Talk:Shaktism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Shaktism has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
October 26, 2007 Peer review Reviewed
December 18, 2007 Good article nominee Listed
January 7, 2008 Featured article candidate Not promoted
Current status: Good article
e·h·w·Stock post message.svg To-do:


  • "Further Reading" list is weak

Lead Paragraph Edits[edit]

Someone had added Smartism as one of the primary schools of Hinduism. In fact, it is a largely caste-based sect of Southern Hinduism, not a primary strand. As far as I know, Smartism was never considered as a major school of Hinduism until Satguru Subramuniyaswami proposed it as such in the mid-90's. He undoubtedly had his reasons -- albeit mainly sectarian and idiosyncratic -- for doing so. But the purpose of an encyclopedia article is to clarify, not obscure a topic.

For all practical purposes, a newcomer approaching Hinduism will be helped by understanding that the faith mainly comprises three sects: Vaishnavism, encompassing Krishna and Rama-centered cults, and representing the vast bulk of rituals, practices and beliefs that most Hindus follow; Shaivism, the more meditative and philosophically sophisticated practices placing Shiva at their apex; and Shaktism, the focus of this article, encompassing the Devi or Goddess-centered sects. These divisions are a useful starting point for getting a grasp on what Hinduism is.

In summary, then, the inclusion of Smartism is (a) a largely arbitrary and sectarian inclusion (i.e. if we admit Smartism as a "main school" of Hinduism, we immediately face the claims of at least a hundred other equally qualified sub-sects); and (b) a complex and difficult subdivision to explain, unlike Vaishnavism and Shaivism, and one more likely to confuse and obscure readers than to enlighten them.

Criticism Para[edit]

Adi Shakti in form of Goddess Kali is liberator of Moksha. Hence Shaktism is paradoxic too many scientific interpretations are similar with all paradoxic shaktism Concept.

Animal sacrifice section[edit]

@Jonathansammy: Have you actually checked the sources? The content you restored is in parts not supported by the sources, and in some parts not relevant, not WP:Due and WP:Fringe to Shaktism. Please check the sources carefully (I have), then let us discuss and reach a consensus version. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 22:10, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Absolutely, Spent a whole afternoon going through them again. Let me know which ones you object to ? The Rajputs sacrificing at Navratri is not fringe. The bhils and salis clearly offer sacrifice to central Goddesses of shaktism such as Bhavani and Kalika. The sacred groves in Maharashtra are around devi temples. Alf Hitelbeit was an authority on Hinduism in Southern India. The JSTOR article took such a long time to read. Do not forget, I found these references a long time ago. Please note I do not have any POV. On any encyclopedic article you should exercise NPOV. . Nevertheless, I follow Wikipedia policy and only add reliable sources. You will see very few if any website, blog or news citations from me. By the way, i have not stopped working on this section. i intend to find more material in the coming days to show that animal sacrifice in Shaktism is practiced throughout India and not just the North east. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 22:32, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
@Jonathansammy: Let us start with this and the Singh source on page 962. Where is the source mentioning anything about Shaktism or Shakta, or talking about a naming ceremony? There is a mention of goat sacrifice promise in the last para, but we can't use that in this article, because that is WP:OR of the WP:Synthesis variety. Is this on another page number? I can't find it, but we can consider it if this source discusses Shaktism or Shakta or equivalent. But no OR, no synthesis, etc. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 22:40, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
@Ms Sarah Welch , The Kuthari caste content. I will have to double check that. I did not add that but the claim sounds plausible. That can stay off until additional sources are presented. The Bhil and Sali content should be added back because they offer sacrifice to Bhavani and Kalika, two mainstream manifestations of Shakti !. Is that WP:Synthesis ? I must say what surprises me above all is how this article achieved GA without having a section on animal sacrifice. Thanks. Jonathansammy (talk) 03:30, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
@Jonathansammy: Yes, this article should have a reasonable, well sourced animal sacrifice section. But if the source never mentions Shaktism, it is OR-WP:Synthesis to allege or interpret anecdotal cases to be a generic Shaktism practice. Instances of animal sacrifice can go in the article on Bhavani / Kalika, but to put such stuff into this article requires that the scholar interpret/conclude that to be about Shaktism, or by Shakta-Hindu, or equivalent. Remember the Bhavani / Kalika / etc instance could be by a local tribe/ non-Shakta Hindus/ Muslims/ Tantra-Buddhists/ etc. In Bangladesh, for example, many instances of local Muslims worshipping goddesses have been reported (1, 2). That sort of stuff can go into the wikipedia article on goddess Olabibi or Bonbibi, but it would be OR-synthesis to list such unusual Muslim practices in this overview article on Hindu-Shaktism. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 12:15, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Website and other sources[edit]

Let me know if we can add the material from the following in the animal sacriifice section:

