From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former featured article Hinduism is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 24, 2004.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hinduism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:43, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

This page shouldn't mention Hindu Religion as an Indian religion. This is not a country specific religion. There may be more people who follow Hindu religion. But there is Nepal which is the Hindu religion dominated country.

The author should mention in a way that Hindu religion was originated from Indus like that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:3801:1A00:206D:302A:C2EB:CE7F (talk) 10:16, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Household shrine[edit]

Most Hindu families have a household shrine [1]..Depending on the economic status of the family, the shrine could be located within a separate room but more commonly in the kitchen[2] Household shrine and the daily worship of the images and pictures in that shrine is the central aspect of popular Hinduismm.There are tons of reliable sources on the subject.I believe we should have either a separate section or at least add more material on the topic. ThanksJonathansammy (talk) 23:20, 8 November 2017 (UTC)


  1. ^ Huyler, Stephen P. (Author); Moore, Thomas (Forward (1999). Meeting god : elements of Hindu devotion. New Haven ,USA: Yale Univ. Press. pp. 42, 71–72,89. ISBN 9780300079838. 
  2. ^ Pintchman, Tracy (2007). Women's lives, women's rituals in the Hindu tradition. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 96. ISBN 9780195177060. 

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Didn't you propose and discuss this previously? such as here. The article already mentions this. You may want to reread the context in those two sources. We can't do OR/synthesis beyond what the source is stating. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 05:24, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

I remember that but that was mainly about adding an image of a household shrine rather than adding content in form of text.As I said before,in most Hindu households, worship of their Gods and saints happens in front of the household shrine rather than at a temple.The references I cite are just two of the hundreds of books and peer reviewed journals on the subject.Let me know your thoughts on the topic and then we can go from there.thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 13:25, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
There are numerous books and articles in peer reviewed journals on many aspects of Hinduism, which we condense in this article in a few sentences. In the same way, this article mentions household shrines both in individual and festival context. If there something that we haven't stated about household shrines which numerous secondary and tertiary sources are stating, that would be welcome. Note that both of the above are WP:Primary accounts. Stephen Huyler visits a person, summarizes his observations in a memoir-style in that chapter. Thomas Moore, which you list as co-author, mentions in his introductory review that the memoir book has a "coffee table" anecdotal quality. Similarly, Tracy Pintchman is summarizing a regional / Tamil home context. We need to be careful in avoiding OR:Synthesis. As for your sweeping claims about whatever you made previously or make now, please avoid them. Not only is it difficult to believe you have visited 100+ million homes, or even 1% of them, we can't summarize personal wisdom / prejudice / opinions. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 14:52, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
I have looked through the article, and it appears that the only mention of home shrines are:

Some devout Hindus perform daily rituals such as worshiping at dawn after bathing (usually at a family shrine, and typically includes lighting a lamp and offering foodstuffs before the images of deities) [...]


Bhakti is practiced in a number of ways, ranging from reciting mantras, japas (incantations), to individual private prayers within one's home shrine, or in a temple or near a river bank, sometimes in the presence of an idol or image of a deity.

