|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
I don't think it should be deleted. But people should have access to the web site.
Donot add issues irrelevant to Visishtadvaita on the page. It is quite possible that Advaita was not influenced by Buddhism. That can be discussed in the space given for Advaita. Considering that Buddhism predated Advaita and the two having quite a bit in common besides originating in the Indian sub-continent, it is very much possible that the philosophy was influenced.
The role of Ramanuja in the propogation of Sri Vaishnavism is adequately presented in Ramanuja page.
The diacritics and spelling of Sanskrit words need to be severely fixed in this article. E.G.: the term sabda does not have a retroflex s (the diacritic should be over, not under, the 's'); "thathva" should be "tattva"; etc., etc., etc.
VishishtAdvaita vs Vishishtadvaita
i don't get why it is in some places written with a capital "a," and not in others. to my mind, it is best written as "vishishtadvaita." at least, if you really are gonna write it with a capital "a," write it that way everywhere (to everyone that feels concerned). /2 cents Twipley (talk) 17:29, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
It has to be written as viSishtAdvaitam if one were to write it in the ITRANS format for writing Indic text. In ITRANS, a longer syllable is denoted this way (an "aa" or "A"). The need for a longer syllable of "a" being the word viSishtAdvaitam is a union of two words viSishta and advaitam. According to Sanskrit Grammar when two words unite, if the first ends with a short vowel and the second word starts with a short vowel as well, the two short vowels combine to form a single longer vowel that corresponds to them. Thus viSishta advaitam in one word would become viSishtAdvaitam (or) viSishtaadvaitam depending on the writing format. As for visishtadvaitam, the lack of a longer vowel there would mean the word would become viSishta dvaitam which in essence means "Qualified Dualism" as opposed to "Qualified Non-Dualism" which the school actually states. Hope it clarifies things. Sriram Murali (talk) 06:43, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Break the detail on different schools etc down into several articles?
This is a very detailed and complex article and given that it is well written - yet on the other hand it could do with more specific quotations from scripture and gurus and in-line citations from modern commentators. There is a great deal of breaking down into various schools of though and comparisons between them which makes it hard to get an overall grasp balanced with enough detail. I'd like to have a more concise article with spin-off articles on the separate schools. I approached this article with a determination to learn more about the subject but found it hard to see the wood for the trees.Steve M Kane (talk) 13:16, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://sriramanujar.tripod.com/tVsv.html (there is no doubt this is the source as it was cited when the content was pasted here). Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:56, 15 May 2013 (UTC)