Talk:Chaitanya Mahaprabhu/Archive 1

English Transliteration needs correction

As a native Bangla speaker, I think the name is correctly transliterated to English as "Chaitanya". The corresponding Bangla character is "cha", which is pronounced as in Charity. So the tranliteration needs to be changed. In India and Bangladesh, the "Chaitanya" spelling is more commonly used. Lets discuss on this before making changes. Thanks. --Ragib 21:58, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC) Please refer to A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada's translation of Bhagavad Gita, Srimad Bhagavatam or Sri Caitanya Caritamrta .In the Sanskrit/Bengali Pronunciation guide a full explanation is given .Basically it avoids the use of a double 'h' <= Please sign your posts! =>

Among common transliteration conventions, IAST, Harvard-Kyoto and ITRANS, that are the bulk of it, all transliterate চ as "ca" and ছ as "cha". Some, wishing to make it more phonetic, opt for "cha" and "chha" respectively. This leads to cumbersome transliterations with words like ইচ্ছ, which would be come "ichchha" instead of the tidier "iccha". While A.C. Bhaktivedanta's works do not set a standard per se, they are a point of reference. In our publications, we have opted in favor of phonetic spelling for names and very common words, in which case diacritics are also dropped, while rarer words and entire Sanskrit or Bengali passages are "properly" transliterated. We have found this dual standard to be the most sensible in meeting the needs of the audience. Of course, creating style-sheets for something like WikiPedia is, well, an interesting endeavor... Raga 20:47, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External Link

Hi, I would like to add an external link to the World of Biography entry

probably the most famous portal of biography to this article. Does anybody have any objections?

Dear Anon, I've included the above article in the external links section, I can't see anyone having any objections to it? Thankyou for adding to the page GourangaUK 09:56, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

please do not add this to the article, and please read the incident report before giving the go-ahead. This is spam and not link-worthy under WP:EL; the articles contain many distortions, lack citations, and contain nothing that wouldn't fit directly in the wiki article. a link to worldofbiography has been placed on over 70 talk pages by User:Jameswatt. thanks. --He:ah? 20:59, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the case of a person who is important for religious beliefs, it basically is irrelevant that some clearly separated and attributed section of the "biography" are unsupported by evidence or citations: it is also important to show the popular hagiographical tradition. If the external link is a good example of this hagiographical tradition then it can be included if an appropriate description is added. Andries 21:37, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On a brief scan of the biography I couldn't see anything that I found particulary out of line with the traditional stories, we have however already got a number of detailed links? If it's part of a general spamming campaign through Wikipedia then maybe best left alone? GourangaUK 16:40, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Parallels with Gaudiya Vaishnavism

A lot of stuff here goes parallel with Gaudiya Vaishnavism, which I've tagged for re-write - it's a mess. Suggest making this purely biographical with a clear link to Chaitanya's tradition: Gaudiya Vaishnavism. -- Raga 21:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Raga - I think that at least the basics of Mahaprabhu's teachings and tradition should be included in this page. How about we try a clean-up on the GV page and then see what is repeated on both pages at the end of it? Ys, GourangaUK 09:21, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah - that's a good idea. Let's clean up GV first. Let's continue the chat in the discussion area there. I'm getting back to this in a couple of days, a bit too busy just now. Raga 12:39, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Required

"A chandal (one of the lowest castes) is not a chandal if he says the name of Krishna; A brahmin is not a brahmin if he walks an unholy path." - Where is this recorded? Google returns nothing. Just looking to approve the translation above it but can't find the quote in the CC. Dwayne Kirkwood 23:17, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dwayne, the nearest I could find were these three quotations:

It might be quoted exactly somewhere else on the net but in a Balarama style font which Google wouldn't recognise? Best Wishes, GourangaUK 08:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hari. I searched vedabase & google for the quoted text ("candala candala nahe") and found nothing of the sort. Without any reference to where it's from, imo it should be removed.... I'll take it off tomorrow if it's not corrected. ys Dwayne Kirkwood 09:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The bulk of Caitanya's biographies aren't available in as transliterated e-texts; it could be from Caitanya-bhagavata or Caitanya-mangala. Whatever the case, I disagree with the point that is being made of Caitanya's rejecting the caste system, though it's a popular "belief". I could cite a dozen examples that showed he also supported it in a social context, though he felt Krishna-bhakti itself crossed all boundaries and had no restrictions. The translation itself is accurate. The meter of the original payar doesn't rhyme though, which suggests it's a popular saying, possibly derived from a number of original verses. --Raga 18:03, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Social reform

Chaitanya's religious persona tend to foreshadow his social reformer personality. But his religious movement was triggered by his social reformation agenda. And in that capacity of a social reformer, Chaitanya's influence on later bangali socio-cultural landscape is far too great to ignore.

