Talk:Swadhyaya Movement

In recent articles, the the Swadhyaya Pariwar have come under scrutiny of the indian government for the alleged murder of someone who exposed their questionable distribution of funds, I don't understand why the following was deleted instead of being edited. (Please See Note Below)

"The Swadhyaya Pariwar philosophy has recently been the target of a significant scandal. Many leaders of this so called "philosophy" have used donated funds by followers to personally benefit them. Several leaders of the organization have purchased large amounts of property and other lavish gifts under personal ownership and not under the organization. One such incident, exposed by Pankaj Travedi, cited several discrepencies of financial distribution for victims of the quake. After writing a letter to the government, Pankaj Travedi was brutally murdered by members of the Swadhyaya Pariwar cult and an intense investigation is currently underway. The murder is believed to have been orchestrated by leaders of the organization as a cover-up to the exposure of the monetary scandal. (http://in.news.yahoo.com/060620/48/658nt.html)"

Okay, this page had a "context" tag and a single sentence that didn't seem to impart much information. Although I have only a slight knowledge of the philosophy, I have at least got the article started. Anyone with more information, please jump in. --rhmoore 08:37, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Note: The reason why that paragraph was deleted from the main section was because Swadhyaya is a symbol of decades worth of work. If one had to define what the Swadhyaya work is, it can not be defined with that paragraph. With that said, it was deleted. Nevertheless, we are all brothers and sisters underneath the fatherhood of God, and please do not be offended by having it deleted. It was deleted because it was not an accurate definition of the work done by Parum Pujya Pandurang Shashraji Athavale.

Go to [1] to find link to many news article as well as discussion representing both sides of the issue.

Rewrite, revisited

Just found this article with the random article button. Very unprofessional looking. Will some please clean it up? Stoneice02 04:43, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Rewrite

This page is definitely not written from a neutral point of view. I'm going to attempt a rewrite. I think the controversy should definitely be included, also written from a NPOV. Most of the article is preachy and philosophical. It should limit itself to the organization and a much smaller treatment of the philosophy. -- Superdosh 22:43, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• Visit http://www.swadhyayee.org for definite view point and hidden agenda of Swadhyay Pariwar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.108.4.105 (talk • contribs)

www.swadhyay.org is self created website with false, un-realistic, far from truth and tall claims and is not a neutral - trust worthy source.Swadhyayee 12:28, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Merge

I've copied the 'Swadhyay' section from Pandurang Shastri Athavale here, since it's much more relevant to this article. I'll let someone who actually knows something about the subject merge it properly into the article. - ulayiti (talk) 12:19, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Why redirecting of Swadhyay to Swadhyay Pariwar?

Why do any one assume that Swadhyay and Swadhyay Parivar are one thing? What I mentioned on Swadhyay page was not my opinion, it's the disclosing of facts. Since the matter is not in front of me now, I can't say what could Gurubrahma have thought being my opinion? Could someone copy-paste my text so I can recheck it. Swadhyay Pariwar is trying to monopolise the activities dictated in Hindu religious scripture Srimad Bhagwad Geeta. Search Google and you will come across Jain Swadhyay Centres. Since you say, even if my actions of reverting re-direction of Swadhyay to Swadhyay Pariwar were wrong, redirecting Swadhyay to Swadhyay Pariwar by Gurubrahma is also not a right thing. If one is conscious about wikipedia to remain an encyclopedia, one should not encourage such monopolisation of some dictate of Geeta and let the true meaning of Swadhyay be known to the viewers.

Hope you will re-consider this.

With Regards,

Swadhyayee 14:20, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

• Apologies. There was no explanation; that is why I reverted. Here is the original text:

Swadhyay means study of self. Late Mr.Pandurang Shashtri Athavale popularly known as Dada did give discourses upon the message of Srimad Bhagwad Geeta & Upnishads. It does not mean that The Swadhyay was beginned by Late Mr.Pandurang Shashtri Athavale as claimed by Swadhyay Parivar. Swadhyay has reference in Srimad Bhagwad Geeta - a scripture of Hindu. Srimad Bhagwad Geeta in abbreviation known as Geeta state that Swadhyay must be a human quality/virtue. Each human being should daily study philosophy and try to understand causes of one's existence along with causes of existence of other things and relations between other things and creator of all.

Jains claim that they are different from Hindus and yet they call their scripture study as Swadhyay.