Given that this is one of the primary means of worship (Bradshaw, 2013, Cole & Kanit, 2010, BBC, Hindusim Today), I don't think it could be considered undue weight to give it a little bit more attention in this 12,800-word article. The use of home shrines in worship isn't given much mention in the Worship in Hinduism and Puja (Hinduism) pages, either.
Also, the photo of a "home shrine" is actually a setup for a festival (like this one, eg. Henn, 2014, Murdoch, 1991, Häberlein, 2007). Wasechun tashunkaHOWLTRACK 18:55, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Wasechun tashunka: Some of these such as Hinduism Today are weak sources, with unclear peer review process. If it is "primary means", every scholarly encyclopedia would include it. Perhaps you would find a few scholarly encyclopedia and then identify what is it that they state that this wikipedia article doesn't. You probably missed that this article has long included a home shrine for festive occasions. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 00:20, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi Ms Sarah Welch, there are two aspects I'd like to discuss. To begin with, in terms of the photos presented, the "rituals" section states Most Hindus observe religious rituals at home, therefore, I believe there should be a photo of a permanent home shrine to illustrate this. I'm not sure what you mean by a home shrine for festive occasions, as there is a distinction between a permanent home shrine and temporary festival shrine, which need not be in the home. I don't much like Hinduism Today, but my intention was to demonstrate that this point was understood in a range of sources. However, could you explain why the other sources I pointed to would be considered unreliable, in your view?
With regards to the text, the article mentions that people may worship at a home shrine, but it does not provide any description of what a Hindu home shrine may consist of. I believe that Jonathansammy's proposal above was, for the most part, an improvement on what's currently there. This same Huyler title is already accepted as a citation in the article so I'm not sure why you would dismiss this as a primary source, especially since it does not count as a primary source as the authors are describing a foreign culture in a detached manner. I believe Pintchman is a decent source, if somewhat region-specific, but this could be solved with further citing - not a reason to dismiss an addition entirely. As for encyclopaediae referencing a home shrine, would Lochtefeld, 2002, Cush, et al., 2012, or Klostermaier, 2014 be suitable? All three authors are already cited in the article. Wasechun tashunkaHOWLTRACK 20:13, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── We can use primary sources when due and if we attribute/quote it carefully without interpretation. We can't generalize from a particular case or a passing remark because that is OR:Synthesis. Thank you for identifying the three tertiary sources. Lets take the first one. Lochtefeld, page 51. I see articles on Arati, Archana etc. Now, what is it that its states about 'home shrine' that you want included? Or did you intend to link another page? if so, please recheck and identify the page numbers you have in mind. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 20:31, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

household shrine with Deities and Holy persons worshipped by the a family
household shrine with Deities and Holy persons worshipped by the a family
My argument was actually that those two citations were not primary sources.
Regarding the three encyclopaedic sources, some relevant quotes include:

The deity may be present in many forms, such as a picture, statue, symbol [...] Arati is arguably the single most common act of Hindu worship, performed daily in Hindu homes and temples throughout the world

— Lochtefeld, 2002 (The section on the Grhya Sutras, which would deal specifically with home worship, is sadly excluded from the online preview)

Domestic altars are the focus of daily worship for the majority of Hindus. In each Hindu household there is a space set aside for the family shrine. In smaller houses, a corner of the kitchen [...] is made into a shrine containing small images of one or more gods and goddesses. [...] If space is at a premium the home shrine may simply consist of a picture of the family's chosen deity. In larger, richer houses there may be a separate shrine room containing an elaborate altar [...] Worship in the home is an important part of most people's daily religious life. While many people do not visit the temple on a daily basis, some only on special occasions, they would almost certainly offer a brief prayer at their domestic altar

— Cush, et al., 2012 (section author: Lynn Foulston)

The Hindu home [...] plays a central role in Hinduism. [...] from the earliest times essential rituals could only be performed in a family setting. The Veda prescribes a number of ceremonies that a brahmin has to perform daily in his home. [...] Every Hindu home has either a room or part of a room reserved for worship, and members of the family often spend a considerable amount of time doing Puja at home.

— Klostermaier, 2014
Of course, there are also plenty of reliable, non-encyclopaedic sources... Wasechun tashunkaHOWLTRACK 21:05, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
I had previously proposed one these images of permanent Hindu home temple /household shrine /family altar to go in the article.ThanksJonathansammy (talk) 22:12, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
They are primary sources. A report of observations from a home, or a village, or a test tube, or a sample study is WP:Primary. Wasechun tashunka, are you looking at snippet version or online versions without page numbers or context? I have these sources. The Grhya Sutras article in Lochtefeld is on page 262, I don't see home shrine or altar mentioned. I am puzzled by your claim. It is as expected about rites-of-passage etc. I have revised the Bhakti section based on the above comments. Jonathansammy: We already have had the home shrine image, with offerings. Images are meant to help understand the content, not be albums. One suffices. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 23:09, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Ms sarah welch, I propose we should add one of the above images because the one we have in the article with Krishna as the central figure is a temporary shrine for a particular festival and not a permanent household shrine.if you find another image on commons of a permanent shrine then feel free to add that.ThanksJonathansammy (talk) 21:12, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
One suffices. Festival arrangements and shrines are more common. I don't see support in any sources identified so far for "permanent household shrine" classification. For those reasons, I oppose your proposal. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 22:06, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Well,one finds family altar,household shrine,and home shrine mentioned in so many sources that i am surprised that you oppose it.Have a look at these books [1],[2],[3]thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 23:20, 14 November 2017 (UTC)


