BS Murthy

Hi BSMurthy, welcome to Wikipedia, but please do not create articles that simply advertise your own work. I've redirected your article to Bhagavad Gita. Lukas 12:46, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted your edits to the article Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy as Wikipedia does not allow original research, I have also removed the essay from your talk page since talk pages are not the proper place to host your essay. If you have any questions about this please feel free to leave a note on my talk page. Jtkiefer^{T | C | @} ---- 03:23, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Dear Editor:

I see the texts of many transltions of Bhagvad-Gita on Wikipedia.

I would be pleased to make my published work "Bhagvad-Gita: treatise of self-help" a sloka to sloka transcreation in English verse with codification of interpolations, for the first time ever.

If you are agreeable please let me know how can I upload the full text of my book together with the introduction "Awe Unfounded" and "All About interpolations".

With regards,

BS Murthy

Dear BS Murthy,

sorry for the late reply, but I'm not very active here these days. I'm afraid there've been some misunderstandings on your part. First, I do not in any way "coordinate" editing on the Bhagvad-Gita; in fact, I don't know hardly anything about that topic. Second, I'm afraid there's no way you could include that work of yours in Wikipedia. Please see our policies on "No original research" and "What Wikipedia is not". Thank you, Lukas ^(T.|@) 17:02, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

May 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Bhagavad Gita are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. Abecedare (talk) 06:35, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Bhagavad Gita essay

I noticed that you copied your essay on Bhagvad Gita on several wikipedia pages. Unfortunately, wikipedia does not appear to be the right venue for quoting or discussing this article. Wikipedia is a project to write an encyclopedia (i.e., a tertiary source), which summarizes what reliable sources say about a topic. For Bhagvad Gita, the category of reliable sources will mainly consist of books and peer-reviewed articles written by established academic or religious scholars, and published by reputable publishers.
Please let us know if your essay has been published in a scholarly journal or collection, and we can discuss at Talk:Bhagavad Gita whether it is central enough to the subject to be cited in the article. If it hasn't been published yet, then you should submit it to a academic journal first, and if it is published we can reexamine the case for inclusion. Hope that makes the issue clearer. Regards. Abecedare (talk) 05:55, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Dear Mr.Abecedare: 'Mundane distortions in the divine discourse'was first published in the Jan-Mar 2009 issue of Triveni, India's literary and cultural quarterly being published since 1928. You can access the back issues of the journal up to Oct-Dec 2008 at the website of Sri Yabaluri Raghaviah Memorial Trust and maybe in a few days the Jan-Mar2009 issue in which my article was published would be available for your perusal. The said article was also carried out in the Indian Book Chronicle, January 2009. Apart from the above cited Indian journals,my article is published in advaita.org.uk, an authentic site for Advaita philosophy. Hope you would like to reexamine my case for the inclusion of the article in your project. Regards, BS Murthy

Thanks for that information. I have browsed through the advaita.org.uk version of the article, and look forward to reading the Triveni version once it is available online. Your attempt to identify the interpolated verses in BG is interesting and points to an aspect of Gita studies that the current wikipedia article is missing. As I recall, there are several opinions and arguments regarding, (1) whether the BG is an integral part of MbH, and (2) identifying the various stages in which the text developed and the verses (and, even philosophical ideas) that were later interpolation. Of course, we cannot go into all the details of the various arguments in the Bhagavad Gita article, which needs to summarize a humongous amount of literature related to BG. However we need to at least point out to the reader in 2-3 sentences that such hypotheses exist.

I suggest that we continue this discussion on the talkpage of the article so that other interested editors can join in if they wish. The next step would be to collect the best available references that either propound, or ideally summarize, the various theories on the subject, before crafting the language to be added to the article itself. I'll try to look up references in the next few 1-2 days, and will list the citations I find on the article talk page. Since you have studied these questions and presumably are familiar with the literature on this topic, your help in gathering the references will be appreciated. Regards.