Bengali Romanization

My addition of the Bengali Romanization of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's name has been reverted twice (once because I accidentally deleted the previous transliteration), with the second revert labeled "removing strange translation". Obviously, I'm not "translating" the name. I'm just adding the Romanization of this guy's Bengali name, as has been done for all other people mentioned on the Bengali people page. In fact, I am going through and adding the Romanizations to the Bengali people page itself, so that others know what I mean. This Romanization was agreed upon by members of the Bengali Wikipedia community, and it has been used to transcribe the pronunciation of Bengali words and names throughout Wikipedia. Please stop removing my additions. Thanks. --SameerKhan 09:27, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sameer Khan - With all due respect I do not see the logic in including such a strange Romanization on this page when Caitanya Mahaprabhu's name is already translated into standard English? Who say's Chaitanya's name as 'Choitonno Môhaprobhu'? I havn't heard any Bengali's say it in this way on my travels? Regards, GourangaUK 10:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is most definitely the Bengali pronunciation. You can check on the Bengali language and Bengali script pages to see what the Romanization should sound like in IPA or something like that. A few of us have been going through adding to articles on Bengali names and terms by providing the Bengali pronunciation in Romanization (or IPA, in some cases). Feel free to check out the links from the Bengali people page to see other examples. So far, this is the only article where I've encountered people who don't appreciate it, but whatever, it's not a big enough deal for me to argue. --SameerKhan 18:22, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, also, we're trying to keep the name of the language in English, so I will change "Bangla" back to "Bengali". We've been trying to keep this consistent, off of a consensus reached a few months back. Thanks. --SameerKhan 18:24, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral Point of View

Please try and keep within Wikipedia's NPOV policy when adding content to this article, specifically the recent edits by Bradmills2005. These will be reverted entirely if you insist on adding POV material. An example of POV material that has been reverted recently is "It is proved beyond doubt therefore that Sri Sri Radha Krishna (God)is Sri Chaitanya Mahapraphu. Sri Chaitanya Mahapraphu is God." BTW Prabhu is the common spelling, Praphu will be changed if added in any context. Thank you, Hare Krishna, Dwayne Kirkwood 09:24, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Do not Move. —Wknight94 (talk) 20:59, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

Chaitanya Mahaprabhu → Chaitanya – The current title is POV, in my opinion, for mahāprabhu means "Supreme Lord". Even though the fact that Chaitanya is considered as such should be reflected in the article, the title should be neutral in this regard. Besides, the title Chaitanya is perfectly clear, and does not need to be disambiguated. Benne ['bɛnə] _(talk) 11:56, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

Oppose - GourangaUK 18:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - It's a well-established title both among followers and outside. --Raga 19:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Siyavash 21:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Dwayne Kirkwood 21:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Ekantik 03:02, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Add any additional comments

Well, his full name given by his Spiritual Master is "Sri-Krsna-Caitanya". So the page should be moved to this, rather than just part of his name. If we are going to move pages that have given titles in it, we should also move "Mahatma" Gandhi.

Finally, Mahaprabhu means "Great Master", eg. Great Spiritual Master. It does not necessarily mean Supreme Lord. Dwayne Kirkwood 18:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The word 'Chaitanya' itself has various meanings of it's own, whereas 'Chaitanya Mahaprabhu' specifically denotes the person who the article is describing. Use of the word Sri could be argued to be POV, but I would disagree in the case of Mahaprabhu, which is a title given specifically in this case. GourangaUK 18:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vallabha is also known as "Mahaprabhu". At Radha-kunda, you'll find "Mahaprabhu Ji Ka Baithak" right after Tamal Tala and Caitanya Mahaprabhu's baithak. If you really want to remove all titles, then A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada should move to A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami, and so forth. Also, then every "Thakur", "Sri" and so forth would have to go in the name of consistency. — Raga 19:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree Raga, that it's either all or none. I'm not for removing titles at all, unless it's a general one like Sri or Srila. At the end of the day does it really matter enough to remove them if they help to identify the person in question? Maybe the Great Wall of China should be re-named aswell if we have to follow this logic? GourangaUK 19:03, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. We ought to call it Wall of China, or otherwise Relatively High Wall of China to maintain NPOV. --Raga 18:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Neutrality

[comments moved from top of page]

Article is is full of religous points of view stated as fact, edited by devotees. wikipedia is not a platform for preaching.

