User talk:Joshua Jonathan

Userboxes

This user has been on Wikipedia for 12 years, 11 months and 19 days.

This user has made over
38,000 edits on Wikipedia worldwide.

This editor is a Veteran Editor IV and is entitled to display this Gold Editor Star.

This user has been blocked at Wikipedia 1 time.

This talkpage is decorated by Hafspajen

Alien Mentor collection Thanks Hafs!
Now what kind of grammar was that? Be POLITE!! Darth Vader Wikipedia:Newcomers are delicious, so go ahead and bite them I don't like the way you do your citations... That sentence, you need to reword it. It's too near original'.

File:Kalachakra el paso 2012.jpg

Appreciation. For the Kalachakra sand mandala above, see Archive 2012

en:User:Joshua Jonathan/Buddha/message

Invitation to WikiProject TAFI

Hello, Joshua Jonathan. You're invited to join WikiProject Today's articles for improvement, a project dedicated to significantly improving articles with collaborative editing in a week's time.

Feel free to nominate an article for improvement at the project's Article nomination board. If interested in joining, please add your name to the list of members. Thanks for your consideration. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:13, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invitation, but I'm afraid I'm already too busy with India- and Buddhism-related articles. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:43, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

D. P. Agrawal

D. P. Agrawal is one of the people that Mallory invited to comment on Kazanas. I think you will enjoy reading this piece [1], published by, of all people, the Infinity Foundation! - Kautilya3 (talk) 20:52, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Kautilya3: just read part of it; interesting indeed. And nice irony! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:27, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thanks!

my revert was middle-of-the-night.. Thanks for assisting with all that. ;-D 20040302 (talk)

My pleasure. The editor in question is notorious, and has been active for more than a decade already on all sorts of Buddhist fora. If he shows up again, we might as well nominate hin straight away for a Wiki-ban. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:18, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Theory of Kamma, Dalit Buddhist Movement and your future edits.

Hello Joshua! Few days back we discussed about the theory of Kamma in Buddhism on yours and Dalit Buddhist Movement 's talk page. I earlier stated that some results or experiences are not based on previous kamma or are not results of previous kamma. Now for that I have found a direct quote of Buddha from Pali canon marking that statement correct. Here is what Buddha has to say about.

"There are cases where some feelings arise based on bile. You yourself should know how some feelings arise based on bile. Even the world is agreed on how some feelings arise based on bile. So any brahmans & contemplatives who are of the doctrine & view that whatever an individual feels — pleasure, pain, neither-pleasure-nor-pain — is entirely caused by what was done before — slip past what they themselves know, slip past what is agreed on by the world. Therefore I say that those brahmans & contemplatives are wrong."

"There are cases where some feelings arise based on phlegm... based on internal winds... based on a combination of bodily humors... from the change of the seasons... from uneven care of the body... from harsh treatment... from the result of kamma. You yourself should know how some feelings arise from the result of kamma. Even the world is agreed on how some feelings arise from the result of kamma. So any brahmans & contemplatives who are of the doctrine & view that whatever an individual feels — pleasure, pain, neither pleasure-nor-pain — is entirely caused by what was done before — slip past what they themselves know, slip past what is agreed on by the world. Therefore I say that those brahmans & contemplatives are wrong."

Moreover this last statement from this sutta hits the nail on the head.

"Bile, phlegm, wind, a combination, Season, uneven, harsh treatment, and through the result of kamma as the eighth." Sivaka Sutta .

Even the translator Thanissaro Bhikkhu has stated about it very plainly. I hope it may help you in your future edits. Best regards. Terabar (talk) 13:18, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Terabar: great! And I'm sure I have read this before; I think it was Gombrich who mentioned this sutra, also to make the point that karma is not "responsible" for all of our situations. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! Gombrich, What the Buddha Thought, p.20. I've added it to Karma in Buddhism; see diff. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:09, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arabian mythology

Hi Joshua, as a scholar of religion, you might be interested in the debate going on at the Arabian mythology page. It is certainly fascinating to me. - Kautilya3 (talk) 21:08, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arabian mythology? How did you get there? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 03:49, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, read it. Whats'the problem with adding "May have been..." etc? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 03:59, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There was an editor that was edit-warring and his/her edit history led me there. But all pagans are my "friends" anyway. The issue is apparently whether the three goddesses of Mecca were the "daughters" of Allah or not. That kind of a question is very simply answered for a Hindu. But for the Arabians, it is apparently not so clear. It is also funny that we know so little about the Arabia of 600 AD, the time of Harshavardhana! - Kautilya3 (talk) 07:45, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with "may have been" is that we are not saying why the doubt exists. It is WP:WEASEL according to the admin overseeing the dispute. - Kautilya3 (talk) 07:51, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hindu fringe

Despite the fact that the sources talk a lot about the Brahmo Samaj and Arya Samaj etc., do you realize that they are just fringe groups within wider Hinduism? They might have made a lot of impact on the colonialists and the Indologists, but their influence on Hindus is pretty much zilch. - Kautilya3 (talk) 12:30, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh irony... Well, how many Hindus adhere to the kind of Vivekananda-Hinduism that Malhotra says to defend? According to those sources, Vivekananda was one of those of few Hindus who actually were influenced by these ideas. From what I've read about it, it was his acquaintance with western esotericism that made him so succesfull in, ehm, let's say "fringe milieus" in the west - and it was this succes which made him fashionable in India. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:37, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Let me put it another way: if the Brahmo Samaj is "fringe" within "wider Hinduism," than it's weird that Malhotra presents and defends a Brahmo Samaj-derived kind of 'New Age Hinduism' as being the authentic voice of Hinduism. There's so much more to Hinduism than just that! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:44, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, here is how Hinduism works. Most Hindus just follow their family traditions, which are passed down from generation to generation. Some Hindus also have gurus (also acquired through family traditions), who again follow their own parampara (teachings passed down from teachers to disciples). The Hindus that don't have their own gurus are happy to listen to any guru, but of course listening is not practising. Innovation happens, but by only minute increments per generation. Major innovators like Vivekananda end up starting their own parampara. Did Vivekananda's parampara (Ramakrishna Math) impact the other paramparas? I don't think so. Vivekananda has however impacted a lot of educated Indians (including me), who may not care much about practising anything, but we like talking about it. So, Vivekananda is more an intellectual than a guru. The Brahmos and the Arya Samajis likewise started their own paramparas, which are a lot more practical than Vivekananda's and, so, have more adherents. But they have essentially become sects, which means that they drop out of the mainstream Hinduism. It might seem all very complicated, but in reality it is plain simple. Hinduism never changes! - Kautilya3 (talk) 13:26, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What can I say?... A very comprehensive overview! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:18, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Malhotra may be right about one thing. The vast quantity of Hinduism that is out there in the paramparas is probably out of reach of the academics. To access it, they have to become part of it (i.e., go live with the gurus observe them on a daily basis, listen to what they say, etc.) If we want to know whether Vivekananda is "neo" or not, we have to ask them what they think. My impression is that very few paramparas would accept Vivekananda as an authority. They probably think of him as a great populariser. But I think they will also say that whatever Vivekananda taught is true Hinduism as documented in the scriptures, even if they might accuse him of oversimplifying it. So, for us, Vivekananda is an innovator. But I don't think they see him as an innovator. - Kautilya3 (talk) 15:01, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's a heavy walled garden on Ayyavazhi, all primary sourced, I think Redtigerxyz tried doing some cleanup on it sometime back but gave up (could be someone else, as I last adminnned in this area a few years back). —SpacemanSpiff 15:07, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vivekananda was a Christian.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 15:16, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vic, I'm still surprised with your short and surprising comments. Highly appreciated! Regarding gaining an "insiders-view", The Hidden Lives of Brahman] may be one of these few instances where an "outsider" lived and researched as an insider. Vivekananda is not part of the contents... It's a fascinating, though hard to read, book on the living Advaita Vedanta tradition. I bought it a couple of months ago; it humbles me in my perceived knowledge of Hindu-traditions, and gives me an awe-ipnsiring sense of the complexities and richnesses of this tradition. To reduce it to "philosophy", as is the case now at the Wiki-article, is a great disservice to this tradition. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:18, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I should have said Vivekananda was a New Age Christian.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 15:27, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No kidding. Ramakrishna was a Christian too, and a Muslim as well. - Kautilya3 (talk) 19:10, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vivekananda used to carry around Christian texts with him.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 01:42, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Read the Wiki-articles on Transcendentalism and New Thought, and then tell me where this idea of "God dwells within you" comes from: Hinduism or Western esotericism (c.q. New Age Christianity). Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:21, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Moksha and Nirvana

Josh, can you (and you pagewatchers) take a look at the proposal to merge these articles? I have my hands full at moment with a number of merge proposals, and other activities, of a new and very active contributor. Abecedare (talk) 19:12, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, my! That sure beats calling Sikhs Hindus. :) - Kautilya3 (talk) 19:28, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

At least they seem to be truly new: no discussion-section was created. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:29, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see some desparation at their talkpage... So, now we've got the Jain-variant again of 'mine is better than yours'? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:32, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Citation needed for Swami's nationality

Hi Josh,

I'm not sure how exactly my request for a citation disrupted the article?

If you don't have any scholarly reference to back up his nationality then why don't we let someone find a reference and educate us?

After all we all are here to learn, aren't we? Shoshanko (talk) 09:07, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]