Talk:Bhagavad Gita As It Is trial in Russia

Hare Krishna vs. Hindu

This is a minor point - but I would like to add that Hare Krishna devotees often reject the term "Hindu" in reference to them - and the founder of their ISKCON movement, Srila Prabhupada, openly rejected it in documented quotes. True, their beliefs are of Gaudiya Vaishnavism which is considered by many to be a branch of Hinduism, but they do not typically identify personally as "Hindu" - thus I had changed the "Hindu followers" section title. I'd also add that many Hare Krishnas in Russia and elsewhere are NOT Indian, so Indian followers is also inaccurate for that section. I had fixed it earlier, but as it has since been changed back, I thought I'd post here. Thanks. --Shruti14 ^{talk • sign} 12:27, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

This is a very complex identity issue. There are black African Hindus, Caribbean Hindus of mixed ethnicity... These are NOT hard and fast issues, or in other words; they are not black and white... An individual can be a black African Hindu, a South American Hindu... These are all a moot point!!! While Srila Prabhupada referred to groups - it does not make his presumed assumptions universal. This issue is not one way - or the other!!! Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 05:11, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Please rename article. Don't perpetuate media sensationalism.

This is not the Bhagavad Gita trial. This is the "Bhagavad Gita As It Is" trial. This article fell into the same trap of media sensationalism. CO2Northeast (talk) 05:21, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

I have renamed the page to correctly identify the book in question. Skullers (talk) 23:26, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I've reverted your renaming to Bhagavad Gita trial in Russia because it is the subject's most common name in WP:RSs, per WP:MOVE#Reasons for moving a page, WP:TITLE and, specifically, WP:COMMONNAME and WP:PRECISE. Please don't rename without consensus. Cinosaur (talk) 23:59, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Even more importantly, WP:POVTITLE states that: "When the subject of an article is referred to mainly by a single common name, as evidenced through usage in a significant majority of English-language reliable sources, Wikipedia generally follows the sources and uses that name as its article title (subject to the other naming criteria). Sometimes that common name will include non-neutral words that Wikipedia normally avoids (e.g. the Boston Massacre or the Teapot Dome scandal). In such cases, the prevalence of the name, or the fact that a given description has effectively become a proper noun (and that proper noun has become the usual term for the event), generally overrides concern that Wikipedia might appear as endorsing one side of an issue". Regard, Cinosaur (talk) 03:06, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I understand all this, but I have to agree that the current title is not neutral. The Bhagavad Gita as it is, is not just like a different translation as the bible, but a very different book when compared to other translations that I read. Andries (talk) 11:01, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Appeal in 2012

• Note The saga continues. I have added this text to the article, "In January of 2012, the prosecutors began to file an appeal in a superior court, and asked for more time." I would appreciate any thought/ideas. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 13:05, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

References

so much stuff written here but what do real indians think about it??

real indians didnt even write an article about it in hindi, they dont care. I can guarantee you this article is 100% written by an indian living in a western country and is upset that russia isnt so multicultural and alienating itself like the west does. Its only european countries which face mass immigration. This article should consider much more what real indians think and not the immigrants living in western countries.--Shokioto22 (talk) 23:25, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Shokioto22, I know for a fact that there've been dozens, if not hundreds, of news, cartoons, comments, and reports on the topic published in Hindi, Marathi, Gujarati, and other Indian languages, and if you know any of them, you're more than welcome to add their content, duly translated into English and referenced, to the article. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 23:57, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

NPOV

The article does not present the position of prosecution or anyone in favor of the ban. It only quotes reactions by the groups outraged by the trail itself. Skullers (talk) 23:55, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

It sure does: here (Tomsk prosecutor's office and experts), here (first deputy prosecutor general and regional prosecutor), and here (religious leaders). ASAIK, most of the statements of those in favor of the ban have been reported in the article. If you're aware of any other notable statements that have been left out, please add them. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 04:00, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

The claim that "Krishna is evil and not conforming to Christian religious view"[1][2] was apparently fabricated in a letter by ISKON's own Governing Body Commissioner. And people buy into this kind of provocation. This is largely portrayed as an attempt to ban "the Gita", "sacred Hindu scriptures", etc. The Bhagavad Gita is not on trial. The work in question is the 3rd edition of the Russian translation of Prabhupada's "Bhagavad Gita as it is". Though ISKON might hold his comments as sacred scripture but it's greatly misleading to equate the two. Skullers (talk) 10:53, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Skullers, what makes you think so? This is exactly what the expert assessment stated. I've read a certified translation of the Russian original, which confirms the veracity of the media reports. Are you interested to look at them (English or Russian), to form a more informed opinion on the matter? Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 12:19, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

