Jump to content

Talk:Matsyendranatha

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Matsyendranath)

Birth of Matsyendranath

[edit]

Can we get a source for "he was born out of a fish's womb"? As entertaining as it is...

seems a little far fetched to me.

64.92.27.124 (talk) 00:46, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it is the standard legend...

I have read the "Navnath Bhaktisaar" where there are 40 chapters on life of these sages. As per that book, his father is Uparichara Vasu. That book is considered to be authentic book written by Gorakhshanath.


We definitely need to add a version of his origin story here (and put a better version on the Hatha Yoga page). I would vote for the simple one from light on yoga. If memory serves he was born under an inauspicious star and thrown into the ocean by his parents where a fish swallowed him. The fish swam deep under the ocean with baby Matsyendra, passing Shiva giving the secret lessons of Yoga to Parvati where he thought no one could hear. Matsyendranath overheard this discourse, became instantaneously enlightened and sprang out of the fish an enlightened and fully grown man, able to teach yoga to the people. Sort of the Prometheus of yoga, without the torture.Iṣṭa Devata (talk) 15:44, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Iṣṭa Devata:: there's two issues; one is the existence of a separate page for Rato Machhendranath, which definitely needs to be rolled into this one, and the second is providing sourced appropriate mythological material. By "appropriate", I mean we need to clearly separate what factual information we know about the historical figure from the stories told about him. Ogress smash! 19:28, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you're definitely right that those pages should be merged. But I don't know how well one can seperate myth from fact with Matsyendra. Seems like everything we know about him comes through mythically enhanced stories. After all, his 'disciple' Goraksha wasn't even alive at the same time. But, if you've got good sources, more power to you.Iṣṭa Devata (talk) 03:49, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SO! Sanskrit scholar and translator of The Radiance Sutras, Lorin Roche has a much more complete version of the story on his website that I think is much more accurate than the weird version from Light on Yoga we're using here and on the Hatha Yoga page. Instead of being a fish, he is a baby eaten by a fish and instead of Shiva going to an island, he goes to the bottom of the ocean (although he quotes a version with a 'moon island' as well). matsyendra.html Here's the link, and note all the old pictures he has of Matsyendra emerging from a fish.Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 22:43, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
An interesting version comes up here (on the page of an initiated Natha Guru) where he tells a story of Matsyendra's father Minanath being swallowed by a fish and later rescued by another fisherman who cut him free. The question then becomes, is this another fish story, seperate from Matsyendra's or is this another version of the same story? What are the odds of the whole family being eaten by fish at different times? And remember: some scholars say Mina is Matsyendra's father, others say they are the same person (like Lama Govinda below and David Gordon White according to this citation here). Curious the parallels with similar biblical fish-tales. Buddhist Reflections By Lama Anagarika Govinda, Maurice O'Connell, ISBN 978-81-208-1169-0, p.119 claims the Buddhist story of Mina-Pa (here treated as another name of Matsyendra) is 'obviously borrowed' from the biblical Jonah.Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 06:39, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Matsyendranath Temple at Sawarde

[edit]

Mayamba is Guru Matsyendranath Temple with its reference in Navnath Granth. This is located at Sawargaon, Tal: AShti Dist : Beed, Maharashtra — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ravindrashind (talk • contribs) 07:11, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dasam Granth contain teachings of Machindranath

[edit]

Assamese Buddhist

[edit]

