-2

Here is the post:
Why does Lord Shiva fulfill wishes of evil people also?.
This answer is deleted under no clear written policy.

There are 2 requirements for answer to be valid:
1. Attempt to answer (overall SE)
2. Cite sources (Hinduism SE)

My answer satisfies both. Since it was my very first answer, it's quite long but it does answer the main Qn with scriptures. Under which written policy is it deleted?

Originally the answer was deleted under "personal philosophy", as I had put that disclaimer. Now that is removed & answer is edited for clarity.

| |
  • 1
    Possible duplicate of Answer wrongly deleted - 5 – Yogi Apr 21 '17 at 15:45
  • @Yogi, nope. The one you linked is unsourced answer. This is sourced answer. Both are different topics, discussions & deletions. – iammilind Apr 21 '17 at 15:52
1

IMO, your answers are very complicated to handle.

You said:

There are 2 requirements for answer to be valid: 1. Attempt to answer (overall SE) 2. Cite sources (Hinduism SE)

No. This is not correct. On Hinduism SE, we should answer questions only citing relevant verses from Scriptures that can answer the question. We shouldn't add ( in some cases irrelevant) verses to answers and explain "essence of answer" (the part which actually answers the question) with help of Economics or Physics or personal philosophy.

IMHO, your answer for "Why does Lord Shiva fulfill wishes of evil people also?" doesn't answer the question "why". Your answer says:

People ask to Lord Shiva, because he is easy to please. And believe me, till date it happens throughout the world and would continue!

It already assumes He is easy to please but question itself is "why He is easy to please?" You also generalized "Lord Shiva" with "Lord" (obviously this is not what OP wants). From stories of Puranas, it is evident that Lord Vishnu first tests devotion rather than giving boons immediately to His devotees. You can consider story of Sri Krishna and Sudhama, for instance. On the other Shiva and Brahma give boons even to Rakshasas. Also, your answer says:

Short Answer: Why Lord Shiva fulfilled wishes desires for evil all people always? (Lord fulfilled desires for all people always).

This is not probably what OP wants. He wants to know reasons why particularly Lord Shiva (a form of Lord or Supreme Lord depending on philosophy they follow) gives boons easily?

Rest of answer talks about "how can desires be fulfilled?" and "How can Lord fulfill every Jiva's desires" and answer goes from "desires to Moksha". y Thereafter, your answer explains Satva, Rajas and Tamas in detail. IMHO, it's like reading a chapter of Bhagavad Gita again.

The answer no where mentions "why" Lord Shiva gives boons easily. Probably this question could be answered from "tatva" of Lord Shiva or the way He handles Maya.

Some of your answers also try to answer from Economics or physics perspective . But at same time it does contain some verses from Bhagavad Gita.

For example, in housing and Buying answer, you could have simply said Bhagavad Gita (13.8-12) doesn't really care about buying or renting. But your answer also mentions Economic conditions that are suitable for buying or renting. This makes your answers very complex to handle. Definitely, users here don't want answers from Economic or other perspectives. Users here definitely want answers from pure Hinduism Perspective. Sometimes you emphasize on importance on Economic conditions in answers, like in housing and buying answer. But what has economics to do with Hinduism SE? Users here want to get answer from pure Hindu laws.

You may say some questions are like that, you can flag those questions as opinion based or off-topic. To be frank, i'm not able to understand clearly essence of those answers. I'm not clear whether you are answering from pure Hinduism Perspective or from Economic perspective or if both, what is "essence" or emphasizing part in your answer. If user has to follow Economics for deciding housing or renting rather than Hindu Dharma, how is this site different from a real estate site?

Here's my discussion with Pandya regarding your answers:

@TheDestroyer see according to me, if answer at least partially answers the question with citing some sources, no matter right or wrong answer, we should not delete it. such wrong interpretation or incorrectly explanation should be subjected to downvoting. What do you think? - Pandya

@Pandya Wait, there's another case. If half of it answers with scriptures (this is fine) but if other half has his own philosophy or if it answers from Economics or Physics perspective . What should we do those answers? - Me

@TheDestroyer it sounds complicated to handle it. (We can either leave it) - Pandya

So, IMO, it's always better to answer from Pure Hinduism perspective without deviating to Economics or other subjects . Even few parts of your answer here mention theories from Physics. If you feel this is my understanding or my perspective, you can ask active users here about their opinions on these two answers or on other deleted answers.

This is the first aspect i want to answer.

Coming to second aspect of deletion, due to backlash Mods faced previously, when they deleted answers immediately, we gave some time to add sources to users in official policy.

Since policy on old answers is not yet finalized, we are not taking action on answers that were written during initial days of site. But we are handling answers that lack sources, answers with different perspectives such as scientific speculation, answers that don't answer from Hinduism Perspective (which are written later), either when a question becomes active or if someone flags or voluntarily visiting an answer when a particular mod is free.

