Talk:Sri Aurobindo/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Talk page discussion

Why are people so scared to admit he was a Hindu and keep calling him an 'Indian spiritualist?' Sounds like reductive Western paranoia to me.

Someone keeps adding copyrighted text from this site which is definitely not a neutral biographical entry of Aurobindo. http://www.gurusoftware.com/GuruNet/AurobindoMother/Aurobindo.htm. There is nothing on this site to state that it is in the public domain or released under the GFDL therefore the posting of text from that site is a copyright violation and must be removed; if someone wants to add this material they can do so manually rather than taking out all the information that has been put in dealing with his life that is originally written material and not copied from some other source. I am reverting the article to 10:29, 27 Jan 2004 version of User:Maximus Rex and adding the hinduism message. — Alex756 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Alex756 talk] 02:14, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Page title

there is no need to redirect this page to Aurobindo. Sri Auroindo had changed his name to Sri Aurobindo after he reached pondicherry. Although Sri in sanskrit is a prefix to any name which should be respected, Sri Aurobindo attached Sri to his own name probably to establish respect for that which was inside him, and not in the conventional sense.

Can we include his symbol it is nowhere http://www.aurobindo.ru/symbol_sa_e.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.213.73.107 (talk) 11:32, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Non-NPOV

I don't particularly care about the topic, but it strikes me that passages such as

Sri Aurobindo, throughout the later period of his life and until his death, dedicated himself to the spiritual transformation of the human race. It was his sincere wish to take humankind out of duality, division, ignorance, suffering, falsehood, and death and bring all human beings to a new positive existence [...]

and

His recommen[d]ed method out of our essential Ignorance born of creation [...]

are non-NPOV. The article mostly reads as if written by a disciple of Sri Aurobindo, with an occasional "His theology states that..." or "His disciples believe that...." Certainly the use of "we" to describe humanity-as-viewed-by-Aurobindo seems inappropriate for a Wikipedia article. --Quuxplusone 18:49, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Those passages are both within the section entitled: "His evolutionary philosophy". I have changed it to "Aurobindo's evolutionary philosophy". --goethean ॐ 19:15, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Okay by me — actually, I think the extra "Aurobindo"s are redundant in an article about Aurobindo, but whatever. That doesn't actually address the non-NPOV nature of the article, though. (Compare this article's worshipful tone to the tones of articles Jesus, Sun Myung Moon, and Mahatma Gandhi, for example.) --Quuxplusone 23:45, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
ok i made quite a few changes in style, also deleted some paragraphs as unnecessary or repetitive, got rid of most of the "we" which is preachy, included a few refernces. Hopefully this is better. It can still be improved more; i'll come back every so often and write it so it is properly NPOV with lots of refernces and citations to Sri Aurobindo's work. So it isnt "Sri Aurobindo says" (preachy) but rather "In ch. such and such of the Life Divine) M Alan Kazlev 03:50, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This passage: "Even though it is prose, this work of the Master reads like a shear beautiful lyrical poetry. But who would expect less from a Master such as he was?!" is clearly not NPOV. Seems like these sorts of things must be left out to maintain the integrity of this article.

yes i agree, the article still needs a great deal of work. Feel free to delete or reword those sort of statements M Alan Kazlev 03:17, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Diacritics in body of article

By the way, during my copyedit I changed some "Sri"s to "Śrī"s. But that does look kind of weird inline; any thoughts one way or the other on when to use diacriticals in the body text of this kind of article? --Quuxplusone 18:49, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

He was referred to as "Sri", and he wrote in English, it should be Sri, with no diacritical marks M Alan Kazlev 02:00, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

August 15

"The birthday of Sri Aurobindo, August 15 is also the date which Indians celebrate as the Independence Day of India." -- The sentence seems unnecessary, and gives the false impression that these 2 things have something to do with each other. Should be removed. --ppm 20:26, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Fixed. --goethean ॐ 20:59, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
According to followers of Sri Aurobindo they are connected. So maybe add something to the effect that "many devottees see this coincidence of dates as significant" M Alan Kazlev 07:30, 18 August 2005 (UTC)


Nov 6

"Beyond that is the physical transformation of the body, consisting of a new type of individual, operating on spirit as the basis of functioning rather than the crude bodily systems we know today (breathing, digesting, blood circulation etc.)."

