Talk:Guṇa

	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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Philosophy task force (assessed as High-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 articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merge proposal of Satvic into Guna[edit]

I think Satvic is a developed enough article to stand on its own. And it's nice to search for "Satvic" and immediately get the article about it, rather than having to scroll through Guna. Therefore I oppose merging. What do others think? --Krubo 14:01, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

agree; this article is essentially a dab page. dab (ᛏ) 16:33, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If they aren't to be merged, then Satvic should be moved to Satva or Sattva (because article titles should be nouns), and someone should write actual articles for Rajas and Tamas. —Keenan Pepper 16:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this. dab (ᛏ) 17:25, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Keenan Pepper - somebody should write actual articles for Rajas and Tamas and integrate Sattva, Rajas and Tamas via a common page.

I oppose merging, for same reason as Krubo's. —AugPi 04:33, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also oppose merging for the same reasons as Krubo. —bartonfriedland 03:45, 01 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then will someone actually do something about it and write articles for Tamas and Rajas? —Keenan Pepper 03:15, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This has clearly happened. It would be good if the three articles were parallel in organization, the better to ensure that they are parallel in coverage and depth. The outlines of the three (excluding references, etc.) are as follows:

Rajas

The nature of rajas

Tamas

The nature of tamas

Quotes

Sattva

Sattvic objects

Sattvic creatures —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bn (talk • contribs) 17:21, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External Links[edit]

I have removed most of the external links as they did not meet Wiki standards WP:EL and replaced them with the most comprehensive web link I could find. If anyone can find a web site that gives a more thorough, comprehensive and academic overview of the topic please feel free to add it. In general the policy from Wiki is that External Links should be: "helpful to the reader, but they should be kept minimal, meritable, and directly relevant to the article". --Kbob (talk) 00:51, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the current link should be removed. suggest it could be replaced by the link http://www.hinduism.co.za/sattwa,.htm I have added it for now, and it can be removed if others find it of no use. Bigweeboy talk) 21:30, 26 June2009 (UTC)

Terminology: Definitions and Translations[edit]

Regarding recent edits, ie. using Feurestein's definition of each of the gunas. According to my research there are many definitions depending on the author and the context of the word. For example, one noted Vedic author says: "Sattva is the power of harmony, balance, light and intelligence - the higher or spiritual potential". [[1]] So I would suggest we list the most common definitions of the word and leave out any one authors name. If the reader wants specifics they can drill down to the footnote and check the reference for more detail.--Kbob (talk) 13:31, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The introduction should be edited to remove this parentetical segment: "rather TRANSFORMATION than destruction". This segment does not agree with the article on Tamas. I know of no reference which gives Tamas as "transformation". Vivekananda in Raja Yoga agrees with the article on Tamas. PedroLamarao (talk) 16:03, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Personal Aspects of Guna[edit]

I cannot find any references to gunas and their relationship to people's tendencies, state of mind etc. Therefore I am removing these kinds of references from the article. My research shows that gunas are universal qualities or aspects of nature and apply to everything in creation. If someone can source some valid references about 'satvic people' etc. we can certainly add the demension to the article. --Kbob (talk) 19:36, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also removed the sentences below. If anyone can substantiate them with valid references we can put them back in. They appear at this time to be Original Research which is not permitted on Wiki. WP:OR --Kbob (talk) 19:49, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Bhagavad Gita clearly links Gina’s to different varnas 108.39.84.90 (talk) 19:37, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"This type of activity is explained by the term Yogakshem. Yogakshem is composed of two words: Yoga and Kshem. Yoga in the present context is acquiring something that one does not have. Kshem means losing something that one already has. Rajas is the force that creates desires for acquiring new things and fears for losing something that one has. These desires and fears lead one to activity." --Kbob (talk) 19:50, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Guna and Varna[edit]

There is no mention of the relationship between guna and varna in this article. See for example "Old Age: An Ancient Indian View" By Dr Sajjan Singh, p.21 (available on Google books) for a reference. Perhaps a controversial topic, but there probably ought to be some reference. Agree? Ancient Infant (talk) 02:00, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sattva, Rajas, Tamas Ambiguity[edit]

On this page, it lists sattva = preservation, rajas = creation, tamas = destruction. This is a complete disagreement with the Prakrti article which associates sattva to creation and rajas to preservation. Since I'm not a scholar, I don't know. But I hope someone can clear this disagreement up. Bridgetd (talk) 19:49, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Correct meaning of the term "guna" in Slavic means "instinct"[edit]

Guna means atom and three guna i.e. sattv means protons, rajas means neutron and tamas means electrons. I don't get it how can be a term "guna" represent a "string". In Slavic represents "instinct" (nagon("on gon/guna") gonit, gon,...), which perfectly fits together with laws of Bhagavad Gita. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.196.132.80 (talk) 18:15, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In case anyone reads this 5 years later, the dot under the n is not ornamental. It indicates a retroflex consonant that cannot spontaneously appear out of nowhere, as it would have to if this word had Indo-European origins at all. David Marjanović (talk) 01:31, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to remember a sandhi rule that /n/ becomes /ṇ/ after certain phonemes. —Tamfang (talk) 07:05, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New merger proposal[edit]

I propose that Tamas (philosophy, Rajas, and Sattva be merged into Guna. This was proposed 10 years ago with differing opinions resulting in the creation of the then non-existent rajas and tamas articles. A decade later, those articles remain start-class and contain redundant information that can all be contained in the parent article, guna. Morganfitzp (talk) 01:01, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology[edit]

The "Etymology" section is misnamed; it has nothing to do with the etymology of the word (as far as I know, nobody knows where the word guṇa comes from). I don't know how to characterize the material in the section, but it's not etymology and the section should be renamed. Languagehat (talk) 13:42, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Guna (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 19:20, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]