Talk:Āśrama (stage)

Concept of Ashramas obsolete & order of four aims of life

The first external link, The Four Ashrams clearly says that Today, only a few Hindus strictly follow all these four ashrams. Hence the edit to the lead. Secondly, the order of the four aims of life was wrong. The previous version noted Kama (pleasure, passions, emotions, drives) before the other aims of life. This makes it appear that the primary aim of life of a Hindu is sensual pleasure. This is not so. The correct order (as given in Hindu scriptures) is the way it is now in the article. It appears that "Kama" was mentioned first with malicious intent, and in order to bring disrepute to Hindus. That is why I have corrected the order of the four aims of life.Civilizededucation (talk) 07:08, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Requested move 29 January 2017

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. On the one hand, I tend to agree with nom and Cuchullain that it ought to be a no-brainer primarytopic move since the target already redirects to it, just loses the unnecessary disambiguation. On the other hand, several are opposing this, and there is no discussion of the history of why the page Ashrama (disambiguation) got deleted in December; some explanation might help other editors see what's going on and express an opinion one way or the other, so if more info is forthcoming, try again; or let me know that you have something useful to add and I'll revert my close and relist it. (non-admin closure) Dicklyon (talk) 05:45, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

---

Ashrama (stage) → Ashrama – AFAICS, this is the only article called Ashrama. For those called Ashram, there's a dab available. The Evil IP address (talk) 11:13, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose. We already have a redirect for Ashrama. Ashram and Ashrama is and will be confusing. It would also not meet MOS, which states, "A title should be a recognizable name or description of the topic that is natural, sufficiently precise, concise, and consistent with the titles of related articles." Most reader will not know if they have the right article if two articles were titled Ashram and Ashrama. Ashrama (stage) is helpful title, therefore better. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 12:24, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
• Leaning to oppose Ashrama seems also to be used for buildings. I'm not sure why, until this RM I had only heard of ashrama as ashrama (stage of life), but then आश्रम and आश्रम are the same word in Hindi. In ictu oculi (talk) 20:53, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
• Support. Base name Ashrama already redirects here. I see no evidence that any other topic challenges this as primary topic of "Ashrama" with an a.--Cúchullain ^t/c 23:13, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 3 March 2017

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Not moved at this time. We have a knotty problem. There is no consensus for this move because there is objection to the proposition that there is a primary topic for the term. The alternative proposition of redirecting Ashrama to Ashram (disambiguation) is objected to on the basis that it would lead to a non-parenthetical title redirecting to a "Foo (disambiguation)" title. However, it remains equally incorrect for a base title name to redirect to a parenthetical title. The remaining option, as suggested by Cúchullain, is to turn Ashrama into a disambiguation page, which I will do now. bd2412 T 03:27, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Ashrama (stage) → Ashrama – We need to revisit this, as the status quo isn't workable: The base name Ashrama redirects to this article, and has for 10 years. Base names should never redirect to a disambiguated name; the disambiguation is pointless, as anyone who clicks the base name ends up here anyway. Moreover, while there's a hat note to Ashram (disambiguation) (minus the second "a"), none of the other topics are commonly known in English as "Ashrama". Any confusion can be better sorted out with hat notes than wonky current system. Cúchullain ^t/c 14:35, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Comment, @Cuchullain: Why not have Ashrama and Ashram both redirect to Ashram (disambiguation), and move Ashram to Ashram (hermitage)? Would that be clearer, and address your concerns? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 15:06, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

• "Ashrama" could redirect to "Ashram", but I don't see any evidence that anything else is frequently called "Ashrama" in English. The WP:SMALLDETAILS of the second "a" distinguishes it well enough (and has for 10 years). But if this RM fails, then yes, "Ashrama" should be directed to the dab page, as it's not kosher to have it redirecting to a disambiguated title. As for Ashram, it shouldn't be moved unless there's evidence it's not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of the name, but that's a separate discussion.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:24, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

• Ashram(a) = आश्रम has two meanings: hermitage and life stage. Both usage are found in WP:RS. For example, see Encyclopedia of Monasticism: A-L at page 94, where it has both meanings, and ashrama too is discussed. See Monier-Williams Sanskrit-English Etymology Dictionary too. The move you propose, repeats the proposal from few weeks ago, which technically failed. The above compromise might address your concerns, while reflect the dual usage in publications and the vowel-consonant rules of Sanskrit. I remain open to alternate ideas that are consistent with WP:RS. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 15:48, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

The last RM closed as "no consensus", and frankly shouldn't have been closed leaving a base name redirecting to a disambiguated name (it was closed by a non-admin). To address your point, this encyclopedia uses the term "Ashrama" only for this subject, the four stages. The Sanskrit word may be the same, but English use differs in this and other sources.--Cúchullain ^t/c 16:22, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

