Talk:Kama Sutra: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 10:14, 19 February 2007

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kama Sutra article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

India Unassessed

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Sexology and sexuality B‑class High‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality 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.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Hello"

Hi everyone. Cool page. Am using it to help write a talk. Thanks. I made some edits today and would like to make more if I have time. Hopefully I can convince my fiancee who is much more qualified to do the same. The page has some nice stuff on it but is I would say still at around B quality b/c there are a lot of POV problems (I fixed some up in the firts paragraph) and the informtion is inconsistent. Thanks for having me and hope I can help. Isouweine 02:21, 9 January 2007 (UTC)Isaac[reply]

"Featured Article Candidate" status

(The original poster left no headline. I made up one. --Netizen 11:44, 15 March 2006 (UTC)) Oops! I couldn't understand, how this could be FAC...--Rrjanbiah 04:57, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? --ganesh 15:46, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I meant that this article is not complete enough to get featured status. Also, no one did nominate it. --Rrjanbiah 04:09, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Divinity of the text

(The original poster left no headline. I made up one. --Netizen 11:44, 15 March 2006 (UTC))[reply]

2004

Okkey... I have a problem with the first line itself. Kama Sutra in *not* a sacred text. I want to change that. any objections? Spundun 00:23, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

okkey.. I could find any good source which said kama sutra is sacred.. so I am deleting that part. Ofcourse in the text itself vatsyayan says that love and love making is sacred but that doesnt make it a sacred text. he is not (imho) authority on spirituality. Spundun 02:40, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

It is considered to be sacred atleast in India. There is a temple, in konark, dedicated to Kamasutra. --ganesh 15:49, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The temple in konark is a temple of sun with a lot of sculptures of sexual positions on the walls of it. Btw I found this very interesting link on the sculptures.. its a bit depressing though :).

The scope of the word sacred can be debated.... but I think kama sutra doesnt go with geeta, ramayan, mahabharat, bhagwat, upnishads etc. Just like I wouldn't call the text of ayurved as a sacred text either(though its definately ancient.)

Btw for the record I am a hindu/Indian. Although I will have to admit that I didnt know that kama sutra talked about sex as a divine ritual. :)

Regards -- Spundun 03:17, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Let's replace sacred with divine. BTW, till last week the introduction paragraph gave me a feeling as if Burton wrote Sutra. There was only an ephemeral reference to India, Vatsyayana and Sanskrit. This gave me a feeling that no one from India had ever edited!--ganesh 22:02, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

whoa!!... divine is way off.... according to webster: definition: of, relating to, or proceeding directly from God or a god.......this is even worse than sacred. i suggest that we take out divine from that place. Later in the article it is stated that vatsyayan describes sex as a sacred ritual. That should be good enough to convey the information. People can then decide how they want to see that. Ofcourse all of above is my humble opinion.. you can get more people (indian or not) in this discussion for more opinions. oh, and you are right.... I just started using wikipedia recently... only a week or so back I saw the article for the first time. -- Spundun 08:27, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

2006

Listen, the whole origin of Sutra is wrong. There is no sacred nor divine references in it, nor any attributed to Shiva. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.103.127.252 (talk • contribs)

Please read the article more carefully. The article says the earliest text of the Kama Shastra tradition is attributed to Nandi. No one ever said it is attributed to Shiva. --BorgQueen 20:42, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

== Unavailibility of "Kama Shastra" == (The original poster left no headline. I made up one. --Netizen 11:44, 15 March 2006 (UTC)) could maybe mention that Kama Shastra is not available? mostly due to its size, probably, but i couldnt confirm.[reply]
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.110.149.157 (talk • contribs) 04:53, 6 December 2005 (UTC) (See diff) Thats right ..I have the original sanskrit version of kama-sutra..The sanskrit shlokas and all such stuff...Kama sutra is not just about *positions* , but rather it tells about fulfilling one of the 4 duties of a man ( artha,KAMA,moksha,dana)Kama...[reply]

anthropology pleeeze!

can we invite someone from anthropology pages to write/add some context?! Autumnleaf 16:29, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

sexual content warning message?

Although I found this article to be very informative, I think it would be appropriate to place some sort of warning message about the sexual nature of the material. Particularly the image titled , "Anonymous artist from Rajahstan around 1950 Oil on cardboard 12 x 18 cm". I do not believe that image is appropriate for ALL ages. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.36.67.128 (talk • contribs) .

Then you will be shocked by Bondage (BDSM). How about Prince Albert piercing? Wikipedia is not censored for minors. However, if you are serious about your idea I suggest you discuss it on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). --BorgQueen 19:55, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How many chapters

The burton edition has 36 chapters but this includes an introduction which I think is by Burton and not part of the original text. I may be mistaken. How many chapters do other translations have? I only have the Burton/Arbuthnot translation. --Richard Clegg 21:45, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have the Danielou traslation, and it has 36 chapters including the introduction chapter, but it is clearly of the original document, not Danielou's - since he lists his own introduction separately. --BorgQueen 21:52, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks, I just wanted to be sure. --Richard Clegg 22:57, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It explains a book?

It is not a book name. This page must be "kamasutra (book)".

Role of the Kama Sutra in Hinduism?

Is it a Hindu text? Is it accepted or marginal within Hinduism? The Vātsyāyana page describes him as belonging to the Carvaka school, which is contrasted to Hinduism. This is at odds with decsriptions elsewhere on the web. Any thoughts appreciated. ntennis 00:33, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do we need this link?

I'd like to gather consensus about the site "sekspozi.hit.bg". Do we really need this kind of external link? Kama Sutra is not only about the "positions", and we already have more than enough on the topic in the external link section. Besides, I don't think the site contributes much on it anyway. --BorgQueen 13:56, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just had a request to restore it but will wait for consensus on here first. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 10:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You mean this link. It gives different features - animated sex scences, instead of the slide show of still images of clothes models. Slightly more intriguing. --BorgQueen 10:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sekspozi.hit.bg also is interesing site, but ...

@@ Line 62: / Line 62: @@
 :I just had a request to restore it but will wait for consensus on here first. [[User:CambridgeBayWeather|CambridgeBayWeather]] [[User_talk:CambridgeBayWeather|(Talk)]] 10:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 ::You mean [http://kamasutraposes.hit.bg this link]. It gives different features - animated sex scences, instead of the slide show of still images of clothes models. Slightly more intriguing. --[[User:BorgQueen|BorgQueen]] 10:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
+::: sekspozi.hit.bg also is interesing site, but ...