User talk:Hig4ness

Welcome to Wikipedia!
Hello, Hig4ness, and welcome to Wikipedia!

An edit that you recently made to Niyoga seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox.

Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Joyous! Noise! 17:05, 8 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @Joyous! sir I belong to India and I practice Hinduism and the (niyoga) on Wikipedia is misleading peoples because (Niyog is restricted only for birth of child and not for fun) and in Wikipedia it is not written. Hig4ness (talk) 17:10, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Helli, Hig4ness! It is good to hear from you. The edit you removed specifically said that the practice was intended for procreation (the conception of a child). In the edit you added, you said the same thing, but I'm afraid the English was very ungrammatical. That is why I reverted the article to its previous form. Joyous! Noise! 17:35, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Joyous! thank you sir for your response I understand your concerns about grammar. But it also important to write specifically that (Niyog is restricted only for birth of child and not for fun.) if you concerns about grammar so i will try my best to write in proper formal way. Again thank you for your response Hig4ness (talk) 17:44, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok. I understand. Why don't you try out your edit here, and we can work on making it grammatical. Joyous! Noise! 17:45, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Joyous! (Niyoga is permitted only for the purpose of childbirth and not for any kind of pleasure) Is this grammatically correct? Hig4ness (talk) 17:48, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I think that is much better. I might revise the last part to say "not for sexual pleasure," which makes it consistent with a mention a little further down in the article under the heading "Clauses of Niyoga". Joyous! Noise! 17:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Joyous! okay sir Hig4ness (talk) 18:01, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

