Talk:Maitreyi

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 04:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Mythological basis
The article goes too far in implying that Maitreyi was a historical figure and the facts of her life are established. This is not so. Like Yajnavalkya, if Maitreyi existed at all, her biography was subsequently embellished and idealized for poetic and spiritual reasons. To imply that the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad records a historical moment and transcribes a real conversation is not supported by scholarship or common sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.169.200.46 (talk) 14:24, 19 May 2015 (UTC)


 * I didn't write this article and so can't comment on the accuracy of what you state, but if you have any reliable third-party sources mentioning that Maitreyi was not a historical figure please add them to the article. — SMUconlaw (talk) 03:47, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Picture of Sanyasi
The picture of a sanyasi has no relevance to the topic at hand. It should be removed.

198.203.177.177 (talk) 21:47, 19 May 2015 (UTC)


 * The concept of a sanyasi is referred to in the text in the section where the image appears. — SMUconlaw (talk) 03:46, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Commentary
While copyediting this article, I got stuck with the 1st para of Commentary, as I found it confusing. Sureśvara's Vārtika on Yājñavalkya–Maitreyī Dialogue by Hino is a translation and explanation of the Maitreyi-Yajnavalkya dialogue part of Suresvara's larger work Bŗhadāraņyakopanişadbhāşyavārttika. The Bŗhadāraņyakopanişadbhāşyavārttika is a commentary (vartika) on Adi Shankara's vartika on the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad.
 * In the Sureśvara's Vārtika on Yājñavalkya–Maitreyī Dialogue (a doctoral thesis by Shōun Hino), the prime doctrine of Yagnavalkya's philosophy is discussed by Suresvara a disciple of Adi Shankara:
 * How can the 8th century Suresvara discuss in the modern work Sureśvara's Vārtika on Yājñavalkya–Maitreyī Dialogue? Should the original 8th century be noted, rather than Hino's translation.
 * The "According to Adi Shankara ... " seems to be from Adi Shankara's vartika on the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (BU)
 * this chapter 2.4/ chapter 4.5 - is it referring to BU or Adi Shankara's vartika? Probably the latter chapter 4.5 is BU, guessing from the quote. Please check
 * Shankara states that "the truth of the Brahman is ascertained on the authority of the Sruti verse. .. The Maitreyi-Yajnavalkya dialogue is noted in Sureśvara's Vārtika, states Hino, as re-asserting the Hindu tradition in the Sruti, -> Is Sruti part Shankara's view (translated by Hino) OR Hino's original view? Please check in the reference.

Also, "Suresvaracharya Vartika 68-69", there is no text called Suresvaracharya Vartika. The verse number may be part of Hino's translation number scheme or Bŗhadāraņyakopanişadbhāşyavārttika.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 18:53, 15 December 2015 (UTC)


 * @Redtigerxyz: Indeed that section was confusing. I reworded it a bit after rechecking the source. You and @Nvvchar should feel free to revise and improve it further. Both the verse 36 in Sanskrit of original Vartika, and Hino translation, are indeed referring to Sruti, and it is the Vartika's view. Yes, Vartika is a secondary commentary on another secondary work (bhasya), as are Tika and other genre of ancient/medieval Indic texts. But, their Vartika and Tika and such texts typically followed certain ancient scholarly traditions – they included ukta, anukta and durukta; which are respectively "a review of what was said in the text by the previous author", "a review of what was not said in the text by the previous author", and "an analysis of what was improperly said in the text by the previous author". Thus, a Vartika may present fresh ideas or perspectives, and it is important to attribute properly and clarify in the Maitreyi article who is saying what in the Vartika. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 20:09, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * . All issues mentioned above have been addressed. May please see. Nvvchar . 08:52, 16 December 2015 (UTC)