Talk:Ajativada

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Hinduism / Philosophy

(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Start Low This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Hindu philosophy (marked as Low-importance). Yes I know its a stub, I still have a lot of work to do.......Tony.--Aoclery 22:37, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

This article was nominated for deletion on December 15, 2005. The result of the discussion was keep. An archived record of this discussion can be found here.

Deletions
Deleting links as a link-farm. I am not sure there isn't some Ahamkara in these deletions...Convince me it isn't prejudice or inappropriate..........--24.207.41.230 18:59, 7 January 2006 (UTC)Tony O'Clery. I have reinserted the link to the GThomas for it is another treatment of Advaita from a Gnostic Christian view, which well could have originated in India. It is not self promotion as there doesn't seem to be any other treatments of GThomas according to Vedanta. Also the purports were added to an already existing text. So please don't interfere with things that you obviously do not understand. User:Aoclery|Aoclery]] 21:55, 4 April 2006 (UTC)Tony O'Clery I have reinstated the links as they are most appropriate to the article for they are the main authors and philosophers in this subject. Anyone who would say they have no relevance to the article doesn't understand Ajativada and where it came from and who taught it..--Aoclery 22:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC)Tony O'Clery. I deleted some external links and listed each reason in the edit summary. The link to the gnostic gospel seems to be original research. Perhaps if there are articles about the relationship between the gnostic gospels and AV, in published journals, then we can use those. Also, I think that a link to a message in a yahoo forum does not meet WP:EL. Feel free to discuss this with me on my talk page or here.TheRingess 23:19, 8 December 2006 (UTC) The treatment of the GThomas is only in relation to the interpretation to Vedantic Non Dual Philosophy. The

.... additional terms may apply..WHERE HE MENTIONS AJATIVADA SHOULD BE ENOUGH FOR ANYBODY.. The adjective ajāti (अजा त) can mean "eternal. 29 March 2010 (UTC).. so the citation cannot be verified.. . a non-profit organization. as well as some other things such as not having a specific caste membership.. 8 December 2006 (UTC)Tony O'Clery. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.--Aoclery 23:45. 28 May 2009 (UTC) Request for specific citations Hello.... Since the citation has no reference I think it should be cut pending clarification of what the relevance is. 9 December 2006 (UTC) Weasel words are hardly avoidable in discussing mysticism.. and the Sanskrit text does not use the term ajāti or have any obvious connection to the point being made in the article.TheRingess 00:01. The translation of that verse in the Turiyananda editon (p. Retrieved from "http://en. I am trying to determine if the term ajātivāda is primarily used by one or more of the specific modern authors mentioned in the article or if it has a prior use in traditional Indian philosophy as is implied in the article. p.. 195) is very different...... Inc. There would be no other as far as I know..... RAMANA MAHARSHI IN 'BE AS YOU ARE' BY DAVID GODMAN. The article cites verse 426 of Viveka Chudamani and gives a translation but does not cite the source. See Terms of use for details..translations were not original just the commentary. There are no footnotes giving citations to any classical texts. It probably counts as original research and we can't link to it. The Mandukyakarika is cited but with no line number.wikipedia.. I am unable to find the word used as a technical term in traditional Indian philosophy.. not produced" (Apte.TONY.However whoever put that notice there may take time out and explain to me how weasel words are verifiable in Ajativada or forever hold his peace.Tony —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aoclery (talk • contribs) 19:01. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation..org/w/index. 23). Can someone supply a line number? Buddhipriya (talk) 23:55...php?title=Talk:Ajativada&oldid=508316169" Categories: Start-Class Hinduism articles Low-importance Hinduism articles Start-Class Hindu philosophy articles Low-importance Hindu philosophy articles This page was last modified on 20 August 2012 at 16:59.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful