Talk:Sri Yantra

Merge

Should not be merged. Is the most common and popular yantra and multiple books have been written about only this yantra. IPSOS (talk) 12:57, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Mathematical basis

Does one find similarity between Rectified Tesseract - a polytope and a most auspcious religious diagram of Hinduism - The Sri Yantra? The Sri Yantra is much more complex. But because Tesseract is only 4 dimensional figure, and Goddes Lakshmi representated by Sri Yantra must be a still higher dimension being. The Yantra seems to be a 2 dimensional Schlegel diagram of the divine reality.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.2.97.42 (talk • contribs).

I don't think there's a mathematical basis for the Sri Yantra. It's just a bunch of overlapping traingles. SharkD 00:33, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

It is underspecified, in that one can create different designs that satisfy the intersection properties, however there is a only a rather limited range, and drawing one requires a lot of care. Traditionally there are several different ways to construct approximately. Zeimusu | Talk page 10:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

It should be possible double-check in geometry software such as GeoGebra. The instructions I followed have "errors" if you zoom in real close. I'm guessing this will be the case with the other methods as well. SharkD  Talk  23:30, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Yantra vs Mandala?

The introduction starts with "The Sri Chakra or Shri Yantra of Tripura Sundari is a yantra or mandala formed by nine interlocking triangles surrounding the bindu." As far as I have understood there is a difference in form (sort of) between yantra and mandala. A mandala always is surrounded by a circle, a yantra mural has got another form. But: I am not sure enough to change the text. Does anybody know for sure? - Austerlitz 88.75.66.151 (talk) 11:10, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

A yantra always has a square around it with 4 'gates' or openings, one to a side. A yantra is usually in a circle, and includes pictures of deities. The real difference is how elaborately they are drawn. The proper therm for this image is 'yantra' or 'mandala.'

simple search on a dictionary or encyclopedia site will confirm this. I would give citations and links but all the material I found is copyrighted.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.115.45 (talk) 05:56, 17 May 2012 (UTC) 

Suggesting move to Sri Yantra

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was page moved.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:35, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

---

Sri Chakra → Sri Yantra — Sri Yantra is the most commonly used name (at least in English texts), although yantra, mandala and chakra are all correct descriptions. 173.52.187.133 (talk) 22:33, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

It's the one I'm most familiar with as well. However, it would be good if you could provide some evidence that this is in fact the case. SharkD  Talk  11:35, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it occurred to me that some documentation would help, but am a little uncertain how to do that. A search in Google Scholar gives this result

1. Sri Chakra "about 85" results
2. Sri Yantra "about 208" results
3. Sri Mandala 2 results

Additionally, Madhu Khanna, in Yantra: The Tantric Symbol of Cosmic Unity (the most scholarly book I know of on the subject of yantras) gives considerable space to it's descussion as the Sri Yantra. However, he does also mention it as Sri Chakra on p70: The Sri Yantra (also known as Sri Chakra, chakra=circle) is a 'neutral' circuit of world-creation.

I hope this helps. 173.52.187.133 (talk) 12:54, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

That's good enough for me. SharkD  Talk  17:30, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Last section

Tagged as unsourced and POV, Seems to be an essay on how wonderful Sri Yantra is. Zeimusu | Talk page 10:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Shri Yantra & Volcanism

Mika Virpiranta suggests in his book "Auringonkultit vastaan ukkosenkultit" (Unfortunatelly not available in English, and book's shorter English version does not include this topic) that those triangles which connects with outer ring of mandala actually touch latitudes where most powerful volcanoes have always erupted. These locate in 19.47°N & S (20°W Kap Verde, 160°W Hawaii and 80°E Deccan; 20°E Tibesti, 100°W Mexico and 140°E Mariane Islands; 60°E Réunion, 60°W Mato Grosso, and 180° Fidzi Islands; 30°E East Africa Rift, 120°E Java, and 90°W Santa Felix); and 40° N & S (Yellowstone 105° W, Campi Flegrei 15°E, and Baekdu 125° E; Kerguelen 70°E, Puyehue 75°W and Taupo 175°E). These locations prove that inside the Earth heat rises from core toward surfice in tethraedric i.e. 120° triangles.

Discrepancy between the two main images of Sri Yantra

Any close examination of the two will reveal a striking difference. It is my contention that the colored one is correct.

Dan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.120.126.179 (talk) 10:13, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Why now has removed an important and precious information In temples ,In religious,In external information has removed by noq please return it

Any one has removed most rare information releted to shri yantra Temples and lots of valuable and privious information.

Please please please please please please Return it 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏 Jagruti Soman (talk) 15:03, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Can you show with WP:reliable sources why the information is WP:notable? Bear in mind that what you consider important and precious is not necessarily important to English Wikipedia. noq (talk) 15:18, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

No images at all? Gallery section vandalized?

For some reason the article contains no images at all of the yantra. The section labeled "Gallery" is there, bit aside from the heading, it's completely empty, leading me to believe it was vandalism, since a proper edit would have removed the section outright if there WAS a gallery of images at one point.

It seems from the amount of contradictions over the appearance of it in the talk page that you may need to consider locking the page to future edits once this apparent defacement has been resolved. 2607:FEA8:99E0:61D0:9DEA:B308:F10C:7C49 (talk) 19:49, 2 May 2023 (UTC)