I just undid a revision that tried to describe Matsyendranath as an Assamese Buddhist (by User:Bhaskarbhagawati). While the information was referenced, it goes against the mainstream academic understanding of Matsyendra to call him specifically a Buddhist or to claim to know his ethnicity and as such doesn't belong in the intro (and seems like a slight leap from the sentence quoted). If someone wants to re add it with a proper explanation to a new section I wouldn't object, but calling him Buddhist in the intro is to present a fringe perspective as accepted mainstream fact which is misleading and not very encyclopedic.Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 03:32, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Iṣṭa Devatā, i just modified your revert and removed only disputed part. I do think he can mentioned as Buddhist in lede, because he was notable mostly due to his works related to Buddhism. I understand your concerns, if you find other sources which describes his ethnicity as something else, please mention it. And i think his Kamrupi origins should be included as many authors convinced by same. I left it to your best judgement. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 13:43, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ogress, it seems we have some issues, i will more than happy to hear from you. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 03:26, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Bhaskarbhagawati The issue appears to be yours, as two editors have separately reverted your change; as I said in the Edit Summary, "This is the lede. we discuss in-depth controversies in the body of the text, so move it there." Please remove it from the lede, as it is not appropriate to have controversies or discussions in the lede. The lede usually doesn't even contain cites as it summarises the comments of the article. Read WP:LEDE. An appropriate statement in the lede would be "Many scholars believe he was from Kamarupa", not a long discussion of his origin complete with many citations. Ogress smash! 03:31, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, will do it. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 03:34, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I tried a bit to improve it, check if it need more improvement. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 03:54, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looking better, but I'm still not sure if he should be described as de facto Buddhist. I feel like he is commonly considered as a Hindu by many, especially since the group he allegedly founded, the Nathas, are not a buddhist group but Hindu Tantriks (even though the Mahasiddhas are Buddhist saints, often of mythical origin). I'm open to the consensus of the editors here.Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 05:54, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, yes he is important to both Hindus (Vishnu) and Buddhist (Lokesvara). You can certainly go ahead with your edit. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 08:41, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The question isn't to whom he is important. The question is if there is an academic consensus that he was a Buddhist. If not it should be presented as a theory in the body and not as a fact in the lede.Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 17:05, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This article quotes a yoga journal piece that says he was Bengali http://www.lorinroche.com/yoga/yoga/matsyendra.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iṣṭa Devatā (talk • contribs) 22:47, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Better link: heroes-saints-sagesIṣṭa Devatā (talk) 23:04, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yoga Journal is certainly not a reliable source. Ogress smash! 04:22, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Um, it's not a citation: just evidence that there are other prominent theories on his birthplace. However, it is worth noting their staff has its fair share of top level teachers (holding a fair amount of PhDs among them), and is used as a ref on countless yoga articles all across wikipedia. This article's author Colleen Morton Busch is an established journalist, MFA in poetry with a background in Indic prose and an author as well as a former monk. I don't know where on wp:rs it says a respected author in a top journal on yoga is 'certainly not a reliable source' for an article about the founder of hathayoga. It wouldn't trump a book on Matsyendra, but it still adds to this discussion. But the bigger question is what is your point? It is not a citation in the article: it's just part of our discussion on the talk page.Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 05:19, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Its nice to see that we all wanted to look the article in its best shape. We do discuss issues in line; first is, is he was a Buddhist by religion, when we mentioned him as Buddhist scholar, we not necessarily talking about his religion. Religion should had mentioned in infobox. He can compose Buddhist works, even if he is a Hindu by religion.
Another issue we have in our hand is his origin, yes we do have multiple theories, but in-spite of talks by some authors of his origins in Bengal/Gauda, current academic consensus tilt towards Kamrup (not Kamarupa kingdom but modern Kamrup/Kamarupa proper) (see citations). Suhas Chatterjee (1998), being an Bengali himself accepted that though there were some talks about his Bengal origins, he is actually from Kamrup/Kamarupa, and people from Kamrup may be may not considered themself as Assamese, in that way this discussions topic should had Kamrupi Buddhist. Please let us know your thoughts. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 12:44, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Iṣṭa Devatā, it seems that in your recent good faith edits like here, you are unilaterally reaching a consensus and go ahead with your edits, without waiting for talks to finish.

