Talk:Venkateswara

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Vaishnavism This article is within the scope of WikiProject Vaishnavism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Vaishnavism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
WikiProject_Hindu_Mythology This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hindu mythology, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Hindu mythology. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Wikiproject_Hinduism This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Hinduism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance for this Project's importance scale.

The article has excessive Tamil usage and Tamil names. It is appropriate to use the Sanskrit terms as they are more universal and reference the Telugu terms because of the geographical location of the temple. Any writer who feels biased about using Telugu words should strictly use Sanskrit only. Tamil or other regional languages which do not have much significance other than the writers' inclinations should be avoided.

Contents

[edit] Quality of the write-up

This article does not measure up to the quality of Wikipedia articles. The style and grammar should be revised.

[edit] Merger

The content below is copied from Talk:Lord Venkateswara. ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ 04:19, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

I doubt the accuracy of the number of visitors and most-visited status of this temple. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 21:34, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

according to the TTD, Balaji receives over 50K per day. On festival days of course the number would be much higher.

I merged this w Venkateshwara. Please discuss @ Talk:Venkateshwara, and find a compromise so that the dispute can be removed. ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ 04:19, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dispute

I am removing the accuracy dispute header. Please help make the needed changes if you insit on replacing it. ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ 20:18, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

I can help cleanup this article --Vyzasatya 23:58, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Content of the article

The title Venkateshwara implies that this article will deal with Venkateshwara (Hindu GOD). But most of the content seems to be about the famous Tirupati temple dedicated to Venkateshwara. Depending on what we want to make this article we might needs to move some content from here to the temple article --Vyzasatya 19:27, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

All these related articles need heavy reshuffling of content and reorgnization

--Vyzasatya 09:43, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Biblical references

I have removed the references to Baal as a name for Venkateshwara and other related conjecture. There is no basis for any of this and it serves to obfuscate rather than illuminate. If anyone wishes to reinsert please at least make clear that such discussion is merely speculation.

[edit] Neutrality issues

The article at severe times says Venkateswara is "supreme god". This against the WP:NEUTRAL policy.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Dear Redtigerxyz, you wrote some time back the following on the discussion page of Venkateswara:

"The article at severe times says Venkateswara is "supreme god". This against the WP:NEUTRAL policy" According to the original principles of the Sri Sampradayam, to various supported puranic text and Sadhus; Venkateswara is the form of Vishnu for this age of kali as mention in many Sastras. Since He is Vishnu or Narayana...He is the "Supreme God", who is also mention in the original Vedas, main Upanishads, sattvic Puranas, the laws of Manu,by the original Vaishnava saints-the Alwars,by Ramanujacharya as the First and "Supreme God". That is Sastra, Sadhu and Dharma (Scriptures, holy men and tradition). That is what this article-writer is trying to say. In the philosophical context of the Religion; it is not against the WP:NEUTRALpolicy. I also see that you have helped with ISKON articles. And, I know that alot of ISKON people do not know about Venkatesha, because of the belief of Sri Krishna and Caitanya Maha-Prabhu. The awareness, knowledge and scripturally back premise that Venkateswara is God to be Worship by all in the kali yuga is unrefuted by the alwars, Yamunacharya, Ramanujacharya, Vedanta desika, and but Scripture, which is the most important. If you like, I can send you some websites and the names and email address of Sri Sampradayam Scholars that can prove what I said to be truth and absolute FACT.Zeuspitar Govinda Ramanuja dasa(talk) 19:41, 03 March 2008 (UTC)

The article sounds like devotee literature repeating Venkateswara is "supreme god". In Hinduism, other gods like Shiva, Shakti, Ganesha, Surya are considered supreme gods in their resp. cults. (Shaivism, Shaktism, Ganapatya, Saura). In Vaishnavas, Vishnu is supreme, and not just the form of Venkateswara. In Shiva, it is written as " Within Shaivism he is viewed as the supreme deity, where as in other branches of Hinduism such as the Smarta tradition he is worshipped as one of five manifestations of the divine.", not just he is supreme God thus being NEUTRAL. About ISKCON, Somebody said "If we can,...can we work together with ONLY Rudra and redtigerxyz to do this...go through all the articles and make them non-bias....Govinda Ramanuja dasaUSA (talk) 09:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)" on Talk:Bhagavad Gita. I have no connection to ISKCON and i do not know about their philosphy.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 11:50, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Dear Redtigerxyz, Hey... I hope that I didnt come off too hash or too fanatical,if I did, I am very, very sorry. All night I was thinking about this, and...I need to stop it. I hope every thing is o.k. with you .Zeuspitar Govinda Ramanuja dasa(talk) 10:00, 04 March 2008 (UTC)
I think the "Supreme God" reference should probably be changed to avoid confusion, but perhaps (in the interest of WP:NPOV) a note should be added somewhere for the sects of Vaishnavism that do believe Venkateshwara is the Supreme God, preferably with a sourced link. While He is a form of Vishnu, nearly all Vaishnava sects believe that Vishnu is the source of all of His forms, and so to avoid confusion the note should be made. --Shruti14 t c s 23:35, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reassess as Start