  1. ^ White, Joy; Lovelace, Ann (1997). Beliefs, values & traditions : hinduism, Sanatan Dharma. Oxford [u.a.]: Heinemann. ISBN 9780435302528. Retrieved 14 November 2017. 
  2. ^ Waghorne,, Joanne Punzo; Narayanan, Vasudha; Cutler,, Norman; Courtright, Paul (1996). Gods of flesh, gods of stone : the embodiment of divinity in India. Columbia University Press. pp. 34,35,59. ISBN 9780231107778. 
  3. ^ Ridgeon, Lloyd (editor); Killingley, Dermot (2003). Major world religions : from their origins to the present. Routledge Curzon. pp. 43,49,50. ISBN 9780415297967. Retrieved 14 November 2017. 

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Jonathansammy: The article has already summarized household shrines in the Bhakti section. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 01:33, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Ms Welch, we are now talking a little bit at cross purposes here.I am just asking for the picture of shrine with Krishna for Vishu festival to be replaced with a regular home shrine.even in this image you can see the "permanent shrine" at the back of the Krishna murti.A better picture of that will serve the purpose too.Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 16:49, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
The picture that has been in this article for quite a while is better. For why, please see above. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:54, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
I am not going to argue on this anymore but it does leave a gap in the article.ThanksJonathansammy (talk) 18:17, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Pilgrimage -Kumbhamela[edit]

For sake of completion,the place where a Kumbhamela is held should also mention the river associated with it.Taking a dip in the river at that place is central to the Kumbhamela experience.Let me know your thoughts on the topic.ThanksJonathansammy (talk) 16:01, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Indeed. I support adding it with a WP:RS. Perhaps in a refn note. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 23:27, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Opening line[edit]

It is written in opening line that "Hinduism has been called the oldest Religion" I want to replace phrase "has been called" with "is". If someone disagree please tell me reason. Anmolbhat (talk) 15:58, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Not by everyone. The 'has been called' implies some uncertainty, or that this is a view of some/many but is not universal. That phrasing is more NPOV than using "is". Read the archive of this talk page, particularly about whether Hinduism is a modern construct/invention just like other religions. I suggest you leave it alone. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:06, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
I agree with what Ms Sarah Welch is saying.Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 17:27, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Me too. The religion of the Aboriginals in Ausralia is arguably thousands of years older. Actually, I think that that line, and the accompanyingnote, should be removed, since it is a leftover of pov-pushing. But as it is now, it is acceptable. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:42, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
We should remove it. We could get complaints from the Animists out there! --regentspark (comment) 21:35, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Scientific Consistency[edit]

Hello, I want to add the following content under a new sub-topic under "People and Society," after the subtopic "education." Could anyone please review it?

