User talk:Joshua Jonathan: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 11:52, 1 April 2014 editShvrs (talk \| contribs)330 edits →Rajus Article ← Previous edit		Revision as of 18:44, 1 April 2014 edit undoHafspajen (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers86,543 edits →A barnstar for you!: new WikiLove messageTag: WikiLove Next edit →
Line 215:		Line 215:

	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 -] (]) 11:51, 1 April 2014 (UTC)		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 -] (]) 11:51, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

			== A barnstar for you! ==

			{\| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
			\|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" \| ]
			\|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" \| '''The Citation Barnstar'''
			\|-
			\|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" \| http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdzPeMd5cR0 ] (]) 18:44, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
			\|}

Revision as of 18:44, 1 April 2014

Some bubble tea for you!

Freedom for you...............................................................and me. Hafspajen (talk) 12:36, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	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)

Persecution of Hindus

~~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 19:42, 11 March 2014 (UTC)~~ -- SMS 19:47, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry... Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:33, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Re Twinkle

File:CHAU DANCE FROM WEST BENGAL INDIA COMMONWEALTH GAMES 2010 (11).jpg

Hi, Joshua. Please don't use Twinkle messages that aren't fully relevant. 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).

Thanks - for both! I love my Swedish friends; they're great. Just a little bit different from the Dutch (we are noisy, actually), but very nice. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 10:50, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi

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)

@CorinneSD: Now I'm getting curious, Corinne: can we still read what you wrote?

@Hafspajen:

Transpersonal: American term, popularised by Ken Wilber: development past the sense of a personal "I" (but his model is incorrect, I think)
Revelation: Christian term; knowledge which is revealed by God or other cosmic "powers"
Enlightenment (spiritual): catch-all term for "spiritual insight", "mystical experience", etc. Connected to "modern spirituality".

There are a lot of synonymous terms, and many terms have acquired a broad meaning in modern western thinking. Is this a helpful answer? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 09:03, 20 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. From the 1st parag. of lede: Transpersonal is a phenomenon or experience "in which the sense of identity or self extends beyond...the individual or personal to encompass wider aspects of humankind, life, psyche, or cosmos". From the 3rd parag. of lede: In integral theory, transpersonal refers to stages of human development through which a person's self-awareness extends beyond the personal. From 1st parag. in section "Transpersonal states": Transpersonal psychology considers the concept of transpersonal states of awareness. Stanislas Grof defines these as "The common denominator of this otherwise rich and ramified group of phenomena is the feeling of the individual that his consciousness is expanded beyond the usual ego boundaries and the limitations of time and space". These include mystical states and near-death experiences... 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. From the 1st parag. in the lede: In religion and theology, revelation is the revealing or disclosing of some form of truth or knowledge through communication with a deity or other supernatural entity or entities. From the 3rd parag. in the lede: When a revelation is communicated by a supernatural entity that is reported as present during the communication, it is called a vision. From the 4th parag. in the lede: In Abrahamic religions, the term is used to refer to a process by which God reveals knowledge of himself, his will, and his divine providence to the world of human beings...In secondary usage, it refers to the resulting human knowledge about God, prophecy, and other divine things. 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. From the 1st parag. in the lede: Enlightenment refers to the "full comprehension of a situation". It is commonly used to denote the Age of Enlightenment , but is also used in Western cultures in a religious context. It translates several Buddhist terms and concepts... From the 2nd parag. in the lede: In Christianity, the word "enlightenment" is rarely used....Equivalent terms may be revelation, metanoia and conversion. From the section "Buddhism": The English term "enlightenment" has commonly been used to translate several Sanskrit, Pali, Chinese and Japanese terms and concepts, especially bodhi, prajna, kensho, satori and buddhahood. Bodhi is a Theravada term. It literally means "awakening" and "understanding". Someone who is awakened has gained insight into the workings of the mind which keeps us imprisoned in craving, suffering and rebirth, and has also gained insight into the way that leads to nirvana, the liberation of oneself from this imprisonment. Prajna is a Mahayana term. It refers to insight into our true nature, which according to Madhyamaka is empty of a personal essence in the stream of experience. But it also refers to the Tathagata-garbha or Buddhist nature of the essential basic-consciousness beyond the stream of experiences. 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)

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.

