User talk:Raj2004

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to the Wikipedia[edit]

Raj2004 is hereby strongly commended for his innovative diligence and resilience in expanding the coverage of Hinduism on Wikipedia, by Rama's Arrow 13:44, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Raj2004 is hereby awarded this Barnstar as late recognition for all his contributions to Hinduism related articles.

!מזל טוב

from Izehar

I award this Barnstar to Raj2004 for being a cool Hindu working Wiki-sewa and for exceptional Wiki-sabhyata. Jai Sri Rama! Rama's Arrow 04:45, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Here are some links I thought useful:

"*Wikipedia:Policy Library

Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. The Wikipedia:Village pump is also a good place to go for quick answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~. Good edits, please make yourself at home here :D

Be Bold!

Sam [Spade] 21:52, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

User talk:Raj2004/Ayyavazhi


noticed your high-quality additions to the religion page regarding hinduism ... i had a few questions about hinduism i was hoping you might be able to answer. 1) what is the signifance of "sacred characters," such as "aum?" how do they affect one's spiritual life? 2) what is the relationship between hinduism and buddhism -- i.e. i understand the buddhism is typically considered by some to be a hindu "heresy," and that mahayana is more similar to hinduism than theravaada ... would you consider mahayana to be a synthesis of some sort? 3) is there a "conversion" process for hinduism? -- i.e. must one cease to be a christian to become a full hindu, or must one "convert" in one way or another to come to full truth?

thanks for your time:). Ungtss 16:40, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Reply to heya[edit]

Thanks for your compliment. 1) Om represents the primal manifestation or sound of the impersonal absolute brahman. Om is said before every Hindu prayer. It's sort of like amen but is said before each prayer. 2) Buddhism is not Hinduism and is ambivalent about the nature of God. Thervada Buddhism was getting too abstract for some theists and Mahayana Buddhism is not a sythesis but recognized messiah type figures who would help humanity to reach nirvana. Buddhism also rejects the Vedas, which in Hinduism, is the word of God. It would be like rejecting the Bible. I am not an expert on Buddism but there is this concept called shunyata or state of non-being. Hinduism vehemently disagrees and states that the Ultimate Reality is an eternal being-non-being or Brahman which can never be defined. There is no such per se heresy as I said before; each has to realize his own path to God. But Buddhism was considered heterodox as it rejected the Vedas. 3) Hinduism is not a missionary religion and respects each to follow what he believes is his own path to God. Hinduism is a broad concept and is divided into four major traditions, Shaivism, Shaktism, Smartism and Vaishnavism. Traditionally, if you accepted the beliefs and follow the philosphies, you were a hindu. (There are 9 essential beliefs for a Hindu.) also please look at this site, You can contact them and they can answer more in depth as I am not a scholar on Hinduism although I have gained knowledge. However, in recent times, some Western-oriented sections of Hinduism such as ISKCON(for converts to Vaishnavism and, (for converts to Shaivism) have such conversion programs but they have a western bias. see for example, on amazon, (older edition available online.) I don't think you necessarily have to reject Christianity to adopt Hindu views. for you, Jesus is your conception of Saguna Brahman. Many Hindus consider him to be an avatarbut would not accept beliefs such as original sin and that He is the only avatar. others would consider him to be a great master. (an excellent book on Hinduism, but slanted towards Shaivism.)

Hope this helps. Raj2004

Hello Raj, I'm Subramanian, and I have noticed that we share many interests here. I want to say that I have been appreciating your contribuitions on Hinduism in general and I just came by to say thanks for you correcting the information on Benares as a holy city. Aum Shanti, --Subramanian 00:30, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Nayanar: Vanakkam Raj, it's a pleasure to read your articles, you manage to keep a great quality standard. I apologize I could not gather information enough to write it on my own, but it's nice that I now can contribute to the existing article. I have contacted the Himalayan Academy for help; both their and my end-of-the-year schedule, as well as the tsunamis disaster, took our attentions. They are creating a book that covers many of the saints, called "The Elephant Pass" - I thought you would like to know. Best, --Subramanian 06:31, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

external links[edit]

It is best to encase links to outside sites with one set of brackets. If this is not done, the wiki takes the link as the URL, which is not so nice. This can be done by clicking the button with the world on it if the link text is highlighted. If there is no other text added the brackets then the link takes the form of a footnote. The best is if you leave a space out and then put any descriptive text after this space. Try it out in the sandbox. --metta, The Sunborn 07:13, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)



thank you for all your data on hinduism ... it really cleared a lot of things up for me! Ungtss 14:32, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

No problem. Ungtss. Raj2004

sri rudram[edit]

