Jump to content

Talk:Dashavatara

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Daśāvatāra)

Images in lead

[edit]

To solve this confusion among versions of Dashavatara, images of the three major versions followed by sects are added.
Vithoba and Jagannath are considered Krishna by sects outside Warkaris.
Vithobhas wife Rukhmai is Rukmini wife of Krishna and Jagannaths companions are Balabhadra (Balram) and Subhadra, Krishna's siblings.
Omitting versions will lead to generalisation.
The earliest available image is the ivory version in Delhi 2001:4490:48F:C275:0:0:0:1 (talk) 13:43, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Three images is too many for the lead. By all means include your information (and/or the image) in the body of the text, but it should not be the main image; the other two are far better and more illustrative. Dāsānudāsa (talk) 14:39, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The deleted image is more authoritative and ancient. Still you want to press on your ISKCON POV pushing. 2001:4490:487:3913:0:0:0:1 (talk) 00:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Restored older image. Capitals00 (talk) 02:48, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why? The other image is (slightly) older but it's in no way for illustrative or instructive. It's much harder to see the various avatars, and three images is still too many. I am reverting pending further discussion. Dāsānudāsa (talk) 15:25, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am finding them illustrative enough. The IP editor has limited the lead to just 2 images now so your concern has been addressed at large. Capitals00 (talk) 02:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please be specific, and mention the version-name ("Balarama-Krishna," etc.). Obviously, the age of the pictures/statues is not a relevant criterium; the fact that Krishna-Buddha is called the most used list is more relevant. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:50, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

most used list - POV pushing by this editor or not? 2001:4490:48F:31EF:0:0:0:1 (talk) 09:19, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? Giving the most used list the most prominent position seems like a good interpretation of WP:DUE:

Undue weight can be given in several ways, including but not limited to [...] prominence of placement

I fail to see how following Wiki-policies would be pov-pushing. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 09:55, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have no set opinion on one, two or three images in the lead, but I do notice that the statues are poorly visible, due to their size. I can imagine that some people prefer to have more images, to have various variants included, but for esthetical reasons I think one image should be preferred. A gallery could added, to have various lists included. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 12:59, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From Amar Chitra Katha

[edit]

This is a children's book published in the 80's as per this book the avatars (Dashavatar) of Vishnu are

1. Matsya

2. Kurma

3. Mohini

4. Varaha

5. Narasimha

6. Vamana

7. Parashurama

8. Rama

9. Krishna

10. Kalki


I have come across different variations like for example taking out Mohini and adding Balarama or Buddha to fill the space.

As per my understanding Balarama is avatar of Anant Nag and Buddha although mentioned in texts is not specified as an avatar of Vishnu whereas Mohini is specified as Vishnu's avatar.

49.207.5.35 (talk) 13:15, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adi Sankara's Prapanchasara follows the Linga Purana which has Balarama and Krishna but not Buddha.
This is taken by the majority while Freemasons like Ravi Varma & Amar Chitra Katha Uncle Pai popularised the Buddha version 2001:4490:48B:4134:0:0:0:1 (talk) 06:38, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About dashavatar

[edit]

Actually Dashavatar concept is wrong as per Hindu scriptures, because Narasimha Avatar happened before kurma Avatar, King Bali Chakravarthy present in samudra manthan episode in where Kurma Avatar happened, Bali is grandson of Prahalada, Narasimha Avatar happened in Prahalada time, if Narasimha Avatar happened after kurma Avatar, then how Bali present in samudra manthan who is grandson of Prahalada, so Dashavatar concept is wrong, there are 24 incarnation of God Vishnu as per Vaishnava traditions of Hinduism. @Chronikhiles @Chariotrider555 @Classicwiki 2409:4071:248C:F6A2:24D2:5EF0:29FA:84A (talk) 13:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious, did you bother to actually read the article? Because none of what you've stated refutes the tradition that there are ten major incarnations of Vishnu according to the Puranas as well as mainstream Vaishnavism. Chronikhiles (talk) 14:24, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox image

[edit]
Present image. Description: "Hindu god Vishnu (centre) surrounded by his ten major avatars (Krishna-Buddha version). Anticlockwise from top left: Matsya; Kurma; Varaha; ;Narasimha; Vamana; Parashurama; Rama; Krishna; Buddha and Kalki"
Proposal. Description: "Album of popular prints mounted on cloth pages. Colour lithograph, lettered, inscribed and numbered 38. The print is subdivided into ten equal parts, each representing one of the ten avatars, or incarnations, of Vishnu. Each image is identified with a Bengali inscription, and the avatars represented are: Matsya, Kurma, Varaha, Narasimha, Vamana, Parashurama, Rama, Krishna, Buddha and Kalki." 1895

Dear @Joshua Jonathan Can you plz change current image, this image is repeated in two articles, Avatar and Vaishnavism, why same img for different three article. This img is perfectly suited for Dashavatar, add this one. Naanu neenu (talk) 06:23, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your proposal, but personally, I wouldn't choose this one. Pale colours, and a lying picture, instead of standing. Maybe await some other responses? Regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:43, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Balarama

[edit]

The User Joshua Jonathan is consistently PoV pushing the Buddha version forward instead of presenting a neutral picture of the versions. He is also banning many from editing as seen from the log. The earliest depictions of avatars are on the coins of Diodotus. The said user keeps on promoting a 20th century painting instead. Uriiix (talk) 04:14, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not promoting any version; I'm guarding to keep the overview of various versions complete, and counter the believers who are offended by the fact that the Buddha is regarded as an avatar of Vishnu by most traditions. If you don't like that, too bad for you, but you're wasting your time with pov-pushing. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 04:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ditto with you but you seem to promote the buddhist version. In India Buddha is NOT worshipped in any sect as an avatar. Prove this wrong using sources. Also Buddha's teachings are shunned as nastika leave alone being followed even by Vaishnavas
Someone posted Diodotus coins which are a legit ancient source. You pulled them to the gallery along with the Buddha version. Now you want only the Buddha version.
If there should be a rep. image it must be an antique one possibly. Uriiix (talk) 05:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Joshua Jonathan threatens and reverts. Not ready for a constructive talk on Agathocles coins Uriiix (talk) 07:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And why should an ancient coin be the besg illustration? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"If there should be a rep. image it must be an antique one possibly"
Says who? The Balarama-Buddha version is by far the most common in the present day Dāsānudāsa (talk) 08:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]