Talk:Deva (Hinduism)
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Deva (Hinduism) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Untitled
editThere is no way that Zeus is derived from the Latin dios. Fixed.
Untitled
editDoes devas mean shining beings?
Raj2004 15:59, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
- Balvi Riga 2A03:EC00:B17B:74BD:0:0:0:2 (talk) 09:20, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
Yes, the article states this clearly.
False etymologies
editI edited out this text: possibly Greek "theos" and according to some, even English "demon", "devil".
- Greek theos is generally recognised to come from *dhesos.
- English "devil" came via Latin from Greek dia-bolos = "accuser".
- English "demon" came via Latin from Greek daimōn = "divine being".
These words are not derived from the Indo-European root [d-y-w]. Anthony Appleyard 20:57, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
ok, though i do believe Greek is a Indo-european language. but u are otherwise correct. tho ugh theres no way of ruling the theory out completely as of yet.
---Carl
- What about Diva? Seems possibly related. I'd be curious to hear from anyone with educated insight (no gut reaction opinions). -Anon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.223.7.49 (talk) 04:10, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Diva is a feminine form of dio/dios. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.97.116.254 (talk) 17:46, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
Merge Deva (tribe)
editI suggested the merge of Deva (tribe) to here. I am not well versed in the Hindu subjects. Reading the Deva (tribe) page and comparing it with this one makes it appear as if they are the same subject a "mythical tribe". Jeepday 02:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
- Already done! Real96 04:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Tuesday?
editin Etymology row 8 there is the following: "Germanic Tiwaz (seen in English "Tuesday")"
Now im not sure but as i am swedish and also speak a germanic language (like english) i do think our day mean somewhat the same (swedish for tuesday is "Tisdag"). In Swedish this is generally perceived as originally meaning Tyr's Dag-(Day) as the Norse Asar (Aesir) god Tyr (the Norse god of Organized War/Warfare).
This is much likely as most days of the week in Norse languages is named after gods. like: "Onsdag" Odin's Day (Wednesday), "Torsdag" Thor's Day (Thursday), "Fredag" Frei's or Freia's day (Friday).
Though "Mondag" (Monday) is Moon's day, "Söndag" (Sunday) is Sun's day and Lördag (Saturday) is in norse The "Lögar" day which means the day of cleaning or washing.
That takes me to conclude Tuesday as Tyr's day and not the day of the "Tiwaz". but of course i might be wrong. feel free to comment further.
--Carl
I don't know much about the subject of this article (which is why I'm reading it) but I do know that there isn't much difference between the two. Tiwaz is Tyr's rune (for more go to this link Tiwaz rune). But yeah, it did evolve from tiwaz - Say 'Tiwes day' fast together and it sounds like a distorted pronunciation of Tuesday. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.203.45.171 (talk) 02:11, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Bhagavad Gita
editThe perspective shown on the B.G. is purely a Vaishnavite one. It should be a continuation of the previous paragraph.Domsta333 (talk) 10:26, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Edit the Title
editThe title of the article should be Deva rather than Deva (hinduism), because the Devas are not properly Hindu gods, unlike Shiva, Kali or Krishna, they are the gods of the Vedas, and are recognized by Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism as belonging to the older "Vedic" pantheon. The article can however explain their positions in Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism under separate sub-headings. 122.164.29.165 (talk) 07:32, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Make article consistent with article on Asuras
editThis article on Deva (otherwise known as Sura) states that one group of devas are the Adityas, but the article on Asuras says that Adityas are the benevolent subgroup of Asuras. Note: sura and asura. The a- prefix indicates "not" as in clonal, aclonal; cephalic, acephalic; cellular, acellular; capsular, acapsular. So, to say that Adityas are one subgrouping of devas confuses the reader with the information at the Asuras article that states Adityas are a subgrouping of Asuras. I do not believe Adityas are subgroupings of both the Suras (devas) and the Asuras. It seems contradictory, but there are lots of contradictions in these South Asian tradtions/philosophies, so maybe I am wrong and there is some subtlety that I do not understand. 24.189.231.103 (talk) 14:52, 9 August 2022 (UTC)