[go: up one dir, main page]
Jump to content

Talk:Balarama

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Possible undue in lead

[edit]

Nagannaa has repeatedly altered the lead and infobox to emphasize the occasional view of Balarama as an avatar of Vishnu over other aspects of this figure. I am no expert in this field—not by a long shot—but other editors seem to generally disagree with Balarama as an avatar being the primary encyclopedic detail regarding this figure. Nagannaa's additions have been reverted by multiple editors but these reversions have themselves been undone without explanation. Since the sourcing Nagannaa supplied, including the Britannica source, also suggest that the avatar of Vishnu detail is not of primary importance, I wish for Nagannaa to explain their edits. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:48, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Nagannaa: pinging you again to ensure you see the discussion. If you don't reply, I'll revert the text to how it was before your edits. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:09, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Both versions of the lead are highly probemmatic! It goes: "...the eighth avatar of Vishnu and the elder brother of Krishna in pre Buddhist and Jain sources." What "pre Buddhist and Jain sources" are these? None, I suspect. Nothing on them later on. Are they "pre-Buddhist" and "pre-Jain"? If the early Vedas are meant, then say so. Johnbod (talk) 15:34, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed "pre Buddhist and Jain sources". Johnbod (talk) 15:57, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I support that edit. Thanks, Johnbod. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:10, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Mahabharata and Sangam literature are both pre Buddhist/Jain sources. They hold Balarama as the eighth avatara. Mahabharata is a contemporaneous source as self declared. Nagannaa (talk) 01:00, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am an expert in Hinduism. Pbritti and Johnbod seem to be western Catholics who have little or no grasp.
Balarama vs. Buddha vs. Rsabhadeva as avataras is tge basic difference between deciding what Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism are respectively. Nagannaa (talk) 01:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just like Patriarchs vs. Jesus vs. Mohammed as the final prophet decides Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Nagannaa (talk) 01:06, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I may know comparatively little regarding Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism, but I can say that I actually know a bit about the major players. With no sourcing justification provided, I have made some adjustment using additional reliable sources. ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:43, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Buddha died about 400 BC, and from Jain literature: "While some authors date the composition of the Jain Agamas starting from the 6th century BCE,[9] some western scholars, such as Ian Whicher and David Carpenter, argue that the earliest portions of Jain canonical works were composed around the 4th or 3rd century BCE...". Whereas "Most scholars suggest the historical Sangam literature era spanned from c. 300 BCE to 300 CE,...(but others a bit later)" and the Mahabharata was "Principally compiled in 3rd century BC–4th century CE". The major puranas are all usually given CE dates, typically after 250 CE, in their written forms. Only the Vedas can be called "pre Buddhist and Jain sources", and not all of them. Of course all the religions evolved very significantly for centuries after, but the statement as made was just untenable. I've never seen any WP:RS suggest anything like "Balarama vs. Buddha vs. Rsabhadeva as avataras is the basic difference between deciding what Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism are respectively" - a perspective that I imagine no Buddhist or Jain would agree for a moment. Do you have any that say that? Johnbod (talk) 02:40, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Buddhism and Jainism are missionary religions like Advaita, Dwaita and the like. They are ideologies. In India theological religion is a common substrate on which ideologies are built upon.
Mahabharata has been dated by archeologists from 3102 BCE to 1000 BCE. Vyasa was contemporaneous.
Btw, when we pagans have to agree on all the Abrahamic 'interpreters', how do you all expect us to follow your dates for your unsubstantiated prophets? Nagannaa (talk) 08:34, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, dye accept Jews calling Jesus a false messiah, a satanic one?
Or when Muslims call Isa as just another prophet and not God? Nagannaa (talk) 08:36, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Buddha was REAL but we dunno his exact age. Not even real locations of Lumbini and Kapilavattu.
While Balarama & other pagan Gods are but always fictitious.
Another colonial logic. Nagannaa (talk) 08:39, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The events of the Mahabharata are traditionally said to have begun in 3102 BCE or similar dates (but not at all based on archaeology), but the work grew up far later. Most modern scholars think that if the story has a historical basis, it is events from more like 1000 to 800 BCE. But the depiction in the actual work reflects a world from many centuries after that. I'd tone down the ranting or you're likely to get blocked. Johnbod (talk) 13:07, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is not ranting. If a non Abrahamic would say that Moses and Jesus probably did not exist according to archeology as they have left no evidences, how would Abrahamics react?
Anyway Vyasa's contemporaneous Mahabharata is older than both the Sakyamuni Buddha and Rshabhanatha. This is my point.
BTW, talking colonised pagans being suppressed as ranting is what is triggering military coups and BRIC. Nagannaa (talk) 00:50, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Look, @Nagannaa: this has crossed into WP:SOAPBOX territory. Combined with this inexcusable edit, any further edits of the same character as the above will almost certainly land you a WP:NOTHERE block. However, if you have reliable sourcing that you believe should be integrated into the article in a manner that alters it from its present state, please explicitly identify it and the changes you would like to see made. ~ Pbritti (talk) 03:18, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have added ref.s. Thats is all. Nagannaa (talk) 03:40, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTeCw1twHRY
Marine archeology proves that Krishna's reclamation from the Arabian sea, on which the city of Dwaraka was built was active in the second millenium BC Nagannaa (talk) 11:35, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BTW Dwaraka, a reclmmation Nagannaa (talk) 11:33, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's not really relevant to this article. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:40, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Pbritti and Krishna is a mythological figure Doug Weller talk 12:48, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Socking/block-evasion

[edit]

@Pbritti: I used the wrong term; it's User:Nagannaa evading their block; see the reference to Arthur Avalon, again diff. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 02:20, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Joshua Jonathan: I have to admit my attention is not great right now so perhaps I'm missing cues that indicate that more definitively. I'll take your word for it for now (you were pretty involved in dealing with Nagannaa's disruption across several articles) and if the IP editor continues inserting material, we can discuss perhaps seeking an evasion block. ~ Pbritti (talk) 02:42, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They're using a changing IP, which makes blocking harder. But their style of editing is pretty onbvious - and clumsy, whick makes them easily recognizable. Regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:23, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Balarama&oldid=1211163630"