Will you please add page numbers? Eg to "which were collected before 1000 BC in the Rigveda.{{sfn|Samuel|2010}}" I can't find Rigveda in Samuel. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 19:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
In the lead of the Yoga page, there is way too much emphasis on the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali. Indeed, the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali don't need to be mentioned at all. Please eliminate Yoga Sutras of Patanjali in lead. 176.67.169.207 ( talk) 03:23, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Copied to Talk:Yoga#Edit Request on Patanjali
You think there should be following pages?
Like we got
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Navbox Zen. Since you had some involvement with the Navbox Zen redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). John Vandenberg ( chat) 14:15, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Movement, but not removement. Rather: removal. CorinneSD ( talk) 17:27, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
See Aryan Migration talk. 176.67.169.146 ( talk) 19:03, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
If you have time, would you look at the most recent edits to Surat? One editor added a date, first with AD, then changing it to CE. It is missing the word "in" before the year. I was going to add "in", but before I did so, I thought I'd ask you to be sure that the date is correct. Another editor just before that added a www website for "movers and packers in Surat". I thought that might be an attempt to add a website to a business so as to get a little free advertising, but I wasn't sure. CorinneSD ( talk) 19:25, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
1. Add Buddhism as one of the explicit roots of Hinduism. 2. Add this reference to the lead:
Inden, Ronald. "Ritual, Authority, And Cycle Time in Hindu Kingship." In JF Richards, ed., Kingship and Authority in South Asia. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1998, p.67, 55 "before the eighth century, the Buddha was accorded the position of universal deity and ceremonies by which a king attained to imperial status were elaborate donative ceremonies entailing gifts to Buddhist monks and the installation of a symbolic Buddha in a stupa....This pattern changed in the eighth century. The Buddha was replaced as the supreme, imperial deity by one of the Hindu gods (except under the Palas of eastern India, the Buddha's homeland)...Previously the Buddha had been accorded imperial-style worship (puja). Now as one of the Hindu gods replaced the Buddha at the imperial centre and pinnacle of the cosmo-political system, the image or symbol of the Hindu god comes to be housed in a monumental temple and given increasingly elaborate imperial-style puja worship."
VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 01:33, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
No western academic book uses genetics to justify Aryan Migration. Please delete the entire section. 176.67.169.146 ( talk) 21:51, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
For related subjects? Bladesmulti ( talk) 08:19, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " Criticism of Jainism". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 09:05, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! -- Rahul ( talk) 09:05, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
The Citation Barnstar | |
Very nice work on Slavic Vedism, in terms of citations and content. Bladesmulti ( talk) 12:38, 11 January 2014 (UTC) |
That Muhammad was written down at least 120 years later? Bladesmulti ( talk) 13:54, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
But why they do that? You tried to get a rollback? You got 0 ban, and over 18,000 edits?(amazing though) Bladesmulti ( talk) 18:15, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
How do we rename the Shramana page as Sramana? Sramana is by far the most common spelling in academia. It also has the added benefit of not being confused with shamanism as what occurred on the talk page. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 21:22, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Can you help me a bit with this article? There is something very wrong with it, and I have a little trouble explaining it properly to those who have written it. This document might be helpful if you do decide to give it a look. Thanks, -- Rahul ( talk) 15:37, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
I don't think you should classify or dismiss Breaking India and Invading the Sacred as "indigenous understanding". Neither book is written from an indigenous perspective. And then you are linking both books to the concept of Sanatana Dharma, which is also not fair. Invading the Sacred has many non-indigenous contributors, and Breaking India has very little to do with Hinduism at all. If you want to make a section called "Critique of Modern Scholarship", that would make more sense. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 18:59, 14 January 2014 (UTC) Copied to Talk:Hinduism#Indigenous Understanding
Hi Joshua. User:Krishnamoorthy1952, a fellow Tamil Wikipedian contributor contacted me regarding him being blocked in English Wiki. He has acknowledged that User:Spkmoorthy1952 is his username as well. He is new to Wikipedia, and not very familiar with Wikipedia policies or standards. I don't think he created duplicate usernames to commit abuse. Thus, I ask you unblock one of his usernames so that he can contribute to the Wiki.
It is possible that some of his edits are not suitable or upto to standards with the English Wikipedia. If that is the case, please let him know, and I'll advise him as well. -- Natkeeran ( talk) 03:10, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
For your kind words, and for your every contribution here, as I learned so much from them. :) Bladesmulti ( talk) 15:20, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
"Hinduism, with about one billion followers is the world's third largest religion, after Christianity and Islam."
It should be changed to "world's largest religion". Bladesmulti ( talk) 15:55, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Since the issue is heatedly debated, there was reason why it was simply kept that "may have drawn upon elements", Because there can be too much to attribute if we tried. Bladesmulti ( talk) 12:59, 18 January 2014 (UTC) Copied to Talk:Hinduism#Vedic period
Source writes "the first hindu temples emerged - Durga temple, Aihole, Vishnu temple - Deogarh. But the author is only talking about the first temples of this period, not about the temples like Koneswaram Temple(6th century BCE or older), Amarnath(3rd Century BCE), etc. Also the author is incorrect, because Durga temple, Aihole wasn't built during Gupta Empire. Bladesmulti ( talk) 04:06, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Copied to Talk:Hinduism#First temples
Bhavishya Purana is 5th Century BCE(even 3000 BCE according to some), Padma Purana is 8th Century BCE. What you think? Bladesmulti ( talk) 14:51, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:31, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Ask for help at the relevant wikiprojects. I don't think I can help much. Dougweller ( talk) 14:01, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Don't think anymore argument is needed now. I will be looking at the other usage of the Dharmacakra instead, one sentence claim that buddhist nation uses that flag, but it will be much better if i can find that "where", "how", "why" they uses them. And some others, thanks again for joining. Bladesmulti ( talk) 05:14, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua. I was wondering why you reverted my edit to 'Perennial Philosophy': https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Perennial_philosophy&oldid=591137496&diff=prev
Could you give me some feedback so that I can redo that section and add it back in?
Thanks Ruffling ( talk) 14:47, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
You might wanna have look at this. The Buddhist Wheel Symbol, by T.B. Karunaratne [6]
It's an old article but not an outdated one. the section on ″The Significance of the Wheel″ is interesting. Hope it'll be helpful to improve the article.
Thanks. Nishadhi ( talk) 11:56, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Please see here. Best, Devanampriya ( talk) 12:35, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Joshua Jonathan, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community. Devanampriya ( talk) 09:50, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
For those interested (it's a loooong story....)
|
---|
Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 11:04, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
|
Except Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism. Bladesmulti ( talk) 13:54, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Drmies has no dispute with me there, only other person, who keeps adding content from sources like "www.voltaire-integral.com"(half of them), after acclaiming to "derive from french wiki", i mean seriously? Bladesmulti ( talk) 15:50, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
You are discussed on the Rajiv Malhotra yahoo group by an individual claiming to be Manipadmehum. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 22:56, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Ah, you made yourself popular? Seems to be a problem to some, when convictions are being questioned. Anyway, some time ago then, that I was being "discussed"? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 23:17, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
See note on my Talk page. CorinneSD ( talk) 16:01, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
I discovered about Sanghao Caves from your template, just made a page about it, now since it is in Pakistan, we(anyone) wouldn't know much about it, it has definitely something to do with ancient indian subcontinent belief as well. But I wonder when we may know about it. Bladesmulti ( talk) 16:59, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Is it a bird? Is it a plane?
|
---|
[Rajiv: Lets discuss the following issue after peole have read Indra's Net because this book is centered on the issue of Vedanta-Yoga unity and a defense of Swami Vivekananda on this controversy.] Hi Rajiv, I was trying to elaborate on Swami Vivekananda's contributions to yoga in Wikipedia, but I got the following response and my changes got reverted. The id that I use on Wiki is "Manipadmehum". Here is the link to my arguments with the editors of yoga - I have copied the sections below highlighting in bold and underlining those parts which are plan wrong to an average Hindu / Indian. But this is the line of thinking followed by western scholars in some prominent universities like White, University of california. There is also an embedded pdf in the section which explains the "thesis". It is also the first time I hear about Madame Blavatsky who seem to have influenced modern Hinduism and modern Buddhism. Vivekananda & Early Buddhist Texts Vivekananda is absolutely not a reliable source on Yoga. He was a Hindu nationalist, not a scholar. To insert a text like this has nothing to do with understanding the origins of Yoga, but with promoting Hindu-nationalism, and is plain WP:OR. See White (2011) p.20-21 for an assessment of Vivekananda: "Vivekananda’s rehabilitation of what he termed “rāja yoga” is exemplary, for its motives, its influences, and its content. A shrewd culture broker seeking a way to turn his countrymen away from practices he termed “kitchen religion,” Vivekananda seized upon the symbolic power of yoga as a genuinely Indian, yet non-sectarian, type of applied philosophy that could be wielded as a “unifying sign of the Indian nation . . . not only for national consumption but for consumption by the entire world” (Van der Veer 2001: 73–74). For Vivekananda, rāja yoga, or “classical yoga,” was the science of yoga taught in the Yoga Sūtra, a notion he took from none other than the Theosophist Madame Blavatsky, who had a strong Indian following in the late nineteenth century. Following his success in introducing rāja yoga to western audiences at the 1892 World Parliament of Religions at Chicago, Vivekananda remained in the United States for much of the next decade (he died in 1902), lecturing and writing on the YS. His quite idiosyncratic interpretations of this work were highly congenial to the religiosity of the period, which found expression in India mainly through the rationalist spirituality of Neo-Vedānta. So it was that Vivekananda defined rāja yoga as the supreme contemplative path to selfrealization, in which the self so realized was the supreme self, the absolute brahman or god-self within." Replies By RK [Rajiv: I agree 100% with this post. But what have people done about it since the same issue of wicki was discussed her months ago? Nothing. Some folks here resolved to gather and DO something. They put up a totally new entry on Rajiv Malhotra. It was deleted in a few days by the gatekeepers citing all sorts of reasons and lack of due process Our side lost stamina. Because it seemed contrived and not natural from our side the wicki folks toughened their stance against me. Change is supposed to be done gradualy with each change backed by evidence cited in footnotes and links. Hence the half-ass effort by our folks has backfired. So dont start something amateurish as its better to do nothing if you dont know what you are doing. This is not a game for inexperienced folks with passion/opinions but no competence. This entity "Joshua Jonathan" is editing anything that touches Hinduism and Buddhism. �I think it is an organization of multiple people and not a single entity. �If it is a single person, he has a full-time job to do this. �Probably a well-funded entity considering how many man-hours it invests editing and enforcing its views. �This entity "Joshua Jonathan" likes anti-Hindu scholars like Martha Nussbaum. �I conjecture that it may �be related to receive patronage of U of Chicago or some other AAR member. � Just go and take a look at Rajiv Malhotra wiki page and you will see that this entity inserted all kinds of text from references which are anti-RM and some are patently Indian Christian. �In fact, RM's wiki page is dominated by one highly spurious anti-RM reference. �No prizes for guessing - "Joshua Jonathan" is the most active editor of RM wiki page. �Compare that page to those of Wendy Doniger or Martha Nussbaum. �You can see the difference of night and day. � This entity will out-win you by sheer expense of time. �Wikipedia has been turned into a joke by these characters. � "Joshua Jonathan" claims to be a Buddhist but do not buy it. �It is on a mission to demolish anything labeled, or even remotely connected with the label, neo-Hinduism. Unless you are willing to spend considerable time waging an intellectual battle, forget it. By S Well, I have to agree that Vivekananda was not a professionally trained scholar. Rajiv: Based on whatever your criteria of "professional training" means, nor am I or you professionaly trained". Nor was Sri Ramakrishna, Sri Aurobindo, or any of our great acharyas. Nor Buddha, etc... Only Wendy Doniger, Witzel, Hawley, and their large lineages would be considered by you as "professionally trained". You have in effect bought into the coloniation of what makes a competent Hindu thinker. You assume that western style system accredition is what makes one trained. Therefore, all yogis in history are in effect rejected by you as none of them from Patanjali on had certification by western style institutions. Bladesmulti ( talk) 12:01, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
|
You do know you aren't "another user", don't you? You are posting in the wrong place. If you are replying to someone else you can use @otheruser. Dougweller ( talk) 19:15, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Okay, this was dumb. Shouldn't have done this...
|
---|
You have been
blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your
disruption caused by
edit warring and violation of the
three-revert rule at
Dharmacakra. During a dispute, you should first try to
discuss controversial changes and seek
consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek
dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request
page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may
appeal this block by adding the text
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.
Bbb23 (
talk) 19:29, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an
administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the
blocking policy).
Joshua Jonathan ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log)) Request reason: If this is the price of reporting Devanampriya, than that's fair; after all, I've been reverting too, and I was the one who brought up the edit-warring. Yet, there are some nuances I think I have to mention. From Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Devanampriya reported by User:Joshua Jonathan (Result: Both blocked) - Bbb23: "Joshua's last revert occurred on January 23 at 16:03. That means that any reverts that occurred after January 22 at 16:03 count. I believe there are five of those, making the total six." I disagree. two edits were self-reverts, which is allowed: WP:3RRN: "The following actions are not counted as reverts for the purposes of 3RR: 1. Reverting your own actions ("self-reverting")."
So, that makes four - if re-inserting a maintenance templates counts as a revert. WP:AVOIDEDITWAR:
That's exactly what I did. Those tags were removed, and I re-inserted them. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 14:50, 27 January 2014 (UTC) Decline reason: Yep, you were edit warring. --jpgordon ::==( o ) 15:22, 27 January 2014 (UTC) If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. Okay, thanks for responding. I'll take better care in the future. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 15:24, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
|
Assure you, I am no sock puppet of this user, never even heard the name. Ready for any SPI too. Plus, you may want to check my reply on that page. You will know better. Bladesmulti ( talk) 09:22, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Check the recent edit on talk page. Bladesmulti ( talk) 11:47, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi I've answered your concerns on ANI see this. I think he may be a sockpuppet of another user that's been banned from Wikipedia. StuffandTruth ( talk) 16:38, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Chocolate, at least once a day, keeps me happy!
Joshua Jonathan -
Let's talk! 18:21, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Do you know anything about
this practice?
Hafspajen (
talk) 20:05, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Well, there is
Zen in the Art of Archery, but using a
blowgun, that is something new.
Hafspajen (
talk) 21:47, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Hafspajen ( talk) 05:07, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Eeeks! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:12, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Hafspajen ( talk) 08:05, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Joshua Jonathan. I noticed two sets of edits to the article on Hinduism changing the spelling of quite a few words. I just wanted you to know that I left a note on that editor's Talk page User Talk:Hendrick 99 about the changes. Feel free to chime in. (While you're there, take a look at comments from other editors regarding changing spelling in other articles.) CorinneSD ( talk) 03:03, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
I saw what you wrote on Drmies's page. It should be obvious that even you agree, we have similar issue with about 3 or more editors, who are even worse than Yoonadaue, at this moment, when it comes to the same guidelines, issues, that you referred. You cannot make issue of what he is saying on talk page, maybe because everyone is free for expressing themselves on talk page, as long as they don't rage. But I really think that he is not going to create any sandbox, and the way he is "demanding", is going to waste time. Relax. Bladesmulti ( talk) 14:02, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi, how are you? Long time. I have some articles here, Korran and Kudiramalai, that could use your research and writing skills, in the areas of Hinduism and Tamils etc. I highly doubt much of what is in these articles and what they are saying, and I am suspicious of the creator as all of his refs are to unlinked books. Previously I did some copy editing on an article written by the same editor and found that a lot of what is written is either not found in those books or are completely false. Can use your expertise in dealing with such articles here?-- Blackknight12 ( talk) 14:36, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
“ | O snail Climb Mount Fuji, But slowly, slowly! |
” |
— Kobayashi Issa |
Hello! I have replyed to your message on my talkpage. AcidSnow ( talk) 17:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
I did edit , which should be reviewed (since I'm not sure if it was done appropriately). ~Eric: 71.20.250.51 ( talk) 17:57, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
-- Iryna Harpy ( talk) 20:22, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Happy Valentine's Day | |
............................................................................................................................................................................ Hafspajen ( talk) 04:18, 14 February 2014 (UTC) |
I have just looked at a few edits to St. Thomas Christians by an IP editor. I have no way to judge the correctness of these edits (including changes in languages and in a population figure). I just thought I'd ask you if you thought 9,900,000 was possible as a total world population of St. Thomas Christians. CorinneSD ( talk) 18:56, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
It was on basis of your own cogent arguments (that didn't by themselves get through, unfortunately) that I became inspired to try a new appoach; namely to bolster your own arguments with explicit, very thorough source discussion, and that seems to have benefited User:Bladesmultis thinking at last, gradually seeing the rather shaky foundations of initial claims. To me, that simply shows B is a bit of an enthusiast, a dedicated and honest Wikipedian, but rather smitten with the enthusiast's main fault: Once an idea is felt to be "cool", "great" or "fascinating", the critical eye shuts down, and must gradually be opened again by calm, polite (but "merciless") cooling of his ardour by presentation of solid counter-arguments, as well as pointing out how shaky the first "sources" really are.
It can be (very) annoying to meet an enthusiast with cogent, short, but sufficient arguments (like your initial ones) but that doesn't get through to him. But for Bladesmulti at least, his own basic honesty to search for truth wins out in the end, I think, if he is met with patient, explicit counter-arguments. Arildnordby ( talk) 16:57, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
On a LONGER time scale, the whole cultural idea (if not reality) of "Christianity developed from Ancient Hindu Tales" (where both the Ezourvedam and Ramatsariar tale would be imoportant moments in its history!) could be a really important and interesting article.
But right now, Bladesmulti, I think the principal focus should be on the Ezourvedam, how to make that article really good. The Rocher reference is the MAJOR source we should use here! Arildnordby ( talk) 17:18, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Joshua, did you create that wonderful collection of pictures with captions illustrating Wiki types? I so enjoyed looking at it. CorinneSD ( talk) 20:52, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
JJ and Corinne, Bladesmulti does not want to work on Adimo/Ezourvedam, and it sounds like JJ is also tired of that topic. :-) Bladesmulti has suggested that we write a page on Hindu Creation Narratives... which might be okay... but has the downside that it is a very broad subject. Bladesmulti likes to rush from place to place, moving on before fully understanding what was in the past.
One of the reasons I liked Adimo/Ezourvedam, is because it is a very narrow subject: there are not that many sources, so we can actually analyze every source. Compare this to Voltaire, which has almost an infinite number of sources. My worry is that Hindu Creation Narratives will never keep Bladesmulti in one place long enough to understand fully. I don't care if we pick Adimo, or something else, but I'd like to pick a small and contained topic. Bladesmulti was working on another subpage, User:Bladesmulti/Abel_Bergaigne which is an author from the late 1800s. Bergaigne already has a page on frWiki, which we can use to guide us. Or, please, if any co-mentor wants to suggest an alternative strategy, I am all ears. Kangaroo ears, or teddy bear ears, according to Hafspajen. :-) — 74.192.84.101 ( talk) 16:11, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
two big problems for Bladesmulti to solve, with help from the co-mentors
|
---|
|
Donate them to you If you thought about copying it to a Wiki-essay. Hafspajen ( talk) 09:52, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Keeping track of all the discussions going on at various pages is already an accomplishment on its own here... Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:49, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Only you know what that means... In Wikipedia:WikiFauna is described as having desirable traits of an editor who is sporadically highly active and, when sporadically highly active, are boldly and grand, but exhibits less desirable traits of being clumsy or overconfident... Hafspajen ( talk) 09:07, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Joshua, I got your edits on Buddhism_and_Hinduism, if I had time, I would be thoroughly checking every source. There is some misrepresentation of sources. For example, let us take that "Caste" section, that I have edited.
Though I have added a lot clearer content. "Avatar", was already mentioned in a subsection. So I am not slashing, but I had moved it. Page is not really written like essay, so the main tag can be misleading. Bladesmulti ( talk) 07:22, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Here is some nice stuff to play with - Talk:Persecution of Hindus for you. I am needed on other fronts for the moment. Hafspajen ( talk) 12:02, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
This is probably the top source on this subject, along with "Indian Esoteric Buddhism" by Ronald Davidson. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 20:44, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Respected Joshua_Jonathan Sir, I am explaining about what is going on in the page Raju or Kshatriya Raju page.It is a page related to the caste of Kshatriya Varna.
Iam bringing it your notice because there is a very big problem in developing this article.If this article has to be developed,please provide freedom for other editors to develop this article by providing reliable sources.In this page an editor named "Sitush" is creating hurdles by deleting the sourced statements with reliable sources.The reasons he is providing is not considerable.Anyone can clearly understand by his reasons that he don't like to develop the article. I will explain you point by point: 1.)[When Gotras are provided from the following 2 references: (i)cite book| title=Tamil Nadu Part-2 Affiliated East-West Press [for] Anthropological Survey of India, 1997 |publisher=Kumar Suresh Singh, R. Thirumalai, S. Manoharan |year=1997 |isbn= |url= http://books.google.co.in/books?ei=XM78UpaOGIulrQei84CYAQ&id=P3LiAAAAMAAJ&dq=kshatriya+rajus&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=kshatriya+rajus+gotras |page=774] (ii) </ref> Sir, in that page reference 1 which is "Parties,Elections etc." also clearly explains that Rajus are of Kshatriya Varna which is accepted by Britishers,Government of India and also State Government of India.That editor named "sitush" is wantedly removing that "Kshatriya" Varna because he don't want to mention it.Sitush removed Gotras in that page. Sir,K.S.Singh is a great Historian, he(K.S.Singh) wrote many books affiliated to Anthropological Survey of India and Oxford University Press.Iam providing sources from two of his books: (i)India's Communities (ii)Tamil nadu Part 2 and these are reliable sources as i have stated above. Sir,I am requesting you to verify this paragraph: {A number of communities claim the status of " Kshatriya Varna",but apart from " Rajput" they are very small.They are " Rajus"(Andhra Pradesh,Tamil Nadu),"Raghuvamsi Kshatriya"(Karnataka)," Kshatriya"(Kerala),"Koteyar"(Tamil Nadu,Karnataka),"Dal Kshatriya"(Bihar)," Aguri"(West Bengal) and " Kshatriya"(Orissa and Assam)-in all eight communities which are widely accepted in the references of "India's Communities" by K.S.Singh,Vol-V.p.1853,1856-1858"," http://books.google.co.in/books?ei=A0O8UtD5Bo6IiQejnIHQCg&id=1lZuAAAAMAAJ&dq=india%27s+communities&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=aguri" This was the statement mentioned by K.S.Singh in his book.This statement of K.S.Singh is given as the Kshatriya Rajus asked their caste to be placed in Backward castes list in Tamil Nadu for the Backward Classes commission which can be seen in the following link "www.ncbc.nic.in/Pdf/Tamil%20Nadu/Tamilnadu-Vol2/7.pdf".}This is a reliable source and sitush has removed this from the page.
But,that Sitush is removing wantedly and he is not giving freedom for any other editors to develop the Rajus article.
Sir,Finally iam a requesting you as you are one of the senior editor in the wikipedia and i can beleive that You can provide justice for the common editors and also help to maintain the reputation of wikipedia by developing the article. And i am also requesting you to study the above references of K.S.Singh i have provided and discuss it with experts.If you feel those are reliable.Then i request you to develop the article by entering content from those books of K.S.Singh.
Thanking you sir,
Yours faithfully, An Editor. Special:Contributions/117.207.254.186 aka Special:Contributions/117.213.161.28 aka Special:Contributions/117.207.251.145 aka Special:Contributions/117.200.22.72 10:41, 27 February 2014
Summary of thread: According to 117, Sitush is deleting sourced statements with reliable sources:
Copied to Talk:Raju#Recent edits by Sitush. To be continued there. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 14:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Thank you Mr.Joshua Jonathan for the efforts and also spending your valuable time in trying to analyse and develop this Rajus article and i wish you all the best for your future endeavours :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.208.138.14 ( talk) 06:29, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Raju, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sai Baba ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:05, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Copied from my userpage [12]
Why you give importance to language sankrit in hindu religion.Every one know the real founder of hindu regilion was native dravidans and indian tribal people why you are hidding the truth. This is question put to Joshua Jonathan. 14:20, 27 February 2014 User:Madhanmohancoimbatore
Do you know anything about the Saint Thomas Christians? If you don't, do you know an editor who does? The article recently came off a short period under protected status due to some edit warring, but two different editors have just made a few edits to the article. I don't know enough about the topic to judge the changes to content. However, there are also some additions that are not in Standard English. Before I work on that, I thought I'd ask if you or someone else could determine whether the changes to content are correct and an improvement to the article. CorinneSD ( talk) 17:47, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Hafspajen ( talk) 10:59, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
You have been selected to receive a merchandise giveaway. Please send us a message if you would like to claim your shirt. Thank you again for all you do! -- JMatthews (WMF) ( talk) 04:07, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Mr.Joshua Jonathan, the anthropologer Minna Säävälä has clarity about it, she described Rajus caste as traditional rulers and warriors and are Kshatriya that means they are of Kshatriya Varna and you can see that in her book, she also describes Rajus caste as "Raju Kulam(Kshatriyas)" in one sentence in that book.Here Kulam,jati,caste are synonyms.Kshatriya is their varna.In Ancient India,there are only four varnas or castes.But in present India,there are thousands of castes because many castes originated in shudra varna as they have classified due to their profession.In present India,there are castes of Brahmins,Kshatriyas,Vaishyas,Upper Shudras,Shudras,Dalits & Tribals/Adivasis.You can find these in many books.In present India,there are different Brahmin,Kshatriya & Vaishya castes that means those are the castes which comes under those three varnas.And the castes of those varnas will classified according to their respective varnas and they are called as Brahmins,Kshatriyas & Vaishyas.For example,Rajput & Rajus are Kshatriya Castes that means those are different castes but comes under Kshatriya Varna,that means they are called as Kshatriya Castes i.e. Kshatriyas.Also you can notice that gotras of Brahmins,Kshatriyas & Vaishyas are different from shudras.Also those three varnas are dvijas i.e. possess sacred thread and they also possess gotras named after rishis whether they are saptarishis(7 great sages) or other rishis(sages).Kshatriyas are divided into Suryavanshi & Chandravanshi.Rajus are also classified into Suryavanshi & Chandravanshi.But in Rajputs, Agnivanshi Lineage is also present.Many Indian & Foreign Anthropologers made analysis about all these.Minna Säävälä-She is one of the great anthropologers who had written many books and analysed the castes of India. - Shvrs ( talk) 04:53, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
the current version of Pandyan Dynasty and my edits there. Also I guess Early Pandyan Kingdom and my edits. Thanks. Ran into the first after an editor changed Kumari Kandam into a pov mess, and the 2nd from the first. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 13:26, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
I see on your user page that you have an interest in psychology. You might be interested in reading the exchange on the talk page of Hypnosis regarding changes to the lead/lede. I have given up since the editor has not responded to my comments, but I tend to agree with Myrvin. The other editor has gone ahead and changed an Encylopedia Britannica definition and has, in the process, I believe, changed the meaning. I have no problem with the somewhat general words (such as "certain") in the EB definition for this subject which is not an easy one to define and which the article makes clear has been defined in more than one way. The details will come out later in the article. You might want to weigh in. CorinneSD ( talk) 00:49, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
you have been listed as claiming on here on wikipedia as saying my guru Rudi was a nath sadhu....
this is completely false....
please change it..
i would like to know where you got this idea....
sincerely,
swami chetanananda — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swamichetanananda ( talk • contribs) 06:18, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello Joshua,
It seems that you inserted a table on the Nath Wikipedia page that lists the modern lineage holders of the Nath tradition. (I'm new to editing Wiki, so if it wasn't you, please redirect this comment to who did.)
The table lists "Rudi" at the very last, referencing a story written on the web by David Godman as proof of him being a lineage holder.
Joshua, Rudi was not a Nath. He was a Swami (Swami Rudrananda) in the Saraswati order, under the lineage of Bhagavan Nityananda of Ganeshpuri and Swami Muktananda. The story by David Godman is completely erroneous. Rudi never met the Maharaj. Its all fiction.
For us, in his lineage, his biography and the line of teaching is sacred information. Please remove Rudi's name from any Nath lineage tables on any of the pages related to Naths.
Also, if you would be willing to share email exchange with us, we would be interested to know how you came upon this information and how you were inclined to put Rudi's name on this list.