On a separate note, most of your recent edits introduce primary sources into the article, thus bordering on original research. They're also redundant, as their purported use here is already taken care of by plenty of reliable and secondary sources. However, I'll move some of those links to the External links section. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 12:31, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with original sources if they state the original claims. The prosecutor's affidavit made no such claims. If you have authentic materials showing otherwise, then go ahead and provide them, not merely state that you've seen them. How exactly are ISKON body commissioner's letter a more reliable source on the prosecutor's claims than his own words? The commissioner is not a reliable source. This has not been reported by anybody else and is a ridiculous thing to claim. Skullers (talk) 21:13, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Still nothing on that quote. Web searches bring nothing except copies of those two articles and of this very page. One of them only states "A copy of the letter is with IANS." This would be a serious distortion as there is nothing else to WP:V-erify it. Skullers (talk) 04:50, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what verification you're asking for and what you call "serious distortion". The two newspapers cited are WP:RSs by all considerations, as is IANS one of them is quoting. Remember that, per WP:V, Verifiability, and not truth, is one of the fundamental requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia. This means that if there is a statement in a reliable source (which they are), and the reliable source is accessible (which they are), we're justified to cite the statement without holding it to a "truth test". The article follows this principle. I'm removing your verification tag. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 07:51, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm talking about the Commisioner's exceptional claims with regards to the assessment. He ain't exactly Switzerland if you know what I mean. Surely someone else would have reported on such scandalous statements! Their placement gives WP:UNDUE weight to this "letter" in IANS' possession. Is the letter publically available? I'm moving him to the appropriate section. Skullers (talk) 10:33, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

The "instigated by the FSB" is scaremongering due to its image in the west, attempting to give this some kind of clandestine character. There's nothing special about the feds' involvement considering this involves a federal issue. "The prosecutor's office even included a note from the local Federal Security Service office, listing the address of the Tomsk bookstore where the book could be purchased."[3] And? He referenced information relevant to the trial. This means the Chirch conspired with the FSB in order to suppress religious minorities? Skullers (talk) 21:53, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Scape-mongering or not, it's what the WP:RSs reported, and the article reflects that. Anything other than this will be WP:OR or WP:UNDUE. Can we remove the NPOV template now? Cinosaur (talk) 00:26, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

The sources cited[4][5] in no way support the statement as it was written. The only instance of "the FSB" mentions a note included by the prosecutor. ISKCON's prior disputes with the local church are known, however, and should be covered in the text. The sentence as written constitutes WP:ORIGINALSYNthesis and WP:POVPUSHing. Skullers (talk) 02:42, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out the insufficiency of the sources quoted. Added another one, analyzing the FSB and Church involvement in depth. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 04:06, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Comment - The way forward would be to include sources that are reliable that represent prosecution view. Obviously there are sources that have a slant toward the prosecutors, and it is a good idea to add them. Just be bold and add sources, unless there are no sources that are acceptable. However first the most common view is to be presented, which is obviously not the view of prosecutors, and is the view of both judges.Wikid^as© 07:30, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Update needed per June 21, 2012

• Note

Per the Indo-Asian News Service please see Russian Hare Krishna Movement to be Rathyatra theme "The decision to glorify 'Hare Krishna Movement' in Russia comes months after Hindus in Russia won a major legal battle after a court in Siberia dismissed a state prosecutor's case seeking a ban on a Russian translation of the Bhagavad Gita."

Per the New York Daily News please see Mamata inaugurates Ratha Yatra "West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee tugged the rope of the chariots of Lord Jagannath, Balaram and Subhadra to throw open the annual Rath Yatra (chariot festival) here Thursday. Organised by the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), the procession with the deities atop three chariots began from Park Circus Maidan of south Kolkata to reach the Brigade Parade Ground in the central part of the city. The theme for this year's Rath Yatra which marks the annual journey of the three deities, from their abode to their aunt's house, is the Hare Krishna Movement in Russia."

Per the Times of India please see CM Mamta Banerjee to inaugurate Iskcon Rath Yatra on June 21 "International society for Krishna Consciousness (Iskcon) will organise the 41st Kolkata Rath Yatra on June 21; the theme for the festival being Rath Yatra 2012 is "Hare Krishna's in Russia". "We decided on this theme to highlight the wonderful Russian Vaishnava's and their glorious struggle for Krishna Bhakti, we decided to broadcast their glories through this year's Kolkata Rath Yatra. We ask everyone to join Russian devotees in glorifying Lord Jagannath," said general manager Iskcon Radharaman Das."

Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 14:25, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

And per the Times of India please see Rath Yatra gets a Russian flavour in Kolkata. "The Rath Yatra of Lord Jagannath was celebrated with gaiety and fervour on Thursday in the city. International Society for Krishna Consciousness (Iskcon) organised its 41st Kolkata Rath Yatra with the theme of 'Hare Krishna movement in Russia.'" - I will look into adding info about this, if now one else does. I think a few sentences should suffice. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 22:53, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Additional sources

Along the same line as Ism schism above, I'll post here these links hoping that myself or some other willing editors will soon have time to sift through them and add to the article whatever is of substance and relevance that is not already there to make the article's treatment of the subject balanced and comprehensive. Some of them might have already been cited here, but I just don't have the time to check. Here it goes:

• TOI: Iskcon Guwahati reacts to Gita ban attempt
• TOI: VHP, Iskcon to fight against ban attempt on Gita
• TOI: Gita controversy in Russia decoded
• TOI: The Gita on trial
• TOI: Russian court refuses to ban Bhagvad Gita, followers cheer across the world
• TOI: Udupi clergy responds to the trial
• TOI ET: Atheists, rationalists oppose ban on Bhagwat Gita
• TOI ET: India's stand on 'ban Gita' case in Russia vindicated: Government
• TOI: How can you ban an idea?
• HT: Russian court rejects Gita ban
• HT: Facing 'ban Gita' case, Hindus build Krishna temple in Moscow
• HT: Russian court rejects Gita ban
• RIR: Tomsk court rejects bid to ban “Bhagavad-Gita”
• HINDU: India urges Russia to drop case against Gita translation
• HINDU: Rajan Zed hails Russian court’s ruling on Gita
• HINDU: Siberian court throws out case against Gita commentary
• Indian Express: The Gita and the Manifesto
• Indian Express: Russia’s rendezvous with Hinduism
• Reuters: Russian court rejects call to ban Bhagavad Gita
• Reuters: Russian court rejects call to ban Hindu holy book Bhagavad Gita
• DNA: We was targeted due to our conspicuousness: Moscow Iskcon head
• DNA: India helped win Gita case: Iskcon
• DNA: Bangalroe: Outrage over Russian move to ban Gita
• Daily Pioneer: Anxiety grips Hindus in Russia; prosecutors pursue 'Ban Gita' case
• Daily Pioneer: Triumph of dharma
• India Today: Russian court dismisses ban plea on Gita rendition
• India Today: Russian court dismisses petition seeking ban on Bhagavad Gita
• MWS News: Ban on Bhagavad Gita in Russia
• Rediff: Bhagavad Gita ban: Three views, three solutions
• IBNLive: BJP Punjab unit expresses outrage over Gita row in Russia
• Zee News: Iskcon monks cheer Gita verdict in Russia
• News Track: Dismissal of plea banning Bhagvad Gita makes Kolkata devotees dance
• NDTV: Indian legal eagles to battle 'ban Gita' move in Russia
• RAPSI: Bhagavad Gita case perplex scientists
• RAPSI: Scholars to set up independent expert commission on extremism*Bhagavad Gita to be judged by scholars, not judges - ombudsman
• NYT: ‘As It Is’ Focus of Bhagavad Gita Trial
• Turkish Weekly: Bhagavad Gita Texts Up for Experts to Judge - Russian Ombudsman
• RIA: Bhagavad Gita Texts Up for Experts to Judge - Russian Ombudsman

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Bhagavad Gita trial in Russia. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111220151557/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Parliament-ruckus-over-Bhagvad-Gita-facing-ban-in-Russia/articleshow/11166214.cms to http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Parliament-ruckus-over-Bhagvad-Gita%0A-facing-ban-in-Russia/articleshow/11166214.cms

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

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:52, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Bhagavad Gita trial in Russia. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/russian-court-to-consider-ban-on-key-text-of-hare-krishna-movement/2011/12/28/gIQA1GUgLP_story.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111220143222/http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Declare-Bhagavad-Gita-as-national-book-demands-BJP/Article1-784744.aspx to http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Declare-Bhagavad-Gita-as-national-book-demands-BJP/Article1-784744.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120108011714/http://www.thestatesman.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=393903&catid=36 to http://www.thestatesman.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=393903&catid=36
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/russian-court-to-consider-ban-on-key-text-of-hare-krishna-movement/2011/12/28/gIQA1GUgLP_story.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://indiatoday.intoday.in/video/bhagvad-gita-ban-russia-lok-sabha/1/164945.html

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) 09:35, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Article title

I renamed the article, Reason: the previous title is sensationalist POV pushing. The Bhagavad Gita itself was neither tried nor banned. There are numerous bhavadgita texts in russian you can easily buy. On trial was a particular translation, in which not the text, but translators' commentaries were found inciting. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:57, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Not to say that everybody knows that in fact the case is about iskcon, not gita, which is indirectly reflected in the correct title. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:03, 23 April 2018 (UTC)