Talk:Maya religion

Dwarf
This part of the article seems to have no reference or objectivity as it is one unspecified persons account. Please could someone do something about this, either delete or reference in some way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.32.6.239 (talk) 23:04, 29 April 2009 (UTC) I will shortly reference this part.77.162.130.139 (talk) 09:45, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Religion & Mythology
The two separate articles, Maya mythology and Maya religion, could perhaps be merged into an overall Maya religion and mythology article. Alternatively, and at the very least, if they are to remain separate then each need to be overhauled so that each primarily addresses their particular aspects- at present both (religion and mythology) are not distinguished within or between the two articles. Also need a good general copyedit, corrections of fact and tone, and of course references.--cjllw | TALK  03:13, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Requested move
All discussion surrounding the requested move should take place at Talk:Maya calendar. --  tariq abjotu  (joturner) 05:19, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Data from Maya peoples to integrate here
Human sacrifice

The Maya carried out human sacrifice, but on a far smaller scale than that practised by the Aztecs (which has led to criticism of Mel Gibson's portrayal of the Maya in his 2006 film Apocalypto ). The Maya maintained a belief that cenotes or limestone sinkholes were portals to the underworld and sacrificed human beings to please the water god Chaac. The most notable example of this is the "Sacred Cenote" at Chichen Itza where extensive excavations have recovered the remains of 42 individuals, half of them under twenty years old. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Homunq (talk • contribs) 03:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC).

Need numbers


 * I think this article would be improved if it gave numbers regarding the scale of human sacrifice in both Mayan and Aztec societies, but unfortunately I'm not qualified to do it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kmorford (talk • contribs).


 * estimated numbers vary quite considerably. However agreed that it's worthwhile mentioning the range of scale estimates- along with a substantial rewrite and re-referencing of a lot of the content here.--cjllw | TALK  02:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Victims in blue
Apocalypto and apparently real sources show the sacrifice victims painted in blue. What dye did the Maya use? AFAIK, blue dyes prior to the discovery of aniline were limited to indigo and expensive lapislazuli powder. --84.20.17.84 10:51, 31 January 2007 (UTC)


 * AFAIK Mesoamerican peoples obtained blue colouration in pigments from plants, chiefly añil (Indigofera suffruticosa) leaves, ie a type of indigo plant. Another type of blue (in Texotli) may have been made from the flowers of certain plants according to the Florentine Codex, possibly identified as Commelina plants.
 * The particular and unique pigment known as "Maya Blue", which was used by the Maya in pottery, murals, codices and (presumably) the one used for daubing the sacrificial victims, had añil and the clay mineral palygorskite as its main constituents.--cjllw | TALK  07:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * accounts of human sacrifice among the aztec normally states that they were covered in chalk, which would make them white not blue. ·Maunus· tlahtōlli  08:33, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I added a reference I found in the palygorskite article. I did not find pictures of blue victims in Commons. --84.20.17.84 10:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

george bush
this article references george bush. is this junior or senior? and why exactly were preists called to purify where he had been?

Everything Inane 16:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

It was George W. Bush. They did this because they regard him as an evil man. BobMak BobMak 20:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

What a mess!
THIS ARTICLE NEEDS TO BE REWRITTEN. I JUST STUMBLED ACCROSS IT AND WAS SHOCKED AT HOW MANY TIMES I'D HAD TO REREAD SECTIONS BECAUSE OF EXCESSIVELY LONG SENTENCES AND COLORFUL WORDINESS. THE LANGUAGE NEEDS TO BE SIMPLIFIED FOR CLARITY AND EASE OF USE. I'D LOVE TO BE THE GUY TO FIX IT...BUT I ONLY CARED ENOUGH TO REWORD THE VERY FIRST SENTENCE...GOOD THING I DID TOO, LOOKS A LOT BETTER NOW!! :)

WELL, AT LEAST i HELPED ADD SOME GOOD STUFF TO THE MODERN SECTION.... --72.252.71.56 15:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I am adding some information gleaned from conversations with Mayan priests in Guatemala, and some images taken at a gathering of Mayan priests in Tikal. The links are to an extended article on Mayan ceremonies (which are the heart of Mayan religious practice) and to downloadable freeware which calcualtes the Mayan calendar and which has a complete explanation of the meanings of the individual naguals. 1 August 2007 BobMak 20:48, 1 August 2007 (UTC)BobMak 20:02, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

This article needs heavy cleanup
I have placed cleanup tags and POV warning on the article which is in a sorry state. It basically has no reliable information at all. The modern section is particularly bad and consists mostly of new age revisionism, POV and inane blather.·Maunus· · ƛ · 07:35, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I removed a large chunk of the modern religion section, seemed so poor as to be unsalvagable and better off not having anything than something so misleading and low-grade. The entire article practically needs rewrite from scratch, and a rethink to delineate between the scopes of Maya mythology and Maya religion.