hi Raj -- I did not (and don't) want to seem rude, but allow me to say that there is indeed some need to expand the article. I do not want to remove any information that was there, as thankfully you give the sources, and it indeed describes the prevalent, vedantic, interpretation. But, you must be aware that the 'translation' given is not literal at all. Simply take any Sanskrit dictionary and work through the text. It must have occurred to you that 'Vishnu' is not in the text. Again, as an interpretation the English rendition is of course very valid, but it should be labelled as such. I would convert the Sanskrit text to standard transliteration and give a literal translation, but I have more pressing tasks. Until we do get a literal translation, however, intellectual honesty dictates that we say that the English text is a free interpretation. As for the date, 3000 years is reasonable. However, it is reasonable for composition. Written fixation doesn't even enter the picture, as indian culture was and is predominantly oral. There was no writing in India prior to ca. 400-500 BC, and then not for religious texts for some time, so I think we better leave this out. Linguistically, the text cannot possibly be older than some 4000 years, and very probably closer to 3000. Again, please understand the distinction here: I do not contest at all that the intended meaning of "shipi-vishta" is indeed to equate Rudra with Vishnu, because I have no knowledge of that. It is very and npovly clear, on the other hand, that "shipi-vishta" does not mean "in the form of Vishnu". For this reason, "in the form of Vishnu" is a valid (at least in vedantic schools) interpretation, but not a "translation". regards, dab 08:26, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC) PS, for the purpose of 'monotheism' (which was why I looked at the article in the first place), it is a much less compelling example than RV 10.129,130: The interpretation is monotheistic. If we had only the text itself, we wouldn't get such an idea. The vedantic interpretation is probably aged some 2000 years, ie. considerably younger than the text itself (vedanta has completely overhauled vedic religion), and thus (as the text by itself) does not qualify as an early example of monotheistic thought. dab 08:30, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC) I agree with you partly. Rudram has been interpreted by Vedantists to support monistic theism. However, every commentator (Ramakrishna mission, Divine Life society, numerous web sites) that I have read have stated Rudra in the form of Vishnu. User:Raj2004

Sure. This is the common interpretation, and I have no issue with that. Translation is a different animal, and the two should not be confused. You don't have to believe me at all. Just take a Sanskrit dictionary and start looking up the words that interest you. The word that is rendered as "in the form of Vishnu" is shipi-vishta (Dative, shipivishtaya). Here is a dictionary entry: [1]. Besides "pervaded with rays" it could also mean "bald-headed", "leprous" or "having no prepuce", but I think we can disount these here. The point is that the epitheton was applied to both Rudra and Vishnu, and was therefore interpreted to suggest an identification of the two. This is completely legitimate, as long as we don't claim "in the form of Vishnu" is a literal translation. It is more like "o resplendent one [by the way, Vishnu is sometimes also called this]", as in "o you who are pervaded by rays, which incidentially brings to mind Vishnu, who is also pervaded by rays". That's fine, but it's not in the text.

Thank for the link. We would have to convert this text to the transliteration used on Sanskrit#Phonology_and_writing_system, e.g. shipivishhTaaya to śipiviṣṭāya. dab 12:31, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

what am I supposed to do with the pdf file? it's just the text in devanagari. The text we cite should be in standard transliteration. dab 12:45, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

ok, I rendered your text in scientific transliteration now. there were a few errors in the text, and I did it manually, hope I got it correct. dab 13:10, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help. By the way, how do you get your time date stamped as you did? Raj2004

Type the four tildes ~~~~ dab 13:25, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)


Go to Template:Hinduism dab 15:47, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC) Agamas seems short and OK. What about hindu arts architectures and places of pilgrimage etc. I understand that it is difficult to organise topics under hinduism (as against good template on Islam); but there is certainly scope for it. Since i dont have the 'large picture'in my mind, i request members to have a though on it. (I somewhere observed that under festivals - varamahalakshmi vrata is also included. Is it such a big vrata except in Karnataka? The distinction between vrata and utsava also needs to be clearly spelled out).Thanks and regards Ramashray 15:06, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)Ramashray

Sri Rudram text[edit]

it's ok, Raj, I accepted the identification Rudra/Shiva=Vishnu as standard vedantic teaching all along. But I feel we are quoting too much text in the article. I think it will be better to export the actual text to Wikisource. Also, quoting the Amritananda translation in such length may be copyvio. I think we should only keep a short passage (the girivishaya, shipivishtaya part) in the article, and export the rest. dab 16:35, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I exported the text to Wikisource:Shri_Rudram_Chamakam now. I am still searching for the Chamakam in the Yajurveda though (book, chapter?) dab 17:03, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
found it, thanks. it's Yajurveda TS, iv. 5. and iv. 7.

Article Licensing[edit]

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:


Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)


I've recently completely rewritten Caste and Brahmin using info from the 1911 encyclopedia. i'd appreciate your interest, if you'd like to have a look. Always glad to hear your opinion, Sam Spade wishes you a merry Christmas! 22:04, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)


I am concerned we may be misunderstanding each other regarding Brahman, Brahminism, Smartism, Arya Sarmaj and Pantheism. I am curious, do you use any instant messangers? I use several, most of whuch are listed @ User:Sam_Spade/Info. I'd like to be able to speak to you more directly, perhaps it would reduce confusion. My best wishes, Sam_Spade (talk · contribs) 03:32, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

hinduism thanks[edit]

thanks so much for the readings on hinduism -- sorry it took me so long to get back to you, but i wanted to let you know that they were all GREATLY appreciated and have expanded my world -- i am in your debt:). Ungtss 16:21, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

hinduism's conception of human beings[edit]

I am trying to get religious views added to the entry "Human". It currently looks like this:

According to some of the major world religions, human beings are variously considered to be created in the image of god (Judaism, Christianity, Islam), as the incarnation of an eternal, immaterial spirit (Hinduism, Buddhism), as an expression of the ineffable (Taoism), or as lacking any static nature whatsoever (Confucianism).