Everything else made sense to me, but I have no idea what this sentence is implying. It doesn't make any sense to call the bodily systems crude, and it seems to imply that when an individual begins consciously operating in spirit that then no longer need to breath or circulate blood? I can think of a few things to change it to that would be more feasible, but I'm not an expert on Aurobindo's stance on this issue.

Yes perhaps best to scrap that sentence. Sri Aurobindo does speak of a new, supramentalised mode of existence, (see the last two chapters of The Life Divine), but whoever wrote the above passage seems to be drawing more on statements in The Agenda, without bothering to give references. A lot of this page still needs to be fixed with proper references, and the material checked against S.A.'s own writings. I've re-edited the paragraph, and also added some references to that section, and scrapped a POV paragraph that didn't have references. M Alan Kazlev 23:50, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Copyvio?

"The trial for which he was incarcerated was one of the important trials in Indian nationalism movement. There were 49 accused and 206 witnesses. 400 documents were filed and 5000 exhibits were produced including bombs, revolvers and acid. The English judge, C.B. Beechcroft, had been a student with Sri Aurobindo at Cambridge. The Chief Prosecutor Eardley Norton displayed a loaded revolver on his briefcase during the trial. The case for Sri Aurobindo was taken up by Chittaranjan Das. The trial lasted for one full year. Aurobindo was acquitted."

Seems to be lifted straight from this site: [1]. Maybe a reword would be in order? --Loopy e 03:21, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Sri Aurobindo speeches and works

I have been adding several of Sri Aurobindo's speeches and other works at Wikisource. I would suggest to move the section "Sri Aurobindo's integral yoga" to there as well. See http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Author:Sri_Aurobindo ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 20:42, 13 April 2006 (UTC)


Hi, I would like to add an external link to the World of Biography entry

  • probably the most famous portal of biography to this article. Does anybody have any objections?
well i don't know what you mean by it being the most famous portal (the official websites are much better known), but i've no objection to adding the link. M Alan Kazlev 10:56, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Go ahead and be bold ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 12:23, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

please do not add this to the article, and please read the incident report before giving the go-ahead. This is spam and not link-worthy under WP:EL; the articles contain many distortions, lack citations, and contain nothing that wouldn't fit directly in the wiki article. a link to worldofbiography has been placed on over 70 talk pages by User:Jameswatt. thanks. --He:ah? 20:59, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Lack of references

The article is looking better, but sorely lacks any references. I am adding a request for references tag, with the hope that references are found and added. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 17:02, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

cool, thanks Jossi. When I have time I'll add some references (I didn't write most of the orginal sections on Sri Aurobindo's teaching, so it is sort of tedious to look through for the references the other person used), but hopefully other people can too. Yeah the artricle was much too long and poorly written (POV) before, it still needs a lot of work (as do the other specialised pages where I moved some of the extra material to) M Alan Kazlev 22:33, 21 April 2006 (UTC)


Many references have been added and many unreferenced portions have been removed. Urging a review of the "citations and references" tag. Varun (talk) 18:12, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Although the article still needs references for the sections on the Mother, philosophy & spirituality, and poetry, I agree the biography is now well sourced, so I've removed the tag. M Alan Kazlev (talk) 23:10, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

NPOV

I think this article still needs some work to avoid sounding like a hagiography. Things like the influence section seem to suggest that this gentleman has come up with all the answers, represents the ultimate synthesis of all eastern and western wisdom etc. And did he have a life beyond doing great deeds, thinking great thoughts etc etc.? Bwithh 04:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I have made some changes to the wording of the influence section. I don't think that the biography is excessively biased. It merely lays out what is known about his life. More of that information happens to have come down from his admirers than his critics. — goethean ॐ 19:11, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Bwithh. If you take a look at the WP articles of religions or religious movements, it’s pretty obvious that only when secular, rationalist or apostate editors are contributing, npov is reached. I’m afraid we’ll have to wait some time until a secular biographer researches the life of Aurobindo and his “Mother” to hear the other side.

Meanwhile the pov tag should stay.

Just take a look at the flaming archives of the Mother Teresa article for example. Thanks to Christopher Hitchens and other critics, we now have a very different picture of “Mother” Teresa than that of the gullible masses.

