From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Religion / Interfaith (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Interfaith work group (marked as Top-importance).
WikiProject Linguistics  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Ancient Near East (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Near East related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Iran (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Major Re-edit or Remove Required[edit]

This is a very limited and badly-written article. It is heavily biased: it glosses over a few uses of the term in a wider religious context (in a single - albeit large - paragraph) and then focusses on the Abrahamic faiths in a section called "Religious use" (15 paragrahs). It fails to mention several Celtic paradises, the Western Paradise of Pure Land Buddhism, the western paradise of the Nahuatl, various African paradises, ancient Chinese and Japanese concepts of paradise, and so on. A far better article can be found on Heaven, and (until a rewrite is done) maybe this page could be redirected there. The Lesser Merlin (talk) 11:08, 4 November 2011 (UTC)


I gave up on this page straight away, sorry but too many 'big words'. wiki is for quick info for the masses. Very poorly written. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:43, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Paradise is the best possible world[edit]

Healthy is also happy, so a healthy world must be a paradise. And since a healthy one works better than a broken one, a healthy paradise like world does well in competition with other kinds of worlds: paradise is the best way to arrange things also in the modern competition.

HEAVEN is better word. And Jannatul firdos is good as well because that means the highest of paradise —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Some crazy new intro[edit]

No biggie but I took out some weird new intro that is mostly biblical gibberish dealing with mormons and commas. Pretty weird, forgot to sign in for the change though which sucks. TostitosAreGross 05:23, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Paradise in the beginning of time[edit]

Was there such a place. All agree that in the beginning of time the world was without man-made artificialities, so it was in a sense healthy, natural and a fractureless product of either evolution or of god's planning. In both cases it is humans' nature to reach for full health, in other words our feelings and instincts, with the help of the map given by our understanding, guide us toward full health of everything in our lives: of the ways of living and practices. That means that when there is full health, our lives and the world are full of binding feelings: full of happiness and love. In other words the full health of the beginning of time had to be roughly a paradise. InsectIntelligence (talk) 05:34, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Paradise in the end of time[edit]

The development of the man-made artificialities is a factor that is independent of the nature of humans but it does set work efficiency demands on humans and efficiency optimising demands on societies. Those demand one to follow the best ways of living in what comes to working ability, i.e. to reach for full health. That is the same goal as before: a goal that our nature guides us toward, so answering the work efficiency demands ought to lead to happy life according to the nature of humans. (Pictures of the world take into account the existence of the technology.) Optimising the society goes along the same principles as during the evolution or god's creation, so it means perfect moral. A perfect moral and happy healthy ways of living create a final paradise on Earth, this time with the technology around but otherwise just like in the beginning of time: what comes to the lives of teh living beings, technology stays at the place of a servant. InsectIntelligence (talk) 05:34, 6 February 2009 (UTC) See the e-book at — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:59, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Correction in Islam section[edit]

Made a small correction in Islam section. Firdous is the equivelent word for Paradise, but in Islam that word is used for the highest level of it, with the whole of Paradise called "Jannah" or Garden. The sections by the way are small and could stand being grown considerably by using resources of how the Quran and Sunnah (Islam), biblical and gospel(christianity), old testament and jewish scripture (Jeudaism) sees paradie in detail (Who goes in first, what are the rewards for different people, etc.) I am not though up for the project. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sampharo (talkcontribs) 17:12, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Etymological source[edit]

paradise and its equivalent in arabic--الفردوس -- which derived clearely from Persian ,an Indo-arian language closely related to Sanskrit,in addition to another word giving the same meaning in arabic i.e.الجنة which means holy garden.All these equivalents are closely related to the Egyptian concept of heavenly kingdom of Osiris - wrongly described as underworld-as a similar to under world in Greek and Roman mythology.This is a great mistake.The kingdom of Osiris is called SEkHET pronounced سخت which means Field and more precisely Agricultural field .At this point all similarities are disclosed either in sansikrit ,persian, arabic or europian items.

I've removed the claim that 'paradise' is derived from Sanskrit paradesha, since it is untrue (see etymology online), the modern European word is clearly derived from the Avestan through Greek. I've put in a sentence referring to the Sanskrit word, but it would be useful to see a reference to it, and its meaning. Imc 18:44, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Sanskrit is thousand of years older than Greek and Avestan, and most probably the actual form Paradise is derived from Sanskrit Paradesha through Avestan and Greek. Many actual words derive from Sanskrit (i.e. the word wine derives from Latin vinum, which derives from Sanskrit vena – "to love" –, from which were derived also the terms "Venus" and "Venere"; see here) though I actually can't find a reference. /\/\π 13:23, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

pairidaêza would be related to a Skt. *pari- + deha (from the root dih 'smear', not diz) which however does not exist. Someone must remove this wrong skt etymology.

