| Revision as of 03:34, 28 April 2006 editHillel (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,058 editsm →Buddhism, etc.: Comment re. POV issues← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:43, 16 December 2006 edit undo81.145.240.42 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| '''Bold text'''''''''{{<nowiki> | |||
| == WikiProject Hinduism}} ==</nowiki> | |||
| I removed the reference to monotheism. I have nothing against it, I just couldn't see the logical connection. ] 20:25, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC) | I removed the reference to monotheism. I have nothing against it, I just couldn't see the logical connection. ] 20:25, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC) | ||
| == Headline text == | |||
| == Cult image == | == Cult image == | ||
| == Headline text == | |||
| The current text states that |
The current text states that the Murti is a ].A cult image is made by man.This is incorrect, for the Murti need not be sculpted or formed by man. For example, Dwaraka Sila , Salagrama Sila , Govardhana Sila are not formed by man, nor is Amarnath Sivalingam , all of which are worshipped. | ||
| I think the original text of "deities or images" is superior. --] 22:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC) | I think the original text of "deities or images" is superior. --] 22:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC) | ||
| Line 18: | Line 22: | ||
| :I think many people would take the POV that God is in everything, and therefore God is in murthi, and therefore murthi is a form of God, and not merely a representation or likeness--a representation being something which is ''other'' than that which it represents. I would not oppose that section being deleted or changed, but did not delete it or change it myself out of concern for the POV of the author. --] 01:23, 22 April 2006 (UTC) | :I think many people would take the POV that God is in everything, and therefore God is in murthi, and therefore murthi is a form of God, and not merely a representation or likeness--a representation being something which is ''other'' than that which it represents. I would not oppose that section being deleted or changed, but did not delete it or change it myself out of concern for the POV of the author. --] 01:23, 22 April 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ::I agree with ] and tried to address the issue. – ] 03:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC) | ::I agree with ] and tried to address the issue. – ] 03:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)'''''' | ||
Revision as of 15:43, 16 December 2006
Bold text''''{{ == WikiProject Hinduism}} == I removed the reference to monotheism. I have nothing against it, I just couldn't see the logical connection. Prater 20:25, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Headline text
Cult image
Headline text
The current text states that the Murti is a Cult image.A cult image is made by man.This is incorrect, for the Murti need not be sculpted or formed by man. For example, Dwaraka Sila , Salagrama Sila , Govardhana Sila are not formed by man, nor is Amarnath Sivalingam , all of which are worshipped. I think the original text of "deities or images" is superior. --BostonMA 22:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
A second reason why "deity" is more suitable than "cult image". Trimurthi refers to three deities, or to three forms of a single god. It does not refer to three "images". --BostonMA 00:36, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Buddhism, etc.
Are there examples somewhere of the term murti being used to describe Buddhist statuary? If not, I'm not sure why Buddhism should be mentioned on this article any more than Christian icons, etc. would be. Also, is this sentence NPOV?: "This view of murtis being 'idols' misapplies Abrahamic ideas to Hindu practices and fails to reflect actual Vedic philosophy and Hindu belief." Clearly, a Christian or Muslim critique of Hindu practices does apply Abrahamic ideas; that it is a misapplication sounds like someone's opinion. - Nat Krause 00:40, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- I will offer my opinion that the paragraph you cite regarding Abrahamic ideas represents only a particular POV. I am not an expert in the meanings of the words icon vs idol, but according to the Misplaced Pages article Icon, an icon
- "is an image, picture, or representation; it is a sign or likeness that stands for an object by signifying or representing it..."
- I think many people would take the POV that God is in everything, and therefore God is in murthi, and therefore murthi is a form of God, and not merely a representation or likeness--a representation being something which is other than that which it represents. I would not oppose that section being deleted or changed, but did not delete it or change it myself out of concern for the POV of the author. --BostonMA 01:23, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with User talk:Nat Krause and tried to address the issue. – Hillel 03:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)'