If one reads the Vedanta, it shouldn't come one’s surprise that "the undeniable similarity between the Vedanta and Science, lies in the spirit of inquiry" (Ramanuja, 84). Anindita Niyogi Balslev, an Indian philosopher notices that the "creation hymn" of the Vedas begins with the question "Kutah ayam visrsti?" Meaning, "Where from this creation?"(Balslev, 881). The Brahmasutra follows suit, attributing to the opening line "Atato Brahm jignasa" or inquiry into the ultimate reality (Ramanuja, 85). Jonathan B. Endellman explains that even the Shrimad Bhagvatam, that was composed sometime between the 9th and the 11th century C.E, "is designed in a manner that suggests relationship between science and religion," indicating to the fact that it puts a lot of emphasis on the study of nature to be a necessary precondition to understand the creator. The greatest minds of the time had indulged into answering questions related to all aspects of life, be it the human body or any other natural phenomena. The Vedanta are probably the first writings examining the complexities of the neural system. The Upanishadas (derived from the Vedas), mentioned "nasato vidhyate bhavo," meaning from non-being, being cannot arise. Isn’t this just another way of stating Mathias Schielden and Theodore Shwann's Cell Theory? Only that the Upanishadas were written tens and thousands of years before Schielden and Shwann were even born. Moreover, the Shrimad Bhagvatam and the Garbhopnishada, delve into the matter of formation of an individual. "To obtain a [suitable] body, the individual, dwelling in a particle of male semen, is made to enter the womb of a woman by means of its karma and divine providence (Shrimad Bhagvatam, Daivanetren. a: 3, 31, 1)," construes the process of 'daivanetren', meaning how the 'atman' or 'caitanyam', leave the sperm of the male and enters female's womb to gain physical form, in other words the process of fertilization. It might also be to one’s surprise that the mention of evolution and interrelation of species dwelling on the planet, what we now call “Darwinism” was an idea already pondered upon by Vyasa in the Shrimad Bhagvatam, in the form of Vishnu’s multiple incarnations and their evolution form the Kurma or the turtle to Buddha, a human who guided mankind to the path of righteousness and dharma. Not only this, almost all the mentioned Hindu scriptures acknowledge the concept of "many worlds" or "lok" for example " swarg lok," "paatal lok," Vaikunth, "Brahm lok," and the like, many of which are even said to inhabited, a concept that is of no wonder now, with the advancements in the scientific technology. This concept was never even touched upon by any of the contemporary religions, majorly because it “is antithetical to religious quest, or as that which renders this world to be characterized as pointless (Balslev, 882).

However, it is true that some aspects of the Vedanta and the Shrimad Bhagvatam, have certain lurid descriptions of things beyond gross matter that defy the principle of nihil ultra, but at this point, it is important to keep in mind the very nature of these texts. These texts, like any other religious texts, seek to enable mankind to see beyond the phenomenal world. Varadraja V. Raman notes that as far as one is dealing with the phenomenal world, the concept of “nihil ultra,” might seem to be true, but when human consciousness is taken into account, there are “subtle and intangible entities like thought and value, meaning and aesthetic experiences that transcend logico-mathematical explanations” (Raman, 86). This, even if we do think about logical explanations, are not completely explainable, if we ignore the realm of spirit. Vedantic revelations unmask, along with the physical complexities, the spiritual potential of the human brain and lead one to the feeling of “advaita” or oneness with the Almighty. This can be achieved by losing one’s own identity, by rising above the ‘gyanendriyas,’ namely kaam (lust), krodh (rage), mad (ego), lobh (greed) and moh (attachment). This, however, cannot be achieved without having a clear knowledge of nature and natural phenomena, and hence, the Vedas, and all the mentioned texts (that are derived from the Vedas), emphasize on the importance of “tattva gyaan” or “knowledge of the phenomenal world” or “knowledge of the phenomenal world,” through "hearing, contemplation and intellection," which according to the Vedanta is "Apara Vidhya" or "Lower Knowledge" with "Higher Knowledge" (Para Vidhya), being identifying the "Parabrahm" (Almighty), within oneself (Balslev, 882). And besides, with the advent of Quantum Physics, one has known that the “Fundamental” Laws of Physics are not applicable probability clouds of electrons, black holes and singularities.

Skeptics and non-believers would also question the credibility of the Hindu scriptures as being padlocked to criticism and assessment in the early, orthodox Hindu society, but the presence of the Samkhya school of philosophy, rules out this argument. The Samkhya philosophy, is a more skeptical philosophy that constantly argues with the Vedic philosophy to establish a concept of “dwait” or distinction between the self and the Almighty, by the metaphor of “purusha” and “prakriti.” which although, might be true when it comes to macroscopic level, has no significance at the quantum level, where distinctions between the observer and the observed become negligible. It is to be noted here, that the Samkhya school is not an atheistic school.

Vkhat1 (talk) 06:51, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

You haven't cited any source Anmolbhat (talk) 09:03, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

I am new to Wikipedia and this is a part of my assignment. Could you Please guide me as to how I can cite a source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vkhat1 (talkcontribs) 23:57, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Non-encyclopedic. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:03, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

@Vkhat1: See this[1] on how to cite sources and for information on reliable sources see WP:RS I hope it helps Anmolbhat (talk) 05:04, 12 December 2017 (UTC)