Monica O'Neal Research Assistant for Swami Chetanananda Rudrananda Ashram/The Movement Center Portland, OR — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swamichetanananda ( talk • contribs) 06:28, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
If anyone is going to write an article on Shoemaker, it should not be you. Writing a WP:BLP on someoen with whom you are currently engaged in a content dispute is a jaw-droppingly bad idea. Please don't do that! Guy ( Help!) 22:47, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
The original editors painstakingly created this page and cited sources from the India office. Later editors deleted large sections of a brilliant article and one said the sources were dubious.They though the India office records were kept in India and had not heard of them. These editors were clear not historians as anyone who has studied the period knows about these records. However you choose to thake their sides and when the original editors removed the vandalism you reverted the article. Here is the full source from where the research was done on this article. The India Office Records are the repository of the archives of the East India Company (1600-1858), the Board of Control or Board of Commissioners for the Affairs of India (1784-1858), the India Office (1858-1947), the Burma Office (1937-1948), and a number of related British agencies overseas. The focus of the India Office Records is in the territories now included in India, Pakistan, Burma and Bangladesh and their administration before 1947. The Records also include source materials for neighbouring or connected areas at different times, covering not only South Asia, but also Southeast Asia, Central Asia, the Middle East, and parts of Africa. The official archives of the India Office Records are complemented by over 300 collections and over 3000 smaller deposits of private papers relating to the British experience in India. The India Office Records are administered by The British Library as part of the Public Records of the United Kingdom, and are open for public consultation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.55.95.60 ( talk) 11:59, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Singahi Bhiraura Page Please read carefully and remove the protection and revert to original articleDear Jonathan I agree with WP:OR but if you read the sources on the article carefully and compare it with the guidelines to quote "The prohibition against OR means that all material added to articles must be attributable to a reliable published source, even if not actually attributed" Here is the list of attributable reliable sources of the article which were republished and meet the guidelines: There are Papers from the AN Seely Collection: This a a British Library Publication 1972, which is a reputable Publishing House. AN Seely the author was a fellow of Trinity College Oxford, and a scholar in Persian Studies. He compiled these from the original sources and they were published.
31.55.74.104 ( talk) 14:57, 10 March 2014 (UTC) The article complies with WP:OR as from a published source I was the original Editor who started this article. I feel my article was very well cited. Its about the History of a small obscure town in India. It also happens to be my hometown. I( spend considerable time in the British library in London researching its history. The British Library in 1972 Published a collection of papers in Four Volumes called the AN Seely Papers. The Citations come from this published work. British Library Publishing was founded in 1981 They publish titles in a variety of areas, focusing on subjects relating to the British Library’s collections, such as the history of books and manuscripts, including facsimile editions and general guides to our more famous collection items. We also publish audio CDs from the collections held by the British Library Lalitshastri ( talk) 15:12, 10 March 2014 (UTC) |
Freedom for you...............................................................and me. Hafspajen ( talk) 12:36, 11 March 2014 (UTC) |
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
Haha:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::..........................................!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!................ Hafspajen ( talk) 12:37, 11 March 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 13:08, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
I would like to double check. Do you really want to know "
Which RFC?" ? And there were some other reasons also listed in my revert. Did you read that? --
SMS
Talk 19:42, 11 March 2014 (UTC) --
SMS
Talk 19:47, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Joshua. Please don't use Twinkle messages that aren't fully relevant. [13] You haven't removed the uncivil message. (For my part, I've copied it to the Clueless Complaint Generator.:-)) If you can't find a templated message that's just right, please handcraft one.
In other news, your message to Hafspajen had been removed, by I've restored it. Bishonen | talk 10:49, 14 March 2014 (UTC).
Hi Joshua,
Thank you for your comments. I had to use that language - though not justifying it is that I am ok with his edits as long as they are in accordance with wiki terms. The edits went just beyond that based on what he thinks is right or wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldruff ( talk • contribs) 10:00, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
What the heck is the difference between Transpersonal and Revelation, and Enlightenment (spiritual) please need a quick answer. Hafspajen ( talk) 19:03, 19 March 2014 (UTC) Hafspajen ( talk) 19:03, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Joshua: I apologize. Since Hafspajaen needed a "quick answer", I took this as a challenge and thought I could learn something as I tried to help him, so I read the three articles and tried to learn the differences. I wrote an answer, but meant to put it on my Talk page, not yours, but put it on yours by mistake, so removed it. I know you are much more knowledgeable about both psychology and religion than I am, and I did not want to be presumptuous. Please forgive my amateur answer if it is wrong. CorinneSD ( talk) 23:27, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Corinne's summary, reinserted by Joshua Jonathan
|
---|
It seems to me that " transpersonal" is used mainly in the field of modern psychology to mean "a state of awareness beyond the personal", an awareness of things outside, or beyond, the self.
I would surmise that the people who coined the word "transpersonal" had probably read or studied Buddhist and/or Hindu religions. The term " revelation" seems to be used more in the field of religion.
The term " enlightenment" seems to have more meanings than the other two terms. In the west, it is used (1) in the secular world and (2) in religion. It is also used (3) to translate concepts that come out of eastern religions.
This last sentence seems pretty close to the definition of "transpersonal". It seems to me that the term "transpersonal" has a more limited meaning than "enlightenment" (it is a bit difficult to understand from the article on transpersonal precisely what is meant by "transpersonal"), and that "revelation" has a somewhat limited meaning. "Revelation" seems to refer mainly to a brief experience, a direct revealing to humans of the divine, and, secondarily, to the knowledge of the divine that has been received in that experience. "Enlightenment" seems to have two meanings in the western context, one secular (referring to the Age of Enlightenment) and the other (less well known) to a kind of religious experience (William James, etc.), and several meanings coming from concepts in Buddhism and Hinduism. Without more reading, I cannot say more than that. I am sure that Joshua Jonathan can help you more than I can. CorinneSD ( talk) 23:21, 19 March 2014 (UTC) |
Reply by JJ: "Enlightenment" is a western term for bodhi, kensho and prajna. They all denote (intuitive) understanding of the "emptiness" of the I/self. The term is related to "illumination"; see Richard M. Bucke and [14]. It is also related to "conversion" and "religious experience", as used by William James. But that's also where the meaning has shifted: from a "coginitive act" to a "mysterium tremendum et fascinans". Nevertheless, Stanislav Grof does have a point: shamanism, or for example the historical Vedic religion, do know drug-induced trance-states. I'm afraid that all those terms are not so neatly separated from each other. Though I would not recommand drugs to "gain" "enlightenment" - which, by the way, may be the start of the Buddhist path, and not the end! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 19:22, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
You have been selected to receive a merchandise giveaway. Please send us a message if you would like to claim your shirt. -- JMatthews (WMF) ( talk) 06:31, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Mr.Joshua Jonathan,please see the Rajus article,the version created by you is the best version.See the reasons in talk page of Rajus and what sitush had done to Rajus page recently in history,he has edited & removed material according to his likes with fake reasons and he also even vandalised the satya sai baba sentence which was added by you.And also please encourage new editors if they provide reliable sources and also please say to sitush if he doesn't have any proper idea or knowledge about any new materials in this page,then ask him to discuss them with senior editors but he doesn't have any right to delete according to his wish as he is not the owner of wikipedia.After all he is an editor with limited knowledge.Iam reporting it you because you are also a senior editor and also tried to develop Rajus article.And also because,removing and deleting according to personal likes or dislikes is not the motto of wikipedia articles.You please protect the version created by you,which i have restored.Thank you. - Shvrs ( talk) 02:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua,
You replaced the entire universe image I added to the series about advaita vedanta with two swans!
I don't begrudge you that! Saraswati will no doubt honour you in some way. :)
Anyway, due to that edit, I looked at your contributions and saw that you contribute to many mystical/spiritual/philosophical wikipages and I thought you might be able to help me. I just tried to submit a page about a student of Ramana Maharshi's, Robert Adams. However, the page was rejected because I only have sources from Robert Adams himself.
I believe he is a great teacher and worthy of his place on the great wikipedia. Please have a look:
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Robert_Adams
There aren't really many other sources for Robert Adams, because he was fairly unknown. You can find information about him from renowned biographer David Godman on his blog and in various other places on the net, but not much is about.
http://sri-ramana-maharshi.blogspot.co.uk/
If you could have a look at the wikipage I created and see if there is anything I can do with regards to referencing that would increase the likelihood of its submission, that would be much appreciated.
All the best,
Merlyn User talk:MerlynDanielMali 25 march 2014
Hi Joshua, great thanks for the help! And for the following.
Here's some: [15] [16] Not very reliable, but it's something. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 21:40, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll see if I can fit them in!
If you know anyone else who could also help and contribute that would be great. I got in touch with David Godman. He'll get back in touch with me if he finds some other reliable sources.
MerlynDanielMali ( talk) 00:23, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua,
I've submitted the article again. 12 sources, 30 references from these sources. All completely genuine and researched. I hope it makes it through this time. Thanks for your help!
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Robert_Adams
MerlynDanielMali ( talk) 23:30, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua,
Do you know the code to put a bit more space under a paragraph. In the article for Robert Adams, I would like to add a bit of space after the later years section so that the heading 'Teachings' sits beneath, not beside, the photo of Sri Ramana Maharshi.
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Robert_Adams#Later_Years
Thanks in advance for any ideas.
MerlynDanielMali ( talk) 15:42, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Okay, well thanks for your help. I think it's all done now and good to go. I hope it gets accepted by the administrators! Best, MerlynDanielMali ( talk) 13:31, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua,
I read up more about neo-advaita and then removed the category neo-advaita teachers at the bottom of the Robert Adams page, as I don't think Robert Adams qualifies as a neo-advaita teacher in the mould of Mooji or Andrew Cohen or any of the others. Although he is a Westerner, he had no known association with Pappaji, and if he did, it would have been in the 1940s. Like Ramana, he never claimed to be a guru nor have disciples, and he also always kept close to the ancient scriptures. I think if one were to ask David Godman(david_godman@yahoo.co.uk) or Alan Jacobs (alanadamsjacobs@yahoo.co.uk), the head of the Ramana Maharshi UK Foundation, they would both categorise Robert Adams as outside of neo-advaita. Cheers! MerlynDanielMali ( talk) 11:31, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Hey Joshua, something seems to be up with the hindu teacher info box. Check out Ramana's and Nisargadatta's pages. Philosophy has gone missing, and the word Advaita vedanta has been moved to the right. MerlynDanielMali ( talk) 11:00, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
It's okay now. Seems to have fixed itself. MerlynDanielMali ( talk) 11:03, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Merge Indigenous Aryans and Out of India theory? These seem to be the same subject. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 19:11, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Would you care to comment on Talk:Grigori Rasputin on some kind of controversy? the thing is that several references were removed followed by not so polite comments, like: What do you want to prove? Are you starting a new sect? Do you need members? and comments like The Guardian has a foolish article on Rasputin, I am sorry for them. that reference is It is blablabla, by a student. Students don't get their papers put up online without being checked by teachers... I had seven or so references and I am put up against one bestseller book, that did not mentioned Rasputin as Holy fool. Hafspajen ( talk) 10:57, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Hafspajen ( talk) 07:44, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
You were mistaken because of lack of knowledge there.You can see in the Srinivasulu pdf : forward castes table in the pdf file.There Kshatriya population is 1.2% there.You can find the populations in the table.you can find asentence in pdf :{in "Gudiada (Vizianagaram) on 15 July 1987, One dalit labourer killed in a dispute over a small patch of tankbed land by a mob of backward caste farmers led by a forward caste (Raju) Congress Party leader"}
Ask your God i.e Mr.Sitush that how Rajus or Kshatriya Rajus will be mentioned in Government's records & castes list.They will only be "Kshatriya" even he can't say no to the truth.Try to understand,please earn respect but don't lose it.Thank You - Shvrs ( talk) 11:51, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
The Citation Barnstar | |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdzPeMd5cR0 Hafspajen ( talk) 18:44, 1 April 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:07, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua, is there any particular reason my edit was reverted? My main purpose was to add a source which I believe you requested, so perhaps you disagreed with the other changes I made? I'm sure we can reach a compromise. Morinae ( talk) 16:11, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
The origin of the Japanese Chin is clouded in the mysticism of Far Eastern ancient rites.[citation needed] .. well never heard of it. Can you find any references? Otherwise we may chuck this. Hafspajen ( talk) 17:05, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
A couple of days ago a lot of people were complaining about Martinevans123. And here a whole section.. Hafspajen ( talk) 20:54, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello Jonathan, Sitush wantedly removing history from Raju's wiki from last 3 r 4 years What I am saying is truth that Sitush wantedly doing this.
Raju are Surya Vamsha and Chandra Vamsha Kshatriya, there are lot of evidence that are included by many other authors with evidence, but sitush wantedly removing all the contents.
If you see raju wiki, you will understand. he didn't include the history of King Pusapati Ashok Gajapathi Raju from Vijayanagar empire.
I don't know what I can discuss with, but i can say he wantedly doing this, cannot you do any thing.
can you take the evidences and add the raju history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.250.118.227 ( talk) 20:12, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Great work! Bishonen | talk 06:43, 14 April 2014 (UTC).
Outstanding! Bishonen | talk 08:23, 14 April 2014 (UTC).
I've forgotten what article it was but I amended one of your edits yesterday where you had cited a state government list of Other Backwards Classes or Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes. I think you'd used the list for Bihar when the state was Haryana, or vice versa.
Anyway, just a heads-up that there is a more general problem with those lists. They are changed frequently and are mainly a political exercise but - and this is far worse - they are incredibly ambiguous, lacking in consistent spellings etc and not making it clear whether names are of castes or synonyms etc. At the national level, the NCBC has made well over 1000 changes and actually admits to the unreliability of its own lists, pointing out the issues regarding synonyms etc. All this is documented in some discussions somewhere and I really should try to dig them out and stick some links at User:Sitush/Common.
You can see some of the effects at Kashyap (caste), where the politicking is sourced to recent news stories and the list of related communities clearly demonstrates some issues. For example, there are several communities mentioned that seem to be just slightly different spellings of a root name but which are being treated as separate subcastes, and there are some likely synonyms in their (eg: Bhar and Rajbhar). All these issues make it nigh-on impossible to link many caste names unless we have academic sources that make the connections. And, alas, too many people think that the lists produced in Gyan-published books are academic sources. - Sitush ( talk) 11:18, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Charles Joshua Chaplin... Hafspajen ( talk) 23:43, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Chaplin conducted art classes specifically for women at his studio. Hafspajen ( talk) 11:05, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
How are you, Joshua? I know you're interested in psychology, so I thought I'd point out a comment recently added to Talk:Erich Fromm#Needs a serious reworking .... An editor added a comment in response to a comment that had been added in 2005. I don't know enough about psychology to figure out what, exactly, this latest editor wants done with the article, but you might. CorinneSD ( talk) 16:53, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Kindly,please see the talk page of Rajus.Thank You. 06:06, 20 April 2014 User:117.200.29.60
Indo-Aryan migration |
---|
[19] is a disputed map, and it should be avoided. I've check about it, and I don't think that it has correct information. You cannot add similar map twice on a single page, neither a same map can be repeated. The image that I am posting here, probably remains undisputed to some extent, although it is more about linguistic. There are also other maps, such as, [20] but many sources explains that migration or invasion may have taken place during 2500 BCE. Maps are usually disputed in this regard, but we wouldn't need more because [21] is enough. Bladesmulti ( talk) 13:27, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
It has accuracy, the actual proposed module, I didn't objected. On your new reading, I would say that for last 20,000 years, there have been number of notable incidents. There are many more to be discovered. Bladesmulti ( talk) 15:34, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua - I agree with your proposal to merge the articles Mindfulness meditation and Mindfulness (positive psychology) into Mindfulness (psychology). I think Mindfulness-based stress reduction should be merged into it too, and will add a notice there. I will edit the tags you created so Discuss all point to the section you created on Talk:Mindfulness, as recommended by Help:Merging: "(1) Create one discussion section, typically on the destination article's talk page; (2) Tag each article with the appropriate merger tag. All tag Discuss links should be specified to point at the new discussion section." - Thanks; LeoRomero ( talk) 01:12, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
[22] is a Undue, than unsourced. Because it was unnecessary edit, from other user. Bladesmulti ( talk) 04:24, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
File:Schokohase für Ostern, Vollmilchschokolade, February 2010.jpg | The Joshua John-Àthan Pet Award |
Verý good. Verá niče. VerźY tasťȳ. Hafspajen ( talk) 13:16, 27 April 2014 (UTC) |
Hafspajen ( talk) 13:20, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Didn't he just removed what you added again? [23] Do you remember what was your edit? Hafspajen ( talk) 23:26, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello Joshua ..you left me a message on my talk page.
"Ik ben een God in het diepst van mijn gedachten" - Willem Kloos.
Does it mean "I am a God in the depths of my mind" - Willem Kloos.
Its very nice to know that you have a keen interest in Buddhism. Its good. I am a Buddhist too. I make videos on Buddhism and I run a youtube channel. I hope you will see it here. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5UPirykoyG6cAbySvyxovw
Regarding the edit on page 'God in Buddhism".
I gave source from accesstoinsight and it already had sources from this website too. But Bladesmulti removed it saying that it is a unreliable source but there were many sources taken from this website.
Regarding the Vedic culture. Gautama Buddha never accepted the Vedas so how it can have an origin in vedic culture. (Read Tevijja Sutta and other suttas too)
Hindus have been trying to include Buddha as an Avatar or a Hindu God while he rejected that he was any God in Dona Sutta (Search it.) And I think to some effect the page Hinduism and Buddhism has been edited by some hindus for their personal benefits. I have seen it .
You can also watch the page Buddha in Hinduism...there you go. You can discuss more if you like. Thanks.
Don't forget to visit my youtube channel if you like. I just thought to share. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astronautabhinavstar ( talk • contribs) 17:40, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Joshua and @ Bladesmulti: -- I just undid an edit to the article on Parsi, but I am puzzled by one thing in the restored sentence. It says that Parsis are "legally and ethnically distinct from the Iranis..." I don't understand the necessity of including the adverb "legally" there. While it may be true, laws change over time, so in India it's true only now. It may not be true ten years from now. I think it is less important than the ethnic distinction and the historical development of the groups. The way Parsis fit into Indian society, and the laws that apply, can be discussed later in the article. I just think it is strange to introduce a group of people as being legally different from another group. What do you think? CorinneSD ( talk) 01:36, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Joshua bro....I ask you to please kindly watch the page Ambedkar..as some people are trying to vandalize it (Blaedsmulti). He has been reverting my every addition though it was sourced. In India around 95% of Buddhists are following the example of Ambedkar by abondoning Hinduism(as it has caste system) and converting to Buddhism. Bladesmulti is reverting the changes...Kindly see and watch the page. I just request you and I hope you will accept it. With regards, Astronautabhinavstar Astronautabhinavstar ( talk) 05:29, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Joshua bro...you reverted the changes back to bladesmulti. But you removed 2 pics also ...kindly restore them. Dr.Ambedkar was the first law minister in India. How can somebody use the word lawyer for him? Bladesmulti has called all his big brothers (like the redpenofdoom) for seeking consensus. I am new to wikipedia user.
You reverted the changes but what you changed was already there much longer in wikipedia. I asked for a consensus. Bladesmulti called his big brothers. You are the only one whom I have found good in wikipedia. Similiar laundry lists are found in Brentrand Russell page too..I asked Bladesmulti but he arrogantly said that if I want I can edit on his talkpage but the page is semiprotected. Isn't this an Injustice done to Dr. Ambedkar just because he was born in a low caste? Astronautabhinavstar ( talk) 05:54, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Joshua bro...you reverted the changes back to bladesmulti. But you removed 2 pics also ...kindly restore them. Dr.Ambedkar was the first law minister in India. How can somebody use the word lawyer for him? Bladesmulti has called all his big brothers (like the redpenofdoom) for seeking consensus. I am new to wikipedia user.
You reverted the changes but what you changed was already there much longer in wikipedia. I asked for a consensus. Bladesmulti called his big brothers. You are the only one whom I have found good in wikipedia. Similiar laundry lists are found in Brentrand Russell page too..I asked Bladesmulti but he arrogantly said that if I want I can edit on his talkpage but the page is semiprotected. Isn't this an Injustice done to Dr. Ambedkar just because he was born in a low caste? Astronautabhinavstar ( talk) 06:02, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
My salution to your elders.
I just request you and I hope you will accept it.
I will try to seek consensus. Infact I am working on it. Astronautabhinavstar ( talk) 06:39, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
The Civility Barnstar | |
Whenever I see a new editor in some heated discussion, I noticed many times you personally asking them to cool down. Your sincere efforts in participating civilly in discussions is something others can get inspired by. Thank you for this and your valuable contributions. Ugog Nizdast ( talk) 10:43, 1 May 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks. This one is really appreciated. It touches on an essential ideal of how I want to be. Thanks. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 15:16, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Congratulations! I saw several examples, where your kindness towards POV-pushing editors, obviously violating WIKIPEDIA policies, transcended my limited horizon. JimRenge ( talk) 21:51, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
In the Wipikipedia Project Buddhism; list of particiants, I saw that you are interested in Zen. Could you possibly contribute something to Zen liturgy (liturgies)? I know there is a liturgy in Zen, but I I did not succeed in identifying reliable sources. I also tried to find some sources providing general information on Buddhist liturgy, but this seems to be a blind spot in English publications- Best regards JimRenge ( talk) 21:18, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
My answer (i cannot now edit Administration noticeboard):::Vandal is everybody, who do unconstructive edits and this edits are definitely unconstructive (removing category, delete parts of text ...) Vejvancicky it not did not detect. Please remedy it and warning this user (Feezo), who this unconstructive edits saved-- Lisa Shertoon :-P ( talk) 19:43, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
Surprising that a IP could produce that huge amount of references. I have checked that it was the same editor who has been blocked. But what I am not getting is, if his sources don't support his information, why he keeps pushing them? I haven't checked even a single reference, but I can believe on you here.
I really wish that the editor is alright, and he don't feel hurt by any of you. But incidents like this one really saddens me sometimes, what we can do. Bladesmulti ( talk) 04:39, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
I just noticed an edit to Fire temple in which an editor changed "most" to "some" and added a statement that appears to be unsourced. What is the right thing to do here? CorinneSD ( talk) 14:10, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Recently found out that following text from his page is deleted. "Jurist, politician, philosopher, anthropologist, historian and economist" and instead is currently replaced by "Indian lawyer, politician and academic" A kind request to restore the original text as it suits best for Dr.Ambedkar. There are various references to prove each of these diverse qualities of his. He solely wrote the Constitution of India and was a Minister of Law. He had sound knowledge of History and anthropology. The Nobel prize winner Economist Mr.Amartyasen mentions Dr.Ambedkar as his Father in Economy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A1prashant ( talk • contribs) 18:08, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Shiva, Vishnu etc. are acknowledged in Buddhism, although as worldy deities. Saraswati is considered a full Buddha. Should all these Hindu deity pages be edited to reflect this? VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 21:04, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
The monthly Pet Award for Jonathan. | |
A loving nice Pet Hafspajen ( talk) 15:24, 7 May 2014 (UTC) |
Monthly?!? Man, what a good care, in these times of crisis and shortages! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:28, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua, thanks again for your help with Robert Adams. Just to say, I've changed my username from User:MerlynDanielMali to User:Bodhadeepika, and will edit under that name henceforth. Also, I recently discovered that Robert Adams' Four Principles of Self-Realization are very similar to the Buddhist Lankavatara sutra, which may be of interest given your interest in Buddhism. All the best! Bodhadeepika ( talk) 21:49, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks a lot Joshua for all that help with the name change. I hadn't actually expected it. Bodhadeepika means lamp of knowledge or knowledge lamp. I'm not a lamp of knowledge! ;) But it's the last two words of one of my favourite texts on advaita vedanta, namely Advaita Bodha Deepika (the lamp of non-dual knowledge). Check it out! I didn't realise it was in violation to have had two accounts at once. I disconnected my email and watchlist from MerlynDanielMali and then abandoned the account last night and will certainly only edit as Bodhadeepika from now on. Apologies wikipedia! Bodhadeepika ( talk) 09:19, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Regarding this edit summary: "India had always been known as one India, never southern and northern or eastern india", have a look at Middle kingdoms of India. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:17, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
The problem with dictionary Joshua is this that it points back to each other. Similar is the problem with wikipedia citations. I experience India as I live in it. Here in this moment, not in medieval times, it's one India. How can he had been born even in southern India. Mention the kingdom in which he was born. That wasn't known as south India. It was called by that kingdom name.
I don't know how to discuss via email. Is there any method. Is this method correct?, coz I don't know how to reply back 10:24, 8 May 2014 User:Beyondname
Please stop edit-warring, as you're doing now at Nagarjuna, Samkhya and Adi Shankara. One more revert, and I'll report you for edit-warring. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:22, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
I don't really mind any geographical indication and historical information but it shouldn't be classified with pretension or presumption. In medieval times, when Nagarjuna was born, the name of his kingdom was Vidharbha, that lies in between modern day Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra [2] [3]. The geographical divisions like north and south didn't exist during time of Nagarjuna. Mystic term is given to him due to nonavailability of any term for either bodhisattva or any person who has reached nirvana. Please read more about Nagarjuna & his psyche from [8]. I understand your concern about India's sensitive articles, but the problem here is this that you're talking from only the books that are translated in English and I'm talking about direct experience of Nagarjuna's Treatise which is quite similar in nature to Mahakashyapa and Jiddu Krishnamurti in modern times. It's purely based upon Samkhya philosophy which says, pure knowing is enough, because truth is beyond karma or causation (cause and effect). Therefore, no technique could help. Only externally their languages are different because they have to depend on their peculiar education for communication and external expression. That differs form one person to other and it also differs in time. For example, Buddha and Mahavira both knew the truth, and were wandering in small Indian state called Bihar (Bihar name originated from their there sanskrit word "vihar" or prakrit & pali word "bihar which means travel in English), and they even stayed in same place in same village on one incident, but they didn't meet. Lots of people from outside thinks that they were egoistic, that's why they didn't meet, but there's nothing left to discuss amongst them, because both of them knew. However their expressions were quite different and still they knew the same truth. Nagarjuna, Krishnamurti, Mahakashyapa, Ashtavakra are the masters (master of oneself), who emphasized on pure knowing and that's why they cancelled all the arguments that requires one to do something for reaching nirvana. That's the original philosophy of samkhya. How different in articulation it might look form outside, but from inside, it is the same path. Entire Zen (sanskrit word dhyan) is based on the similar concept of direct knowing, that's why the only meditation they ascribe to is Zazen (aka no mind meditation). Finally I'm not very concerned with what you revert to in the changes. You have full freedom and I will not change it. But if you understand the 3 aspects of searching truth, I think this debate could conclude or at least could possibly move into some direction. India divided search into Satyam, Shivam and Sundaram. Satyam is the pure inquiry and is the original path of Samkhya and the Zen in modern age. Shivam is the path of knowing through determinaton (Sankalpa)and it requires lot of doing and is pure path of Yoga. All the mediation ascribed by Buddha and Mahavira and Patanjali belongs to this. Last is sundaram or knowing through beauty or devotion. All the religions that talk about bhakti (devotion) are part of Sundaram. Examples of bhakti are Muhammad, Jesus, Moses, Meera, Nanak, Kabir, Rabiya, Chaitanya, Ramakrishna and many more. If we understand these 3 dimensions of search, then we can relate properly. Nice to know your views on the same (not thoughts, as thoughts have no value in world of inquiry, spirituality or religion).
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Beyondname ( talk • contribs) 09:17, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
..............................well, a different one. Hafspajen ( talk) 17:26, 8 May 2014 (UTC) |
@ Hafspajen: Now I notice! That's roti! I LOVE roti! (Which, by the way, is an Indo-European word: roti, rat, rad, wheel). Thanks!!! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 19:39, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Could you please tell me the reason of your reverted changes on Dharmic religion on various other pages? As per your change summary you have mentioned POV pushing and WP:COMMONNAME. I believe you must know the meaning of these terms before mentioning them anywhere. The term Indian religions is not at all common and no author mentions it. So if you know the meaning of COMMONNAME then you would understand that the word implies opposite to what it was used for. Second there is no POV as you might have missed one important thing in your bias that I gave references that justified the changes i.e. various authors has used the term Dharmic religion in contrary to this new term called Indian religions which is no where read. Third according to wiki policy of changes made with good faith, you should have resisted your temptation to express your bias. Fourth you better focus on Abrahimic religions and left these Indian topics to Indians as we Indians are more knowledgeable about our culture and faith. Don't use wikipedia as a platform to push your Abrahimic POV on others. So I'm reverting the changes and unlike you, I'm notifying you in advance and if you have any issue with this then you can definitely discuss this on talk page Hrihr ( talk) 18:03, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
Reply by JJ: Thanks for your response. Regarding your arguments:
1. Commonname:
There has been previous concencus for the deletion of "Dharmic" pages and categories:
The issue has also been extensiveley discussed at Talk:Indian religions, previously "Dharmic religions":
2. References: WP:RS:
3. Good faith: calling my edits an expression of my "bias" - fill this in yourself.
4. Nationality: Wikipedia is based on WP:RS, not on nationality. Your "advice" is the kind of behavior which is not toelrated here at Wikipedia.
Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 20:11, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
After a short night's sleep, and thinking over your response, here's a lomger response from me:
Best regards, and thanks again for your extensive response, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:25, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
Brother, i agree if we include the instances for every saint who went into samadhi, the page will become endless. But i have specifically shortlisted only the instances from the recent history and that too related to the very prominent saints (i dont see more that 5-7 such instances in the recent history even if someone else adds to the article). The main idea before adding these instances is that there is hardly any information available on the physical aspect of samadhi even this article talks only in terms of consciousness. Moreover there are a lot of myths related to samadhi that can only be dispelled by quoting some real examples like samadhi can be while talking (e.g. Lahiri Mahasaya), it can be while standing, moving (e.g. ramkrishna & chaitanya), biological processes may switch off & the body may require extensive care (e.g. ramkrishna). I do not feel adding real life incidents to a concept will count to WP:UNDUE; i have also tried my best to maintain a neutral point of view by quoting the original text as far as possible. Kindly discuss the same on the article's talk page before removing it so that others can also share their opinion. UnusualExplorer ( talk) 02:00, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
First of all, it is surprising to see you getting heated up for almost no reason. Second thing is that nothing is going to happen about it. Best can be done is, the issue can be brought to WP:DRN, or RfC it usually takes about 14 days.
If you agree, all you have to do is edit out your warnings, I will obviously do the same, thanks. Bladesmulti ( talk) 07:55, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Will look tomorrow. Where did the other Admin tell you to contact him? I couldn't find the post. Dougweller ( talk) 20:53, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua Jonathan,
As suggested by Bishonen, I would formally like to request you to review the article on Bengali Kayastha. Thanks. Ekdalian ( talk) 09:07, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
I've added some pieces of info, and reshuffled Sharma. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:00, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
For your copyediting works in Indian caste related articles, you get this barnstar. Tito☸ Dutta 05:15, 16 May 2014 (UTC) |
You mean of the elections? I thought of it this morning. Hope that wisdom prevails... Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:29, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Couple of months ago, some editor wrote something like "In five months the Indian Government will form a team of specialists, and correct the info at Wikipedia". It feels like returning to the Cold War: "keep on rocking in the free world". I'd never thought, when I was younger, that I would turn up here, defending the freedom of thought and reliable sources. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:39, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
The statement "Rajus claim kshatriya status" is defendable; the statement "Rajus claim kshatriya status" is not defendable. What? -- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 08:05, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Yes, it is better, isn't it? [30] Hafspajen ( talk) 12:16, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Can you please look the page of Ambedkar? A user removed the Table (List of Books) from the page. Theredpenofdoom is a user who is constantly reverting the changes made by other users. Metta
Can you please look the page of B.R. Ambedkar? A user removed the Table (List of Books) from the page. Theredpenofdoom is a user who is constantly reverting the changes made by other users. Metta 123.239.118.255 ( talk) 22:13, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Joshua, is Apostle Paul really there according to ... [31]? But nothing I know about. Hafspajen ( talk) 01:12, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Sigh, you missed all the fun. Just look at the edit history... Paul the Apostle see : Revision history Hafspajen ( talk) 05:44, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
This is worse. I could not ignore a slow edit war on [Buddhist chant] and realized that one editor is systematically adding Ambedkar related pictures/Captions to seemingly unrelated articles like seat, gesture, gate etc. JimRenge ( talk) 21:51, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello JJ, sorry to answer you late on this, i didn't see your remark on my signature in the first place. Well, I don't know what to say: on my computer it looks fine... Best, - TwoHorned User_talk:TwoHorned 15:44, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Joshua brother ... Accesstoinsight isn't a primary source. Its the only website which gives the Buddhist scriptures. I advise you to read the copyright claim here. I saw from your profile page that your interest is in Buddhism. So don't you know the edits I did was correct? I advise you to kindly recheck my edits ...and atleast rvert the edit which I did on God in Buddhism and Buddha in Hinduism;
And many of my edits were not in violation. Other references were also from this website and you call a primary source? Please recheck your claim and give a response. Stalkford ( talk) 12:33, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Why don't you give the opinion of the Buddhists on that article. Its first of all necessary. or otherwise it will go wrong message to the people that Buddha is a God. Also give atleast a sentence that Buddha himself rejected that he was not any god. you can quote from dona sutta and other buddhist monks Even Dalai lama says " Buddha is just the teacher, you are your own master." If you continue doing like this. It won't be healthy. I beg and request from you. Stalkford ( talk) 13:50, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Gautama Buddha in Hinduism and God in Buddhism. The sources were not primary at all. Infact many other articles are taken from what you call a a primary source. Stalkford ( talk) 14:30, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Stalkford "forgot" to inform you. JimRenge ( talk) 15:06, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
There are numerous issues I have with this page. Firstly, there are a couple of discrepancies on the page - it has 2 different dates for Satyananda starting the International Yoga Fellowship (1956 and 1963) - this organisation does nothing that I am aware of, so why is it there anyway - Secondly is the Bihar School of Yoga - was it 1963 or 1964 when it started? Thirdly, most of the statements on the page are sourced from Satyananda's own books about himself and there is no-one alive to prove or disprove them. Members of his Ashram support his statements and continually re-publish them. Reports of several members of Sivananda's Divine Life Society who knew Satyananda there (not published) say other things. The material on sexual assault can be divided into 2. That of Swami Akhandananda in Australia went through the courts so there will be records. Allegations against Sw Satyananda and others remains statements by individuals that has not been before courts or been published. What should be left in and what removed? Sanatan Saraswati 203.171.95.168 ( talk) 05:11, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
For watching my back. Funny couple of days. The guy who took me to ANI is a pain - new editor with 64 edits who thinks he knows it all (unless he's a sock, which is possible and ironic if he is). The IP just seems to be another denier. Dougweller ( talk) 13:46, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Namaskaram ,hi Joshua how are you?i hope you are fine as like ever.:).could you participate with the below talk page Discussion called [Tenali Ramakrishna. As i noticed , Tenali Ramakrishna title which is not opt for that article. Discussion open.Please participate .Thank you. Eshwar.om Talk tome 18:39, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua, with regards to the Advaita-vedanta template, although neo-Advaita partly came out of Papaji's teachings, he himself is of Ramana's time, and I don't believe should be grouped (in this instance) with with Gangaji and co. Just like Raphael wouldn't be grouped with the pre-raphaelite movement. Raphael may have had an influence on their philosophy and this should of course be duly noted in places, but he himself was nonetheless a renaissance painter and should therefore be grouped with Da Vinci, Botticelli and co. Best, Bodhadeepika ( talk) 08:24, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
I get very few of those! I think you may be rather more deserving one than I am given your sustained efforts. Paul B ( talk) 12:00, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello Adorable Joshua, Your recents edits have been reverted by me. I want to inform you something about him.
First Law minister of India - Dr.Ambedkar . (Is Indian Lawyer a better name?) It should be Jurist. Father of Indian Constitution (Largest Indian Democracy) - Dr. Ambedkar . (Is this line to be removed?) Philosopher - He wrote several books on Buddhism such as Buddha or Karl Marx, Buddha and his Dhamma etc., Riddles in Hinduism etc. (Words were removed)
Barack Obama praised him when he came to India. Noble Prize Winner Amartya Sen calls him his father in Economics. (Economist) The Table concering his writings and speeches were removed without any proper justification. Please dont revert those changes. Why am I in trouble as you mentioned? Your's sincerely. Sid Siddheart ( talk) 19:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
By the way . Wow..You are a Buddhist...I am very happy to know that but please edit Dr.Ambedkar page care fully.. you are removing his tables of writings. My salutation for you by the way. :) Siddheart ( talk) 20:43, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I've added a section in the talk pages defending my changes to the lead. All my changes are referenced and I hope after consideration you may change your mind, or at least we can have a healthy discussion on the talk page about improvements. Thanks! 22:45, 2 June 2014 user:Bhny
Hello Joshua -- I just wondered if you would take a look at the latest edit to Fire temple. An editor removed a picture with no explanation. CorinneSD ( talk) 21:54, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Hello Joshua -- I am very new to Wikipedia. I am learning. It is interesting. Thanks for your help.
TraceyWonder ( talk) 05:48, 3 June 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks! You're welcome. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:54, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Redtigeryx is alone rejecting for months that both Krishna, Balarama are considered as 8th avatar and Krishna/Buddha are also considered as 9th avatar.
So I had reverted back to your version. Redtigeryx hasn't provided a single reason to remove it from list, other than reverting. Bladesmulti ( talk) 09:02, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, the current version looks good, but I think the general list should precede regional variations. Any suggestions for organisation? -- Redtigerxyz Talk 13:56, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
[According to vayu purana] | According to Matsya purana | According to
1. ----------------------------------- | 1.
2. ------------------------------------ | 2.
3.------------------------------------ | 3.
Any suggestion? Bladesmulti ( talk) 01:41, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
I have reverted your reversion of my edits to "Indra's net". I repeat what I have written previously: The number of "citation needed" warning markers is an unnecessary distraction to the reader. I cannot be expected to receive criticism from an "editor" who writes (on this talk page) "You'r [sic] welcome", "Poonja seems to have been a great stimulans [sic]", "I aprreciate [sic]", "than [sic] that should be respected", and "thnaks [sic] for the message". Writtenright ( talk) 16:41, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
I have reverted your reversion of my edits to " Indra's net". I hold fast to my previous position that the number of "citation needed" warning markers is unnecessary and a great distraction to the reader.
I cannot be expected to take seriously criticism from an "editor" who can post (on this talk page) such things as "You'r [sic] welcome", "Poonja seems to have been a great stimulans [sic]", "I aprreciate [sic]", "than [sic] that should be respected", and "thnaks [sic] for the message".
Well, no "thnaks" for your "hlep" (or is it "help"?) with your "edting" on the "Idnra's nte" page. Writtenright ( talk) 16:41, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
JimRenge ( talk) 08:19, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:56, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | ||
For taking the time to review all the claims on the talkpage of Koenraad Elst. Calypsomusic ( talk) 09:48, 6 June 2014 (UTC) |
Does it translate: Devadatta kills (or incites) the elephant? I need it for an image caption. Nice language JimRenge ( talk) 13:46, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks JimRenge ( talk) 14:20, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ground of Being (Dzogchen) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:51, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
I made a few changes, since you are mixing up different topics like sutra and Dzogchen, zen and Dzogchen etc. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 17:26, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Why are you sourcing with other wiki's? You know that is not proper right? VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 18:55, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
You should rename ground of being to simply "ground". Ground of being is a term I think originating with Herbert Guenther. However the Tibetan is a simple word "gzhi" and it simply translates to "ground". For example Sam van Schaik, a top academic, simply uses ground in his book "Approaching the Great Perfection." VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 06:27, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Use an academic book for your sourcing, such as "Approaching the Great Perfection" ( preview) by Sam van Schaik. It talks about a lot of topics including the ground. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 15:02, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Ground talk. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 16:04, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Schaik's book is 2004. Google shows 2013, but its wrong. I don't know how to change your sfn. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 21:26, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
What on earth is this? Hafspajen ( talk) 08:32, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Anyone who has lots of spare time, maybe you could seek out training to become qualified as a medium for the Nechung Oracle. 😊 -- Presearch ( talk) 21:22, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
You are becaming a DrMies. Well, OK, I make my first oracle pronunciation for you, Presearch: that Karmapa controversy is no controversy. It is balancing up the situation of the big Panchen Lama's disappearance, you know. Panchen Lama is dead, for sure. Now we have two Karmapas, and it is a way to preserve knowledge. How am I doing? Hafspajen ( talk) 10:16, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Greetings! I was searching for this tiny little subsection that I once ran into at the article Nirvana a long time ago somewhere last year. The subsection is called Samsara is Nirvana [32], and it was obviously removed for the total lack of sources. As I was googling up that very subsection, however, it seemed that there were quite many sources to support the things presented at that subsection (I haven' taken a closer look though). Therefore, I was wondering if you were interested in looking for some actual source material related to that section with me? :P Cheers mate! Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 19:46, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Could you give your opinion on Talk:Mindfulness#Merger proposal? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 16:16, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello Joshua . I just made the changes because I THOUGHT that the Article was missing something because you removed the names of Universities from the sentence. Sorry for that.
Can you please make this Edit yourself about His Holiness Dalai Lama on Dr.Ambedkar. http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/dalai-lama-ambedkar-spread-awareness-on-buddhism-in-india/article1472413.ece
I saw this Picture of His Holiness on Dalai Lama's website,. http://www.dalailama.com/gallery/album/0/310
Tibetan Buddhists carry the portrait of Ambedkar. http://www.reachladakh.com/mass-essay-writing-competition-on-123rd-birthday-of-dr-br/2344.html
I hope you can make a contribution. Atleast something can be added. Thanks. Siddheart ( talk) 13:14, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
His Holiness Dalai Lama quoted Dr.Ambedkar that he spread awareness about Dr.Ambedkar.I gave the various sources also. It seems you don't want to edit because you also reverted it. I came here seeking help from you as a friend but you never help and instead you reverted it. If you think there is no relevance about this Dalai Lama quote on Dr.Ambedkar then I congratulate you. Thanks. Have a nice day. May all beings be well and happy. 101.58.180.92 ( talk) 06:10, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Dear Joshua brother, Teach me something If I don't know. I came here as a friend. The first link is from a Newspaper Article. 2nd Link is from Dalai Lama's own website. Third Link is about Tibetan Buddhists who carry the portrait of Dr.Ambedkar on his birthday. Now from where else I can have a source? I was talking about first link. And if its a primary source (which I think is not) then why can't we add it? It has a relevance to Dr. Ambedkar's page. I am a big fan of His Holiness because I like when he laughs . It seems like that Laughing Buddha is in-front of me. Will you please help me? Your's Siddheart 115.185.80.137 ( talk) 11:56, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
I quoted from The Hindu which is a newspaper and is not a primary source. Will you please add it brother? 115.185.80.137 ( talk) 13:01, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Dear Joshua brother, This quote is relevant because it is quoted by His Holiness Dalai Lama on Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. That's why it is relevant. Can you edit it? If you can't edit it then will you please allow me to edit because when I edit it you revert it. I am asking this seriously and the quote is from a Newspaper The Hindu and why can't it be edited. Why I am in trouble ? You always say it.I am just giving an Information. User:Joshua Jonathan Thanks User:Siddheart 115.249.44.252 ( talk) 18:06, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
I didn't knew that it is like that. I was just answering to you. I didn't say Ambedkar is Important to Tibetan Buddhists. Well Still you are my friend. Happy editing. Thanks. 115.249.44.252 ( talk) 06:52, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Joshua, Wikipedia 'turiya' is not accurate. Please note turiya is not synonymous with samadhi. Thank you, sir. My e-mail is ddotsmith009@gmail.com if u need clarification. Svenakira1 17:28, 21 June 2014
Shouldn't you organize the page into sutric Buddha Nature (for example the Tathāgatagarbha sūtras) and tantric Buddha Nature (for example Mahamudra)? There are 2 Buddha Natures. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 01:32, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Copied to Talk:Buddha-nature#Buddha Nature page; to be continued there
Hi! I noticed that the Three pillars of Zen by Philip Kapleau is being used as a source at Buddha-nature. I was wondering, how reliable account about Hakuun Yasutani's life the book really is, taking into consideration that Philip Kapleau never received a Dharma transmission and wasn't later even acknowledged by the Sanbo Kyodan school? For example it is said that (Sharf, Robert H. (1995-C), "Sanbokyodan. Zen and the Way of the New Religions", Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 1995 22/3-4) [33]:
Nevertheless, the dangers of defection and schism were not unknown, for just three years prior to Yasutani’s retirement his American disciple, Philip Kapleau, led his own af³liate group to secede from the Sanbõkyõdan. Kapleau’s training was, by Sanbõkyõdan standards, quite rigorous. As mentioned above, he spent almost three years (1953–1956) in the Hosshin-ji sõdõ under Harada prior to his training under Yasutani. He remained with Yasutani for about ten years, serving as translator in dokusan for Yasutani’s foreign students. He returned to America in 1965 and established a Zen Center in Rochester, New York, that was one of the first of its kind in America. Kapleau quickly set about adapting Yasutani’s Zen to the American scene: students wore Western dress and used English chants in the zendõ, they were given Western-sounding Buddhist names at ordinations, and they modified ceremonies and rituals to “accord with our Western traditions” (KAPLEAU 1979, p. 269). Apparently Kapleau took the Zen rhetoric he had been taught quite literally: he considered the outward forms of Zen mere upãya, to be modified in accord with the needs and abilities of his students. As long as he remained true to the experiential essence of Zen, the outward “cultural forms” were of little consequence. Yasutani, however, objected strongly to some of the reforms, notably to the use of an English translation of the Heart Sðtra in the zendõ. These and other factors led to a serious falling-out, and in 1967 Kapleau formally ended his relationship with Yasutani."
The assertions get even more severe, as we can see from here:
David Scates, an ex-student of the Rochester Zen Center, wrote to Yamada asking about Kapleau’s credentials. Yamada’s reply, dated 16 January 1986, included a blunt public statement to the effect that Kapleau never finished his kõans and never received inka. This was accompanied by a long letter to Scates that detailed Kapleau’s inadequacies and lack of training, and even hinted that Kapleau may be guilty of fraud (Yamada suggests that Kapleau might be proffering a precept or kenshõ certificate as a document of transmission; since Kapleau’s Western students know no Japanese, they supposedly would not know the difference)e
The most critical blow against Kapleau, however, can be found here (Lachs, Stuart (2006 / 2008), "The Zen Master in America: Dressing the Donkey with Bells and Scarves", Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Religion, Washington D.C., Nov. 18, 2006 / The International Association of Buddhist Studies Congress, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, June 24, 2008) [34]:
In 1997 Ji’un Kubota roshi, Yamada’s successor as head of the Sanbokyodan sect, answered an enquiry from a Polish Zen group asking about Kapleau’s credentials. He replied that Kapleau did not finish his training, claiming that Kapleau’s fame for the Three Pillars of Zen was undeserved because he [Kubota] and Yamada roshi had translated “all” of the work in the book. He added that Kapleau “was not able to read Japanese” and only made their translation “more understandable” to native English readers. He remarked that Kapleau was arrogant and proud and that he treated Yasutani “abusively and impolitely.” He then proclaimed, “He [Kapleau] is no more a Zen man. His teaching is no more Buddhist Zen but only his own philosophy.”
.
What do you think? =P Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 14:09, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Copied to Talk:Buddha-nature#Philip Kapleau as a source; to be continued there
Sorry, I restored the wrong version. Do you think 101.57.90.252 is a SP of Siddheart? JimRenge ( talk) 08:08, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Afternoon tea ... for you. Have a cake too, Chocolate Pecan Tarts on baking sheet. Hafspajen ( talk) 13:41, 26 June 2014 (UTC) |
Since most of us who were active on the India page aren't very active now, some of the same talk page posts and content requests are getting restarted. You may want to look at the archives. Also, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Realhistorybuff/Archive. cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 05:16, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Is this our friend, going IP, traveling around? Looks like it is editing much the very same topics like him... (and - Is this true?) Hafspajen ( talk) 09:55, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Maybe not. Can you check out if it is a copy-thing. In that case it needs to be rewritten. My first rection was that someone tries to blow up this holy-fool thing about Rasputin again. And if it IS copyvio, one can simply reword it, write it in a different way. -You had good sources, didn't you? - and I know only one person who is targeting Rasputin like this, with this foxterrier-like stubborness. Did it again, that one. Hafspajen ( talk) 17:03, 2 July 2014 (UTC) Ha, LOOK at this... Hafspajen ( talk) 19:52, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
See this innovative test of my sense of humour. JimRenge ( talk) 14:06, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Can you please take a look at Dorje Shugden Controversy and Dorje Shugden? VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 18:33, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Also please take a look at hatha yoga. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 19:39, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
I updated the Saiva flowchart that I saw floating around on a couple of pages. Please see it here. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 18:07, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
The current Vedic page is full of historical errors such as the inclusion of the Aryan Invasion theory, which was propagated by the British to divide and conquer India by causing strife between the various castes (where there was little to none). Similar theories have been used such as the Hutu-Tutsi origin, and have led to genocide in Rwanda. Please understand that teaching false theories such as this leads to ignorance in academia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JiggerJones ( talk • contribs) 01:50, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Aren't they in the article anyway? Dougweller ( talk) 10:36, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Joshua, I thought you might be interested in this. Bishonen | talk 13:27, 7 July 2014 (UTC).
I am astounded to see no mention of Maratha Empire in the History section of India. I, as a student of History, consider it to be a distortion of history.It was mainly the Marathas who destroyed the Mughals and the most influential power in the subcontinent before the Britishers properly established themselves in the early 19th century was the Marathas.There should be at least 2-3 lines on the Maratha Empire in the history section between the Mughals and the EIC. I am adding just one common line there. Please see it and if needed make some additions. Even, History of India page makes it clear but I do not know what happened to India page. I waited in the talk page there for 60 hours but there was no reply. Thank You. Ghatus ( talk) 08:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC) Copied to Talk:India#Maratha Empire
The sentence you copied over from History of India is a copyvio from EB. Unfortunately the History of India article seems to have a lot of these, we will need to clean that up. You might want to rephrase this one. cheers. — Spaceman Spiff
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Dzogchen may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s and 2 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:32, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mindstream may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:44, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Joshua, could you please look at the latest edits at the Celibacy. They messed up the lead, so they can't stay where they are now, but if it is useful, we can move them to the appropiate sections. Hafspajen ( talk) 06:59, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
OK. Thanks. Hafspajen ( talk) 07:20, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Padmasambhava is 99% fictional and Tonpa Shenrab Miwoche is 100% fictional. See Sam van Schaik's "Tibet: A History", Ronald Davidson's "Tibetan Renaissance" and David Germano's "Funerary Transformation of the Great Perfection". Basically, you are filling the articles with very late mythologies, not actual history. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 19:46, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:57, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
how are you?i hope your fine.Again user Redtigerxyz started his journey to destroy all my edits.almost more than 10 pages of my edits correpted by single day itself.I am helpless.Please if you have time kindly look on that.thank you! Eshwar.om Talk tome 19:34, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Joshua Jonathan, for your comments. I know you are always fair, so I have tried to make the heading of that particular subsection a little more balanced. As you are aware, there has been a debate raging for centuries as to whether Buddha Nature is essence or potential - or both. I think you will agree that in view of this contention it is best to cover both aspects and reflect that in the subsection heading. Thanks again for your input. Best wishes to you. From Suddha ( talk) 12:02, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
There is no need for 3 Atman articles: Atman (Buddhism), Ātman (Jainism) and Atman (Hinduism). If you look at Sanskrit dictionaries, there is just 1 entry for words, not 3 different entries. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 21:08, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
The problem is that Neoadvaitins accuse each other of being Neoadvaitins, while denying that they themselves are Neoadvaitins. And then they set up websites proclaiming that they are the real Advaitins, while everyone else are Neoadvaitins. Most of this article is made of such non-RS sources for example Dennis Waite and James Swartz. Dennis Waite, James Swartz etc. have no qualifications and are not RS. I would urge you to clean the article of this junk. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 04:49, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Off topic, but to address what you frequently elude to. In Mahamudra, one receives initiation. Then one recognizes the fourth time and the conceptualizing mind. Once one definitely recognizes, one simply can relax in the knowledge. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 17:00, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
So if I disagree with a scholar, I can just edit and revise their translation? VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 18:12, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Copied to Talk:Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra#Tony Page's translation
@ user:Joshua Jonatan, don't you think we have the same problem with using Philip Kapleau as a source, like discussed here [36]? He is not a Buddhist scholar nor a linguist, and he is even discredited by the current of Sanbokyodan. What do you think? =P Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 19:55, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me remind about talkpage of Dr.Ambedkar. It is not good for someone to define Ambedkar in usually 3 words. There should be atleast 4 words. There are not 6 words which can be called a Laundry list but rather 4 words. Will you shake a hand on this? Akhil Bharathan ( talk) 13:11, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Thankyou Joshua for your condolences. I like well-wishers like you. Many Dalits are killed brutally, raped and tortured just because they belonged to the lowest category of caste system. It happened with my own family too. Buddha was the onewho was against caste system and fought against it. Read Assalyana sutta, Aggana Sutta, Vasala Sutta etc to know about Buddha's view on caste system. In Dhammachakkapavvataana sutta (turning of wheel) Buddha said to not to indulge oneself in extreme sensual pleasures OR self mortification(just like some jains do). So you are right my friend. His Holliness Dalai Lama said " You are your own master, Buddha's duty is just to show you the way". Recently Dalai L ama was also in headlinesdue to some followers of Dorje Shudjen. I am again sorry If I hurted you whether intentionally or unintentionally. I saw your recent contributions and I guess you are a Vajrayana Buddhist. With Karuna, Metta and Mudita. Akhil Bharathan ( talk) 15:55, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
What do you mean?? Akhil Bharathan ( talk) 17:32, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
The Dorje Shugden issue is completely manufactured by the British group New Kadampa Tradition. This same group has been controlling Wikipedia since 2007. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 17:32, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Well I actually saw this video > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIjCDKKvcuI. Akhil Bharathan ( talk) 17:54, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
I understood what you say. I like His Holiness Dalai lama for his behavior friend. He is a great soul on earth. Akhil Bharathan ( talk) 17:59, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Please see here. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 21:53, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:53, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi! I thought you might be interested in this view on icchantikas by Stephen Hodge: "It is at this phase of textual development that the icchantikas make their appearance, a term first used to denote the many this-worldly monks leading settled lives. It was then extended and worsened in its connotations to include all those who have destroyed any chance of liberation in themselves. It is interesting to see development of historical conceptions between different religions - even such distant as Buddhism and Christianity. For example the development of the concept of Hell in Christianity compared to the Buddhist view of icchantikas - from the salvific point of view of course. :P Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 18:33, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
I addressed some issues on the Dorje Shugden Controversy page, mostly raised by CFynn, including the previous deletion of academic material and the need to summarize the academic views on the subject. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 16:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
What is the difference between your Sources section and Further Reading and References? VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 05:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! Is Bultrini's "The Dalai Lama and the King Demon" a reliable source? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:29, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jonathan
Sometimes different people have different views about what is "the truth" about a controversial subject like this (particularly if they are in any way connected with the subject) and so will try to edit an article so that it more reflects what they view as the "truth" or the "real facts". In doing so they will often claim that they are simply trying to make the article "more balanced" or "neutral" - which they usually sincerely believe they are. However Wikipedia is not about getting to "the truth" (See: [[Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth[]). Generally Wikipedia articles should reflect the balance of current academic opinion on a subject - whether that academic opinion coincides what you or I, or religious believers, consider to be the truth or not. We may not agree with what respected academics like Thurman or very experienced and professional investigative reporters like Bultrini say - but they are widely acknowledged in their respective fields so Wikipedia counts them as very good sources. If other, equally good, sources disagree with their opinion then of course those sources should be used in the article as well. Cheers.
Chris Fynn (
talk) 10:03, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jonathan - Please respect the {{In use}} template when the message is displayed for a whole article or for a section. Next time, whenever you ate actively editing an article I suggest you use it to avoid edit conflicts. Meanwhile please hold back from this article while the message is displayed. You can make whatever changes you want to once that message is gone. Chris Fynn ( talk) 09:34, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Editing style (selecting, arranging and commenting quotes from religious texts without providing secondary RS which provide context, critical analysis and multiple points of view) and content of this edit reminds me of another user. I fear he might be a reincarnation looking for trouble. Some time ago I read on top of the talk page of davidwr (January 22, 2014): "People are more important than Wikipedia.". I agree with this insight and try hard to avoid hurting users, whose edits or behaviour appear to be disruptive. I hope he will spare us the discussion at the drama board. JimRenge ( talk) 15:07, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Within "Note 1" it shows a reference with page number. But "Note 3" doesn't. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 23:38, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Please see the other Dorje Shugden page. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 04:27, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
( talk page stalker) Keep up the good work that you are doing! Oh, and enjoy your holidays! =) Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 15:14, 30 July 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks - for the Barnstar, and for the good holiday-wishes! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 16:22, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
etc. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 01:07, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua Jonathan
I see you were one of the last people to edit the Eight Consciousnesses article. I have added a list of some useful sources to the talk page of that article - if anyone wants to improve it (might be a bit of a relief from Shugden). In view of other articles you have been editing recently, this one in particular might interest you: A Comparison of Alaya-vijñāna in Yogacara and Dzogchen.
