Talk:Garuda Purana

---

Untitled

I cleaned this article up a little, but I wasn't sure if the following was a quote, synopsis, or someth8ing else, so I move it here:

''every body are going to be punished who are going to die all these days that is in this kaliyuga.mainly the people who kill and eat cow or any of its kind.lord srikrishna`s amsha(a leaf from tree of krishna)is going to come and kill the half of world .and make peace whole round the world. this matter is even written by == norstedalmous == (of 15th centuary) books may be provided in library or published.''

I hope someone can clean this up and move it back into the article. Thanks. -JCarriker 19:19, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Narada is not the 18th Avatara. He is the Devarshi avatara.

Saravana Kumar K 09:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Added a nowiki clause to get order into this talk page. ... said: Rursus (bork²) 10:18, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

What ever written above is a poorly comprehended statement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramakrishnaperi (talk • contribs) 19:28, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

List of Punishments

It is surprising that the Tamil versions (and other Tamil words) of the names of various Narakas (for instance Panrimukha for Sukaramukha) have not been corrected to their proper Sanskrit versions for so long a time. (My recent edit to that effect was reverted.) Nidhishunnikrishnan (talk) 20:16, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

It says fourteen but lists thirteen gems

Shaligram? 'Sri Kailash Shila'? Padparadscha? Lapis lazuli? What is the fourteenth gem? 213.125.246.234 (talk) 07:47, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Wood's 1911 book is not the correct source

This version of Garuda Purana article relies predominantly on the 1911 publication of Ernest Wood and S.V. Subrahmanyam, alleging it is a translation of Garuda Purana. That is flawed because that 1911 translation is not of Garuda Purana, but of Garuda Purana Sarodhhara which is a different work and a bhasya/publication of Navanidhirama. The Sarodhhara is actually a primary+secondary work, wherein parts of it are claimed to be based on Garuda Purana source, but modern scholarship concludes that the Sarodhhara in 1911 translation was based on other texts. See page 870 of K P Gietz et al edited book (item 5003). Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 01:53, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

An anthropological / sociological observation

ב״ה, I've gotten kind of wrecked for trying the Oppenheimer trip without sufficient Jewish study, and within that, y'know, gotta be careful studying others' traditions even if I'm from one of the it takes the whole world schools of Judaism (as arguably is more like wishful thinking for anthropologists of Jewish heritage than the actual mitzvot over in Torah) -

So just going to drop this in a random corner of Wikipedia for peace and understanding, because skimming this particular article brought the realization: these texts from the subcontinent can be (overwhelmingly) extensive and expansive. Meanwhile I've received the return chuckles that Torah is kind of short even for containing genealogical laundry lists repeated twice.

What did not occur to me amidst all the chiding is what's historically obvious: the middle east is desert. The subcontinent preferred more vegetable papers than parchment to my knowledge and receives monsoons. So this apparent stylistic preference doesn't occur in a vacuum, it would appear to be a product of, y'know, religious and societal reasons to include knowledge to show reverence, but reinforced by holy texts receiving the most protection from the weather, so if any of the scribes of history or their rulers could get their knowledge into that 'blockchain' it was preserved. Not really deep in all the historical realities, but I'm sure the historical timeline of temple libraries vs. royal libraries might be thesis material for someone.

Perhaps this transcends some colonial attitudes on the construction of the texts. Britain of course also had rain to deal with but less the dual threats of rain and tropical climate, and also lost a lot of its own precolonial history to bogs, so you'd think this reality would have been noticed before just the 'huh, this sure is a lot of loosely connected literature to read in one volume' huffs. 2600:1010:B124:8C8C:C8AD:5798:115:7F30 (talk) 15:07, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

ב״ה, not my problem / above my pay grade, but I also feel like pointing out that including vaguely industrial knowledge would have furthered religious and perhaps royal review and perhaps monopolization of certain industries, something the region and its colonizer had in common and may have learned from each other on in one of the world's bizarre like-attracts-like scenarios. Just going for truth here and many cultures have some of that (consider kosher wine), just that the particular situation with climate suggesting the continual incorporation of knowledge in this way may have had effect similar to a patent system. 2600:1010:B124:8C8C:C8AD:5798:115:7F30 (talk) 15:19, 22 August 2025 (UTC)