• I think it's not quite encyclopedic. I think maybe a sentence at the top of the Swadhyay parivar page explaining that they do not have a monopoly on the term would suffice? -- Superdosh 14:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks but no sir, can we allow a absolute false claim and just put a tag it is not their monopoly. I don't think, it would be appropriate. The present day followers of Pandurang Shashtri Athavale have been considering their activities super natural and resorted to violence when old Swadhyayees left Pandurang Shashtri for his wrongs and tried to carry on Swadhyay activities. One lady, Kantaben Thakkar was threatened to be un-dressed (remove her saree) if she went to take any Swadhyay centre of her own. Daughter-in-law of Prof.S.K.Joshi was threatened that she will be raped in presence of her husband and father-in-law if her father-in-law did not stop from exposing wrongs.

What do every one think, should be done?

Swadhyayee 14:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

• I think it is appropriate because in English, Swadhyay most commonly refers to this organization. I hope the tag at the top is acceptable. I know it's cumbersome, so maybe someone else can whittle it down to essentials. -- Superdosh 20:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Your Attention Please.

"It was created by Pandurang Shastri Athavale (known as Dadaji to practitioners) in the 1940s."

Swadhyay was created by Pandurang Shashtri Athavale is a wrong claim. "Swadhyay" is a dictate in Srimad Bhagwad Geeta [abbreviation: Geeta] (See Verse 1 of Chapter 16). First 3 verses of Ch. 16 of Geeta state qualities of divinity that could be seen in a person possessing divine qualities.

Swadhyay is made of two words SWA + ADHYAYAN.

"SWA" MEANS SELF (OWN SELF); "ADHYAYAN" MEANS STUDY.

Pandurang Shashtri explained meaning of Geeta but that does not mean that Pandurang Shashtri created Swadhyay. Pandurang Shashtri himself in his discourses said that practicing Swadhyay was a way of life in ancient India. Means studying religious scripture was a daily affair of ancient Indians.

THIS CLAIM FROM SWADHYAY PARIWAR PAGE SHOULD BE REMOVED.

Further, Jains claim that they are different from Hindus but they also use the word Swadhyay for study of their scripture. "Swadhyay" is a Sanskrit word and followers of Pandurang Shashtri Athavale well try to stake their monopoly on anything considered to be pious and add take un-due credit. SEARCH IN GOOGLE FOR "SWADHYAY" AND ONE WILL COME ACROSS JAIN SWADHYAY CENTRES.

Jains call their study of their scripture "Swadhyay".

Swadhyayee 14:45, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

The Swadhyay (self-study) movement started in the 1950s in Mumbai. Athavale was influenced when he was invited in 1954 to the Second World Religious Conference in Japan.

Somebody who did research has claimed that there was no World Religious Conference in Japan but was a private gathering and from the records, it is seen that Pandurang Shashtri Athavale had left for India within 48 hours. Mr.Compton was not there in the conference.

The claims of World Religious Conference and meeting Mr.Compton as well his offers are challenged.

Swadhyayee 15:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Swadhyay Pariwar is not a Hindu philosophy.

01/09/2006.

"The Swadhyay Pariwar is a Hindu philosophy emphasizing self-realization (swadhyaya literally means self-study)."

The above sentence on "Swadhyay Pariwar" page is a mis-leading sentence. The word "Pariwar" means "Family". Followers of Pandurang Shashtri prefer to collectively recognised them as "Swadhyay Pariwar" and "Swadhyay Pariwar" is not a philosophy but a group of people - followers of Pandurang Shashtri.

This sentence should be corrected along with false claim of Dada having created Swadhyay.

Swadhyayee 10:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Dadaji - "ji" not acceptable under Wikipedia policy.

Pandurang Shashtri Athavale preferred him to be addressed by his followers as "Dada". The word "Dada" is a word of Marathi language, spoken in State of Maharashtra of India.

"ji" added to "Dada" and written as "Dadaji" is not acceptable under Wikipedia policy. Since, Titles are not allowed to be prefixed to the names, the contributor has preferred to add suffix "ji" to "Dada".

Pandurang Shashtri advocated simplicityin his earlier days. He advocated his city followers to wear simple dress so as to make farmers mix with them without feeling of inferiority complex.

Dada never felt wrong in anyone addressing him as "Dada". For years even from dias "Dada" was referred to as "Dada".