Would you like to critique the Hinduism part? --Goethean 01:00, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Very helpful. --Goethean 15:11, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your help at my Chalkboard. Tom Haws 17:08, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)

Welcome back - from Spade and Subramanian![edit]

Glad to see you editing again, I've missed you! Cheers, Sam Spade 12:16, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi my friend Raj! I will use this space by Sam Spade because he is one of the people I will mention here. He recently said to me that he felt Hinduism was becoming an anti-Hindu article. I don´t think these people are ill-meant, but we have to stand strong for Hinduism - with a gentle hand. I wrote a comment at Talk:Lingam explaining to them why it is simplistic and only a instictive man would call the Lingam a phallic symbol. I hope it helps. I also suggest thet you bring our friend Spade to this. Meanwhile, we work. The Devas will help us. :-) Let us also be as kind and flexible as Hinduism is. Best, Satya Subramanian talk 08:28, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

"I find there is a lot of ignorance. Raj2004"
Yes, a lot. That´s why all we Wikipedians are here for: to fight for the light of information against ignorance. See you, Great Raj! Subramanian talk 09:31, 27 May 2005 (UTC)


he raj -- I don't want to argue this point too much, since it's really a terminological red herring. The Vedas are what is generally understood by "scripture", but if it was up to me I would avoid the term, because it is incorrect, pedantically speaking. The Vedas could not have been written down before ca. 300 BC, because there was no script. But that is not important, since Indian tradition places importance on memorizing texts, and looks down on written tradition. I am not trying to make the Vedas look less important by saying they were not written down. It's just, they weren't, and it didn't matter. dab () 10:21, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

there's no 100% dead certain with these questions. It is not known whether Panini's grammar was written down at all, and whether he lived closer to 500BC or to 300BC. The earlier he lived, the less likely he had anything written down. After all, Panini's grammar was intended to be memorized, just like the Vedas. Raj, the pattern of the adoption of a writing system is very similar in many cultures. there are typical, almost universal, steps. The Vedic/Hindu culture is very much in line with such a typical transformation from a nomadic to an agricultural, to an urban, to a literate civilization. You need a lot of background, about this and other cultures, and I cannot elaborate this all on your talk page. afaik, experts widely agree that the Vedic texts were not written down for at least 1000 years after their composition. They were redacted, i.e. put in a fixed form, in late Vedic times, perhaps at the time of Panini. It is difficult for us to imagine it, but this was almost certainly done without writing. The memories of whole clans was used instead of paper. This was about a 1000 years after the earliest hymns had been composed. This fixed text was passed down for many generations before writing started to be used, at first not to make "holy books" to keep in temples or libraries, but just as a tool for memorization, the writing could be discarded after the text was settled in your memory. This is what makes this culture so special, they relied on the living mind to store their texts, not on dead paper. If you are serious about contesting this, fundamentally, I'll dig up a couple of references, and you'll have to counter them with other references (after all, we're not supposed to think for ourselves (aka original research) for the purposes of Wikipedia  :)dab () 08:49, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

"He", etc.[edit]

Ah, I didn't have to ask; the manual of style syas:
"Deities begin with a capital letter: God, Allah, Freya, the Lord, the Supreme Being, the Messiah. The same is true when referring to Muhammad as the Prophet. Transcendent ideas in the Platonic sense also begin with a capital letter: Good and Truth. Pronouns referring to deities, or nouns (other than names) referring to any material or abstract representation of any deity, human or otherwise, do not begin with a capital letter."

--Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 4 July 2005 11:24 (UTC)

Hello from a new Wikipedian[edit]

I am profvk. I have started contributing to Wikipedia only recently. I noticed you have already written several articles on Hinduism. I have not yet gone through them. But in the meantime I thought I should get in touch with you. Regards. -- 02:23, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your message in reply to the above. Yes, I have seen some of your talk pages. But I am not able to locate any of your articles. Please let me have names of some articles. Some of my new articles are: Vedantadesika, Jivanmukta, Appayya Dikshidar, South India's 75 Apostles of Bhakti, Jothi Ramalinga Swamigal, Sadashiva Brahman. And some of my contributions to existing articles are: Nayanars, Alvars, Vishishtadvaita, Bhakti, etc. Of course you can get a complete list from 'What links here' on my User page. But if I do this to your page I do not get a list of the articles you have written! I would like your comments on my articles. And also I would like your suggestions about topics where I can help. I am mostly interested in writing about advaita philosophy, and all great devotees of Bharat. --Profvk 16:56, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

OK. I shall work on Lalita Sahasranama. You can see already(earlier to your suggestion) I had added a few paragraphs to it. Now I shall expand it with some depth in terms of meaning and significance. You may also see my article on Devi Mahatmya which is a kind of introduction to the study of Lalita Sahasranama. In the meantime, why don't you add your name to the list of Participants in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Hinduism ? --Profvk 18:26, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Robert Hansen[edit]

Hello Raj! Subramuniyaswami was born Robert Hansen according to this website Hawaiian Temple: Indian sculptors abstain from habits. Do you think it is appropriate to mention this in the article about him? Juan dela Cruz talk



I have made many edits to List of Hindu deities and List of Hinduism-related articles, please have a look and see what you think. ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ 01:04, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Featured articles[edit]

Madhva, Karma in Hinduism and avatar are each excellent articles. Of the 3, I think Shri Madhvacharya is closest, because it has nice images and seems reasonably thorough. I do think it could use a bit more content however, in certain sections. Avatar could use an image at the top, I think, and perhaps a bit more discussion of non-Hindu ideas of avatars. Karma in Hinduism is extremely good, but I am worried if the title is proper (maybe Karma (Hinduism) like Atman (Hinduism)?) , and also it needs some images. I think the next step is to look at some similar articles that are featured, and then submit a peer review. I'd be glad to help w that, and w making whatever changes people feel are needed for them to be featured, and I agree there isn't far to go. Cheers,

Tasks you can do 19:57, 27 August 2005 (UTC)


Raj, I am really sorry for that, because I don't know any thing about that. I just place the terms in the quote. Yesterday when I present the quote, you didn't rise any question so I think that You may be through with those. If it confuse you, Iam sure that it will also do others. So what to do? -வைகுண்ட ராஜா

Thanks, I shall try -வைகுண்ட ராஜா

Peer review request for Vishnu sahasranama[edit]

I noticed that you attempted to place a peer review request for Vishnu sahasranama, but no peer review subpage appears to have been created for this article. In addition, the comments you added to Wikipedia:Peer review/DirectShow/archive2 seem to indicate that you may be wishing to submit this article to Wikipedia:Featured article candidates instead of to peer review.