Please state what parts of the article you are refering to? Thanks Chopper Dave 03:21, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Following on the above remark regarding the neutrality of the article I have gone through today and performed a general tidy-up, removing any POV statements where I could see them and adding in extra information where appropriate. In my opinion there may have been one or two incorrectly worded sentances, but overall the article was and is (hopefully) factually based and informative on the subject of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and his life and precepts. Best Wishes, ys GourangaUK 10:45, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Name of Mahaprabhu

His given Sannyas name was actually "Krishna Chaitanya" or "Krsna Caitanya" depending on the transliteration scheme. The name means actually "Krishna Conscious" and unfortunately unicode does not seem to have the underdotted letters which are needed for the second translation scheme. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gunananda (talk) 07:24, 7 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Chaitanya Mahaprabhu accepted the order of sannyasa from Keshava Bharati, who belonged to the Shankara-sampradaya (externally a Mayavadi sannyasi). I was under the impression Chaitanya was the only sanyass name given in this instance (without the Krishna prefix)? The word chaitanya (in general) meaning living force. CC M.5.142. Do you know a reference on the web to the name Krishna being given also at that time? Ys, Gouranga(UK) 12:47, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tantric Vaishnavism

I would appreciate the investigation of the following paragraph which was deleted from the body of this article be investigated an appropriate redress of the weighted Gaudiya Vaishnavism voice within this article (which is NOT conducive of scholarly discourse) and appropriate for an encyclopedia:

Through comparison of the biographies of Chaitanya a definite progression in philosophical interpretation, attribution and/or exegesis is evident which incorporates Tantric elements. Tony Stewart (1999) ^[1] has performed an excellent study of the biographies. In addition, Tony Stewart assisted Ed Dimock with the Introduction (pp 82-106) to the Chaitanya Charitamrita which summarizes that the early biographies (Murari Gupta and the Caitanya Bhagavata) see Chaitanya principally as an incarnation of Visnu/Krsna in the Puranic vein. Hence, Chaitanya comes to destroy (or convert) the miscreants or evil-doers and establish Dharma. Chaitanya is affirmed as a yuga avatara and there is no mention of Radha. In Kavikarnapura's first biography, that view is upheld but is extended by the invention or recognition of the panchatattva as part of the incarnational theory. Jayanananda's Caitanya-mangal again only sees him as an incarnation of Krsna. It is only with the second biography of Kavikarnapura, the Caitanya-candrodaya, that Chaitanya's feminine side, Radha is textually recognised, but recognition of Chaitanya as a dual incarnation is not explicitly stated. Only in the Chaitanya Charitammrita does that image of Chaitanya as a dual-incarnation of Krishna and Radha seek full exegesis. Therefore, this progression shows a marked inclusion of Tantric views in the interpretation, attribution and/or exegesis of Chaitanya and by association, Gaudiya Vaishnava. Stewart and Domock also state that the last view, that of the Chaitanya Charitamrita, clearly elucidates parallels with the Sahajiya practitioner (who invokes Krsna into his body) and his sadhika (who invokes Radha into her body) and conjoin in the sexual rite or maithuna. The final image of Chaitanya as a dual incarnation of Krishna and Radha demonstrates a marked Sahajiya and Tantric influence. Chaityanya is the image of an embodied union, the perfect union of the male and female principles.

B9 hummingbird hovering^{(talk • contribs)} 10:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above paragraph is opinion based, containing speculative statements and theories with little or no factual basis. Basicially it gives a distorted and minority Tantric viewpoint of a Chaitanya's life and theology. I see little reason to include it within an encyclopedic article? Gouranga(UK) 14:13, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

note: None of this article is historical,and it is speculative in totality. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.72.101.94 (talk) 03:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

^ Tony K Stewart (ed & tr), Chaitanya Caritamrta of Krsnadasa Kaviraja, Harvard Oriental Series no. 56, Cambridge, MA, 1999.

[1] Tony K Stewart (ed & tr), Chaitanya Caritamrta of Krsnadasa Kaviraja, Harvard Oriental Series no. 56, Cambridge, MA, 1999.

[1]