May 2024
Hello, I'm GorillaWarfare. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Hinduism and LGBT topics—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 19:35, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I'm SafariScribe. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Lingam, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 07:10, 9 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @SafariScribe hi sir I'm Indian and I follow Hinduism. From a long time I was reading vedas and other Hindus scriptures where it is mentioned that the shiva linga is formless shiva ( reference Linga MahaPuranVedas (Yajurveda Taittiriya Aranayaka), Shiv Mahapuran 1.11, Shiva Manasa Pooja by Adi Sankaracharya) and there is no authentic text books where Shiva linga is mentioned as phallus. And sir vedas are oldest Hinduism scriptures. And it is mentioned in it that shiva linga is formless shiva. Thank you for reading this. Hig4ness (talk) 09:27, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * These are more references
 * Vedas
 * - **Yajurveda (Sri Rudram):** A hymn that praises various aspects of Lord Shiva, including his formless nature.
 * - **Atharva Veda (15:1):** Discusses Lord Shiva as Mahadeva and describes his cosmic form.
 * Puranas
 * - **Linga Purana (1.17.6):** "At the end of the Kalpa, when there was nothing else but a vast expanse of water, the infinite pillar of light, the Jyotirlinga, appeared as the source of the universe. It had no beginning, middle, or end."
 * - **Shiva Purana:** Provides extensive narratives on the significance of the Shiva Linga and its worship.
 * - **Skanda Purana (Kashi Khanda - 10, 11):** Details the penances associated with different forms of the Linga in Kashi.
 * - **Brahmanda Purana:** Narrates the origin of the Shiva Linga as the cosmic pillar of light.
 * Mahabharata
 * - **Anushasanika Parva:** Features the Shiva Sahasranama, which includes names of Lord Shiva that signify his formless nature.
 * Ramayana
 * - **Valmiki Ramayana (Yuddha Kanda - Sarga 123, Verse 19):** Describes Lord Rama's worship of the Shiva Linga at Rameswaram, signifying the divine grace of Lord Shiva. Hig4ness (talk) 07:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Lingam, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan -  Let's talk!  18:05, 12 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @Joshua Jonathan sir can you please tell me about your concerns about my edit? I provide reference too so why my edit is reverted? Hig4ness (talk) 18:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * You removed a lot of info, which was supported by WP:RS, and replaced it with pieces of info supported by non-WP:RS. Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!  19:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Joshua Jonathan vedas are are non WP:RS and a hinduphobia who already said Hinduism doesn't make any sense ( Wendy doniger) is WP:RS supported am i right? Hig4ness (talk) 19:42, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Your edit diff not only removed info sourced to Doniger, but also info sourced to Kramrich; both are indeed considered RS. As a replacement you added snippets of info, not very well written, sourced to several puranas, not to the Vedas. If you want to contribute to Wikipedia in a meaningfull way, then get a grip on the basics; Wikipedia is not going to bend it's rules to your wishes, unless you know what you're talking about, and give very good arguments. Otherwise, find another avenue for your interests. Regards, Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!  19:55, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Joshua Jonathan This page belongs to Hinduism, and relying on references from someone like Doniger, who has openly expressed disdain for Hinduism, is absurd. How can anyone trust her interpretations when she's made it clear she doesn't even respect the religion? And as for Kramrich, sure, they may be considered reliable, but when I have references from revered texts like the Puranas and the Mahabharata, why should I prioritize anyone else's interpretations? It's not about hinduphobia; it's about integrity and respect for our sacred texts. Hig4ness (talk) 03:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Because we use WP:RS, and not our own interpretations of primary sources. You may have been raised with specific views on your religious heritage, but there are also other views, based on naturalistic assumptions. And Doniger iz definitely not the only one who sees a phallic symbol in the lingam. If you don't like it how Wikipedia works, or modern scholarship, well.... You can try to forbid Wikipedia, or science, but you'll probably have to accommodate. And the bottomline of religion is, I think, to try to be a decent human being for your fellow human beings. Eternal Law of the heart, even before any sacred text is composed. Regards, Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!  06:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Joshua Jonathan Using reliable sources is crucial, no doubt. But blindly adhering to them without considering their biases or agendas is naive. Yes, there are multiple interpretations, but when those interpretations disrespect or misrepresent a religion, they should be questioned. And just because someone sees a phallic symbol in the lingam doesn't mean it's the only valid interpretation. Respect for diverse perspectives is important, but so is maintaining integrity and sensitivity towards sacred beliefs. Indeed, many see the Shiva Linga as representing the formless aspect of Shiva. Several scriptures emphasize this perspective, portraying the Linga as a symbol of the divine without form, representing the transcendental nature of Shiva beyond physical attributes. It's essential to acknowledge and respect the diversity of interpretations within Hinduism, honoring both the symbolic and philosophical richness of its traditions. Hig4ness (talk) 06:25, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Edit warring at Sati (practice)
Hi, I see that you are currently engaged in behaviour that may be considered disruptive over at Sati (practice). The correct process is to Discuss changes on the Talk page of the article if another editor reverts a change that you have made. Please also don't mark your changes as a minor edit unless it meets one of the criteria listed on the page. Ujwal.Xankill3r (talk) 15:40, 9 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @Ujwal.Xankill3r can you please tell me what are your concerns about my edit? Hig4ness (talk) 15:46, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * That you reverted another editor's revert of your edit. That goes against recommended practices like WP:BRD. Since your edit is unsupported by a Reliable Source I have reverted it back. Please discuss on the talk page of the article and provide good reliable sources so that the information in the edit can be retained. Ujwal.Xankill3r (talk) 04:15, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ujwal.Xankill3r The source is the Vedas (Rigveda), and if you're concerned about the website reference, multiple Vedas websites state that Rigveda Mandal 10, Sukta 18, Mantra prohibits the practice of Sati. The Rigveda is the oldest scripture in Hinduism, predating even the Mahabharata. I have seen multiple sections in articles where it is written that the Puranas allow it. Can you provide me with some Puranas where the practice of Sati is mentioned? Hig4ness (talk) 04:28, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics
Sixteen edits, of which eight on your talkpage, four warnings: that's a ratio of 50%. Better try better, otherwise you'll soon be blocked. Regards, Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!  18:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)