This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

a very informative article on india and spirituality. Thanx to wikipedia !(Rohitom (talk) 09:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC)).[reply]

this looks like a propaganda article for a TV personality.. This guy claims to have attained self realization?? This guy has to be a fraud. 128.125.20.94 (talk) 08:09, 22 April 2008 (UTC) hi this is anu787 can u tell me some thing more abt these saints and all actually i want to know each and every thing abt this[reply]

Hi Anu, Ask me what do you want to know. If I start talking about saints each one of them is an ocean in themselve. And we have so many of them in our life, we just need to decide who is the one who can change me to think positive and achieve some thing in life and that something is not physical its spiritual because all if you give all the materialistic things of the world to one person you cant make him happy but you can make a person happy by making him realise that he is happy. Ask me some specific questions if you want to know. I would be happy to answer any of the question to best of my knowledge. Rohit 21:22, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign any comments that you add here. Rohit 08:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can we be specific about the neutrality issue please. If you have something to discuss please write it here before putting in the NPOV. Rohit 13:49, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the section Sri Asaramayan and its now available a saperate page. Rohit 11:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone help with the neutrality banner coming up on the top of the article. What does that means and why it is coming up again and again. The person who is doing it is not putting anything in the discussion page. Thanks. Rohit 11:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The banner is intended to show that the article is not written in a neutral point of view, a lot in the article is written from one POV, leaving out other points of view. The tone in which it is written also reflects this. Sfacets 11:32, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And why did you remove the Indic Fonts Banner. Regarding the references I was editing the article at the same time providing all the required citations. So please don't change the article. Rohit 11:35, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide an edit summary when you make changes. Also, please keep in mind WP:NPOV. Sfacets 12:50, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you got what you were looking for. I also left NPOV as it is. Can you suggest on the NPOV further. Thanks. Rohit 13:28, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Substantial Glorification and Superstitious presentation as Superhuman / Godlike figure

This artical looked me me also as a glorification and substantial exaggeration of the spiritual attainment. It contains several superfluous claims without much substance in modern day world. It also needed to include the flip side of the Ashram and Asaram Activities for which I had to Goodle for not more than 10 seconds - which i have included in this article with a courtsey from Indian Express news article (Courtsey Quoted).

Wikipedia is for promotion of knowledge and should not be used to promote religious beliefs/disbeliefs. Using titles such as "Bhagwan" or "Krishna" for oneself hurts the feelings of millions of Hindus across the world. Such titles are most frequently used for either Asaram or his Son Naray Prem. I request Rohit not to overburden wikipedia platform by aggressive marketing techniques employed by Asaram and stay away from propaganda.(talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:55, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality????

THis article is a glorification of the person. statements like "The young & the old, the rich & the poor, the atheist & ardent, all find Bapuji approachable" are not needed. He is "a saint" is disputable. He can best be described as a Hindu guru.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:56, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The para, "The young & the old, the............" has been removed, as it seems glorification.
He is a saint is not disputable. Hinduism believes in saintly-hood while living, while as per some other faiths a person can be declared saint after death. Being saint is as per faiths and Hinduism believs in saintly-hood while living.
The person who is followed by people of all faiths can't be best described as a Hindu guru. I disagree even on this issue.--rohitom (talk) 09:07, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No replies ! I think the dispute is resolved now. Please remove the banner or should i remove it?--rohitom (talk) 18:24, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article is still NOT NEUTRAL (glorifiactions exist from the title" and tone issues:

"This website is a humble attempt to spread the Divine Message of Pujya Bapuji. Visit the links on the left to begin your Spiritual Journey Today."

Corrected--rohitom (talk) 12:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Param Pujya Sant Shri Asaramji, endearingly called 'Bapu', is a Self-Realized Saint from India."
"Shri Thaumal Sirumalani and his consort Menhgiba were indeed blessed"

Corrected--rohitom (talk) 12:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The "ji", "sri", "sant", "pujya" are gloriffications - POVs.
The article should be named "Asaram Bapu", e.g in this site of "The Hindu" a reliable source[1]. It may be noted later that he is called "Sant Sri Asaramji Bapu" by his followers.

No objection--rohitom (talk) 12:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"India is considered the land of saints and seekers of spiritual realization. From time immemorial there has been an anxious groping after the unknown reality throughout the nation. In one way or another, efforts have been made to see God face to face. All the resources of human mind, both emotional and intellectual sides, have made efforts to obtain the sacred bliss of Atman - the peace which is beyond all material understanding. From the Vedic times till date, luminaries like Lord Rama, Lord Krishna, Buddha, Nanak, Sankara, RamaKrishna, Ramanuja, Vivekananda & many others incarnated in India, our country is essentially the the land of saints & sages." UNDUE

Corrected--rohitom (talk) 12:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"in every human being; be it Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Sikh or anyone else."
"Therefore he brought a swing for this special child"

Corrected--rohitom (talk) 12:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Like the parents of many other great saints Asumal's parents were adorned with the hearts that shone with purity, nobility and great reverence to teachers and saints"
"Granite walls however high are not high enough to shut out fate, Iron chains however strong are not strong enough to trap a free bird." is NOT encyclopedic

Corrected--rohitom (talk) 12:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Many people have found peace and joy of living after reading these pearls of wisdom."
Then there are the stories: claims of divinity, which need refs (Reliable, neutral ones)
Give me a Neutral, WP:RS which says he is a "saint".--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:23, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I found 2 such links, which says he is a "saint"

But [2] and The Times of India, which "the world's largest selling English broadsheet newspaper" - a more Neutral newspaper than the religious The Hindu just calls him a "spiritual guru", not a saint.Redtigerxyz (talk) 12:52, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

.........of sant asaram bapu at nava wadaj on......., now this is from The Times of India, which "the world's largest selling English broadsheet newspaper" - a more Neutral newspaper than the religious The Hindu--rohitom (talk) 06:34, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To balance the POVs of his followers and Hindus in general, rephrased the lead sentence.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 08:18, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redtigerxyz wrote, .......considered as a saint by his followers, do u think the times of india is the follower of asaram bapu (ref : .........of sant asaram bapu at nava wadaj on.......)--rohitom (talk) 08:53, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The writer of that particular article may or may not be a follower, another article of TOI refers to him just as a spiritual guru should be noted.Redtigerxyz (talk) 11:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality remains disputed due to excess of "peacock terms" used.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 11:17, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peacock terms removed hence Neutrality dispute resolved.--117.194.96.229 (talk) 14:27, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfDM still there ?

The dispute has been settled. Please remove the AfDM Banner.--rohitom (talk) 14:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rohitom…..If you wanted to have some neutrality on this article, please include the criticisms and controversies related to Asaram Bapu ( For eg recent controversy regarding the death of two kids from the ashram)Worldplayer (talk) 13:36, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The controversy put here has no connection with Asaram Bapu. Neither asaram bapu is alleged of death of the kids, nor of the violence. Thus I propose to remove the irrelevant content. The controversy has no direct relationship with Asaram Bapu.--rohitom (talk) 18:42, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy

Why is there no controversy section describing the death of children in the preacher's schools? 125.21.165.158 (talk) 07:28, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peacock

What is this doing in the infobox?

"serving worldwide to uplift the society morally & spiritually so 
that all experience the blessings of God by the means of Karma 
(Action), Gyan (Knowledge), & Bhakti (Devotion) Yoga."

125.21.165.158 (talk) 07:34, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]