Jump to content

Talk:Rajneesh

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Matt57 (talk | contribs) at 02:14, 3 September 2010 (→‎Untitiled: copypaste). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former good article nomineeRajneesh was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 18, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
April 12, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
Did You KnowA fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 23, 2007.
Current status: Former good article nominee

Criticism

I've read some of the archive of discussions, and this thing needs a lot more structured criticism of someone who persistently changed his name and his teaching, and produced a (quote from the current article) "contradictory" legacy of content. Somehow, the acolytes have won, and that's no good for anyone. Wiki Editors, congrats again for killing a piece of your own project.

jmanooch 14:18, 28 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmanooch (talk • contribs)

This entry is too long

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too long. You'd think he was the Einstein of consciousness. (No wait, that's Ken Wilber. Whose page is also way too long.) You could lose the entire middle two thirds with no real loss, and a great gain in readability. As it is, it seems entirely too credulous.Tao2911 (talk) 23:22, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not only that, but it reads like a defense brief. Neutrality, anyone? Gtcaz (talk) 20:42, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Meh, the more detail the better IMO. "Wiki is not paper" and a need for comprehensiveness ought to trump Summary style the way I see it.
But you're right that it could use some editing for neutrality. -- Ϫ 02:32, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where is Criticism of Osho

Not that I am in favor of pointing out real or perceived flaws of Beloved Bhagwan I am just expressing wonder that Wiki does not criticize the greatest critic in recorded history ! Perhaps it is simply not possible to criticize Him.

 Jon Ascton  (talk) 15:09, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The criticism is spread throughout the article in various places where appropriate, relevant and sourced e.g. in the reception section if you had read the article in its entirety. Currently its not collected together in one section. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 15:13, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I can see that and saw that before commenting. Please try to catch the deeper meaning of my reflection. What I am saying is a single pointed body of text is not there and that says something about the general feeling Osho is gaining over people in west. Understood ?

 Jon Ascton  (talk) 16:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It would take a source of considerable authority to identify some body of text as typifying such a general feeling: would you like to suggest something? Redheylin (talk) 23:38, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Jon Ascton, my "reflection" is that all of us here are busy doing our own stuff. If you think an article should contain something, then you're the one who has to do that. If Osho is gaining popularity in the west, you would have to have a reliable source say that (as you probably already know since you've been around for a while). I would also suggest you improve your signature and take out that extra line break which causes your signature to go over to a new line. As you can see everyone's signature stays on the same line. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 14:22, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

link to...

maybe see also : eckhart tolle and the primacy of consciousness?

just a thought as some of the essentials are the same (living in the now is the key to bypassing the ego mind blah blah blah)

throwing it out there —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.63.197.186 (talk) 19:51, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Untitiled

As the most magnanimous incarnation of Sri Krishna, the Personality of Sri Krishna Caitanya has made the path of going "Back to Godhead" so easy for every one that even a boy of the world can swim across the ocean of religiosity, although it is injected with so many dangerous animals ready to devour up a fallen person in that great massive water. Letter to Dr. Rajendra Prasad, President of Indian Union -- Delhi 21 November, 1956: In the Bhagavad-gita it is said very clearly that whosoever may adopt the specific principle of accepting Sri Krishna the Personality of Godhead, he will be able to achieve the highest transcendental goal of life,—never mind what he is either a born untouchable, a fallen woman, a laborer or a man dealing in rupees annas pies. His being so, what is there difficulty for a pious "Brahmin" and devoted king for going "Back to Godhead"? Everyone should therefore adopt this principle of going "Back to Godhead" in order to get released from the world of miseries, with temporary existence.

This fact is corroborated by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu as the practical demonstrator of Bhagavad-gita and as the most magnanimous incarnation of Sri Krishna—the Personality of Sri Krishna Caitanya has made the path of going "Back to Godhead" so easy for every one that even a boy of the world can swim across the ocean of religiosity, although it is injected with so many dangerous animals ready to devour up a fallen person in that great massive water.


Considering the position of the people of this age, the chanting of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's name is more essential than the chanting of the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra because Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu is the most magnanimous incarnation and His mercy is very easily achieved. CC Adi 8.31, Purport: It should be noted in this connection that the holy names of Lord Kṛṣṇa and Gaurasundara are both identical with the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Therefore one should not consider one name to be more potent than the other. Considering the position of the people of this age, however, the chanting of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's name is more essential than the chanting of the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra because Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu is the most magnanimous incarnation and His mercy is very easily achieved. Therefore one must first take shelter of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu by chanting śrī-kṛṣṇa-caitanya prabhu-nityānanda śrī-advaita gadādhara śrīvāsādi-gaura-bhakta-vṛnda. By serving Gaura-Nityānanda one is freed from the entanglements of material existence and thus becomes qualified to worship the Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa Deity.


Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu is the mercy incarnation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. He is addressed by Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī as mahā-vadānyāvatāra, or the most magnanimous incarnation. CC Adi 7.150, Purport: Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu is the mercy incarnation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. He is addressed by Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī as mahā-vadānyāvatāra, or the most magnanimous incarnation. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī also says, karuṇayāvatīrṇaḥ kalau: it is only by His mercy that He has descended in this Age of Kali. Here this is exemplified. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu did not like to see Māyāvādī sannyāsīs because He thought of them as offenders to the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, but here He excuses them (tāṅ-sabāra kṣami' aparādha). This is an example in preaching. Āpani ācari' bhakti śikhāimu sabāre. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu teaches us that those whom preachers meet are almost all offenders who are opposed to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, but it is a preacher's duty to convince them of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement and then induce them to chant the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra. Our propagation of the saṅkīrtana movement is continuing, despite many opponents, and people are taking up this chanting process even in remote parts of the world like Africa. By inducing the offenders to chant the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu exemplified the success of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. We should follow very respectfully in the footsteps of Lord Caitanya, and there is no doubt that we shall be successful in our attempts.


Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu is known as mahā-vadānyāvatāra, the most magnanimous incarnation, for He does not consider the offenses of the fallen souls. CC Adi 7.4, Purport: As preachers of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, we first offer our obeisances to Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu by chanting this Pañca-tattva mantra; then we say Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare. There are ten offenses in the chanting of the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra, but these are not considered in the chanting of the Pañca-tattva mantra, namely, śrī-kṛṣṇa-caitanya prabhu-nityānanda śrī-advaita gadādhara śrīvāsādi-gaura-bhakta-vṛnda. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu is known as mahā-vadānyāvatāra, the most magnanimous incarnation, for He does not consider the offenses of the fallen souls. Thus to derive the full benefit of the chanting of the mahā-mantra (Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare), we must first take shelter of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, learn the Pañca-tattva mahā-mantra, and then chant the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra. That will be very effective. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.132.97.81 (talk) 17:12, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? -- Ϫ 02:36, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously a copy paste from somewhere. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 02:14, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rajneesh&oldid=382595344"