Talk:Krishna/Archive 1

New contents header
Added on 2 May 02005 to make a ToC by Imc 15:36, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Early references
It's impossible for the occurance of Krishna to come in Chandogya, due to anachronistic effects. According to the Hindu timeline Krishna postdates Chandogya Upanishad. The Devaki putra in Chandogya is different. Like we have many Krishnas today, in ancient times the name was just as common.

I also agree! It is an attempt by ISKON/Gaudiya people to justify their "group" belief in the Pre-Itihasas scriptures. Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA (talk) 16:07, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Krishna is not the narrator of the Bhagavad Gita. It is Sanjeya, who reports the words Krishna addresses to Arjuna (and Arjuna's responses) back to Dhritarashtra. Imc 22:35, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)

SANJAYA LISTENS TO THE WORDS OF VED VYASA AND VED VYASA ACTUALLY HEARD THE ORIGINAL CONVERSATION BETWEEN KRISHNA AND ARJUNA....GET IT!!

Major revision of 10 Nov 03. I have removed much of the previously existing material for this revision. This is essentially in an effort to create a structured encyclopaedic entry that tries to cover a broad range of the Krishna legends, references, and literature, and not focus on any particular traditions. Some of the previous material may be better placed in different linked articles, such as under an account of some the modern Vaishnava traditions. Imc 23:28, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * And it's beginning to lose structure and focus now. It should now be split into separate articles, especially to take account of differing views and traditions. Imc 18:04, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Regarding the adding again of Krishna meaning 'all attractive'; I would like a reference for this. I cannot find any.

The reference I have for Arjuna being called Krishna, meaning attractive, actually says (Arjuna speaking) 'my father gave me the tenth name of Krishna because I was very attractive' Quoted from Vettam Mani's Puranic encyclopaedia.

My Sanskrit dictionary gives no other meaning for Krishna than black. Imc 18:32, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Just about every single source I've read about Krsna states that the Sanskrit word means "all-attractive". http://www.google.com/search?q=krsna+all-attractive returns 793 hits; http://www.google.com/search?q=krishna+all-attractive another 1,250. AFAIK, painting murtis of Krsna black is only done in the South-Indian tradition (which with I am not so familiar.) Mkweise 19:44, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * I've read a lot about Krishna as well from earliest childhood, and 'all attractive' was new to me. The number of google hits is not exactly a proof of the meaning, especially since a search on Krishna and black - http://www.google.com/search?q=krishna+black - returned about 147000 results. Since I haven't seen an older origin for this than ISKCON websites (and I have not looked too deep), it may be reasonable to suppose it a interpretation that was originated by Swami Prabhupada and that has spread with ISKCON? Imc 17:20, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * I also agree with you. I tried studying the meaning of Krishna for a while and I found the same thing. The ONLY time you find Krishna in the vedic scriptures is to describe some thing as black. I also agree with you about that the "all attractive" aspect was spread by ISKON.zeuspitar 00:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * This comment was made in 2003! It is redundant. The statment within the article is now referenced as a Gaudiya belief (please note it is not ISKCON specific). Talk page needs archiving. Gouranga(UK) (talk) 20:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Krishna has been said to mean black and has been represented as blue for centuries. The internet is a horrible way of finding out about Krishna. Most Krishna worshippers in India have no truck with ISCKON. ISKCON is one small group of Krishna worshippers and don't in any way represent most Hindus.


 * I agree with you also.zeuspitar 00:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Krishna means all-attractive : sir you dont have to find a sanskrit dictionary to know that as most of those dictionaries give a objective meaning of a word. You will find the meaning of Krishna as all attractive when you go thru some good Vedic books. Which i am sure you wont fine time for. DONT TRY TO FIND THE MEANING OF GOD IN DICTIONARIS, IF YOU EVEN HAVE A LITTLE COMMON SENSE


 * First, you wrote..."You will find the meaning of Krishna as all attractive when you go thru some good Vedic books."...which "Vedic books" are you talking about? The Four Vedas, the main Upanishads, the Brahmanas, the Laws of Manu, the Vedanta sutra, etc., etc...which one of these? OR..are you talking about "ISKON/Gaudiya" books? Then, it would explain your statement.zeuspitar 00:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I have heard that this all-attractive comes from sanskrit verb root kRs or karsati meaning to pull or to attract someone. Sankrit words often can be explained in many different ways. Lonehermit 23:31, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * I see that both possibilities are now mentioned, and I have no wish to re-open the debate on the derivation of Kṛṣṇa. However, I wanted to make the probably irrelevant observation that a black body is all-attractive to the electromagnetic spectrum.