@Cúchullain: Respectfully, I believe you may have missed or are misreading the source (this encyclopedia which I linked above). The first para clearly explains Ashram has two meanings, one of which is a life stage. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 16:39, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

It does, but the question isn't over the term "Ashram", it's over "Ashrama", and that source (and others) only use it for what this article covers. But yes, if substantial numbers of other sources use "ashrama" for the hermitage, then it's probably ambiguous, though I'm not seeing strong evidence for that.--Cúchullain ^t/c 17:27, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

For "Ashrama" = hermitage, please see this (page 123 last line), this, this, etc. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:42, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose again. Please see the discussion from few weeks ago, and above compromise proposal discussion. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 15:48, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
• Support per nom. This seems like the primary topic, and undisambiguated names shouldn't redirect to disambiguated ones; that means there's no ambiguity, so the undisambiguated title can safely be occupied. Nohomersryan (talk) 16:35, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

• The issue isn't disamb guideline about which Cuchullain and you are right, the issue is that the two words are related, spelled same and discussed as one in the RS. It is not the primary topic. See this starting with ninth line of the middle column of page 158. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 16:58, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose again it's a highly unusual situation, I can't think of a similar one, but that doesn't change that आश्रम ashram/ashrama and आश्रम ashram/ashrama are the same word with two meanings. It isn't Wikipedia's job to create a distinction in English by spelling one without an -a, one with an -a. The present situation works fine by confirming readers have got what they were looking for. Everyone wins. In ictu oculi (talk) 19:24, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

To repeat, the present situation with base name "Ashrama" redirecting to a disambiguated title is not acceptable. Either this article is the primary topic for "Ashrama", and moves there, or it's not and "Ashrama" points to disambiguation.--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:41, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

"not acceptable"? Well them Ashrama should point to disambiguation, since it is ambiguous. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:15, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

• Support per nom. I've read the discussion here thus far, and the previous discussion. Ashram/ashrama are two distinct words. It's not our job to treat them as if they're conflated. WP:TITLE trumps WP:MOS. The fact that Ashrama redirects here demonstrates there is no other use of it. The purpose of disambiguation is disambiguation, not to make a title more recognizable. There is no need for disambiguation here. The need for a more recognizable title is arguable at best, and certainly not supported by policy. Think about it: almost any title can be made "more recognizable" with additional parenthetic information in the title - that's an untenable reason to prefer one title over another. That's why WP:CRITERIA for many years set an implicit and albeit subjective limit on recognizability (as long as anyone familiar with the topic could recognize it, the criterion was met). In this case anyone familiar with Ashrama would recognize the topic of this article from its title - so it meets the recognizability criterion. That's why, in general, with few if any exceptions, any [[name]] that redirects to [[name (something)]], as is the case here, is cause for change. --В²C ☎ 19:41, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Except that this isn't the case. In ictu oculi (talk) 19:46, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

IIO, you're toying with alternative facts. Of course this is the case. Ashrama redirects here, to Ashrama (stage). That is a case of "[[name]] that redirects to [[name (something)]]". You can't seriously dispute this. --В²C ☎ 20:27, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

"toying with the facts" sounds very much like a personal attack. I'm assuming you don't know Hindi/Sanskrit or much about Hinduism Buddhism but this is no obstacle to you talking like this to people who do? In ictu oculi (talk) 22:17, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

To be fair, Ms Sarah Welch provided sources showing that "Ashrama" is sometimes used for Ashram in English. I'm not convinced that this occurs enough (in English) to challenge the ashrama stages as primary topic, as it seems that most sources I've looked only use "ashrama" for the latter.--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:41, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

A part of the complication is that the Ashram article is neither reasonably complete nor an npov summary of the reliable sources. @In ictu oculi: spot on. @Cúchullain and @B2C: You make good points, but two wrongs don't make a right. This is, as @In ictu oculi puts it, a highly unusual situation. Lets meditate on it a bit. Perhaps we should merge the two articles, or perhaps we should have a section in both articles that discuss with RS, the alternate spelling and confusion. Something is not quite right here. Thanks @Cúchullain for raising this discussion again!! Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 21:48, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Olivelle, P. (1993): The Āśrama System. The History and Hermeneutics of a Religious Institution, Oxford University Press, p. 16-18:

Ancient Indian literature reveals two meanings of the term āśrama. The first is that of a residence where holy people live and perform religious austerities. When it refers to such a residence, the term is commonly translated as "hermitage." This is by far its most common meaning; it is so used in Brāhmaṇical, Buddhist, and Jain literary sources, as well as in what might be called non-religious texts such as drama, poetry, and fables. The second meaning of the term is that of a religious or holy way of life. The latter is, in all likelihood, a technical usage, as it occurs exclusively in Brāhmaṇical literature and mainly within the context of the āśrama system.

