Talk:Nimbarka

Research citation
I've added more information regarding the reasons for this dating and also have given references. (User talk:Madhav kiran sodum) 12:50, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

View of the Shastras
The "View of the Shastras" section mentions info about the beliefs of followers and not specifically Nimbarka, and so I am removing it. The info is here for reference. -- Shruti14 t c s 23:55, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Members of the Nimbārka Sampradāya, the disciplic tradition founded by Śrī Nimbārkācārya, tend to lean toward the date as accepted in the Vedic Scriptures. There are many sources for this date, but primarily the focus tends to be on the Puranas. The members of that tradition suggest the fact that many verses of the Puranas, which have been evolving since their creation, have disappeared in the modern versions that are available.

POV
The "Life" section has some minor POV issues. -- Shruti14 t c s 23:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Krishna supremacy ref to verify and complete
'In the Nimbarka tradition, there is Nimbarka's Dasa-sloki and its commentary by Giridhar Prapannam published as "The Theology of Nimbarka" by Gita Khurana, Vantage Books, NY. It describes not only that Krishna is superior to Vishnu, but that the two-armed Krishna is superior to the four-armed Krishna form, from a rasa standpoint.' Anyone can verify and complete this ref? Jan 82.208.2.200 (talk) 17:37, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Nimbarka as a philosopher needs a separate page
Nimbarka as a person needs a separate page distinct from his sect. He is one of the four major Vaishnava philosophers and there has been enough academic research into his life to write about him. All the other Advaitins have a personal page independent of their sect. I can't understand why Nimbarka does not have one. Joshua Jonathan Please clarify. Reo kwon (talk) 03:56, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Because there is very little substantive information; the main part is the scholarly dispute about his datings. Rather than having two separate pages, it's more convenient, both for readers and editors, to have just one page. The page you recreated was already missing essential info; imagine discussing and correcting this twice. Regards, Joshua Jonathan  - Let's talk!  04:19, 25 October 2020 (UTC)