Prabhanjanmutalik

Your submission at Articles for creation: List of works by Jayatirtha has been accepted

List of works by Jayatirtha, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:37, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Query

You claimed that Sri Vidyaranya was defeated in a debate by Akshobhya Tirtha. The books published from Madhwa mutts also describe that this debate was conducted in the presence of Sri Vedanta Deshika, a follower of Sri Ramanuja. It is claimed that the debate was regarding the Mahavakya 'Tattvamasi' and that Sri Vedanta Deshika declared Akshobhya Tirtha as the winner. Poorna pragna explains this Mahavakya as 'a-tattvamasi' whereas bagavathpada shri Shankara and Sri bagavad Ramanuja explain the same as 'Tattvamasi'. Assuming that Sri Vedanta Deshika, a great scholar and an ardent devotee of Sri Ramanuja, would accept views opposing those of his own Guru is foolish. Sri Vidyaranya, the architect of Hindu Samrajya in south India preached unity among Hindus and was instrumental in resisting Muslim invasions. In those times, when the Indian culture was being torn apart by Muslims, would Sri Vidyaranya spend time in dry debates abusing other paths and views?

I'm not sure you understand that this is an "encyclopedia" and not a blog. I am not saying anything. I am quoting from a few peer reviewed sources. This is not my original research. As to what or why someone did something in the past, I cannot answer (and frankly, neither can you). Historians have put forward an interpretation and I have written it. If you bring up a source on the topic which disputes the ones I have referenced, I am willing to include that. Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 12:44, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Seminar on Sri Raghavendra Teertha's Contribution to Indian Philosophy and Sanskrit Literature at Bangalore[edit] H

Hi there, just letting you know that I have a copy of the work you requested at the WP Resource Exchange. Please send me an email and I would be happy to pass it along. --Usernameunique (talk) 20:13, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Just sent the email! Let me know if it gets through alright. Assuming it fulfills your request, please place the {{resolved}} template on your request so that it will be archived. Thanks, --Usernameunique (talk) 20:25, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello Usernameunique, I received it and it is indeed helpful for the article. I have placed the tag. Thank you once again! Prabhanjanmutalik (talk) 20:30, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Madhva Sampradaya

Hi Prabhanjanmutalik, i saw your contributions to Madhva philosophy on wikipedia. Can you improve the article Madhva Sampradaya with your style of writting. Thank you

Why does this article even need to exist? It is unnecessary! There is nothing new this article talks about. Dvaita is the main article. And I'll be adding my improvements there. Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 09:40, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Vyasatirtha

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Vyasatirtha you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Farang Rak Tham -- Farang Rak Tham (talk) 23:00, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

@Farang Rak Tham Glad to hear that!

Your GA nomination of Vyasatirtha

The article Vyasatirtha you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Vyasatirtha for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Farang Rak Tham -- Farang Rak Tham (talk) 21:21, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Please check Indian spelling

Hello Prabhanjan, can you remember me? I did a GA review for you. I was wondering whether you would mind doing an Indian spelling check for the article Jīvaka, which I have significantly expanded. The article was set at Indian spelling, which I do not know much about. Normally, policy doesn't allow one to change the language for spelling without good reason, so I was wondering whether you would mind checking the article for any spelling or grammar errors, following the standards of Indian English. It is an average sized article. Thanks!--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 13:26, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Hello! I'd love to! It seems to me that the intro needs some correction to read better narratively. Do you want me to look into that as well? Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 17:21, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 08:14, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Is there any particular reason why you chose to remove the term gaṇikā? Is it perhaps not used in the sense of 'courtesan'? Just asking.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 08:20, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

It was redirecting to a dead link. I would suggest you either use the term gaṇikā or just use "courtesan" inorder to make it more readable. Unless the exact sanskrit term is essential to the article. This was my thinking but you can revert it if you find it necessary! :) I have finished converting the article to Indian/British english. Let me know if you need some more help! Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 10:08, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Great,thanks, Prabhanjan!

What article are you working on now?--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 09:19, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

I have been procrastinating for a long time actually. Trying to contribute to List of works by Madhvacharya but I'm facing the writers block. Cannot get a word out. Any tips? Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 11:16, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Write about what fascinates you the most, especially topics of which you do not know much detail yet. --Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 13:21, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Will do! Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 16:47, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Kloppenborg and paccekabuddhas

I think you might find this an interesting article to start with.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 16:35, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Farang Rak Tham, thank you! I understand this is a pretty obscure topic in the Buddhist circles? Is it scorned upon because the Pratyeka Buddha is unwilling to share the information with world in the Bodhisattva fashion? Does this kind of Buddha have any presence in the Pure Land strains of Buddhism? Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 09:47, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

obscure, but that's just because not much has been written about it. I don't know what Pure Land says about it. Perhaps you should find out. Meanwhile, is this write-up useful for you?--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 13:01, 6 November 2019 (UTC) Edited.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 19:32, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Great! I shall check it out. :) Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 03:33, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Regarding articles

Hi Prabhanjanmutalik, I'm planning to write more articles on our Dvaita scholars. Can we work together? Please do let me know, Thanks. MRRaja001 (talk) 10:35, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello! That's great. I'm a bit held up right now (with work) and on top of that I have a few articles I want to improve that may take time. That being said, I could help out with whatever resources I have left! Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 03:12, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Prabhanjanmutalik, I'll let you know. And also i have a doubt in Madhvacharya article, in Monastries section, is there any way that we could add the Madhva Mathas that descended in the lineage of Padmanabha Tirtha, Thanks.MRRaja001 (talk) 9:07, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes we need to add a short history of the mathas. And it also important to do that without any glorification or taking sides. The history of the mathas is complex and at some point would require a separate article. For now we could add a paragraph about it. Also keep in mind that we are talking to the lay public who may not be familiar with the terms and customs. Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 06:33, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, I agree with you Prabhanjanmutalik, Cheers!!! MRRaja001 (talk) 17:00, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Dvaita Vedanta article

Hi Prabhanjanmutalik, i think we need to add more useful content to Dvaita Vedanta article. It says nothing significant about Dvaita Vedanta. Please see Advaita Vedanta article it almost have complete content regarding Advaita. Lets expand the Dvaita Vedanta article with good content and proper citations. What do you say? MRRaja001 (talk) 9:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good. It is, however, very important to be neutral and write with lucidity. We could discuss more on the talk page. Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 14:48, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Ya true, Anyway thanks for intimating about the neutrality, i'll take care of that. Lets work together for this article independently. Before adding any content to the page i'll share you my Sandbox, let's discuss about it there itself and then we can decide. What do you say? MRRaja001 (talk) 17:12, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Regarding a revert

Hi Prabhanjanmutalik, may I know the reason for reverting back my edits on Raghavendra Tirtha page. Raghavendra Tirtha's wife name is Saraswati Bai, Thanks. - MRRaja001 (talk) 03:59, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

It is a matter of semantics. I don't see how adding "Bai" makes a difference or gives any new information. As far as I know it is akin to "madam". A lot of women of that era have that suffix and it is not necessarily a part of their name. As this is an encyclopaedia, I'm not sure if you can add terms of endearment such as those. If you do then you'll have to add such terms of endearment for everything and everyone. This was my thinking. I may be wrong here. Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 15:37, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Bai is not just suffix. Like Acharya, Rao for Men; Bai is for women. If we remove Acharya or Rao it'll become very difficult to find out who they are. Just like that we should not remove Bai for women too. MRRaja001 (talk) 06:47, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Fair point. Go ahead. Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 18:03, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Regarding a edit

Hi Prabhanjanmutalik, regarding this edit why did you remove Sripadaraja's and Raghunatha Tirtha's joint pilgrimage to Benares, Thanks. - MRRaja001 (talk) 06:33, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

How is it notable? Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 07:16, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your extraordinary work in Dvaita-related articles. Simply awesome job MRRaja001 (talk) 08:14, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

That's very kind of you. Thank you. :) Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 14:01, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Regarding dates in Jayatirtha page

Hi Prabhanjanmutalik, I have changed the dates in Jayatirtha article as per Dvaita traditions. The year 1365 is not his date of birth. In 1365 he succeeded the peetha after Akshobya Tirtha. His date of birth is 1345, I don't know why some foreign books are mentioning like that. Anyways I corrected the dates with proper citations. Thanks - MRRaja001 (talk) 04:20, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

You are right. The year he was born in has not been officially verified as such (or I was unaware of it). If references state the date then good. Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 16:27, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Suggestion needed for content

Hi I'm thinking to add this to Dvaita article. I need your suggestions for further addition and correction, Thanks - MRRaja001 (talk) 07:19, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

My take is it can be mentioned in the article as "B.N.K Sharma proposes an alternative title...". If Dr. Sharma's opinions had been accepted by a significant majority then we could have made a case for it in a detailed way. But mentioning it in a concise form can be done as he is a respected Indologist. Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 16:33, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

@Prabhanjanmutalik: You can edit my sandbox, if you want to make any changes. - MRRaja001 (talk) 09:10, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Vyasatirtha article

Hi Prabhanjan Mutalik, Please add the content relating to the number of Hanuman idols installed by Vyasatirtha and the Yantrodharaka Hanuman Temple at hampi. Here is a citation for it History of the Dvaita School of Vedānta and Its Literature: From the Earliest Beginnings to Our Own Times, Thanks - MRRaja001 (talk) 14:45, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello. The count, as I understand by the citation you have provided, is not historically validated information. Even Sharma quotes someone else as saying that the number of idols is 700 and odd. And also Wikipedia is an open encyclopedia. All referenced claims are welcome. Please add it yourself if you feel it belongs there. Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 16:11, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Okay - MRRaja001 (talk) 06:18, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Prabhanjanmutalik!

Happy New Year!

Prabhanjanmutalik,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
MRRaja001 ^(talk) 11:58, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thank you! Wish you the same! Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 13:12, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

WP:ONUS

Hi Prabhanjanmutalik, regarding Akshobhya Tirtha, the onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content. Best regards, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:35, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Regarding a article

Hi Prabhanjanmutalik, hope you're doing well. Coming to point, some added huge content to Raghavendra Tirtha article. The content is looking like not following WP:NPOV which we followed until now regarding Madhva Sampradaya. Can you please go through it once. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 19:29, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 23 November 2021 (UTC)