Jump to content

Talk:Sri Aurobindo: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
SineBot (talk | contribs)
ClueBot III (talk | contribs)
m Archiving 1 discussion to Talk:Sri Aurobindo/Archive 1. (BOT)
Line 59: Line 59:


{{Talk:Sri Aurobindo/GA1}}
{{Talk:Sri Aurobindo/GA1}}

== Critics: Ramana Maharshi ==

Paul Brunton:
:''"That these differences of view exist even among illumined mystics is a striking but rarely studied fact. Why did Ramana Maharshi poke gentle fun at Aurobindo’s doctrine of spiritual planes?" [http://richardpettymd.com/category/mystical-experiences/page/5/]''
I also remember a response by Ramana Maharshi on Aurobindo's planes in "Talks." [[User:Joshua Jonathan|<font size="2"><span style="font-family:Forte;color:black">Joshua Jonathan</span></font>]] -[[User talk:Joshua Jonathan|<font size="3"><span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva;color:black">Let's talk!</span></font>]] 15:01, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

:? I did not get the point ?, I think there were like [[osho]] too who critcised more "specifically" ? [[User:Shrikanthv|Shrikanthv]] ([[User talk:Shrikanthv|talk]]) 09:03, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

::Ramana Maharshi rejected Aurobindo's model of spiritual planes, and the "descend" of spirirtual power from above. Might be of interest here. [[User:Joshua Jonathan|<font size="2"><span style="font-family:Forte;color:black">Joshua Jonathan</span></font>]] -[[User talk:Joshua Jonathan|<font size="3"><span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva;color:black">Let's talk!</span></font>]] 09:37, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

::: JJ here you will be stepping into actuallity vs intellectual understanding (or " notion of knowing " ) tread that path ? (it may again tread you back you from the boundry of understanding but yes an effort is not a loss) [[User:Shrikanthv|Shrikanthv]] ([[User talk:Shrikanthv|talk]]) 10:32, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

:::: The basic problem with understanding upanishads or Sri Aurobindo's, Sri Ramana Maharshi, Gurdjieff writings is that in which '''floor''' level you are viewing (a "self observatory skyscrapper") .
::::consider a skycraper each of them have a balcony in front and in front of the skyscraper there is a huge road some one (1st guy) standing from 10th floor loudly states here comes the red car, a person standing in 2nd floor (2nd guy) looks out sees nothing and after few minutes sees the red car! wow the guy above in the 10th floor is a magician how can he know the future!!.

::::now consider there is some one (3rd guy) standing on the road infront of the skyscraper he just walks in front of skyscrapper in one direction for 5 km and makes a note and then in the other direction makes a note and again in another direction makes a note , now he walks 10 km in every direction makes a note , now he has compunded a written map of how things are situated in around the building!
::::what difference do you see between these three guys ? [[User:Shrikanthv|Shrikanthv]] ([[User talk:Shrikanthv|talk]]) 09:42, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

:::::{{yo|Shrikanthv}} if I understand you correctly, you're saying that both were enlightened souls, but looking from a different plane, c.q. taking different approaches? The one (Ramana Maharshi) was merely looking, whereas the other (Sri Aurobindo) also described the territory?
:::::What strikes me, is that Ramana Maharshi (if I understand him correctly) says that "truth" ('satya-prajna') is not something that descends from another plane, but just ''is''. Seeing (prajna) truth (satya) = being (satya) truth (satya), so to speak. [[User:Joshua Jonathan|<font size="2"><span style="font-family:Forte;color:black">Joshua Jonathan</span></font>]] -[[User talk:Joshua Jonathan|<font size="3"><span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva;color:black">Let's talk!</span></font>]] 13:57, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
{{od}}
Rajneesh ("Osho") was a fake, he plagiarized whole paragraphs of his books from other books (the person who discovered that fact, does not want to be the target of threats - but you can see this verified in the scholarly quotes on the Osho wikipedia page.) Other spiritual teachers pointed out the dubious aspect of Rajneesh and his teachings, much as Maharshi commented on Aurobindo.

To corroborate Maharshi's point, note that there are no "levels" or "hierarchies" in nature, those only come from animal social status instincts. There is nothing greater about a galaxy than a solar system - it is only bigger. Stars do not ascend to greater status or meaning.

Also, evolution is merely the reproduction of genes, and the selection of some genes by their survival. Contrary to popular views on the word "evolution", there is nothing positive implied.

Lastly, changing your name and signature to "Holy Aurobindo" is highly dubious for a spiritual teacher. Realized beings whom I have met personally characterized themselves as "no one".[[Special:Contributions/162.205.217.211|162.205.217.211]] ([[User talk:162.205.217.211|talk]]) 02:34, 25 January 2016 (UTC)


== Modi ==
== Modi ==

Revision as of 09:28, 28 August 2016

Good articleSri Aurobindo has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 31, 2012Good article nomineeNot listed
March 27, 2014Good article nomineeListed
April 16, 2014Peer reviewReviewed
June 3, 2014Good article reassessmentDelisted
October 31, 2014Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article

Template:Vital article

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Sri Aurobindo/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 15:47, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. Believe copyright is ok, hard to be sure as many sites use WP's text.