 * --Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley talk contrib 01:27, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Krishna
is there somewhere online where there is a good, detailed, outsider's explanation of the beliefs and principles of the Hare Krishna faith? I am trying to see if they believe in the Christian God, and anything else. What I don't want is a bunch of words that take me ten minutes to pronounce. I just want to know what they stand for, and do not stand for. thanks  P.R.


 * Try looking at the Hare Krishna article at International_Society_for_Krishna_Consciousness

thank you, i'll check it out P.R.


 * THe Christian God? Dude... they believe in Krishna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As Hindus, they believe everyone prays to the same God, though they feel that God is ultimately Krishna. --LordSuryaofShropshire 03:10, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)

Technically, the Hare Krishnas are not Hindu--they're followers of the Vaisnava philosophy. The devotees are only interested in satisfying Krishna's (God's) senses. They will only accept food which has first been offered to the Lord. Similarly they are always chanting the Hare Krishna maha-mantra. Ultimately, they are following the teachings of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu, who started the Hare Krishna movement. -D. Vaishnavism is a VEDIC philosophy and hinduism is psudo name for vedic religion. Vedic religion is very old and is brought forward by aryans. :)


 * First, Vaishnava means devotee of VISHNU...not a vibhava/avatara form. ONLY ISKON/Gaudiya people chant the Krishna maha-mantra. The Original Vaishnavas chant the ashta-mantra or eight syllable mantra to Narayana, the dvaya mantra or two sentence mantra for surrendering to Narayana, the charam mantra and the Vishnu sahastranama stotram as commanded by the acharyas like Ramanujacharya and those before him. Only the ISKON/Gaudiyas follow Caitanya maha-prabhu, The Original Vaishnavas follow Ramanujacharya, Vedanta desika and the Alwars. All of the different segments of the Hindu religion;Vaishnavas, Shavites, the Ganesha devotees....ALL throughly follow the original Vedas, Upanishads, Laws of Manu,etc.,etc. If they are following the Vedic shastras and the principles...then, they are VEDIC! While ISKON/Gaudiyas doesnt follow the Original four Vedas, Upanishads, Laws of Manu and etc....the Vedic scriptures! They only follow the Isha-Upanishads, Itihasas scriptures, and their own Sampradayam books like the Caitanya caramrita. So, who's Vedic? The term Hindu, is a term use for all of the different religions and denominations in India that are suppose to follow the Vedic shastra (Holy books) and principles...then, they are all Vedic! Vaishnavas are only a part of the greater spectrum of Hinduism. Again...Vaishnava means...Devotee of Vishnu! Maybe Krishnava would be a better name for ISKON/Gaudiyas.Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA (talk) 16:29, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello Govinda Ramanuja dasa and GourangaUK. I have added this discussion to the Vaishnavism Wikiproject talk page at, Vaishnavism's relation to Vedic religion. Please feel free to add any comments. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 16:42, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Again, this is a comment from some years ago (2004! - see above). Gouranga(UK) (talk) 17:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Some inconsistencies and outdated material in the article.
The article states "Krishna was born in a prison cell at Mathura, in modern day Uttar Pradesh in about 3206 BC.". Subsequently it states "A paper presented recently at a convention in Prabhas Patan near Somnath, concludes that Krishna died at the ripe old age of 125 on February 18, 3102 BC at 14:27:30 hours on the banks of river Hiran in Prabhas Patan. As the report goes, he was 125 years, 7 months and 6 days when he died."

3206 - 3102 != 125. The numbers don't add up.

