Jump to content

Talk:Lakshmi

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 70.39.186.132 (talk) at 06:01, 15 January 2015 (→‎Finding in Pompeii, Italy: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Wealth

I just redid the transliteration for the eight kinds of wealth. I didn't want to make it unfriendly for those not unicode friendly in the first place, but saw umlauts for macrons and thought I'd just revamp the list to IAST standards. If you disagree with this, simply revert. I thought her epithets (the पद्मप्रिय, etc) might also be rendered in Devanagari w/ proper transliteration. And is the श्री|śrī commentary necessary here? Other miscellaneous elements could be cleaned up and standardized perhaps. I know that there are a whole lot of people here whose knowledge of Hinduism far surpasses mine though, so I'll leave that to them ;-) Khiradtalk 23:52, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Epithets

There is absolutely no reason why Lakshmi's epithets shouldn't be on this page. All other goddess articles have their epithets and other names listed on their actual article page. Lakshmi's page isn't very big anyway, and removing it just makes it even smaller. Editing the category, deleting it or relocating it is not acceptable Wikipedia conduct, as others have also tried to put it back after you have removed it. Please rethink your actions. 80.43.96.64 17:20, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you in that right now the list of names is small. However, later on if other people add more names (I think there are 108 names like for many Hindu deities) it will become too big. I was just pre-empting the big list of names in the future. Do you want to wait until other people add more names and then relocate it when it takes too much space. Also if you see most other pages, they have their list of names closer to the bottom. I don't think a list looks good in the middle of the article. GizzaChat © 21:16, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I already added another three names, Sridevi, Bhumi Devi and Chanchala. I am fine with keeping it here at the moment but I know Lakshmiji has many more names so eventually it will have to be moved. On a lot of Wikipedia pages, there is only a link on the main page because the list is too big. GizzaChat © 21:33, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think for now the list should be kept on the main page as it isn't too big, but if you think it would be better moved a little further down the page to suit the other gods articles I think that's ok (as long as it is the same as the other gods articles). Perhaps you can keep an eye out and if the list does become too big you should do something about it then. But it is important for the list of any god's epithets to be easily found in an article. 80.43.37.9 17:10, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Coconut and Shell/Conch are bothers of Laxmi

Can someone add this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.243.125.126 (talk) 14:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

You can add it yourself if you have a verifiable source. (Ghostexorcist 19:55, 26 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Stop messing with the intro...

OKay I am sick and tired of someone adding the astrological information to the opening, and omitting the comparisons to the Greco-Roman goddesses. That's why this article got tagged: the astro info is wholly irrelevant and sounds unencyclopedic, and doesn't really even apply to the discussion of the goddess. Can a moderator please prevent these changes from being made again? Ikshveku 09:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged "Legends" section

Added ==refimprove== tag to this section because it doesn't cite any outside sources--just links to wikipedia articles. PainMan 18:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correction. It does not cite enough outside sources. --Ghostexorcist 19:15, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Hinduism reassessment

Due to the recent creation of class C and introduction of 6-clause B-criteria, i am checking this artcle for the B-criteria:

  • The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations where necessary.
Very few Inline citations for an article of this size.
  • The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.
Her associations with other gods except Vishnu like "as a wife of Sūrya , as a wife of Prajā-pati , as a wife of Dharma and mother of Kāma , as sister or mother of Dhātṛ and Vidhātṛ , as wife of Datt^atreya , as one of the 9 Śaktis of Viṣṇu , as a manifestation of Prakṛti &c. , as identified with Dākshāyaṇī" not covered in detail. Association with Ganesha as a shakti. Role in other religions like Jainism not covered. Historical development, mention in Rigveda, identification with goddess Sri [1] missing
  • The article has a defined structure, including a lead section and all appropriate sections of content.
lists and one-line para, not in std form
  • The article is reasonably well written.
  • The article contains supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams, where appropriate.
  • The article presents its content in an appropriately accessible way.

RESULT: C-classRedtigerxyz (talk) 14:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actress

There is an actress named Laxmi; the article of that name redirects here. Unfortunately, there has been a lot of very lazy linking (see what links to Laxmi). Anyone want to take on the clean-up? — crism (talk) 20:17, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind; there weren’t actually all that many. Fixed, I think. — crism (talk) 20:42, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Misinterpretation

Atharva veda:7.46 doesn't say that Lakshmī is the consort of Vishnu. It says that Sinīvālī is the consort of Vishnu. Further , Lakshmī is not mentioned in vedas

Hence, 7.46.3 is mistranslated hopelessly. I am replacing the reference.....--Powerprowess (talk) 08:29, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Laksmi is homologous to another of Visnu's consorts, Sinīvālī. JSTOR: Early Vaisnava Bhakti and Its Autochthonous HeritageWikidās ॐ 15:04, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Radha was never a wife of Krishna

Radha was never married to Krishna. In fact she was married to someone else like all the other Gopikas. Krishna was a boy when he was in Brindavan. Radha and all the Gopikas were much older than him. Rukmani and Sathyabhama are the well known wives of Krishna. This is what is written in Srimad Bagavatha. Sankarrukku (talk) 15:53, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

alt spelling

Shouldn't the spelling Laxmi be explicitly mentioned somewhere near the top? —Tamfang (talk) 04:12, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

aalakshmi vahana

AALAKSHMI VAHANA IS OWL, SHE IS THE WIFE OF KAALEE DITYA, THEY RESIDE IN THE PLACE LIKE WHERE PEOPLE QUARREL, AND WHERE DIRT IS PLACED IN THE HOUSES OR OFFICE ..THEY BOTH KAALE AND AALAKSHMI MAKE PEOPLE TODO BAD THINGS, ONE SUCH EXAMPLE IS IT IS BELIEVED THAT AALAKSHMI RESIDE INSIDE MANTRA AND PRECHED EVIL THINGS TO THE MIND OF KAYKAEE,THIRD WIFE OFRAJA DASHARATH,KING OF, TO SEND LORD SHRI RAAMA TO FOREST FOR 14YEAR. IN THE MAHABHARATH DURYODHANA HIMSELF IS KAALII AND HIS WIFE BHANUMATHI IS AALAKSHMI. IT SI BELIVED THAT WHERE EVER THESE COUPLES STAY THEIR EVIL THINGS WILL HAPPEN . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.249.29.230 (talk) 05:47, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

The meaning of Lakshmi does not mean only a "mark, sign" but has root with "LAKS" लक्ष्, which means: Look in English(Lukati in Slavic) with appendix "IM" मी, which could be "movement, understanding, creating comething"...

"mlk" (Lakshmlk) could mean many things (in context); for example म्लुच् (mluc (mluk); "to go") or malika (a king), melaka (assembly),...

Finding in Pompeii, Italy

A statuette of Lakshim was found in Pompeii, Italy, dated before of the Vesuvium eruction of 79 AD. See http://www.pompeiiinpictures.com/pompeiiinpictures/R1/1%2008%2005.htm

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lakshmi&oldid=642566599"