Talk:Bhumi (goddess)

The name Bhuma Devi
Any references for this odd name? The earth goddess is generally Bhūmi. For a reference, see Vettam Mani, Puranic Encyclopaedia, which includes common alternative names, but has no mention of Bhuma. Perhaps a regional variant? The 'Devi' bit is optional. Imc 20:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

This is more like a comment: I agree with you. Bhudevi is more familiar name - this is what we know as Telugu (language) natives. Bhima Devi is pretty new to me - we should look at other vernaculars on how they call it. Sudha 18:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC) Actually as far as I know Bhim Devi is a different Goddess. As far as I know the name "Bhim" or "Bhima" in the feminine means "fearsome." "Bhu" is the earth. Instead of discussing the proposal to merge maybe we should consider changing the name.AaronCarson (talk) 22:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC) my devaraj invert in tha system ling go some thah lingerr — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.193.161.157 (talk) 10:36, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Proposal to merge
Bhudevi or Bhumadevi is not a regional goddess. Bhu, Bhumi (like Dhra, Dhrati, Prithivi) are synonyms of Prithvi in Sanskrit, the suffix devi is added. Thus Prithvi and Bhudevi is the same goddess. Thus they should be merged into Prithvi as Prithvi covers the goddess as well as the tavva or element--Redtigerxyz 10:51, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Then, logically consistent, all goddesses should be merged into one article, they all are forms of the One. But Bhudevi is described totally different from Prithivi, because they are DIFFERENT forms of the earth goddess: Prithivi is spouse of the vedic (from the Vedas) god Dyaus Pita, but Bhudevi belongs to the puranic (from the Puranas) Varaha, avatar of Vishnu. So one article only would be totally wrong. (Sorry for my poor english, Durga from german wp) --80.108.164.202 12:06, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

While I respect the concept in Hinduism of all the various forms of the Gods and Goddesses being aspects of one deity, I do think that this tendancy can lead to dangerous loss of knowledge in the sense that less and less detail is required when two forms of a deity become synonomous. There is already too much blurring of identities, in my opinion, especially in the case of Goddesses. People are always ready to argue the differences between the Lords Jagannath and Dwarkanath, both accepted as forms of Lord Vishnu, but when it comes to the Goddesses, people become lazy, as though Goddesses, and their distinctions are less important. It is well known that all the Gods and Goddesses are manifestations of one divine being, but do we have to belabour the point at the expense of the beautiful diversity of the Hindu Pantheon? Also the iconographies of Prithivi and Bhoomidevi differ, not to mention the etymologies of their names. I find the proposal to merge these articals very alarming as so many other Goddesses have already faded into obscurity and near-extinction due to this "all is one" notion, not only on wikipedia, but throughout the history of hinduism.AaronCarson (talk) 17:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Uncited and impertinent
"Several female deities have had births similar to Sita. Alamelu Thayar of Tiruchendur had a similar beginning, being found in a ploughed field by Akasa Raja. Goda (Andal) was found under a Tulasi plant by Perialvar." This uncited section is not particularly pertinent to the Goddess Bhumi. I wonder if it shouldn't be removed, or it might be better suited to the Sita article.--AaronCarson (talk) 21:28, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

change of infobox image
as info box image give less info about how she is worshiped adding https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/Bhudevi_in_temple.jpg/640px-Bhudevi_in_temple.jpg image as it is the form in which she is worshipped b locals — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pointn (talk • contribs) 13:53, 30 May 2022 (UTC)