Talk:Tirumala - Tirupati

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
WikiProject_India This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
This article is maintained by the Indian cities workgroup.
More information about this article...
Wikiproject_Hinduism 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.
??? This article has not been rated yet on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] Christian conversion controversy

This sections seems to be a total POV. It needs a lot of cleanup /fact verification. Sumanth 12:27, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree, I can't believe how articles can be POV'd like this and still get away with it. rohith 15:22, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] From Tirumala page

This article really needs some expansion

Originally Tirumala belonged to the Tamil land. That is why the name is still Tamil. Even Tirupati is a Tamil word.

The Lord is called Venkatavan. But later to remove Tamil influence He was called Venkateshwara. He is not Eashwara as the name eashwar often refers to Lord Siva and not Lord Visnu. It is apt that the world's richest temple is named after the worlds classical language, TAMIL. Tiru is actually Thiru meaning sacred in Tamil and Mala is malai or mountain in Tamil. It is really befitting that the richest temple is named after the richest classical language of India (TAMIL) ==

The section on Tonsure leaves out some vital information, imho. I'm no authority on this temple, having visited it only once, but I kept hearing the same story about it while there and later, from numerous people whom I asked, or who just happened to comment on it.

The tonsure is not done solely "as a symbol of devotion to God". It's done specifically as fulfillment of a promise. If you make a wish while at Tirumala, presumably to or invoking the assistance of Lord Venkateswara, and then your wish comes true, you are duty-bound to come back to Tirumala and shave your head as a symbol of your gratitude.

I didn't look very hard for corroboration of this, but just to make sure I wasn't completely nuts I did find one site: http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/2808/context/cover/.

Secondly, the dispostion of the hair: yes, lots, probably nearly all of it is exported. But I heard (and have not verified) that you can recover your own hair, and arrange to have it made into a wig for yourself until your hair grows back. I think this was more complicated than just getting an already-made wig, so if I recall more people opt for the latter (of those who go for a wig on-site at all, which is a small minority).

Thirdly, a quibble about the use of the term 'tonsure' to mean shaving the head. While some dictionaries admit the meaning of "shaved bald" for this term, it is usually secondary, the primary meaning being the "Friar Tuck" haircut with a bald spot at the top and a bowl-like fringe of hair all around, and includes the sense of it being a ritualistic cut prior to becoming a monk. Other dictionaries(e.g. Columbia, Merriam-Webster, also Wikipedia) admit only the second meaning. In fact, I had never heard it use with the prior meaning. If this is, in fact, the term used at Tirumala itself, then I'd keep it, but add some additional explanation to how it's being used. If it isn't specifically used at the temple, then I'd remove the word as too prone to misinterpretation, and replace it with something else.

[edit] Headline text ==

[edit] Merger with Tirupati

Tirupati and Tirumala are so hyphenated we cannot discuss or write about one without significantly overlapping with the other. Commanly hyphenated as "Tirumala - Tirupati". We can have a common article and then redirect both Tirupati and Tirumala to it. If in future much content is developed for Tirupati city. Then we can have "Tirupati city" article focussing on major city apect of it. --Vyzasatya 10:44, 8 October 2005 (UTC)


DUde chill thats okay actually people know this plaace as tirupati more than tirumala and while searching they will search for tirupati rather than tirumala because of this so... u know there r loads of important things u could rather do for our religion rather disscussing on this silly thing

itsborin@hotmail.com

[edit] From Tirupati page

  • Is the word "queque" as used in this article rightly used? Should it not be "queue" ?

--Profvk 01:38, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

  • Someday, I shall make some minor changes in the style and use of words to make it more comprehensible for a wider circle of readers. --Bhadani 13:10, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Merger with Tirumala

Tirupati and Tirumala are so hyphenated we cannot discuss or write about one without significantly overlapping with the other. If you realise much of the content in this article is about Tirumala temple. The places are Commanly hyphenated as "Tirumala - Tirupati". We can have a common article and then redirect both Tirupati and Tirumala to it. If in future much content is developed for Tirupati city. Then we can have "Tirupati city" article focussing on major city apect of it. --Vyzasatya 10:46, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Removed the following sentence which was added in version 22:03, 25 July 2006:

"This is the 2nd most Busiest and Rich Religious Center in the world after Vatican (It was suppose to beat vatican soon). Every year about 1.2 million people visit this temple from with in India and world but moslty South India."

Reason: numerous grammatical, spelling and usage errors, and mickey-mouse English. Too many errors to fix; if the underlying content is accurate, please rewrite it and add it back in again--I have nothing against the factual content. (I'm not sure how you're all getting your user ids in here, but if someone can point me to a page which explains it, I'll do so; not trying to hide, here.)

[edit] Merged article

Though I pasted stuff from both articles. Lot of redundancy still remain. should be cleaned up. The article is in imbalance with respect to covering diff topics. Any ideas to improve?? --Vyzasatya 19:24, 12 October 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Older than the Earth

Can someone please check the validity of "Tirumala also has a naturally formed rock arch which at about 1500 million years old,"

1500 million years?

I cannot verify the validity of the 1500 million year old rock arch, but 1500 million years is not older than the earth. The age of earth is around 4.5 billion years or 4500 million years.

LazyTiger 08:21, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

It seems to be valid. Please refer to http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/life/2004/09/24/stories/2004092400120200.htm Sumanthk 11:13, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

The rocks are "certified" as being 1500 million years old, but who did that? The same people who say that the main idol in the temple was a transformation of the "Lord Srinivasa" into a stone. And the hindu newspaper article says "believed to be" rather than stating their source. How trust worthy is it? Sasank 07:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I just visited the arch at tirumala three days ago. The explanatory sign that is posted there does claim that the arch is 1500 million years old. It also gives a figure of 2500 million years for something else - the age of the rock the arch consists of, if I recall correctly. Where this information came from, I can't say, but I was under the impression that the site itself was not managed by the governing body of the temple, but by the Indian forest service, which, judging from a number of roadside signs I saw posted, manages much of the land in the hills surrounding Tirupati.


Nothing unusual about 1.5 Billion years for a rock. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldest_rock

[edit] Weasel Words

  • In the section "History of the Shrine" there are weasel words -

....and is said to be older .....

While some scholars accept the antiquity of the shrine .......

....namely Nagarjunakonda and Amravati, thus scholars suggest ......

......the identity of the deity was still disputed until ...........

LazyTiger 08:21, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I removed it because what is written is what most people agree, it is. Beacuse historically all kinds of doubts can be raised but by 5th AD it was a Hindu shrine although Ramanuja had to reconfirm it in the 12th AD. Read about the subject before tagging well written articles. Kongan 21:54, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
And I am adding the tag again because you need to read wikipedia weasel words policy. If you want it to be removed, you need to remove weasel words. Mention sources instead of using some etc.

LazyTiger 05:23, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/i/r/Talk%7ETirumala_-_Tirupati_7ab5.html"