If your intention was to submit the article for peer review then please perform he first four actions described at Wikipedia:Peer review#Instructions (step 5 is currently completed). If your desire is to have the article considered for Featured Status immediately, then there is no need to submit a peer review request. Instead the instructions for submitting and article as a FA candidate are located at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates#Adding nominations. --Allen3 talk 19:43, August 28, 2005 (UTC)


Raj, there's a counter to Ayyavazhi's influence on Vivekananda. See, the talk page - Vaikunda Raja

Indian wikipedia[edit]

Hi Raj, saw your post on Sam Spade's page. These are some India related links you may find useful:

You can post your comments on your article to the India-noticeboard, maybe someone there might review it. User:Bhadani may have some time to spare in reviewing the page. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:55, September 3, 2005 (UTC)

Peer review[edit]

Hi, I left some comments for one of your peer review requests, Karma in Hinduism. I hope they were helpful. I can give you more comments on what it would take to have the article reach featured status if you like. - Taxman Talk 23:04, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

New article[edit]

Raj, I've created a new article, Venneesan. - வைகுண்ட & ராஜா

Also take a look on expanded Kaliyan and Kalicchi

Raj, Also a new article. Take a look into Rules and Regulations to God-heads. - Vaikunda & Raja

Raj, Sorry it's a spelling mistake. It was Sandal.

Raj, again a new article Tatvas. Take a look. - Vaikunda & Raja

Florida article about Jim Wales and wikipedia[edit]

Hi, Sam There's an interesting article about Jim wales and wikipedia.

Interestingly, Jim is virtually unknown in Florida, where he lives and is more famous outside the Us.

Raj2004 00:33, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

That is an extremely good article, thank you! I'm going to post it on the mailing list. Sam Spade 13:56, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

See [2]. Cheers, Sam Spade 14:03, 17 October 2005 (UTC)


Thanks for the reply, Raj. I was questioning the line: As per [] the majority of Hindus are Vaishnavas, though often mixing in some aspects of the Smarta viewpoint.

which cites website. Originally, I edited the page to say something like:

Many Hindus do not belong/adhere to any particular denomination and tend to be smarta, the most inclusive, in belief.

That is because most Hindus (mostly non-brahmins) don't classify themselves under any denomination. The majority may worship Vishnu but I think they hold smartist beliefs. I may be wrong, but the website doesn't help as it doesn't distinguish smartism as a denomination and possibly distributes the smartists into other categories.

I will try to word my question on the page better. (I am Vaishnavite in belief myself) --Pranathi 21:35, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

I would like to also say that Smartha is not commonly seen to be a denomination, and that most Hindu's are probably Smartha, because most don't have a chosen denomination at all, but agree w many smartha beliefs. of those who do choose a denomination label however, I again agree w Pranathi that most of these are Vaishnavites. Sam Spade 22:50, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Avatar#Types of avatars

Hi, I really appreciate what you are doing. I originally didn't know anything about Hinduism except that they honour cows (from TV). I was once doing some research on gilgul (the orthodox Jewish concept of reincarnation) and I found out that it is used in Hinduism today. Fascinating links, may our religions and cultures live on.... Izehar (talk) 23:57, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

I've often wondered, the many Hindu deities are supposed to be manifestations of a single divine source called Brahman, right? Does Brahman have a personality like the Jewish G-d, or is It/He an impersonal force? The Jewish G-d is often described to have emotions and thoughts and other human qualities such as anger in certain quotes from the Torah such as and Elohim was angered... (Elohim or אלהים in Hebrew is what G-d is often called in the Torah, it resembles the Muslim Allah, which shows the links between the two religions). Qualities such as "being merciful" are often atributted to Him as well (the same goes for Islam and Christianity). Can the same be said for Hinduism? Izehar (talk) 00:27, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Tanks for clearing a few things up for me. It all seems so complicated... One of the reasons Islam was supposed to be so successful was its simple religious doctrine - Hinduism has almost as many followers, and its doctrine seems (at first at least) utterly incomprehensible. One last question: is ISKCON a legitimate form of Hinduism in the eyes of mainstream Hindus? Izehar (talk) 00:53, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I remember reading somewhere that according to the Vedas, Hinduism has 300 million deities and the reason for that being that when you count your gods in milions, numbers become meaningless and as a result, "blur the picture" of the "Supreme Deity", which cannot be defined. Also, on a more personal tone, what Hindu branch do you affiliate to? Izehar (talk) 01:11, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I think an important aspect of a religion is not to try to convert people. In Judaism, we are taught that when you approach someone and try to convert then to another faith, that is the greatest arrogance, as you are telling him/her that your faith is better or superior. Christians and Muslims unfortunately don't share that view, but claim that their religions are the only way to G-d. I'm not criticising, as everyone is entitled to their opinions, but that view has lead to savage persecutions against the Jews and other "unfaithfuls" for years (see Christianity and anti-Semitism and Islam and anti-Semitism). Christians believe that Jesus said that no one gets to the Father (G-d) except through him (in other words, he is the only way and the Jews who rejected his teachings shall not be saved). Muslims quote the Koran, and say that while they must respect those who believe in the same god and that includes the Children of Israel (the Jews), that doesn't stop Jews being rejected as kafirs (non-believers) and being treated accordingly. I do give them this though; Jews in Muslim countries escaped the terrible persecutions inflicted in Christian Europe. It's a good thing that Hindus respect other religions and don't claim exclusivity - the I am right, and everyone else is wrong attitude. Izehar (talk) 01:39, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


Hey - I guess the thing fell flat. Nevertheless, with the barnstar I wanted to compliment your good culture and great work. "Sewa" is like service to Wikipedia, and "sabhyata" is your personal culture. I've personally had a tough time dealing with some difficult people here, but I wanted to compliment you.