Didi, his adopted daughter mooted the idea to add "ji" to Dada without realising that such un-necessary reverential suffix does not give anything else than adding distance which is not desirable between a Guru and his disciples. The present generation address Dada as "Dadaji" and feels those who address "Dada" are mannerless.

After adding "ji" to Dada, "ji" is being addressed to "Didi". Didi is now called as "Didiji". It's an effort to gain un-due and non-deserving reverence from the people around.

"ji" is not acceptable under Wikipedia policy and since the controls are with few, this must be removed and also removed the false claim of Swadhyay created by Dada/Pandurang Shashtri Athavale.

There is no effort on my part to lower the image of Dada. I was associated with these activities for more than 2 decades and have never felt that "Dada" was anyway less reverential for his disciples or to me.

Swadhyayee 10:59, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

True, Dadaji said not to have blind faith.Bakaman _Bakatalk 22:07, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Stay away from removing critical links and removing facts.

The Viewers should respect that Wikipedia being an encyclopedia should contain article with necessary criticism. Nearly 10 Swadhyayees have been arrested by police for the murder of Pankaj Trivedi. No one should remove the critical links.Swadhyayee 16:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I am compelled to copy-paste two articles published in an Indian magazine "India Today" to stress the point that Swadhyay Parivar under the guise of religious/spiritual activities is involved in criminal activities and have gone so far as killing of Pankaj Trivedi, on 15/06/2006 at Ahmedabad, India. Pankaj Trivedi questioned trust funds mis-appropriation and filed civil suit to open a temple built on Govt. land from public donations which was closed down by Jayshree Talwalkar. In retalliation, nearly 100 false criminal cases were filed in rural Gujarat State of India against Pankaj Trivedi and very old dedicated followers of Pandurang Shashtri who opposed Pandurang Shashtri's wrongs. So was done to kill these old dedicated followers through mob violence outside Court premises on Court dates when Pankaj Trivedi and others attended Courts. An appeal was filed against 22 such identical cases by Pankaj Trivedie & others in The High Court at Ahmedabad. The High Court quashed all 22 cases and recorded The High Court's obseravation from identical language of all cased filed miles away from each other by different persons that the false cases were engineered and filed by Swadhyay Parivar to harass Pankaj Trivedi and others who were voicing against the wrongs of Swadhyay Parivar.

Plot to kill Pankaj Trivedi was hatched in The High Court premises when the order was read out. This was confessed by killers of Pankaj Trivedi to the police.

Most of the authentic material in support is in an Indian language Gujarati. It's difficult to provide internet links. The link to following article is either timebound or open for reading of subscribers only. I am compelled to copy-paste the 2 articles.

Swadhyayee 12:45, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I've removed them because of copyright concerns. Feel free to read them by clicking on the links. MER-C 13:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

They are registration required sites, please go to bugmenot.com to retrieve an open login. MER-C 08:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Please see two Englsih articles published by the 'India Today' magazine, which are as follows:

• [2]
• [3]
• [4] 13/07/2006

Let this article remain balanced with due criticism.

Pl. let this article remain balanced and with due criticism. The Swadhyay Parivar has a blot of killing of Pankaj Trivedi; Crippling of old dedicated followers and non-utilisation of earth quake reliefs in addition to converting trusts of God to privately held trusts. The article can not go without due criticism. The followers of Pandurang Shashtri should restrain themselves from removing criticism and removal of critical links, else these will be reverted and may be supplemented with more wrongs.

Swadhyayee 05:26, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Indian newspapers and magazines should not be used as sources, as they are tabloids and print anything if they are paid enough. This is an encyclopedia, and all speculative information/rumors should be deleted. The Controversy section has a lot of opinion, and is totally inappropriate here.

What's your suggestion for clean up, Stoneice02?

Ref: Your message for clean up on page Swadhyay Parivar. You have not put your comments on discussion page. What's the point, until you give your say? "Swadhyay Parivar" is behind the killing of Pankaj Trivedi (on 15/06/2006 at Ahmedabad, India). Pankaj Trivedi had filed bonafide suit to get a temple opened which was closed down by leader of Swadhyay Parivar. Pankaj Trivedi was instrumental in erection of the temple in question and was an old associate of Swadhyay Parivar. The temple is built on Govt. land from the charitable funds of public. Pankaj Trivedi also questioned non-utilisation of millions of U.S. dollars, collected by Swadhyay Parivar for relief work for victims of earthquake of Kutch, India. The Swadhyay Parivar is in habit of non-utilising charitable trusts' funds and later controlling them privately. Pankaj Trivedi objected to this civil wrong. Pankaj Trivedi was found to be bonafide by The High Court at Ahmedabad, India which quashed 22 false criminal cases against Pankaj Trivedi and others. The High Court was kind enough to record it's observation in it's order quashing cases against Pankaj Trivedi.