I think Ālayavijñāna should probably have its own separate article as it is one of the key concepts in Buddhist thought.
- Chris Fynn ( talk) 11:44, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Dorje Shugden controversy, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Chris Fynn ( talk) 19:25, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Can you review my recent edits to Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen. Thanks. Chris Fynn ( talk) 22:38, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Cleaned up Yellow Book section. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 16:03, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
For example, see the Barnett quote in the NKT/WSS section. Its completely unintelligible. Can I fix the various errors you introduced into the article? VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 06:35, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Kjangdom/Audrey37 ( same person and director of the ISC) deleted half the article. Please work off this revision, where I use your expanded intro. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 15:46, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
A merge would bring stability. You are free to oppose, but I don't think its in the best interest. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 05:07, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
There is a derogatory content by self styled editor Sitush I already tried contacting your volunteers but they refused to help. Sitush May be a hard working genius in your eyes but it does not give him full right to assault anyone please ask him to stop that. Please find the issues below which I discussed with your team
Insulting /Derogatry content on JAT people page P PC to info-en-v 3 days agoDetails Sir/Madam,
I would like to bring to your notice the derogatry content on Jat people page which is clearly aimed at insulting the community.
In the introduction: the intoduction starts with term 'non elite' and 'backward caste' so as to give readers as impression of a lower community. The Jats won majority of medals for India in recent olympics, commonwealth games and they are present in every sphere of life- from doctors, engineers, sports( Sushil kumar, virender sehwagvijender singh, saina nehwal). Acting(Ranbir hooda. mallika sherawat, dharmender), Politics, building( DLF) , Army(including present army chief)so why the negative aspects are highlighted?
In the Varna status only based on fiction of Uma Bharti it is written: Uma Chakravarti reports that the varna status of the Jats improved over time, with the Jats starting in the untouchable/chandala varna during the eighth century, changing to shudra status by the 11th century, which is offensive , without evidence.
Whenever I tried to edit the page by highlighting achievements of Jats in sports, army , positive social customs they have been deleted.
It is a clear assault on the community by other caste hindus who think that the best way to exert superiority of there caste is to highlight negative aspects of Jats. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Praveen3333 ( talk • contribs)
Today another user sent me a link to a discussion about whether overpopulation in India that was archived. If I were to start a discussion that provided sources and participate every now and then (I'm busy with other stuff) would you contribute to it? Regards-- Taeyebaar ( talk) 05:32, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
In case you wish to contribute to it on and off it's here. I'm going through some sources but am thin on time-- Taeyebaar ( talk) 04:25, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua,
I do not understand why you have reverted my recent edit and at the same time accused me of 'edit-warring'. You have also accused me of POV pushing, but I am merely including some pro-Shugden statements using, in my opinion, reliable sources. It is clear that the article gives far too much weight to the anti-Shugden view at the moment, which is something I am trying to address, and would encourage other editors to do the same. I do not accuse people of POV-pushing when they include anti-Shugden statements, and I would suggest you refrain from this unecessary name-calling - "POV-pushing", "edit-warring". It seems a little inflammatory and over the top.
Anyway, just the record, I am keen to improve this article, and I think the edits I made did improve it. It is in no-one's interst that the article is so heavily anti-Shugden at the moment. I think we need to work together to improve this article. You seem like a sane person and I would be happy to work with you and other editors in a constructive way.
All the best, Audrey37 ( talk) 13:46, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Cool. I'll check out Kay, and take it from there. All the best. Audrey37 ( talk) 20:40, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:BLP unreliable sources must be removed immediately from biographies of living persons. Can you please rewrite this section at the 14th Dalai Lama page? The current section contains the Bernis PDF, which must be removed immediately. CFynn and I also discussed the Bernis PDF here. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 20:16, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I want to draw your attention to History of India Page (Before 1947). The opening phrase of the introductory line of the page was changed from “history of India” to “history of the Indian sub-continent” yesterday. I undid it to the previous form. But, it was changed by a user again. I do not intend to go into an edit war with him. Hence, I am informing you to look into the matter.
This is a classic or typical case of confusing “India”, a cultural and geographical entity ( Sindu>Hindu>Indus>India) with the modern nation-state of “Republic of India” which came in being into 1947. Before 1947, “India” was a term used to denote a cultural and geographical entity like “Arabia”. The concept of “Indian Sub-continent” is as modern as the concept of the nation state of “Republic of India”. Both of the terms did not exist 2000 years or 5000 years ago. Past can not be judged by present realities.
Again, a clarification is given on the top of the page that this is not about the “Republic of India”, but on “India” before 1947. One can notice the same sort of misconception regarding the birth place of Lord Buddha without realizing that both “Republic of India” and “Republic of Nepal” did not exist 2500 years ago. Hence, Buddhism is called an "Indian Religion", not a "Nepalese Religion".
BTW, One can not give the reason of "Redirection" as an excuse to change history.Clarification is already given on the top of the page for the purpose.
I hope I have made you understand my point. Please look into it. Thank you. Ghatus ( talk) 04:45, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for looking into the matter. But, is there now any need for clarification on the top of the page as the introductory sentence starts now with the phrase "history of the Indian sub-continent" instead of "history of India"? Isn't it needless repetition? Shouldn't then the clarification be removed as the matter is already cleared below??? Since clarification is already made now,I have moved the History of Pakistan and History of Bangladesh link to the "See Also" section.History of RoI was already moved. Ghatus ( talk) 08:19, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
What are you talking about VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 06:20, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
I can't even access the WSS-site! It's blocked by Web of Trust! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:29, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
There are 2 Buddha Natures. When you say Buddha Nature you are probably referring to sutric Buddha Nature of the Tathāgatagarbha Sūtras. When I say Buddha Nature I generally refer to tantric Buddha Nature of Mahamudra etc., which is merely the nature of mind. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 23:04, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
@ Jayaguru-Shishya:Buddhist tantra (Vajrayana) is stuff like Kalachakra Tantra, Cakrasamvara Tantra, Hevajra Tantra etc. with associated commentaries. Also includes dohas and terma. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 21:42, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
I am not sure I agree with the approriateness of including living people in this category. People are not controversies. If they are involved, they'll be mentioned in the articles about the dispute. Yworo ( talk) 20:34, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Joshua Jonathan. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 00:12, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
I may be wrong or may not be, but When did Buddha or Buddhism promote the concept of God? Buddha left the question on God extremely vague and refused to accept a Supreme Creator. In early Buddhism there was no concept of God before they got split in two main branches much later. At the time of Ashoka, there was no GOD in Buddhism, forget about having "Gods". Later, some Devas and Supernatural Beings came, but that's a different issue. BTW, I would like to have your response on this. Thank you. Ghatus ( talk) 13:29, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
The highest stage of Buddhism is "Moksha/ Nirvana" or "Emancipation". After "Moksha", no one can re-born.Even the stories of Jataka ( The "alleged" reincarnations of Lord Buddha) are highly contested and go against the teachings of Lord Buddha. Lord Buddha denounced ignorance and superstitions, hence the stories of mythology or cosmology or "may be born" have no place in Buddhism, surely not at the time of Ashoka in the 3rd century BCE. BTW, loved talking to you. With best wishes, Ghatus ( talk) 16:58, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, this is about edits, re-edits and reversals in Yoga article. You seem to have strong opinion regarding pre-Buddhist Nikayas sources about origins of yoga. Your description “speculative” seems to be a biased approach that labels material evidence to fit that label. ‘Speculative’ is rather a theoretical realm, where people argue about semantics and such, but here we’re talking about something that you can see and possibly touch. So, what is speculative here? You need to explain that before arbitrarily removing some description. Also, I might point out there’s growing number of commentators who indeed support the view that Pashupati seals testify to yoga’s origins. It’s not a certainty but a possibility that needs to be mention for the sake of completeness. Thanks. Pradeepwb. (Pradeepwb) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pradeepwb ( talk • contribs) 16:35, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
It might be helpful to read this article that outlines the views and opinions regarding this subject: "3 Ways to View the Ancient History of Yoga" Bjonnes, Ramesh. "3 Ways to View the Ancient History of Yoga". Elephan Journal. Retrieved Sep 2, 2014. (Pradeepwb 17:00, 2 September 2014 (UTC))
Copied to Talk:Yoga#Pashupati seal. To be continued there.
On their respective pages, I would define Hinduism and Buddhism as Dharmas, not religions. VictoriaGrayson Talk 17:54, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Don't know if you would still consider Bladesmulti to be your mentee, but if you do, I would really appreciate it if you weighed in here. Blades has been insisting that a journal published by the university of Florence is "an SPS with an anti-agenda." [40]. The discussion was awful enough without him, but he was invited there two days ago, and proceeded to delete the source that the entire discussion was based off of. If you cannot be bothered with him anymore, or if you do not have the time, I understand. Regards, Vanamonde93 ( talk) 01:29, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Have you read Buddhism in Vietnam? Pretty informative, although it may require some templates and more information about current situation. Bladesmulti ( talk) 05:56, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
There was an entry for a book on Hinduism which was removed with comment "Removed non-scholarly work".
Thanks, Gurudutt ( talk) 09:46, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
The simple question is: why this book, and why not one of the thousands of other books? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 12:24, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
@ Guruduttmallapur: I have objected to books written by the Dalai Lama and other modern lamas. So your analogy up above doesn't make sense. VictoriaGrayson Talk 17:28, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
This Q came to me from ABISY page but is generic. Is Times of India, Hindustan Times, The Hindu not 'published' sources. IMHO, They are available on web too just like other publications. The [web #] super-scripts looks like a distraction. I haven't observed it on other articles also, is there alternative ways? Thank you. -- AmritasyaPutra✍ 14:13, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diplomacy | ||
Barnstar of Diplomacy for your help in resolving disputes on Akhil Bharatiya Itihas Sankalan Yojana. Thank you. AmritasyaPutra✍ 01:47, 11 September 2014 (UTC) |
Thank you very much for the barnstar! I'm really happy that my interference is appreciated. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:04, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for all your help there, especially in reinstating the text that our over-zealous friend blanked. In any case, I suspect that this particular question got a little drowned on the talk, so I'm asking it here again; is there a reason you removed the reference to OIT, after drawing attention to it yourself? Cheers, Vanamonde93 ( talk) 21:00, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Please do not place people, especially living people, in this category. A person is not a controversy. They may be controversial, but we don't call this out by placing them in a category for controversies. If the controversy is notable, then an article should be written on the controversy. But we don't place people in such categories. Thank you. Yworo ( talk) 04:10, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi JJ, what is the way forward if I believe some editor(s) is consistently trying to be unfriendly (you can substitute a stronger adjective) on talk pages... follows my edits consistently, repeatedly gets into edit war and the argument is let the new disputed content stay and let us discuss (refuse to follow BRD every single time). What are my options? I seriously dislike ANI and 'complaining', I want to stay limited to content discussion. -- AmritasyaPutra T 15:12, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
appear to have been rev-deleted, but not completely; you can still see them looking through the history (which I did because your talk is on my watchlist). Vanamonde93 ( talk) 15:53, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
-- AmritasyaPutra T 04:34, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi JJ, could you take a look at this talk page discussion, I have given the exact diff I am talking about and expressed my concernt explicity with the policy I am referring to directly linked there. I think I have made my objection clear, could you comment wethere I have not been sufficiently clear and should add any other detail(s): Talk page link. -- AmritasyaPutra T 05:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
A mentorship is a good idea, but it's also a lot of work. But it's praisable that you ask for it. How about this: when needed, you ask me for advice, and I'll see what I can do. I'll also keep an eye once and a while on your edits. Is that okay? I'll give feedback on content, interaction with other users, and Wiki-policies. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Kalakannija. Please be so kind not to insert the Nibbedhika sutra-quote all over the place. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:42, 23 September 2014 (UTC) who cares? Kalakannija ( talk) 19:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Greetings Jonathan! I know that you are fond of the {{sfn}} tags for sources, but is it that you can't include a URL with those? Honestly, I have no idea how to use those ones. xP I'd like to add two Google books sources to Mindfulness#Buddhism. Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 13:49, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=User_talk:Joshua_Jonathan/Archive_2014#Primary_source.3F There was one more link, where JimRinge had also said that we cannot use this website as a source. Bladesmulti ( talk) 14:41, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
You probably heard of this fracas already, but does this seem like a reliable source to you? The language screems POV at me, even from just the blurb. Possibly barely acceptable for a statement about an event, certainly nothing else. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 05:09, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Oh please, step back, both of you. I'll have a longer look later today, and I'll read the mail(s). Please be so kind, both of you, to hold back for a while. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:46, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jonathan, if you have a chance, I would be interested in your opinion on this discussion on the the Karma talk page: Talk:Karma#Problem_with_recent_section_reordering
Best regards, Dorje108 ( talk) 19:15, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Like the heading says. Regards, Vanamonde93 ( talk) 01:23, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Template:Modern Indian religions writers has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. §§ Dharmadhyaksha§§ { T/ C} 06:42, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
I am not, I am only concerned about India Bhishek ( talk) 14:58, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
I think that would be from the oldest article of Glowalkar which was rejected and disowned officially in press by RSS but few keep using it selectively. I would have all earlier prints too (I have access to physical libraries that hols old books, if you want I can scan and send, I have worked in digitisation). :-) -- AmritasyaPutra T 07:51, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Note also the clarification that I put in [44], sourced from Jaffrelot, none less. I was hoping that some RSS person might give me a barnstar for it some day, but I am not holding my breath! Kautilya3 ( talk) 18:03, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
You reverted, reintroducing "Swami". You should be aware that this has previously discussed here in regards the move which corrected the article title. Please reconsider. An edit war would not be productive. LeadSongDog come howl! 07:24, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Copied to Talk:Vivekananda#Swami. To be continued there.
Not really incorrect. Searching about way of life, there's higher generalization about Buddhism. You can add way of life, anywhere on first paragraph and probably last line? Bladesmulti ( talk) 14:50, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
The Indian Barnstar of National Merit | ||
I am truly feeling honored to give you this barnstar. Thanks for "everything" you have done to improve WikiProject India | ||
this WikiAward was given to Joshua Jonathan by Tito☸ Dutta on 03:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC) |
Sincere thanks for this Barnstar. I'm really moved that my contributions are being appreciated, not just for the good of India and the need to live together with so many different groups, but also given the resistance those contributions have also met. Thank you, very much! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:13, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
That editor has a long history of copyvio problems, and one of his sources, [48], is a forum full of copyvio - added by "arun.vr". Dougweller ( talk) 16:08, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Jonathan, I am dumbfounded by your recent edits to the Four Noble Truths. Don't you think it is appropriate to discuss changes of this magnitude on the talk page before making these types of edit? Needless to say, I don't agree with your changes. Dorje108 ( talk) 00:42, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
You may try leaving me a message on your/my talk page or mentor page, before blanking content on my user page. The words were not full username nor linked. You also know it is not for nothing and this has a source. It is not in sarcasm if you presumed so, it is sincere even if you do not believe and no speculation is needed either because it is not a discussion. It is a strong message. Do you think backing out of three articles is not a good gesture? You yourself congratulated me for the neutral and dispassionate way I put my argument recently and also left it to them, I took the first step back each time. Is five out of five ani by the same people while they follow me from article to article a coincidence? You saw how "also known as" edit war happened by them. You also noted that the recent edit was also two sided and it is unfair to put entire blame on one person. How fair is it that I continuously defend old referenced content itself which shall stand deleted while at the same time I must bring argument against new content that shall remain in the article? No answer is expected. I need to resist back to the wiki-hounding that I perceive, I am not asking for any confirmation. I mean what I have written, there is no hidden thing and this is not a matter of discussion here, let it rest here. Thank you. -- AmritasyaPutra T 15:55, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
This table inserted (given below) is erroneous. We talked about it on my talk page. Sources are taken from those authors who are neither Historians nor experts on India History nor written on the periodization of Indian Histoy.All eminent Historians on Indian history like R. Thapar, R.C.Majumder, Eaton etc never gave such periodization. Such pharses like “Ascetic reformism”, “Late-Classical Hinduism”, “Islamic rule and "Sects of Hinduism", “Modern Hinduism” as periods of Indian History are bogus. Show me one such example given by ANY historian on Indian history in ANY historical work/research/book as the name of those as historial periods. You are trying to pass some phrases of Hinduism as The History of India. NO historian has done such periodization of Indian History. It is totally a fanciful creation.
The other table is detailed. Hence it was entered. Name it what you want-Time table of south Asia or Indian Sub-Continent. It does not matter. But, do not replace it with a bogus one. Ghatus ( talk) 07:24, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Likely to be controversial. VictoriaGrayson Talk 03:19, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Please see the Talk:India page. Since you are the last person to make a change there, am writing to you. Are you an admin? I request involvement of other wiki editors and admin to resolve points mentioned here. Can you help please? How do I go about it? Does this require going to dispute resolution? Please guide.-- Mayasutra [= No ||| Illusion =] ( talk) 00:22, 25 October 2014 (UTC)Mayasutra
Hello, please clarify this. Is it disallowed to mention verbatim what both OED and EB mention within ref tags as in this. Thanks. -- Mayasutra [= No ||| Illusion =] ( talk) 04:49, 25 October 2014 (UTC)Mayasutra
Joshua, Looking at this diff, I know that it apppears that additional citations to EB and OED are being added. But that is not the case: what is happening is that existing citations to those same refeernces (using the {{ sfn}} tag used throughout the article) are being duplicated (using the inconsistent and incomplete {{ cite}} template). Placinng this on your page, because the discussion on Talk:India is such a lengthy mess, and because the misunderstanding seems to be raising tempers between you and I, which is unwarranted (and, personally disheartening to me) given our long history of cooperative editing. Cheers. Abecedare ( talk) 06:01, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
This is not OED Abecedare ( talk) 15:16, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Some guy is changing this article from traditional to modern - I don't understand why. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Religion_and_drugs&curid=2550591&diff=631680540&oldid=631680225 What do you think. Hafspajen ( talk) 00:11, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jonathan, in one of those debates we had on some page you said, "Dharma is a beautiful word." On my user page, I had written that Valmiki had recast Dharma in terms of rational debate. A good example of such debate, one that I was introduced to when I was 12 or 13, is this one between Rama and Vali. Would you like to give it a read, and then we can talk about it? Cheers, Kautilya3 ( talk) 21:25, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
enjoy the peace of mind
Thank you for quality articles on Buddhism, such as
Zhongfeng Mingben, for
quoting and explaining, for inspiring images and "enjoy the peace of mind", - you are an
awesome Wikipedian!
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:04, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
Please take a look at Tulku edit war. VictoriaGrayson Talk 00:05, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
Greetings! How are you doing mate? Anyway, I'd like to ask you if you happen to know what's the conduct with including hanzi names in Tibetan Buddhist articles? This is something I've ran into quite much lately. For example here in the Dorje Pakmo article, should we include the Hanzi names as well or not? Personally, I'd fancy keeping them but some other editors think the opposite. I was hoping that you could give as a more experienced editor a second opinion on that one! :-) Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 20:14, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
"K.R. Norman concluded that the earliest version of the sutta did not contain the word "noble", but was added later."[37]
Is this Norman, cited in Batchelor? JimRenge ( talk) 16:28, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
The heading "The middle way: dhyana" is confusing: I know there are many interpretations of the middle way but this reads like The middle way = dhyana. (?) This corresponding section does only mention dhyana. JimRenge ( talk) 20:09, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Please see. VictoriaGrayson Talk 18:16, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
About this ? Hafspajen ( talk) 15:10, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Jonathan, your going to have to prove and disprove here, I have correct answers that are true, when I think, I, as a precious consciousness, only have 5 senses and that's it, what makes them happen is either mechanics or choice if we have choice, understanding which you can also test yourself is just you seeing vision and the sense of this vision sense being seeing a object prominant or another ex. is you feel pleasure or feel a scared pain in body or feel pain or feel cold or you feel disgust when hand is in dirt, or see digust/attract when viewing the vision of gender faces. It's just senses, and how you get them, that's all we us consciousnesses are! K I'm waiting to hear back! And yes, I heard sound of all these words in my head plus attached vision of everything. 20:38, 22 November 2014 Immortal Discoveries
I was in the process of undoing all of Immortal Discoveries' edits to
Immortality with an edit summary saying "Reverting edits by Immortal Discoveries that are unclear, ungrammatical and unsourced", but it didn't work. Then I saw your edit. I tried again, trying to undo everything back to A's edits, but without success. I see you undid the last edit, but I think all the edits should be undone, not just the last one. Do you want to try?
CorinneSD (
talk) 00:22, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
You are a rollbacker. I you rollback, all edits are undone.
Hafspajen (
talk) 00:27, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
On this page /info/en/?search=Immortality I am talking about the undesirability of immortality.
Objective: Being either delete it all & add the truth OR only add the truth. If you must, then find references supporting the truth answer.
Reason: 1)You would not be in hell with hellish torment of your 5 senses. 2) You would not be in a built heaven with bored senses such as seeing vision and hearing and feeling being boring, you would have great feeling and tasting and seeing of vision and hearing of long-quality incredible techno power music and palaces and a girl and best quality never ending games and best food such as fries and would always be great senses and so CANNOT be bad boring senses, great senses forever, they stay great cause that's what a consciousness can keep getting is great senses, and the things of the most attractive girl and best games and keep eating food are so incredible it goes further the greatness of high quality senses or great fun forever! 3) Even though totally unneccesary, you can erase memory anyhow and have great senses forever. 4) The greatest things for our senses arrrrre-the meaning, it says: the meaning doesn't grow and grow and that it doesn't grow with living forever and infact de-grows, wrong, there isn't such thing! you have great senses of eating fries as much as want over and over and still are awesome senses and the best never ending games to see how far can get & your most attractive partner you see and see as object-of-vision and the most most attractive face for you of vision and 5 great senses together that will be incredible you get forever, it's funner! 17:42, 24 November 2014 ForeverDoctor User talk:ForeverDoctor
Go ahead and merge Out of India theory and Indigenous Aryans. VictoriaGrayson Talk 03:34, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:19, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Two warnings for one disruptive edit. Shall I remove my softer version? JimRenge ( talk) 14:54, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for grammar check & correcting merit (Buddhism). I left you a massage on talk page merit (Buddhism) please consider correcting it (If you wish to do so). S.B.M. Summon 21:04, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Please consider to change the reason for requesting a cleanup at Dukkha from "Over-reliance on primary sources" to Over-reliance on sectarian sources. Texts from buddhist teachers may be either primary or secondary (due to content and context) but they are clearly not independent sources ( WP:3PARTY). JimRenge ( talk) 09:39, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Please see. VictoriaGrayson Talk 20:46, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
What on earth. Hafspajen ( talk) 18:16, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) The proto-science / pseudoscience debate is the most interesting. We have similar issues at articles, such as traditional Chinese medicine and acupuncture where the both have been labelled as "pseudoscience" even they pre-date modern science by some thousand year. Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 17:06, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
"Good Morning"Josh" :
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia!
13 December is the day when Swedes perplex the rest of the world by showing up way too early in the morning dressed in white tunics, candles in their hair, singing and bringing saffron buns and breakfast in bed to nice people. Hope you have a bright day!
Hafspajen (
talk) 09:23, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Haha :D been permanently thinking the same over the course of the last few days. spent so much time reading through all the discussions...and when i see what you've been doing..WOW! regarding our discussion: I don't think we will solve this soon. I am glad that we are having a conversation and i think this conversation is very important because it concerns nearly all of the articles on Buddhism. I think in the long run we will have to establish some guidelines or a basic structure template about which sections should be included, which perspectives reported, and which weight assigned to each of them repectively...or are there already? I remember having quite similar discussions many years ago... ok...but NOT NOW...first: eat! then: work! ;) Andi 3ö ( talk) 14:58, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
(I suggest we keep this to idle chatter between the two of us; any serious discussion can be piled to the existing stack.) Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:54, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
See HERE. VictoriaGrayson Talk 00:06, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Greetings Joshua Jonathan! As I was just glancing through the edits of the past few days, I noticed at the WikiProject:Buddhism that the discussion has been taken to a number of venues. Seriously, I do not have the time to go through all the venues, but please do free to quote me on whether instance you feel like it.
I'll try to have a look later, but I am always ready to respond any questions whenever necessary. Anyway, my respond delay might be even up to 3-4 days delay, so thats just for public information. Cheers! =P Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 19:58, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
In case you don't have it on your watchlist, see Talk:Faith in Buddhism. Nice comment by Chris Fynn on sutra quoting OR. JimRenge ( talk) 12:03, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
I have no interest in the details of the content dispute, but it looks like it can go to the dispute resolution noticeboard. The Buddhist virtues of compassion, mutual respect, moderation, and respect for truth should help avoid the conduct issues that too often derail resolution of content issues. (I'm not a Buddhist, but Christians know that Buddhism has good ethical teachings too.) Robert McClenon ( talk) 17:46, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Happy Holiday Cheer | ||
Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys! Hafspajen ( talk) 02:41, 23 December 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks! Did you notice that I linked the angel at top of my talkpage to your talkpage? ;) All the best, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:18, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Ekdalian (
talk) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!! | |
Hello Joshua Jonathan, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Jim Carter is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
There is no generation and perfection phase in Dzogchen. This is in basic books such as "A Guide to the Words of My Perfect Teacher". Possibly you are confused by the fact that terma cycles like Longchen Nyingthig are not just Dzogchen. VictoriaGrayson Talk 16:27, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | ||
Hi there! I want to thank you for your recent edits on the Nirvana article. Thanks to you, I think the article is in a much better place, with better organization and lots of new information. I was thinking of doing the same over the holidays, but I was pleasantly surprised to find that the article has been greatly modified since the last time I checked. Manoguru ( talk) 17:09, 24 December 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks for your Christmas Greetings, Joshua! Please do accept mine - not late, but... - now on the actual Christmas day! Hah! I tried to find you some cool Santa with reindeer image, but it seems Wikimedia Commons is whole empty of such luxury xF Anyway, Merry Christmas to you too! Cheers!
Ps. Santa is from Finland, not from any freaking North Pole. Lol! Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 18:24, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello, JJ -- Season's greetings to you! I was just looking at the latest edit to Ananda Coomaraswamy. In spite of the edit summary, it looks like some sourced information has been deleted from the article. Can you take a look at it? Thank you. CorinneSD ( talk) 15:52, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Read THIS. VictoriaGrayson Talk 20:25, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Try this paper. VictoriaGrayson Talk 14:36, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Where did you get the idea that semde is not tantra? VictoriaGrayson Talk 17:32, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
"Religion, Medicine and the Human Embryo in Tibet" has a lot about Dzogchen. VictoriaGrayson Talk 06:52, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
? ....Can you find sources? Find sources: Mohammad Ejuddin ... or Bladesmulti or any talk page stalker Hafspajen ( talk) 14:49, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
“The shifting terrain of the tantric bodies of Buddhas and Buddhists from an Atiyoga perspective”. (2007) by Germano talks about Menngagde being derived from Kalachakra. VictoriaGrayson Talk 16:38, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Dear Joshua, I deleted some parts in the article Hinduism, https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Hinduism&action=history, especially the "theory of iranian migration" to India, Author 468sm cites sources which are mostly books, thus opinions that Iranians and Europeans migrated to India. I had cited, the archaeology department link, harvard studies, a university study and other indian researches and newspapers. Idea of migration is a personal opinion, as of now it is imposed very strongly, perhaps it would help if you edited the text to fairly display both the sides. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pydisc ( talk • contribs) 06:09, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Ehm... please refrsh my mind; could you be more precise? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 16:55, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
In this section you have "Germano 2005, p. 2548". But elsewhere you have "Germano 2004, p. 2547." etc. VictoriaGrayson Talk 08:06, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Anyone home? Hafspajen ( talk) 23:44, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
The Civility Barnstar | |
Much love to you, JJ. Iṣṭa Devata ( talk) 01:53, 31 December 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks, though I'm not sure if I'm a good help for your position (what's in a name...) on Malasana. Anyway, I've been typing Sanskrit for the first time in my life. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:24, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
I believe that your mentee bladesmulti has started using extraordinary means to destroy the Malasana page. I am at risk of over reverting, but he has removed almost all practical information from the page using a secondary user name User:TheRedPenOfDoom to avoid being reported. But it is pretty clearly the same user with similar editing history. He also deleted the account after making the edits. This is bordering on ban worthy. I'm afraid to revert changes. Help please if you can, either convincing him to stop massive undiscussed changes to the page, or reverting it for me so I can avoid warring with him. And thanks for all your work on wikipedia! Iṣṭa Devata ( talk) 02:12, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Joshua Jonathan,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Hafspajen (
talk) 10:05, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Will you please add page numbers? Eg to "which were collected before 1000 BC in the Rigveda.{{sfn|Samuel|2010}}" I can't find Rigveda in Samuel. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 19:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
In the lead of the Yoga page, there is way too much emphasis on the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali. Indeed, the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali don't need to be mentioned at all. Please eliminate Yoga Sutras of Patanjali in lead. 176.67.169.207 ( talk) 03:23, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Copied to Talk:Yoga#Edit Request on Patanjali
You think there should be following pages?