From the 1st parag. of lede:

Transpersonal is a phenomenon or experience "in which the sense of identity or self extends beyond...the individual or personal to encompass wider aspects of humankind, life, psyche, or cosmos".

From the 3rd parag. of lede:

In integral theory, transpersonal refers to stages of human development through which a person's self-awareness extends beyond the personal.

From 1st parag. in section "Transpersonal states":

Transpersonal psychology considers the concept of transpersonal states of awareness. Stanislas Grof defines these as "The common denominator of this otherwise rich and ramified group of phenomena is the feeling of the individual that his consciousness is expanded beyond the usual ego boundaries and the limitations of time and space". These include mystical states and near-death experiences...

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.

From the 1st parag. in the lede:

In religion and theology, revelation is the revealing or disclosing of some form of truth or knowledge through communication with a deity or other supernatural entity or entities.

From the 3rd parag. in the lede:

When a revelation is communicated by a supernatural entity that is reported as present during the communication, it is called a vision.

From the 4th parag. in the lede:

In Abrahamic religions, the term is used to refer to a process by which God reveals knowledge of himself, his will, and his divine providence to the world of human beings...In secondary usage, it refers to the resulting human knowledge about God, prophecy, and other divine things.

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.

From the 1st parag. in the lede:

Enlightenment refers to the "full comprehension of a situation". It is commonly used to denote the Age of Enlightenment , but is also used in Western cultures in a religious context. It translates several Buddhist terms and concepts...

From the 2nd parag. in the lede:

In Christianity, the word "enlightenment" is rarely used....Equivalent terms may be revelation, metanoia and conversion.

From the section "Buddhism":

The English term "enlightenment" has commonly been used to translate several Sanskrit, Pali, Chinese and Japanese terms and concepts, especially bodhi, prajna, kensho, satori and buddhahood.

Bodhi is a Theravada term. It literally means "awakening" and "understanding". Someone who is awakened has gained insight into the workings of the mind which keeps us imprisoned in craving, suffering and rebirth, and has also gained insight into the way that leads to nirvana, the liberation of oneself from this imprisonment.

Prajna is a Mahayana term. It refers to insight into our true nature, which according to Madhyamaka is empty of a personal essence in the stream of experience. But it also refers to the Tathagata-garbha or Buddhist nature of the essential basic-consciousness beyond the stream of experiences.

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)

Yes, it is you say, an American term, also coined by Stanislav Grof and this is the problem. And the problem is that when he did coined this expression, the word "transpersonal" was using drogs on his patients. Main problem = he uses drugs (LSD) to reach this "transpersonal" state. He argues that there is no diffence between a drug induced state where you have some kind of enlightment-like state, and the real enlightment achieved by years of praying, training or the Christian mysticism and so on. A quick-fix. I don't like this. I am trying to figure out what the diffence is ( except for the drugs, of course). It makes me feel weird. He argues that there is no difference between this drug induced state and other religious experience, ... like Aldous Huxley. Thanks, Corinne, great work, really. I start to notice some fundamental differences, but still my problem is

how can he know for sure. He is no saint, he just had some LSD experience ( he was also using drugs and uses them to treat patients in the field of psycology). How the heck can he say that knowledge which is revealed by God and chemically induced states are the same.

Yes, he also argues that mysticians were using drugs, well - I am not aware of that one. Most mysticians were awake and just fine, not drugged, thanks. Hafspajen (talk) 00:36, 20 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 . 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)

I know very well about the shamanism, but they are part of a long religious tradition, they know about the dangers, and do warn, learn and work their ~~heck~~ butt off, especially Tibetans, until they are considered fully learn. And this shortcut with LSD, I don't know. It is a bit of a pandoras youknowwhat. If something unpleasant is happening the Tibetans are learned to imediatelly stop the meditation, while a person taking drugs can't. And an apparition has never ever hurt anyone. Scared, maybe, but never hurt. Hafspajen (talk) 22:06, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Uh, Hafspajen, the Swedicism "work their heck off" may be a little confusing to anglophones. :-D I've offered a suggestion. Bishonen | talk 22:16, 20 March 2014 (UTC).