Since, Pankaj Trivedi was legally right and winning the cases, a plot to kill him came in shape in The High Court premises as confessed by the killers-followers of Swadhyay Parivar. According the plot, he was brutally killed on 15/06/2006. Police have arrested people of Swadhyay Parivar.

Swadhyay Parivar desire to bury it's criminal activities and for the purpose they want glorified and false things projected on public forums like Wikipedia.

Could an encyclopedia be allowed to be used for such malicious objective?

Swadhyayee 08:31, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Stoneice02"

This article is very difficult to read. A lot of it seems to assume the reader has a preexisting knowledge on the subject. I don't even know where to start. One thing that definitely sticks out is the fact that you tell the reader to read the talk page for more information. I don't know WP's policy on this, but I find it hard to believe that that's kosher. Stoneice02 14:53, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

There are only two users I know of with much knowledge of Swadhyaya. One is myself, the other is Swadhyayee. After a couple of my problems on a CfD are sorted out, I will try to make this article better, I need a bit of time. Any other users who know a bit about Swadhyaya are appreciated. Bakaman _Bakatalk 01:03, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Update on case?

'Swadhyayee' should update us on status of this case. I believe Police has clreared Jayshree didi from all the charges. There are few bad people who don't like good things in the world, Dadaji said "The god lives in everyone. Each single person is 'Dev' to us. Sometime the god tests us in form of a bad person, who is not bad actualy." God bless you.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.73.202.34 (talk • contribs) 06:11, 23 September 2006 (UTC) .

Until we can find some articles on an update on the case, it should not be in the article. Stoneice02 06:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Media has mis-interpreted upon filing charge-sheet against Swadhyayees arrested for the murder of Pankaj Trivedi that Police has given clean chit to Didi. Legally, the investigation can go ahead inspite of charge-sheet filed and Didi can still be arrested and charged. Police have no authority to give clean chit.

Swadhyayee 08:48, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Uncatorgized tag

The uncatorgized tag {{Uncategorized|September 2006}} should not be removed until the article is catorgorized.Stoneice02 06:40, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Good addition?

I just saw an edit that was made today which I think was a positive direction to go in. Anyone else agree? I saw we incorportate those changes into the article. Stoneice02 22:03, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Can you be specific? Swadhyayee 08:53, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

This page is a constant place of section blanking. I am doing my best warning the vandals (usually IP addresses) but could use everyone's help. In the future, if you revert vandalism from this page (please put "rv" in the edit summary) please visit the vandal's Talk page and add one of the following warnings:

• {{subst:blatantvandal-n|Swadhyay Parivar}} ~~~~ - for blatant vandlism
• {{subst:test4a-n|Swadhyay Parivar}} ~~~~ - for deleting content (most common)

For a full list of warning templates, see Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace

Stoneice02 16:34, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

I think restructuring the entire article to fit the exact same format as the Scientology article would be a fantastic step forward towards cleanup. I will move forward with this cleanup in December, if nobody else is able to pick up the ball until then.

FOBioPatel 23:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Good, if you feel of doing. I did not want to touch the article created by someone. I just wanted to highlight some of the controversies and false glorification. I feel criticism at minimal level is fair and acceptable to all else it tarnishes the good intentions. If, you could pl. see that too much wrongs do not take place so that the viewers will be disinterested and the article serve the purpose of boredom.Swadhyayee 05:43, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Swadhyay parivar

I agree, there must be change in the swadhyay parivar defination. It is utmost wrong and ignorance to defame and demoralize such a pious and unhateful movement. Those who do hate the Swadhyay karya should not ever try to define swadhyay because they themselves don't know what swadhyay is, if they choose to speak out nonsense against Didi and the whole karya. If they wer true swadhyayees, they would know that true swadhyayees would continue to move forward instead of holding on to this whole Pankaj Trivedi mess and true swadhyayees don't come to swadhyay just because they want to; it is because they believe that Dadaji truly made a difference in their lives with his thoughts and actions and watn to continue to recieve his inspiring and uplifting thoughts. So i'm all for changing the defination in wikipedia.

