Talk:Bhagavata Sampradaya

	Hinduism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism 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.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Krishnaism (assessed as Top-importance).

Religion Top‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Disambiguation

It has been suggested that the page become a disambiguation page for Bhagavata, which can refer to either of two different religious traditions from two different time periods, as well as an abbreviated name of the Bhagavata Purana. This proposal can be discussed here. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 18:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I support the proposal. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 18:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support proposal for disambiguation. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 18:08, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal clarification I would appreciate if you can outline which two different religious traditions you mean. As I can see the need of the disambiguation but some conclude that 4 c. BC Bhagavata and current Bhagavata sampradaya are the same tradition, and others are branches of that tradition, we need to have one article for all bhagavata traditions? I propose to have 3 main entries in disambiguation

Bhagavata religious traditions that include anscient Bhagavatism as a section, as well as other traditions that belong to this line,
Bhagavata as the name of purana, with the associated meanings of the term.
Bhagavata as a devotee of Bhagavata Purana or Bhagavata(within one of the traditons belonging to Bhagavata No1.)Wikidās ॐ 16:14, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Narayana worship is non vedic?

Narayana the seer who composed Purusha Sukta(10th mandala of Rigveda),was later deified as the supreme God,how is that non vedic?(the flowchart says so) Nijgoykar (talk) 02:56, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is really nuts.49.207.61.24 (talk) 10:44, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's a very incorrect statement. Refer to the main Narayana article for his origin. Chronikhiles (talk) 04:15, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bhagavata. 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/20090304122300/http://orissagov.nic.in/e-magazine/Journal/journalvol3/pdf/40-48.pdf to http://orissagov.nic.in/e-magazine/Journal/journalvol3/pdf/40-48.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 17:30, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rename article as Bhagavatism

For both the purposes of distinguishing the article from other related traditions, and to designate it as the cult rather than its adherents, I propose it be renamed as Bhagavatism. If you agree, please do respond with your assent below. Chronikhiles (talk) 04:19, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Misrepresentation of image on Coin

The main page shows a coin. The explanatory note with the coin is <<Historically, the Bhagavatas worshipped Vāsudeva-Krishna. An early depiction of Vāsudeva-Krishna on a coin of Agathocles of Bactria, 190–180 BCE.>> This is incorrect. The Brahmi inscription on the coin reads Agathoclisia (Agathocles). Similar coins from Takshashila show the same name in the Greek script. Again a claim is made that the figure is Samkarshana (Balram).

. The fact is the figure in both coins is Agathocles and his name appears on both coins (in Greek on one and in Brahmi on the other). He is dressed , as can be expected, in the greek style,complete with helmet and short skirt. In one coin the figure is holding an 8 spoked wheel wich is clearly Buddhas Dhamma Chakra because Agathocles followed the Buddhist faith. By no stretch of imagination can the coins be for Keishn/ Balram.

So , claiming that the coins represent Krishna / Balram is pure motivated conjecture. Ajayjo (talk) 09:54, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ajayjo cite reliable source in place of pov. Nxcrypto Message 09:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The coin (images) purportedly associated with Balrama/ Krishna are theselves the reference. The inscriptions just mention the name of the king Agathocles. Krishna / Balaram are NOT mentioned on the coins. You can see other coins issued by Agathocles at this link https://coinindia.com/galleries-agathocles.html

The coins are associated with the Heliodorus pillar found in Vidisha which was under a Buddhist King (nag Dynasty) at that time. Heliodorus himself was an ambassador of the King Agathocles who followed Buddhism. So it is very unlikely that the pillar was dedicated to Krishna/ Balaram. THe connection with Vishnu / Krishna/ Balaram has been made on the basis of a half-word "vasa" and the presence of a Garuda (Vishnu's mount) figure . Garuda is by no means exclusive to Vishnu. In my separate comment I have explained that interpreting "vasa" as "vasudeva" is incorrect.

ALL coins carry ONLY the name of Agathocles. Therefore whoever claims that the coins show Krishna / Balaram, THAT person must provide references to support the claim. The references provided for the Balaram/ Krishna claim are either A> General knowledge books (1 and 2) or B> do not actually have a reference to Balaram/ Krishna (3 and 4).

Is there any other reference that I can provide ?

Thanks Ajayjo (talk) 07:43, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ajayjo provide the link of those books Nxcrypto Message 09:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The reference are already in the Article tab. But repeating

1.[1]https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Kal%C4%81dar%C5%9Bana/-qoeAAAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA129&printsec=frontcover

2. https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Basic_Facts_of_General_Knowledge/Z0mjae1kdYUC?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA68&printsec=frontcover

3.https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/A_History_of_Ancient_and_Early_Medieval/H3lUIIYxWkEC?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA437&printsec=frontcover

4. https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Iconography_of_Balar%C4%81ma/5vd-lKzyFg0C?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA22&printsec=frontcover Ajayjo (talk) 09:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ajayjo first reference is not accessible to me, second reference lacks reliability, third reference is WP:RS but it appears that Upinder Singh also agree with the identification of the deity as Balarama and Krishna[2]. Nxcrypto Message 13:23, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In reference 4 ( by Nilkanth Purushottam Joshi) the text mentions inscriptions but does not specifically say if the inscriptions mention Krishna / Balaram or Agathocles. The inscriptions actually read Aghathocles in Greek and Brahmi scripts. Then the text "establishes" a creative connection of the coin with Krishna / Balarama by saying <Both brothers are dressed as warriors and have sheathed swords hanging from their belts>>. Firstly sheathed swords are not associated with Balarama and Krishna. Secondly both figures are wearing Greek-style skirts and even a helmet. So on a coin issued by agathocles, with the inscription reading Agathocles and the figure dressed exactly like a Greek warrior of the times, how believable is the claim that the figures are not Agathocles but Balaram/ Krishna ?

[3]https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Iconography_of_Balar%C4%81ma/5vd-lKzyFg0C?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA22&printsec=frontcover Ajayjo (talk) 09:08, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ajayjo But, could you provide the references you have to support the identification of the two deities as something other than Balarama and Krishna? The sources currently cited by you do not present convincing evidence to dispute this identification. Nxcrypto Message 13:30, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]