Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hillel (talk | contribs) at 03:34, 28 April 2006 (→Buddhism, etc.: Comment re. POV issues). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hinduism Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

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)

Cult image

The current text states that Murthi is a Cult image. The Cult image states that a cult image is made by man. This is incorrect, for Murthi 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)

• Unassessed Hinduism articles
• Unknown-importance Hinduism articles