Talk:Gopala Tapani Upanishad

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gopala Tapani Upanishad 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

Hinduism: Krishnaism Mid‑importance

	Hinduism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism 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.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Krishnaism (assessed as Mid-importance).

Red Links[edit]

I found several red links in this article. If their subjects are notable, articles about them should be created, but if not, the red links should be removed. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 19:26, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is next round of Vaishnava upanishads, I have these as to do articles. Probably will just put up stubs later this week. Wikidās ॐ 22:40, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very PRO ISKCON/Hare Krishna[edit]

- - I was doing reseach and came across this and other hindu related article. I must state this....this page and others are sooo ISKCONish/Hare Krishna, it is unbelievable! Any one, who has any scholarly knowledge into the Hindu religion...*** —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.160.86.87 (talk) 09:40, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back GRd,

Thank you for your open remark, there are no sources in ISKCON that even commented on the Gopala Tapania and it is a Upanishad that is specifically connected to Gopala, Krishna, so all tradition of Krishnaism are holding it in esteem. Regards Wikidās ॐ 14:26, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So you (71.160.86.87) are anti-ISKCON or something and if ISKCON comments on it it is bad? Very strange bias that you have. So what if ISKCON comments on it. BTW the word "Hindu" is no where found in the Vedas and is of recent vintage.106.51.19.129 (talk) 14:52, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Date[edit]

Why exactly should we accept the date given? The dating of these texts is notoriously unscientific and extremely subjective. I have seen dates for various Vedic texts by authorities that have a range spanning over 1000 years. Hardly a precise science. Why not just admit that you don't know what the date is? That at least is honest.106.51.19.129 (talk) 14:58, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Radhakrishna Darshan at Vrundavan.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:51, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rukmini/Radha[edit]

For the avoidance of doubt, here is what the source cited (Steven Rosen's Essential Hinduism p218) says:

"The Gopal-Tapani Upanishad begins by interpreting OM as described above, but it moves on from there (2.56):

"The wise and enlightened sages declare that the pleasure potency of God, Sri Radha, and all living beings are also contained in OM."

You can access the entire document here. Dāsānudāsa (talk) 13:43, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]