Talk:Ajna

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ajna article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Yoga Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Yoga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Yoga, Hatha yoga, Yoga as exercise and related articles 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.YogaWikipedia:WikiProject YogaTemplate:WikiProject YogaYoga articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hinduism Low‑importance

	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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Onel5969, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 2 May 2014.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Location

The pineal gland is mentioned twice as two different locations. Maybe the other one is the pituitary gland? Paranoidhuman (talk) 00:24, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Guys the chakra system is an ancient Eastern science and deserves better. What is this shit about the pineal gland again and again? There is no traditional text that links the two. The rumor actually started from Blavatsky's theory, but Blavatsky was a modern Eastern scholar studying Eastern philosophies, and in the book that she talks about this it is evident that it's just the way she understands it, and of course she gave no reference to it. this matter is becoming a joke and makes a serious subject seem like cheesy New Age bullshit

Typo

One can't contribute anymore to wikipedia? So much for the idea... had a good run while it lasted

There is a typo in the links sections: It should be: Shyam Sundar Goswami (not Goswani).

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki2don (talk • contribs) 03:30, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation

Could someone verify the pronunciation and maybe render it in IPA? "Aagya" doesn't quite deliver the correct pronunciation for everyone, and I'm not sure it is even correct. If the name is in Sanskrit, I'd guess that it's [ɑ(:)ʤɲɑ] in IPA. But please clarify if you know about this. --Oghmoir 10:46, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Figured it out myself, then. --Oghmoir 22:28, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate a more "layman" pronunciation . . . what did you figure out? Please share. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.30.46 (talk) 14:04, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[ʤɲ] is not necessarily the most common or most correct pronunciation of jñ. The Sanskrit j was apparently originally a stop. It did become an affricate in other positions, but generally not before [ɲ]. I think [gj] is indeed a common pronunciation, so "Aagya" would be correct as an informal pronunciation guide. In Teach Yourself Sanskrit, Coulson suggests pronouncing jñ as [gnj]~[gɲ], which would make this word [a:gnjə] ("Aagnya"). I doubt most English-speakers who learn this word from a book would pronounce it that way, though. It seems to me that I often hear jñ as [ʒnj] or [ʒn], but I think that is purely a spelling pronunciation.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 04:13, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edits

I have added more information about Ajna, but I don't have a lot of time now. I'm trying to find out exactly what the two petals signify, as I'm not sure --Krsnajinana 15:21, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't revert without you posting your objection on talk page, why is it always the other guy who has to start

I removed: 1) sentences or paragraphs marked with {who} or {fact} 2) See also links also linked from the body of the article 3) headings with only a sentence or two after them 4) a link to a blog, which is disallowed

Please don't revert, but selectively add back what you think is necessary, preferably with citation. Tunnels of Set 06:36, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that listing see also entries which are already linked from the body of the article is discouraged as it is unnecessary. Tunnels of Set 06:51, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marina Nabil

Marina Nabil Is Student And From The Beautifulest Girl She Is In Grade 12 Like To Take Photos All Time And She Like TO Be Happy And Her Smile Can Change The World — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kerolous98 (talk • contribs) 21:57, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Error on this page

The symbol of the mandata is wrong. That is the symbol of the mantra “Om” or “Aum” not Ajna one.

Please stop missinforming people Wikipedia. Thanks. 2800:AC:4011:2BD8:819A:7B5E:4078:80EF (talk) 23:45, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge from Third eye

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To not merge given that Ajna is a subarticle of Third eye, and that readers are best served by this arrangement. Klbrain (talk) 14:33, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since all the chakras are under their Sanskrit names, this would be the correct direction for merge. Each article seems to be sort of helf-baked... perhaps together would be a more robust article. Skyerise (talk) 17:55, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Ajna is a subarticle of Third eye. Ajna focusses on the Hindu chakra aspect. The iconographical aspects of the third eye are undue in Ajna. Also, the third eye beyond Hinduism is also undue in Ajna. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 06:30, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Ajna is clearly a version of the third eye which is specific to Hinduism, and is even described as such in the Third eye article, so the direction of the merge is inappropriate. Further, both seem to be notable and substantial topics in their own right (although currently they are under-developed), so a merge of any direction wouldn't be hugely appropriate. --Xurizuri (talk) 04:43, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Reverted undiscussed move to Ājñā

The article is written in plain English, not IAST. The spelling Ajna without the Italics is common in Indian English https://www.google.com/search?q=chakra+ajna&rlz=1C1ONGR_enIN1057IN1057&oq=chakra+ajna&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyCQgAEEUYORiABDIHCAEQABiABDIHCAIQABiABDIHCAMQABiABDIICAQQABgWGB4yCAgFEAAYFhgeMggIBhAAGBYYHjIICAcQABgWGB4yCAgIEAAYFhgeMggICRAAGBYYHtIBCDU1NTJqMGo3qAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 WP:USEENGLISH applies Redtigerxyz ^Talk 15:30, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I apologize for not discussing the move. As many other articles pertaining to Indic terms and concepts have titles with IAST spelling, I thought it uncontroversial to do the same with this one, especially since it uses the notorious conjunct jña. I don't know how the use of Indian English applies to English Wikipedia, but I can't help but think that defeats the argument about the article being written in "plain English" as IAST is clearly used within it. Invokingvajras (talk) 11:34, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]