The user here-in above has not preferred to sign his comments. The history reflect that this comments are made by one regd. user: Arjun. This is to clear the mis-conception that the above comments were made by "johnpseudo". swadhyayee 03:47, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not meant to be a platform for any particular view, and users who are personally involved in the article they are editing should be careful not to include bias in favor of their point-of-view. If there is a controversy involving the definition of Swadhyay Parivar, editors should cite their facts, mention the controversy, and try to limit their edits to verifiable facts. johnpseudo 21:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

To clear up my view:I respect Dadaji, but I'm an ex-Swadhyayee.Bakaman _Bakatalk 03:48, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

The fact remains that Swadhyay Parivar is not as it was or as it's ideology. I do not agree that those who speak against Swadhyay Parivar do not know what Swadhyay is. In fact, they know, what Swadhyay is more than un-regd. user Arjun. Pankaj Trivedi murder can not be seen as a mess. The news cited here are from Times of India and Yahoo, which are by-means no tabloids. I have heard that Swadhyay Parivar is in habit of paying tabloids to suppress news of wrongs of "Swadhyay Parivar" coming out. Swadhyay Parivar is in un-due influence of criminal mentality and tactics. The news of Swadhyay Parivas has come out because of press conference held by none other than shri B.J.Diwan - Ex-Chief Justice of High Court at Ahmedabad and Andhra Pradesh who was a senior trustee and was very close with Dada, Didi and Tai and deeply involved in the activities. Shri B.J.Diwan at the suggestion of Dada had talked to all senior most Swadhyayees, varified the documents and declared the wrongs in a press conference. The news were first circulated by Gujarat Samachar which by no means is a tabloid. Arjun, should varify the claims before making any statement here. Let me clarify that I am not involved in any personal attacks on Swadhyay Parivar, at the same time, whenever, I removed some of the im-proper contents, it was restored by someone or other. I have avoided edit war on this count. Baka, pl. say something about murder of Pankaj Trivedi by Swadhyayees. Is it a tabloid report and do you agree that whether it is a corrupt report? swadhyayee 04:00, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Editors trying to remove the info you are discussing again... --Xiahou 01:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Need clean-up and re-structuring

For any novice user, this article is not at all appealing. What are the wikipedians doing? It should be well sturctured. If its about an organization, then it must stating its philosophy, scope, work, practises, influence etc.. on the society. And I can read two different groups of people fighting each other in editorial war, but still they didnt come up with a good article. Its not a justification to the encyclopedia. Can some one please organize the article? or I will have to collect the information and have to go ahead. Traver Rebello 16:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey Mr.Traver, you are just regd. and a lot of judgement!! You are dumb like me. Shaionara 18:13, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

This is an encylopedia and this is a page on an organisation. The way article should be organised is

- Philosophy
- Brief History
- Scope & Nature of Work

If no one does this, I will do it. This was done a few months back by some one after the comments by Traver Rebello but slowly and steadily the page is again in messy condition. As is done with article on Islam, the controversey should not be portrayed on this page and there should be a seprate page on "Swadhyay Parivar Controversey". So that this page can be properly organised and not subjected to un due edit wars and the much awaited cleanup can take place Hemendra 18:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC) Hemendra

Hemendra,

It is devil quoting Bible. I agree this is encyclopedia and so should not be used to glorify Swadhyay Parivar - a criminal organization of some shameless people now.

Also pl. place your comments on bottom so that it comes in chronological order for discussion. Pl. don't put it anywhere you like. Shaionara 02:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey Mr. Shaionara you cant bluff anything like "Swadhyay Parivar - a criminal organization of some shameless people now". I strictly oppose you. Mind that it can ban your editorial access due to your unprofessional and personal attack. I get to know that this is organization of 5 million people which is conutineously working for the development of society. 5 million pepole organization cant be considered as some people. Why cant you look at hundreds of creative work done by them, let me just point one of them, http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/iwmi-tata_html/PartnersMeet/pdf/016%20-%20Nagar.pdf Water Recharge Movement by Swadhyay Pariwar.