Like we got
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Navbox Zen. Since you had some involvement with the Navbox Zen redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). John Vandenberg ( chat) 14:15, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Movement, but not removement. Rather: removal. CorinneSD ( talk) 17:27, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
See Aryan Migration talk. 176.67.169.146 ( talk) 19:03, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
If you have time, would you look at the most recent edits to Surat? One editor added a date, first with AD, then changing it to CE. It is missing the word "in" before the year. I was going to add "in", but before I did so, I thought I'd ask you to be sure that the date is correct. Another editor just before that added a www website for "movers and packers in Surat". I thought that might be an attempt to add a website to a business so as to get a little free advertising, but I wasn't sure. CorinneSD ( talk) 19:25, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
1. Add Buddhism as one of the explicit roots of Hinduism. 2. Add this reference to the lead:
Inden, Ronald. "Ritual, Authority, And Cycle Time in Hindu Kingship." In JF Richards, ed., Kingship and Authority in South Asia. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1998, p.67, 55 "before the eighth century, the Buddha was accorded the position of universal deity and ceremonies by which a king attained to imperial status were elaborate donative ceremonies entailing gifts to Buddhist monks and the installation of a symbolic Buddha in a stupa....This pattern changed in the eighth century. The Buddha was replaced as the supreme, imperial deity by one of the Hindu gods (except under the Palas of eastern India, the Buddha's homeland)...Previously the Buddha had been accorded imperial-style worship (puja). Now as one of the Hindu gods replaced the Buddha at the imperial centre and pinnacle of the cosmo-political system, the image or symbol of the Hindu god comes to be housed in a monumental temple and given increasingly elaborate imperial-style puja worship."
VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 01:33, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
No western academic book uses genetics to justify Aryan Migration. Please delete the entire section. 176.67.169.146 ( talk) 21:51, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
For related subjects? Bladesmulti ( talk) 08:19, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " Criticism of Jainism". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 09:05, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! -- Rahul ( talk) 09:05, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
The Citation Barnstar | |
Very nice work on Slavic Vedism, in terms of citations and content. Bladesmulti ( talk) 12:38, 11 January 2014 (UTC) |
That Muhammad was written down at least 120 years later? Bladesmulti ( talk) 13:54, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
But why they do that? You tried to get a rollback? You got 0 ban, and over 18,000 edits?(amazing though) Bladesmulti ( talk) 18:15, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
How do we rename the Shramana page as Sramana? Sramana is by far the most common spelling in academia. It also has the added benefit of not being confused with shamanism as what occurred on the talk page. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 21:22, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Can you help me a bit with this article? There is something very wrong with it, and I have a little trouble explaining it properly to those who have written it. This document might be helpful if you do decide to give it a look. Thanks, -- Rahul ( talk) 15:37, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
I don't think you should classify or dismiss Breaking India and Invading the Sacred as "indigenous understanding". Neither book is written from an indigenous perspective. And then you are linking both books to the concept of Sanatana Dharma, which is also not fair. Invading the Sacred has many non-indigenous contributors, and Breaking India has very little to do with Hinduism at all. If you want to make a section called "Critique of Modern Scholarship", that would make more sense. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 18:59, 14 January 2014 (UTC) Copied to Talk:Hinduism#Indigenous Understanding
Hi Joshua. User:Krishnamoorthy1952, a fellow Tamil Wikipedian contributor contacted me regarding him being blocked in English Wiki. He has acknowledged that User:Spkmoorthy1952 is his username as well. He is new to Wikipedia, and not very familiar with Wikipedia policies or standards. I don't think he created duplicate usernames to commit abuse. Thus, I ask you unblock one of his usernames so that he can contribute to the Wiki.
It is possible that some of his edits are not suitable or upto to standards with the English Wikipedia. If that is the case, please let him know, and I'll advise him as well. -- Natkeeran ( talk) 03:10, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
For your kind words, and for your every contribution here, as I learned so much from them. :) Bladesmulti ( talk) 15:20, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
"Hinduism, with about one billion followers is the world's third largest religion, after Christianity and Islam."
It should be changed to "world's largest religion". Bladesmulti ( talk) 15:55, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Since the issue is heatedly debated, there was reason why it was simply kept that "may have drawn upon elements", Because there can be too much to attribute if we tried. Bladesmulti ( talk) 12:59, 18 January 2014 (UTC) Copied to Talk:Hinduism#Vedic period
Source writes "the first hindu temples emerged - Durga temple, Aihole, Vishnu temple - Deogarh. But the author is only talking about the first temples of this period, not about the temples like Koneswaram Temple(6th century BCE or older), Amarnath(3rd Century BCE), etc. Also the author is incorrect, because Durga temple, Aihole wasn't built during Gupta Empire. Bladesmulti ( talk) 04:06, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Copied to Talk:Hinduism#First temples
Bhavishya Purana is 5th Century BCE(even 3000 BCE according to some), Padma Purana is 8th Century BCE. What you think? Bladesmulti ( talk) 14:51, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:31, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Ask for help at the relevant wikiprojects. I don't think I can help much. Dougweller ( talk) 14:01, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Don't think anymore argument is needed now. I will be looking at the other usage of the Dharmacakra instead, one sentence claim that buddhist nation uses that flag, but it will be much better if i can find that "where", "how", "why" they uses them. And some others, thanks again for joining. Bladesmulti ( talk) 05:14, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua. I was wondering why you reverted my edit to 'Perennial Philosophy': https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Perennial_philosophy&oldid=591137496&diff=prev
Could you give me some feedback so that I can redo that section and add it back in?
Thanks Ruffling ( talk) 14:47, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
You might wanna have look at this. The Buddhist Wheel Symbol, by T.B. Karunaratne [6]
It's an old article but not an outdated one. the section on ″The Significance of the Wheel″ is interesting. Hope it'll be helpful to improve the article.
Thanks. Nishadhi ( talk) 11:56, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Please see here. Best, Devanampriya ( talk) 12:35, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Joshua Jonathan, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community. Devanampriya ( talk) 09:50, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
For those interested (it's a loooong story....)
|
---|
Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 11:04, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
|
Except Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism. Bladesmulti ( talk) 13:54, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Drmies has no dispute with me there, only other person, who keeps adding content from sources like "www.voltaire-integral.com"(half of them), after acclaiming to "derive from french wiki", i mean seriously? Bladesmulti ( talk) 15:50, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
You are discussed on the Rajiv Malhotra yahoo group by an individual claiming to be Manipadmehum. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 22:56, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Ah, you made yourself popular? Seems to be a problem to some, when convictions are being questioned. Anyway, some time ago then, that I was being "discussed"? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 23:17, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
See note on my Talk page. CorinneSD ( talk) 16:01, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
I discovered about Sanghao Caves from your template, just made a page about it, now since it is in Pakistan, we(anyone) wouldn't know much about it, it has definitely something to do with ancient indian subcontinent belief as well. But I wonder when we may know about it. Bladesmulti ( talk) 16:59, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Is it a bird? Is it a plane?
|
---|
[Rajiv: Lets discuss the following issue after peole have read Indra's Net because this book is centered on the issue of Vedanta-Yoga unity and a defense of Swami Vivekananda on this controversy.] Hi Rajiv, I was trying to elaborate on Swami Vivekananda's contributions to yoga in Wikipedia, but I got the following response and my changes got reverted. The id that I use on Wiki is "Manipadmehum". Here is the link to my arguments with the editors of yoga - I have copied the sections below highlighting in bold and underlining those parts which are plan wrong to an average Hindu / Indian. But this is the line of thinking followed by western scholars in some prominent universities like White, University of california. There is also an embedded pdf in the section which explains the "thesis". It is also the first time I hear about Madame Blavatsky who seem to have influenced modern Hinduism and modern Buddhism. Vivekananda & Early Buddhist Texts Vivekananda is absolutely not a reliable source on Yoga. He was a Hindu nationalist, not a scholar. To insert a text like this has nothing to do with understanding the origins of Yoga, but with promoting Hindu-nationalism, and is plain WP:OR. See White (2011) p.20-21 for an assessment of Vivekananda: "Vivekananda’s rehabilitation of what he termed “rāja yoga” is exemplary, for its motives, its influences, and its content. A shrewd culture broker seeking a way to turn his countrymen away from practices he termed “kitchen religion,” Vivekananda seized upon the symbolic power of yoga as a genuinely Indian, yet non-sectarian, type of applied philosophy that could be wielded as a “unifying sign of the Indian nation . . . not only for national consumption but for consumption by the entire world” (Van der Veer 2001: 73–74). For Vivekananda, rāja yoga, or “classical yoga,” was the science of yoga taught in the Yoga Sūtra, a notion he took from none other than the Theosophist Madame Blavatsky, who had a strong Indian following in the late nineteenth century. Following his success in introducing rāja yoga to western audiences at the 1892 World Parliament of Religions at Chicago, Vivekananda remained in the United States for much of the next decade (he died in 1902), lecturing and writing on the YS. His quite idiosyncratic interpretations of this work were highly congenial to the religiosity of the period, which found expression in India mainly through the rationalist spirituality of Neo-Vedānta. So it was that Vivekananda defined rāja yoga as the supreme contemplative path to selfrealization, in which the self so realized was the supreme self, the absolute brahman or god-self within." Replies By RK [Rajiv: I agree 100% with this post. But what have people done about it since the same issue of wicki was discussed her months ago? Nothing. Some folks here resolved to gather and DO something. They put up a totally new entry on Rajiv Malhotra. It was deleted in a few days by the gatekeepers citing all sorts of reasons and lack of due process Our side lost stamina. Because it seemed contrived and not natural from our side the wicki folks toughened their stance against me. Change is supposed to be done gradualy with each change backed by evidence cited in footnotes and links. Hence the half-ass effort by our folks has backfired. So dont start something amateurish as its better to do nothing if you dont know what you are doing. This is not a game for inexperienced folks with passion/opinions but no competence. This entity "Joshua Jonathan" is editing anything that touches Hinduism and Buddhism. �I think it is an organization of multiple people and not a single entity. �If it is a single person, he has a full-time job to do this. �Probably a well-funded entity considering how many man-hours it invests editing and enforcing its views. �This entity "Joshua Jonathan" likes anti-Hindu scholars like Martha Nussbaum. �I conjecture that it may �be related to receive patronage of U of Chicago or some other AAR member. � Just go and take a look at Rajiv Malhotra wiki page and you will see that this entity inserted all kinds of text from references which are anti-RM and some are patently Indian Christian. �In fact, RM's wiki page is dominated by one highly spurious anti-RM reference. �No prizes for guessing - "Joshua Jonathan" is the most active editor of RM wiki page. �Compare that page to those of Wendy Doniger or Martha Nussbaum. �You can see the difference of night and day. � This entity will out-win you by sheer expense of time. �Wikipedia has been turned into a joke by these characters. � "Joshua Jonathan" claims to be a Buddhist but do not buy it. �It is on a mission to demolish anything labeled, or even remotely connected with the label, neo-Hinduism. Unless you are willing to spend considerable time waging an intellectual battle, forget it. By S Well, I have to agree that Vivekananda was not a professionally trained scholar. Rajiv: Based on whatever your criteria of "professional training" means, nor am I or you professionaly trained". Nor was Sri Ramakrishna, Sri Aurobindo, or any of our great acharyas. Nor Buddha, etc... Only Wendy Doniger, Witzel, Hawley, and their large lineages would be considered by you as "professionally trained". You have in effect bought into the coloniation of what makes a competent Hindu thinker. You assume that western style system accredition is what makes one trained. Therefore, all yogis in history are in effect rejected by you as none of them from Patanjali on had certification by western style institutions. Bladesmulti ( talk) 12:01, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
|
You do know you aren't "another user", don't you? You are posting in the wrong place. If you are replying to someone else you can use @otheruser. Dougweller ( talk) 19:15, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Okay, this was dumb. Shouldn't have done this...
|
---|
You have been
blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your
disruption caused by
edit warring and violation of the
three-revert rule at
Dharmacakra. During a dispute, you should first try to
discuss controversial changes and seek
consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek
dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request
page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may
appeal this block by adding the text
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.
Bbb23 (
talk) 19:29, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an
administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the
blocking policy).
Joshua Jonathan ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log)) Request reason: If this is the price of reporting Devanampriya, than that's fair; after all, I've been reverting too, and I was the one who brought up the edit-warring. Yet, there are some nuances I think I have to mention. From Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Devanampriya reported by User:Joshua Jonathan (Result: Both blocked) - Bbb23: "Joshua's last revert occurred on January 23 at 16:03. That means that any reverts that occurred after January 22 at 16:03 count. I believe there are five of those, making the total six." I disagree. two edits were self-reverts, which is allowed: WP:3RRN: "The following actions are not counted as reverts for the purposes of 3RR: 1. Reverting your own actions ("self-reverting")."
So, that makes four - if re-inserting a maintenance templates counts as a revert. WP:AVOIDEDITWAR:
That's exactly what I did. Those tags were removed, and I re-inserted them. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 14:50, 27 January 2014 (UTC) Decline reason: Yep, you were edit warring. --jpgordon ::==( o ) 15:22, 27 January 2014 (UTC) If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. Okay, thanks for responding. I'll take better care in the future. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 15:24, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
|
Assure you, I am no sock puppet of this user, never even heard the name. Ready for any SPI too. Plus, you may want to check my reply on that page. You will know better. Bladesmulti ( talk) 09:22, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Check the recent edit on talk page. Bladesmulti ( talk) 11:47, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi I've answered your concerns on ANI see this. I think he may be a sockpuppet of another user that's been banned from Wikipedia. StuffandTruth ( talk) 16:38, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Chocolate, at least once a day, keeps me happy!
Joshua Jonathan -
Let's talk! 18:21, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Do you know anything about
this practice?
Hafspajen (
talk) 20:05, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Well, there is
Zen in the Art of Archery, but using a
blowgun, that is something new.
Hafspajen (
talk) 21:47, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Hafspajen ( talk) 05:07, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Eeeks! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:12, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Hafspajen ( talk) 08:05, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Joshua Jonathan. I noticed two sets of edits to the article on Hinduism changing the spelling of quite a few words. I just wanted you to know that I left a note on that editor's Talk page User Talk:Hendrick 99 about the changes. Feel free to chime in. (While you're there, take a look at comments from other editors regarding changing spelling in other articles.) CorinneSD ( talk) 03:03, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
I saw what you wrote on Drmies's page. It should be obvious that even you agree, we have similar issue with about 3 or more editors, who are even worse than Yoonadaue, at this moment, when it comes to the same guidelines, issues, that you referred. You cannot make issue of what he is saying on talk page, maybe because everyone is free for expressing themselves on talk page, as long as they don't rage. But I really think that he is not going to create any sandbox, and the way he is "demanding", is going to waste time. Relax. Bladesmulti ( talk) 14:02, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi, how are you? Long time. I have some articles here, Korran and Kudiramalai, that could use your research and writing skills, in the areas of Hinduism and Tamils etc. I highly doubt much of what is in these articles and what they are saying, and I am suspicious of the creator as all of his refs are to unlinked books. Previously I did some copy editing on an article written by the same editor and found that a lot of what is written is either not found in those books or are completely false. Can use your expertise in dealing with such articles here?-- Blackknight12 ( talk) 14:36, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
“ | O snail Climb Mount Fuji, But slowly, slowly! |
” |
— Kobayashi Issa |
Hello! I have replyed to your message on my talkpage. AcidSnow ( talk) 17:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
I did edit , which should be reviewed (since I'm not sure if it was done appropriately). ~Eric: 71.20.250.51 ( talk) 17:57, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
-- Iryna Harpy ( talk) 20:22, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Happy Valentine's Day | |
............................................................................................................................................................................ Hafspajen ( talk) 04:18, 14 February 2014 (UTC) |
I have just looked at a few edits to St. Thomas Christians by an IP editor. I have no way to judge the correctness of these edits (including changes in languages and in a population figure). I just thought I'd ask you if you thought 9,900,000 was possible as a total world population of St. Thomas Christians. CorinneSD ( talk) 18:56, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
It was on basis of your own cogent arguments (that didn't by themselves get through, unfortunately) that I became inspired to try a new appoach; namely to bolster your own arguments with explicit, very thorough source discussion, and that seems to have benefited User:Bladesmultis thinking at last, gradually seeing the rather shaky foundations of initial claims. To me, that simply shows B is a bit of an enthusiast, a dedicated and honest Wikipedian, but rather smitten with the enthusiast's main fault: Once an idea is felt to be "cool", "great" or "fascinating", the critical eye shuts down, and must gradually be opened again by calm, polite (but "merciless") cooling of his ardour by presentation of solid counter-arguments, as well as pointing out how shaky the first "sources" really are.
It can be (very) annoying to meet an enthusiast with cogent, short, but sufficient arguments (like your initial ones) but that doesn't get through to him. But for Bladesmulti at least, his own basic honesty to search for truth wins out in the end, I think, if he is met with patient, explicit counter-arguments. Arildnordby ( talk) 16:57, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
On a LONGER time scale, the whole cultural idea (if not reality) of "Christianity developed from Ancient Hindu Tales" (where both the Ezourvedam and Ramatsariar tale would be imoportant moments in its history!) could be a really important and interesting article.
But right now, Bladesmulti, I think the principal focus should be on the Ezourvedam, how to make that article really good. The Rocher reference is the MAJOR source we should use here! Arildnordby ( talk) 17:18, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Joshua, did you create that wonderful collection of pictures with captions illustrating Wiki types? I so enjoyed looking at it. CorinneSD ( talk) 20:52, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
JJ and Corinne, Bladesmulti does not want to work on Adimo/Ezourvedam, and it sounds like JJ is also tired of that topic. :-) Bladesmulti has suggested that we write a page on Hindu Creation Narratives... which might be okay... but has the downside that it is a very broad subject. Bladesmulti likes to rush from place to place, moving on before fully understanding what was in the past.
One of the reasons I liked Adimo/Ezourvedam, is because it is a very narrow subject: there are not that many sources, so we can actually analyze every source. Compare this to Voltaire, which has almost an infinite number of sources. My worry is that Hindu Creation Narratives will never keep Bladesmulti in one place long enough to understand fully. I don't care if we pick Adimo, or something else, but I'd like to pick a small and contained topic. Bladesmulti was working on another subpage, User:Bladesmulti/Abel_Bergaigne which is an author from the late 1800s. Bergaigne already has a page on frWiki, which we can use to guide us. Or, please, if any co-mentor wants to suggest an alternative strategy, I am all ears. Kangaroo ears, or teddy bear ears, according to Hafspajen. :-) — 74.192.84.101 ( talk) 16:11, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
two big problems for Bladesmulti to solve, with help from the co-mentors
|
---|
|
Donate them to you If you thought about copying it to a Wiki-essay. Hafspajen ( talk) 09:52, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Keeping track of all the discussions going on at various pages is already an accomplishment on its own here... Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:49, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Only you know what that means... In Wikipedia:WikiFauna is described as having desirable traits of an editor who is sporadically highly active and, when sporadically highly active, are boldly and grand, but exhibits less desirable traits of being clumsy or overconfident... Hafspajen ( talk) 09:07, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Joshua, I got your edits on Buddhism_and_Hinduism, if I had time, I would be thoroughly checking every source. There is some misrepresentation of sources. For example, let us take that "Caste" section, that I have edited.
Though I have added a lot clearer content. "Avatar", was already mentioned in a subsection. So I am not slashing, but I had moved it. Page is not really written like essay, so the main tag can be misleading. Bladesmulti ( talk) 07:22, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Here is some nice stuff to play with - Talk:Persecution of Hindus for you. I am needed on other fronts for the moment. Hafspajen ( talk) 12:02, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
This is probably the top source on this subject, along with "Indian Esoteric Buddhism" by Ronald Davidson. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 20:44, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Respected Joshua_Jonathan Sir, I am explaining about what is going on in the page Raju or Kshatriya Raju page.It is a page related to the caste of Kshatriya Varna.
Iam bringing it your notice because there is a very big problem in developing this article.If this article has to be developed,please provide freedom for other editors to develop this article by providing reliable sources.In this page an editor named "Sitush" is creating hurdles by deleting the sourced statements with reliable sources.The reasons he is providing is not considerable.Anyone can clearly understand by his reasons that he don't like to develop the article. I will explain you point by point: 1.)[When Gotras are provided from the following 2 references: (i)cite book| title=Tamil Nadu Part-2 Affiliated East-West Press [for] Anthropological Survey of India, 1997 |publisher=Kumar Suresh Singh, R. Thirumalai, S. Manoharan |year=1997 |isbn= |url= http://books.google.co.in/books?ei=XM78UpaOGIulrQei84CYAQ&id=P3LiAAAAMAAJ&dq=kshatriya+rajus&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=kshatriya+rajus+gotras |page=774] (ii) </ref> Sir, in that page reference 1 which is "Parties,Elections etc." also clearly explains that Rajus are of Kshatriya Varna which is accepted by Britishers,Government of India and also State Government of India.That editor named "sitush" is wantedly removing that "Kshatriya" Varna because he don't want to mention it.Sitush removed Gotras in that page. Sir,K.S.Singh is a great Historian, he(K.S.Singh) wrote many books affiliated to Anthropological Survey of India and Oxford University Press.Iam providing sources from two of his books: (i)India's Communities (ii)Tamil nadu Part 2 and these are reliable sources as i have stated above. Sir,I am requesting you to verify this paragraph: {A number of communities claim the status of " Kshatriya Varna",but apart from " Rajput" they are very small.They are " Rajus"(Andhra Pradesh,Tamil Nadu),"Raghuvamsi Kshatriya"(Karnataka)," Kshatriya"(Kerala),"Koteyar"(Tamil Nadu,Karnataka),"Dal Kshatriya"(Bihar)," Aguri"(West Bengal) and " Kshatriya"(Orissa and Assam)-in all eight communities which are widely accepted in the references of "India's Communities" by K.S.Singh,Vol-V.p.1853,1856-1858"," http://books.google.co.in/books?ei=A0O8UtD5Bo6IiQejnIHQCg&id=1lZuAAAAMAAJ&dq=india%27s+communities&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=aguri" This was the statement mentioned by K.S.Singh in his book.This statement of K.S.Singh is given as the Kshatriya Rajus asked their caste to be placed in Backward castes list in Tamil Nadu for the Backward Classes commission which can be seen in the following link "www.ncbc.nic.in/Pdf/Tamil%20Nadu/Tamilnadu-Vol2/7.pdf".}This is a reliable source and sitush has removed this from the page.
But,that Sitush is removing wantedly and he is not giving freedom for any other editors to develop the Rajus article.
Sir,Finally iam a requesting you as you are one of the senior editor in the wikipedia and i can beleive that You can provide justice for the common editors and also help to maintain the reputation of wikipedia by developing the article. And i am also requesting you to study the above references of K.S.Singh i have provided and discuss it with experts.If you feel those are reliable.Then i request you to develop the article by entering content from those books of K.S.Singh.
Thanking you sir,
Yours faithfully, An Editor. Special:Contributions/117.207.254.186 aka Special:Contributions/117.213.161.28 aka Special:Contributions/117.207.251.145 aka Special:Contributions/117.200.22.72 10:41, 27 February 2014
Summary of thread: According to 117, Sitush is deleting sourced statements with reliable sources:
Copied to Talk:Raju#Recent edits by Sitush. To be continued there. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 14:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Thank you Mr.Joshua Jonathan for the efforts and also spending your valuable time in trying to analyse and develop this Rajus article and i wish you all the best for your future endeavours :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.208.138.14 ( talk) 06:29, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Raju, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sai Baba ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:05, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Copied from my userpage [12]
Why you give importance to language sankrit in hindu religion.Every one know the real founder of hindu regilion was native dravidans and indian tribal people why you are hidding the truth. This is question put to Joshua Jonathan. 14:20, 27 February 2014 User:Madhanmohancoimbatore
Do you know anything about the Saint Thomas Christians? If you don't, do you know an editor who does? The article recently came off a short period under protected status due to some edit warring, but two different editors have just made a few edits to the article. I don't know enough about the topic to judge the changes to content. However, there are also some additions that are not in Standard English. Before I work on that, I thought I'd ask if you or someone else could determine whether the changes to content are correct and an improvement to the article. CorinneSD ( talk) 17:47, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Hafspajen ( talk) 10:59, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
You have been selected to receive a merchandise giveaway. Please send us a message if you would like to claim your shirt. Thank you again for all you do! -- JMatthews (WMF) ( talk) 04:07, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Mr.Joshua Jonathan, the anthropologer Minna Säävälä has clarity about it, she described Rajus caste as traditional rulers and warriors and are Kshatriya that means they are of Kshatriya Varna and you can see that in her book, she also describes Rajus caste as "Raju Kulam(Kshatriyas)" in one sentence in that book.Here Kulam,jati,caste are synonyms.Kshatriya is their varna.In Ancient India,there are only four varnas or castes.But in present India,there are thousands of castes because many castes originated in shudra varna as they have classified due to their profession.In present India,there are castes of Brahmins,Kshatriyas,Vaishyas,Upper Shudras,Shudras,Dalits & Tribals/Adivasis.You can find these in many books.In present India,there are different Brahmin,Kshatriya & Vaishya castes that means those are the castes which comes under those three varnas.And the castes of those varnas will classified according to their respective varnas and they are called as Brahmins,Kshatriyas & Vaishyas.For example,Rajput & Rajus are Kshatriya Castes that means those are different castes but comes under Kshatriya Varna,that means they are called as Kshatriya Castes i.e. Kshatriyas.Also you can notice that gotras of Brahmins,Kshatriyas & Vaishyas are different from shudras.Also those three varnas are dvijas i.e. possess sacred thread and they also possess gotras named after rishis whether they are saptarishis(7 great sages) or other rishis(sages).Kshatriyas are divided into Suryavanshi & Chandravanshi.Rajus are also classified into Suryavanshi & Chandravanshi.But in Rajputs, Agnivanshi Lineage is also present.Many Indian & Foreign Anthropologers made analysis about all these.Minna Säävälä-She is one of the great anthropologers who had written many books and analysed the castes of India. - Shvrs ( talk) 04:53, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
the current version of Pandyan Dynasty and my edits there. Also I guess Early Pandyan Kingdom and my edits. Thanks. Ran into the first after an editor changed Kumari Kandam into a pov mess, and the 2nd from the first. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 13:26, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
I see on your user page that you have an interest in psychology. You might be interested in reading the exchange on the talk page of Hypnosis regarding changes to the lead/lede. I have given up since the editor has not responded to my comments, but I tend to agree with Myrvin. The other editor has gone ahead and changed an Encylopedia Britannica definition and has, in the process, I believe, changed the meaning. I have no problem with the somewhat general words (such as "certain") in the EB definition for this subject which is not an easy one to define and which the article makes clear has been defined in more than one way. The details will come out later in the article. You might want to weigh in. CorinneSD ( talk) 00:49, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
you have been listed as claiming on here on wikipedia as saying my guru Rudi was a nath sadhu....
this is completely false....
please change it..
i would like to know where you got this idea....
sincerely,
swami chetanananda — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swamichetanananda ( talk • contribs) 06:18, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello Joshua,
It seems that you inserted a table on the Nath Wikipedia page that lists the modern lineage holders of the Nath tradition. (I'm new to editing Wiki, so if it wasn't you, please redirect this comment to who did.)
The table lists "Rudi" at the very last, referencing a story written on the web by David Godman as proof of him being a lineage holder.
Joshua, Rudi was not a Nath. He was a Swami (Swami Rudrananda) in the Saraswati order, under the lineage of Bhagavan Nityananda of Ganeshpuri and Swami Muktananda. The story by David Godman is completely erroneous. Rudi never met the Maharaj. Its all fiction.
For us, in his lineage, his biography and the line of teaching is sacred information. Please remove Rudi's name from any Nath lineage tables on any of the pages related to Naths.
Also, if you would be willing to share email exchange with us, we would be interested to know how you came upon this information and how you were inclined to put Rudi's name on this list.
