Jump to content

Talk:Tukaram

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

I have added a whole lot of content, hoefully will add more soon, currently translating the letter from tuka to shivaji

--Gd 08:51, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)


To 67.106.157.231: I only listed this on speedy deletion candidates due to it lacking any content at the time. When editing an article, you can use the preview button to see how your edits are going, rather than saving it while it has no content. If you'd first saved it in its current state with some content I wouldn't have touched it, I agree it's a valid article. Shane King 14:35, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

We need some references for this article. Gd, could you provide some? Thanks. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 17:42, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I find it hard to believe that I'm seeing a Ladinsky poem here, as supposedly representative of Tukaram's work. This has nothing to do with Tukaram. Opinions differ as to the validity of Ladinsky's poetry, but all who have looked into the matter seriously are in agreement that Ladinsky makes no claim to be translating classical poetry. Rather, Ladinsky is "inspired" in some way, usually inspired by Hafez or some other poet whose name he has apparently picked out of the air. The Ladinsky poem should be deleted from this article, but I do not presume to claim sufficient ownership to do so. Ramseyman (talk) 19:37, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Full Name

[edit]

His full name was Tukaram Bolhoba More but I am not sure of the middle name so I haven't added it.--59.95.7.183 (talk) 13:50, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Birth and Death

[edit]

His birthyear is dispued and is given as 1490, 1520 or 1530 but the calender is not mentioned so they can be Gregorian or 'Shaka' commanly used in Maharashtra. Also his death year is given as 1571 and 1572 with same problem in Tukaram Mahrajanchi Sartha Gatha edited by S. K. Neurgawakar, Pracharya Dandekar Dharmik & sanakritic vangamaya Publications, Pune.--59.95.7.183 (talk) 14:18, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Hinduism reassessment

[edit]

Due to the recent creation of class C and introduction of 6-clause B-criteria, i am checking this artcle for the B-criteria:

  • The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations where necessary.
Inline citations missing.
  • The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.
Life story, abhangas not covered.
  • The article has a defined structure, including a lead section and all appropriate sections of content.
  • The article is reasonably well written.
  • The article contains supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams, where appropriate.
No infobox
  • The article presents its content in an appropriately accessible way.

RESULT: C-class Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:17, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing the current form, reassessed as start again.--Redtigerxyz Talk 06:47, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Details of initiation

[edit]

Current section;

==Religious life and poetry==

Tukaram was a devotee of Lord Vittala (or Vithobā) --an incarnation of Lord Krishna, who in turn, considered to be an incarnation of Lord Vishnu-- in Hinduism.

Tukaram is considered as the climactic point of the so-called Bhāgawat Hindu tradition, which is thought to have begun in Maharashtra with Nāmdev. Dnyāneshwar, Nāmdev, Janābai, Eknāth, and Tukaram are revered especially in the wārakari (वारकरी) sect in Maharashtra. He has recived guru-mantra containing names of Krishna, Rama and Hari. This was at the hands or by the media of a dream, of one Babaji Chaitanya — a possible indication that Tukaram had some connexion with prominent saint Chaitanya,[1] and Gaudiya Vaishnavas believe that he was initiated and was a disciple of Chaitanya.[2] Whatever information about the lives of the above saints of Maharashtra comes mostly from the works Bhakti-Wijay and Bhakti-Leelāmrut of Mahipati. Mahipati was born 65 years after the death of Tukaram, (Tukaram having died 50 years, 300 years, and 353 years after the deaths of Ekanath, Namdev, and Dnyaneshwar, respectively.) Thus, Mahipati undoubtedly based his life sketches of all above "sants" primarily on hearsays.

Tukaram's public relgious discourses ("कीर्तने") used to be mixed, by tradition, with poetry, which included some of his own compositions. His discourses focussed on day-to-day behavior of human beings, and he emphasized that the true expression of religion was in a person's love for his fellow human beings rather than in ritualistic observance of religious orthodoxy, including mechanical study of the Vedās. His teachings encompassed a wide array of issues, including the importance of the ecosystem. Tukaram worked for his society's enlightenment in the "warakari" tradition, which emphasizes community service and musical group worship.

Like Namdev, Janabai, and Eknath, Tukaram wrote in Marathi a large number of devotional poems identified in Marathi as abhang (अभंग). A collection of 4,500 abhang known as the Gāthā is attributed to Tukaram. Mantra Geetā, a Marathi translation in abhang form of the Sanskrit Bhagavad Geetā, is also attributed to him. It is an interpretation of Geeta from a Bhakti (भक्ती) --devotional-- perspective.

does not give much details on his initiation, I have read it was in the dream or in the vision. Any other versions are welcome. Wikidās ॐ 21:06, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There much more to write on Tukaram: legends of his death (he did not die according to legend, but went to heaven with his physical body on back of Garuda), his abhangs, legends about the Brahmins ordering him to submerge all his books and they mysteriously floating up after a few books.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:37, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ *Hastings, James Rodney (2nd edition 1925-1940, reprint 1955, 2003) [1908-26]. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics. John A Selbie. Edinburgh: Kessinger Publishing, LLC. p. 467. ISBN 0-7661-3673-6. Retrieved 03-05-2008. {{cite book}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= and |year= (help)CS1 maint: year (link)
  2. ^ Durga Chaitanya Bharati Sri Gouranga: The Man, (1933) pp.107-108

