This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Self-Realization Fellowship article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Self-Realization Fellowship. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Self-Realization Fellowship at the Reference desk. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page needs more work. And really, a lot more content could be added. More photos needed. Jack B108 ( talk) 15:11, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes or no? http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Self-Realization_Fellowship&action=history http://img105.imageshack.us/img105/5961/srf0hc.jpg))
This article is biased towards the subject. It contains no criticism of SRF, as if none existed. Academically, this entry is second rate, as most concerning it whitewashes this organization's issues, especially regarding Swami kriyananda. Jack B108 ( talk) 15:46, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
How ironic that Red Rose 13 would state that WP is not the place to promote personal views. If that editor actually practiced that dictum and stopped meddling in posts like this one, several articles would look better. Jack B108 ( talk) 18:52, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
RE :"RECEPTION" The last paragraph of that section is laughable, as it's not really a reception, but SRF's view of what happened when it sued Ananda using one of the largest law firms in California. This conveniently omits the fact that among other things, Ananda gained the right to freely reproduce the 1946 version of the Autobiography of a Yogi by Yogananda, which the court ruled had no valid copyright by SRF at that time. This conveniently omits the tremendous David and Goliath battle in which the much larger and more powerful SRF tried to destroy an entire church in California. The case's federal judge at that time, Judge Garcia, said as much in court to SRF that it looked like they were trying to destroy Ananda. That would be an actual reception. Jack B108 ( talk) 22:07, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
NPV Neutral Point of View - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view - which explains posting with a neutral point of view on Wikipedia
Identifying Reliable Sources http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. This means that we only publish the opinions of reliable authors, and not the opinions of Wikipedians who have read and interpreted primary source material for themselves. ( talk) 10:21, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
I removed this paragraph - SRF is a religion with a kind of hybrid theology, Its claims to be perfectly in line with the teachings of Jesus, are untrue. For example, Jesus says the soul may be destroyed (Matthew 10:28, see also Luke 12:4-6; Matthew 5:29) whereas Yogananda teaches it cannot be destroyed. [14] Compare SRF's publicly held Aims and Ideals). Kriya yogis from the same line of teachings are either in two minds about how SRF teaches kriya yoga or scorn it. Because Wikipedia is not a place for ones opinions or interpretations about scripture. I read the Bible references and I don't interpret the same as you do. It all comes down to interpretation.
SRF promotes a kind of New Age Hinduism in Christian garb, says Elliot Miller. - (1) I read the whole article and did not see this quote anywhere. Can you tell me which paragraph it is in? (2) what is CRI and who is Elliot Miller. If we are going to quote something from this article we need this information, can you provide this? I found a similar quote - "In keeping with its mission to bring yoga to the “Christian” West, SRF is in outward appearance, a unique Hindu-Christian hybrid."
I will continue to look over all of your additions and bring them here for discussion. Red Rose 13 ( talk) 09:43, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Look over your additions - there are many to websites and Wikipedia does not encourage the use of citations that take you off the Wikipedia site. Also, third party references are required. Red Rose 13 ( talk) 10:03, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Removed this sentence because again - it is opinion - this kind of post is meant for a forum outside Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a place to add ones own view - *The voices of single individuals who speak up against it, may get drowned, no matter how pertinent and substantial their topics may be. For example, the SRF attitude toward sex may not be fored until one is enrolled. And then marriages can break because one of the family gets controlled by SRF guidelines. The are, simply said, "no to sexual outlets for the unmarried and sex perhaps once a month (or year) for the married (!). Red Rose 13 ( talk) 10:08, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Removed this one because the citation is not reliable - Yogananda, the founder of SRF, seems at least at one time to have regretted founding it. In a letter he think it was a great blunder to start the organisation. Red Rose 13 ( talk) 10:15, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Removed another opinion - *The discussion forum of former SRF monastics contains huge amounts of criticism, some fit and some unfair. Red Rose 13 ( talk) 10:16, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
removed another opinion - Kriya yogis from the same line of teachings are either in two minds about how SRF teaches kriya yoga or scorn it. Red Rose 13 ( talk) 22:22, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
removed this post because the sources were not reliable and includes spamming to outside website - SRF's ways of mass propagation violate old injunctions as to how kriya yoga is to be administered, shows Swami Satyeswarananda of the Sanskrit Classics in San Diego.
