Talk:Evil eye/Archive 1

Archive 1

strange sentence

Hello

I was reading this sentence:

"Some cultures hold that the evil eye is an involuntary jinx that is cast unintentionally by people unlucky enough to be cursed with the power to bestow it by their gaze."

but that is the same as saying"Cultures say that the evil eye is a jinx casted by people with the power to bestow it by their gaze."

.. which implies that the people with the "evil eye" actually pass on that "evil eye" to the person they gaze on.

This statement doesn't seem to fit in with what the rest of the article is saying (for example, "that the evil eye causes disease, wasting away, and even death").

  Should the sentence be fixed, or left alone?

Thanks!

The evil eye is both the power to curse and an instance of the curse itself - rather vague usage. Should be cleaned up. kwami 23:27, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

• • I think what they are trying to say is that the evil eye can be cast unintentionally. Mythologically, some people may be able to curse others without knowing it. The word bestow is used incorrectly there, but the rest of the sentence makes sense.

2004-2005 comments

"or "Hook 'em Horns" gestur"

Why does this link to a university? - Omegatron 21:57, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)

"Hook e Horns" is a slogan for fans of the Texas Longhorns. -- Smerdis of Tlön 01:43, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

What does seeing eye have to do with this? — BenFrantzDale 08:18, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

Damned if I know. I removed the link. -- Smerdis of Tlön 11:42, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Definitely a dumb link, but the horns gesture is sometimes used to ward off the evil eye --Mpa 07:56, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the horns gesture (pointing the index and little fingers, other fingers and thumb curled up) is a classic gesture to ward off the evil eye. It features prominently in the first chapter of "Dracula," when the peasants learn that the narrator is headed for Dracula's castle.

Back in El Salvador 9 out of 10 babies had an evil eye bracelet. - Guanaco152003 22:24, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Evil eye in cameras

Removed the "evil eye in cameras" pgraph after seeing the no original research policy .. sorry ..

--Mpa 05:39, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Sicilian talisman

It is interesting that mention of Mediterranean practice comes into play with this article. My Grandmother who came to the U.S.A. from Sicily, used red fabric to create small 1" hand sewn salt balls. These balls are placed above a doorway, window(s) or main entrance to the home to deflect the evil eye. It is said that a person who wishes ill will upon your family or has feelings of jealousy will get it back if you have one of these in place. These are also effective if carried on your person. We also have the practice of a red ribbon tied into a bow and fastened with a safety pin to the inside of a garment (hidden) for the same reason. (This interesting contribution by 67.21.82.0 made at 09:05, April 25, 2006, was moved from the main article to here by Lambiam^Talk 09:46, 25 April 2006 (UTC))

Distribution of the belief

I don't think this section is needed. The belief is 'universal'.--Jondel 09:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Is that so? You'd be hard pressed to find Scandinavians who subscribe to this belief. Can you imagine a Swedish airplane with an eye painted on it to ward of the evil eye? In Turkey, on the other hand, you'll find that a majority of people fear the evil eye. The distribution is definitely not even, and the customs attending it vary from place to place. --Lambiam^Talk 10:23, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Not about painting an eye , but a superstition or belief that someone can cause bad luck or something bad to happen by just looking at you . Sorry , I guess I'm wrong. They don't paint eyes in the Philippines. But some people fear the 'evil eye'. So, I guess there are no superstitions among Scandinavians if someone gives you the evil eye. Ok.--Jondel 10:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Sections added on Turkey by Ali Akyuz & 88.233.24.35

While this information on Turkey's fascination with the evil eye is interesting, it is not appropriate to the first section. It also reads like a personal narrative, has incorrect punctuation, is signed, and contains original research, all of which are inappropriate. I will now tear it apart and refactor it for the distribution of belief section. Emoticon 08:09, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

this article seriously doesn't make any sense.

Islamic Evil Eye

Belief in the evil eye features in Islamic mythology; it is not a part of Islamic doctrine, however, and is more a feature of folk religion. The practice of warding the evil eye is also common within Muslims (though once again without evidence from an Islamic doctrine).