—Cesar Tort 06:11, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

copyvio

I have reverted the changes made by User:Larry-Seidlitz which were a copyright violation. They were copied from here. Please see Wikipedia:Copyrights. — goethean ॐ 15:32, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

no copyvio

Larry Seidlitz is also the author of the original article on the web site referred to above, and also has permission of Sri Aurobindo Darshan: The University of Tomorrow, to republish the article in whole or part, on wikipedia. I have added my name as author on the original article to confirm my authorship. Also, some of the material removed had been newly written for wikipedia, such as the revisions of the opening paragraph, and the revisions of the involution and evolution sections. Therefore I would like to reapply my changes, which I feel improve the article. I also plan to add new material that I had written originally for the University of Tomorrow website to further expand the wikipedia article. Larry-Seidlitz 05:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that Wikipedia is allowed to take the word of a Wikipedia editor that they own text that was copied from a website. To do so can expose the Wikimedia organization to severe legal liability. I'm going to ask a Wikipedia administrator to deal with this issue. — goethean ॐ 15:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Larry: Publish the material on your personal website and mark it with the Creative Commons license or mark it as available under the terms of the GFDL, and then we can use it here. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:53, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
You could also publish it under the same conditions at our sister project for free texts at Wikisource. See http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Sri_Aurobindo ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Would publishing it on a personal website help? I have added my name as author of the article on the university of tomorrow site. But I suppose there is no guarantee that wikipedia username Larry-Seidlitz is in fact Larry Seidlitz who signed his name to the original article and has permission of the university of tomorrow. I don't see how this situation would change if I published it on a personal website. But the text of the wikipedia guidelines, which is shown in large bold text at the bottom of the edit window, is to not copy text from other websites without permission (emphasis added). I suppose I could indicate on the university website that I agree to license the article under GFDL. 59.144.3.152 07:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't have a personal website, but I have added a note at the bottom of the article on the university of tomorrow website agreeing to license the article under GFDL and giving the link to the text of the GFDL. I hope this will be sufficient. Larry-Seidlitz 09:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I think it is... — goethean ॐ 15:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Your revert of a realistic photo

goethean:

You just reverted a more realistic, non iconographic, image of Aurobindo Akroyd Ghose. You see: this is part of the hagiographic problem with this article. Just take a look at this archived discussion about the most famous icon of all time: an icon that helped to create the stupid myth about Ernesto Guevara.

