http://veda.harekrsna.cz |
|||
[[User:Imc|Imc]] 14:11, 30 December 2005 (UTC) |
|||
==Chronology section== |
|||
The chronology section contains doubtful and vague statements e.g. |
|||
:"The finding was based on clues in the Vedic literatures. " |
|||
What findings? Krishna is not mentioned in the Vedas. [[User:Andries|Andries]] 00:46, 4 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
I agree, I think it should be removed until it can be actually backed up. [[User:Dwayne Kirkwood|Dwayne Kirkwood]] |
|||
I also agree that this sentance should be removed, it is a bit vague. 'The date of 3102 BC is generally taken as the date of Krishna's birth by followers of Hinduism.' Or something along those lines may be more appropriate? |
|||
"The Vishnu Purana (Book Four, Chapter Twenty-four) establishes that the age of Kali-yuga began when Lord Krishna left this world in 3102 BC" |
|||
http://www.stephen-knapp.com/sri_krishna.htm |
|||
On another note regarding the Vedas, Krishna Himself says in Bhagavad-Gita: |
|||
BG 2.46: 'All purposes served by a small well can at once be served by a great reservoir of water. Similarly, all the purposes of the Vedas can be served to one who knows the purpose behind them.' |
|||
[[User:GourangaUK|GourangaUK]] 09:33, 4 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
==NPOV dispute - intro== |
|||
The intro states "Krishna appears in a number of stories in different cultures and traditions. Sometimes these contradict each other, though there is a common core story that is central to most people's knowledge of Krishna - a pastoral childhood and youth, a celebrated warrior and as the divine incarnation." |
|||
Perhaps "''it is argued that'' Krisha appears in a number of stories" would be a more non-exclusive approach? |
|||
He does appear in a number of stories however. It's not really 'arguable'. [[User:203.109.146.19|203.109.146.19]] |
|||
I don't really see the intro as being non NPOV - it may not be worded very well and could be improved, but isn't really saying anything out of place. There are a lot of stories regarding Krishna, and they do sometimes conflict with each other - but within them there will be a number of certain elements of common ground. [[User:GourangaUK|GourangaUK]] 08:52, 10 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Unless I'm misunderstanding something, despite the what the tag on the article says, this is not a claim of non - [[NPOV]] but of questioning [[Factual accuracy]]? [[User:Imc|Imc]] 19:12, 10 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::{{tl|sofixit}}! "it is argued that Krisha appears in a number of stories" is really horrible. "Krishna appeared in the Kali Yuga" would conceivably be POV. Krishna appearing in stories is about as factual a statement as it can be. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|('''ᛏ''')]]</small> 19:50, 10 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::Which is why I suggested it instead of replaced it. "Krishna appearing in stories is about as factual a statement as it can be." is stated from a non-NPOV. You might as well be saying, "the reincarnation of Buddha appears in all stories". The point I'm trying to make is that term "Krishna" in and of itself is non-neutral. [[User:Albert.so|ays]] 21:10, 16 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Removed: "The immense popularity of Krishna in India also meant that various non-Hindu religions that originated in India had their own versions of him." Badly worded and clearly written with biased intent.[[User:Albert.so|ays]] 19:19, 28 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== "Lord" = POV == |
|||
Again, I removed "Lord" from the first image caption. I believe the title "Lord" is not to be used in this article, because it expresses a point of view. In the intro it is clearly stated that Krishna is considered the Supreme Being, that should in my opinion be sufficient. Jesus is not called "Lord" on Wikipedia, so why would Vedic deities be? --'''[[User:Benne|Benne]]''' ['bɛnə] <sub>([[User_talk:Benne|talk]])</sub> 21:22, 16 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Please stop bringing Jesus into this: he is not the same as Krishna. I do not want to make any anti-Christian remarks that might offend anyone, which is why I stay away from that topic on Wikipedia, so I would appreciate not having to discuss Jesus while debating an entirely unrelated issue. "Lord Jesus" is nowhere near as common in Christian circles as "Sri Krishna" is in Vaishnava circles. The article only refer to Krishna by the noun "Lord" (which would indeed be totally unacceptable) when it has been vandalised. [[User:Elvenscout742|elvenscout742]] 21:50, 16 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Sure Jesus is not the same as Krishna, but that's not my point. They're both considered God, and addressed as "Lord", be it in different circles. However, Wikipedia belongs to neither Christian, nor Vaishnava circles, but is ''supposed'' to be a neutral source of information, and not a place of veneration. Therefore, general usage in Vaishnava literature does ''not'' apply to this encyclopaedia. I don't see the difference between calling Krishna "Lord Krishna", or referring to him plainly as "Lord", it's the same to me. --'''[[User:Benne|Benne]]''' ['bɛnə] <sub>([[User_talk:Benne|talk]])</sub> 06:56, 17 January 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:47, 21 July 2024
![]() | Krishna has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Revert
@DaxServer I assume that your revert is based on the image change, thus I will bring back the informations added excluding the image. Do you approve? —कृष्णकुलिKrsnaquli || Contact - 09:19, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
