User talk:Krsnaquli

Welcome!

Hello, Krsnaquli!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 14:35, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! —कृष्णकुलि^Krsnaquli || Contact - 14:35, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, you may be blocked from editing. —SpacemanSpiff 07:05, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You must use page numbers for books

I'll probably revert all your edits without page numbers. No one should have to read all a book to find what you are referring to. Doug Weller talk 16:29, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are multiple parts within book that refers the information, and its impossible to enter multiple pages. Instead of damaging contributions, you could simply ask for the specific part you are searching for at the talk page. —कृष्णकुलि^Krsnaquli || Contact - 16:49, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the last revert I made, how about quotes backing the text. Doug Weller talk 20:25, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you are mentioning your revert in Sufi metaphysics page. David Bentley Hart's book, "The Experience of God: Being, Consciousness, Bliss" underlines classical theistic sufi understanding; But I will start with quoting the definition of classical theism within book:

DBH describes his purpose to be explaining the classical theistic traditions at the book:

"All I want to do in the pages that follow is to attempt to explain, as lucidly as I can, how traditional understandings of God illuminate and are illumi nated by those experiences" page 15

He later separates understanding of singular God into two different definitions. He calls the belief of "God as an all-powerful designer" as theistic personalism, and "God as Absolute Being, the souce of all other existence" as classical theism. This part is quite long so I will just include the last sentence, I would reccomend you to read it:

"...Actually, the argument of my second Protestant philosopher above provides an almost perfect illustration of the difference be tween “theistic personalism” (to use the politer term) and classical theism." page 130

For God being transcendant to all existence, he mentions that traditions of classical theism do not consider questions that concern nature as a relevance to God:

"...That, however, is not a question relevant to the reality of the transcendent God, and for this reason it has never been treated as such in the philosophical traditions of classical theism." page 303

He also differates the conditioned beings and the Unconditioned Being, God, per the God definition of classical theistic traditions:

"For one thing, it has made it very hard for many of those philosophers to make much sense of the ancient and necessary premise, common to all classical theistic philosophies, that the words we use about God, to the extent that we use them correctly, have meanings only remotely analogous to what those same words mean when we use them of created things." page 125

Below here is mentioned about Sufi traditions

At this part he is explaing Sufi God definition:

"As Sufi tradition says, God is al-Haqq, Reality as such, underlying everything. All finite things are limited expressions, graciously imparted, of that actuality that he possesses in infinite abundance." page 109

Here, before he explains classical theistic God; he mentions traditions that follow the same definition:

"What then, at last, does it really mean to say that God is “Being” or Reality or the source and ground of all reality? What does it mean to think of him as Sufism’s al-Haqq, or Jewish mysticism’s Great Reality or “Root of all roots,” or Thomas’s actus essendi sub sistens (subsistent act of being), or Eckhart’s Istigkeit (“Is-ness”), or so on?" page 122-123

Sufism's God as the Absolute:

"as Sufi tradition says, God as al-Ahad, the One, is also the transcendent unity of all existence, wahdat al-wujud. We can affirm also that, as the Isha Upanishad says, God dwells in all as transcending all; or that, as Augustine says, God is at once both nearer than what is inmost to me and beyond what is highest in me." page 141

God as Absolute Self in Sufism:

"For Sufi thought, God is the Self of all selves, the One—al-Ahad—who is the sole true “I” underlying the consciousness of every dependent “me.”" page 228

Please keep in mind that I'm quite a new editor and might have mistakes. Feel free to ask if you have other questions! —कृष्णकुलि^Krsnaquli || Contact - 06:51, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

— DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 21:11, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Supreme God (Hinduism) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Supreme God (Hinduism) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Supreme God (Hinduism) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

HalfdanRagnarsson (talk) 16:05, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]