Jump to content

Talk:Mahadevi

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

Role in Creation of Universe

[edit]

This section, whilst informative, seems a bit garbled to me and arguably needs to be rewritten. Unfortunately my knowledge of the subject precludes me from doing it myself. MikeEagling (talk) 11:09, 1 July 2011 (UTC) I have taken this information from Devi Bhagwat Purana, which is totally true.[reply]

Yes i can Change this topic to legends — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snehilsharma (talk • contribs) 20:30, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Devi

[edit]

Wouldn't this be better included in the article on Devi/Shakti herself (as one very popular way of seeing Devi) rather than as a separate article, especially as they are so intertwined as to be almost synonymous, at least to many Shaktas? Apologies if I've missed a vote somewhere.--Snowgrouse (talk) 01:55, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rahulverma.nsv (talk) 03:29, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

[edit]

Since the Article is Core for Shakta/Shaktism sect and having top importance for the same. Shivaism people are coming and changing it on un sourced manner. So I am requesting admin to change it on Semi protected mode.--Snehilsharma (talk) 05:17, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Devi and Modern Science

[edit]

This section is unsubstantiated conjecture that reads more like a religious polemic than anything else. I took the liberty of removing it, 66.254.228.105 (talk) 19:24, 2 October 2014 (UTC) This is not unsubstantial, All the scholars who belong to Shakta sects were great philosophers, physicians and scientist e.g. Vivekanada, Aryabhatta and there are many others, Concept of Adi shakti is not a myth, but it is more of related to science and spirituality.--Snehilsharma (talk) 05:38, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Technically science itself was born from the Vedas accordingly the Vedas can be said to be created in different ages the most recent one is in the Dwapar Yuga by Krishna dwaipayana in 1500 bce or more the first Vedic humanly author was none other than shukracharya he wrote the Vedas in satya yuga which is like million of years ago 950CMR (talk) 15:00, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Consort of Adi shakti

[edit]

I always see that many shaivia people trying to mislead the information regarding the consort of Adi Shakti. It is really hurting the supreme deity of Shaktism Group. Devi Bhagwat Maha purana and many other Shakti upa puranas clearly mentions that Adi Shakti doen't have any consort. She is nirgun. Only human form of Adi shakti i.e. Parvati married to Shiva. Devi Bhagwat depicts Adi Shakti as mother of Brahman, Vishnu and Shiva. In Shiva purana too, Parvati is addressed as mere an incarnation of Adi Shakti. Durga is also physical form of her as per the same text. I want Adi Parashakti topic to be protected from non authentic content so that no Shavite editor will make such change.--Snehilsharma (talk) 06:03, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Snehilsharma: If you are sure that the article requires protection, please file a request at WP:RFPP. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:58, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen the banner on the Wikipedia website that Wikipedia's content is Partial to man, because less than 20% are female contributors. This Article which is solely dedicated to Adi Parashakti, God as Female. So many editors are coming changing the content. In Devi Bhagwat, It is clearly written that Adi shakti is mother for Trimurti, but many users like @Redrose64 are editing this article to mis lead the content. I have already said admin and requested admin to make this content semi protected, but due presence of male dominance, how can this article be fully feminine. --Snehilsharma (talk) 09:17, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Someone please do something to this vandalism edits regarding consort of Mahadevi Mili977 (talk) 09:03, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Adi Parashakti and Science

[edit]

I believe this section should be removed as it cites a source that doesn't say anything about Hindu philosophy vs. Modern Science. The whole article is mainly garbled and biased (and it looks like it's copy-pasted from a Shakta website). --111.84.193.41 (talk) 21:25, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Adi Parashakti. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:55, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edits Reverted

[edit]

Edits of user Paramatmadeva is reverted back bcoz his/hers edit is not in a good taste, feels its just POV pushing without any valid verifiable refernces to back his claims Arjunkrishna90 (talk) 03:12, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Adi Parashakti. 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) 20:48, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Editing section in Adi Parashakti in Sikhism

[edit]

I was not able to find a clear reference of Khanda being same as Adi shakti. Not able to find theology Sikhism showing belief in Adi Shakti. I find small and recent section of Sikhs believing in Adishakti.