- Various Vaishnava deities are considered Supreme in Vaishnavism - Vishnu, Rama, Krishna, Vithoba. Also, Krishna is pan-Hindu in nature, not a sectarian Vaishnava deity. Redtigerxyz Talk 12:41, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
- Vishnu, Rama, Krishna, Vithoba are all considered the same person; even Krishnaists agree that Krishna and Vishnu point out to the same person. Also Krishna himself claims to be the Ultimate Being in every single text he himself talks, so I thought this deserves a greater representation in his own article. But you are a more experienced editor and I guess you'd know better than me, so I will take some time reading more about article priorities and ways of writing a proper article in Wikipedia. Thank you —कृष्णकुलिKrsnaquli || Contact - 14:16, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
- Disagree. Krishnaists consider Vishnu as a form of Krishna - the Supreme Being (not the same), Sri Vaishanavas consider Vishnu as the Supreme, Krishna as an avatar of Vishnu. Ramanandi Sampradaya considers as Rama as the Supreme, Krishna being his avatar. We need to define Krishna in a WP:NEUTRAL language as done in various scholarly references. Redtigerxyz Talk 15:50, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
- What you just said theoretically means that both Vishnu and Krishna forms indicate the same person, Vaishnavas have consensus on that. —कृष्णकुलिKrsnaquli || Contact - 16:54, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, disagree again. The Sri Vaishnava belief that Krishna is the avatar/ form of Vishnu, but not vice versa. Vishnu is Supreme, not the form of Krishna in this viewpoint. Redtigerxyz Talk 17:19, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
- What I'm trying to say is that both Krishna and Vishnu are forms of Svayam Bhagavan according to Vaishnavism —कृष्णकुलिKrsnaquli || Contact - 17:36, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Krsnaquli I agree with @Redtigerxyz. It is clear that what Redtigerxyz says is correct - e.g. consider Edwin Bryant's Krishna: A sourcebook page 13 "Moving forward to the sixteenth century and the theologies of what are sometimes referred to as the Krishnaite schools, we find the emergence of organized Krishna lineages that reversed the commonly held relationship between Vishnu and Krishna, positing Krishna as the source of Vishnu rather than a derivative incarnation of Vishnu". Asteramellus (talk) 23:04, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
- What I'm trying to say is that both Krishna and Vishnu are forms of Svayam Bhagavan according to Vaishnavism —कृष्णकुलिKrsnaquli || Contact - 17:36, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, disagree again. The Sri Vaishnava belief that Krishna is the avatar/ form of Vishnu, but not vice versa. Vishnu is Supreme, not the form of Krishna in this viewpoint. Redtigerxyz Talk 17:19, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
- What you just said theoretically means that both Vishnu and Krishna forms indicate the same person, Vaishnavas have consensus on that. —कृष्णकुलिKrsnaquli || Contact - 16:54, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
- Disagree. Krishnaists consider Vishnu as a form of Krishna - the Supreme Being (not the same), Sri Vaishanavas consider Vishnu as the Supreme, Krishna as an avatar of Vishnu. Ramanandi Sampradaya considers as Rama as the Supreme, Krishna being his avatar. We need to define Krishna in a WP:NEUTRAL language as done in various scholarly references. Redtigerxyz Talk 15:50, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
- Vishnu, Rama, Krishna, Vithoba are all considered the same person; even Krishnaists agree that Krishna and Vishnu point out to the same person. Also Krishna himself claims to be the Ultimate Being in every single text he himself talks, so I thought this deserves a greater representation in his own article. But you are a more experienced editor and I guess you'd know better than me, so I will take some time reading more about article priorities and ways of writing a proper article in Wikipedia. Thank you —कृष्णकुलिKrsnaquli || Contact - 14:16, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 26 March 2024
Krishna should be changed to Krishn as Krishna is Draupadi's another name Maskedchocolate (talk) 12:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Not done It is unclear what change you are seeking. If you are referring to a single instance of the usage of Krishna, please specify where and please provide a reliable source. If you are referring to the article title, please see WP:RM. RegentsPark (comment) 14:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Infobox Fields
Infobox Fields 'birth' and 'death' should be changed to 'avatar_birth' and 'avatar_end' respectively, considering Krishna is worshipped in dual forms—as a Supreme God residing in Goloka, and as an human avatar of his Supreme self or Vishnu depending upon the sect. Therefore, it is much more appropriate to use the suggested fields for his human birth. I did it but was asked for an consensus. .245CMR.•👥📜 16:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Devki's brother name is wrong with the article
his name is Kans 2402:8100:26B1:DE2:D09B:1BF1:BD6E:19D6 (talk) 17:02, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- It may be written as "Kans" in Indian language(s), but the sanskrit word is spelled "Kaṃsa". Asteramellus (talk) 20:51, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Typo
ISCKON should be corrected to ISKCON 203.221.17.46 (talk) 13:08, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed; thank you for pointing this out. Certes (talk) 13:25, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Name change
This page's name should be changed to Krishna (in Hinduism), as a general overview page of Krishna, named Krishna-Vasudeva or historic Krishna is already there. Cuddlemebaby (talk) 19:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)