Talk:Hindu iconography

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A fact from Hindu iconography appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on December 1, 2006.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hindu iconography article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	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. Guidelines: Manual of Style - Naming conventions How you can help: Notice board - Discussion board
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance for this Project's importance scale.

[edit] Welcome

Your help is needed to expand, correct, reorganize and improve this newly created article. It would be particularly helpful if you can add appropriate references or images to the main page. If you are not sure of any particular proposed edit, or think it may be controversial it is good idea to discuss it on the talk page before-hand.

Look forward to your input ! Abecedare 22:35, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The symbol for Omkara

The idea that the visual depiction of Aum has any relevance is not held by any notable scholar, or even a significant minority of common people. Besides the devanagari symbol, we have symbols in various languages, like the Tamil symbol on right (and Tibetan, Chinese, Gurmukhi, etc). Aum derives its importance from the three syllables, the vibrations they generate, not its notation used to denote it in Devanagari script (which is less than 800 years old.) Read also the introduction of the article on Mantra, which is very well written. It mentions how mantras like Aum are all about sound symbolism. It also says:

For many cultures it is the written letters that have power -- the Hebrew Kabbalah for instance, or the Anglo-Saxon Runes. Letters can have an oracular function even. But in India special conditions applied that meant that writing was very definitely inferior to the spoken word."

The only place where I heard of the visual motif was from the Omkara yantra from the fringe tantra text Sayantra Sunya-Samhita and has little to do with mainstream views.

Quote from User:Zora: "Since the Mandukya Upanishad, which discourses on AUM, was probably written between 800-400 BCE (and closer to the 400 BCE figure), it considerably predates Devanagari script. In fact, it might well pre-date the use of Brahmi script, the ancestor of Gupta, Sharada, Nagari, etc. The syllable, as sound, was considered sacred before writing was common, and 1600 years before Devanagari was developed. How then could the shapes of the Devanagari letters have anything to do with the sacredness of the syllable? Finding holiness in the shapes of the letters reminds me of the people who see the Virgin Mary in tortillas and mildew stains. Human beings are pattern and significance seeking animals, and we find significance in the strangest things."

The idea of the devanagari depiction of Aum being a symbol of Hinduism to parallel the Christian cross or the Star of David also surfaced in the article Mantra, and was removed from there after disussion at Talk:Mantra. deeptrivia (talk) 02:18, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree with you Deep, but in recent times devotees from North India I presume have created some visual significance for the Devanagari Aum. A Google Search shows how Ganesha for instance, is literally Omkara (Having the body of Om). Then again, much of visual iconography in Hinduism has a metaphorical purpose. Many Hindus would believe Ravana's "Ten heads" symbolise the wealth of knowledge he had. Gizza^{Chat ©} 03:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Artists use their creativity in an infinitude of ways. At what point does this becomes notable enough to be included in an encyclopedia shouldn't be hard to determine, following wikipedia principles such as WP:RS, WP:UNDUE, etc. Also, as can be verified in Sanskrit dictionaries such as [1], omkara still refers to the syllable, not its visual depiction (this is another piece of bogus information in this article.) In fact the suffix -kara always refers to syllables in Sanskrit grammar, akara, mkara, chkara, etc. deeptrivia (talk) 05:45, 17 June 2007 (UTC)