NPOV Discussion

[edit]

Several sections in the page (notably "Contribution To The Bhakti Movement" and "Films on Tukaram") are quite subjective in their wording. Talking about absolute evils of the way a society is structured or passing judgement on the quality of movies doesn't seem appropriate. 76.219.254.230 (talk) 04:37, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have massively pruned the films section, which was almost entirely fancruft etc. - Sitush (talk) 12:28, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Human3015 edits

[edit]

@Human3015: Can I help you? Why "claims", instead of "scholars" in the Shivaji paragraph? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 02:55, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ms Sarah Welch you don't come to conclusion, author himself doubted Chaitanya's heritage to Jnandev also there is a claim by Mahipal. --Human3015Send WikiLove  03:00, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Human3015: how many pages of Ranade have you read? which page number of Ranade is Mahipal on? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 03:04, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ms Sarah Welch Why you want to mention caste of Jnandev, we are writing 4-5 people in that line, we are not mentioning caste of Kabir, Namdev, Eknath, Chaitanya, Tukaram then why you are insisting to Unduely mention caste of Jnandev which is irrelevant here.--Human3015Send WikiLove  03:13, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Human3015: Because mutiple reliable sources state so. It is notable that his teacher lineage was of a different caste. Kabir etc are irrelevant, as he was influenced by their literary works and did not study in school(s) started by them or their disciples lineage. Just check the sources. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 03:21, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Ms Sarah Welch: you are still not expalined why Jnandv's unsourced caste is important here when Ranade's source doesn't mention it. Why you are giving undue importance? We are not mentioning anybody's caste here. --Human3015Send WikiLove  03:26, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Ms Sarah Welch: School? does really source taks about school? Source clearly mentions that 4 persons, Namdeva, Kabira, Jnandeva and Eknatha established spiritual base of Tukarama, read page 11. Why you want to state caste of only Jnandev?--Human3015Send WikiLove  03:31, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Don't edit war, Human3015. This is in active discussion. I have already answered you above. Have you checked Eleanor Zelliot, Anna Schultz, Belsare, Nelson, Edwards? They explicitly discuss what you are asking. I was going to add all these and other sources. Our edits are conflicting. So I will hold off editing this article for a while, and let you contribute. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 03:36, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ms Sarah Welch: The source from which you are writing about Babaji and his heritage to Jnandev doesn't states caste of Jnandev. Still you are pushing your POV by unnecessarily adding caste of the subject. If you want to add caste then add caste of his all Gurus/mentors (Namdeva, Kabira, Jnadeva and Eknatha). --Human3015Send WikiLove  03:40, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Human3015: As I said, I will let you edit. I will add sources and expand the article later. Consider your latest edit:
My text:
Tukarama, states Ranade, referred to earlier Bhakti poet-sants such as Namdev, Kabir and Eknath to have "peculiarly contributed to the formation of his spiritual life".[11]
You reverted it to:
Tukarama peculiarly contributed earlier Bhakti poet-sants such as Namdev, Kabir and Eknath to formation of his spiritual life.[11]
Please reconsider. How can Tukaram contribute Namdev, Kabir etc to his spiritual life? They lived in different centuries. Even otherwise, how can one person contribute another person to the formation of his own spiritual life? That sentence makes no sense, and that is not what the source states. Were you trying to revert the Brahmin wording, and inadvertently reverted this as well? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 03:59, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Ms Sarah Welch: Read WP:OR, we are citing sources, it is Tukarama who is saying in his Abhangas that those 4 people are his mentors. With same logic neither Jnandev lived in Tukaram's era. We citing to whom Tukarama attributed as his mentors in his abhangas. Your edit was misleading people that "it was Ranade's opinion that those 4 are mentors of Tukarama", while same source clearly mentions that "it is Tukarama's opinion that those 4 people are his mentors". --Human3015Send WikiLove  04:33, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, I didn't know that there were book sby R.D. Ranade published in the west. Are there more? Anyway, I've rphrased the sentence; "Tukarama peculiarly contributed earlier Bhakti poet-sants" does not say what's intenden here, namely that those poet-saints contributed tpo Tukaram's spiritual development. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:34, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@JJ: Indeed. Thanks for the fix. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 05:50, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The source says "refers" (p.11), and "In his work of Abhangas, Tukarama repeatedly attribute to four other persons who had a primary influence on his spiritual development" is non-sensical: what does he attribute to those four persons? If you want to use that term, you should write "In his work of Abhangas, Tukarama repeatedly attribute to four other persons a primary influence on his spiritual development". Nevertheless, the source says refers; why not use the direct quote, as Ms Sarah Welch did? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:37, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Ms Sarah Welch: Thanks for contributing to this article. If you are expert in Varkari issues then kindly comment on Talk:Vithoba and give your opinion. Kindly read all comments carefully with source before giving your opinion. Thank you. --Human3015Send WikiLove  03:10, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yogee23 et al changes

[edit]

@Yogee23 et al: Why add "leaving the world with this body" and such "earth is flat" fringe theories into this article, linked to ahmednagarpride.com style blogs or similar non-RS websites? How is this consistent with scholarship, WP:RS and non-fringe content guidelines of wikipedia? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:38, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tukaram&oldid=1211117383"