Some issues remain (tagged). I've copy-edited the new text but the rapid editing risks causing further imbalance, as well as disrupting the style of text (and of references, which had been very tidy - not a GA issue, but the article isn't looking its best with references in so many recent styles).

1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. Lead ok; layout ok; weasel ok; fiction n/a; list probably acceptable, though "Followers" could with benefit be rewritten as text (and it needs refs). Done. External links far too numerous, and appearing POV - either incorporate as refs or remove, one link to ashram should suffice. Done.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. Reference to Ken Wilber's works on Aurobindo are oblique rather than actual direct citations. This needs to be fixed. Influences section is not adequately cited.

Answer: updated please have a look. This has fixed the immediate problem, but the coverage of Wilber and other critics remains very thin, not near GA status in this respect.

2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). There are uncited sections, eg Involution, Evolution, Brahman. Since these are questions of spiritual/religious belief they are open to challenge and must be cited.

Answer : Have completely re-written and in summary way from the autobiographical source of Sri Aurobindo. Shrikanthv (talk) 21:58, 1 January 2013 (UTC) Done.[reply]

2c. it contains no original research. Broadly ok.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. Seems acceptably broad, covering expected topic areas. Not sure politics is covered broadly enough, e.g. influence of Vivekananda should be mentioned; indeed, the question of who and what influenced Aurobindo needs some coverage, there is no shortage of sources. Poetry is barely mentioned either. The whole topic of criticism of and reactions to Aurobindo, favourable or otherwise, is not treated - this applies to his politics, poetry and philosophy.

Have added info , Vivekananda influence was very brief and have mentioned this regarding politics , he was influenced by French , Italian , American struggle over England Shrikanthv (talk) 15:02, 6 January 2013 (UTC) The direct influence perhaps, but the whole question of the cultural, political and philosophical influences remains almost wholly uncovered in the article, and this is a critical question for GA status.[reply]

3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Focus is ok. Each area is concisely summarized.
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. The Influence section is too brief for a major figure like Aurobindo, and dissenting opinions (or interpretations, like Wilber's) need fuller exploration and citation. This remains a major issue for GA status; the article is now referenced, making it clear that most of it is either from Aurobindo's own writings or from his ashram, risking a breach of WP:NPOV. This must be balanced by a suitable coverage of other points of view, especially but not limited to the Influence section. It would be advisable to introduce a "Critiques" section also to give adequate coverage of other authors' views of Aurobindo and his philosophy.

Answer : updated with citation. The progress that has been made makes it clear that much work remains to be done to achieve proper balance, rather than having a view "from inside". This will involve substantial knowledge of the literature about Aurobindo.

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. no sign of it.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. Surat Congress image lacks author, copyright tag

Answer : Have corrected the image details with new url source , (please note that picture is more than 100 years old and the author cannot be identified.) Done.

6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. ok.
7. Overall assessment. The hard work of the week on hold has fixed the immediate referencing issues, but has exposed the structural weakness of the article in describing mainly the Aurobindo story from within, with only marginal coverage of the influences on his politics and philosophy, and equally thin treatment of his position vis-a-vis the critics, favourable or otherwise, of politics, philosophy and poetry. Since it does not appear likely that this could be rectified if the article is held for another week or two, it will be best if it is worked on quietly by the community for a while, and brought back here perhaps in six months or so when ready.

I would not even bother to review it. The article is largely unsourced and it is impossible to fix it in a month or two. It is full of tags and in need of more. Thus, it is eligible for a quick fail. — Yash [talk] 14:22, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If other people feel the same, we can do that. For now, I'm minded to wait a week and see if it's making realistic progress. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:46, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Modi

@Mihirjha27: please stop WP:EDITWARRING, and discuss your edits per WP:BRD. Your addition is problematic for several reasons:

"Narendra Modi, one of the most Popular politicians in the world and Prime Minister of India, is also influenced by ideals of the great Sri Aurobindo. In his visit to Paris in June 2015, he paid homage to Sri Aurobindo in Paris Unesco. [10]"

References

  • "one of the most Popular politicians in the world": that's a non-encyclopedic personal comment, which violates WP:NPOV and WP:SOAPBOX
  • the sentence in toto is WP:UNDUE: it's not relevant to Sri Aurobindo.

Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:55, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

World War II

I've included a new section regarding Aurobindo's support for the Allies during World War II, as well as his warnings on communism, under "Later political views". I've not included the claims that Aurobindo and the Mother influenced the war (such as the Mother appearing to Hitler as the Asura), only that they were anti-Nazi. Do people think they should be included? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.2.244.193 (talk) 16:17, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thanks for addition, regarding communisim and hitler , both mother and aurobindo had views which have deduced by their followers according to what they heard is right , may be if multiple sources depect the same thing we can have a view, but currently it seems like cherry picking to affirm a statment. Shrikanthv (talk) 07:37, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Possible addition to legacy

Obscura write songs using his poems. Is this significant enough to be added to the legacy section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:7044:3F00:C42A:3D27:954D:A81C (talk) 23:07, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]