Talk:Ganesha in world religions

Untitled

The picture added by another editor

File:Yhst-40343108707036 1937 1014321.jpg

Tibetan statue of Ganesha

appears to be a picture of modern Indian statue of a particular form of Ganesha known as Vira Ganesha, distinguishable by having 16 arms. It is one of the 32 standard iconographic forms for Ganesha described in the Sritattvanidhi. The image is not of Tibetan style and the picture was probably copied from a commercial web site selling the statue. A line drawing of Vira Ganapati showing the same form as used in this modern statue is at this web site. At that web site, look at picture number 4, which is Vira Ganapati. Here is a link to another web site selling a very similar statue. Here is a link to yet another store selling a similar statue.

According to the analysis of iconographical variants of Ganesha images given by Shanti Lal Nagar in Cult of Vinayaka, Appendix I, pp. 191-195, the only known form with 16 arms is Vira Ganapati. That is, the number of arms can be considered diagnostic for this form. Buddhipriya 20:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu

Preoccupation with this idea has shown up before in postings by socks of Maleabroad, e.g., this diff by the sock "Draft1" and this diff by the sock "Spectra01". Interesting that it is coming up here from "Randomatom001". Buddhipriya 21:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Name change

I think "outside Hinduism" is most accurate. Tibetan Buddhism, for example, is not longer outside India. Dharamsala, the seat of the Tibetan govt. in exile, is in India, and so much of the worship of Ganesha in Tibetan Buddhism actually takes place within the boundaries of India. I am not sure what "beyond" was supposed to mean in the context of the title. It gives the idea of an evolution or improvement, which would not be NPOV. Outside is most succinct. I'm open to other suggestions, but I don't see how one could be more accurate and succinct than the current title, except to merge the material back into the main article. On that point, this article needs a lead section. IPSOS (talk) 13:45, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree that finding the right name for this is not easy. This is the second name change it has had so far and probably will not be the last. There are two issues that I see:

• Ganesha worship in faiths other than Hinduism, e.g., Buddhism
• Ganesha worship by Hindus outside of India

Any attempt to get all of this into one long name might result in: "Ganesha outside India and/or by people other than Hindus" which seems a bit much. The big problem I see with the article is not really the title, but that the sourcing is a bit weak. It does have some nice pictures, however, and the idea of a page like this is great. Buddhipriya 04:28, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

The latter should be in the main article, as it is still within Hinduism. Or there should be two articles: this one and one on that topic. When you put two unrelated things into one article, it become impossible to title. IPSOS (talk) 04:32, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

The point about the second point going into the main article is not bad, and we are currently doing a major copyedit of Ganesha. We mention geographical scope briefly now but it could be slightly expanded. That would allow the scope of this to be more clearly on "Ganesha in religions other than Hinduism", with wording either as now, or whatever. A problem, however, is that the Ganesha article is already at a length to which we are moving things out of it to subarticles. A major change is being done by another copyeditor in the next couple of days. The topic of worship of Ganesha by Hindus in countries other than India could potentially be a separate article if it were done well, and properly sourced. So that is the argument against relying on the main article for that. Much of the interest of the subject comes in the artwork and different concept of Ganesha, which is so different from the Hindu model that is the core subject of the mainline article, it really needs to be in a specialty location. There is probably more than one way to solve this, but that is the reason for the previous title. Buddhipriya 04:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, they may seem related enough to go into one article, but they are not. The difficulty titling such an amalgam is a clear indication of the same. IPSOS (talk) 04:58, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Please check reference

The following sentence is not supported by page 257 of my edition of this book (First Edition, 1996, ISBN 0-945497-64-4), as the pages in that range deal with Ganesha home liturgy. Can you provide a citation for the edition you are using? I think the statement is true, but the reference check is the problem. In the article see: "While we do not find temples dedicated specifically to Gaṇeśa, He is found in every Śiva shrine throughout the islands. Referenced in the article by: Loving Gaṇeśa: Hinduism's Endearing Elephant-Faced God By Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami, Subramuniya, P. 257. Buddhipriya 19:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

srry, the page was 287. --Redtigerxyz 13:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:KANGITEN.jpg

Image:KANGITEN.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 07:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

rationale provided.--Redtigerxyz 08:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:GaneshRupiyah.jpg

Image:GaneshRupiyah.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:26, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

The reference to Jains is unnecessary as their pantheon has many Hindu gods, just as Sikhs have. I have read about South American Ganpati like images or figures or paintings. That would have been an interesting addition. Another angle could have been Ganesha and Hindu-Parsi syncretism.[1]and the cultural nature of Ganesh Utsav.[2]Yogesh Khandke (talk) 05:18, 23 October 2009 (UTC) 05:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Songs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79qWATj-bz4&NR=1

--88.75.220.156 (talk) 20:01, 26 April 2010 (UTC)