User talk:Dharmamitra Jeff Stefani

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Dorje108 Deletion[edit]

Could this be included as a conversation on the talk page? Is there debate? MaynardClark (talk) 20:44, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

I added this commentary to the Talk Page Discussion. The simple answer is that: No, this is not a topic of debate, it was Disinformation. Thanks for the suggestion, I am new to actually taking time to edit, although I have wanted to many times, none this grossly inaccurate, but now that I know more about the process, I will not be so shy! Thanks! I removed this 2-sentence paragraph. “Buddhic Self” 1) is not a Buddhist Term used by any major School.** 2) a Meta Search of over 100 Internet Search Engines returns the only use being a shortened version of “Becoming Your Christed-Buddhic Self” by “New Age, Spiritualist Hybrids” (that is my neologism for this “group” (two people, namely one: ‘Judy Satori’) on Facebook and a WordPress Blog that uses the term [1] . 3) The translation of the Vedic Sanskrit, Brahmanism, Hinduism: “atman” as “Buddhic Self” [It is already referenced on This Section, and the Buddha’s Dharma teaches Anātman/Anattā = prefix ‘an’ + ‘atman’ ≈ ‘No-Self’] is so antithetically misconstrued that I can only deem it: “Disinformation.” 4) The remainder of the two sentences is saturated with Dualistic natured grammar and syntax that even without the use of the clearly Non-Buddhist term “Buddhic Self,” the remainder a) adds no informational value or even a “Buddhist flavor,” yet it does b) distract and dilute the previous and following text. The term “immaculate” is both Dualistic (Which Buddha-Nature is not) and wreaks of “Good and Bad Morality” which are not buddhist concepts. There is no “good and bad,” the Buddha never used such a dichotomy. c) The second sentence then starts: ”One the other hand...” as though whomever added this 2-sentence paragraph were weighing evidence of how he/she feels about the previous sentence. 5) I attempted to edit out the term “Buddhic Self”...and then as little as possible, but there was nothing in remainder that added to a User Experience, valid Buddha-Dharma knowledge, or augmenting perspective, but there was nothing to salvage, nothing to augment the article, and quite a lot to detract from the Page.

    • I’ve been a full-time Ecumenical Buddhist Minister for over 17 years, six years of residential “Buddhist Ordination Seminary,” Post-Graduate education by some of foremost Academics and Ordained Buddhist Leaders from all over the World, representing every major School and Sect of Buddhism, including courses in Pāli and Sanskrit, as well their Tibetan, Korean, Sinhalese, Japanese, Tamil, Hindi, Vietnamese, English equivalents. I researched the term before I edited the section out, not because I doubted the bastardization of terminology, but for prudent Due Diligence. Dharmamitra Jeff Stefani (talk) 04:00, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
    • ^‎