Anywayz, take care. Jai Sri Rama!

Rama's Arrow 01:18, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Very glad to see some well deserved awards coming your way! Often the wikipedia has too much complaining and not enough thanks, but your generous contibutions and noble spirit are clearly deserving of our gratitude! Cheers,
Sam Spade 14:33, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Hey, sorry I made a tiny mistake...forgot to sign within the barnstar..will make that correction with your permish.

Rama's Arrow 04:44, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you much, see [3] :D

Sam Spade 13:32, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliments Raj. Lemme know if there are areas you want me to help you in, or things I need to improve upon.

Jai Sri Rama!

Rama's Arrow 06:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)


Hi Raj,

Thanks a million holmes! A very perfect Christmas gift!

Jai Sri Rama!

Rama's Arrow 15:35, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


Sorry about that. I knew about "Acyuta", but the misspelling and what could only be called quasi-vandalism by the Anon blinded me to that. I just think that Krishna, Shiva, Bhagavata purana and almost every other Hinduism article here need major cleanups, and as of now cannot afford to be messed up even more, even if there are valid points of information in the gibberish. Concerning the Kroni-Satan thing, I just don't think it's a valid analogy (at least not lead paragraph material), as their roles are completely different. In Hebrew myth, Satan committed the first evil act (tempting Eve) because he was in the employ of Yahweh, testing them. (My personal feelings about Yahweh aside, he is viewed by his followers as being basically good.) The eternal nature of Kroni (basically just being the source of evil) is entirely different to Satan's role as a physical being that rebels against Yahweh/Jesus and sop is viewed as being evil, who can and will ultimately be defeated. Since Hindu/Ayyavazhi mythology (as well as the existence of the human soul in that mythology) is essentially infinite, it cannot really be compared to the finite universe portrayed in the Bible, which essentially only lasts a few thousand years before returning to God. I don't want to start an argument over this issue, so I will not revert your edit 'til I hear what you have to say about it. (P.S.: I have no problem with the article mentioning Satan, as long as it does not subtly attempt to equate the two, and does not do so in the header.) elvenscout742 22:17, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar of diligence[edit]

I'm sorry to be a sop Raj, but your diligence is innovative and amazing. The God and gender thing is a perfect example to illustrate your point. I used to be endlessly enraged when I saw the reference to the Almighty in Judeo-C and Islamic as God, and Vishu/Siva/Rama/Krishna referred to as Hindu gods.

The distinction is you could do something good about it. My heartiest congratulations.

Jai Sri Rama!

Rama's Arrow 13:45, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Holmes is Latino slang for friend/brother, casual address.

Why did you delete my suggestions message?

Rama's Arrow 17:08, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

dat's cool.

Jai Sri Rama!

Rama's Arrow 17:31, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi Raj - although you may not be interested, there is a final vote ongoing to resolve the Hindu-Arabic title issue. I strongly suggest that you cast your vote - that will help resolve the issue once and for all.

Jai Sri Rama!

Rama's Arrow 21:08, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi again[edit]

Thanks for responding to my message. Yes Dear Raj, I fully agree with you that the level of awareness about figures and concepts relating to Hinduism by a number of Hindus in India is less than several others born and brought up outside India. Perhaps, all persons interested in this matter must endeavor to create better awareness amongst our Hindu brothers and sisters, living in India as well as in other countries. We, the wikipedians, may do this in our own way by our collective effort to expand the contents of Hinduism related stubs/ articles. I shall do whatever may be possible depending on my knowledge and time. We should inter-act more. Thanks. --Bhadani 09:24, 18 December 2005 (UTC)


Raj, some additions to Ayyavazhi; Please take a look into Ayyavazhi. Thank You .- Vaikunda (<.^.>) Raja

Raj, Ayyavazhi conception of time is linear; According to Hinduism the four yugas came repeatedly in a circular manner. But in Ayyavazhi, the life begins from neetiya Yukam and ends in Dharma Yukam. Dharma Yukam is stated to be eternal(for ever). There is no quote in Akilam to object it. (i.e): The way of narration will be studied and concluded it to be a linear one which is also accepted by most theologians of Ayyavazhi. No quotes in akilam to say the yugas being repeated. It may be suitable to say that,"As far as Akilam is studied, it reveals only that".
Then, which website states so? "It is Kalanemi/Kroni who approaches to destroy Dharma and righteousness in every yuga. From far away in Patala loka, he approaches nearer and nearer and finally at the end of Kali-yuga, God destroys him and throws him again far away and the satya yuga starts. These cycles (of chathur yugas) repeat continuously. Only the names and forms of Kalanemi may be different in different yuga cycles."- Vaikunda (<.^.>) Raja
Raj, I feel really sorry I not noticed this so far. According to Akilam this site had done a major mistake. One example the skanda and Rama incarnates in different Yugas as per Akilam. But here!!!?. Also look at the number of yugas!!! I think they had tried to mingle Akilam and previous hindu scriptures. In such matters that is impossible to mingle those as joining the north and south poles. Sorry and Thank you for information. Then I added some history to Ayyavazhi. Please take a look. That you.- Vaikunda (<.^.>) Raja


I wish you and your family a Merry Christmas and a happy New Year. --Bhadani 17:25, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

FA work[edit]

Hi Raj - I recently got the India integration article FA'd and I can give you some advice on stuff to watch out for. I'm posting it here coz its mainly for you:

(1) First off, if you want to work on two articles to get FA'd, you should drop everything else and focus on this. Its a lot of work, and as the main guy who wants these to become FA, you need to do all the cross-checking and legwork. Maybe you should consider going one article at a time as well.