But what I think is, initially let controversy be part of article, because afterall its encyclopedia. But everything in article should be precise, compact and with references. I have also noticed that some users are only intrested in controversy part of the section, and they are shouting that they know swadhyay pariwar better. Then why cant those user come up and help to rewrite the creative and organization activity in more structured manner. I am completely agree with Hemendra, with minor modifications, lets sturcture this article in following way

• Philosophy
• Brief Histroy
• Nature & Scope of work
• Recognitions
• Critisisms

Traver Rebello 06:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Controversy section looks clean and more precise now. What about the main article? Take initiative to reorganize it. Traver Rebello 07:02, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Traver Rebello,

Swadhyay Parivar has criminal elements and God's wealth has not remained God's wealth. Swadhyay Parivar has leaders who are liars and the foundation has been only on "lies". Probably unknowingly, you also believe so and propagate so. I do not say every one is bad but the control is in the hands of bad and immoral people only. You are too young to describe Swadhyay Parivar. Shaionara 17:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I think, if you attempt to remove facts, more disgusting facts may find a place here. Shaionara 17:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Its very nice suggestion to reconstruct the page...because lots of junk are there, putting and removing the details will not make this page stable. We have to work towards making it better.

from godjustify

If you remove the facts of criminalisation and allow false propaganda to remain, it might look good and suit to many but the painful facts are Pandurang Shastri removed all neutral trustees and replaced them with his adopted daughter Jayshree Talwalkar and her husband as trustees on trusts holding God's wealth. The senior most dedicated followers of Pandurang Shastri did not trust Jayshree Talwalkar and protested. Pandurang Shastri lied to his novice and low intellectual followers and used them to unleash reign of terror on dedicated followers who were in foundation of Swadhyay Parivar. Bones of few were broken and at last Pankaj Trivedi was killed. Pandurang Shastri had vowed that he will not ask for money, flour (food) or vote from his followers but his daughter now threatens politicians for using Swadhyay Parivar people to cast vote against them, thus blackmails and controls politician from taking action against her. Police have arrested nearly 10 followers of Swadhyay Parivar for killing Pankaj Trivedi. One of them Bharat is close confidant of Jayshree Talwalkar and was/is managing Jayshree Talwalkar's funds. Bharat Bhat from India spoke to Jayshree Talwalkar while she was in London within minutes of murder of Pankaj Trivedi even when police had not reached the site of murder. He spoke to Jayshree Talwalkar at length for half an hour or more in wee hours of the night of murder. He lied to police that he had taken sleeping pills and had slept throgh out the night after murder of Pankaj Trivedi and he did not speak to Jayshree Talwalkar but when police produced his cell phone records he confessed his involvement. Jayshree Talwalkar is known to be Pankaj Trivedi's blood thirsty. Thousands of Swadhyayees are threatened to be used against ruling politicians and God's cash worth $ 44 millions protect her from arrest yet she has not stepped in Gujarat since the murder of Pankaj Trivedi fearing her arrest. If, the article on Swadhyay Parivar or Pandurang Shastri has to remain on Wikipedia, these criminal history of Swadhyay Parivar has to be in it. Edward11 02:45, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Protected

Arjun01 (talk · contribs) protected this page. Please discuss the issues germane to the page below. To clear up my view, I have respect for Mr. Athavale, but do not really care for swadhyay otherwise. The Pankaj Trivedi murder deserves its own page because of the vast info available on it. I'm not knowledgeable on the other issues, which is why I hope the editors involved can use reliable sources to back up whatever views they may have on swadhyay.Bakaman 03:12, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Baka,

Having a seperate page for Pankaj Trivedi's murder will be facilitating false projection and glorification of Swadhyay Parivar continue on Wikipedia Swadhyay Parivar article. Whatever is claimed for Swadhyay Parivar is self declarations. www.swadhyay.org is personal website of Swadhyay Parivar managed by Swadhyay Parivar. Baka, you should have experienced how emotional Swadhyayees are about Dada and the activities that they fail to balance between right and wrong. Wrong means can not be a medium for any good cause. Swadhyay Parivar has done all criminal acts under the sky, pocketing of God's wealth, levelling false allegations on dedicated past followers who protested, threatened past followers and their families, threatened to rape women, broke bones of number of old followers, setting ablaze house of a past dedicated follower, attempted to kill many but succeeded in killing only Pankaj Trivedi, filed criminal cases against practically all active past followers in rural area with intention to kill them when they attend court. Filed complaints agaist newspapers. They lost all court cases be it against media or past followers.