Also "The year 2004 is the year 5105 of the Kali Yuga (which began with a year 0)." seems outdated, maybe it should be replaced by 2005, 5106?

added in "Birth"
Added that Krishna was born in Mathura, and linked it to the page with a picture of teh temple at Krishnajanmabhoomi

Major rewrite 2 May 2005
A number of revisions. Included quite a number of removals of redundancies in the encyclopaedia, such as the redundant explanation of where Vidharba is. Also removed a number of other items or paragraphs.

Smaller removals
Removed the section on dating from the first paragraph; the information in it is duplicated at the end.

Removed from the Govinda section. Only specific to Vaishna traditions, and implied in the mention of Gaudiya. "He is the Supreme Lord of Hinduism (internally known as Sanatana-dharma, or eternal dharma), and all incarnations of God are said to emanate from him." Removed from the Major aspects section, as irrelevant given the later item on the same topic. "* Childhood of Krishna is easily identified with Indian country life; concentrating mainly on cattle rearing and cultivation."

Removed from the cowherd section as being a specific Vaishna telling. "Balarama is his primary svamsa emination, or expansion. "

Removed the following from the last item of Major aspects. This would be better placed in the Bhagavad Gita article. "He teaches Arjuna several topics, such as jnana, dharma, yoga, kala (time), prakriti (nature), karma (action), moksa (release), tattva (haecceity), bhakti (devotion), and guna (qualities) in the Bhagavad Gita, and is known as the greatest Yogin, or Yogesvara. The Bhagavad Gita is the first true Yoga text in the Yoga tradition. It is also one of the oldest primary texts for Devotional Krishna-bhakti traditions, and is the most widely read Vedic/Hindu text in print."

Removed most of the last paragraph in the Texts and literature section. Same reasons as the preceding item. "Before the great battle of Kurukshetra (in present day Haryana) starts, Arjuna loses heart with the prospect of fighting his cousins and other relatives for the kingdom. Krishna reminds him that he has done everything he could possibly do to avoid the battle, and that his duty (dharma) is serve Him by fighting . Krishna goes on to show why the Gita is known as the first Yoga Scripture, and gives a lengthy exegesis on the means of fulfilling life's goals through the systems of yoga. In it, he describes in detail the philosophies of Bhakti (devotional), Karma (selfless action), Jnana (self-transcending knowledge), Astanga (meditational) Yoga and all in the ends connect one to Krishna whose personal form is the highest realization of Absolute Truth (as compared to Brahman and Paramatma). He shows Arjuna how to reconcile his misapprehension about the war with the eternal truths that underlie life through the Vedic doctrine of Yoga. These form the basis of the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita."

Imc 15:24, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Larger article chunks removed
Removed most of the content of the sections “The birth of Krishna” and all of “The Appearance of Krishna. “ and replaced these with a short section called Birth and childhood.

Reason; This is a selected retelling of the story, and the origin is not given. It does not appear to be a standard text. Also, if continued would cause the article to become too large. I suggest the removed text could be incorporated in new articles on the life of Krishna.

The text removed was;

"“Krishna was born in Mathura, and the place of his birth is now known as Krishnajanmabhoomi, where a temple is raised in his memory. Krishna was born in a tense historical period preceding a devastating war. The warring factions built up so many weapons that the burden on the earth became unbearable. Finally the goddess of Earth took the form of a cow and prayed to Lord Brahma for relief. Lord Brahma called all the demigods to the shore of the Milk Ocean to hear Mother Earth and to worship the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Vishnu. Lord Brahma fell into trance reciting the Vedic hymns known as the Purusa-sukta and heard the voice of Lord Vishnu. Then he announced, "O demigods, hear from me the words of God. He is aware of the distress on Earth and wants you demigods to incarnate as sons and daughters in the Yadu dynasty. The Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Krishna, will personally appear as the son of Vasudeva. Therefore you will all have the benediction of joining the eternal pastimes of Lord Krishna."

Lord Brahma consoled the cow and sent her home, then returned to his planet, Brahmaloka. The demigods then began to take birth in the Yadu dynasty, awaiting the appearance of Lord Krishna. The members of the Yadu dynasty, headed by Vasudeva and Devaki, along with their friends, relatives and well- wishers were all demigods. The residents of Vrindavana, headed by King Nanda, Queen Yasoda and Queen Rohini, were also demigods.

King Kansa was another relative in the family, however he was not a demigod. He usurped the throne of his father, Ugrasena, and put him in prison. When Devaki, a member of Ugrasena's family, married Vasudeva, she received a large dowry of elephants, horses, chariots and servants. After the wedding, Kansa took the reins of the wedding chariot and started to escort the couple home. Along the way, a voice from the sky addressed him: "You foolish king, the eighth son of Devaki will kill you!"

Kansa pulled Devaki down by her hair, drew his sword and prepared to kill her on the spot, but Vausdeva begged for his bride's life and promised to let him kill the eighth child, so that the oracle would not be fulfilled. Kansa agreed to spare her life, but locked Vasudeva and Devaki in a stone prison. Thereafter, he mercilessly killed the first six sons of Devaki. Devaki's seventh son miscarried but mystically transferred to the womb of Queen Rohini in Vrindavana. This became Krishna's older brother, Balarama. Soon thereafter, Devaki became pregnant with her eighth child.

The Appearance of Krishna
Krishna was born at the stroke of midnight in His four-armed Vishnu form, dressed in silk and jewels, carrying the four weapons: the conch, disc, club and lotus. His parents prayed for Him to turn Himself into an ordinary baby so they could hide Him from Kansa. The Lord advised Vasudeva to take him to Vrindavana and exchange him with a girl that had just been born there. Then he turned Himself into a baby.

Magically, the guards in Kansa's prison fell asleep, and all the iron shackles, chains and locks automatically opened. Without questioning this, Vasudeva took the child and departed for Vrindavana. Like the story of Moses, the story of Krishna also includes a parting of the waters, allowing Vasudeva to carry Krishna across the Jamuna River to Vrindavana. When Vasudeva reached the house of Nanda, all the cowherds were asleep. Thus he placed his own son on the bed of Yasoda, picked up her newborn girl and returned to the prison of Kansa.

There was a chance Kansa would spare the child because the omen said it would be the eighth son that would kill him. Devaki pleaded with him, but Kansa pulled the baby girl from her arms and dashed her against a stone. The girl slipped from his hands and rose above his head as the eight-armed form of Goddess Durga, dressed in fine garments and jewels. She said, "The enemy you contemplate is living somewhere else. You are a fool to hurt innocent children. Krishna will kill you."

Kansa became remorseful and begged Devaki and Vasudeva to forgive him for his sins. He released them from their shackles and fell down on their feet, crying tears of regret. The next day, however, Kansa's ministers advised him to give up his sentimental attitude and take action to kill all newborn children in the region. They also advised him to disturb the demigods and saintly people.”

Imc 15:29, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Other changes
Removed reference to dark blue being the colour of the night sky. To most of us the night sky is black and starry? Some more evidence of this being an original meaning would be useful.

Moved the following text as being out of context in this section, to a new section on other meanings of the name. Deleted the following sentence to this as being out of context. "According to Vishnu sahasranama, Krishna, the 57th name, also means the Existence of Knowledge and Bliss. "

Removed the following texts about the name / colour as questionable and not evidenced. Added a brief note instead on other meanings of the name.

"This is understood as having come into existence from scriptural allusions to his deep hue. Indeed, he is divine, and being dark-skinned, it deepens so much that it takes on a rich blue tone.

Krishna's body is the colour of an enchantingly beautiful dark raincloud. The philosophical backdrop for Krishna's dark blue skin is that Vishnu, who is ultimately incarnated as Krishna, is also known as Narayana. Narayana means &quot;born of water.&quot; This is because water, seen as the base principle for life as we know it on earth, the nourisher of plants and animals alike, the very substance of cyclic existence, is essential to preservation. Vishnu, who in avatar form comes down to earth to help preserve dharma, is epitomised by the principle of water, being himself the God of Preservation. As water is commonly seen as being blue, and Vishnu is said to sleep in Yoga Nidra, floating on cosmic waters on Shesha (a snake-god), it is only natural that Vishnu's representations are all blue. By syllogism, it transferred to his great avatar, Krishna.