(2) Put your articles on peer review, advertise them a lot (including personal request for help). You need to re-open peer review on your two articles and keep it open for 3 weeks minimum. It helps for voters to see that you've done the best possible work. Advertise this effort on Portal:Hinduism, Indian topics notice board, etc.

(3) References: both your articles incorporates a lot of external links, but this is not good enough, especially for articles on religion and mythology. You need to have book references - NY Public Library, Amazon, anything that works is good.

(4) Inline Citations: I know its not a formal requirement, but inline citations are vital especially for religion articles - when there is a sentence that states a new fact or makes an assertion, you need to provide a direct link to the source. People are picky about this in the voting process.

(5) Lead: an article of FA quality needs 2-3 opening paras that broadly summarize the article and cover its main points.

(6) Images: again it is no formal requirement, but images are strongly encouraged. For the articles you've chosen to work on, images of Vishnu and any rishis/philosphers who advocated Karma are good options. Plus, they need to be proper copyright - consult user:Deepak gupta, or user:Miljoshi. They're experts on these things.

(7) You need to be comprehensive on the subjects you tackle. That's another good reason why you need book references - especially Hinduism.

(8) Don't go POV - keep original research, your personal convictions out of the mix. I'm saying this coz I know you're a passionate Hindu.

(9) Imbib this in your work!

I know I'm kinda lecturing, but believe me, its not easy to make complicated subjects into FAs. That's why FAs are the best work around. I'll help you as much as I can. Jai Sri Rama! Rama's Arrow 03:37, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

P.S. - Vishnu Sahasranama looks more comprehensive, so I would recommend you work on it first. Definitely re-open peer review. On Karma in Hinduism - its not comprehensive, cite differences with Buddhism/Jainism, and cut out the section on one Swami's interpretation. You should create a bigger, balanced interpretation section. Definitely explore how real, common Hindus have incorporate karma in real life - the caste system was inspired by karma. Rama's Arrow 04:31, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

FA ideas[edit]

Hi Raj - I didn't wish to imply that its a gigantic task - if you can finish (1) addition and organization of text, that's the bulk of your work. (2) this step is making corrections, listening to other opinions and revise the article. FA writing is a 3-4 week process - 2-3 weeks on peer review, and 1 week on the vote.

You should pick one article at a time - you're sure to have help. FA is the best work here, so obviously it takes a good bit of your time. Rama's Arrow 20:54, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Lemme add my example: I finished the bulky info adding to Lothal and Rama first - made sure to cite sources and inline citations - and have opened it up for peer review. Its quite manageable right now - an hour a day or less. I hope to achieve FA status for both by end of February max. Rama's Arrow 20:57, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Need Help[edit]

Raj, thanks for your help so far. Now I had added a sub-heading to Ayyavazhi, Ayyavazhi#Phenomenology. Please take a look and help me if it need any modifications. Thank you. - Vaikunda (<.^.>) Raja

Raj, Moksha concept is hard to found in Ayyavazhi. The concept of ekam in Ayyavazhi seems closer to the conception of moksha. But in the linear conception of Ayyavazhi the end is the Dharma Yukam where Ayya rules as a king. If some one rules as a king, is there any sign for personal liberation? But still this is not to be confirmed because mind you the ekam(ultimate oneness) incarnated as Vaikundar. So if Vaikundar rule as a king (may be) all others (all the rest) will be a part of Vaikundar then, and not out side him. But the word moksha came in few places in Akilam. One example, in one place Vaikundar is told that "one who gives moksha". There are possibilities for moksha!? But on a sudden vision no signs for the same moksha (as addressed in Hinduism) in Akilam. - Vaikunda (<.^.>) Raja


Some prefer to use lower case, some upper; the custom is generally that it isn't changed — if the article uses upper, I leave it upper, and if it's lower, I leave it lower. My own view is that upper case is PoV ("god" isn't a proper name, so there's no NPoV reason to use a capital), but my custom on Wikipedia is to defend the status quo in the article. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:50, 13 May 2006 (UTC)


What people like Aupmanyav propagate and follow is just "cultural Hinduism" and not religious Hinduism. Thats why they are rather more comfortable with atheism + the deities as beautiful dumb dolls. My criticism against him includes his bend towards atheism too.Cygnus_hansa 17:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Cygnus_Hansa gets me wrong. The deities of theist Hinduism are cultural heroes to me and very much alive, ones that I cannot live without, from whose stories I take my cues for conduct in life. Cygnus may have problems with my atheism (though I strongly feel that Hinduism has no problems with that), I do not have any with his theism (after all I was a theist for nearly the whole of my life). Even now my cultural heroes are not very far from being deities. Aupmanyav 10:32, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


My signature is Cygnus, not Cyrus.Cygnus_hansa 06:03, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Please contact outside wiki[edit]

Hai Raj, Good questions and I will answer all of them. But I no more (I've stopped) edit in english wiki. So please contact through some other ways ; (I don't know your mail id) - provide an e-mail id [or] contact to the mail - . we shall share all our opinins. Please don't mistake. Thanks - Vaikunda Raja