Either both the articles, Pandurang Shastri and Swadhyay Parivar should be removed from Wikipedia or have to exist with it's criminal turn.

It's fact that there was no World Religious Conference at Japan and Pandurang Shastri returned within 48 hours. Mr.Compton was not a participant and all stories about invitation to Pandurang Shastri to stay in U.S. and carry on his activities is bluff.

If you make a seperate article on Pankaj Trivedi's murder, it will go to the advantage of Swadhyay Parivar as the main article will be free from facts.

The article on Pankaj Trivedi's murder would be subject to constant vandalism. See the edits of followers of Swadhyay Parivar, under one or other name they remove the weblinks which expose wrongs of Swadhyay Parivar. You will ever see those editers hardly editing elsewhere except removing damaging facts and weblinks.

swadhyayee 08:25, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Look you are looking at swadhyay too emotionally, as is every other editor here. Pankaj trivedi is just the tip of the iceberg, I have heard of other controversies as well which can be documented here.Bakaman 16:00, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Baka,

There may be so many other controversies. I have no idea what you are referring to but it may fall under the above headings I mentioned. I am trying to keep myself away from commenting on the lack of necessary character for persons heading a religious/spiritual organisation. I am not agreeable to all negative inclusions here but I am avoiding disputes. My objections are against the removal of facts and weblinks damaging Swadhyay Parivar's intentions to continue false projection about them. When good people for good cause take support of notorious elements they can not be termed as a good organisation. Here, the faith in God is less and the faith is more in an individual with bad/good influence over society which is exactly opposite to what is needed to be nurtured within oneself and within society viz. have faith in God and in good motivated actions.

Pankaj Trivedi's murder may be a tip of iceberg but it's height of wrongs. If a person or organisation is deviating from righteousness and someone draws attention, instead of thanking him and changing, should he be killed to cover up and continue wrongs!!! How idiotic, ruthless and in-human? Just put a leg in the shoes of his spouse, son or daughter and think. How a family could miss his dear one whose life is taken away in barbaric way? Today, people of Swadhyay Parivar mis-interpret court's order on Wikipedia and try to project that Bharat Bhat was not involved in murder of Pankaj Trivedi. The trial of murder has not begun, when it starts, just see the lies of defense. swadhyayee 02:34, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

All personal and religious issues aside. The critics are there. Cited. So for example take wikis page on chirstianity it has a link in the right infobox on criticism. Goes right to an article about it. There you go. Have the main article. Then a critical article (personally think most wiki articles should be like this) Simple solution if you are worried about vandalism of it. Patrol it. Treat it netural. I honestly have 0 idea what this Swadhyay article is about. I reverted blantat blankings of cited materials. The article didn't have a seperate page for it so it should be in the article its not all roses here. Until a critic article is made for it, it has to have a critical section. Othwerwise its one big pov. So far both editors above have personal sounding stakes. If Christianity and other religions have seperate pages for critics it seems the obvious and rather simple solution. Make sure the link is readly seen in the main article. Patrol both using wiki policys not personal feelings when editing or reverting. Keeping NPOV in mind. Get the point across without trying to 'win sides'. --Xiahou 22:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I do not have any emotional connection to the page but noted as you did that it was the site of a protracted struggle. Therefore I provided some possible solutions.Bakaman 22:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup Citationless sentences

Can we remove all the sentences which have citation needed and the citation is not provided —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.222.183.3 (talk) 22:29, 4 April 2007 (UTC).

No Gentleman/Lady from Hong Kong, you can't clean up contents of talk page. Talk page is meant for discussion.swadhyayee 09:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I think he/she was referring to the actual page, not the talk page, so yes 203xxx, you may offer to clean up but still discuss anything which may be objected to. Thanks Gizza^{Chat ©} 09:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Merge with Swadhyaya?

It looks like someone above said they are different, if that is true, maybe one the pages need to be changed to show that or maybe a section should be added to the pages to explain the difference.

The above comments were added by IP 72.90.138.197.

Swadhyay has a distinct meaning. Only less knowledgable followers of Pandurang Shashtri Athavale try to feel that Swadhyay has been introduced by their reverential figure Pandurang Shastri Athavale. I have removed false contents from "Svadhyay" swadhyayee 17:37, 3 May 2007 (UTC)