Sometimes the term Krishna has been explained as meaning 'attractive'. This is eminently understandable with his mythic allure to women of all kinds (i.e. the gopis). Moreover, he is viewed by his devotees, from ancient times till the present day, as reflecting the intense beauty of God in his physical aspect."

From the names of Krishna. I've removed Padmanabha. This is as far as I can see, a name of Vishnu rather than Krishna, and there is very little material or explanation about it.

Imc 15:32, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

announcing a policy proposal of general interest
This is just to inform people that I want Wikipedia to accept a general policy that BC and AD represent a Christian Point of View and should be used only when they are appropriate, that is, in the context of expressing or providing an account of a Christian point of view. In other contexts, I argue that they violate our NPOV policy and we should use BCE and CE instead. See Neutral point of view/BCE-CE Debate for the detailed proposal. Slrubenstein  |  Talk  22:55, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

108 names of Krishna
I've replaced this with the previous list. Mainly because this list was incomplete, and the descriptions given of these names seem to specific to a particular Gaudiya interpretation. e.g. Vishnu is a name of Krishna, (only in Gaudiya Vaishna traditions). Also other translations / interpretations are non-standard, e.g. that for Mayur, and they seem to be an odd mix of Sanskrit and Hindi forms. List does not agree with other lists of the 108 names. Complete text follows:-

Krishna is said to have 108 names.