Thanks for helping out on the Sudama article. Your contributions added a lot to the page and brought another perspective to the morals of such a great man.Bakaman Bakatalk 00:25, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


I am not too familiar with Jaydratha. I only know the "I will kill Jayadratha or swallow fire" line by Arjuna. Sorry.Bakaman Bakatalk 00:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


Dude, Shiva did grant Jayadratha's wish. He gave Jayadratha the power to keep all the Pandavas at bay (except Arjuna), which prevented the four from going to Abhimanyu's aid in the chakravyuha. Rama's arrow 00:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes it was temporary, but it was still a boon. Shiva loves his devotees equally - he does not ignore the tapasya of rakshasas, asuras or anybody, which is cool. Yet he finds ways to protect dharma and not allow anybody evil to triumph over good. Rama's arrow 01:02, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


When I found a List of Muslim soldiers on wiki I thought us Hindus deserved a list for our loooong list of soldiers. Since you are the unofficial expert on Mahabharat/Ramayana can you add to the List of Hindu soldiers ?Bakaman Bakatalk 00:59, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

New lists[edit]

While browsing I noticed Muslim entertainers. I created Hindu entertainers (for Hindu celebs).Bakaman Bakatalk 02:13, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


Thank you for the good wishes. I hope that you have a fun-filled Diwali as well.Bakaman Bakatalk 18:39, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Diwali's greetings and a very Happy New Year to you and your family! Jai Sri Rama! Rama's arrow 22:07, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your Diwali greetings. GizzaChat © 04:28, 22 October 2006 (UTC)


Hey Raj, I wanted to add my thanks to you for the cooperative work on the Hinduism page. It's not easy to get three or more editors to each transcend their own strongly held understanding of a subject, and come up with a compromise that works for all, and improves an article. Hari Om. ॐ Priyanath 19:38, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Article That Could Do With Your Input[edit]

Hi Raj, I think this article and this could do with your input and balancing up. Thanks --Sikh-History 17:47, 5 January 2010 (UTC)


The point to remember is that it is not necessary to convince the other party in such discussions, but to lay down your legitimate points (backed up by sources) as precisely and succinctly as possible. That way, it is easy, for outside editors to assess the evidence and support changes to the article. On the other hand when uninvolved editors see incivil remarks, sniping, and point-scoring in a discussion they simply focus on the editors' conduct, overlook the content issue, lock the page and move on - therefore such filibustering is (unfortunately) very effective if one supports the status quo, but is counter-productive if one intends to make actual improvements. Hope everyone will keep this in mind before getting into a tit-for-tat debate. Cheers. In case you are wondering why I am not commenting on the incivility on the other side, see the last post in this thread; I don't think repetition there will help. Abecedare (talk) 00:40, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Swami Krishnananda[edit]

Dear Raj2004,

I just wanted to say hello and introduce myself. I am the principle author of and researcher for the Swami Krishnananda page thus far. I notice that you are an experienced editor who seems to have an interest in Hinduism and related subjects. What do you think of our work? Do you know much about Swami Krishnananda?

I understand from another user—Goethean—that some of our citations need to be improved, namely 3, 4, and 5. I can assure you that the sources to which those citations correspond are valid, and we are working to find away to cite them properly.

For your records, we have attached a letter initially addressed to users Health Researcher and Goethean that may shine some light on the situation regarding the contested citations.

Thank you for your recent good edits:)