Does any one has more pointers? Poojarshankar10 (talk) 07:27, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Parashakti Page Redirection

[edit]

This page says on top that 'parashakti' page is getting redirected to this page. 'Parashakti' page has been created separately cause parashakti term is used in the Shaivism differently and this page talks about Shaktism. So could someone deleted the line on top stating that parashakti page is getting redirected here. It's hard to search for the parashakti via search engine शिव साहिल (talk) 13:19, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merger Proposal

[edit]

I propose that the article "Shakti" should be merged into this article. Adi Parashakti and Shakti are the same goddess. Shakti is another name of Adi Parashakti . Some informations like Shaktism, Mantras, etc. should be transferred here. 245CMR (talk) 10:16, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox section

[edit]

@Rosguill: @245CMR: @Fylindfotberserk: @Redtigerxyz: I propose removal of infobox from this article. The consort section in the artcile infobox have become very big headache. Even after explaining the problem people are continuously adding the same thing. Since its just like a term Parabrahman, I think its better to remove the infobox. What do you guys say? - MRRaja001 (talk) 11:58, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:MRRaja001, I have removed the "Consort" field from the infobox. Though Shiva is most often associated with her manifestations, there is a idea stream where Adi Parashakti is without a consort and the mother of all. --Redtigerxyz Talk 17:06, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that removing the infobox entirely is appropriate, although keeping the consort parameter out of the infobox likely is. signed, Rosguill talk 17:38, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Name

[edit]

@Redtigerxyz: There is hardly an RS which refers the goddess with the name "Adi Parashakti". In the sources (eg. Five feminine faces, Asian Mythologies) the Supreme Shakta goddess is generally called "Devi". We cannot change this article's name to Devi as another article (Devi, refering to any goddess) exists. What should we do? Please reply, regards .245CMR.•👥📜 07:47, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:245CMR, The Supreme Goddess is known by various names - Devi (proper noun), Mahadevi, Shakti, Adi Shakti, Adi Parashakti. Suggest a merge with Mahadevi and rename this as Mahadevi (as David Kinsley and Tracy Pintchman call her).--Redtigerxyz Talk 11:32, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Redtigerxyz: Ok, thank you for your suggestions..245CMR.•👥📜 11:43, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 19 June 2021

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Mahadevi per reasonable nom, unopposed. No such user (talk) 12:26, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Adi Parashakti → Mahadevi – As per suggestion by User:Redtigerxyz,

The Supreme Goddess is known by various names - Devi (proper noun), Mahadevi, Shakti, Adi Shakti, Adi Parashakti. Suggest a merge with Mahadevi and rename this as Mahadevi (as David Kinsley and Tracy Pintchman call her).

— User:Redtigerxyz (originally answered on Talk:Adi Parashakti#Name

There is hardly a WP:RS which refers the goddess with the name "Adi Parashakti". However, many sources refer the supreme goddess as Mahadevi. Eg. [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. The article Adi Parashakti should be renamed as Mahadevi, as per WP: Common name. Regards, .245CMR.•👥📜 12:10, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Anthony Appleyard: Can you move this page, it has been almost two weeks and looks like that no one opposing..245CMR.•👥📜 05:06, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
@No such user and Anthony Appleyard: Ok, thank you very much..245CMR.•👥📜 13:05, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please edit the page to explain the relationships between various names. I usually do this myself after the move, but the terminology here gave me headache; I'm not sure if Parashakti and Mahadevi are the same goddess. Confusingly enough, {{Shaktism}} had both entries (and, after your edit, has link to Mahadevi twice). No such user (talk) 14:18, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@No such user: Let me explain this:

Untitled

[edit]

I have added the information which is correct about mahadevi I referred books and should for it. It's correct about adishakti.Why the user mr. Raja is tried to erase parvati. Goddess parvati is a religious matter. And no one should to hurt the sentiments of the peopele Nath2081 (talk) 07:28, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the information which is correct about mahadevi I referred books and should for it. It's correct about adishakti.Why the user mr. Raja is tried to erase parvati. Goddess parvati is a religious matter. And no one should to hurt the sentiments of the people Nath2081 (talk) 07:28, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding disruptive editing on the article

[edit]

Hi @Rosguill: , the user Nath2081 is messing up the whole article. Can you please look into it. - MRRaja001 (talk) 07:21, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MRRaja001, they appear to have been indefinitely blocked by another admin as of a few hours ago. signed, Rosguill talk 15:12, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Rosguill: Okay. - MRRaja001 (talk) 11:20, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit War

[edit]

