![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I don't endorse having the entire translation here. This is what wikisource is for; but first we have to establish whether the text is even in the public domain. dab (ᛏ) 13:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 18:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Evidence that the Upanishad predates Mahaprabhu? Seeing that it figures in the Muktika canon as 103 out of 108, it stands to reason that it was considered one of the most recent at the compilation of that canon. However, it is unknown when that canon was compiled. All that can be said is that the canon predates 1656, when it was first recorded in historical context. It is perfectly reasonable to assume that the Muktika canon dates to the 16th century, and that the Kali-Santarana Upanishad may date to either the 15th or 16th century.
My question is, is there any support of the assertion that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's use of "Hare Krishna" necessarily predates the Upanishad's use of "Hare Krishna"? -- dab (𒁳) 12:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The article isn't saying that Mahaprabhu's use of "Hare Krishna" predates the Upanishad. It is saying that the Upanishad most likely predates Mahaprabhu's use of "Hare Krishna", which would be the reason he encouraged its chanting so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.156.85.53 ( talk) 07:00, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
My apologies to any Bhaktas, but I believe this article has lost a lot of important information in order to protect an unsupported theory. The version here [1] seems to give the most information, but was apparently censored for suggesting Caitanya Prabhu didn't introduce the mahamantra. I believe both sides can be defended and one does not need to be supplanted by the other. Therefor I recommend restoring the version mentioned above, and editing in the Gaudiya perspective (with citations) that Caitanya introduced this mantra before this upanisad was composed. Iṣṭa Devatā ( talk) 20:09, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
@ Gareth E. Kegg: It has multiple sources. What is your concern with those sources? I invite you to discuss it on this talk page per WP:BRD. Ms Sarah Welch ( talk) 00:50, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
References
Note that the above (header) DYK entry was removed (hours too late) from the main page for being wrong on multiple issues. It wasn't a beatles' recording, John Lennon had no hand in it, and "topped the charts" is debatable (it never made number one, it reached 12 in UK and 15 in Germany and an unknown position in Czechoslovakia). We have one reliable source about Hare Krishna in India (so not really an authority on Western pop music) which is contradicted by every other reliable source about the Beatles and recordings associated with them. Fram ( talk) 09:49, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
The IAST Romanisation of the Sanskrit title and of the Wiki page (Kali-Saṇṭāraṇa Upaniṣad) does not match that in Devanagari (कलिसन्तरणोपनिषद्). If the Devanagari is correct, then the Roman text should be Kali Santaraṇa Upaniṣad (no below-dots for "nt", and no macron over a, in the second word. If the Roman is correct, then the equivalent Devanagari should be कलिसण्टारणोपनिषद्. Request someone learned in Sanskrit or on the book to advise. Vedabit ( talk) 10:53, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
The page should be moved to Kali-Santarana Upanishad to remove the dots from the words, and to conform with the spelling of other articles about Upanishad. However, an administrator is needed to move the page over the redirect. Yoninah ( talk) 19:39, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I don't endorse having the entire translation here. This is what wikisource is for; but first we have to establish whether the text is even in the public domain. dab (ᛏ) 13:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 18:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Evidence that the Upanishad predates Mahaprabhu? Seeing that it figures in the Muktika canon as 103 out of 108, it stands to reason that it was considered one of the most recent at the compilation of that canon. However, it is unknown when that canon was compiled. All that can be said is that the canon predates 1656, when it was first recorded in historical context. It is perfectly reasonable to assume that the Muktika canon dates to the 16th century, and that the Kali-Santarana Upanishad may date to either the 15th or 16th century.
My question is, is there any support of the assertion that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's use of "Hare Krishna" necessarily predates the Upanishad's use of "Hare Krishna"? -- dab (𒁳) 12:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The article isn't saying that Mahaprabhu's use of "Hare Krishna" predates the Upanishad. It is saying that the Upanishad most likely predates Mahaprabhu's use of "Hare Krishna", which would be the reason he encouraged its chanting so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.156.85.53 ( talk) 07:00, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
My apologies to any Bhaktas, but I believe this article has lost a lot of important information in order to protect an unsupported theory. The version here [1] seems to give the most information, but was apparently censored for suggesting Caitanya Prabhu didn't introduce the mahamantra. I believe both sides can be defended and one does not need to be supplanted by the other. Therefor I recommend restoring the version mentioned above, and editing in the Gaudiya perspective (with citations) that Caitanya introduced this mantra before this upanisad was composed. Iṣṭa Devatā ( talk) 20:09, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
@ Gareth E. Kegg: It has multiple sources. What is your concern with those sources? I invite you to discuss it on this talk page per WP:BRD. Ms Sarah Welch ( talk) 00:50, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
References
Note that the above (header) DYK entry was removed (hours too late) from the main page for being wrong on multiple issues. It wasn't a beatles' recording, John Lennon had no hand in it, and "topped the charts" is debatable (it never made number one, it reached 12 in UK and 15 in Germany and an unknown position in Czechoslovakia). We have one reliable source about Hare Krishna in India (so not really an authority on Western pop music) which is contradicted by every other reliable source about the Beatles and recordings associated with them. Fram ( talk) 09:49, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
The IAST Romanisation of the Sanskrit title and of the Wiki page (Kali-Saṇṭāraṇa Upaniṣad) does not match that in Devanagari (कलिसन्तरणोपनिषद्). If the Devanagari is correct, then the Roman text should be Kali Santaraṇa Upaniṣad (no below-dots for "nt", and no macron over a, in the second word. If the Roman is correct, then the equivalent Devanagari should be कलिसण्टारणोपनिषद्. Request someone learned in Sanskrit or on the book to advise. Vedabit ( talk) 10:53, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
The page should be moved to Kali-Santarana Upanishad to remove the dots from the words, and to conform with the spelling of other articles about Upanishad. However, an administrator is needed to move the page over the redirect. Yoninah ( talk) 19:39, 3 February 2016 (UTC)