Talk:Evil eye: Difference between revisions

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Evil eye 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. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

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

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 730 days

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Mythology Mid‑importance This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. 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.MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyTemplate:WikiProject MythologyMythology articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Paranormal Low‑importance This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Seeing as though Africans taken to America were in some instances Muslims, and African Americans have been involved in Islam for a long time, why is it an occultist is credited with introducing the evil eye into African American circles? Unless there is some factual basis for this that I (in ignorance) have missed this seems to be a patronising passage that should be removed or at least verified.

I read most of the article and still don't understand. Is it a fae-like floating eye? Is it some invisible demon flashing looks at people? Is it just when one person looks at another with scorn? I have no clue if it is a person, thing, or idea. Is it a living thing in and of itself? Is it the way something expresses? The article is so very unclear. I have seen the talismans, but am not sure if they are the evil eye or not—and if not, how are they thought to work? Why an eye to guard against an eye?

It reminds me of "the game." As soon as you have thought about the game, you've lost the game. When you see one of those talismans you think about the evil eye, whatever that is, and otherwise, no one thinks about it. Which means the talisman rather than protecting people from a thing keep it fresh in mind all the time. Or maybe people were tricked by someone who wanted the evil eye to be everywhere and the talisman is the evil eye. Or does the talisman just stare back at the eye? Os ot like a weeping angel where you suffer if you blink while the eye is watching; so the talisman watches for you?

I just don't understand it at all because I never grew up with this folklore. So, those who do understand, please explain it as if you area talking to someone who has no clue. Because I don't have any.2604:2D80:DE11:1300:ED2A:9572:F1A4:6B7C (talk) 06:04, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The book "The Poor, the Crippled, the Blind, and the Lame: Physical and Sensory Disability in the Gospels of the New Testament" (https://books.google.com/books?id=_hVnDwAAQBAJ, p. 105) explain it well:

It refers to the power possessed by a person to bring harm or injury (I would also add and misfortune) to others simply through one's gaze. Such powers are wrought through the feelings of envy or jealously at the happiness, beauty and prosperity of others. Gre regiment (talk) 22:27, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the Eye of Horus from ancient Egypt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_Horus) would be an earlier precedent than eye-cups. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shanaoc (talk • contribs) 21:35, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of the examples cited in Protective Talismans and Cures > By Religion > In Christianity purporting to indicate Christianity's beliefs on the evil eye have anything to do with the subject. Luke 11:34 is not talking about the evil eye in the mythological/paranormal sense; it is essentially talking about the effects of turning one's "eye" towards things Jesus considered wicked. (See Pulpit Commentary on Luke 11:34 - "If they gave way to passion, jealousy, prejudice, impurity, lawlessness in its hundred forms, then for them the spiritual eye of the soul would become diseased, and therefore incapable of rightly discerning any heavenly sign. It was this danger that the Master was pointing out to the crowd.") Mark 7:22 is cited, because the Greek words ὀφθαλμὸς πονηρός literally translate "eye evil", but this is translated "envy" in most modern translations (https://biblehub.com/mark/7-22.htm). Even if this were to be translated differently, the verse is a list of sins and is not talking about "the evil eye" in the sense of the supposed supernatural phenomenon. Zomwolf (talk) 06:25, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. The proposed bits in "In Christianity" are of Hollywood and hearsay. I recently edited out said bits, leaving in place a sentence of the "evil eye" not having any significant meaning or value in Christianity. I also wrote that even if some translation could possibly come to the word pair of "evil eye" somewhere in the Bible it doesn't mean it would still be of the "evil eye" as per the article.

All my edits were reverted. How does this work - how do we replace the current sham with facts?

Thanks. Jaakko.pontinen (talk) 20:17, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I feel obliged to agree with you @Jaakko.pontinen; the section you originally axed is a disgrace. "Original research" doesn't even begin to cover it; whoever wrote it extrapolated very obviously false information from primary sources, if you can even call the 1897 novel Dracula a primary source on christian beliefs.

The user who reverted your edit didn't justify or explain their revert in any way, which by itself straddles the line of acceptable conduct. I can only assume they mistook your contribution for vandalism. I invite you to re-submit your changes, citing this discussion thread and any wikipedia policies you find fit to support it. If they still find your contribution unacceptable, they're welcome to explain their concerns here.

Heck, I'd do it myself, but I'm too lazy to log in :P 83.5.139.163 (talk) 05:41, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2024 and 10 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kendra.Moreno (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Kendra.Moreno (talk) 21:52, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]