It also seemed to engage in removing directly cited content like here, here, here, here (failed WP:OR too), here (needed for context) also here. Please try to throughly discuss prior to removing contents which are sourced with reliable sources. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 03:05, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please show us the quote that says Matsyendranath's name indicates the tantric use of fish, because that is an illogical statement when the reason for his fish name is spelled out multiple times (either he was a fish, a fisherman, or swallowed by a fish). The sentence was unexplained and I doubt comes from the source cited. I only removed things that were blatantly incorrect, and that being said, little was removed, only rearranged and cleaned up. As for the rearranging and rewording, you must realize that many of your edits are written with poor grammar and syntax because English is (I assume) not your first language. Everything I added is referenced and verifiable so there is no need to reach a consensus on the talk page and almost everything I removed is blatantly incorrect or written unclearly. For example: saying he was a 'Buddhist scholar' in English the primary reading would be he is a Buddhist who was a scholar or he was a scholar of Buddhism, neither of which is correct or what you were trying to say (according to your own comments). As for the academic opinion 'tilting' towards Kamarupa being his birthplace: No, that is not an academic consensus and smacks of your clear agenda to ascribe things to Assam and increase the assamese articles on wikipedia. Scholars can't agree on a birthplace if they can't even agree if he was real, and all the differing theories of his birthplace hold equal value on this page unless discredited. The Bengal and Nepal theories are just as prevalent. I didn't remove your view on Kamarupa, it is merely presented as one of many views because that's what it is. If you want to point out any actual errors in the facts on the page, feel free. But this page was being muddied and needed to be cleaned up.Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 06:30, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Pick up a copy of "The Alchemical Body: Siddha Traditions in Medieval India" by David Gordon White and you'll see just how uncertain all these details are that you would present as facts: the list of Siddhas; the origin, number and names of the nine (or 18) Nathas; the dates of Matsyendra and Goraksha's lifes; the uncertain lists of attributed works. This can't be written like a biography, this a figure whose life and its details are 90% mystery. He has been claimed by many different peoples throughout history, hence the Newari temples built to him and the texts posthumously attributed to him. You see even on this talk page someone claiming his role in sikhism, another his importance in Sawarde, Maharashtra.Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 06:38, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As per your request, i have tried to provide quotes. Please check. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 16:15, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That quote definitely clarifies what you mean. But to present the statement 'matsya suggests more tantrik affiliation' makes no sense without the rest of the statement: 'while gorakh implies vedic association'. I think you should impart the whole concept of the quote, because by itself it doesn't make as much sense (it sounds like he is named Matsya because he's a tantric). But in the context of tantric teachings being more associated with the teacher named 'matsya'-fish while vedic teachings from the naths are more associated with 'go'-cow. And then the further explanation that fish is used in tantric ritual while cows are more associated with vedic culture. Ultimately I don't know how necessary a point it is for the article, but it is a nice bit of color. Perhaps it's more appropriate to put on the Nath page. What are your thoughts Ogress?Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 20:52, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As for the statement "Matsyendranath did a lot to bring about social and religious awakening by combining the best in Buddhism and Hinduism" it seems like your source says the exact same thing you did so I can't fault you there. I wonder at the wording (of the original quote) just because it sounds like he was working specifically with elements of Hinduism and Buddhism as a reformer, while the impression from what I've read is that he was a tantrik essentially unconcerned with creeds and developed tantric practices which influenced tantric Hinduism and Buddhism. Like much of medieval yoga it was an amalgamation but not really an intentional synthesis of the two traditions. I would love to hear another editor's opinion on this. ANy thoughts from Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk!? Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 21:06, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is sorry to see that you continue to remove quoted citations. भास्कर् Bhagawati Speak 17:06, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I give an explanation for everything. Almost everything can be readded if you make it fit the article. If you insert statements that lack context or are missing antecedents it becomes unintelligible. The point is to make this article readable and verifiable.
•Some references don't belong where they were put. Don't use a reference that says he was in Kamarupa or teaching in Kamarupa as a citation to say he was born there. Especially when there are already several citations that do say he was born there why do we need one that doesn't actually say that?
•Don't put incomplete statements into the article. If a reference says Matsya alludes to tantric and Gorakh alludes to vedic aspects of Nath praxis, express that whole idea in the article. The fragment you put in implies something more specific and crosses into either misrepresenting or reinterpreting the cited author.
•Everything removed can easily be readded and used, if they are presented accurately and if they add to the article. Things that make it messy and harder to understand, things that are in conflict with their citations, and things that are in the wrong section will be removed. The way to build this article is to edit based on these notes and the edit summaries, not to revert edits or to bellyache about edits on the talk page. Editing is a collaboration here and I have worked hard to keep as much contributed material on this page without leaving it the incomprehensible mess it was when I started.Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 21:16, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Matsyendranath. 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) 02:59, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note to the person using "Kindle Locations" in references

[edit]

Did you know that if you tap your Kindle where it shows the location, it will give you the actual page number? Another method is to highlight the quote, then view "Your Clippings." This will also give you the page numbers. Kindle Locations aren't generally useful and should not be used in references: and only someone with a Kindle who has also purchased the same book can correct them. Please don't use Kindle Locations in references. Thanks! Skyerise (talk) 15:56, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Matsyendranatha&oldid=1207267064"