Quoting the reference book, entitled, Insight on the Scriptures, says:

Some lexicographers would derive the Hebrew word par·des′ (meaning, basically, a park) from the same source. But since Solomon (of the 11th century B.C.E.) used par·des′ in his writings, whereas existing Persian writings go back only to about the sixth century B.C.E., such derivation of the Hebrew term is only conjectural. (Ec 2:5; Ca 4:13) The remaining use of par·des′ is at Nehemiah 2:8, where reference is made to a royal wooded park of Persian King Artaxerxes Longimanus, in the fifth century B.C.E. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:15, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Revitalization of the discussion[edit]

Verses 8-10 in Genesis read as follows:

8 And God planted a garden eastward in Eden, and placed there the man whom he had formed. 9 And God made to spring up also out of the earth every tree beautiful to the eye and good for food, and the tree of life in the midst of the garden, and the tree of learning the knowledge of good and evil. 10 And a river proceeds out of Eden to water the garden, thence it divides itself into four heads.

The original Greek Septuagint translation utilized the transliterated word παράδεισον -- parádeisos, which in Hebrew is the plural form of pardes, "orchard," for the Garden of Eden. Hebrew is thus the source of the word "paradise," not Old Iranian. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 02:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

As stated above, "comes from language A so it cannot come from language B" is a fallacy. But I find it very strange that there should be no scholarly sources that either confirm or dispute the common origin of परदेश/wikt:प्रदेश "p[a]radeś" and paradise. They are so remarkably similar in meaning (district, enclosure, land with a wall/fence around). The "-des" part is clearly a cognate, but what about "p(a)ra-"? -- (talk) 16:30, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Origin of word.[edit]

Iranians came to iraq in the 6 th century BC and did not speak Avestan,in fact as official languages they used Elamite and Akkadian and not an Iranian language,besides all it's illogical to think that akkadians so quickly adopted this possibly iranian word whereas achmenians did not use an iranic language as their official language.

So what is the date when this word is first attested in a written document and could this word be a loanword from munda,dravidian,buruhaski,elamite,hurrian,sumerian or even semite?

As for the suggested possible avestan etymology,many words can be interpreted by serious iranian,elamite,sumerian and semite etymologies at the same time.

Humanbyrace (talk) 22:44, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

North afro-asiatic egyptian etimology?[edit]

According to this site pardaws comes from Egyptian Far-Da-Was meaning the eternal lasting land.

So it could be that this word was adopted by ancient semites and iranians taked it from them.

Humanbyrace (talk) 23:11, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

The word 'utopia?'[edit]

Near the beginning of the beginning of the article, it says that 'paradise' and 'utopia' are contextually similar, however, it says later on that a paradise and a utopia are not to be confused. Seem strange to anyone else? Zoombus (talk) 04:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Removed odd section[edit]

I removed this section:

 "The word Paradise entered European languages from the Persian root word "Pardis" which was the name of a beautiful garden enclosed between walls. In this sense, paradise existed on earth and was a place that uplifted the human spirit. Through history, paradise started to mean heaven which implied a non-earthly place that could only be reached by the common person after death. In this way, paradise has been described as a idealistic perfect place, tailored by individual societies. We know now that Pardis garden could be enjoyed fully by live humans with no need for a physical death of the body. This implies that happiness and peace can be obtained by living people and that in fact the picture of heaven was formed by what humans saw on this beautiful planet earth. Perhaps the idea of an outside paradise entered the minds of those who were not close to the Pardis garden and longed for its beauty and hoped that one day their soul could leave the physical limits of space and distance and enjoy the garden. Also, many people pondered the possibility of other beautiful gardens in the sky. Since as of today the average living person cannot easily go to far away places in the sky, it is believed that the souls of the good hearted people find their way to beautiful sky gardens that are even more spectacular than the original "Pardis" garden."

The etymological information is already present elsewhere in the article, better explained. The rest seems nonsensical -- "gardens in the sky?"

If other editors think I've removed anything useful, it can of course be reworked into the article. Vultur (talk) 09:20, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Problem with comma in Luke 23:43[edit]

There are serious problems with some of the information in the Jehovah's Witness section of this article. Checking the text for Luke 23:43 in all available English translations, there is no comma where it is placed in this reference (see The Watchtower is used as a reference, stating that this is what is written in the Bible, but one cannot simply rewrite the Bible to suite one's own desires. This reasoning is fundamentally flawed, and I suggest the entire paragraph be struck, or another reference be added to explain that though the Watchtower quotes the Bible with a comma before the word "today", the Bible itself does not contain such punctuation, hence the interpretation is independent of the BIble. TranquiliC (talk) 20:14, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: procedural close in favour of the merge proposal just under this section. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 05:51, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

ParadiseHeaven – The two articles are synonymou in meaning, and their content is almost exactly the same. Pass a Method talk 11:26, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Comment: Are they really synonymous? "Paradise", after all, is derived from the garden of eden rather than heaven. Both may be biblical fantasies, but we generally document biblical fantasies in separate articles rather than mashing them together in a single one. bobrayner (talk) 20:56, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose this article is about "paradise" the word, and its etymological origins and historical usage. This is not the same as the etymological history of "heaven" or its historical usage. -- (talk) 22:21, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Support The word "Paradise" is used in various religions, not just biblically, Such variant description s are already suficiently covered in Heaven. Pass a Method talk 08:51, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
    • Comment this is a !vote by the nominator. -- (talk) 04:13, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • speedy close this is not a move, this is a merge discussion. Close and reopen as a merge discussion. FWIW, I would oppose the merge however.--KarlB (talk) 16:15, 3 July 2012 (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.


There is a clear consensus against merging the two articles. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 06:14, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I propose a merging this article "Paradise" into Heaven. Do you support or oppose? Pass a Method talk 19:32, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Support The articles are very similar, and the religion sub-sections are even more similar to the religion sub-sections of heaven. Pass a Method talk 19:34, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • oppose the articles cover different subjects - they are related, but are not the same. There are many different concepts for heaven, paradise, utopia, nirvana, etc across different faiths and traditions; while the articles as they stand are not perfect, I don't think a merge is in order. Also, you may want to read this Help:Merging which gives help on how to propose a merge. --KarlB (talk) 19:40, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Procedural comment The nominator has failed to tag Paradise (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and Heaven (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) with merge tags, or list it at WP:PM. -- (talk) 04:14, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
I just tagged them. --KarlB (talk) 20:07, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose the etymological and historical use history for the word "paradise" has nothing to do with the word "heaven". -- (talk) 04:16, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose per KarlB. Also the differences is concepts are briefly mentioned here ("Earthly Paradise", heaven to describe the universe, etc.) --NeilN talk to me 04:20, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose per KarlB. While heaven could be described as Paradise, the concept of Paradise is a broader concept and deserves a separate article. Monty845 04:42, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose It's not clear what the problem is that this would solve. DoriTalkContribs 19:54, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

World Is Of Love[edit]

"World Is Of Love

All action is based on what works i.e. on what is healthy.
The healthy is what our nature guides us towards,
what we naturally feel love for.
So the world, all it’s dynamics, 
is based on the healthy, which we love.
On a flowery language: “The World Is Of Love!”
A thought by Hannele Tervola
Say that all man-made things which are fully functioning, optimized for many purposes at the same time and used rationally wisely in the light of one's whole picture of the world, are "healthy". Notice that we like strenght, protection, speed etc., so we mildly love the healthy artificial things too, and the ideally good we would love.
This way the above thought applies also in the modern world full of man-made artificialities.
This is also a social skill: to see the place of each thing in the healthy natural original ages old way of living. That is a little bit the same as the social role of a stupid person: "Here am I doing this thing that I am motivated toward naturally, like you too can see in yourself the natural inclination for this type of things." and so the other one is slightly amused and does something along the same lines but one's own version, kind of catches the tune of doing. And so for some minutes things run smoothly and everybody is happy. This is connected to learning about healthy natural ways of living on all areas of life: enjoyable motion, watching beauty, enjoying friendly conversations, doing nice things according to one's likings, caring for the major matters of the world, reacting emotionally to different things in life and in the world, etc."

Source: the earliest writings at by Hannele Tervola (talk) 12:53, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Slavic 'ray', etymology[edit]

I've added [citation needed] regarding the "Persian origin" of the word. The word is most likely Iranian indeed (Vasmer's dictionary agrees), but is not necessary of Persian origin; that would be especially doubtful considering the absense of any direct contact between Persians and proto-Slavs. Vasmer himself brings up the Mordvin word "riz" of Iranian origin, but its exact origin is Sarmathian (like a great part of Mordvin vocabulary), not Persian. Scythians and Sarmathians apparently were the only Iranian groups who contacted proto-Slavs as well. These days "Iranian" and "Persian" are mostly synonyms (because Iran is an official name of the modern day Persia), but it isn't always so. (talk) 13:48, 10 December 2013 (UTC)