PS: I'll drop a note below on how one can easily sign and date ones post on article talk pages. You can read more on the use of wikipedia talk pages at WP:TPG Abecedare (talk) 12:05, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Dear Mr.Abecedare: Thank you very much for agreeing to carry forward the discussion. The text of the article carried by advaita.org.com (Part II to follow) is the same as the one earlier published in the Triveni. It is not a discussion regarding the Gita’s antiquity or about its being an integral part or otherwise of Mahabharata. It is but an analysis of the content of the 700 +0 verse-text to pin down the deviant by the yardstick of the philosophy that the Gita postulates besides spotting the digressive that break the continuity of the discourse. But for Sir Edwin Arnold who dubbed s23-s27 of ch.8 as the ranting of some vedanti which he excluded from his century old ‘Song Celestial, there is no known attempt to identify much less codify the interpolations that most concede to exist in the Gita. I was inspired by this Arnoldian approach to probe the Gita for further fault lines that resulted in my Bhagvad-Gita: treatise of self-help sans hundred and ten interpolations in the end. The general tendency to take the Gita ‘As it Is’ can be attributed to the possibility that while the Indian translators/interpreters tend to accord a measure of sacredness to it, the Westerners who worked on it confined themselves with the philosophical aspects of the work and being unfamiliar with the apathy of the underprivileged castes towards these interpolations cannot be expected to delve deep into them. Ridden of the interpolations of deviant nature or of partisan character, the source of so much misunderstanding about this pristine philosophical work in certain sections of the Hindu fold, in the long run, my Bhagvad-gita: treatise of self-help is bound to bring in new readers from the majority of the Hindus who tend to keep away from it owing to the alleged sanction of the inimical caste system by Lord Krishna himself. While one can appreciate the genesis of the interpolations and understand the methodology of codification of hundred and ten interpolations in the introductory pages of my Bhagvad-Gita: treatise of self-help in contemporary idiom, the integrity of the philosophy can be grasped in the remaining 591 free-flowing verses. The text of my work can be accessed at Vedanta Spiritual Library besides gatewayforindia.com, which hosts an audio of the same. I request you to go through my work to be able to appreciate the veracity of my averments. BS Murthy (talk) 15:21, 6 May 2010 (UTC) BS Murthy

I had raised the topic of BG's integrality in MbH because I thought the wikipedia article didn't mention that (I realized that your article is not on that subject). However, now I see that the wikipedia article does have a sentence covering that issue, so for now we can focus on the various theories on BG's expansion/interpolation. Humboldt seems to be the first modern scholar to raise this question and in the ~2 centuries since then numerous other scholars have opined on it. I have listed a few books dedicated to the topic on the article talkpage and we can continue the discussion there. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 16:45, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Signing talk page comments

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. Abecedare (talk) 12:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

File: Onto the Stage - Slighted Souls and other stage plays.pdf and others

Hi, User:BS Murthy, are you the author of these? They need to be categorized. Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 09:14, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Lotje I'm pleased to confirm that I'm the author of Onto the Stage - Slighted Souls and other stage plays, which is part of my body of work of eleven books, the others being, Benign Flame: Saga of Love, Jewel-less Crown: Saga of Life, Crossing the Mirage – Passing through youth Glaring Shadow - A stream of consciousness novel, Prey on the Prowl – A Crime Novel, Of No Avail: Web of Wedlock (a novella), Stories Varied – A Book of Short Stories, Puppets of Faith: Theory of Communal Strife (Non-fiction), Bhagvad-Gita: Treatise of self – help (A translation in verse) and Sundara Kãnda - Hanuman’s Odyssey (A translation in verse). May know that but for Of No Avail: Web of Wedlock in Amazon Kindle, the rest of my books are available as free ebooks in a number of sites https://g.co/kgs/gXe7ca. Regards, User:BS Murthy

Bhagvad-Gita: treatise of self-help - transcreative verse with codification of interpolations - BS Murthy listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Bhagvad-Gita: treatise of self-help - transcreative verse with codification of interpolations - BS Murthy. Since you had some involvement with the Bhagvad-Gita: treatise of self-help - transcreative verse with codification of interpolations - BS Murthy redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:38, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

[[Hi, I'm pleased to inform you that I have made a detailed submission about my work in the Bhagvad Gita article talk page that you may like to go through https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bhagavad_Gita#Interpolations_in_BG Regards, BS Murthy]]

External links

Some of these links are inappropriate and are being duplicated — but more importantly, you are adding them incorrectly as refs. El_C 10:23, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

---

Also, regarding Template:Bhagvad-Gita: Treatise of Self -help in verses sans 110 interpolations by BS Murthy — I deleted it as a test page, but now I see that you've recreated Bhagvad-Gita: treatise of self-help - transcreative verse with codification of interpolations - BS Murthy multiple times. Signing your name, too? What gives? El_C 10:29, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

---

Hello, are you reading these messages? Please stop. El_C 10:40, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Bhagvad Gita Treatise Of Self Help By BS Murthy

If this was the first article that you created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

The page Template:Bhagvad Gita Treatise Of Self Help By BS Murthy has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appeared to be a direct copy from https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11857512-bhagvad-gita-treatise-of-self-help. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition has been be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review — Diannaa (talk) 20:21, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Replying to your email. We need to have documentation that shows the copyright holders have given permission for the material to be copied to this website. Wikipedia has procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa (talk) 10:47, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Dear Ms. Diannaa: I invite your attention to the above discussions between Abecedare and me regarding Bhagvad-Gita: Treatise of Self-help sans inane interpolations. As you can gather from therein, somehow the momentum was lost till you picked it up again on 14 April 2020 and my subsequent listing of the said book, after furnishing my copyright to you, under the External Links was deleted by some other editor, vexed by which, I too gave up. Since, it is too important an issue, I would like to pursue it afresh to inform you that the said work has been accorded the pride of place at the Great Books and Classics site among the Gita's translations, that is over and above Sir Edwin Arnold's timeless The Song Celestial http://www.grtbooks.com/HinduTexts/Bhagavad-Gita.asp?aa=TE&at=BH&yr=-400 Wikipedia editors may also know that I've placed my book as free ebook at 1_Internet Archive https://archive.org/details/BhagvadGitaTreatiseOfSelfHelpByBSMurthy 2_ Google Books https://books.google.co.in/books/about/Bhagvad_Gita_Treatise_of_Self_help.html?id=zRrWDwAAQBAJ&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y 3_ Holybooks https://holybooks.com/bhagvad-gita-treatise-of-self-help/ to name only a few and the umpteen other sites in which it is available can be seen from its Google page https://g.co/kgs/KDP5sh I'm sure the above more than establish that I'm the copyright holder of this book bearing ISBN 81-901911-0-1. However, to further convince Wiki editors I've mailed the relevant document indicating the ISBN Nos of this and my other books to permissions-en@wikimedia.org Hope you would take forward the issue to its logical conclusion of its inclusion in Wikipedia's the Bhagavad-Gita page. Best regards, BS Murthy

January 2021

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 13:24, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi MrOllie, I appreciate your contention that "links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product" are inappropriate for one to include. You may also realize that Wiki editors too should look for significant new works to update / enlarge the scope of the subject matter but as you can see from my above post, sadly, they are stubbornly closed to my work that throws fresh light on the Gita to show it in its original form polluted by subsequent interpolations to not only to its hurt but also the Hindu society at large. You may see from this link that my path-breaking work on Bhagvad-Gita without 110 inane interpolations and distractive interpretations is recommended by the sites dedicated to Hindu scriptures, who know better about the subject matter, and what is more, the Great Books and Classics site has accorded the pride of place to it over and above Sir Edwin Arnold's The Song Celestial, 2nd in your reference list (Mr. Mike Stickles of the site had emailed me that my work is better than that of Sir Edwin's) http://www.grtbooks.com/HinduTexts/Bhagavad-Gita.asp?aa=TE&at=BH&yr=-400. Also you seem to be blind to the works repetitively recommended /listed / cited in the Bhagavad -Gita page (Eswaran's work for a pathetic example finds mention in "References" under sl #s 126, 128,134 thru 138, 141,142,145,147, 151, 157, 160, 162, and he has many to keep company in this repetitive process, and laughably for the diligent wiki editors the irrelevant "40th National Film Awards (PDF)" (PDF). Directorate of Film Festivals. Retrieved 2 March 2012" is an online resource! So, it pays for Wikipedia if its editors get down from their high horses to set its crowded Bhagvad-Gita house in order as in the present form it is nothing but a collection of links, repetitive at that, of books based mostly on hearsay, though you've stated in your intervention that "Wikipedia is not#LINK|Wikipedia is not a collection of links" and advised me to see Wikipedia:Spam|spam guidelines. What a joke! Be that as it may, as my work is in the public domain in umpteen book sites as free ebook https://g.co/kgs/xQ3Bp3, my posting it in Wikipedia, by no stretch of imagination can be deemed as advertising the same. Whatever, going by the ever growing readership, be sure, my version of the Gita is going to be the Gita of the future, never mind whether or not it finds a place in the references jungle of Wikipedia. Bye 'n Best, BS Murthy https://www.google.com/search?kgmid=/g/113ygtc21&hl=en-IN&q=BS+Murthy&kgs=3cc165c6dbb7e9ea&shndl=0&source=sh/x/kp&entrypoint=sh/x/kp

March 2021

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. MrOllie (talk) 13:09, 13 March 2021 (UTC)