Bishywise, now you start here too. Maybe I should send you a T_shirt or something. Hafspajen (talk) 23:49, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Joshua -- Sorry I didn't get back to you right away. I see you found it on my Talk page and re-inserted it here. That's fine. I was just trying to find the key sentences in the three articles to help clarify the differences between the three terms as best I could in order to help Hafspagen, who said he needed an answer quickly. I can see from your comments above that you know much more about the topic than I do. CorinneSD (talk) 23:50, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Eh, debate is closed now, (no not on Wiki) but it did help clarifying things for me. Hafspajen (talk) 23:54, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Hafspajen, but what do you mean by "Eh, debate is closed now, (no not on Wiki)"? I don't understand either part of that. I didn't think the above discussion was a debate. I was just trying to be helpful, and the discussion doesn't sound like a debate. CorinneSD (talk) 23:59, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

You know, today at five o'clock, at my university. I got this paper from a crazy woman who wrote about this subject, and I need arguments to oppose this. Thank you Corinne, very much for your help. Hafspajen (talk) 00:05, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Bishy, sorry to be naughty about this, now this was indeed a weird expression in English, the heck - . http://sv.glosbe.com/sv/en/slita%20h%C3%A4cken%20av%20sig. Hafspajen (talk) 03:39, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

One more remark: I suspect that "illumination" has been merged in our western understanding with "perfection" and something like "eternal happiness" via the Buddhist notion of "enlightenment" - enlightenment as in "insight", but also as in "perfect Buddhahood". That's not how it works; "insight" does not lead to a magical disappearance of all the "downsides" of human existence... But the idea is very tempting, of course: never being hurt anymore. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:59, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Oh, well. Different ways and hopes... Hafspajen (talk) 09:59, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! A gift from fellow Wikipedians.

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)

Protect Rajus Article

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)

I'm sorry Shvrs, but you'll have to continue your argument with Situs at Talk:Raju. There simply are very little WP:RS on the Raju-caste... A simple advice: start your own website. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:21, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice.But,remember don't become a puppet in the hands of sitush and don't blindly believe what he says as that sitush is a deceiver who will mostly do offences regarding caste articles especially Kshatriya Castes.And finally "I know what to do".Thank you -Shvrs (talk) 09:28, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Advaita Vedanta

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:

https://en.wikipedia.org/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

@MerlynDanielMali: HiMerlyn; I already had a look; I'll see what I can do. By the way, don't forget to sign messages with ~~~~; Misplaced Pages converts this automatically into your signature. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 21:33, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Joshua, great thanks for the help! And for the following.

Here's some: 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)

If he can't help ypu, nobody else can. Very good! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:42, 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!

https://en.wikipedia.org/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.

https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Robert_Adams#Later_Years

Thanks in advance for any ideas.

MerlynDanielMali (talk) 15:42, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I think it's okay as it is now; different screens, different sizes, different looks. I'll give some help with the lay-out, though. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:07, 28 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)

Merge Indigenous Aryans and Out of India theory?

Merge Indigenous Aryans and Out of India theory? These seem to be the same subject. VictoriaGrayson (talk) 19:11, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

"Out of India" seems to be a subset of "Indigenous Aryans"-theories, so I guess two separate articles is better. But you could propose a merger, of course; see how others respond. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:39, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Question

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)

Rajus Article

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"}

There are forward castes list in table.There Rajus are mentioned as "Kshatriyas" and also reddi & kapu are equivalent castes they are grouped together but reddies & Kapus(both are of shudra varna) are two different castes in Government's caste list.I had already said clearly many times to you that Government of Andhra Pradesh & India mentions Rajus/Kshatriya Rajus as "Kshatriya" in caste list but not as "Rajus"."Rajus" or "Kshatriya Rajus" are terms used by people & caste members.Government mentions them only as "Kshatriya" in its records & castes list.This 1.2% you can also find in the other references at the starting.Please first know about the forward castes and their alternate names and how they are mentioned by Government of Andhra Pradesh and Government of India.So,you were mistaken there.Thank You -Shvrs (talk) 09:20, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

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)

A barnstar for you!

	The Citation Barnstar
	http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdzPeMd5cR0 Hafspajen (talk) 18:44, 1 April 2014 (UTC)