If you feel deletion without notifying again is not fair, we can undelete your answer(s) and you can fix them accordingly or you can edit your answer and we can undelete (if you are convinced with my first aspect of answer).

| |
  • Thanks for the answer. Actually you have gone too deep into the answer. That could be ok if we are discussing the philosophical aspect of it. But if we discuss meta aspect of it then, we should not deviate ourselves in if the answer is right or wrong or what user wants. Rather we should concentrate if the answer is valid or not. I.e. Is the answer talking about Kaali Mara in the Qn of Shiva? Is answer promoting some blog? Is answer a spam? Is answer without scriptures? If any of these then delete the answer. If not then undelete. Benefit of doubt goes to user due to efforts being put in. – iammilind Apr 21 '17 at 18:56
  • Regarding "why" part I have answered that in various forms. You may refer to "short answer" and Everyone is entitled to get all wishes fulfilled!. Many other answers contain bit of user's own understanding or philosophy. I was little naive to mention that as it was my 1st. But that can't delete an answer. The scriptures referred are relevant to the answer. Again if this is a doubtfu case then it can't be deleted. – iammilind Apr 21 '17 at 19:04
  • 1
    @iammilind We should answer what OP wants. Here he wants to know why Shiva gives boons easily to evil people? I said how your answer doesn't answer the question (from my pov). Yes. Mods shouldn't involve into technicality of answer. But they do check whether it answers the question. (1/1) – The Destroyer Apr 22 '17 at 3:52
  • 1
    @iammilind I'm not clear how "Everyone is entitled to get all wishes fulfilled!" is related to Shiva giving to boons easily to evil people. If everyone gets boons at one point or other, how does the above statement explains peculiarity of Lord Shiva when compared to other Gods? I think we missed what you are trying to say. A user also flagged your question as "not an answer". So, may be you should edit it explaining "why" part or make users here understand. – The Destroyer Apr 22 '17 at 3:54
  • Now I have made it clear in that answer. Kindly again See from meta perspective & not technicality or correctness. Also flagged to you. – iammilind Apr 22 '17 at 4:25
  • 1
    @iammilind I'm not seeing whether your answer is correct or not. I'm seeing whether it attempts to answer or not. Also, as per majority of users here including me, there are some portions which are redundant.in your answer. This, this and this. – The Destroyer Apr 22 '17 at 8:37
  • Redundant part shouldn't be point of discussion. Something redundant for you might be important for me. Something confusing to you might be enlightening for me. Those things are subjective. Differs person to person. Look at Qn in title & if you find that my answer is not even attempting to answer or it's a spam or comment or plagiarism then update that in this answer as final decision & let my post remain deleted under that policy. It's perfectly acceptable. – iammilind Apr 22 '17 at 9:42
  • @TheDestroyer The Q is wrong. Shiva does not give boons to evil people easily. None gets boons easily. One has to do sufficient penance . Also nothing exclusive about Shiva here. All Gods will do the same. Q actually is why all evil or Asuras( ?) pray only to Shiva. Now this is also wrong, since they pray to and get boons from Brahma too. – Rickross Apr 22 '17 at 16:17
  • Your points are valid as are the points that @iammilind makes in the comments to this answer. Moderation by and large should steer clear of content as long as it is not spam or abuse. There was objectionable content which has been edited out. – user1195 Apr 23 '17 at 18:18
1

This answer needs good editing but does not warrant deletion as it attempts to respect the site's rules.

I think iammilind is trying to say "yat bhAvam tat bhavati" and equates Shiva to the supreme brahman. The equivalence holds for any form of God. So basically, according to the responder, Shiva is just a manifestation of the supreme that acts on one's desires and to that extent, the form in which it manifests is immaterial.

@iammilind, please edit your answer to enable us to understand the esoteric aspects you are trying to articulate.

| |
  • As you know, the objectionable part was already edited. But the answer was deleted under "personal philosophy" reason. Any Qn which asks "Why", demands reasoning. This reasoning may differ person to person, because most of the times scripture contains "what" & not "why"; such as this Qn. Since it was my 1st answer, I was naive to admit that as a disclaimer that this answer contains my personal thinking too. Now that disclaimer is removed & the title Qn is answered with better clarity --- Shiva & good/evil are Brahman. Brahman grants Brahman's own wish. Remainder of answer discusses reasoning. – iammilind Apr 24 '17 at 1:10
  • Milind- your intent / thought process is not obvious from the answer. So if you could make it simpler to the readers, it will help. – user1195 Apr 24 '17 at 2:12
  • @iammilind Yes. I agree with moonstar. You can make it clear and simpler to users. – The Destroyer Apr 25 '17 at 15:43
  • moonstar & @TheDestroyer, actually in last edit I tried my best to make the answer clearer. But now again I have put the real answer in bold within the 1st line itself. Rest of the content is a kind of purport of why I arrived at that answer. From meta perspective attempt to answer is within 1st line. The scriptures are backed up in rest of the answer. Even though this answer need not have scriptures (as seen in other 2 answers), because the Qn-s with Why-s will incur opinion based answers & they are protected under our "opinion based answer" policy. Hopefully no further edits are needed. – iammilind Apr 26 '17 at 6:12
  • 1
    @iammilind I undeleted your answer as your first line makes it clear what you wanted to say. – The Destroyer Apr 26 '17 at 6:47
  • @TheDestroyer, thanks for the efforts. Since we had discussed lots here & in chat, if you would like to edit your above answer to brief then I will accept it. As of now it contains lot of discussion, which might be useful but not relevant to layman. Anyways I will mark this post has resolved. – iammilind Apr 26 '17 at 7:44
  • @iammilind I think i should delete my meta answer. I can say your esoteric content was difficult to understand previously (so not clear how it answers the question) but as now you made it clear we can undelete it. Also, my current meta answer in some portions gives my opinion of how answer should be. – The Destroyer Apr 26 '17 at 7:47

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .