Talk:Radha Krishna

Using Diacritics

This text ràdhikà kêìçàìîaka is unreadable. Wikidās ॐ 20:48, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Will be replacing it with normal text. AroundTheGlobe (talk) 22:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

 Done - AroundTheGlobe (talk) 13:51, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Good job - what about english for it? Is it an English Wiki? I like the idea of different poetry section dedicated to Radha Krishna, this first addition seems to be great, but not many can read it, and the source of translation should RS, as you know. Wikidās ॐ 14:07, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

The problem with the english is tht its not online- and I dont no a text tht has it. I can get it - but it would be termed as OR. The site is the official site of the Swaminarayan Mandir in London (Stanmore), hence I think it is reliable. AroundTheGlobe (talk) 14:14, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I would not see any problem with official site of the Swaminarayan Mandir in London (Stanmore) for this purpose. Wikidās ॐ 14:35, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I think u got me wrong - the present reference is of the Stanmore site (ref 39 - Radhashtak) - it does not hv an english translation - I can get tht but it would be considered OR. AroundTheGlobe (talk) 15:02, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

If its published it should be okay. Is it you yourself translating - its OR. Wikidās ॐ 15:22, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

As I said - dont know of any published sources - and I dont know tht much of religious literature to translate it myself - the only way I could get it is by asking other editors who Im in contact with - but tht would be OR. Ill try and see if the other editors have any publsished sources. AroundTheGlobe (talk) 15:25, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Iv found the interpretation on http://www.swaminarayan.nu/youth/aarti.shtml. ATG ^Contact 14:14, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Temples

I think the International temples section should be merged with the Major temples. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 21:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Some of the international temples may not be big or notable if they were in India, but they will be notable if they are say in Hong Kong... that the reason. In India, there are so many temples of Radha Krishna, hard to list and some are not notable. Wikidās ॐ 21:23, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Then I suggest renaming Major temples as Major temples in India. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 21:25, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

 Done Wikidās ॐ 21:36, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Translation problems

What does this mean? "It is believed that Krishna desired to experience fully what it is like to love Krishna as Radha does has appeared as Caitanya Mahaprabhu. And what Radha (appearing as Caitanya) does in her longing for Krsna is to chant his names." The first sentence would be a complete sentence if it ended with "as Radha does." The rest of the sentence, "has appeared as Caitanya Mahaprabhu", is a predicate without a subject. According to the second sentence, Radha was the one who appeared as Caitanya. But how would Radha's appearance as Caitanya help Krishna experience what it is like to love Krishna as Radha does? Instead, Krishna would experience what it is like to be loved by Caitanya (who is really Radha), not what it is like to love himself as Radha does. If Krishna wanted to experience that, he should have become Radha and turned Radha into himself. Of course I'm not questioning your religion, just the translation. Art LaPella (talk) 23:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I believe your second to last sentence seems to understand the issue correctly concerning the perspective of Caitayite Vaishnavas. The translation is difficult but, given the context, does represent the views of this religious tradition. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:03, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The sentence that ends with "has appeared as Caitanya Mahaprabhu." needs to be rewritten because a predicate without a subject doesn't make sense (see Sentence (linguistics)); the question is how to rewrite it, consistent with the religious tradition. If my second to last sentence understands the issue, then I think that means that Krishna became Radha and Radha became Krishna - but the article also says that Radha became Caitanya. Does that mean that first Radha became Caitanya, and then traded places with Krishna? If so, I shall rewrite the sentence to say that. Art LaPella (talk) 01:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Woops, I apologise, it is a bit more complicated. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 01:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Shri Radhika Krishashtaka

The lyrics of Shri Radhika Krishashtaka are an UNDUE, should be deleted.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

We certainly need to discuss a way to keep relevant and as this case is valuable work, and at the same time comply with policies. All suggestions are welcome. Wikidās-ॐ 07:11, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

IT's mention is OK, why do we do the lyrics. Better suited in say Wikibooks, NOT HERE>--Redtigerxyz (talk) 10:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Redtiger, I agree that we can not have all the lyrics here. However maybe we should have sub page with all lyrics? That will certainly help. Wikidās-ॐ 21:56, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

In this case can I propose that we have a seperate page for it, Shri Radhika Krishashtaka - ATG ^Contact 14:02, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I personally think that it can be done under Krishnaism/Shri Radhika Krishashtaka with a reference to a reliable source.[1] I can not see any policy that state it should not be that way.Wikidās-ॐ 16:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Vrundavan Radha Krishna 01.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:51, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Duplication the lists of Krishna and Radha Krishna temples

Colleaguess Kridha and others. I have only one question for this article. For what reason do you include almost all the temples of Krishna in the list of the temples of Radha-Krishna? Wouldn't it be more accurate to limit ourselves only to those where the central shrine is dedicated to Radha Krishna, and not an additional altar? Otherwise, there will be duplication and, for example, all ISKCON temples will included both in the list of Krishna temples and the list of Radha Krishna. I included only a part of ISKCON temples in the Category:Radha Krishna temples and in related Commons files category. DayakSibiriak (talk) 02:31, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

My idea behind keep on adding temples on Radha Krishna page was to list all the Radha Krishna temples at the same place. But yes, issue of duplication is there. So, okay to shorten the list and make the section less bulky, we can eliminate certain temples from the list. Kridha (talk) 03:29, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Well. The same at page Radha. May more relate to list of Category:Radha Krishna temples, where is no duplication. See how better. But I sure needn't each Swaminarayan and ISKCON temple. DayakSibiriak (talk) 06:21, 28 April 2021 (UTC)