This isn't true at all. The evil eye in Islam is mentioned in authentic Hadith. Look at this link: http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=50&translator=4

And look at this fatwa: http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503543922

Armyrifle 00:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

The Japanese "Evil Eye"

In Japanese fiction (often revolving around ninjas), there is something known as "dōjutsu" that translates into "eye skill/techniqe" that comes with various dangerous and/or fatal effects. I don't know how old this phenomenon is, but the oldest documented occurance I've been able to find dates back to the late 1950's where it occured in the Kōga Ninpōchō novel... Should there be any notice of this "Evil Eye"? 81.224.28.144 13:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Historiography

what does everyone think of this section? I will continue to add new approaches to the evil eye in the following days. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjdemur (talk • contribs) 17:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Greek

μάτιασμα cannot be right. In Greek the stress must fall on one of the last three vowels. It is probably ματιάσμα but den xero for certain. Intelligent Mr Toad 04:18, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

The fist sentence of this article is very unclear:

"The evil eye is a folklore belief that the envy elicited by the bad luck of fortunate people may result in their misfortune, whether it is envy of material possessions including livestock, or of beauty, health, or offspring."

Say this another way, and it comes out: "The evil eye is a belief that the envy elicited by a lucky person's bad luck may result in their bad luck..."

First, shouldn't "bad luck" in the first line be amended to read "good luck"? Otherwise, how can a "fortunate person" have "bad luck" (apart from the occasional mishap), and how could that bad luck elicit envy?

Does the author actually mean something along these lines? "Evil Eye: A folklore belief that a person can knowingly or unknowingly cause misfortune through an envious gaze, and negatively affect any aspect of the envied person's life, possessions, or family.

I added "any aspect" above because the sentence reading "including livestock, beauty, health or offspring," really means "including but not limited to livestock, beauty..." For instance, an evil eye that envys an acrobat's balance could no doubt cause them to fall, or one envying a person's popularity could cause them to lose friends.

83.217.115.146 17:39, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Μάτιασμα is right. The stress is correctly in that place.

Michael IX the White 18:22, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Hung what

In the "Classical Evil Eye" section: "In the Roman days not only were individual considered to possess the power of the evil eye but whole tribes, especially those of Pontus and Scythia, were believed to be transmitters of the evil eye. In Greece, People hung them over their doors for protection."

What exact did people in Greece hang over their doors for protection? Scythians? I don't get it. Seems a rather odd practice to hang the people of a particular tribe over your door. I suspect some context has been lost due to editing. Unfortunately, I can't seem to locate this context to restore it. 24.254.163.150 (talk) 04:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

(followup) After looking through the article's history, it seems no context was lost. The context was never there. "In Greece, People hung them over their doors for protection." was added in under the section 16:22, 14 March 2008 216.124.93.254 (Talk) (28,262 bytes) (→The Classical Evil Eye) So I'm undoing it since there never was any context to begin with. If 216.124.93.254 wishes to add it back in. Please make sure you either are adding it to the proper section or bother putting the context in next time :) 24.254.163.150 (talk) 04:58, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Creatures?

It sounds quite similar to the powers of Gorgon, Medusa and Basilisks. The petrifying glance or simple killing glance. Should this be added into the article?(at least as a see also section?) MythSearcher^talk 20:19, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

The only connection being eyes as a source of harm? No, it should not be added- nor should Superman's heat vision, Cyclops's eye-beam, or the withering stare of the ex-whatever.Mavigogun (talk) 21:03, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Envy