 * Not quite sure what to do with the Maya shamanism article &mdash;it's equally as bad. Dunno whether to incorporate it here or if somewhere under the tosh there's a valid, independent article struggling to see the light...--cjllw ʘ  TALK 01:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Merge with Maya shamanism
I oppose the merge with Maya shamanism for now, since both articles handle different topics, also, shamanism isn't automatically religion. I do agree the articles are a mess. Let's fix it, the Mayans are notable enough for it. Shoombooly (talk) 11:04, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Finding the Balance
It is hard to find a balance between historical data and traditional Maya religion as it still exists. Although the emphasis is clearly on the past, I think it is important to show the continuity as well. In this respect, there is still a lot to be done!77.162.130.139 (talk) 09:27, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


 * IMO Maya religion should focus on post-Columbian practice and perhps also consider mayanism, and let Maya mythology deal with the past. / Kurtan (talk) 02:35, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Those who wish to compare the present data with mayanism can easily do so, and since mayanism is a phenomenon of a literate, western-educated public, there is little sense in discussing it here.77.162.130.139 (talk) 13:55, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Propose merge from Maya priesthood
It is a shame there is so little about the priesthood in this page but an oversized article elsewhere. Let's concentrate the information in this page. Pegasus &laquo;C¦T&raquo; 03:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


 * no merge, while both are in need of a fair bit of work still and material from the priesthood article could and should be summarised in this one, they each have sufficient scope to stand on their own / have sufficient merits / as separate articles, IMO. --cjllw ʘ  TALK 07:22, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


 * no merge, for the same reasons.77.162.130.139 (talk) 11:58, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Ethics
The idea of this section is to provide some answers to questions like: Were there good and evil deities; was there an idea of love, of unselfishness, etc., in prayer and sacrifice; how bad was human sacrifice; was Maya religion an ideology of the nobility, legitimizing an oppressive social system?; etc. It should possibly also contain elements such as confession, divine sanction, purification. 77.162.130.139 (talk) 11:19, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Recent Yucatec data inserts
Dear Hubert Smith, thanks for your observations! It is, however, problematic to add your name to a bibliography which should only contain published reports with numbered pages, and, within the main text, to refer to unpublished data. Why don't you first publish your valuable accounts in the usual manner, instead of using this Wikipedia article in an improper way? Please try to integrate the gist of your contributions into the existing text, or provide more acceptable references, to your own work, or to that of others. 77.162.130.139 (talk) 10:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

reassessment
If you reassess, please explain the result of the reassessment. 77.162.130.139 (talk) 21:59, 21 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Excellent expansion. I've assessed the article as C-class because, although there is a list of references at the end of the article, there are very few inline cites in the article, so it would be fairly difficult for anyone to verify a particular fact. If inline cites were applied throughout, the article would easily make B-class. Best regards, and good work on the article, Simon Burchell (talk) 11:42, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Calendar is "formerly"?
It's fundamental to this day! Can somebody please please fix the calendar section, emphasizing its importance and linking to the various calendar articles such as Tzolkin. Homunq (talk) 20:16, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Will Black extension
The discussion of Will Black's book is out of place and has been moved to the 2010 phenomenon. Reviews of specific books are undesirable in a general overview article. Moreover, the book review does not add specific data relevant to the section.77.162.130.139 (talk) 23:12, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * agreed.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 12:16, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Recent additions to Ritual Domains, section Calendar removed
I removed the recent additions to Calendar, Ritual Domains, for the following reasons: (1) The focus on ritual does not allow lengthy discussions of calendar mechanisms, (2) the additions are also redundant in that there is a link to Main article: Calendar.

Maya peoples still practicing it
What of the Lacandon? Don't they still practice the traditional religion? Couldn't there religious belief be used as a source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.253.41.234 (talk) 00:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Animatism and Popol Vuh: added paragraphs removed
I removed two added paragraphs about animatism and the Popol Vuh. A theoretical discussion of 'animatism' is out of place in a factual article and the Popol Vuh is mentioned several times throughout the article; moreover, several articles are already devoted to it.
 * I was going to remove the para, then forgot all about it! At any rate, it belongs in mythology rather than religion... At any rate, it was completely unreferenced, and looked out of place... Simon Burchell (talk) 20:20, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Dedicatory caches: a problem
This is a valuable addition, BUT it has been inserted in the wrong place and occupies too much space. I intend to shorten it and to move it to another position. The full text could then be made into a separate article. OK?77.60.162.212 (talk) 10:31, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Pilgrimage: a problem
The section occupies too much space now and has become a bit wordy. I intend to shorten it, OK?77.60.162.212 (talk) 10:35, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

As I announced in the two previous postings (thus giving ample opportunity for discussion), I have restored the balance in the article. I included a reference to dedicatory caches in the text of the Offerings and sacrifices section and moved the Dedicatory Rituals text as a whole to a new article, "Maya dedication rituals". I also restored the original text of the Pilgrimage section and moved the new text as a whole to another new article, "Maya pilgrimage". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Retal (talk • contribs) 15:21, 8 January 2017 (UTC)


 * The editor who changed it (you) has a name that doesn't match the previous conversations. Thanks for the explanation and work at any rate. Stevie is the man!  Talk • Work 15:27, 8 January 2017 (UTC)