| Revision as of 07:24, 12 May 2005 editAsbestos (talk | contribs)5,333 edits →Aghora← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:37, 25 May 2005 edit undoDbachmann (talk | contribs)227,714 edits →AghoraNext edit → | ||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
| Why the hell does ] redirect to Shiva? Aghora is the Hindu god of evil. He's not even mentioned in this article. ] 02:59, May 12, 2005 (UTC) | Why the hell does ] redirect to Shiva? Aghora is the Hindu god of evil. He's not even mentioned in this article. ] 02:59, May 12, 2005 (UTC) | ||
| :Looks like the redirect was created by ]. You could ask him, or, better, create a stub for ]. — ] | ] 07:24, 12 May 2005 (UTC) | :Looks like the redirect was created by ]. You could ask him, or, better, create a stub for ]. — ] | ] 07:24, 12 May 2005 (UTC) | ||
| ==the name== | |||
| What is the meaning of the statement that the name Shiva "may be interpreted" as "One who purifies everyone by the utterance of His name"? That's completely arbitrary. It can also be interpreted as "One who smiles a lot, and likes yellow butterflies" with the same justification. ''Shiva'' means "kind", or "auspicious", and the interpretation of the name ends there (''unless the interpretation is attributed to some authority, and explained''). I'm not saying "One who purifies everyone by the utterance of His name" is ''wrong'', it's just that it's a theological interpretation of the name and needs some context. I suggest we give "auspicious" as the meaning of the name in the intro, and save the interpretations for the article. ] <small>]</small> 12:37, 25 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 12:37, 25 May 2005
"Siva is no more a name for G-d than the Holy Spirit" ---
Except of course, that a lot of christians do think that 'Holy Spirit' is a name for G-d.
Indeed. See the entry for the Athanasian Creed for the historical understanding of the Trinity held by Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and many Protestant Christians.. It's not at all clear to me what the author means by saying the Holy Spirit is a 'facet' of God, or by saying that Christ 'developed' Christianity from Judaism.
my goodness. This is an exceptionally inaccurate treatment of Christianity, which makes me wonder how accurate a treatment of Shaivism it can possibly be! 'Facet'-language for the Holy Spirit is modalist, I think the author to mean. In which case it is not a correct presentation of orthodox Christian theology, but some sort of reinterpretation. And by the way history of religion folks are DEEPLY divided on the origins of religion in animism - lots of them (based on study of religion in remaining hunter/gatherer groups) like to talk about a kind of primitive monotheism. Not that I think much of anthropologists in general when they talk about religion before the invention of writing, but it's worth noting that this article asserts something that is not simply accepted by everryone. --MichaelTinkler
These last few sentences are either inaccurate (modalism applied to the Trinity - not accurate Christian theology) or gratuitous (the Buddha bit - what's it doing in a Siva article?):
- Siva is no more a name for God than the Holy Spirit--Siva is a facet of atman just as the Spirit is a facet of the HolyTrinity. Buddha developed Buddhism from Hinduism in an analogous fashion to Christ developing Christianity from Judaism.
Shiva is supposed to be anaadi (with no beginning) and ananth (with no end), i.e. without birth or death. Vishnu on the otherhand was born as Parasurama, Rama, Krishna. Where does Ammavaru fit in?
BTW most of the hits at http://www.google.com/search?q=ammavaru are for the Telugu word (Ammavaru/Ammavari). Amma means mother in many Indian languages. Varu/vari is a Telugu term of respect. Ammavari usually refers to Parvathi or Lakshmi. -- Paddu 09:25 Mar 22, 2003 (UTC)
Note the Page titled Cannabis has a reference that states: History The use of cannabis is thought to go back at least 5000 years. Neolithic archaeology grounds in China include cannabis seeds and plants. The first known mention of cannabis was in a Chinese medical text of 2737 BC. It was used as medicine throughout Asia and the Middle East to treat a variety of conditions. In India particularly, cannabis was associated with Shiva.
Should the Shiva page reflect this surprising connection? zzzz 08:06 21 Jun 2003 (UTC)
In the first line, the article states "Shiva (...) is form of God in Hinduism." I assume that this should either be "Shiva is a form of God in Hinduism", or "Shiva is a god in Hinduism." The current version is ungrammatical.
Also, the part in brackets is ungrammatical: "Shiva (also spelt Siva, and referred to as Lord Shiva has many names)...". Either "has many names" should go outside the brackets, or should just be removed entirely. --Asbestos 21:37, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
axe
on Labrys, we say that Shiva carries a double-headed axe. Is this at all true? dab (ᛏ) 22:33, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Aghora
Why the hell does Aghora redirect to Shiva? Aghora is the Hindu god of evil. He's not even mentioned in this article. → JarlaxleArtemis 02:59, May 12, 2005 (UTC)
- Looks like the redirect was created by User:TUF-KAT. You could ask him, or, better, create a stub for Aghora. — Asbestos | Talk 07:24, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
the name
What is the meaning of the statement that the name Shiva "may be interpreted" as "One who purifies everyone by the utterance of His name"? That's completely arbitrary. It can also be interpreted as "One who smiles a lot, and likes yellow butterflies" with the same justification. Shiva means "kind", or "auspicious", and the interpretation of the name ends there (unless the interpretation is attributed to some authority, and explained). I'm not saying "One who purifies everyone by the utterance of His name" is wrong, it's just that it's a theological interpretation of the name and needs some context. I suggest we give "auspicious" as the meaning of the name in the intro, and save the interpretations for the article. dab (ᛏ) 12:37, 25 May 2005 (UTC)