Talk:Karma in Hinduism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Karma in Hinduism is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive. | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Hinduism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
|
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance for this Project's importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] References
The reference section needs to be put into order; it's amess at the moment. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:51, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
== Copy-editing ==--Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:14, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
I have added copy-edit changes wherever needed in the article and removed the "copy-edit needed" tag.
Splitpeasoup 12:00, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
- I've replaced the template, as much more needs doing I'm afraid. It's not so much grammar and the like, but tone; too much of the article reads like a religious text (the new edits insert some more of this, in fact). The article needs to be neutral in its account of the subject. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:06, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- You may be right about neutrality. In that case I suggest you remove the copy-edit tag and replace it with a POV tag. My edits merely addressed grammar, spelling, and style, and did not make any attempt to change tone, neutrality, or content. Putting the right tag on the article makes sure it gets flagged for the appropriate kind of editing and also that readers are alerted with regard to neutrality or lack thereof. Splitpeasoup 19:18, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
{{NPOV}} is less appropriate here, as it's not really the content but the tone (which is explicitly covered by {{copyedit}}. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:14, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Clean-up
There is still much to be done with regard to language and style (aside from the issues mentioned above, there are inconsistent transliterations, etc.). The content also needs to be looked at (for example, the summary: karma isn't an explanation of causality, though it's used in causal explanations). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 08:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Unreferenced content
Namaste. I have just read the article over for the first time. It seems to contain a certain amount of POV material that is not well-supported by references. Examples of this would be the role of God, the comparison with other religions, etc. Also, some of the statements are supported by a reference to a particular teacher or religious tradition without any effort to put that persepective into a more broad context, or suggest that there is variation in views. E.g., the section on Advaita Vedanta seems to rely on two citation to Sivananda and no other sources. I came upon the article because it had been nominated for featured status, and my feeling is that it could use a good peer review. Buddhipriya 00:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Factually incorrect
The following statement :- The concept was adopted by other religions such as Buddhism and Jainism, whose views differ from Hinduism as the concept of Karma does not involve a personal supreme God. is incorrect and represents the Hindu orthodox POV. Jaina concept of Karma is totally different and non-hindu. So there is no question of it being adopted from hindusim.--Anishshah19 10:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- I removed that unsourced statement from the article pending someone providing better sources. My opinion is that the article needs work just to clarify what Hinduism thinks of this and attempts to compare the idea with other religions requires strong references. I have been able to track down the use of the term theodicy which used to appear in the lead of this article (Karma in Hinduism explains the problem of evil that persists in spite of an omniscient, omnipotent, benevolent God; it is thus related to theodicy.) A quote pertaining to this exists in the book by Michaels which I have just cited, but in context it is clear that the term can only be clearly applied to one view of karma. I will try to flesh out that citation in the article as perhaps it was significant to someone, having been placed in the lead even though it was unsourced. Buddhipriya 20:46, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Role of Ishvara
I have reworked the section on the role of "God" and am moving this unsourced POV material here:
In fact, Hinduism argues for the existence of an Omniscient God (Sanskrit: Ishvara) because the judgment of intelligent actions (i.e. Karma) requires intelligence on the part of the judge (i.e. God). Unintelligent nature by itself cannot judge the performance of actions of intelligent beings. Hence the intervention of an Omniscient God is required to dispense the fruits of Karma — which are rewards for good actions (in the form of pleasure) and punishments for evil actions (in the form of pain).
In working on this section I get the impression it was written from a fairly specific viewpoint that did not appreciate the diversity of views within Hinduism. Because there are many commentaries, you can prove anything by citing Swami X on the subject. It would be good if more sourcing can be done, specifically trying to put these ideas into context. Buddhipriya 21:42, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] some feedback
- Types of karma - Sanchita karma, [Pprarabdha karma]] and kriyamana karma has stub pages. It is better to merge these as a section into the main article itself
- Right after the definition, please add a section and provide examples of how karma is understood in hindu religion (move markhandeya and Ajamila examples).
- Also glaring is in the current format, the various divisions between hindu theologists are bought out before the section "Views of Hindu traditions on karma". i think it should be the other way around
Kalyan 19:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- I concur that a merge of Sanchita karma, [Pprarabdha karma]] and kriyamana karma into this article would be a good idea, as with your other suggestions. Buddhipriya 22:54, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