There have been numerous controversies concerning SRF over the years and many of these sources have been removed or perhaps forcibly removed from the internet. Any decent Wikipedia article would have a 'Controversies' section; we wonder why this one hasn't. Moreover Red Rose 13 has the habit of removing any statements that doesn't favor her simply because the "sources were not reliable" when in fact they are very much so. Wikipedia must make note of such dubious authors and ban them from editing articles any further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.106.76.129 ( talk) 04:46, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Self-Realization Fellowship. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:58, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
Anyone know of careful work on how many members SRF has? Can it be put in the article? Moabalan ( talk) 04:39, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
This is notice of a pending Neutral Point of View [NPOV] violation tag. The "Reception" section is blatantly biased to omit legal cases and rulings not favorable to SRF. Completely missing is mention of Ananda's partial success in federal appeals court against SRF regarding multiple trademark and copyright claims. E.g., 9th Circuit ruling of 1995, https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1224987.html.
Wikipedia conveniently neglects to mention that SRF lost a federal appeal and then appealed for writ of cert to the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to hear SRF's argument... This article makes it look like in total, Ananda committed copyright infringement and lost every point in a simple jury of trial in the 2000s. That is simply false and misleading, in a dispute that went on for years and involve multiple points of argument, with both sides losing and gaining in the courts. Ananda members over the years spent millions of dollars simply defending their right to practice religious freedom in the United States of America under the attack by the extremely well-endowed Self-Realization Fellowship, which hired Gibson Dunn & Crutcher to crush the smaller church. Interesting how Wikipedia does not state Ananda's 'reception' to this landmark legal and moral fight. This is gross NPOV violation Jack B108 ( talk) 23:12, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
@ Jo Jc Jo:In regards to the lead section, the general sentence about what Yogananda taught explains to the reader the very core of his SRF teachings. I propose we restructure the lead something like this. I am trying to improve the page... let me know your thoughts on the lead. Also it seems we need a new section called Teachings.
Self-Realization Fellowship (SRF) is a worldwide spiritual organization founded by Paramahansa Yogananda in 1920 and legally incorporated in the United States as a non-profit religious organization in 1935.[3][4][5][6] Before coming to the United States, Yogananda began his spiritual work in India in 1917 and named it Yogoda Satsanga Society of India (YSS).[11] He then founded SRF in 1920 which became the international headquarters for the SRF and YSS, located on Mount Washington in Los Angeles, California.[12]
Yogananda's teachings include yoga techniques and a form of meditation that promotes awareness of ones soul and expands ones consciousness. Yogananda wrote in God Talks With Arjuna: The Bhagavad Gita that the science of Kriya Yoga[7] was given to Manu, the original Adam, and through him to Janaka and other royal sages.[8]
Self-Realization Fellowship disseminates and publishes his teachings guided by his Aims and Ideals.[4][9] SRF publishes his home-study lessons, writings including his autobiography, lectures, and recorded talks; oversees temples, retreats, meditation centers, and monastic communities bearing the name Self-Realization Order. It also coordinates the Worldwide Prayer Circle, which it describes as a network of groups and individuals who pray for those in need of physical, mental, or spiritual aid, and who also pray for world peace and harmony. Red Rose 13 ( talk) 04:29, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
@ Jack B108: Dear Jack B108, I have seen your many posts stating that not enough is said regarding the long legal battle between SRF & Kriyananda et al. I have searched high and low for reliable secondary sources that discuss this legal battle. We cannot use Ananda writers, Kriyanandas lawyers writings nor SRF lawyers, or SRF associated writers etc... nor websites writing by Ananda members nor SRF members, etc. Nor can we use actual legal documents themselves but only a writer that discusses it in a reliable medium. In a controversial subject as this, we need to only use secondary, reliable source preferably scholarly sources. I would be happy to add information from one of these neutral sources if I knew where it was. Do you have access or have you found one of these sources: reliable secondary sources preferably scholarly sources? I have only found info in a secondary reliable source like the LA Times article and the local Nevada City newspaper. If you cannot find a source and neither can I, then we can't write anything more. Let me know. Red Rose 13 ( talk) 21:24, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Are there any references that indicate how the documentary is relevant to the organization? Otherwise, I don't know why it deserves a section. -- Hipal ( talk) 15:46, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Also, if you had read about the documentary, you would have realized that SRF paid for the production including the hiring of the directors. And I quote: "Funded by SRF, the documentary Awake: The Life of Yogananda was co-directed by Paola Di Florio and Lisa Leeman." In other words SRF paid for it and hired the directors... it is SRF's film. I am going to put it back but it doesn't matter for the article if it has its own section or is under The Teachings. Which is your preference. Red Rose 13 ( talk) 18:49, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
