Jump to content

Talk:Alvars

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

Untitled

[edit]

This needs a cleanup, and the articles on Nayanars and South India's 75 Apostles of Bhakti, as well as other related articles have to be editted into coherence. As of now, all these articles have redundant information, and information that's in the wrong place. Thevaram and Thiruvaachagam have to be put in Nayanars and not Alvars, and a listing of all the alvars might make more sense. Also, more info on their compositions and deeds. Same goes for the Nayanars article, and I think that the "South India..." article has to be totally redone (and renamed). Nayanars is linked up with the rest of the Hinduism topics, and this one should be too. - shash 13:14, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Also: this article needs replacing the rather breathless praise of the Alvars with more objective History of Religions-oriented language - Ohammer 13:48, 3 March 2006

I believe that the date given for the existence and compositions of Alvars is incorrect. The date of discovery of their works by Nathamuni has been attributed as dates of their existence. I have books published by Vishishtra-Dvaitha research center and Nrihasimha Priya trust to establish these points. How do I go about correcting this obvious mistake. Please let me know.

Hawkeye26 20:24, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the Table, please insert under column heading 2 the name of the state and in the column of months give the English equivalent names to make the table more informative for the non-tamil readers. Also there are some valid comments in the discussion page which needs to be incorporated in the main article.--Nvvchar (talk) 10:44, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alvars; their place, month and star of birth not correct?Places not correctly mention.

[edit]

Please verify once.Andal birth Place not Sri Villiputhur in past.thats Tiru Villiputhur while her time period.After non Tamil kings ruled Tamilnadu they changed some city names "Tiru in to Sri".Example. Tiruvarangam-srirangam,Tiruperumputhur-sriperumputhur.Like Tiruvilliputhur-srivilliputhur.Any way what ever may it is,but while Writing the article dont forget to mention the original name.Even now also it is called Tiruvilliputhur.[[1]]Eshwar.om (talk) 10:09, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I beg to disagree. When Andal was born, the place was Srivillipuththur. Andal's Thiruppavai shows that Thamizh was already influenced by Sanskrit at that time. Even the oldest Thamizh records have a few Sanskrit words in them. You say that Srivillipuththur is called Thiruvillipuththur today; can you tell me why Thiruvarangam is still called Srirangam? One more point - Among the Thamizh-origin dynasties of Pandiyas and Sozhas, one can find many rulers with Sanskrit names. To the best of my knowledge, the cities have been renamed to remove Sanskrit words because of recent Dravidian movements encouraged by politicians who have been criticized for encouraging reverse-discrimination and Thamizh-extremism in order to get votes, when the names of themselves and their sons are not in pure Thamizh.

I would have appreciated your efforts if you had, instead of asking for this correction, asked the admins to chance Alvar to Azhwar, since in Thamizh it is 'Azhwar' and not 'Alwar'. 'Alwar' is used by people who are not fluent enough to pronouce 'zha' properly. Because of people like them and because of others who ignore them, Thamizh has become Tamil, Azhwars have become Alwars, Vizhuppuram has become Villupuram, Mazhai (rain) has become Malai (mountain), and the worst of all, Vazhi (way) has become Vali (pain).

Request to admins - please replace 'la' with 'zha' wherever necessary on Wikipedia. Many pages have this problem, which is a serious issue since most Indian visitors of Wikipedia either do not know phonetics or do not bother to read the correct pronunciation of words. I understand that this is not the correct place to discuss this issue; please guide me to the correct forum so that I can request this change.

Dating

[edit]

While traditional Hindus may disagree with the academic dates given for the Alvars, it is important to have both the traditional and academic accounts on this page. Do not remove the dates given just because you believe them to be incorrect. This is not a place for a singular world view to be endorsed over another: this is an encyclopedia for users of all backgrounds. Iṣṭa Devata (talk) 17:48, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please know the difference between vandalism and non vandalism before you throw out the word vandalism like trash. It is common that your so called "academic dates" have got no evidence, and it is well maintained in the article, just read Some modern scholars suggest that they lived during 5th - 9th century, although such estimates lack evidence. Bladesmulti (talk) 17:54, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This article promotes traditional dating, 4200 BCE - 2700 BCE and rubbishes the modern scholarly view. "Some modern scholars suggest that they lived during 5th - 9th century, although such estimates lack evidence" is an example of the POV pushing. "Ancient India: Collected Essays on the Literary and Political History of Southern India", by Sakkottai Krishnaswami Aiyangar, p. 403-404 which is used as the reference for the traditional dates, clearly gives the scholarly dating on further pages. E.g. traditional date of Thirumangai Alvar is 2706 BCE (pp. 403-4); but is dated to 7-8th century CE (p. 409-10).--Redtigerxyz Talk 18:05, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
While traditional would remain traditional. While the view that is held by some modern estimate would be inserted as Some scholars holds that.. Without pointing any situation of evidence. What you would suggest? Bladesmulti (talk) 18:12, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Chari clearly says that "Modern scholars have questioned these dates and assigned a period ranging from the 5th to the 9th centuries AD on the basis of a few historical evidences." Then after discussing Dr. N. Subba Reddiar dates. Chari says "Even these dates lack clear historical evidence". It does not say it is NO evidence, which POV the article forwards "such estimates lack evidence".--Redtigerxyz Talk 18:15, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes he talked about the historical evidence.[2] I have removed the same from other line. Bladesmulti (talk) 18:18, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Redtigerxyz. S. M. Srinivasa Chari writes:

"Modern scholars have questioned these [traditional] dates and assigned a period ranging from the 5th to the 9th centuries on the basis of a few historical evidences. There is no unanimity among them regarding the dates" (p.11) [...] "... in all probability the Alvars belong to the period ranging from the 5th to the 8th centuries" (p.13.

"such estimates lack evidence" is a personal opinion, not a correct paraphrsing of the source. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:25, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys, I added the academic dates a while back and certain users have been compelled to remove them. Is there any chance of restoring my references for the date or adding new ones? I'm worried that if I do so it will get reverted again.

Iṣṭa Devata (talk) 01:46, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you have checked correctly, we have already extended that part of the article, as well as few others where the information had no citations. Bladesmulti (talk) 02:03, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Alvars/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

I believe that the date given for the existence and compositions of Alvars is incorrect. The date of discovery of their works by Nathamuni has been attributed as dates of their existence. I have books published by Vishishtra-Dvaitha research center and Nrihasimha Priya trust to establish these points. How do I go about correcting this obvious mistake. Please let me know. Hawkeye26 21:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 21:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 07:28, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Alvar or Alwar or Azhwar

[edit]

Copying my comments from User talk:Ssriram mt: There are three spellings of Alvars used in wikipedia articles. There is no consistency in the spelling (Alvar or Alwar or Azhwar). IMO all articles in wikipedia should have the same spelling. Currently, the main article Alvars as well as most of individual Alvar articles use Alvar; inconsistencies remain; e.g. Pey Azhwar, Kulashekhara Alwar (which uses all three spellings). It seems Alvar is the most popular in RS.

There is a Tamil word called Alvar, which translates to ruler. Most of the authors leaving a few are not of Tamil origin and have used Alvar and may not be aware of its meaning. The Azhwar prefix names are mostly common names (like Pei, Bhoothath, Nam), which when taken with Alvar gives altogether a different meaning. The etymology insists on azh meaning the one who gets immersed. Ssriram mt (talk) 14:03, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In English translations of Tamil literature, the ழ character is not spelt as "zh", but rather as "l". Please refer to https://archive.org/details/secretgarlandantalstiruppavaiandnacciyartirumoliarchanavenkatesan_380_k/page/n3/mode/2up and https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.101169/page/n7/mode/2up to view examples of the same.
I propose that the term be universally rendered as Alvar on Wikipedia and measures be taken by editors to make edits appropriately to standardise this spelling. Chronikhiles (talk) 06:59, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's true that both ஆழ்வார் (Vaishnavite saint) and ஆள்வார் (meaning "one who rules" or "a ruler") are rendered "Alvar" in English. However, only the former has a real meaning in English, indicating a group of Hindu poet-saints of Vaishnavite sect. The latter can only be a transliteration and does not have any meaning in English. Thus, "Alvar" in English only refers to the poet-saints of the Bhakti era. Since the English "zh" spelling for the Tamil character ழ is only an indigenous assignment by the locals rather than actual pronunciation, the spelling can be either "Alvar" or "Alwar", depending on which one is used the most in reliable sources. Rasnaboy (talk) 08:09, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Alvars. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:31, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Alvars. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:28, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Traditional origins

[edit]

Hi, Wikipedians. I tried to find the source of the mythological origins of the Alvars, the debate between Agastya and Vishvakarma over the languages, the whole incarnation tale, the whole nine yards. I was unable to find anything about this legend. It's not on the Tamil Wiki either. If any of you guys are able to offer sufficient references for this legend, and also rewrite the grammatical mess that it currently is, I would greatly appreciate it. Good luck! Chronikhiles (talk) 08:24, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alvars&oldid=1250967419"