I don't know if this is a modern phenomenon or whatever. I just know that a lot of explanations about the evil eye I have heard from Rabbis (including Lithuanian Orthodox and Hasidic) have given much less of a supernatural explanation of it. Basically, the explanations I have gotten really stress that by showing off, you create antipathy that will come back to bite you. Not so much that if you buy a new car and show off you will get into an accident. More like if you buy a new car and show off, nobody is going to care much about scratching the paint as they open the door parked when next to it. I don't have any sources for this, but it seems to me pretty clear that the concept, if not the particular name, would be built around such a thing. 75.3.235.25 (talk) 05:35, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Please: delineate your Rabbinical Survey as a published work in a respected venue, citing both data and sources, and get back to us. 'Educated' guesses, speculation, and original research are not applicable to this venue.Mavigogun (talk) 21:09, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

scientific explanation

the so called "evil eye" is such a prevalent belief around the world that i am surprised that no one researched the posible causes..I'm from Romania and throughout the region(except greece and turkey) it is believed to be some form of involuntary hipnosis and it's also a popular belief that you shouldn't look a child in the eye with an intense gaze,i've personally seen cases of this happen especially to children,they become letargic,sleepy,without energy..i was hoping to find some posible scientific explanation, if any —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.117.48.230 (talk) 14:12, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Removal

This change removed the names of Evil eye in various languages with the explanation: "removing section which is not specifically attributed to a reliable third party source which would demonstrate encyclopedic relevance or notability WP:RS)"

I fully disagree. I find this section very interesting and encyclopedic, since different cultures give different versions of the bad eye, as explained in detail further down in the article.

I have therefore reverted the removal and I would recommend discussing the issue here before taking such bold actions.--FocalPoint (talk) 19:52, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Any source on the etymology of "evil eye" in different countries? --Enric Naval (talk) 22:24, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, I just added one reference. I suppose other editors will add others. --FocalPoint (talk) 23:25, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

?????

Hi.

I was reading in de introduction to the article that infants are most likely to suffer from mal de ojo. And then it says that "adult females" can also suffer from it. As far as I know (I am latino, and very familiar with the superstition) infants and children ARE the most likely victims from mal de ojo, but virtually any person can suffer from it. Why does it say only female adults???

Thx. Crazypersonbb (talk) 02:41, 8 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazypersonbb (talk • contribs) 02:38, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

arabic ين

it is عين not ين Mewoone (talk) 09:57, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, there is a good deal of obscenity within the page, maybe someone should think about removing it? Julie94.124.223.184 (talk) 03:08, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Protective talismans and cures

This long section is terrible. Most of it appears to be personal opinion or original research. Most of the sections are completely uncited. We need sources to support these superstitious beliefs or the unsourced sections should simply be removed. Some of it is quite dubious. Yworo (talk) 23:55, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Edits of RolandMerchant

Since RolandMerchant has been indefinitely blocked for misrepresenting sources, and soon afterwards for socking, I suggest editors of this page carefully review any text that he/she inserted. In particular, compare text against citations. Zero^talk 08:26, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Daimon vs. Demon

It's highly problematic to translate the Greek daimon simply as "Demon", despite the similarity in the words. Socrates was considered to have a connection to a 'daimon' which was simply a sort of familiar spirit, not explicitly evil in nature. This daimon would warn him when he was about to do or say something incorrect. It's reasonable to extend this to the suggest that his daimon was the guiding principle of his philosophy. Thus the term 'daimon-lookers' could very easily mean that his disciples were simply 'those who experience philosophy' under the guidance of Socrates' daimon. This entire section is unsourced but I don't want to delete it. Some sort of source is really needed here though I don't know of any that explicitly mention Socrates as having an 'evil eye', as fascinating as this possibility is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.222.165.231 (talk) 02:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Or I guess we could just delete my suggestions entirely because it's certainly more reasonable to suggest that Socrates was influencing his inner circle by some malefic satanic influence simply because 'demon' and 'daimon' kind of sound the same to people who have absolutely no knowledge of Greek whatsoever. I mean it's clearly all very well sourced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.222.165.231 (talk) 06:12, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