1. [1]

2. [2], page 128

3.[1]

4. [2]

I hope my fellow editors do not think that I am obsessed with this section. My objective here is to give a fuller picture of Shaktism and show that historically and even in contemporary times, animal sacrifice has been part of Goddess worship throughout India rather than just in the Northeast. Some of these traditions might be on the decline but youtube videos, newspaper articles and recent books say otherwise. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 20:47, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Sivapriyananda, Swami (1995). Mysore royal Dasara. New Delhi: Abhinav Publications. p. 46. ISBN 978-8170173311. Retrieved 14 October 2016. 
  2. ^ Harlan, Lindsey (2003). The goddesses' henchmen gender in Indian hero worship ([Online-Ausg.]. ed.). Oxford [u.a.]: Oxford University Press. pp. 22–23. ISBN 978-0195154269. Retrieved 14 October 2016. 
@Jonathansammy: I am concerned about RS, OR-synthesis and WP:Due issues you are inadvertently creating despite your good intentions. Youtube and such websites etc are not RS. The source should mention Shaktism or equivalent. Just because there is a deity and an animal sacrifice, it is WP:Synthesis to present it as Shaktism unless the source interprets or implies so. Harlan is a good source, and we can add it. Yet, we must pay attention to relative weight to avoid undue issues. The animal sacrifice section cannot be bigger than history or theology or Durga puja or Shakti temples or tantra or etc sections. Just look at other wikipedia articles, where annual animal sacrifices occur at much larger scale than in Shaktism (e.g. Eid al-Adha etc and Islam), yet a few sentences or a paragraph suffices. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 21:38, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
@Ms Sarah Welch I will mostly use these sources as citations to add weight to the existing content. The Mysore Dasara mentions Durga and Navaratri. That should definitely be in without danger of synthesis. What is our policy on adding primary sources ? I certainly will not be able find a book on recent incidences of animal sacrifice. Whether other religions sacrifice animals or not is irrelevant here. We are not doing an article on comparative religion here. There are groups in India that want to downplay aspects of Hinduism that may be construed as negative but on the Wikipedia project we have to put an unvarnished NPOV. There is no room for censorship here. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 22:30, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @Jonathansammy: This is not a case of censorship nor of down-playing aspects of Shaktism. The issue is the opposite: up-playing an aspect to a disproportionate level. The example of far-bigger-scale animal sacrifices every year in Islam, than Shaktism, is to give you another article to review, then reflect on WP:Due guideline's implementation elsewhere in religion-related wikipedia articles, to encourage you to introspect / diversify your focus and editing history on "animal sacrifice" aspects here. Our goal in this article is to present all aspects of Shaktism per WP:Due and other content guidelines of wikipedia. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 23:07, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

@Ms Sarah Welch Our mission here is to improve and make the article more comprehensive. We do not have to bring anything relating to religions of the middle-east like Christianity , Judaism or Islam in the picture. For that matter, USA annual meat consumption for year 2009 was 120 kg per capita, with European countries at 70-100 kg, Pakistan at 16 kg, Saudi at 54 kg and India at 4 kg. Ritually sacrificed or not, a lot of killing takes place to satisfy human craving for flesh around the world. Having said that, the information I just mentioned has no place in the article on shaktism. I agree with you that animal killing is on a lower scale overall in India and only a small percentage of that would be ritual animal killing by Hindus. You can allude to that in the section but the bottom line is, rare or not, ritual killing in Shaktism takes place in all regions and all sections of the society, all the way from the royals of Mysore and Rajasthan to the rural poor and the tribals. That is not undue weight on the topic. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 17:07, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
@Jonathansammy: We have already agreed, see my reply above long ago, that animal sacrifice section is appropriate to this article. The question now is balance. Tell, what is bigger, major, more notable in WP:RS and more generic practice in Shaktism: Durga puja or Animal sacrifice? Now compare how many lines this article has on Durga puja, and how many on Animal sacrifice. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 12:42, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Removal of referenced large sections under "cleanup" title[edit]

[3] I reverting back this edit as most of the article is lost in this vandalism. User:Ms_Sarah_Welch and User:Jonathansammy, I apologize to you as many of your edits are being reverted. I will incorporate them slowly in the article after the revert. --Redtigerxyz Talk 18:03, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

@Redtigerxyz: I already did restore a lot of it, with this edit and others. But @VictoriaGrayson's major deletion is appropriate in parts. I have gone through the sources and additions since the very old GA review. I suggest you work with the new version. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 18:08, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
@Redtigerxyz: You should know better than to call people's edits vandalism. I'll add to my userpage, my editing philosophy.VictoriaGraysonTalk 18:19, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
@R: This post-GA edit added much content with issues noted above. It will not pass a GA review. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 18:25, 14 October 2016 (UTC)