Talk:Shaiva Siddhanta

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Hinduism: Philosophy / Shaivism High‑importance High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Philosophy task force (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by the Shaivism task force (assessed as High-importance). Religion Top‑importance Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Veganism and Vegetarianism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of veganism and vegetarianism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Veganism and VegetarianismWikipedia:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismTemplate:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismVeganism and Vegetarianism articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I've organized the ideas into sections, to see if that helps. Somebody please add a table of contents. If the edit does not make sense, try to reorganize until it does.

I have been looking at the complex of articles

"Most vigorously practiced Shaivite Hindu group?" How can that ever be measured or known?--ॐJesucristo301 16:37, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"However the Muslim subjugation of North India restricted Shaiva Siddhanta to the south" - given that Hindu traditions (both Shaivaite and Vaishnavaite) flourished right through the period of Islamic rule, this seems a biased view. North Indian Hindus became largely Vaishnavaite, not Islamic, though many areas continued with Shaivaite and Tantric traditions - such as Bengal or Kashmir (both large centres of Islamic rule) Shanky (talk) 06:17, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article is biased in that it is slanted towards the view of a small minority of shaivas. The Shaiva Siddhanta tradition in India is known for and overwhelmingly dualistic (mono-theistic), as opposed to Kashmir Shaisvism which is nondualistic (monist). Yet by reading this article a person would come away believing that "real" Shaiva Siddhanta is monist like the Kashmiri school. I assume this is due to the followers of the Saiva Siddhanta Church, who are a small sect of Shaivas who like to teach that their type of Shaiva Siddhanta (the monist variety) represents Shaivism within the Hindu world (see this article in their newspaper "Hinduism Today" https://www.hinduismtoday.com/magazine/october-november-december-2003/2003-10-hinduism-2/ Go down to the section titled 'On the Soul and God' where you will see this

"Saivism: God Siva is one with the soul. The soul must realize this advaitic (monistic) Truth by God Siva's grace.

Shaktism: The Divine Mother, Shakti, is mediatrix, bestowing advaitic moksha on those who worship Her.

Vaishnavism: God and soul are eternally distinct. Through Lord Vishnu's grace, the soul's destiny is to worship and enjoy God.

Smartism: Ishvara and man are in reality Absolute Brahman. Within maya, the soul and Ishvara appear as two. Jnana (wisdom) dispels the illusion."

Not only is the description of Saivism giving the minority view (since most Shaivas belong to the non-monist traditions), also the description of the Smarta tradition is biased (While most smartas believe in monist philosophy it is not what makes a smarta a smarta, many are not monists, a smarta can have any vedic philosophical belief and still be a smarta)

One example of the general bias of this article is this section:

"A dualistic development

In the thirteenth century, another important development occurred in Shaiva Siddhanta when Meykandar wrote the twelve-verse Sivajñanabodham. This and subsequent works by other writers laid the foundation of the Meykandar Sampradaya, which propounds a pluralistic realism wherein God, souls and world are coexistent and without beginning. Siva is efficient but not material cause. They view the soul’s merging in Siva as salt in water, an eternal oneness that is also twoness. This school’s literature has so dominated scholarship that Shaiva Siddhanta is often erroneously identified as exclusively pluralistic. In truth, there are two interpretations, one monistic and another dualistic, of which the former is the original philosophical premise found in pre-Meykandar scriptures, including the Upanishads."

The entire article is twisted to promote the views of a minority as being the real true form of the religion while relegating the larger tradition as some new form which is not in line with the Upanishads! Essentially that paragraph is saying the main tradition is bogus, since the Upanishads are revealed scripture in Hinduism, and that the minority monist sect is the true religion!

Here is how Shaiva Siddhanta philosophy is usually described

http://www.saivism.net/sects/siddha/siddhasaivism.asp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Shaivism

Shiva das 20:53, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a page on shaivism but about the this particular school of shaivism.so obviously it is not intended to represent the "majority view" as u put it.In the very beginning of the article it is expictly stated that it is one form of shaivite hinudism although the oldest and extensively warrants ciations -which are not provided-it is obvious it is not the only school of thought.It would most kind of you if you can add content to the page .

talk) 16:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

I removed the following until checked; Redheylin (talk) 02:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The first known

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/76/Development_of_Shaivism.svg/440px-Development_of_Shaivism.svg.png

https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-1e085c5e9d197e65c2c4597a2082bc44-lq 2A00:1FA0:8429:6A31:40B3:2B8B:549B:7238 (talk) 13:44, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]