[...]

Āśrama, we may conclude, refers to religious exertion. The term, however, is used in ancient Indian literature with two distinct but related meanings: it refers to both a residence for and a mode of life devoted to religious exertion. Which of these is the root meaning from which the other is derived? Winternitz (1926, 227) gives priority to the latter:

The word āśrama (from the same root śram as śramaṇa) probably denoted at first "the religious exertion" of śramaṇas, ascetics and forest dwellers, and consequently it also received the meaning "place for religious exertion," "hermitage."

Sharma (1939,14) agrees with Winternitz. Sprockhoff also gives priority to a mode of life. According to him, however, the term originally referred to the life of a householder, and he strongly—and properly—objects to Winternitz's association of āśrama with the life of śramaṇas.

The evidence, however, appears to point the other way; the more basic meaning of āśrama, I believe, is that of a residence for religious exertion. The term is used with reference to a mode of life mainly within the confines of the āśrama system. The latter should be regarded, therefore, as a technical use. When the term is used outside that context it invariably refers to a residence. In the Bṛhaddevatā (5.64; 6.99), in the Gopatha Brāhmaṇa (l.2.8), and with great frequency in the two epics and in Sanskrit belles lettres and fables, the term is used with reference to the residence of a special type of Brahmin. This, moreover, is the only meaning of the term in all non-Brāhmaṇical literature, including the Pāli Canon. It is difficult to see how such a common and broad use of the term could have been derived from its more technical and narrow use. The presumption clearly has to be that the latter must be a secondary and derived meaning.

BoH (talk) 22:35, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

@BoH: Indeed. Thanks, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 00:47, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

• Comment from nominator: It appears that "Ashrama" is more widely used in English for ashram than I anticipated. While the current status quo remains unworkable, it may be best to either turn ashrama into a dab page or point it to the similar dab page Ashram (disambiguation).--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:02, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

@Cuchullain: That is along the lines I am thinking. Per the lead section of WP:D (see Mercury examples), and WP:2DABS, Ashrama (stage) and Ashram (hermitage) may be our "least bad" choices. I am okay with either disamb pages or hat. Of course, we need to add a section in both articles to clarify these alternate meanings and their historical link, citing reliable sources. It is on my to do list, but hopefully someone will save me the time and effort. @In ictu oculi:, @Others: any additional suggestions? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 14:32, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

@Ms Sarah Welch: it would seem clear that even if Ashram suggests first the building or event 90/10, Ashrama is ambiguous - split about 60/40. Under those circumstances further clarification is needed more for Ashrama (stage) than for Ashram (hermitage). Ashrama could be a dab page with Ashram (disambiguation) directing to the Ashrama dab page? In ictu oculi (talk) 15:54, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Ashram (disambiguation) shouldn't be moved to Ashrama, since most of the items on there are "Ashram" rather than "Ashrama". But "Ashrama" could redirect to it, or be made its own dab page, since most people looking for "Ashrama" will want one of these two topics and not Ashram (band), for instance.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:17, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks In ictu oculi and Cúchullain. I agree with you, and we seem pretty close to consensus here. Let us give others a week or two to suggest anything else, so we can avoid having to go through this again. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 23:21, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose. Ashrama when used in English commonly denotes "hermitage" (today, more precisely, a "religious establishment led by a guru", as Ashrama is primarily an organisation, not just buildings). The spelling with a trailing a is preferred among the Sanskrit-oriented groups and by establishments of an academic rather than purely religious character (e.g., Advaita Ashrama[1]). On the other hand, the meaning "stage of life", a technical term related to a certain concept in Hinduism, is used more narrowly these days, mostly in technical literature. Unlike "hermitage", it remains largely unknown to an average Hindi speaker today. In my view, it should not be placed as primary term over "hermitage". So, I am in favour of having Ashram(a) as the primary topic for "hermitage" (with alternative spelling redirecting to the other) and keeping Ashrama (stage) the way it is. Hatnotes should be placed on both articles for clarity. — kashmiri ^TALK 11:00, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
• Comment from nominator: in the interest of moving this forward, I'll reiterate that I support the alternate suggestion, supported by other participants, of redirecting Ashrama to Ashram (disambiguation). We do have evidence that the term "Ashrama" is ambiguous in English between "Ashram" hermitages and this use.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:40, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ashrama (stage). 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150125224425/http://www.hinduism.co.za/pravritt.htm to http://www.hinduism.co.za/pravritt.htm

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) 13:14, 10 July 2017 (UTC)