Monica O'Neal Research Assistant for Swami Chetanananda Rudrananda Ashram/The Movement Center Portland, OR — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swamichetanananda ( talk • contribs) 06:28, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
If anyone is going to write an article on Shoemaker, it should not be you. Writing a WP:BLP on someoen with whom you are currently engaged in a content dispute is a jaw-droppingly bad idea. Please don't do that! Guy ( Help!) 22:47, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
The original editors painstakingly created this page and cited sources from the India office. Later editors deleted large sections of a brilliant article and one said the sources were dubious.They though the India office records were kept in India and had not heard of them. These editors were clear not historians as anyone who has studied the period knows about these records. However you choose to thake their sides and when the original editors removed the vandalism you reverted the article. Here is the full source from where the research was done on this article. The India Office Records are the repository of the archives of the East India Company (1600-1858), the Board of Control or Board of Commissioners for the Affairs of India (1784-1858), the India Office (1858-1947), the Burma Office (1937-1948), and a number of related British agencies overseas. The focus of the India Office Records is in the territories now included in India, Pakistan, Burma and Bangladesh and their administration before 1947. The Records also include source materials for neighbouring or connected areas at different times, covering not only South Asia, but also Southeast Asia, Central Asia, the Middle East, and parts of Africa. The official archives of the India Office Records are complemented by over 300 collections and over 3000 smaller deposits of private papers relating to the British experience in India. The India Office Records are administered by The British Library as part of the Public Records of the United Kingdom, and are open for public consultation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.55.95.60 ( talk) 11:59, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Singahi Bhiraura Page Please read carefully and remove the protection and revert to original articleDear Jonathan I agree with WP:OR but if you read the sources on the article carefully and compare it with the guidelines to quote "The prohibition against OR means that all material added to articles must be attributable to a reliable published source, even if not actually attributed" Here is the list of attributable reliable sources of the article which were republished and meet the guidelines: There are Papers from the AN Seely Collection: This a a British Library Publication 1972, which is a reputable Publishing House. AN Seely the author was a fellow of Trinity College Oxford, and a scholar in Persian Studies. He compiled these from the original sources and they were published.
31.55.74.104 ( talk) 14:57, 10 March 2014 (UTC) The article complies with WP:OR as from a published source I was the original Editor who started this article. I feel my article was very well cited. Its about the History of a small obscure town in India. It also happens to be my hometown. I( spend considerable time in the British library in London researching its history. The British Library in 1972 Published a collection of papers in Four Volumes called the AN Seely Papers. The Citations come from this published work. British Library Publishing was founded in 1981 They publish titles in a variety of areas, focusing on subjects relating to the British Library’s collections, such as the history of books and manuscripts, including facsimile editions and general guides to our more famous collection items. We also publish audio CDs from the collections held by the British Library Lalitshastri ( talk) 15:12, 10 March 2014 (UTC) |
Freedom for you...............................................................and me. Hafspajen ( talk) 12:36, 11 March 2014 (UTC) |
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
Haha:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::..........................................!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!................ Hafspajen ( talk) 12:37, 11 March 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 13:08, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
I would like to double check. Do you really want to know "
Which RFC?" ? And there were some other reasons also listed in my revert. Did you read that? --
SMS
Talk 19:42, 11 March 2014 (UTC) --
SMS
Talk 19:47, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Joshua. Please don't use Twinkle messages that aren't fully relevant. [13] You haven't removed the uncivil message. (For my part, I've copied it to the Clueless Complaint Generator.:-)) If you can't find a templated message that's just right, please handcraft one.
In other news, your message to Hafspajen had been removed, by I've restored it. Bishonen | talk 10:49, 14 March 2014 (UTC).
Hi Joshua,
Thank you for your comments. I had to use that language - though not justifying it is that I am ok with his edits as long as they are in accordance with wiki terms. The edits went just beyond that based on what he thinks is right or wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldruff ( talk • contribs) 10:00, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
What the heck is the difference between Transpersonal and Revelation, and Enlightenment (spiritual) please need a quick answer. Hafspajen ( talk) 19:03, 19 March 2014 (UTC) Hafspajen ( talk) 19:03, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Joshua: I apologize. Since Hafspajaen needed a "quick answer", I took this as a challenge and thought I could learn something as I tried to help him, so I read the three articles and tried to learn the differences. I wrote an answer, but meant to put it on my Talk page, not yours, but put it on yours by mistake, so removed it. I know you are much more knowledgeable about both psychology and religion than I am, and I did not want to be presumptuous. Please forgive my amateur answer if it is wrong. CorinneSD ( talk) 23:27, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Corinne's summary, reinserted by Joshua Jonathan
|
---|
It seems to me that " transpersonal" is used mainly in the field of modern psychology to mean "a state of awareness beyond the personal", an awareness of things outside, or beyond, the self.
I would surmise that the people who coined the word "transpersonal" had probably read or studied Buddhist and/or Hindu religions. The term " revelation" seems to be used more in the field of religion.
The term " enlightenment" seems to have more meanings than the other two terms. In the west, it is used (1) in the secular world and (2) in religion. It is also used (3) to translate concepts that come out of eastern religions.
This last sentence seems pretty close to the definition of "transpersonal". It seems to me that the term "transpersonal" has a more limited meaning than "enlightenment" (it is a bit difficult to understand from the article on transpersonal precisely what is meant by "transpersonal"), and that "revelation" has a somewhat limited meaning. "Revelation" seems to refer mainly to a brief experience, a direct revealing to humans of the divine, and, secondarily, to the knowledge of the divine that has been received in that experience. "Enlightenment" seems to have two meanings in the western context, one secular (referring to the Age of Enlightenment) and the other (less well known) to a kind of religious experience (William James, etc.), and several meanings coming from concepts in Buddhism and Hinduism. Without more reading, I cannot say more than that. I am sure that Joshua Jonathan can help you more than I can. CorinneSD ( talk) 23:21, 19 March 2014 (UTC) |
Reply by JJ: "Enlightenment" is a western term for bodhi, kensho and prajna. They all denote (intuitive) understanding of the "emptiness" of the I/self. The term is related to "illumination"; see Richard M. Bucke and [14]. It is also related to "conversion" and "religious experience", as used by William James. But that's also where the meaning has shifted: from a "coginitive act" to a "mysterium tremendum et fascinans". Nevertheless, Stanislav Grof does have a point: shamanism, or for example the historical Vedic religion, do know drug-induced trance-states. I'm afraid that all those terms are not so neatly separated from each other. Though I would not recommand drugs to "gain" "enlightenment" - which, by the way, may be the start of the Buddhist path, and not the end! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 19:22, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
You have been selected to receive a merchandise giveaway. Please send us a message if you would like to claim your shirt. -- JMatthews (WMF) ( talk) 06:31, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Mr.Joshua Jonathan,please see the Rajus article,the version created by you is the best version.See the reasons in talk page of Rajus and what sitush had done to Rajus page recently in history,he has edited & removed material according to his likes with fake reasons and he also even vandalised the satya sai baba sentence which was added by you.And also please encourage new editors if they provide reliable sources and also please say to sitush if he doesn't have any proper idea or knowledge about any new materials in this page,then ask him to discuss them with senior editors but he doesn't have any right to delete according to his wish as he is not the owner of wikipedia.After all he is an editor with limited knowledge.Iam reporting it you because you are also a senior editor and also tried to develop Rajus article.And also because,removing and deleting according to personal likes or dislikes is not the motto of wikipedia articles.You please protect the version created by you,which i have restored.Thank you. - Shvrs ( talk) 02:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua,
You replaced the entire universe image I added to the series about advaita vedanta with two swans!
I don't begrudge you that! Saraswati will no doubt honour you in some way. :)
Anyway, due to that edit, I looked at your contributions and saw that you contribute to many mystical/spiritual/philosophical wikipages and I thought you might be able to help me. I just tried to submit a page about a student of Ramana Maharshi's, Robert Adams. However, the page was rejected because I only have sources from Robert Adams himself.
I believe he is a great teacher and worthy of his place on the great wikipedia. Please have a look:
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Robert_Adams
There aren't really many other sources for Robert Adams, because he was fairly unknown. You can find information about him from renowned biographer David Godman on his blog and in various other places on the net, but not much is about.
http://sri-ramana-maharshi.blogspot.co.uk/
If you could have a look at the wikipage I created and see if there is anything I can do with regards to referencing that would increase the likelihood of its submission, that would be much appreciated.
All the best,
Merlyn User talk:MerlynDanielMali 25 march 2014
Hi Joshua, great thanks for the help! And for the following.
Here's some: [15] [16] Not very reliable, but it's something. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 21:40, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll see if I can fit them in!
If you know anyone else who could also help and contribute that would be great. I got in touch with David Godman. He'll get back in touch with me if he finds some other reliable sources.
MerlynDanielMali ( talk) 00:23, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua,
I've submitted the article again. 12 sources, 30 references from these sources. All completely genuine and researched. I hope it makes it through this time. Thanks for your help!
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Robert_Adams
MerlynDanielMali ( talk) 23:30, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua,
Do you know the code to put a bit more space under a paragraph. In the article for Robert Adams, I would like to add a bit of space after the later years section so that the heading 'Teachings' sits beneath, not beside, the photo of Sri Ramana Maharshi.
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Robert_Adams#Later_Years
Thanks in advance for any ideas.
MerlynDanielMali ( talk) 15:42, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Okay, well thanks for your help. I think it's all done now and good to go. I hope it gets accepted by the administrators! Best, MerlynDanielMali ( talk) 13:31, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua,
I read up more about neo-advaita and then removed the category neo-advaita teachers at the bottom of the Robert Adams page, as I don't think Robert Adams qualifies as a neo-advaita teacher in the mould of Mooji or Andrew Cohen or any of the others. Although he is a Westerner, he had no known association with Pappaji, and if he did, it would have been in the 1940s. Like Ramana, he never claimed to be a guru nor have disciples, and he also always kept close to the ancient scriptures. I think if one were to ask David Godman(david_godman@yahoo.co.uk) or Alan Jacobs (alanadamsjacobs@yahoo.co.uk), the head of the Ramana Maharshi UK Foundation, they would both categorise Robert Adams as outside of neo-advaita. Cheers! MerlynDanielMali ( talk) 11:31, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Hey Joshua, something seems to be up with the hindu teacher info box. Check out Ramana's and Nisargadatta's pages. Philosophy has gone missing, and the word Advaita vedanta has been moved to the right. MerlynDanielMali ( talk) 11:00, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
It's okay now. Seems to have fixed itself. MerlynDanielMali ( talk) 11:03, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Merge Indigenous Aryans and Out of India theory? These seem to be the same subject. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 19:11, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Would you care to comment on Talk:Grigori Rasputin on some kind of controversy? the thing is that several references were removed followed by not so polite comments, like: What do you want to prove? Are you starting a new sect? Do you need members? and comments like The Guardian has a foolish article on Rasputin, I am sorry for them. that reference is It is blablabla, by a student. Students don't get their papers put up online without being checked by teachers... I had seven or so references and I am put up against one bestseller book, that did not mentioned Rasputin as Holy fool. Hafspajen ( talk) 10:57, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Hafspajen ( talk) 07:44, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
You were mistaken because of lack of knowledge there.You can see in the Srinivasulu pdf : forward castes table in the pdf file.There Kshatriya population is 1.2% there.You can find the populations in the table.you can find asentence in pdf :{in "Gudiada (Vizianagaram) on 15 July 1987, One dalit labourer killed in a dispute over a small patch of tankbed land by a mob of backward caste farmers led by a forward caste (Raju) Congress Party leader"}
Ask your God i.e Mr.Sitush that how Rajus or Kshatriya Rajus will be mentioned in Government's records & castes list.They will only be "Kshatriya" even he can't say no to the truth.Try to understand,please earn respect but don't lose it.Thank You - Shvrs ( talk) 11:51, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
The Citation Barnstar | |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdzPeMd5cR0 Hafspajen ( talk) 18:44, 1 April 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:07, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua, is there any particular reason my edit was reverted? My main purpose was to add a source which I believe you requested, so perhaps you disagreed with the other changes I made? I'm sure we can reach a compromise. Morinae ( talk) 16:11, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
The origin of the Japanese Chin is clouded in the mysticism of Far Eastern ancient rites.[citation needed] .. well never heard of it. Can you find any references? Otherwise we may chuck this. Hafspajen ( talk) 17:05, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
A couple of days ago a lot of people were complaining about Martinevans123. And here a whole section.. Hafspajen ( talk) 20:54, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello Jonathan, Sitush wantedly removing history from Raju's wiki from last 3 r 4 years What I am saying is truth that Sitush wantedly doing this.
Raju are Surya Vamsha and Chandra Vamsha Kshatriya, there are lot of evidence that are included by many other authors with evidence, but sitush wantedly removing all the contents.
If you see raju wiki, you will understand. he didn't include the history of King Pusapati Ashok Gajapathi Raju from Vijayanagar empire.
I don't know what I can discuss with, but i can say he wantedly doing this, cannot you do any thing.
can you take the evidences and add the raju history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.250.118.227 ( talk) 20:12, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Great work! Bishonen | talk 06:43, 14 April 2014 (UTC).
Outstanding! Bishonen | talk 08:23, 14 April 2014 (UTC).
I've forgotten what article it was but I amended one of your edits yesterday where you had cited a state government list of Other Backwards Classes or Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes. I think you'd used the list for Bihar when the state was Haryana, or vice versa.
Anyway, just a heads-up that there is a more general problem with those lists. They are changed frequently and are mainly a political exercise but - and this is far worse - they are incredibly ambiguous, lacking in consistent spellings etc and not making it clear whether names are of castes or synonyms etc. At the national level, the NCBC has made well over 1000 changes and actually admits to the unreliability of its own lists, pointing out the issues regarding synonyms etc. All this is documented in some discussions somewhere and I really should try to dig them out and stick some links at User:Sitush/Common.
You can see some of the effects at Kashyap (caste), where the politicking is sourced to recent news stories and the list of related communities clearly demonstrates some issues. For example, there are several communities mentioned that seem to be just slightly different spellings of a root name but which are being treated as separate subcastes, and there are some likely synonyms in their (eg: Bhar and Rajbhar). All these issues make it nigh-on impossible to link many caste names unless we have academic sources that make the connections. And, alas, too many people think that the lists produced in Gyan-published books are academic sources. - Sitush ( talk) 11:18, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Charles Joshua Chaplin... Hafspajen ( talk) 23:43, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Chaplin conducted art classes specifically for women at his studio. Hafspajen ( talk) 11:05, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
How are you, Joshua? I know you're interested in psychology, so I thought I'd point out a comment recently added to Talk:Erich Fromm#Needs a serious reworking .... An editor added a comment in response to a comment that had been added in 2005. I don't know enough about psychology to figure out what, exactly, this latest editor wants done with the article, but you might. CorinneSD ( talk) 16:53, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Kindly,please see the talk page of Rajus.Thank You. 06:06, 20 April 2014 User:117.200.29.60
Indo-Aryan migration |
---|
[19] is a disputed map, and it should be avoided. I've check about it, and I don't think that it has correct information. You cannot add similar map twice on a single page, neither a same map can be repeated. The image that I am posting here, probably remains undisputed to some extent, although it is more about linguistic. There are also other maps, such as, [20] but many sources explains that migration or invasion may have taken place during 2500 BCE. Maps are usually disputed in this regard, but we wouldn't need more because [21] is enough. Bladesmulti ( talk) 13:27, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
It has accuracy, the actual proposed module, I didn't objected. On your new reading, I would say that for last 20,000 years, there have been number of notable incidents. There are many more to be discovered. Bladesmulti ( talk) 15:34, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua - I agree with your proposal to merge the articles Mindfulness meditation and Mindfulness (positive psychology) into Mindfulness (psychology). I think Mindfulness-based stress reduction should be merged into it too, and will add a notice there. I will edit the tags you created so Discuss all point to the section you created on Talk:Mindfulness, as recommended by Help:Merging: "(1) Create one discussion section, typically on the destination article's talk page; (2) Tag each article with the appropriate merger tag. All tag Discuss links should be specified to point at the new discussion section." - Thanks; LeoRomero ( talk) 01:12, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
[22] is a Undue, than unsourced. Because it was unnecessary edit, from other user. Bladesmulti ( talk) 04:24, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
File:Schokohase für Ostern, Vollmilchschokolade, February 2010.jpg | The Joshua John-Àthan Pet Award |
Verý good. Verá niče. VerźY tasťȳ. Hafspajen ( talk) 13:16, 27 April 2014 (UTC) |
Hafspajen ( talk) 13:20, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Didn't he just removed what you added again? [23] Do you remember what was your edit? Hafspajen ( talk) 23:26, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello Joshua ..you left me a message on my talk page.
"Ik ben een God in het diepst van mijn gedachten" - Willem Kloos.
Does it mean "I am a God in the depths of my mind" - Willem Kloos.
Its very nice to know that you have a keen interest in Buddhism. Its good. I am a Buddhist too. I make videos on Buddhism and I run a youtube channel. I hope you will see it here. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5UPirykoyG6cAbySvyxovw
Regarding the edit on page 'God in Buddhism".
I gave source from accesstoinsight and it already had sources from this website too. But Bladesmulti removed it saying that it is a unreliable source but there were many sources taken from this website.
Regarding the Vedic culture. Gautama Buddha never accepted the Vedas so how it can have an origin in vedic culture. (Read Tevijja Sutta and other suttas too)
Hindus have been trying to include Buddha as an Avatar or a Hindu God while he rejected that he was any God in Dona Sutta (Search it.) And I think to some effect the page Hinduism and Buddhism has been edited by some hindus for their personal benefits. I have seen it .
You can also watch the page Buddha in Hinduism...there you go. You can discuss more if you like. Thanks.
Don't forget to visit my youtube channel if you like. I just thought to share. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astronautabhinavstar ( talk • contribs) 17:40, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Joshua and @ Bladesmulti: -- I just undid an edit to the article on Parsi, but I am puzzled by one thing in the restored sentence. It says that Parsis are "legally and ethnically distinct from the Iranis..." I don't understand the necessity of including the adverb "legally" there. While it may be true, laws change over time, so in India it's true only now. It may not be true ten years from now. I think it is less important than the ethnic distinction and the historical development of the groups. The way Parsis fit into Indian society, and the laws that apply, can be discussed later in the article. I just think it is strange to introduce a group of people as being legally different from another group. What do you think? CorinneSD ( talk) 01:36, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Joshua bro....I ask you to please kindly watch the page Ambedkar..as some people are trying to vandalize it (Blaedsmulti). He has been reverting my every addition though it was sourced. In India around 95% of Buddhists are following the example of Ambedkar by abondoning Hinduism(as it has caste system) and converting to Buddhism. Bladesmulti is reverting the changes...Kindly see and watch the page. I just request you and I hope you will accept it. With regards, Astronautabhinavstar Astronautabhinavstar ( talk) 05:29, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Joshua bro...you reverted the changes back to bladesmulti. But you removed 2 pics also ...kindly restore them. Dr.Ambedkar was the first law minister in India. How can somebody use the word lawyer for him? Bladesmulti has called all his big brothers (like the redpenofdoom) for seeking consensus. I am new to wikipedia user.
You reverted the changes but what you changed was already there much longer in wikipedia. I asked for a consensus. Bladesmulti called his big brothers. You are the only one whom I have found good in wikipedia. Similiar laundry lists are found in Brentrand Russell page too..I asked Bladesmulti but he arrogantly said that if I want I can edit on his talkpage but the page is semiprotected. Isn't this an Injustice done to Dr. Ambedkar just because he was born in a low caste? Astronautabhinavstar ( talk) 05:54, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Joshua bro...you reverted the changes back to bladesmulti. But you removed 2 pics also ...kindly restore them. Dr.Ambedkar was the first law minister in India. How can somebody use the word lawyer for him? Bladesmulti has called all his big brothers (like the redpenofdoom) for seeking consensus. I am new to wikipedia user.
You reverted the changes but what you changed was already there much longer in wikipedia. I asked for a consensus. Bladesmulti called his big brothers. You are the only one whom I have found good in wikipedia. Similiar laundry lists are found in Brentrand Russell page too..I asked Bladesmulti but he arrogantly said that if I want I can edit on his talkpage but the page is semiprotected. Isn't this an Injustice done to Dr. Ambedkar just because he was born in a low caste? Astronautabhinavstar ( talk) 06:02, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
My salution to your elders.
I just request you and I hope you will accept it.
I will try to seek consensus. Infact I am working on it. Astronautabhinavstar ( talk) 06:39, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
The Civility Barnstar | |
Whenever I see a new editor in some heated discussion, I noticed many times you personally asking them to cool down. Your sincere efforts in participating civilly in discussions is something others can get inspired by. Thank you for this and your valuable contributions. Ugog Nizdast ( talk) 10:43, 1 May 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks. This one is really appreciated. It touches on an essential ideal of how I want to be. Thanks. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 15:16, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Congratulations! I saw several examples, where your kindness towards POV-pushing editors, obviously violating WIKIPEDIA policies, transcended my limited horizon. JimRenge ( talk) 21:51, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
In the Wipikipedia Project Buddhism; list of particiants, I saw that you are interested in Zen. Could you possibly contribute something to Zen liturgy (liturgies)? I know there is a liturgy in Zen, but I I did not succeed in identifying reliable sources. I also tried to find some sources providing general information on Buddhist liturgy, but this seems to be a blind spot in English publications- Best regards JimRenge ( talk) 21:18, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
My answer (i cannot now edit Administration noticeboard):::Vandal is everybody, who do unconstructive edits and this edits are definitely unconstructive (removing category, delete parts of text ...) Vejvancicky it not did not detect. Please remedy it and warning this user (Feezo), who this unconstructive edits saved-- Lisa Shertoon :-P ( talk) 19:43, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
Surprising that a IP could produce that huge amount of references. I have checked that it was the same editor who has been blocked. But what I am not getting is, if his sources don't support his information, why he keeps pushing them? I haven't checked even a single reference, but I can believe on you here.
I really wish that the editor is alright, and he don't feel hurt by any of you. But incidents like this one really saddens me sometimes, what we can do. Bladesmulti ( talk) 04:39, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
I just noticed an edit to Fire temple in which an editor changed "most" to "some" and added a statement that appears to be unsourced. What is the right thing to do here? CorinneSD ( talk) 14:10, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Recently found out that following text from his page is deleted. "Jurist, politician, philosopher, anthropologist, historian and economist" and instead is currently replaced by "Indian lawyer, politician and academic" A kind request to restore the original text as it suits best for Dr.Ambedkar. There are various references to prove each of these diverse qualities of his. He solely wrote the Constitution of India and was a Minister of Law. He had sound knowledge of History and anthropology. The Nobel prize winner Economist Mr.Amartyasen mentions Dr.Ambedkar as his Father in Economy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A1prashant ( talk • contribs) 18:08, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Shiva, Vishnu etc. are acknowledged in Buddhism, although as worldy deities. Saraswati is considered a full Buddha. Should all these Hindu deity pages be edited to reflect this? VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 21:04, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
The monthly Pet Award for Jonathan. | |
A loving nice Pet Hafspajen ( talk) 15:24, 7 May 2014 (UTC) |
Monthly?!? Man, what a good care, in these times of crisis and shortages! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:28, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua, thanks again for your help with Robert Adams. Just to say, I've changed my username from User:MerlynDanielMali to User:Bodhadeepika, and will edit under that name henceforth. Also, I recently discovered that Robert Adams' Four Principles of Self-Realization are very similar to the Buddhist Lankavatara sutra, which may be of interest given your interest in Buddhism. All the best! Bodhadeepika ( talk) 21:49, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks a lot Joshua for all that help with the name change. I hadn't actually expected it. Bodhadeepika means lamp of knowledge or knowledge lamp. I'm not a lamp of knowledge! ;) But it's the last two words of one of my favourite texts on advaita vedanta, namely Advaita Bodha Deepika (the lamp of non-dual knowledge). Check it out! I didn't realise it was in violation to have had two accounts at once. I disconnected my email and watchlist from MerlynDanielMali and then abandoned the account last night and will certainly only edit as Bodhadeepika from now on. Apologies wikipedia! Bodhadeepika ( talk) 09:19, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Regarding this edit summary: "India had always been known as one India, never southern and northern or eastern india", have a look at Middle kingdoms of India. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:17, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
The problem with dictionary Joshua is this that it points back to each other. Similar is the problem with wikipedia citations. I experience India as I live in it. Here in this moment, not in medieval times, it's one India. How can he had been born even in southern India. Mention the kingdom in which he was born. That wasn't known as south India. It was called by that kingdom name.
I don't know how to discuss via email. Is there any method. Is this method correct?, coz I don't know how to reply back 10:24, 8 May 2014 User:Beyondname
Please stop edit-warring, as you're doing now at Nagarjuna, Samkhya and Adi Shankara. One more revert, and I'll report you for edit-warring. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:22, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
I don't really mind any geographical indication and historical information but it shouldn't be classified with pretension or presumption. In medieval times, when Nagarjuna was born, the name of his kingdom was Vidharbha, that lies in between modern day Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra [2] [3]. The geographical divisions like north and south didn't exist during time of Nagarjuna. Mystic term is given to him due to nonavailability of any term for either bodhisattva or any person who has reached nirvana. Please read more about Nagarjuna & his psyche from [8]. I understand your concern about India's sensitive articles, but the problem here is this that you're talking from only the books that are translated in English and I'm talking about direct experience of Nagarjuna's Treatise which is quite similar in nature to Mahakashyapa and Jiddu Krishnamurti in modern times. It's purely based upon Samkhya philosophy which says, pure knowing is enough, because truth is beyond karma or causation (cause and effect). Therefore, no technique could help. Only externally their languages are different because they have to depend on their peculiar education for communication and external expression. That differs form one person to other and it also differs in time. For example, Buddha and Mahavira both knew the truth, and were wandering in small Indian state called Bihar (Bihar name originated from their there sanskrit word "vihar" or prakrit & pali word "bihar which means travel in English), and they even stayed in same place in same village on one incident, but they didn't meet. Lots of people from outside thinks that they were egoistic, that's why they didn't meet, but there's nothing left to discuss amongst them, because both of them knew. However their expressions were quite different and still they knew the same truth. Nagarjuna, Krishnamurti, Mahakashyapa, Ashtavakra are the masters (master of oneself), who emphasized on pure knowing and that's why they cancelled all the arguments that requires one to do something for reaching nirvana. That's the original philosophy of samkhya. How different in articulation it might look form outside, but from inside, it is the same path. Entire Zen (sanskrit word dhyan) is based on the similar concept of direct knowing, that's why the only meditation they ascribe to is Zazen (aka no mind meditation). Finally I'm not very concerned with what you revert to in the changes. You have full freedom and I will not change it. But if you understand the 3 aspects of searching truth, I think this debate could conclude or at least could possibly move into some direction. India divided search into Satyam, Shivam and Sundaram. Satyam is the pure inquiry and is the original path of Samkhya and the Zen in modern age. Shivam is the path of knowing through determinaton (Sankalpa)and it requires lot of doing and is pure path of Yoga. All the mediation ascribed by Buddha and Mahavira and Patanjali belongs to this. Last is sundaram or knowing through beauty or devotion. All the religions that talk about bhakti (devotion) are part of Sundaram. Examples of bhakti are Muhammad, Jesus, Moses, Meera, Nanak, Kabir, Rabiya, Chaitanya, Ramakrishna and many more. If we understand these 3 dimensions of search, then we can relate properly. Nice to know your views on the same (not thoughts, as thoughts have no value in world of inquiry, spirituality or religion).
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Beyondname ( talk • contribs) 09:17, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
..............................well, a different one. Hafspajen ( talk) 17:26, 8 May 2014 (UTC) |
@ Hafspajen: Now I notice! That's roti! I LOVE roti! (Which, by the way, is an Indo-European word: roti, rat, rad, wheel). Thanks!!! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 19:39, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Could you please tell me the reason of your reverted changes on Dharmic religion on various other pages? As per your change summary you have mentioned POV pushing and WP:COMMONNAME. I believe you must know the meaning of these terms before mentioning them anywhere. The term Indian religions is not at all common and no author mentions it. So if you know the meaning of COMMONNAME then you would understand that the word implies opposite to what it was used for. Second there is no POV as you might have missed one important thing in your bias that I gave references that justified the changes i.e. various authors has used the term Dharmic religion in contrary to this new term called Indian religions which is no where read. Third according to wiki policy of changes made with good faith, you should have resisted your temptation to express your bias. Fourth you better focus on Abrahimic religions and left these Indian topics to Indians as we Indians are more knowledgeable about our culture and faith. Don't use wikipedia as a platform to push your Abrahimic POV on others. So I'm reverting the changes and unlike you, I'm notifying you in advance and if you have any issue with this then you can definitely discuss this on talk page Hrihr ( talk) 18:03, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
Reply by JJ: Thanks for your response. Regarding your arguments:
1. Commonname:
There has been previous concencus for the deletion of "Dharmic" pages and categories:
The issue has also been extensiveley discussed at Talk:Indian religions, previously "Dharmic religions":
2. References: WP:RS:
3. Good faith: calling my edits an expression of my "bias" - fill this in yourself.
4. Nationality: Wikipedia is based on WP:RS, not on nationality. Your "advice" is the kind of behavior which is not toelrated here at Wikipedia.
Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 20:11, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
After a short night's sleep, and thinking over your response, here's a lomger response from me:
Best regards, and thanks again for your extensive response, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:25, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
Brother, i agree if we include the instances for every saint who went into samadhi, the page will become endless. But i have specifically shortlisted only the instances from the recent history and that too related to the very prominent saints (i dont see more that 5-7 such instances in the recent history even if someone else adds to the article). The main idea before adding these instances is that there is hardly any information available on the physical aspect of samadhi even this article talks only in terms of consciousness. Moreover there are a lot of myths related to samadhi that can only be dispelled by quoting some real examples like samadhi can be while talking (e.g. Lahiri Mahasaya), it can be while standing, moving (e.g. ramkrishna & chaitanya), biological processes may switch off & the body may require extensive care (e.g. ramkrishna). I do not feel adding real life incidents to a concept will count to WP:UNDUE; i have also tried my best to maintain a neutral point of view by quoting the original text as far as possible. Kindly discuss the same on the article's talk page before removing it so that others can also share their opinion. UnusualExplorer ( talk) 02:00, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
First of all, it is surprising to see you getting heated up for almost no reason. Second thing is that nothing is going to happen about it. Best can be done is, the issue can be brought to WP:DRN, or RfC it usually takes about 14 days.
If you agree, all you have to do is edit out your warnings, I will obviously do the same, thanks. Bladesmulti ( talk) 07:55, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Will look tomorrow. Where did the other Admin tell you to contact him? I couldn't find the post. Dougweller ( talk) 20:53, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua Jonathan,
As suggested by Bishonen, I would formally like to request you to review the article on Bengali Kayastha. Thanks. Ekdalian ( talk) 09:07, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
I've added some pieces of info, and reshuffled Sharma. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:00, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
For your copyediting works in Indian caste related articles, you get this barnstar. Tito☸ Dutta 05:15, 16 May 2014 (UTC) |
You mean of the elections? I thought of it this morning. Hope that wisdom prevails... Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:29, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Couple of months ago, some editor wrote something like "In five months the Indian Government will form a team of specialists, and correct the info at Wikipedia". It feels like returning to the Cold War: "keep on rocking in the free world". I'd never thought, when I was younger, that I would turn up here, defending the freedom of thought and reliable sources. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:39, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
The statement "Rajus claim kshatriya status" is defendable; the statement "Rajus claim kshatriya status" is not defendable. What? -- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 08:05, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Yes, it is better, isn't it? [30] Hafspajen ( talk) 12:16, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Can you please look the page of Ambedkar? A user removed the Table (List of Books) from the page. Theredpenofdoom is a user who is constantly reverting the changes made by other users. Metta
Can you please look the page of B.R. Ambedkar? A user removed the Table (List of Books) from the page. Theredpenofdoom is a user who is constantly reverting the changes made by other users. Metta 123.239.118.255 ( talk) 22:13, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Joshua, is Apostle Paul really there according to ... [31]? But nothing I know about. Hafspajen ( talk) 01:12, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Sigh, you missed all the fun. Just look at the edit history... Paul the Apostle see : Revision history Hafspajen ( talk) 05:44, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
This is worse. I could not ignore a slow edit war on [Buddhist chant] and realized that one editor is systematically adding Ambedkar related pictures/Captions to seemingly unrelated articles like seat, gesture, gate etc. JimRenge ( talk) 21:51, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello JJ, sorry to answer you late on this, i didn't see your remark on my signature in the first place. Well, I don't know what to say: on my computer it looks fine... Best, - TwoHorned User_talk:TwoHorned 15:44, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Joshua brother ... Accesstoinsight isn't a primary source. Its the only website which gives the Buddhist scriptures. I advise you to read the copyright claim here. I saw from your profile page that your interest is in Buddhism. So don't you know the edits I did was correct? I advise you to kindly recheck my edits ...and atleast rvert the edit which I did on God in Buddhism and Buddha in Hinduism;
And many of my edits were not in violation. Other references were also from this website and you call a primary source? Please recheck your claim and give a response. Stalkford ( talk) 12:33, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Why don't you give the opinion of the Buddhists on that article. Its first of all necessary. or otherwise it will go wrong message to the people that Buddha is a God. Also give atleast a sentence that Buddha himself rejected that he was not any god. you can quote from dona sutta and other buddhist monks Even Dalai lama says " Buddha is just the teacher, you are your own master." If you continue doing like this. It won't be healthy. I beg and request from you. Stalkford ( talk) 13:50, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Gautama Buddha in Hinduism and God in Buddhism. The sources were not primary at all. Infact many other articles are taken from what you call a a primary source. Stalkford ( talk) 14:30, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Stalkford "forgot" to inform you. JimRenge ( talk) 15:06, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
There are numerous issues I have with this page. Firstly, there are a couple of discrepancies on the page - it has 2 different dates for Satyananda starting the International Yoga Fellowship (1956 and 1963) - this organisation does nothing that I am aware of, so why is it there anyway - Secondly is the Bihar School of Yoga - was it 1963 or 1964 when it started? Thirdly, most of the statements on the page are sourced from Satyananda's own books about himself and there is no-one alive to prove or disprove them. Members of his Ashram support his statements and continually re-publish them. Reports of several members of Sivananda's Divine Life Society who knew Satyananda there (not published) say other things. The material on sexual assault can be divided into 2. That of Swami Akhandananda in Australia went through the courts so there will be records. Allegations against Sw Satyananda and others remains statements by individuals that has not been before courts or been published. What should be left in and what removed? Sanatan Saraswati 203.171.95.168 ( talk) 05:11, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
For watching my back. Funny couple of days. The guy who took me to ANI is a pain - new editor with 64 edits who thinks he knows it all (unless he's a sock, which is possible and ironic if he is). The IP just seems to be another denier. Dougweller ( talk) 13:46, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Namaskaram ,hi Joshua how are you?i hope you are fine as like ever.:).could you participate with the below talk page Discussion called [Tenali Ramakrishna. As i noticed , Tenali Ramakrishna title which is not opt for that article. Discussion open.Please participate .Thank you. Eshwar.om Talk tome 18:39, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua, with regards to the Advaita-vedanta template, although neo-Advaita partly came out of Papaji's teachings, he himself is of Ramana's time, and I don't believe should be grouped (in this instance) with with Gangaji and co. Just like Raphael wouldn't be grouped with the pre-raphaelite movement. Raphael may have had an influence on their philosophy and this should of course be duly noted in places, but he himself was nonetheless a renaissance painter and should therefore be grouped with Da Vinci, Botticelli and co. Best, Bodhadeepika ( talk) 08:24, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
I get very few of those! I think you may be rather more deserving one than I am given your sustained efforts. Paul B ( talk) 12:00, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello Adorable Joshua, Your recents edits have been reverted by me. I want to inform you something about him.
First Law minister of India - Dr.Ambedkar . (Is Indian Lawyer a better name?) It should be Jurist. Father of Indian Constitution (Largest Indian Democracy) - Dr. Ambedkar . (Is this line to be removed?) Philosopher - He wrote several books on Buddhism such as Buddha or Karl Marx, Buddha and his Dhamma etc., Riddles in Hinduism etc. (Words were removed)
Barack Obama praised him when he came to India. Noble Prize Winner Amartya Sen calls him his father in Economics. (Economist) The Table concering his writings and speeches were removed without any proper justification. Please dont revert those changes. Why am I in trouble as you mentioned? Your's sincerely. Sid Siddheart ( talk) 19:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
By the way . Wow..You are a Buddhist...I am very happy to know that but please edit Dr.Ambedkar page care fully.. you are removing his tables of writings. My salutation for you by the way. :) Siddheart ( talk) 20:43, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I've added a section in the talk pages defending my changes to the lead. All my changes are referenced and I hope after consideration you may change your mind, or at least we can have a healthy discussion on the talk page about improvements. Thanks! 22:45, 2 June 2014 user:Bhny
Hello Joshua -- I just wondered if you would take a look at the latest edit to Fire temple. An editor removed a picture with no explanation. CorinneSD ( talk) 21:54, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Hello Joshua -- I am very new to Wikipedia. I am learning. It is interesting. Thanks for your help.
TraceyWonder ( talk) 05:48, 3 June 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks! You're welcome. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:54, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Redtigeryx is alone rejecting for months that both Krishna, Balarama are considered as 8th avatar and Krishna/Buddha are also considered as 9th avatar.
So I had reverted back to your version. Redtigeryx hasn't provided a single reason to remove it from list, other than reverting. Bladesmulti ( talk) 09:02, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, the current version looks good, but I think the general list should precede regional variations. Any suggestions for organisation? -- Redtigerxyz Talk 13:56, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
[According to vayu purana] | According to Matsya purana | According to
1. ----------------------------------- | 1.
2. ------------------------------------ | 2.
3.------------------------------------ | 3.
Any suggestion? Bladesmulti ( talk) 01:41, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
I have reverted your reversion of my edits to "Indra's net". I repeat what I have written previously: The number of "citation needed" warning markers is an unnecessary distraction to the reader. I cannot be expected to receive criticism from an "editor" who writes (on this talk page) "You'r [sic] welcome", "Poonja seems to have been a great stimulans [sic]", "I aprreciate [sic]", "than [sic] that should be respected", and "thnaks [sic] for the message". Writtenright ( talk) 16:41, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
I have reverted your reversion of my edits to " Indra's net". I hold fast to my previous position that the number of "citation needed" warning markers is unnecessary and a great distraction to the reader.
I cannot be expected to take seriously criticism from an "editor" who can post (on this talk page) such things as "You'r [sic] welcome", "Poonja seems to have been a great stimulans [sic]", "I aprreciate [sic]", "than [sic] that should be respected", and "thnaks [sic] for the message".
Well, no "thnaks" for your "hlep" (or is it "help"?) with your "edting" on the "Idnra's nte" page. Writtenright ( talk) 16:41, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
JimRenge ( talk) 08:19, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:56, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | ||
For taking the time to review all the claims on the talkpage of Koenraad Elst. Calypsomusic ( talk) 09:48, 6 June 2014 (UTC) |
Does it translate: Devadatta kills (or incites) the elephant? I need it for an image caption. Nice language JimRenge ( talk) 13:46, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks JimRenge ( talk) 14:20, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ground of Being (Dzogchen) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:51, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
I made a few changes, since you are mixing up different topics like sutra and Dzogchen, zen and Dzogchen etc. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 17:26, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Why are you sourcing with other wiki's? You know that is not proper right? VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 18:55, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
You should rename ground of being to simply "ground". Ground of being is a term I think originating with Herbert Guenther. However the Tibetan is a simple word "gzhi" and it simply translates to "ground". For example Sam van Schaik, a top academic, simply uses ground in his book "Approaching the Great Perfection." VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 06:27, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Use an academic book for your sourcing, such as "Approaching the Great Perfection" ( preview) by Sam van Schaik. It talks about a lot of topics including the ground. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 15:02, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Ground talk. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 16:04, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Schaik's book is 2004. Google shows 2013, but its wrong. I don't know how to change your sfn. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 21:26, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
What on earth is this? Hafspajen ( talk) 08:32, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Anyone who has lots of spare time, maybe you could seek out training to become qualified as a medium for the Nechung Oracle. 😊 -- Presearch ( talk) 21:22, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
You are becaming a DrMies. Well, OK, I make my first oracle pronunciation for you, Presearch: that Karmapa controversy is no controversy. It is balancing up the situation of the big Panchen Lama's disappearance, you know. Panchen Lama is dead, for sure. Now we have two Karmapas, and it is a way to preserve knowledge. How am I doing? Hafspajen ( talk) 10:16, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Greetings! I was searching for this tiny little subsection that I once ran into at the article Nirvana a long time ago somewhere last year. The subsection is called Samsara is Nirvana [32], and it was obviously removed for the total lack of sources. As I was googling up that very subsection, however, it seemed that there were quite many sources to support the things presented at that subsection (I haven' taken a closer look though). Therefore, I was wondering if you were interested in looking for some actual source material related to that section with me? :P Cheers mate! Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 19:46, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Could you give your opinion on Talk:Mindfulness#Merger proposal? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 16:16, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello Joshua . I just made the changes because I THOUGHT that the Article was missing something because you removed the names of Universities from the sentence. Sorry for that.
Can you please make this Edit yourself about His Holiness Dalai Lama on Dr.Ambedkar. http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/dalai-lama-ambedkar-spread-awareness-on-buddhism-in-india/article1472413.ece
I saw this Picture of His Holiness on Dalai Lama's website,. http://www.dalailama.com/gallery/album/0/310
Tibetan Buddhists carry the portrait of Ambedkar. http://www.reachladakh.com/mass-essay-writing-competition-on-123rd-birthday-of-dr-br/2344.html
I hope you can make a contribution. Atleast something can be added. Thanks. Siddheart ( talk) 13:14, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
His Holiness Dalai Lama quoted Dr.Ambedkar that he spread awareness about Dr.Ambedkar.I gave the various sources also. It seems you don't want to edit because you also reverted it. I came here seeking help from you as a friend but you never help and instead you reverted it. If you think there is no relevance about this Dalai Lama quote on Dr.Ambedkar then I congratulate you. Thanks. Have a nice day. May all beings be well and happy. 101.58.180.92 ( talk) 06:10, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Dear Joshua brother, Teach me something If I don't know. I came here as a friend. The first link is from a Newspaper Article. 2nd Link is from Dalai Lama's own website. Third Link is about Tibetan Buddhists who carry the portrait of Dr.Ambedkar on his birthday. Now from where else I can have a source? I was talking about first link. And if its a primary source (which I think is not) then why can't we add it? It has a relevance to Dr. Ambedkar's page. I am a big fan of His Holiness because I like when he laughs . It seems like that Laughing Buddha is in-front of me. Will you please help me? Your's Siddheart 115.185.80.137 ( talk) 11:56, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
I quoted from The Hindu which is a newspaper and is not a primary source. Will you please add it brother? 115.185.80.137 ( talk) 13:01, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Dear Joshua brother, This quote is relevant because it is quoted by His Holiness Dalai Lama on Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. That's why it is relevant. Can you edit it? If you can't edit it then will you please allow me to edit because when I edit it you revert it. I am asking this seriously and the quote is from a Newspaper The Hindu and why can't it be edited. Why I am in trouble ? You always say it.I am just giving an Information. User:Joshua Jonathan Thanks User:Siddheart 115.249.44.252 ( talk) 18:06, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
I didn't knew that it is like that. I was just answering to you. I didn't say Ambedkar is Important to Tibetan Buddhists. Well Still you are my friend. Happy editing. Thanks. 115.249.44.252 ( talk) 06:52, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Joshua, Wikipedia 'turiya' is not accurate. Please note turiya is not synonymous with samadhi. Thank you, sir. My e-mail is ddotsmith009@gmail.com if u need clarification. Svenakira1 17:28, 21 June 2014
Shouldn't you organize the page into sutric Buddha Nature (for example the Tathāgatagarbha sūtras) and tantric Buddha Nature (for example Mahamudra)? There are 2 Buddha Natures. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 01:32, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Copied to Talk:Buddha-nature#Buddha Nature page; to be continued there
Hi! I noticed that the Three pillars of Zen by Philip Kapleau is being used as a source at Buddha-nature. I was wondering, how reliable account about Hakuun Yasutani's life the book really is, taking into consideration that Philip Kapleau never received a Dharma transmission and wasn't later even acknowledged by the Sanbo Kyodan school? For example it is said that (Sharf, Robert H. (1995-C), "Sanbokyodan. Zen and the Way of the New Religions", Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 1995 22/3-4) [33]:
Nevertheless, the dangers of defection and schism were not unknown, for just three years prior to Yasutani’s retirement his American disciple, Philip Kapleau, led his own af³liate group to secede from the Sanbõkyõdan. Kapleau’s training was, by Sanbõkyõdan standards, quite rigorous. As mentioned above, he spent almost three years (1953–1956) in the Hosshin-ji sõdõ under Harada prior to his training under Yasutani. He remained with Yasutani for about ten years, serving as translator in dokusan for Yasutani’s foreign students. He returned to America in 1965 and established a Zen Center in Rochester, New York, that was one of the first of its kind in America. Kapleau quickly set about adapting Yasutani’s Zen to the American scene: students wore Western dress and used English chants in the zendõ, they were given Western-sounding Buddhist names at ordinations, and they modified ceremonies and rituals to “accord with our Western traditions” (KAPLEAU 1979, p. 269). Apparently Kapleau took the Zen rhetoric he had been taught quite literally: he considered the outward forms of Zen mere upãya, to be modified in accord with the needs and abilities of his students. As long as he remained true to the experiential essence of Zen, the outward “cultural forms” were of little consequence. Yasutani, however, objected strongly to some of the reforms, notably to the use of an English translation of the Heart Sðtra in the zendõ. These and other factors led to a serious falling-out, and in 1967 Kapleau formally ended his relationship with Yasutani."
The assertions get even more severe, as we can see from here:
David Scates, an ex-student of the Rochester Zen Center, wrote to Yamada asking about Kapleau’s credentials. Yamada’s reply, dated 16 January 1986, included a blunt public statement to the effect that Kapleau never finished his kõans and never received inka. This was accompanied by a long letter to Scates that detailed Kapleau’s inadequacies and lack of training, and even hinted that Kapleau may be guilty of fraud (Yamada suggests that Kapleau might be proffering a precept or kenshõ certificate as a document of transmission; since Kapleau’s Western students know no Japanese, they supposedly would not know the difference)e
The most critical blow against Kapleau, however, can be found here (Lachs, Stuart (2006 / 2008), "The Zen Master in America: Dressing the Donkey with Bells and Scarves", Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Religion, Washington D.C., Nov. 18, 2006 / The International Association of Buddhist Studies Congress, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, June 24, 2008) [34]:
In 1997 Ji’un Kubota roshi, Yamada’s successor as head of the Sanbokyodan sect, answered an enquiry from a Polish Zen group asking about Kapleau’s credentials. He replied that Kapleau did not finish his training, claiming that Kapleau’s fame for the Three Pillars of Zen was undeserved because he [Kubota] and Yamada roshi had translated “all” of the work in the book. He added that Kapleau “was not able to read Japanese” and only made their translation “more understandable” to native English readers. He remarked that Kapleau was arrogant and proud and that he treated Yasutani “abusively and impolitely.” He then proclaimed, “He [Kapleau] is no more a Zen man. His teaching is no more Buddhist Zen but only his own philosophy.”
.
What do you think? =P Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 14:09, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Copied to Talk:Buddha-nature#Philip Kapleau as a source; to be continued there
Sorry, I restored the wrong version. Do you think 101.57.90.252 is a SP of Siddheart? JimRenge ( talk) 08:08, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Afternoon tea ... for you. Have a cake too, Chocolate Pecan Tarts on baking sheet. Hafspajen ( talk) 13:41, 26 June 2014 (UTC) |
Since most of us who were active on the India page aren't very active now, some of the same talk page posts and content requests are getting restarted. You may want to look at the archives. Also, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Realhistorybuff/Archive. cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 05:16, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Is this our friend, going IP, traveling around? Looks like it is editing much the very same topics like him... (and - Is this true?) Hafspajen ( talk) 09:55, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Maybe not. Can you check out if it is a copy-thing. In that case it needs to be rewritten. My first rection was that someone tries to blow up this holy-fool thing about Rasputin again. And if it IS copyvio, one can simply reword it, write it in a different way. -You had good sources, didn't you? - and I know only one person who is targeting Rasputin like this, with this foxterrier-like stubborness. Did it again, that one. Hafspajen ( talk) 17:03, 2 July 2014 (UTC) Ha, LOOK at this... Hafspajen ( talk) 19:52, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
See this innovative test of my sense of humour. JimRenge ( talk) 14:06, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Can you please take a look at Dorje Shugden Controversy and Dorje Shugden? VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 18:33, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Also please take a look at hatha yoga. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 19:39, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
I updated the Saiva flowchart that I saw floating around on a couple of pages. Please see it here. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 18:07, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
The current Vedic page is full of historical errors such as the inclusion of the Aryan Invasion theory, which was propagated by the British to divide and conquer India by causing strife between the various castes (where there was little to none). Similar theories have been used such as the Hutu-Tutsi origin, and have led to genocide in Rwanda. Please understand that teaching false theories such as this leads to ignorance in academia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JiggerJones ( talk • contribs) 01:50, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Aren't they in the article anyway? Dougweller ( talk) 10:36, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Joshua, I thought you might be interested in this. Bishonen | talk 13:27, 7 July 2014 (UTC).
I am astounded to see no mention of Maratha Empire in the History section of India. I, as a student of History, consider it to be a distortion of history.It was mainly the Marathas who destroyed the Mughals and the most influential power in the subcontinent before the Britishers properly established themselves in the early 19th century was the Marathas.There should be at least 2-3 lines on the Maratha Empire in the history section between the Mughals and the EIC. I am adding just one common line there. Please see it and if needed make some additions. Even, History of India page makes it clear but I do not know what happened to India page. I waited in the talk page there for 60 hours but there was no reply. Thank You. Ghatus ( talk) 08:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC) Copied to Talk:India#Maratha Empire
The sentence you copied over from History of India is a copyvio from EB. Unfortunately the History of India article seems to have a lot of these, we will need to clean that up. You might want to rephrase this one. cheers. — Spaceman Spiff
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Dzogchen may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s and 2 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:32, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mindstream may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:44, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Joshua, could you please look at the latest edits at the Celibacy. They messed up the lead, so they can't stay where they are now, but if it is useful, we can move them to the appropiate sections. Hafspajen ( talk) 06:59, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
OK. Thanks. Hafspajen ( talk) 07:20, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Padmasambhava is 99% fictional and Tonpa Shenrab Miwoche is 100% fictional. See Sam van Schaik's "Tibet: A History", Ronald Davidson's "Tibetan Renaissance" and David Germano's "Funerary Transformation of the Great Perfection". Basically, you are filling the articles with very late mythologies, not actual history. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 19:46, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:57, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
how are you?i hope your fine.Again user Redtigerxyz started his journey to destroy all my edits.almost more than 10 pages of my edits correpted by single day itself.I am helpless.Please if you have time kindly look on that.thank you! Eshwar.om Talk tome 19:34, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Joshua Jonathan, for your comments. I know you are always fair, so I have tried to make the heading of that particular subsection a little more balanced. As you are aware, there has been a debate raging for centuries as to whether Buddha Nature is essence or potential - or both. I think you will agree that in view of this contention it is best to cover both aspects and reflect that in the subsection heading. Thanks again for your input. Best wishes to you. From Suddha ( talk) 12:02, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
There is no need for 3 Atman articles: Atman (Buddhism), Ātman (Jainism) and Atman (Hinduism). If you look at Sanskrit dictionaries, there is just 1 entry for words, not 3 different entries. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 21:08, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
The problem is that Neoadvaitins accuse each other of being Neoadvaitins, while denying that they themselves are Neoadvaitins. And then they set up websites proclaiming that they are the real Advaitins, while everyone else are Neoadvaitins. Most of this article is made of such non-RS sources for example Dennis Waite and James Swartz. Dennis Waite, James Swartz etc. have no qualifications and are not RS. I would urge you to clean the article of this junk. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 04:49, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Off topic, but to address what you frequently elude to. In Mahamudra, one receives initiation. Then one recognizes the fourth time and the conceptualizing mind. Once one definitely recognizes, one simply can relax in the knowledge. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 17:00, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
So if I disagree with a scholar, I can just edit and revise their translation? VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 18:12, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Copied to Talk:Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra#Tony Page's translation
@ user:Joshua Jonatan, don't you think we have the same problem with using Philip Kapleau as a source, like discussed here [36]? He is not a Buddhist scholar nor a linguist, and he is even discredited by the current of Sanbokyodan. What do you think? =P Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 19:55, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me remind about talkpage of Dr.Ambedkar. It is not good for someone to define Ambedkar in usually 3 words. There should be atleast 4 words. There are not 6 words which can be called a Laundry list but rather 4 words. Will you shake a hand on this? Akhil Bharathan ( talk) 13:11, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Thankyou Joshua for your condolences. I like well-wishers like you. Many Dalits are killed brutally, raped and tortured just because they belonged to the lowest category of caste system. It happened with my own family too. Buddha was the onewho was against caste system and fought against it. Read Assalyana sutta, Aggana Sutta, Vasala Sutta etc to know about Buddha's view on caste system. In Dhammachakkapavvataana sutta (turning of wheel) Buddha said to not to indulge oneself in extreme sensual pleasures OR self mortification(just like some jains do). So you are right my friend. His Holliness Dalai Lama said " You are your own master, Buddha's duty is just to show you the way". Recently Dalai L ama was also in headlinesdue to some followers of Dorje Shudjen. I am again sorry If I hurted you whether intentionally or unintentionally. I saw your recent contributions and I guess you are a Vajrayana Buddhist. With Karuna, Metta and Mudita. Akhil Bharathan ( talk) 15:55, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
What do you mean?? Akhil Bharathan ( talk) 17:32, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
The Dorje Shugden issue is completely manufactured by the British group New Kadampa Tradition. This same group has been controlling Wikipedia since 2007. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 17:32, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Well I actually saw this video > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIjCDKKvcuI. Akhil Bharathan ( talk) 17:54, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
I understood what you say. I like His Holiness Dalai lama for his behavior friend. He is a great soul on earth. Akhil Bharathan ( talk) 17:59, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Please see here. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 21:53, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:53, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi! I thought you might be interested in this view on icchantikas by Stephen Hodge: "It is at this phase of textual development that the icchantikas make their appearance, a term first used to denote the many this-worldly monks leading settled lives. It was then extended and worsened in its connotations to include all those who have destroyed any chance of liberation in themselves. It is interesting to see development of historical conceptions between different religions - even such distant as Buddhism and Christianity. For example the development of the concept of Hell in Christianity compared to the Buddhist view of icchantikas - from the salvific point of view of course. :P Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 18:33, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
I addressed some issues on the Dorje Shugden Controversy page, mostly raised by CFynn, including the previous deletion of academic material and the need to summarize the academic views on the subject. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 16:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
What is the difference between your Sources section and Further Reading and References? VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 05:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! Is Bultrini's "The Dalai Lama and the King Demon" a reliable source? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:29, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jonathan
Sometimes different people have different views about what is "the truth" about a controversial subject like this (particularly if they are in any way connected with the subject) and so will try to edit an article so that it more reflects what they view as the "truth" or the "real facts". In doing so they will often claim that they are simply trying to make the article "more balanced" or "neutral" - which they usually sincerely believe they are. However Wikipedia is not about getting to "the truth" (See: [[Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth[]). Generally Wikipedia articles should reflect the balance of current academic opinion on a subject - whether that academic opinion coincides what you or I, or religious believers, consider to be the truth or not. We may not agree with what respected academics like Thurman or very experienced and professional investigative reporters like Bultrini say - but they are widely acknowledged in their respective fields so Wikipedia counts them as very good sources. If other, equally good, sources disagree with their opinion then of course those sources should be used in the article as well. Cheers.
Chris Fynn (
talk) 10:03, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jonathan - Please respect the {{In use}} template when the message is displayed for a whole article or for a section. Next time, whenever you ate actively editing an article I suggest you use it to avoid edit conflicts. Meanwhile please hold back from this article while the message is displayed. You can make whatever changes you want to once that message is gone. Chris Fynn ( talk) 09:34, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Editing style (selecting, arranging and commenting quotes from religious texts without providing secondary RS which provide context, critical analysis and multiple points of view) and content of this edit reminds me of another user. I fear he might be a reincarnation looking for trouble. Some time ago I read on top of the talk page of davidwr (January 22, 2014): "People are more important than Wikipedia.". I agree with this insight and try hard to avoid hurting users, whose edits or behaviour appear to be disruptive. I hope he will spare us the discussion at the drama board. JimRenge ( talk) 15:07, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Within "Note 1" it shows a reference with page number. But "Note 3" doesn't. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 23:38, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Please see the other Dorje Shugden page. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 04:27, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
( talk page stalker) Keep up the good work that you are doing! Oh, and enjoy your holidays! =) Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 15:14, 30 July 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks - for the Barnstar, and for the good holiday-wishes! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 16:22, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
etc. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 01:07, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua Jonathan
I see you were one of the last people to edit the Eight Consciousnesses article. I have added a list of some useful sources to the talk page of that article - if anyone wants to improve it (might be a bit of a relief from Shugden). In view of other articles you have been editing recently, this one in particular might interest you: A Comparison of Alaya-vijñāna in Yogacara and Dzogchen.