Advedom (talk) 02:09, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Dear Goethean,
Though my collaborators and I did spearhead the Swami Krishnananda page, including writing all of its content and doing all associated research thus far, we by no means wish to claim ownership of the article. We are fully aware of the open and collaborative nature of Wikipedia, and are more than willing to work in this capacity with other editors to improve the page. However, we are quite knowledgeable about Krishnananda and his work, and it may be helpful if we could maintain a leadership position on the project until it fully complies with Wikipedia policy. Either way, we intend to comply with that policy.
One of the missions of the institution that Swami Krishnananda ran for more than 40 years—the Divine Life Society—is the free dissemination of spiritual, religious, and philosophical literature. In accordance with that mission, Krishnananda did not promote nor profit monetarily from his writing or teaching. Therefore, Krishnananda’s work is not known much to the lay public. It has been challenging for us, then, to find impartial viewpoints about him outside of a relatively small, albeit highly respected, academic community, some of the makeup of which includes Dr. Stephen Phillips, Dr. Clooney, Dr. Grayling, and Dr. Pintchman—the professors cited as references in the article. According to one of our researchers, these professors have used Krishnananda's work in their lecturing, and do in fact assert that he was a significant 20th century theologian and philosopher. This assertion is testified further by Krishnananda’s extensive body of work, which speaks for itself, and by consensus among serious theologians and philosophers.
Essentially the article consists of three phases: biographical, academic, and contextual. The sources for the work in the first two phases have been cited amply with references to biographical information on Krishnananda published at, by Krishnananda’s own scholarly work, and by a few sources relating to the defining of key terms and concepts. Over half of the citations in the article correspond to these sources. The other phase of the article is “contextual,”—that is, related to the perspective with which the reader will view Swami Krishnananda. This phase of the article consists of the 13 assertions connected with the contested university professor references. Without these assertions, by virtue that Krishnananda is not well-known outside of religious and academic circles, the lay reader will have difficulty in fully appreciating the scope and scale of Krishnananda’s life and work, and therefore may not take the time to read the article in its entirety. For this reason, it is important to us that these assertions, which I can assure you are accurate, remain in the article.
With the exception of a few over-generalized correlations of statements in regards to Krishnananda’s work and, which I will soon correct, the only references in the article that remain unacceptable as per Wikipedia policy are the aforementioned which correspond to Dr. Stephen Phillips, Dr. Clooney, Dr. Grayling, and Dr. Pintchman. I will work diligently to get in touch with these individuals in an effort to obtain copies of their published material—course materials, syllabi, and work in academic journals—in which they have referred favorably to Swami Krishnananda and his work. I could provide quotations of theirs to such effect immediately, but as I understand it, this would be deemed by Wikipedia as “original research.” These professors are very busy people, so it may take some time for me to obtain copies of, or find online locations for, their published comments as regards Swami Krishnananda and his work. If I am unable to locate this material in a timely fashion, perhaps you and I could collaborate to find sources elsewhere which can attest to the validity of the 13 assertions made in the “contextual” phase of the article.
Unfortunately, religion is under attack today. The reasons for this are rooted in ignorance. However, the study of a man like Swami Krishnananda, who had an unblemished record, who lived a life of admirable self-discipline, who selflessly served millions of people, and who left behind an ocean of knowledge, all in the name of religion, can replace this ignorance with an understanding of what the ancient science is really about.
Advedom (talk) 03:52, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Dear Raj2004,
How interesting that your father was a disciple of the great Swami Sivananda. Swami Sivananda was a mighty sage. He was one of our greatest jnanis. He was a God-man. I learned his work before learning Swami Kirshnananda’s. The first book that I read of his was Thought Power. It changed my life for the infinite good. Thank you for starting the Swami Sivananda page.
Swami Krishnananda’s devotion to Swami Sivananda was unparalleled, as is testified by, if nothing else, the fact that he remained in Rishikesh his whole life, to preserve the spirit and mission of the institution which Sivananda founded—the Divine Life Society—by overseeing its day-to-day operations, by serving as Editor of its monthly organ, Divine Life, and by serving as professor of philosophy and theology at its Yoga Vedanta Forest Academy.
You may be interested in Sri Krishnananda’s 1987 speech The Purpose of the Advent of Swami Sivananda, a video link to which is provided in the “External Links” section of the article. It is quite moving.
Sivananda writes of his young disciple:
“Krishnanandaji is a wonder to me! He has excelled me. He has excelled Sankara. He has excelled Dakshinamurthy. He came a few years ago. As usual, I asked him to stay in the Ashram. After six or seven days, he told me, "I know the Gita a little." I asked him to recite the Gita. And he recited a chapter of the Gita beautifully. Then, gradually... how he evolved and grew in knowledge and wisdom is a wonder to me!
Not a single harsh word he has spoken. He never becomes angry. He never complains. I think there is none in this Ashram of his type.
Lord Krishna was in a hurry; therefore, He enumerated some major virtues only, and we have to add to them the virtues that Krishnanandaji possesses.
He is the proper man to go to the West. But if that is not to be, even his mere presence in the world is sufficient. His books are treasures for us. I am sending them all over the world. A man remaining in his own Kutir can send powerful thoughts that would stir the whole world. It is not necessary to go here and there, delivering lectures; it is not necessary even to write books. It is good that a great man remains in his own place; bees will come when the flowers bloom. Swami Krishnanandaji is silent dynamism.”
Sri Krishnananda was very catholic in his approach to philosophy and religion. He did much to unite the East and the West. He had no religion or philosophy. He came to impart the Universal Message. When listening to him and reading his work, one gets the impression that he was merely a commentator on Hinduism, rather than a Hindu himself. He was always objective. He knew the Gita and the Gospels alike. He had no conflict.
To my mind, religions are like automobiles. Automobiles that are designed to take us back whence we came. Heaven. Like automobiles, some religions are more efficient than others. I think Hinduism is the most efficient automobile. Sri Krishnananda happened to be riding in the Hinduism automobile. We respect and admire all of your hard work and service in contributing to Hinduism in the Wikipedia. We reviewed your article on karma. Excellent work!
I think I have some information on Sri Krishnananda’s switch from Dvaita to Advaita. I know that it happened when he was a child, long before he became a sanyasin. I will work on it. Out of curiosity, what are the typographical errors in the article? We will be happy to fix those too.
We understand Goethean’s position. However this is our first article and we do not know Wikipedia policy as well as he does. So I do not see the need for his frustration; he said some very insensitive things to us. We have thoughtfully articulated to him our position and have politely requested that he give us a chance to do what we have said we will do, fix the footnoting. Considering that we are new editors, I think this is reasonable. Goethean is a great Wikipedian. We admire his hard work and service. Without his commitment to excellence Wikipedia would not be the great source of knowledge that it is. All is well and good.
We thank you for your kind words and are honored that you find the Krishnananda page to be relevant contribution to the Wikipedia. Many hours of hard and inspired work went into it. We hope it will serve as a stepping-stone for those interested in meeting and learning from one of our greatest sages.
Hari Om Tat Sat
Advedom (talk) 22:38, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Dear Raj2004,

I am leaving the Swami Krishnananda article in your capable hands.

I created my Wikipedia account specifically for authoring the Swami Krishnananda article (hence why the vast majority of my editing on the article has been conducted under IP addresses rather than usernames); and now that I have someone to whom to pass the torch, I am going to close my account. The Krishnananda article can be a great addition to your important work on Wikipedia Hinduism. Make it so.

May the blessings of Swami Sivananda and Swami Krishnananda be with you always.

Yours in the Lord,

Advedom (talk) 21:11, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Could Do with Your Input[edit]

Hi fellow editor, could you add your expertise here. Thanks--Sikh-History 07:06, 9 August 2010 (UTC)