Talk:Swami Vivekananda

Removing Link

Link added by anonymous user is being removed,

• Vivekananda: The Handsome Duckling Debunking

Reasons being: The article quotes from book by Sil, already included in list of books

• Swami Vivekananda: A Reassessment by Narasingha P. Sil ISBN 0945636970

Also, visiting brothel(sometimes plural in the article while single incident is narrated) and consumption of alcohol are the only things mentioned in the article. But in 19th century Bengal, prostitutes were also great artists and connoisseur of art visited their places for the purpose of listening to music and watching dance. In fact, many of the drama artists were from class/caste of prostitutes, Shri Ramakrishna watched many of those dramas. Notion of brothel in India during those days is vastly different from that of western countries. And hindu spirituality does not believe in "eternal damnation" for finite 'immoral' acts such as assumed debauchery. Ramashray

Mr. Geoffrey has written the book after stripping his own mind. Utterly illogical depiction of events. He seems to have delibrately chosen to hide facts and analysis and chose certain lines to arrive at some pre meditated conclusion. He seem to have purposefully left the context out of discussion. Not worth wasting time to read or write a

Reliable Source needed to confirm cause, age, prediction of death of Vivekananda.

Mahasamadhi is not scientifically proved. Such superstitions are misleading to common reader. Hence 'mahasamadhi' theory of vivekananda is proposed to be deleted. Also the prediction about his death needs reliable source. The wikisource page which was cited as source does not exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhishka (talk • contribs) 16:06, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Mahasamadhi is a very important concept of Hinduism and not a superstition and it cannot be omitted just because scientists haven't proved it because religious concepts are seldom proved scientifically. I have restored the death section with a reliable source. --Mankar Camoran^talk 15:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

To me "scientifically proved" means "measurable by instruments". Feelings are therefore not scientifically proved, so let us erase all articles or sentences in Wikipedia where feelings are mentioned. Scientists have just discovered that matter and light are the same thing or have the same essence. Yogis have been saying for thousands of years that matter is a form of light, "condensed light".

True, advanced or realized yogis, (I mean not someone like Osho Bhagwan or the Maharishi rightly rejected by the Beatles), seem to know the body better than doctors, the mind better than psychologists and pychiatrists and the soul better than theologians.

But how is western man going to accept that we have a secret door in our brain that that they have not discovered that can make a human being see more than telescopes, microscopes or any instruments. Even though we have evidence that our "brain" can register something, feelings, that instruments cannot register. Or are feelings also an eastern superstition?

In my almost humble opinion the west has gone from one extreme to the other, as a captain suddenly noticing the boat is going too much to the right, changes course too fast, and ends up going too much to the left. From Middles Ages superstition to "scientific superstition". We are funny. Instruments are not the only source of knowledge. --Pedrero (talk) 06:14, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

This section now has a reliable source. -- vineeth (talk) 17:19, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I think this section is sourced reasonably well and should be kept. Also well said Pedrero! Duty2love (talk) 20:21, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Mahasamadhi is neither a theory,a concept, or a superstition. It is an experience. It can only be related by those who have experienced it. Unfortunately, words are totally inadequate. Sex is called 'the poor man's samadhi.' Well it should be. Imagine the sensation of an orgasm by a million if you can. Who knows what it is like to birth a baby, a 63 year old obstetrician who has delivered 3,650 babies, or an 18 year old girl who just has had her first one?

No one has ever found a direct method of generating this experience in terms of repeatability, which science requires before validating anything. Most people who experience it only experience it once in a lifetime. Nirvakalpa samadhi is not a terminal event. It usually happens on an involuntary basis. It can come when least expected. Let me be clear, the doubts of the ignorant have absolutely no power to contradict those who have had direct experience. ```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Macrocosmentalist (talk • contribs) 21:27, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

User:paul raj & ayyavazhi

Please see http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/swami-vivekananda/notes.html. From this "Dr. Poulose in his book Advaita Philosophy of Brahmashri Chattampi Swamikal (Ayyavazhi Publications), says that Atmanada Swamikal was the disciple of Ayya Vaikundar and Atmanada Swamikal learned the Marmavidya in Sidha vidya and ghecherividya (Chinmudra) from Ayya Vaikundar and Atmanada Swamikal further taught all these vidyas to his disciple, Sri Chattampi Swamikal. The book also says that when Swami Vivekananda arrived in Ernakulam, Sri Chattampi Swamikal taught this Chinmudra to him."

Dr.Paulose merely speculates that Swami Vivekananda have met Chattampi swamikal.(AFAIK , no other historian nor any other verifiable source exists). His statement that Atmanada swamikkal was "guru" of Shree chattampi swamikkal is wholly inaccurate because there exists multiple written sources completely describing shree chattampi swami's life. According to some of these sources( http://www.geocities.com/guruforum/Thycaud-Ayya-Swamikal.htm), Chattampi swamikal had learnt spiritual lessons from Sivaraja Yogi Thycaud Ayya Swamikal alias M. Subbaraya Panicker (1814-1909) ( No connection to ayyavazhi stuff).So accordingly; even if paulose's statement is assumed to be correct, in the context of this article ,only chattampi Swamikkal needs to be mentioned . -Bharatveer (talk) 10:25, 11 February 2008 (UTC)-Bharatveer (talk) 06:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Neutral Point of View?

This article does not convey a neutral point of view towards its subject. Its tone is adulatory, if not worshipful, and does not match the tone of a typical Wikipedia article at all. Please: less praise, more facts. The encyclopedia-memorizing anecdote is particularly embarrassing. Facetious Nickname (talk) 05:16, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

You are right. I just removed a couple of adulatory comments. It looks better now. --Mankar Camoran^talk 11:58, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

It might look better, but it still doesn't look good enough. There should be cites for all important points, and the tone needs to become way more neutral. If no scholarly references exist (this is unlikely) the article should be stubbed. Rumiton (talk) 13:02, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I am new to this article, however not new to Swami Vivekananda. Reading this article for the first time and having some knowledge of his personality, I did not get the feeling that it is too adulatory. Could you pls point out specifically which section seems to deviate from WP:NPOV? Also I noticed many of the reference links pointing to http://www.ramakrishnavivekananda.info are not working, the website seems to be down. May be its temporary, let's watch. Duty2love (talk) 03:32, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

This site is backup, so I will leave it, however I will continue to look for more reliable sources as well. Duty2love (talk) 14:09, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

No need to put attribute word Swami or swami on the name of Vivekananda in as per wikipedia rules we are not following this attributes e,g. mahatma gandhi - disambligation this title as a Mohan das karamchand gandhi- --selvam thamizh (talk) 18:54, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I am new to this rule, could you plsease tell which rule it is and why is "Pope" used here? Duty2love (talk) 14:02, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

reorganisation of material

Few things are confusing in the article and there seems to be a improper flow. For Ex : "Birth and Childhood" mentions about college & western education, where as this ideally belongs to the next section. Similarly the paragraph on "Narendranath's mother" should be moved up, after the line "His thinking and personality". Others please their ideas as well. I will try to fix these. Thank you. Haripriya63 (talk) 07:41, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Discuss here

Please discuss here before removing cited information.-Bharatveer (talk) 06:35, 7 December 2009 (UTC)