@Mili977: Stop this edit war and please revert your edits. The name is already discussed, please see the discussion #Requested move 19 June 2021..245CMR.•👥📜 08:29, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mahadevi is not the general name of supreme goddess. This is page regarding the supreme goddess. In puranic literature mostly goddess parvati mentioned as Mahadevi, because she is wife of mahadeva, also in vaishnava purana goddess lakshmi and radha mentioned as Mahadevi. In shaktism ssupreme goddess does not mentioned as shakti of vishnu or shiva. Also most people know her as Adi shakti or Adi parshakti not Mahadevi. All pages in other languages connect to Adi Parashakti not Mahadevi. If you change the name to Mahadevi its a very difficult to understand to some readers Mili977 (talk) 08:34, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mili977: This is not how Wikipedia works, it is not based on a user's original research. See WP:MOS. Mahadevi is used in most WP:RS..245CMR.•👥📜 08:37, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mahadevi is not use much her original name was Adi parashakti. Only indians use mahadevi. Mili977 (talk) 08:39, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mili977: Not a valid reason, also I have listed many sources on #Requested move 19 June 2021, most of which are written by non-Indians only. So please revert your edits..245CMR.•👥📜 08:42, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All other pages related to name Adi Parashakti. Not Mahadevi. Mahadevi means wife of Mahadeva. Mahadevi is form of adi parashakti. Her original name is Adi parashakti. Also in the picture your provided that is Mahasaraswati. Mili977 (talk) 08:42, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mili977: WP:OR, secondly, Mahadevi means 'great goddess'. See sources!.245CMR.•👥📜 08:43, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The original page was Adi parashakti (primordial cosmic energy). So keep it that. Dont change it. Mili977 (talk) 08:43, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mili977: on what basis?? Your WP:OR?? I have already established that Mahadevi is more widely used in sources. .245CMR.•👥📜 08:45, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mahadevi is another name of Adi Parashakti. Adi Parashakti is her original name.Keep her original name. Mili977 (talk) 08:45, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mili977: Please stop adding your unsupported OR and give valid reason..245CMR.•👥📜 08:46, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can see in 4th one in notes already explain about her name. Mili977 (talk) 08:50, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mili977: See WP:MOS to know how name is decided, most RS use Mahadevi. .245CMR.•👥📜 08:52, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mili977, you are requested to provide references that Adi Para shakti is WP:COMMONNAME. Tracy Pintchman and David Kinsley, noted experts on Hindu goddesses use Mahadevi for the Supreme Shakta Goddess.--Redtigerxyz Talk 07:50, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:08, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

[edit]

Page is been constantly vandalised by some users especially mili user and the information is tried to put it in fallacious manner. Specifically this page id attacked by the particular sects who keeps another belief system Baavarimata (talk) 15:52, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 October 2021

[edit]

I want to change the affiliation according to the sources 2409:4042:4E12:9889:522:94B8:CD07:A373 (talk) 04:23, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 04:47, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Protect this page

[edit]

Please protect this page. Thaukmaa (talk) 07:31, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please protect this page. Thaukmaa Mili977 (talk) 07:12, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All forms are overall one as SHAKTI. Merge this to DEVI article

[edit]

Durga is the most supreme form here. Actually all are same and overall one as shakti. Parvati, Lakshmi, Kaali, Radha, Sita etc. These all are same and one as SHAKTI/DEVI/MAHADEVI but are doing different roles and are divided but have the same root of the most supreme form known as SHAKTI/DEVI/MAHADEVI.

Among all these forms, Durga/Vaishno Devi is the most worshipped and common.

I suggest that this page should be merged wirhe DEVI page as there is no mention of terms like mahadevi in the holy texts. These both means the same. Keshavv1234 (talk) 11:56, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is No Need for that. Mili977 (talk) 07:11, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Saraswati

[edit]

@Mili977 and @Keshavv1234 I thought it might be helpful to start a discussion (based on your recent reverts) regarding Saraswati and Mahadevi. It might also be helpful to get others' thoughts here and see if we can find a consensus. I tried to look into this to see what I could find. One thing I came across was in Diana Eck's book, India a Sacred Geography, where she mentions that in Mahadevi theology, "The Supreme Reality, Shakti, is manifest as various Shaktis- Durga, Lakshmi, Sarasvati, Savitri, and Radha." She also mentions that in Shakti theology and in the Devi Bhagavata Purana, “The Goddess is the All—indescribable and ultimately ungraspable. When she takes form, however, she is triple. Manifest as sattva (purity), she is Mahalakshmi; as rajas (power or passion), she is Mahasarasvati; and as tamas (darkness), she is Mahakali.” Based on this, I think that Saraswati should be included since it's part of Mahadevi/Shakti theology. Thanks. Eucalyptusmint (talk) 21:05, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Saraswati does not worship as a supreme form of Mahadevi.A large number of forms of Mahadevi are worshiped all over India. There is no need to highlight each form one by one. Mili977 (talk) 10:37, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mili977, I agree, there's no need to highlight every single form of Mahadevi since that would be excessive. But based on my reference above, Mahasaraswati is a part of the tridevi in shakti theology. This would be important to note and clarify when providing info about how different sects worship/view her. Also, could you clarify what you mean by 'supreme form'? Eucalyptusmint (talk) 15:39, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Supreme forms are direct incarnations of goddess. As as example Goddess Parvati is a full incarnation of Mahadevi. Srikula sect believes goddess Tripura sundari as a physical emembodiment of Mahadevi. Kalikula sect believes Mahakali. Mili977 (talk) 04:57, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying. Could you provide WP:RS that you've come across that mention this and why Saraswati isn't included? As I mentioned previously using Eck's reference, Saraswati is part of the tridevi form of Mahadevi. Based on that, what are your thoughts about including the following sentence: "In the Devi Bhagavata Purana Mahadevi's three qualities (sattva, rajas and tamas) take form as a triple goddess or Tridevi. According to Diana Eck, when manifest as purity (sattva) she is Mahalakshmi, as power or passion (rajas) she is Mahasarasvati, and as darkness (tamas) she is Mahakali." Eucalyptusmint (talk) 18:33, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Association

[edit]

Per WP:V content on wikipedia is determined by previously published information rather than editors' beliefs, opinions, or experiences. Even if you are sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it. So if you can find sources to support the inclusion of this information, feel free to add it back in. I don't think edit warring is going to be helpful and would suggest WP:BRD. Eucalyptusmint (talk) 16:17, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To note these two sources [7] [8] aren't reliable. This looks like a self-published source and in this one it's not clear who's writing the information. Also, just wondering if you had a chance to read the two websites because the content is exactly the same in both. Eucalyptusmint (talk) 18:41, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

duplicate pages

[edit]

Hello, I propose adding the information from this page to the Devi page and removing this page. Since Mahadevi and Devi are the same thing (as mentioned in the first sentence of the article) it would make sense to make the information more easily searchable. Devi is a much more commonly used term than Mahadevi, and having this information on the Devi page would make it easier to find. Does anyone have thoughts on this? Thanks, ~~~~ Hemmingweigh (talk) 08:43, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Devi is about Hindu goddesses in general; Mahadevi is about the Supreme Goddess of Shaktism. Two articles are required Redtigerxyz Talk 14:17, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, while Mahadevi is also known as Devi, this page shouldn't be merged with the Devi page since there is a distinction between the topic of focus for each page, as noted by Redtigerxyz. Eucalyptusmint (talk) 19:06, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Redtigerxyz and @Eucalyptusmint, thanks for your swift response. A conceptual difference between the pages "Supreme Goddess of Shaktism" vs. Hindu goddesses in general would be very useful. My goal in proposing the unifying of these pages is simply to make the pages better; A clear distinction would be a step in the right direction. However, the differentiation described does not exist at this time. There are entire subsections on Parvati, Mahadevi, and all of the other Goddesses considered the Goddess of Shaktism on the Devi page. There are many more examples of this overlap. Take the below translation of the Devisukta which is currently on both pages:
The Devīsūkta of the Rigveda (10.125.1 to 10.125.8) is among the most studied hymns declaring that the ultimate reality is a goddess:

I have created all worlds at my will without being urged by any higher Being, and dwell within them. I permeate the earth and heaven, and all created entities with my greatness and dwell in them as eternal and infinite consciousness.

What do you both think? I am really open to alternative solutions and approaches, but keeping things on different pages with overlapping information is just confusing. It doesn't help Wikipedia readers find the information they're looking for.
Thanks,
Hemmingweigh (talk) 08:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I'm not quite sure I follow what it is that you are proposing. Are you suggesting that the article titles be changed? And that the subsections regarding goddesses related to Shaktism on the Devi pages should be deleted?/moved? because there are overlaps? Eucalyptusmint (talk) 00:42, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mahadevi or Devi of Shaktism is a distinct Hindu goddess (devi). A separate article is required, similar to articles on other devis Lakshmi, Parvati. Devi is written in summary style with sections on major devis. Redtigerxyz Talk 03:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Eucalyptusmint @Redtigerxyz, thank you for your responses. I proposed moving the information from this page to the Devi page and deleting this page. If you both are in favor of keeping both distinct pages a lot of work is required to make these pages coherent in regard to the related pages. After carefully reading both pages some things will have to be deleted, some moved, some added. If either of you would like to spearhead this please let me know. Otherwise, I can take this on if I have your support. Thanks, Hemmingweigh (talk) 07:26, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hemmingweigh you are welcome to be WP:BOLD and edit the page constructively. If the other editors differ in opinion, they will revert or edit appropriately. Redtigerxyz Talk 11:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mahadevi&oldid=1224614916"