I think Ālayavijñāna should probably have its own separate article as it is one of the key concepts in Buddhist thought.
- Chris Fynn ( talk) 11:44, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Dorje Shugden controversy, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Chris Fynn ( talk) 19:25, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Can you review my recent edits to Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen. Thanks. Chris Fynn ( talk) 22:38, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Cleaned up Yellow Book section. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 16:03, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
For example, see the Barnett quote in the NKT/WSS section. Its completely unintelligible. Can I fix the various errors you introduced into the article? VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 06:35, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Kjangdom/Audrey37 ( same person and director of the ISC) deleted half the article. Please work off this revision, where I use your expanded intro. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 15:46, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
A merge would bring stability. You are free to oppose, but I don't think its in the best interest. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 05:07, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
There is a derogatory content by self styled editor Sitush I already tried contacting your volunteers but they refused to help. Sitush May be a hard working genius in your eyes but it does not give him full right to assault anyone please ask him to stop that. Please find the issues below which I discussed with your team
Insulting /Derogatry content on JAT people page P PC to info-en-v 3 days agoDetails Sir/Madam,
I would like to bring to your notice the derogatry content on Jat people page which is clearly aimed at insulting the community.
In the introduction: the intoduction starts with term 'non elite' and 'backward caste' so as to give readers as impression of a lower community. The Jats won majority of medals for India in recent olympics, commonwealth games and they are present in every sphere of life- from doctors, engineers, sports( Sushil kumar, virender sehwagvijender singh, saina nehwal). Acting(Ranbir hooda. mallika sherawat, dharmender), Politics, building( DLF) , Army(including present army chief)so why the negative aspects are highlighted?
In the Varna status only based on fiction of Uma Bharti it is written: Uma Chakravarti reports that the varna status of the Jats improved over time, with the Jats starting in the untouchable/chandala varna during the eighth century, changing to shudra status by the 11th century, which is offensive , without evidence.
Whenever I tried to edit the page by highlighting achievements of Jats in sports, army , positive social customs they have been deleted.
It is a clear assault on the community by other caste hindus who think that the best way to exert superiority of there caste is to highlight negative aspects of Jats. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Praveen3333 ( talk • contribs)
Today another user sent me a link to a discussion about whether overpopulation in India that was archived. If I were to start a discussion that provided sources and participate every now and then (I'm busy with other stuff) would you contribute to it? Regards-- Taeyebaar ( talk) 05:32, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
In case you wish to contribute to it on and off it's here. I'm going through some sources but am thin on time-- Taeyebaar ( talk) 04:25, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Joshua,
I do not understand why you have reverted my recent edit and at the same time accused me of 'edit-warring'. You have also accused me of POV pushing, but I am merely including some pro-Shugden statements using, in my opinion, reliable sources. It is clear that the article gives far too much weight to the anti-Shugden view at the moment, which is something I am trying to address, and would encourage other editors to do the same. I do not accuse people of POV-pushing when they include anti-Shugden statements, and I would suggest you refrain from this unecessary name-calling - "POV-pushing", "edit-warring". It seems a little inflammatory and over the top.
Anyway, just the record, I am keen to improve this article, and I think the edits I made did improve it. It is in no-one's interst that the article is so heavily anti-Shugden at the moment. I think we need to work together to improve this article. You seem like a sane person and I would be happy to work with you and other editors in a constructive way.
All the best, Audrey37 ( talk) 13:46, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Cool. I'll check out Kay, and take it from there. All the best. Audrey37 ( talk) 20:40, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:BLP unreliable sources must be removed immediately from biographies of living persons. Can you please rewrite this section at the 14th Dalai Lama page? The current section contains the Bernis PDF, which must be removed immediately. CFynn and I also discussed the Bernis PDF here. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 20:16, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I want to draw your attention to History of India Page (Before 1947). The opening phrase of the introductory line of the page was changed from “history of India” to “history of the Indian sub-continent” yesterday. I undid it to the previous form. But, it was changed by a user again. I do not intend to go into an edit war with him. Hence, I am informing you to look into the matter.
This is a classic or typical case of confusing “India”, a cultural and geographical entity ( Sindu>Hindu>Indus>India) with the modern nation-state of “Republic of India” which came in being into 1947. Before 1947, “India” was a term used to denote a cultural and geographical entity like “Arabia”. The concept of “Indian Sub-continent” is as modern as the concept of the nation state of “Republic of India”. Both of the terms did not exist 2000 years or 5000 years ago. Past can not be judged by present realities.
Again, a clarification is given on the top of the page that this is not about the “Republic of India”, but on “India” before 1947. One can notice the same sort of misconception regarding the birth place of Lord Buddha without realizing that both “Republic of India” and “Republic of Nepal” did not exist 2500 years ago. Hence, Buddhism is called an "Indian Religion", not a "Nepalese Religion".
BTW, One can not give the reason of "Redirection" as an excuse to change history.Clarification is already given on the top of the page for the purpose.
I hope I have made you understand my point. Please look into it. Thank you. Ghatus ( talk) 04:45, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for looking into the matter. But, is there now any need for clarification on the top of the page as the introductory sentence starts now with the phrase "history of the Indian sub-continent" instead of "history of India"? Isn't it needless repetition? Shouldn't then the clarification be removed as the matter is already cleared below??? Since clarification is already made now,I have moved the History of Pakistan and History of Bangladesh link to the "See Also" section.History of RoI was already moved. Ghatus ( talk) 08:19, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
What are you talking about VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 06:20, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
I can't even access the WSS-site! It's blocked by Web of Trust! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 06:29, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
There are 2 Buddha Natures. When you say Buddha Nature you are probably referring to sutric Buddha Nature of the Tathāgatagarbha Sūtras. When I say Buddha Nature I generally refer to tantric Buddha Nature of Mahamudra etc., which is merely the nature of mind. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 23:04, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
@ Jayaguru-Shishya:Buddhist tantra (Vajrayana) is stuff like Kalachakra Tantra, Cakrasamvara Tantra, Hevajra Tantra etc. with associated commentaries. Also includes dohas and terma. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 21:42, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
I am not sure I agree with the approriateness of including living people in this category. People are not controversies. If they are involved, they'll be mentioned in the articles about the dispute. Yworo ( talk) 20:34, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Joshua Jonathan. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. VictoriaGrayson ( talk) 00:12, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
I may be wrong or may not be, but When did Buddha or Buddhism promote the concept of God? Buddha left the question on God extremely vague and refused to accept a Supreme Creator. In early Buddhism there was no concept of God before they got split in two main branches much later. At the time of Ashoka, there was no GOD in Buddhism, forget about having "Gods". Later, some Devas and Supernatural Beings came, but that's a different issue. BTW, I would like to have your response on this. Thank you. Ghatus ( talk) 13:29, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
The highest stage of Buddhism is "Moksha/ Nirvana" or "Emancipation". After "Moksha", no one can re-born.Even the stories of Jataka ( The "alleged" reincarnations of Lord Buddha) are highly contested and go against the teachings of Lord Buddha. Lord Buddha denounced ignorance and superstitions, hence the stories of mythology or cosmology or "may be born" have no place in Buddhism, surely not at the time of Ashoka in the 3rd century BCE. BTW, loved talking to you. With best wishes, Ghatus ( talk) 16:58, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, this is about edits, re-edits and reversals in Yoga article. You seem to have strong opinion regarding pre-Buddhist Nikayas sources about origins of yoga. Your description “speculative” seems to be a biased approach that labels material evidence to fit that label. ‘Speculative’ is rather a theoretical realm, where people argue about semantics and such, but here we’re talking about something that you can see and possibly touch. So, what is speculative here? You need to explain that before arbitrarily removing some description. Also, I might point out there’s growing number of commentators who indeed support the view that Pashupati seals testify to yoga’s origins. It’s not a certainty but a possibility that needs to be mention for the sake of completeness. Thanks. Pradeepwb. (Pradeepwb) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pradeepwb ( talk • contribs) 16:35, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
It might be helpful to read this article that outlines the views and opinions regarding this subject: "3 Ways to View the Ancient History of Yoga" Bjonnes, Ramesh. "3 Ways to View the Ancient History of Yoga". Elephan Journal. Retrieved Sep 2, 2014. (Pradeepwb 17:00, 2 September 2014 (UTC))
Copied to Talk:Yoga#Pashupati seal. To be continued there.
On their respective pages, I would define Hinduism and Buddhism as Dharmas, not religions. VictoriaGrayson Talk 17:54, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Don't know if you would still consider Bladesmulti to be your mentee, but if you do, I would really appreciate it if you weighed in here. Blades has been insisting that a journal published by the university of Florence is "an SPS with an anti-agenda." [40]. The discussion was awful enough without him, but he was invited there two days ago, and proceeded to delete the source that the entire discussion was based off of. If you cannot be bothered with him anymore, or if you do not have the time, I understand. Regards, Vanamonde93 ( talk) 01:29, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Have you read Buddhism in Vietnam? Pretty informative, although it may require some templates and more information about current situation. Bladesmulti ( talk) 05:56, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
There was an entry for a book on Hinduism which was removed with comment "Removed non-scholarly work".
Thanks, Gurudutt ( talk) 09:46, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
The simple question is: why this book, and why not one of the thousands of other books? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 12:24, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
@ Guruduttmallapur: I have objected to books written by the Dalai Lama and other modern lamas. So your analogy up above doesn't make sense. VictoriaGrayson Talk 17:28, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
This Q came to me from ABISY page but is generic. Is Times of India, Hindustan Times, The Hindu not 'published' sources. IMHO, They are available on web too just like other publications. The [web #] super-scripts looks like a distraction. I haven't observed it on other articles also, is there alternative ways? Thank you. -- AmritasyaPutra✍ 14:13, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diplomacy | ||
Barnstar of Diplomacy for your help in resolving disputes on Akhil Bharatiya Itihas Sankalan Yojana. Thank you. AmritasyaPutra✍ 01:47, 11 September 2014 (UTC) |
Thank you very much for the barnstar! I'm really happy that my interference is appreciated. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:04, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for all your help there, especially in reinstating the text that our over-zealous friend blanked. In any case, I suspect that this particular question got a little drowned on the talk, so I'm asking it here again; is there a reason you removed the reference to OIT, after drawing attention to it yourself? Cheers, Vanamonde93 ( talk) 21:00, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Please do not place people, especially living people, in this category. A person is not a controversy. They may be controversial, but we don't call this out by placing them in a category for controversies. If the controversy is notable, then an article should be written on the controversy. But we don't place people in such categories. Thank you. Yworo ( talk) 04:10, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi JJ, what is the way forward if I believe some editor(s) is consistently trying to be unfriendly (you can substitute a stronger adjective) on talk pages... follows my edits consistently, repeatedly gets into edit war and the argument is let the new disputed content stay and let us discuss (refuse to follow BRD every single time). What are my options? I seriously dislike ANI and 'complaining', I want to stay limited to content discussion. -- AmritasyaPutra T 15:12, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
appear to have been rev-deleted, but not completely; you can still see them looking through the history (which I did because your talk is on my watchlist). Vanamonde93 ( talk) 15:53, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
-- AmritasyaPutra T 04:34, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi JJ, could you take a look at this talk page discussion, I have given the exact diff I am talking about and expressed my concernt explicity with the policy I am referring to directly linked there. I think I have made my objection clear, could you comment wethere I have not been sufficiently clear and should add any other detail(s): Talk page link. -- AmritasyaPutra T 05:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
A mentorship is a good idea, but it's also a lot of work. But it's praisable that you ask for it. How about this: when needed, you ask me for advice, and I'll see what I can do. I'll also keep an eye once and a while on your edits. Is that okay? I'll give feedback on content, interaction with other users, and Wiki-policies. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Kalakannija. Please be so kind not to insert the Nibbedhika sutra-quote all over the place. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:42, 23 September 2014 (UTC) who cares? Kalakannija ( talk) 19:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Greetings Jonathan! I know that you are fond of the {{sfn}} tags for sources, but is it that you can't include a URL with those? Honestly, I have no idea how to use those ones. xP I'd like to add two Google books sources to Mindfulness#Buddhism. Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 13:49, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=User_talk:Joshua_Jonathan/Archive_2014#Primary_source.3F There was one more link, where JimRinge had also said that we cannot use this website as a source. Bladesmulti ( talk) 14:41, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
You probably heard of this fracas already, but does this seem like a reliable source to you? The language screems POV at me, even from just the blurb. Possibly barely acceptable for a statement about an event, certainly nothing else. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 05:09, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Oh please, step back, both of you. I'll have a longer look later today, and I'll read the mail(s). Please be so kind, both of you, to hold back for a while. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:46, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jonathan, if you have a chance, I would be interested in your opinion on this discussion on the the Karma talk page: Talk:Karma#Problem_with_recent_section_reordering
Best regards, Dorje108 ( talk) 19:15, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Like the heading says. Regards, Vanamonde93 ( talk) 01:23, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Template:Modern Indian religions writers has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. §§ Dharmadhyaksha§§ { T/ C} 06:42, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
I am not, I am only concerned about India Bhishek ( talk) 14:58, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
I think that would be from the oldest article of Glowalkar which was rejected and disowned officially in press by RSS but few keep using it selectively. I would have all earlier prints too (I have access to physical libraries that hols old books, if you want I can scan and send, I have worked in digitisation). :-) -- AmritasyaPutra T 07:51, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Note also the clarification that I put in [44], sourced from Jaffrelot, none less. I was hoping that some RSS person might give me a barnstar for it some day, but I am not holding my breath! Kautilya3 ( talk) 18:03, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
You reverted, reintroducing "Swami". You should be aware that this has previously discussed here in regards the move which corrected the article title. Please reconsider. An edit war would not be productive. LeadSongDog come howl! 07:24, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Copied to Talk:Vivekananda#Swami. To be continued there.
Not really incorrect. Searching about way of life, there's higher generalization about Buddhism. You can add way of life, anywhere on first paragraph and probably last line? Bladesmulti ( talk) 14:50, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
The Indian Barnstar of National Merit | ||
I am truly feeling honored to give you this barnstar. Thanks for "everything" you have done to improve WikiProject India | ||
this WikiAward was given to Joshua Jonathan by Tito☸ Dutta on 03:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC) |
Sincere thanks for this Barnstar. I'm really moved that my contributions are being appreciated, not just for the good of India and the need to live together with so many different groups, but also given the resistance those contributions have also met. Thank you, very much! Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:13, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
That editor has a long history of copyvio problems, and one of his sources, [48], is a forum full of copyvio - added by "arun.vr". Dougweller ( talk) 16:08, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Jonathan, I am dumbfounded by your recent edits to the Four Noble Truths. Don't you think it is appropriate to discuss changes of this magnitude on the talk page before making these types of edit? Needless to say, I don't agree with your changes. Dorje108 ( talk) 00:42, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
You may try leaving me a message on your/my talk page or mentor page, before blanking content on my user page. The words were not full username nor linked. You also know it is not for nothing and this has a source. It is not in sarcasm if you presumed so, it is sincere even if you do not believe and no speculation is needed either because it is not a discussion. It is a strong message. Do you think backing out of three articles is not a good gesture? You yourself congratulated me for the neutral and dispassionate way I put my argument recently and also left it to them, I took the first step back each time. Is five out of five ani by the same people while they follow me from article to article a coincidence? You saw how "also known as" edit war happened by them. You also noted that the recent edit was also two sided and it is unfair to put entire blame on one person. How fair is it that I continuously defend old referenced content itself which shall stand deleted while at the same time I must bring argument against new content that shall remain in the article? No answer is expected. I need to resist back to the wiki-hounding that I perceive, I am not asking for any confirmation. I mean what I have written, there is no hidden thing and this is not a matter of discussion here, let it rest here. Thank you. -- AmritasyaPutra T 15:55, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
This table inserted (given below) is erroneous. We talked about it on my talk page. Sources are taken from those authors who are neither Historians nor experts on India History nor written on the periodization of Indian Histoy.All eminent Historians on Indian history like R. Thapar, R.C.Majumder, Eaton etc never gave such periodization. Such pharses like “Ascetic reformism”, “Late-Classical Hinduism”, “Islamic rule and "Sects of Hinduism", “Modern Hinduism” as periods of Indian History are bogus. Show me one such example given by ANY historian on Indian history in ANY historical work/research/book as the name of those as historial periods. You are trying to pass some phrases of Hinduism as The History of India. NO historian has done such periodization of Indian History. It is totally a fanciful creation.
The other table is detailed. Hence it was entered. Name it what you want-Time table of south Asia or Indian Sub-Continent. It does not matter. But, do not replace it with a bogus one. Ghatus ( talk) 07:24, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Likely to be controversial. VictoriaGrayson Talk 03:19, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Please see the Talk:India page. Since you are the last person to make a change there, am writing to you. Are you an admin? I request involvement of other wiki editors and admin to resolve points mentioned here. Can you help please? How do I go about it? Does this require going to dispute resolution? Please guide.-- Mayasutra [= No ||| Illusion =] ( talk) 00:22, 25 October 2014 (UTC)Mayasutra
Hello, please clarify this. Is it disallowed to mention verbatim what both OED and EB mention within ref tags as in this. Thanks. -- Mayasutra [= No ||| Illusion =] ( talk) 04:49, 25 October 2014 (UTC)Mayasutra
Joshua, Looking at this diff, I know that it apppears that additional citations to EB and OED are being added. But that is not the case: what is happening is that existing citations to those same refeernces (using the {{ sfn}} tag used throughout the article) are being duplicated (using the inconsistent and incomplete {{ cite}} template). Placinng this on your page, because the discussion on Talk:India is such a lengthy mess, and because the misunderstanding seems to be raising tempers between you and I, which is unwarranted (and, personally disheartening to me) given our long history of cooperative editing. Cheers. Abecedare ( talk) 06:01, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
This is not OED Abecedare ( talk) 15:16, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Some guy is changing this article from traditional to modern - I don't understand why. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Religion_and_drugs&curid=2550591&diff=631680540&oldid=631680225 What do you think. Hafspajen ( talk) 00:11, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jonathan, in one of those debates we had on some page you said, "Dharma is a beautiful word." On my user page, I had written that Valmiki had recast Dharma in terms of rational debate. A good example of such debate, one that I was introduced to when I was 12 or 13, is this one between Rama and Vali. Would you like to give it a read, and then we can talk about it? Cheers, Kautilya3 ( talk) 21:25, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
enjoy the peace of mind
Thank you for quality articles on Buddhism, such as
Zhongfeng Mingben, for
quoting and explaining, for inspiring images and "enjoy the peace of mind", - you are an
awesome Wikipedian!
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:04, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
Please take a look at Tulku edit war. VictoriaGrayson Talk 00:05, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
Greetings! How are you doing mate? Anyway, I'd like to ask you if you happen to know what's the conduct with including hanzi names in Tibetan Buddhist articles? This is something I've ran into quite much lately. For example here in the Dorje Pakmo article, should we include the Hanzi names as well or not? Personally, I'd fancy keeping them but some other editors think the opposite. I was hoping that you could give as a more experienced editor a second opinion on that one! :-) Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 20:14, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
"K.R. Norman concluded that the earliest version of the sutta did not contain the word "noble", but was added later."[37]
Is this Norman, cited in Batchelor? JimRenge ( talk) 16:28, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
The heading "The middle way: dhyana" is confusing: I know there are many interpretations of the middle way but this reads like The middle way = dhyana. (?) This corresponding section does only mention dhyana. JimRenge ( talk) 20:09, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Please see. VictoriaGrayson Talk 18:16, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
About this ? Hafspajen ( talk) 15:10, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Jonathan, your going to have to prove and disprove here, I have correct answers that are true, when I think, I, as a precious consciousness, only have 5 senses and that's it, what makes them happen is either mechanics or choice if we have choice, understanding which you can also test yourself is just you seeing vision and the sense of this vision sense being seeing a object prominant or another ex. is you feel pleasure or feel a scared pain in body or feel pain or feel cold or you feel disgust when hand is in dirt, or see digust/attract when viewing the vision of gender faces. It's just senses, and how you get them, that's all we us consciousnesses are! K I'm waiting to hear back! And yes, I heard sound of all these words in my head plus attached vision of everything. 20:38, 22 November 2014 Immortal Discoveries
I was in the process of undoing all of Immortal Discoveries' edits to
Immortality with an edit summary saying "Reverting edits by Immortal Discoveries that are unclear, ungrammatical and unsourced", but it didn't work. Then I saw your edit. I tried again, trying to undo everything back to A's edits, but without success. I see you undid the last edit, but I think all the edits should be undone, not just the last one. Do you want to try?
CorinneSD (
talk) 00:22, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
You are a rollbacker. I you rollback, all edits are undone.
Hafspajen (
talk) 00:27, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
On this page /info/en/?search=Immortality I am talking about the undesirability of immortality.
Objective: Being either delete it all & add the truth OR only add the truth. If you must, then find references supporting the truth answer.
Reason: 1)You would not be in hell with hellish torment of your 5 senses. 2) You would not be in a built heaven with bored senses such as seeing vision and hearing and feeling being boring, you would have great feeling and tasting and seeing of vision and hearing of long-quality incredible techno power music and palaces and a girl and best quality never ending games and best food such as fries and would always be great senses and so CANNOT be bad boring senses, great senses forever, they stay great cause that's what a consciousness can keep getting is great senses, and the things of the most attractive girl and best games and keep eating food are so incredible it goes further the greatness of high quality senses or great fun forever! 3) Even though totally unneccesary, you can erase memory anyhow and have great senses forever. 4) The greatest things for our senses arrrrre-the meaning, it says: the meaning doesn't grow and grow and that it doesn't grow with living forever and infact de-grows, wrong, there isn't such thing! you have great senses of eating fries as much as want over and over and still are awesome senses and the best never ending games to see how far can get & your most attractive partner you see and see as object-of-vision and the most most attractive face for you of vision and 5 great senses together that will be incredible you get forever, it's funner! 17:42, 24 November 2014 ForeverDoctor User talk:ForeverDoctor
Go ahead and merge Out of India theory and Indigenous Aryans. VictoriaGrayson Talk 03:34, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:19, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Two warnings for one disruptive edit. Shall I remove my softer version? JimRenge ( talk) 14:54, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for grammar check & correcting merit (Buddhism). I left you a massage on talk page merit (Buddhism) please consider correcting it (If you wish to do so). S.B.M. Summon 21:04, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Please consider to change the reason for requesting a cleanup at Dukkha from "Over-reliance on primary sources" to Over-reliance on sectarian sources. Texts from buddhist teachers may be either primary or secondary (due to content and context) but they are clearly not independent sources ( WP:3PARTY). JimRenge ( talk) 09:39, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Please see. VictoriaGrayson Talk 20:46, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
What on earth. Hafspajen ( talk) 18:16, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) The proto-science / pseudoscience debate is the most interesting. We have similar issues at articles, such as traditional Chinese medicine and acupuncture where the both have been labelled as "pseudoscience" even they pre-date modern science by some thousand year. Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 17:06, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
"Good Morning"Josh" :
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia!
13 December is the day when Swedes perplex the rest of the world by showing up way too early in the morning dressed in white tunics, candles in their hair, singing and bringing saffron buns and breakfast in bed to nice people. Hope you have a bright day!
Hafspajen (
talk) 09:23, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Haha :D been permanently thinking the same over the course of the last few days. spent so much time reading through all the discussions...and when i see what you've been doing..WOW! regarding our discussion: I don't think we will solve this soon. I am glad that we are having a conversation and i think this conversation is very important because it concerns nearly all of the articles on Buddhism. I think in the long run we will have to establish some guidelines or a basic structure template about which sections should be included, which perspectives reported, and which weight assigned to each of them repectively...or are there already? I remember having quite similar discussions many years ago... ok...but NOT NOW...first: eat! then: work! ;) Andi 3ö ( talk) 14:58, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
(I suggest we keep this to idle chatter between the two of us; any serious discussion can be piled to the existing stack.) Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:54, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
See HERE. VictoriaGrayson Talk 00:06, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Greetings Joshua Jonathan! As I was just glancing through the edits of the past few days, I noticed at the WikiProject:Buddhism that the discussion has been taken to a number of venues. Seriously, I do not have the time to go through all the venues, but please do free to quote me on whether instance you feel like it.
I'll try to have a look later, but I am always ready to respond any questions whenever necessary. Anyway, my respond delay might be even up to 3-4 days delay, so thats just for public information. Cheers! =P Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 19:58, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
In case you don't have it on your watchlist, see Talk:Faith in Buddhism. Nice comment by Chris Fynn on sutra quoting OR. JimRenge ( talk) 12:03, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
I have no interest in the details of the content dispute, but it looks like it can go to the dispute resolution noticeboard. The Buddhist virtues of compassion, mutual respect, moderation, and respect for truth should help avoid the conduct issues that too often derail resolution of content issues. (I'm not a Buddhist, but Christians know that Buddhism has good ethical teachings too.) Robert McClenon ( talk) 17:46, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Happy Holiday Cheer | ||
Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys! Hafspajen ( talk) 02:41, 23 December 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks! Did you notice that I linked the angel at top of my talkpage to your talkpage? ;) All the best, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:18, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Ekdalian (
talk) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!! | |
Hello Joshua Jonathan, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Jim Carter is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
There is no generation and perfection phase in Dzogchen. This is in basic books such as "A Guide to the Words of My Perfect Teacher". Possibly you are confused by the fact that terma cycles like Longchen Nyingthig are not just Dzogchen. VictoriaGrayson Talk 16:27, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | ||
Hi there! I want to thank you for your recent edits on the Nirvana article. Thanks to you, I think the article is in a much better place, with better organization and lots of new information. I was thinking of doing the same over the holidays, but I was pleasantly surprised to find that the article has been greatly modified since the last time I checked. Manoguru ( talk) 17:09, 24 December 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks for your Christmas Greetings, Joshua! Please do accept mine - not late, but... - now on the actual Christmas day! Hah! I tried to find you some cool Santa with reindeer image, but it seems Wikimedia Commons is whole empty of such luxury xF Anyway, Merry Christmas to you too! Cheers!
Ps. Santa is from Finland, not from any freaking North Pole. Lol! Jayaguru-Shishya ( talk) 18:24, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello, JJ -- Season's greetings to you! I was just looking at the latest edit to Ananda Coomaraswamy. In spite of the edit summary, it looks like some sourced information has been deleted from the article. Can you take a look at it? Thank you. CorinneSD ( talk) 15:52, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Read THIS. VictoriaGrayson Talk 20:25, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Try this paper. VictoriaGrayson Talk 14:36, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Where did you get the idea that semde is not tantra? VictoriaGrayson Talk 17:32, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
"Religion, Medicine and the Human Embryo in Tibet" has a lot about Dzogchen. VictoriaGrayson Talk 06:52, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
? ....Can you find sources? Find sources: Mohammad Ejuddin ... or Bladesmulti or any talk page stalker Hafspajen ( talk) 14:49, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
“The shifting terrain of the tantric bodies of Buddhas and Buddhists from an Atiyoga perspective”. (2007) by Germano talks about Menngagde being derived from Kalachakra. VictoriaGrayson Talk 16:38, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Dear Joshua, I deleted some parts in the article Hinduism, https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Hinduism&action=history, especially the "theory of iranian migration" to India, Author 468sm cites sources which are mostly books, thus opinions that Iranians and Europeans migrated to India. I had cited, the archaeology department link, harvard studies, a university study and other indian researches and newspapers. Idea of migration is a personal opinion, as of now it is imposed very strongly, perhaps it would help if you edited the text to fairly display both the sides. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pydisc ( talk • contribs) 06:09, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Ehm... please refrsh my mind; could you be more precise? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 16:55, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
In this section you have "Germano 2005, p. 2548". But elsewhere you have "Germano 2004, p. 2547." etc. VictoriaGrayson Talk 08:06, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Anyone home? Hafspajen ( talk) 23:44, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
The Civility Barnstar | |
Much love to you, JJ. Iṣṭa Devata ( talk) 01:53, 31 December 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks, though I'm not sure if I'm a good help for your position (what's in a name...) on Malasana. Anyway, I've been typing Sanskrit for the first time in my life. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:24, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
I believe that your mentee bladesmulti has started using extraordinary means to destroy the Malasana page. I am at risk of over reverting, but he has removed almost all practical information from the page using a secondary user name User:TheRedPenOfDoom to avoid being reported. But it is pretty clearly the same user with similar editing history. He also deleted the account after making the edits. This is bordering on ban worthy. I'm afraid to revert changes. Help please if you can, either convincing him to stop massive undiscussed changes to the page, or reverting it for me so I can avoid warring with him. And thanks for all your work on wikipedia! Iṣṭa Devata ( talk) 02:12, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Joshua Jonathan,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Hafspajen (
talk) 10:05, 31 December 2014 (UTC)