Jump to content

Talk:Satyagraha: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Section on "Economic Satyagraha" seems like a promotional link.
Line 25: Line 25:




The translation stopped me dead in my tracks. Satyagraha is possibly a [[neologism]] of Ghandi's. I think ''truth+force'' is the way it gets translated.
The translation stopped me dead in my tracks. Satyagraha is possibly a [[neologism]] of Gandhi's. I think ''truth+force'' is the way it gets translated.
People writing the several articles have not got a good handle on Gandhi.
People writing the several articles have not got a good handle on Gandhi.


Line 45: Line 45:
Trust, P.O. Navajivan, Ahmedabad-380014.
Trust, P.O. Navajivan, Ahmedabad-380014.



==Section on "Economic Satyagraha" seems like a promotional link.==

The section on "Economic Satyagraha" doesn't seem encyclopedic in the least. I checked the literature linked by this section, and the connection to Gandhian satyagraha is spurious. I propose cleanup or deletion.

[[Special:Contributions/68.57.139.189|68.57.139.189]] ([[User talk:68.57.139.189|talk]]) 21:45, 19 October 2009 (UTC)


==Origins of Satyagraha==
==Origins of Satyagraha==

Revision as of 21:45, 19 October 2009

WikiProject iconIndia: History / Politics B‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Indian politics workgroup (assessed as High-importance).
WikiProject iconPhilosophy: Ethics Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
Ethics

Entry should also mention Martin Luther King and learning of Satyagraha from Gandhians in the 1950s, using it as an extention of Jesus' 'love in action' put into a new concept. Also might refer to new excellent work from Center for Nonviolence education, written by Michael N. Nagler.

Idea of Stayagraha is 'truth force' which King used in context of Jesus' lessons. (See both Stride Toward Freedom by King, and Hope or Terror on METTA website)

Noma119


Bouncing from pacifist,to pacifism, to Gandhi where I clipped up this:

Gandhi's principle of satyagraha (Sanskrit: truth + grasping firmly or holding onto it), often roughly translated as "passive resistance"...

Very roughly.How on Earth does truth become passive and grasping firmly become resistance?

---I want to reinforce this last comment. In one of his essays (can't recall which right now) Gandhi *specifically* repudiates the idea that satyagraha is passive resistance. the point of satyagraha (which is far more profitably translated as 'soul force') is that it is *not* passive. it is nonviolent force designed to generate a specific outcome, and the reason Gandhi advocates it is not only because it is nonviolent but because he believed it to be almost universally effective. he did *not* believe the same thing of passive resistance--in fact, he quite vigorously disliked passive resistance.


The translation stopped me dead in my tracks. Satyagraha is possibly a neologism of Gandhi's. I think truth+force is the way it gets translated. People writing the several articles have not got a good handle on Gandhi.


Yes there are too many quotes. But I like'm, but, they got to be pruned, stabalized, and then pruned again. They should go at the end of the article.Letters with Tolsoy are in the public domain possibly.


It might be a large article, if we look at this as a serious philosophy, which created the world's largest democracy, and showed the meaning of will to the British Empire. There is a lack of subtlety, in the way the wikipedia talk pages handle Gandhi. Based on how cruical he is to entries in biographies, philosophy, history, we can free up some wikipedians for brilliant prose if we provide an authoritative shorter entry.

Two16Two16


IMHO, somebody should put the bibliographic reference of these texts from Gandhi. From where they were taken from? This is important, for reference and information (e.g, I am interested in reading more about it, it would be nice to start looking for this books). 161.148.79.107


The copyright of all writings of Mahatma Gandhi vests with M/s Navajivan Trust, P.O. Navajivan, Ahmedabad-380014.


Section on "Economic Satyagraha" seems like a promotional link.

The section on "Economic Satyagraha" doesn't seem encyclopedic in the least. I checked the literature linked by this section, and the connection to Gandhian satyagraha is spurious. I propose cleanup or deletion.

68.57.139.189 (talk) 21:45, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Origins of Satyagraha

replaced "earlier" with "various" since Jesus and everything else listed came AFTER the Upanishads, Jainism, etc, not before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.160.221.55 (talk) 06:58, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


important question: Gandhis relation to Jesus

Did Gandhi explicitly relate to Jesus, especially his law "love your enemies" anywhere in his writings or outline of Satyagraha? Just started studying, so excuse me if the question is dumb.

--Jesusfreund 20:06, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

---

I read the same thing about Muhammed's influence on him:

"I become more than ever convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers and his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle."

http://playandlearn.org/ramadhan/YouMustKnowThisMan.htm

Yes, Gandhi often said that Jesus was an influence on him. He was particularly devoted to the Sermon of the Mount, which he read frequently, and often quoted the phrases "Love your enomies" and "retaliate not against evil." (His favorite Christian hymns were Lead, Kindly Light and Abide With Me. Tom129.93.17.139 19:16, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

---

Leo Tolstoy's The Kingdom of God is Within You seems to have been a major influence. The book is largely focused on the message of the Sermon on the Mount. JSteinbeck2 (talk) 14:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---

Just to add: When Gandhi died, among his very few personal possessions were only three books: the Bhagavad Gita, the Koran, and the Bible.JSteinbeck2 (talk) 09:52, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Messy?

I think this article needs a clean-up tag. Doesn't look encyclopedic at all. Discuss? User:Borisblue

Agreed. It's basically just a few long Gandhi quotes. Cleanup... Jebba 00:58, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
also, and more importantly i think, the quotes in the 'civil disobedience' and 'fasting' sections are never actually identified AS quotes. if you just skip down to one of those sections (which i did when first coming to this article) it sounds like an incredibly POV writer, not like a quote. (oops, that was me --dan 15:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Not "messy", just incomplete!

We're not told in this article what Satyagraha is. Nor are we treated to a history of the concept and its uses by Gandhi and others.

And to we have a system of diacritics on Wikipedia, so we can distinguish between long and short vowels? Tom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.93.17.139 (talk) 19:20, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone familiar with this topic do some work on the above article? I recreated it after it was speedy deleted, but I am unfamiliar with this area and only modified what the original author had written. Thanks! KnightLago (talk) 05:24, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Non-possession is not the same as neither poverty nor posperity. I realized that an entry needed to be written to clarify the topic upon encountering the text. --Ellesmelle (talk) 01:44, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]