Needs a CLEANUP. Issues:

  • WP:UNDUE glorification of the Diety. Not encyclopedic, more like devotee literature
  • No References. WP:OR like "Adi Sankaracharya came to Tirumala and placed Sri chakra at the lotus feet of Lord Venkateshwara and sung the famous song "Bhaja Govindam". So Lord Venkateshwara is the supreme God of this Kali yuga".
  • Infobox needed
  • Lead not as WP:LEAD
  • WP:MOS violations like use of "God" (not 'god'); bolding of BALAJI, GOD etc.

Thus not worthy of the "commonly the highest article grade that is assigned outside a more formal review process".--Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:36, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Maybe Legend of Tirumala can be provided in legends. The legend be written in summary style. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 11:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
By any chance, are you coming from an ISKON/Gaudiya stance in regard to this issue? Venkatesha is one of the most revered forms of God in India. Scripturally, it says that Venkateswara is the present incarnation of Vishnu or Narayana. Scripturally, Sadhu-wise and tradition, before the schisms from the Sri Sampradayam of 12th through 16th centuries,all say that Narayana is God or Brahman. If you would like, I can give you websites and email addresses of Actual vedically trainned, school trainned Sri Sampradayam pandits and others who can prove this point. --zeuspitar Govinda Ramanuja dasa(talk) 11:53, 04 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Covered Eyes

In the lonely planet guide it says that Lord Venkateshwar's eyes are covered because they would scorch the universe otherwise. Any substantiation for this claim in scripture or folklore? It would make a nice addition to the article and draw some of the focus off of the temple. AaronCarson (talk) 19:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Never heard of that one before - in scripture or folklore. AFAIK (and through research) there is no such scriptural reference, and although there might be one in folklore (haven't heard of it and can't find one yet) I will say that it's not the first time I've seen incorrect claims or 'facts' made in Lonely Planet travel guides. --Shruti14 t c s 15:52, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Recent Changes Made by Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA

While I like some of the changes made to the article, I do not think that I agree with all of them. (See here for a comparison of the article from before Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA made changes to what is there currently.) Parts of it still don't comply with WP:MOS, and more importantly, large portions of the article have been removed. I think we should keep some of the changes, but restore parts of the original article. --Shruti14 t c s 15:03, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Study the comparison, almost no info is removed, its just re-organized. Kudos Zeuspitar.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 12:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Hey, guys, I am very thankful that we can help each other, comprimise with one another to improve articles. It actually quite nice. Please Shruti and everyone, let know what is wrong and I'll change them. Shruti, please help me to change what you think I did wrong. Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA (talk) 17:15, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
The changes are pretty good for the most part - not much info was removed. Actually now that I look back at it I think they are fine - what needs to be focused on now is expansion and citing sources. --Shruti14 t c s 00:29, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Etymology

Instead of the parenthesized breakup of the word at the top, I have rewritten it in an "Etymology" section in sentence form. --Shruti14 t c s 02:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] UNDUE

REmoved: "Beliefs: To the majority of Vaishnavas; Vishnu or Narayana is considered and worshipped as the one supreme God or Brahman. Even though Vishnu incarnates in various forms or avataras at different times and purposes, He is still considered one and indivisible. His better known past avataras or incarnations have been Narasimha, Parashurama, Rama, and Krishna. According to Sastra or the Vedic scriptures; for this specific age called the Kali yuga, He has come in the form of Venkateshwara. To Vaishnavas, since He is Vishnu-incarnated, Venkateshwara is considered the supreme one God. " WP:UNDUE to beliefs about Vishnu, nothing really about Venkateswara form. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 12:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Now thinking about it, I agree with you. Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA (talk) 15:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The improvements on the page

Dear everyone, Hey, I really think that the changes that everyone has made to the Venkatesh. page are wonderful. It looks alot better than before. It's more stream lined, cleaner, and more user-friendly. I am very glad to have worked with you all in making this much better page than it was before. And, I am very thankful to have done this seva/kainkarya/devotional service to Vishnu and the public.Love and Namaskar. Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA (talk) 15:22, 17 April 2008 (UTC)