You know in actually trying to research the whole 'blepodaimones' thing I can only find references to this article on Wikipedia. Is this even something with a basis in fact at all? Certainly one would expect a participle in this case and the form is not a participle, and furthermore it is mis-spelled. "Blepedaimones" doesn't mean 'demon-look', it means 'look-demons', beyond which conjoined forms of the verb 'blepo' retain the final 'o', so the word should be 'blepodaimones' even to be 'look-demons' correctly. Much more likely the word would have been 'daimoblepomenos', 'demon-looker' but frankly speaking I can't find any outside verification of any part of this entire thing. As a result I am deleting it because it has no source, I can't find any source for it, and given the blundering nature of the Greek word used I'm really skeptical that this was ever a true story. It seems very much to me the work of a jaded undergrad with a hate-on for Socrates using his or her half-year of Greek to invent some preposterous myth linking the man with black magic.

Confusion

('Hello, I am confused, because in my country (Turkey) it is used for protection, and protection only. It is well respected gift for people whom can be a focus of envy of others, like new born or beautiful people. We believe that it magnets the bad energy of others, collect this energy and eventually cracks, so it protects the person from that bad energy. This is why people put amulets into their cars or doorways of their homes, and replace it when it is cracked. Also an old Middle eastern civilization Kennans would be worthy to check as a source of this object. And I am also surprised you do not have a subtitle of Turkey under this topic. Thanks.') — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kikima (talk • contribs)

New stuff goes at the bottom, and please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~), thank you. The amulets are used for protection against the evil eye, the evil eye refers to that energy the amulets are meant to protect against. Nazars are probably what you're confusing with the evil eye. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:35, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Pius IV

The article says Pius IV had the evil eye - but there is no mention of the subject on his page (and besides I read somewhere it was supposedly Pius IX who had the evil eye). More details? 128.127.29.19 (talk) 17:09, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Picture

This article has many photos, but it feels like the one it's missing is of someone purporting to give the evil eye. -- Beland (talk) 16:15, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Pashto meaning

"Chsiem mora" is wrong, the word Cheisem is Persian and the correct variant would be "Bado Stergo" which means bad eye in Pashto. I am going to change this. Akmal94 (talk) 06:53, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Evil eye. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100101104543/http://www.lausanne.org/all-documents/ethiopian-case-study.html to http://www.lausanne.org/all-documents/ethiopian-case-study.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120817130521/http://anthro.palomar.edu/medical/med_1.htm to http://anthro.palomar.edu/medical/med_1.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071014071246/http://forteantimes.com/features/articles/241/the_evil_eye.html to http://www.forteantimes.com/features/articles/241/the_evil_eye.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:19, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Evil eye. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110727213519/http://www.revistatabularasa.org/numero_dos/florez.pdf to http://www.revistatabularasa.org/numero_dos/florez.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718162216/http://www.loghatnaameh.com/dehkhodaworddetail-c9b0681b19334f39af7cb32b7c4d64b0-fa.html to http://www.loghatnaameh.com/dehkhodaworddetail-c9b0681b19334f39af7cb32b7c4d64b0-fa.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:57, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Origin

A few days ago I did some work on the lead section. As part of that, I noticed that one or more people have been repeatedly adding "originating in Greece", and a Greek translation, to the first sentence. The cited sources don't support this, either about the superstition, the amulets, or the glass beads. They do note the existence of the legend in Ancient Greece, but don't say that it originated there; at least one says that it came to Greece from Ancient Egypt, others say it's too old and widespread to trace. Even if it's possible to find published claims of a Greek national origin, there is insufficient agreement among reliable sources to make the unqualified statement in the lead sentence. Accordingly, I removed it as per WP:WEIGHT, and the translation as per MOS:FORLANG.

I have just reverted three subsequent edits by 49.180.118.234 (talk), that re-added some material, for these reasons:

• [1] re-adding "originating in Greece", see above.
• [2] unsourced, and the sentence just doesn't make sense to me.
• [3] unexplained deletion of sourced content, addition of unsourced.

--IamNotU (talk) 15:13, 14 February 2021 (UTC)