I think the title of the documentary makes it clear what it's about. -- Hipal ( talk) 17:12, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Self-Realization Fellowship article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Self-Realization Fellowship. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Self-Realization Fellowship at the Reference desk. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page needs more work. And really, a lot more content could be added. More photos needed. Jack B108 ( talk) 15:11, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes or no? http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Self-Realization_Fellowship&action=history http://img105.imageshack.us/img105/5961/srf0hc.jpg))
This article is biased towards the subject. It contains no criticism of SRF, as if none existed. Academically, this entry is second rate, as most concerning it whitewashes this organization's issues, especially regarding Swami kriyananda. Jack B108 ( talk) 15:46, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
How ironic that Red Rose 13 would state that WP is not the place to promote personal views. If that editor actually practiced that dictum and stopped meddling in posts like this one, several articles would look better. Jack B108 ( talk) 18:52, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
RE :"RECEPTION" The last paragraph of that section is laughable, as it's not really a reception, but SRF's view of what happened when it sued Ananda using one of the largest law firms in California. This conveniently omits the fact that among other things, Ananda gained the right to freely reproduce the 1946 version of the Autobiography of a Yogi by Yogananda, which the court ruled had no valid copyright by SRF at that time. This conveniently omits the tremendous David and Goliath battle in which the much larger and more powerful SRF tried to destroy an entire church in California. The case's federal judge at that time, Judge Garcia, said as much in court to SRF that it looked like they were trying to destroy Ananda. That would be an actual reception. Jack B108 ( talk) 22:07, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
NPV Neutral Point of View - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view - which explains posting with a neutral point of view on Wikipedia
Identifying Reliable Sources http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. This means that we only publish the opinions of reliable authors, and not the opinions of Wikipedians who have read and interpreted primary source material for themselves. ( talk) 10:21, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
I removed this paragraph - SRF is a religion with a kind of hybrid theology, Its claims to be perfectly in line with the teachings of Jesus, are untrue. For example, Jesus says the soul may be destroyed (Matthew 10:28, see also Luke 12:4-6; Matthew 5:29) whereas Yogananda teaches it cannot be destroyed. [14] Compare SRF's publicly held Aims and Ideals). Kriya yogis from the same line of teachings are either in two minds about how SRF teaches kriya yoga or scorn it. Because Wikipedia is not a place for ones opinions or interpretations about scripture. I read the Bible references and I don't interpret the same as you do. It all comes down to interpretation.
SRF promotes a kind of New Age Hinduism in Christian garb, says Elliot Miller. - (1) I read the whole article and did not see this quote anywhere. Can you tell me which paragraph it is in? (2) what is CRI and who is Elliot Miller. If we are going to quote something from this article we need this information, can you provide this? I found a similar quote - "In keeping with its mission to bring yoga to the “Christian” West, SRF is in outward appearance, a unique Hindu-Christian hybrid."
I will continue to look over all of your additions and bring them here for discussion. Red Rose 13 ( talk) 09:43, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Look over your additions - there are many to websites and Wikipedia does not encourage the use of citations that take you off the Wikipedia site. Also, third party references are required. Red Rose 13 ( talk) 10:03, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Removed this sentence because again - it is opinion - this kind of post is meant for a forum outside Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a place to add ones own view - *The voices of single individuals who speak up against it, may get drowned, no matter how pertinent and substantial their topics may be. For example, the SRF attitude toward sex may not be fored until one is enrolled. And then marriages can break because one of the family gets controlled by SRF guidelines. The are, simply said, "no to sexual outlets for the unmarried and sex perhaps once a month (or year) for the married (!). Red Rose 13 ( talk) 10:08, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Removed this one because the citation is not reliable - Yogananda, the founder of SRF, seems at least at one time to have regretted founding it. In a letter he think it was a great blunder to start the organisation. Red Rose 13 ( talk) 10:15, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Removed another opinion - *The discussion forum of former SRF monastics contains huge amounts of criticism, some fit and some unfair. Red Rose 13 ( talk) 10:16, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
removed another opinion - Kriya yogis from the same line of teachings are either in two minds about how SRF teaches kriya yoga or scorn it. Red Rose 13 ( talk) 22:22, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
removed this post because the sources were not reliable and includes spamming to outside website - SRF's ways of mass propagation violate old injunctions as to how kriya yoga is to be administered, shows Swami Satyeswarananda of the Sanskrit Classics in San Diego.