NAMES-MEANING


 * Achaia - Still Lord
 * Achyuta - Infallible Lord
 * Adbhutah - Wonderful God
 * Adidev - The Lord Of The Lords
 * Aditya - The Son Of Aditi
 * Ajanma - One Who Is Limitless And Endless
 * Ajaya - The Conqueror Of Life And Death
 * Akshara - Indestructible Lord
 * Amrut - One Who Is Sweet As Nectar
 * Anaadih - One Who Is The First Cause
 * Anandsagar - Compassionate Lord
 * Ananta - The Endless Lord
 * Anantajit - Ever Victorious Lord
 * Anaya - One Who Has No Leader
 * Aniruddha - One Who Cannot Be Obstructed
 * Aparajeet - The Lord Who Cannot Be Defeated
 * Avyukta - One Who Is As Clear As Crystal
 * Balgopal - The Child Krishna, The All Attractive
 * Bali - The Lord Of Strength
 * Chaturbhuj - Four-Armed Lord
 * Danavendra - Granter Of Boons
 * Dayalu - Repositiory Of Compassion
 * Dayanidhi - The Compassionate Lord
 * Devadidev - The God Of The Gods
 * Devakinandan - Son Of Mother Devaki
 * Devesh - Lord Of The Lords
 * Dharmadhyaksha - The Lord OF Dharma
 * Dwarkapati - Lord Of Dwarka
 * Gopal - One Who Plays With The Cowherds, The Gopas
 * Gopalpriya - Lover Of Cowherds
 * Govinda - One Who Pleases The Cows, The Land And The Entire Nature
 * Gyaneshwar - The Lord Of Knowledge
 * Hari - The Lord Of Nature
 * Hiranyagarbha - The All Powerful Creator
 * Hrishikesh - The Lord Of All Senses
 * Jagadguru - Preceptor Of The Universe
 * Jagadisha - Protector Of All
 * Jagannath - Lord Of The Universe
 * Janardhana - One Who Bestows Boons On One And All
 * Jayantah - Conqueror Of All Enemies
 * Jyotiraaditya - The Resplendence Of The Sun
 * Kamalnath - The Lord Of Goddess Lakshmi
 * Kamalnayan - The Lord With Lotus Shaped Eyes
 * Kamsantak - Slayer Of Kamsa
 * Kanjalochana - The Lotus-Eyed God
 * Keshava - One Who Has Long, Black Matted Locks
 * Krishna - Dark-Complexioned Lord
 * Lakshmikantam - The Lord Of Goddess Lakshmi
 * Lokadhyaksha - Lord Of All The Three Lokas (Worlds)
 * Madan - The Lord Of Love
 * Madhava - Knowledge Filled God
 * Madhusudan - Slayer Of Demon Madhu
 * Mahendra - Lord Of Indra
 * Manmohan - All Pleasing Lord
 * Manohar - Beautiful Lord
 * Mayur - The Lord Who Has A Peacock Feathered-Crest
 * Mohan - All Attractive God
 * Murali - The Flute Playing Lord
 * Murlidhar - One Who Holds The Flute
 * Murlimanohar - The Flute Playing God
 * Nandgopala - The Son Of Nand
 * Narayana - The Refuge Of Everyone
 * Niranjana - The Unblemished Lord
 * Nirguna - Without Any Properties
 * Padmahasta - One Who Has Hands Like Lotus
 * Padmanabha - The Lord Who Has A Lotus Shaped Navel
 * Parabrahmana - The Supreme Absolute Truth
 * Paramatma - Lord Of All Beings
 * Parampurush - Supreme Personality
 * Parthasarthi - Charioteer Of Partha - Arjuna
 * Prajapati - Lord Of All Creatures
 * Punyah - Supremely Pure
 * Purshottam - The Supreme Soul
 * Ravilochana - One Who Eye Is The Sun
 * Sahasraakash - Thousand-Eyed Lord
 * Sahasrajit - One Who Vanquishes Thousands
 * Sahasrapaat - Thousand-Footed Lord
 * Sakshi - All Witnessing Lord
 * Sanatana - The Eternal Lord
 * Sarvajana - Omniscient Lord
 * Sarvapalaka - Protector Of All
 * Sarveshwar - Lord Of All Gods
 * Satyavachana - One Who Speaks Only The Truth
 * Satyavrata - The Truth Dedicated Lord
 * Shantah - Peaceful Lord
 * Shreshta - The Most Glorious Lord
 * Shrikanta - Beautiful Lord
 * Shyam - Dark-Complexioned Lord
 * Shyamsundara - Lord Of The Beautiful Evenings
 * Sudarshana - Handsome Lord
 * Sumedha - Intelligent Lord
 * Suresham - Lord Of All Demi-Gods
 * Swargapati - Lord Of Heavens
 * Trivikrama - Conqueror Of All The Three Worlds
 * Upendra - Brother Of Indra
 * Vaikunthanatha - Lord Of Vaikuntha, The Heavenly Abode
 * Vardhamaanah - The Formless Lord
 * Vasudev - All Prevailing Lord
 * Vishnu-All Prevailing Lord
 * Vishwadakshinah - Skilfull And Efficient Lord
 * Vishwakarma - Creator Of The Universe
 * Vishwamurti - Of The Form Of The Entire Universe
 * Vishwarupa - One Who Displays The Universal Form
 * Vishwatma - Soul Of The Universe
 * Vrishaparvaa - Lord Of Dharma
 * Yadavendra - King Of The Yadav Clan
 * Yogi - The Supreme Master
 * Yoginampati - Lord Of The Yogis"

change - removed this link The Johnny (Straws) Experience Y2k05 why is this appearing in this article

Krishna a Scythian
I think Krishna was among indo scythian (Ahir,Abhir or Aver)who overthrew Kamsa and the story about being swapped with a girl child when Yasoda was asleep and Kamsa trying to kill that and all the divine play are mere subterfuge implanted by brahmanas of which we have many in our scriptures.Another one is the story of YAyati,Progenetor of all the vedic Kshatriya tribes like puru ,Yadu etc in which it is said Puru the youngest son offered his youth to his father for 1000years in lieu of succession to the throne and yadu was cursed along with his sons not being able to rule.This seem to be a legend rather than true story.It tries to justify why Yadavs should not rule who were facing stiff opposition during that time.Yadavs were next to come in india after purus and were called lunar dynasty on the pretext of purus being called solar.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yadav"

We need this link he is one of our biggest supporters.

The Johnny (Straws) ExperienceThe Johnny (Straws) Experience

Krishn not son of devaki
It seems like the baby swapping story is fabricated one by brahmanas.Locks opened on their own all guards laid asleep,Vasudeva not only swapped the child without Yashoda noticing it (How can't a mother know sex of her child)he returns too and the story breaks after he Kills Kamsa and snatches the royal throne of mathura .Great story a similar subterfuge was implanted by Shivaji during coronation,of having traced his root to sishodia Rajputs to cool the dirty heads of brahmanas.Karnas recognition as Kshatriya after his death is well known to all of us.It seems our society had a culture of lying to masses through all the ages to protect the myth that kshatriya alone could rule.Another subterfuge story in medieval era is the story of Kabirdas who was traced to brahmin mother to protect the myth that brahmin alone could learn.What is wrong with these celebrities was that they never challenged these beliefs rather they succumbed to it.Great was Chandragupta Maurya who never vied for these titles and ruled whole of south asia and changed the conception of people through Buddhism

"It seems"? This is speculation. It clearly states in the Bhagavatam that Devaki is the mother of Krishna. You question why Mother Yasoda doesn't notice the sex change - you forget this this is an arrangement of the supreme will. Dwayne Kirkwood

Although concern shown by anonumous may not be fully correct.But even I am Skceptical if these two people called deviki and Vasudeva ever existed.Because same Krishna has been shown to be fighting for the title of Vasudeva against King Paundrak.What for the battle took pacle??????Holywarrior 15:40, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


 * In my humble opinion 'proving' the existence of anyone is beyond the scope of any Wikipedia article. It should give an overview of the subject matter only - any POV regarding the factual nature (or not) of events that are said to have happened 5000 years ago should not be included (unless both sides are shown). However, the above story concerning Devaki is described in Srimad Bhagavatam and is thus essential to the Krishna article as Dwayne has described. GourangaUK 10:26, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Meaning of Vaasudeva
Vasudeva is derived from two words vasumeaning snake and deva meaning god.To become bhoj(Head of Kings) one needed to be son of this mythical character.Yadavas(gwals) who identified themselves with snakes gave this title to their bhoj,thats why Krishna was called vaasudeva meaning son of vasudeva and her mythical wife deviki.The story of child swapping has many flaws just as the story of yayati.Krishna's clash with another king who himself had declared vaasudeva is recorded in puranas itself.It proves beyond doubt that this title was merely honorary and had nothing to do with the birth of Krisna as a human being.Kshatriya used to give this title to their king like son of sun, moon etc which was all honorary.The story of child swapping seems to be added later on,by brahmanas, with a motive to alienate Krishna from gwals and create distinction between the two terms but has been poorly done.Brahmans wrote some books(in modern age) later on trying to declare krishna as brahman and the fabricated story tries to prove that Krishna who was acatually the son of vasudeva(the story takes refuge in same child swapping theory) was a brahmin.

Yadvas lost their glory many times and regained it.Both the great dynasties Maurya and Gupta belongs to yadava. Gupta is synonym of gope both words mean same in fact gupta in egyptian indeed mean cowherd.People who say why yadvas don't write gupta as their surname they should look at the development in recent past the surnames mahato and mandal too belonged to yadvas but they gave up writing this surname when many kurmis and other castes adopted it.(would Late Shri B P Mandal of Mandal Comission be considered a Kurmi?)

Kshatriyas were supposed to be preserver and owner of cows.In ancient times Cows(a divine creature should we call it animal?) were the wealth of people and yadavas have the distiction of bringing the concept of cow worship in the land of cow eaters aryans.Royal family of Nepal still call themselves Gurkha meaning preserver of cows.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yadav"

Krishna was not chandravanshi
Against the popular belief generally due to ignorance,Krishna has never been called Chandravanshi.Actually Chandravanshis were purus(kauravs and pandavas),Yadus and krishna were Nagvamshi and hence he held the title Vaasudeva or Devikiputra(meaning son of God vasuki and deviki)this title has nothing to do with his physical birth.Nagvamshis and chandravamshis were together referred to as somvamshis.Symbol sun or suryavamshi had been ascribed to raghukul (of lord Rama) Because Krishna held the title vaasudeva a story of child swapping had been deliberately fabricated.Actually these two people vasudeva and deviki does not find any reference anywhere thereafter.However same Krishna has been found to be challenged for this title by another king who too claimed to be vaasudeva and humbled by krishna (recorded in the same puranas).This makes mockery of child swapping story


 * Lets stick to facts. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and there is no place for speculative stuffs here. Its the job historians and religious scholars to figure out whether Krishna was a Chandravanshi or not. --Deepak|वार्ता 00:30, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

LET US STICK TO lOGIC

Mr Gupta I don't know whether You have the ability of arriving at conclusions or not.You wilfuly deleted the material added perhaps without much thinking because people like you lack courage to accept facts.It is a fact known to every Hindu that our scriptures has been doctored to suit some sections of the society.And you call it speculations.One must answer these illogical insertions and if you don't have answers you should accept these are errors which need to be rectified .People like you i think better not come on encyclopidea because it is not merely for accumulation of facts(as known to you )but also forum to discuss anamolies and sort them out.I had inserted it in main article because these anamolies need to be answered .I hope some logic will pass through your brain and if it fails you better leave this forum and stick to whatever orthodox believes are.


 * To the anonymous editor at 210.214.82.22 who inserted the above comment.
 * * Please refrain from personal attacks.
 * * Please obtain a log in, and sign your entries.
 * * Please do not insert preformatted text (enclosed in pre tags) into talk pages, or anywhere else here for that matter, it makes it difficult or impossible to read.
 * * User Deepak Gupta's point could be put another way; that Wikipedia is not the place for original research, which is what you seem to be proposing. As an alternative, perhaps you could write your points in a separate article. The Krishna article is already moderately long, and it will probably need breaking up further in time. Some material, such as List of titles and names of Krishna is already separate. It will often be material that is not of mainstream interest that will go into separate pages.
 * Imc 10:06, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Formatting page, images, and boxes
I've rearranged the large uppermost image, and the Indic text box. Together in their original position they occupied the width of the page and either pushed the text off the bottom of the screen, or into a very narrow column. (on low res browsers (800 x 600 px), of which there are still a few about. ) The large image may be more suited to the Gita page.

Also teh Indic text box may be better replaced by help link after each instance of Indic text. This would stop it being intrusive, and many users will have no idea what 'Indic script' means. Imc 09:43, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Accuracy...
This article says at the very top that it is about the Hindu deity, rather than a possible historical figure on whom he was based. Sinced the bulk of the historical evidence indicates that he did not in fact exist, should the article not focus on the way he is described in the sacred texts? I mean, I approve wholeheartedly of reverting POV vandals and not simply changing "dies there" to "returns to brindavan in the heavens" (for one think, that should be a wikilink with a capital "B"), but the article seems to be treating him more in the section entitled "Summary of the story of Krishna" as a rational historical figure, rather than as an incarnation of Brahman supreme. Anyone else agree? elvenscout742 12:31, 27 December 2005 (UTC)


 * There's actually no mention of a possible historical figure at the start of the article. The summary of the story of Krishna in the article now  is explicitly that story that is told in the Mahabharata. This makes perfect sense when looking at the place of Krishna in Hinduism as a whole. There is a problem here; should descriptions attempt to be 'scholarly' and impersonal, or should the descriptions be of the deity, as seen by devotees, when these views may not be universal? It is particularly a problem with Krishna and associated figures such as Radha, Balarama, because of a preponderance (or so it seems to me anyway) of ISKCON and other Vaishnava devotees  in Wikipedia. The language for instance of these devotees contains such terms as appearance for birth, disappearance for death, pastimes for activities. These terms are not generally used or understood by those who have not read that specific literature, and it is probably in English only. These terms were, I imagine (and stand to be corrected), introduced by Swami Prabhupada, in his relatively recent works.
 * Imc 14:24, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Hello Elvenscout - How about 'leaves this world' as a compromise between the two views? I agree with you changing of the picture, it is much more appropriate. 86.136.7.74 13:56, 27 December 2005 (UTC)


 * No, it's not a question of points of view, and your solution does not solve anything. My suggestion would be to say he "died", and is viewed by Vaishnavas as having returned to his abode in the heavens.