Talk:Gaudapadacharya Math

Shri Gaudapadacharya Mutt
This page on Kavale mutt has been initiated and updated by me. Please feel free to edit and update the page in case you have more to add to the contents, or if you have any suggestion/feedback please feel free to mail us.

Cheers, --Ashok Prabhu (talk) 12:22, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

There are a lot of terms used in this article that aren't understood by people in general: peethadhipati,aradhya devata,trikal. The name also varies between Kavale Mutt and Kavale mutt. I'll also try to fix the English a little. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:12, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks DJ Clayworth, point noted will try to work on those words. Any help from your side is very much appreciated. --Ashok Prabhu (Talk) 13:58, 24 March 2010 (UTC)


 * You are welcome. I very much like the way this article has progressed from a short, sketchy beginning to become a well-written, comprehensive, informative article. This is exactly the way Wikipedia should work. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:53, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I take that as complement Mr.Clayworth. Thanks -- Ashok Prabhu ( Talk ) 03:01, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Name
Can we actually decide on the name of this establishment? The intro doesn't seem to agree with the name. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:29, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I did the correction Mr.DJ. Thanks for bringing this up. --Ashok Prabhu (talk) 12:23, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Alignment
Please help me on Alignment of text where Pictures are placed in Shri Gaudapadacharya Mutt page under section Adi Guru Shri Gaudapadacharya & Branches (Ashrams). I did not have this problem till yesterday..? Why is it behaving strange today..? --Ashok Prabhu (Talk) 11:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)


 * (Help request moved to user talk page; will answer there  Chzz  ►  12:08, 24 March 2010 (UTC))

Thanks Chzz for your help. -- Ashok Prabhu  talk 03:30, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Observations

 * There is overuse of honorifics like Shri, ji, Lord, Bhagavan etc. Remove them, they do not adhere to wiki policy
 * There is an inconsistency in the use of standardized English spellings and IAST. I suggest to stick to the former to avoid confusion
 * I see almost no third-party, neutral references in the article, which are needed. Read WP:RS
 * The article needs a through copyedit to fix grammar issues.
 * Consistency of spellings like diksha and deeksha; math and matha. Stick to one spelling
 * WP:OVERLINK violated. Link to another article only once in the article, only at first instance
 * Overuse of jargon like shishya. English equivalent like disciple do the job equally well. Whenever one use a jargon term, give a short explanation in brackets. e.g peetadhipati ("head of the math").-- Redtigerxyz Talk 16:05, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Redtigerxyz, for the review and feed back. I will try to work on the points one by one.-- Ashok Prabhu ( Talk ) 05:43, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

-- Ashok Prabhu ( Talk ) 05:43, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Consistency of spellings like diksha and deeksha; math and matha. Stick to one spelling ✅


 * The neutrality is an issue. The article reads like devotee literature filled with glorification. The problem is not with the author, but is with the the references he is referring, which is non-neutral, devotee literature. Example of WP:POV (non-neutral point of view) are assertions like "In Kali Yuga Sri Gaudapadcharya is the first preceptor to imbibe the Vedanta Wisdom" is POV of the sect praising their own guru and does not reflect the overall views of Hinduism
 * The Sanskrit spellings in Guru Parampara are not needed. Also, ब्रह्मः is wrong Sanskrit. ब्रह्मा is right.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 18:12, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I do not agree that "In Kali Yuga Sri Gaudapadcharya is the first preceptor to imbibe the Vedanta Wisdom" is a non-neutral point of view. It is a historical fact. I have added the Citations to that line with more than one website which reiterates this fact. kindly have a look at them. And also the 'Parampara-stotra' given under 'Guru Parampara' section confirms this. -- Ashok Prabhu ( Talk ) 12:43, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

"In Kali Yuga Sri Gaudapadcharya is the first preceptor to imbibe the Vedanta Wisdom ... thus he is the first historical proponent of Advaita Vedanta" the problems here are Other problems:
 * non-Hindus do not believe in Kali yuga. It is POV of Hindus
 * Historicity of a person is determined by views of scholars, not religious leaders. The references are religious sites, we need books by scholars. Several scholars have written about Advaita Vedanta. If he is first philosopher to talk of Vedanta, definitely they will note.
 * How can the Sringeri math's website assert Shri Gaudapadacharya Math's beliefs? Do they have a connection? If yes, establish it with a reference.
 * Contentious facts like destruction of temples by Portuguese, needs references. Everyone that is controversial and can be challenged, dates (yrs), quantities (eg. size of an army, dimensions of a temple etc.) need references.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 15:42, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Good points Redtigerxyz, I will reply to you one by one. I am off the net for about 15 days. Thanks - Ashok Prabhu ( Talk ) 16:54, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Answers:
 * non-Hindus do not believe in Kali yuga...... - Please let me know the basis on on which you are saying this. If you mean to say they do not understand what is 'Kali yuga' then there is hyper link to Kali yuga page and they can understand it by reading it. Since the page is within Hinduism ambit its important to mention 'Kali yuga'.


 * Historicity of a person is determined by views of scholars....... : I have given the references not only from religious institutions but from independent vedanta schools also. And if you carefully check the websites they have given the reference to those articles from various books written by eminent scholars. More over Shankaracharya himself thanks his grnad guru Gaudapada in his commentary on 'Gaudapada karika' for recovering the Vedanta wisdon from Vedas. A later scholar who commenst on Shankaracharya's work can be greater than Shankaracharya himself..? and reliable..?. Request you to quote any other person or written book earlier than 'Gaudapada karika' on Vedanta philosophy if you are disputing Gaudapada is not the first exponent of Vedanta wisdom.

I request you to check out following Books on google books, written by Notable Scholars who write about Shri Gaudapada and share the view of Shri Gaudapada being the first Exponent of Vedanta wisdom:

A)|The Āgamaśāstra of Gauḍapāda, by VidhuShekara Bhattacharys, First Published in 1943

B) |Gauḍapāda: A study in early Advaita by T.M.P.Mahadevan, published in 1952

C)| The spiritual heritage of India, Page 273, by Swami PRabhavananda, Published in 2003

D)| The Encyclopaedia Of Indian Literature (Volume Two) (Devraj To Jyoti), Volume 2 By Amaresh Datta, Page 1376

E) | A companion to the philosophers By Robert L. Arrington- Page 586

F) | Companion encyclopaedia of Hindu philosophy By Subodh Kapoor, Page 389

G) | The essential Vedanta: a new source book of Advaita Vedanta By Eliot Deutsch, Rohit Dalvi

H) | Encyclopedia of Indian philosophies: Bibliography By Karl H. Potter

I) | From early Vedanta to Kashmir Shaivism: Gaudapada, Bhartrhari, and Abhinavagupta By N. V. Isaeva, Page 13

Let me know if you still need list of books which talks about Shri Gaudapada ..? If you still claim these authors are not eminent, then it will be your personal view, no one can help you.


 * How can the Srinngeri......... Sringeri math's Lineage is traced back from Shri Shankaracharya, Gaudapadacharya Maths Lineage is traced back from Gaudapada him self who is Grand guru of Shankracharya. Govindapada; the guru of Shankaracharya is the 2nd in lineage of Gaudapadacharya Math. This is the relation between Sringeri math and Gaudapadacharya math.


 * Contentious facts like destruction of..... I have already given few citations, however will try to provide more. This page is not on destructions but its significance on the history of Gaudapadacharya math, so giving details such as size of an army, dimensions of a temple is out of place. One who is more interested int hose events should do separate study.-- Ashok Prabhu ( Talk ) 06:36, 30 May 2010 (UTC)