There have been numerous controversies concerning SRF over the years and many of these sources have been removed or perhaps forcibly removed from the internet. Any decent Wikipedia article would have a 'Controversies' section; we wonder why this one hasn't. Moreover Red Rose 13 has the habit of removing any statements that doesn't favor her simply because the "sources were not reliable" when in fact they are very much so. Wikipedia must make note of such dubious authors and ban them from editing articles any further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.106.76.129 ( talk) 04:46, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Self-Realization Fellowship. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:58, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
Anyone know of careful work on how many members SRF has? Can it be put in the article? Moabalan ( talk) 04:39, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
This is notice of a pending Neutral Point of View [NPOV] violation tag. The "Reception" section is blatantly biased to omit legal cases and rulings not favorable to SRF. Completely missing is mention of Ananda's partial success in federal appeals court against SRF regarding multiple trademark and copyright claims. E.g., 9th Circuit ruling of 1995, https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1224987.html.
Wikipedia conveniently neglects to mention that SRF lost a federal appeal and then appealed for writ of cert to the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to hear SRF's argument... This article makes it look like in total, Ananda committed copyright infringement and lost every point in a simple jury of trial in the 2000s. That is simply false and misleading, in a dispute that went on for years and involve multiple points of argument, with both sides losing and gaining in the courts. Ananda members over the years spent millions of dollars simply defending their right to practice religious freedom in the United States of America under the attack by the extremely well-endowed Self-Realization Fellowship, which hired Gibson Dunn & Crutcher to crush the smaller church. Interesting how Wikipedia does not state Ananda's 'reception' to this landmark legal and moral fight. This is gross NPOV violation Jack B108 ( talk) 23:12, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
@ Jo Jc Jo:In regards to the lead section, the general sentence about what Yogananda taught explains to the reader the very core of his SRF teachings. I propose we restructure the lead something like this. I am trying to improve the page... let me know your thoughts on the lead. Also it seems we need a new section called Teachings.
Self-Realization Fellowship (SRF) is a worldwide spiritual organization founded by Paramahansa Yogananda in 1920 and legally incorporated in the United States as a non-profit religious organization in 1935.[3][4][5][6] Before coming to the United States, Yogananda began his spiritual work in India in 1917 and named it Yogoda Satsanga Society of India (YSS).[11] He then founded SRF in 1920 which became the international headquarters for the SRF and YSS, located on Mount Washington in Los Angeles, California.[12]
Yogananda's teachings include yoga techniques and a form of meditation that promotes awareness of ones soul and expands ones consciousness. Yogananda wrote in God Talks With Arjuna: The Bhagavad Gita that the science of Kriya Yoga[7] was given to Manu, the original Adam, and through him to Janaka and other royal sages.[8]
Self-Realization Fellowship disseminates and publishes his teachings guided by his Aims and Ideals.[4][9] SRF publishes his home-study lessons, writings including his autobiography, lectures, and recorded talks; oversees temples, retreats, meditation centers, and monastic communities bearing the name Self-Realization Order. It also coordinates the Worldwide Prayer Circle, which it describes as a network of groups and individuals who pray for those in need of physical, mental, or spiritual aid, and who also pray for world peace and harmony. Red Rose 13 ( talk) 04:29, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
@ Jack B108: Dear Jack B108, I have seen your many posts stating that not enough is said regarding the long legal battle between SRF & Kriyananda et al. I have searched high and low for reliable secondary sources that discuss this legal battle. We cannot use Ananda writers, Kriyanandas lawyers writings nor SRF lawyers, or SRF associated writers etc... nor websites writing by Ananda members nor SRF members, etc. Nor can we use actual legal documents themselves but only a writer that discusses it in a reliable medium. In a controversial subject as this, we need to only use secondary, reliable source preferably scholarly sources. I would be happy to add information from one of these neutral sources if I knew where it was. Do you have access or have you found one of these sources: reliable secondary sources preferably scholarly sources? I have only found info in a secondary reliable source like the LA Times article and the local Nevada City newspaper. If you cannot find a source and neither can I, then we can't write anything more. Let me know. Red Rose 13 ( talk) 21:24, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Are there any references that indicate how the documentary is relevant to the organization? Otherwise, I don't know why it deserves a section. -- Hipal ( talk) 15:46, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Also, if you had read about the documentary, you would have realized that SRF paid for the production including the hiring of the directors. And I quote: "Funded by SRF, the documentary Awake: The Life of Yogananda was co-directed by Paola Di Florio and Lisa Leeman." In other words SRF paid for it and hired the directors... it is SRF's film. I am going to put it back but it doesn't matter for the article if it has its own section or is under The Teachings. Which is your preference. Red Rose 13 ( talk) 18:49, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
I think the title of the documentary makes it clear what it's about. -- Hipal ( talk) 17:12, 16 May 2023 (UTC)