—Cesar Tort 04:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

But why should a photo taken of Sri Aurobindo when he was in his 40s, at the time he was indeed writing and publishing all his important works except Savitri (in the journal Arya), less realistic and more "hagiographic" than one of him taken only a few months before his death? As for Che Guevara's famous portrait, one might equally mention any iconic figure - e.g. famous portraits of Darwin (one as a young man and the othger as an old man), of Freud with his cigar, of Lenin, of Einstein, of Marilyn Monroe, of Lincoln, of Ramakrishna or Yogananda or Tagore any other famous or striking-looking personality M Alan Kazlev 04:37, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Point taken.
However, even if I am no expert on Aurobindo (the “Sri” is pure POV language; even liberal Catholic theologians such as Hans Kung no longer write “St. Augustine”, only Augustine), I can detect the hagiographic bias in the present article. Aurobindo’s views of the Vedas for example are simply wrong. They’re a perfect example of Third World romantic nationalism.
This is a well-known phenomenon in esoteric and New Age people. Instead of acknowledging some of the brutalities of the Old Testament (e.g., those narrated in Joshua’s book), esoterics “interpret” the Scripture in such a way that the new “poetic” interpretation washes away the plain, brutal, historical reality.
The same is true for Aurobindo’s “Vedas”.
—Cesar Tort 05:02, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
the “Sri” is pure POV language - Incorrect, Sri Aurobindo specifically directed that he be called "Sri Aurobindo". It's like Rajneesh calling himself "Osho". Even the Wikipedia page on him is under the heading "Osho". Or again, Franklin Jones calls himself "Adi Da". Sure you could call Rajneesh "Mr Jain", and Da "Mr Jones", just as you could call the Queen of England "Mrs Windsor". If Augustine hgimself were still around and specifically directed that people call him "St Augustine", one should respect that title (of course he isn't and he wouldn't, but this is just for the sake of example). It's simple etiquette, and has nothing to do with whether one agrees or disagrees with the philosophy of that person.
Aurobindo’s views of the Vedas for example are simply wrong. They’re a perfect example of Third World romantic nationalism.' - you've already admitted that you are not an expert on Sri Aurobindo; so there is no reason why your own dogmatic statements on this point should be considered any more or any less authoritative than that of anyone else who isn't an expert (and I don't claim to be an expert either btw, only a student). The point of the article moreover isnt to pronounce judgemnt on true or false interpretations of the Vedas, but to present in NPOV language Sri Aurobindo's interpretation of the Vedas, regardless of whether one agrees or disagrees with it.
Instead of acknowledging some of the brutalities of the Old Testament (e.g., those narrated in Joshua’s book), esoterics “interpret” the Scripture in such a way that the new “poetic” interpretation washes away the plain, brutal, historical reality. - Even as far back as the late Hellenistic period (Roman empire), the Gnostics were against the Old Testament God for precisely those sort of reasons. While in the 19th century, Blavatsky was very critical of Judaeo-Christian style religion. So it is absurd to make blanket statements such as esotericists do this, and new age people do that. Esotericism is not a monolithic entity, nor are esotericism and the New Age movement synonymous (although there are a few instances of overlap - e.g. Alice Bailey). For example I am an esotericist but I have never tried to whitewash exoteric scripture or say that it is just a metaphor for poetic truth. I fully acknowledge that some esotericists and New Age people do do that, but I am among those who don't.
I am sure you are sincere and well-meaning, and I don't mean to sound harsh, but bald pronouncements and generalisations based on lack of scholarship do not engender respect. It is much better to first be familiar with what you are talking about, then you can talk with authority, rather than simply from opinion or ignorance(and there have been at least a few times I have done the same thing, so this is not intended as a criticism). M Alan Kazlev 11:28, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

You sound pretty much ad hominem, M Alan Kazlev. Aurobindo’s views on the Vedas (and this is a single example among much, much more) are just wrong and the article says nothing about it. Obviously it has been written by advocates. If you read the 2007 Britannica’s article on the Vedas you will see the immense gulf between WP’s pious article on Aurobindo and real scholarship.

St Augustine was a monster BTW. Even conservative Catholic historian Paul Johnson acknowledges he was the dark ideologue for the empire. And it strikes me as just stupid to call a guru by an invented title (Mother Teresa for example was neither a “mother” nor “Teresa”: this was just semantic propaganda for naïve religionists).

I very much doubt I will spend much time arguing with you, M Alan Kazlev. The article is already pov tagged, and with good reason. We are perfect antipodes and, in fact, I shall now remove this article from my watchlist —don’t bother to respond because I won’t read it.

Good luck with your hagiography and profound esoteric studies.

—Cesar Tort 12:20, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

fair and balanced

hello, I am not an expert on this subject, and to me, this article paints a flattering portrait of Aurobindo that ignores his work's contributions to some current dynamics of Indian politics.

specifically, his efforts for Hindu nationalism, today, support Hindu communalism, which is frequently at odds with the Indian constitution which guarantees citizens freedom of religion ("secular", part of the 42nd amendment act of 1976, and articles 25-28 per Wiki entry). For this reason, I would suggest changing references in the article from "Indian culture" to "Hindu culture".

the Hinduvata/Hindu Revivalist movement in India is real today, and is a form of fundamentalism - religious basis for social and political organization. Without passing judgement on this phenomena, I think it should be included - the notion that Aurobindo's work (and other's work as well) was and is a form of religious discrimination, an effort to revive a Hindu state to replace a state currently secular - that is a destabilizing force in modern Indian secular politics.

for reference, see http://web.abo.fi/comprel/temenos/temeno32/tamminen.htm http://india.indymedia.org/en/2003/02/3250.shtml http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_politics

dr elys jimenez (talk) 06:35, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi dr elys. It is an unfortunate fact that Sri Aurobindo has been so completely misinterpreted by both the left and the right (although perhaps not surprising because few have studied his actual teachings). I would recommend the following essay by a formost authority on Sri Aurobindo's life and political activities:
  • Peter Heehs (2006) 'The uses of Sri Aurobindo: mascot, whipping-boy, or what?', Postcolonial Studies, 9:2, 151 - 164
I have a copy in pdf, and if you want i can email it to you. Regards M Alan Kazlev (talk) 05:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

external links

this is the wikisite for aurobindo not the mother or his ashram's or whathaveyou. Wikipedia is not to advertise the publisher of his works or to provide indirect links to the matter on hand. See the guidelines at WP:EL Lihaas (talk) 17:51, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Lengthy essays should be removed

The vast bulk of this article (79 kb!) is due to a personal essay about Aurobindo's philosophy and works, without any references or reason for notablility of that particular view. I propose that everything under "Evolutionary Philosophy" through "The Future of Poetry" be deleted on that account. ~ priyanath talk 16:48, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


I second this suggestion. This page is supposed to be a biography enough to convey an essence, and not a lengthy discourse on each of his activities. These can be shifted to their own main articles - Varun (talk) 12:18, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Varun. There should be a brief summary of Sri Aurobindo's ideas, with each section linking to longer secondary pages on each of these topics. Unfortunately, the Western materialistic consensus paradigm bias of Wikipedia means that such pages would instantly be nominated for deletion, whereas were they about a Western writer or philosopher they wouldn't. Therefore it is important that any new pages be secure M Alan Kazlev (talk) 00:11, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Restructuring the article

Sri Aurobindo achieved notable fame in more than one areas during his life. 1. He was at the forefront of the extermist freedom fighter movement and nationalism, defining its shape for the future. 2. He was later at the forefront of spiritual philosophy completely rewriting or interpreting almost every school of thought in Indian philosophy, and also commentries of importance on some western philosophy. 3. Apart from these two notable achievements he was also a prolific writer who published a large number of poetry and plays. The wikipedia article seems to be biased wholly towards the area of spiritual and philosophy, almost neglecting the other two. Secondly, Even though Sri Aurobindo himself never distinguished these facets as phases or modes different from each other, but for wikipedia readers, this distinction can help to organize his contribution into the existing world-view of compartmentalizing things. Therefore I plan to introduce the other facets of his achievement and restructure this article along the following lines:


Introduction
1. Biography
1.1 Early Life and Youth.
1.2 Baroda Years.
1.3 Bengal Years.
1.4 Retirement from politics and Conversion to Spirituality.
1.5 Pondicherry .
2. Role in the Freedom Movement (Will have a main article)
2.1 Writings (Bande Mataram Karmayogin and Indu Prakash)
2.2 Spiritual Nationalism.
2.4 Alipore Bomb Plot.
3. Philosohy and Spiritualism (Bulk of currently written stuff related to this heading to be shifted to a main article)
3.1 Evolutionary Philosohy
3.2 Integral Yoga
3.3 Philosohy of Social Evolution
3.4 Analysis of Indian Culture
4. Poetry and Drama (Will have a main article)
4.1 Savitri
5. Selected Works (Will have a main article - already exists)
6. Sri Aurobindo's influence and Followers
7. Bibliography and References.
8. External Links.
Need consensus on the restructuring effort that I intend to undertake. The target size of the article would be approximately 50Kb. Any comments, objections, alterations, changes etc. are solicited so better planning can be done. - Varun (talk) 14:41, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good Varun! It will be a definite improvement over the current essay, which, I agree, is overly unbalanced towards spiritual philosophy, which, important as it may be, is, as you point out, only one aspect of Sri Aurobindo's life (For that matter, Sri Aurobindo didn't even consider himself a philosopher) M Alan Kazlev (talk) 23:00, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I like this basic reorg plan. I'd like to see added a section on his continuing modern-day followers or supporters or students, whatever they should be called here. The Institute for Wholistic Education, e.g., appears to exist to continue to promote his memory and teachings and while I wouldn't want to see a lot of detail on that subject, the fact of the institute's existence and continuing support and enthusiasm for Sri Aurobindo is at least worth noting. (Dan Shafer)

Dan, there is if you notice, a heading called Sri Aurobindo's influence and followers where i would think all institutions or peronalities motivated by SA's thought can be listed out. Please notify if this doesn't satisfy what you want to add.Varun (talk) 15:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Introduction Line

Currently ( http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sri_Aurobindo&oldid=292891866 ) the introduction line reads : Sri Aurobindo was an Indian nationalist and freedom fighter, poet, mystic, evolutionary philosopher, Yogi and spiritual master. To a layperson the difference between the words mystic, Yogi and spiritual master may be too thin to be discernable. Infact it can come across as intimidating to someone who may not have a background in these matters. I suggest that the three words be replaced by a single word representative of Aurobindo's philosophical and spiritual endeavors. I would have suggested the word "Yogi" for this, not sure if everyone would agree though.- Varun (talk) 11:29, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Good point Varun! I agree, those words do overlap, except for evolutionary philosopher, which can be replaced with just "philosopher". Yogi is pretty much the accepted term, even Peter Heehs, writing for mainstream academia, uses it ("Part 4: Yogi and Philosopher") M Alan Kazlev (talk) 23:46, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


Social Reforms

I'm surprised that there is no mention of social reformers attributed to Sri Aurobindo. Please consider to include Sri Aurobindo to the list of Social reformers of India after mentioning reforms attributed to him. --Bigsuperindia (talk) 04:40, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

WP:Honorifics

Per WP:Honorifics I removed "Sri" from childhood, 1884 and marriage 1901 photos. He was not "Sri" Aurobindo at this time. See also Google Scholar. Clarification needed on if/why the spelling Ghose/Ghosh co-exists? In ictu oculi (talk) 00:32, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Jenks24 (talk) 10:30, 30 June 2012 (UTC)


Sri Aurobindo → Aurobindo Ghosh –

Preface

I doubt there have some conflicts already with article title (Wikiblamer report), and all over Wikipedia both Aurobindo Ghosh and Sri Aurobindo have been linked, so I think the article has been moved from "Aurobindo Ghosh" to "Sri Aurobindo" at least once. But, in article talk page, I could not find any discussion on move request. Was this article moved without any discussion?

Let's talk

Sri is an honorific title (we do not use honorific in Wikipedia article title). By doing some studies I think Aurobindo Ghosh is regarded as Sri Aurobindo at least in some parts of India[where?].
But,

Not applicable everywhere

He was a Bengali and in his native state he is known as "Rishi Aurobindo". See about.com article where article title is "Rishi Aurobindo]. See Wikipedia Bengali article where "Sri" has not been used in article title. Also see, bunch of articles from one of the most circulated daily newspapers of Bengal where they are using either "Rishi Aurobindo" or "Aurobindo Ghosh", also see these Google search results which will prove that in Bengal he is known as "Rishi Aurobindo". So, if we are really going to use honorific, why not this one "Rishi Aurobindo"?

Either "Sri Aurobindo Ghosh" or only "Aurobindo Ghosh" but NOT "Sri Aurobindo"

I suggest to move the article to–

  • Either to Sri Aurobindo Ghosh [(if we really need to use honorific) (as it has been followed in multiple Government websites and documents)]
  • Or only Aurobindo Ghosh and we can mention about the honorific titles in lead etc.
Second confusion– Aurobindo Ghosh or Aurobindo Ghose

Another confusion may be which is correct spelling Aurobindo Ghosh or Aurobindo Ghose? Well, it's Aurobindo Ghosh. See these Government documents. All reliable and heavy weight Government sites including India's national government portal india.gov.in and pondicherry.gov are using the spelling Aurobindo Ghosh

–Tito Dutta ✉ 16:01, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I oppose the move. The fact is that Aurobindo uniformly referred to himself in his writings as "Sri Aurobindo". For me, this answers the question. The subject of the article should be referred to how he wanted to be referred to, end of story. — goethean ॐ 19:50, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose his surname Ghose/Ghosh is hardly used. He is often called Sri Aurobindo/Aurobindo. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:34, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose Would you like to move Mark Twain while you're at it? --BDD (talk) 18:27, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

unsourced information

following is the unsourced information i have moved to talk page, i find them relevent and may be are summary of corpus of books, for which currently am unable to find the references please update it if any body find any sources for following texts

Analysis of Indian culture

In Renaissance in India (earlier called The Foundations of Indian Culture),[citation needed] Sri Aurobindo examines the nature of Indian civilization and culture. He looked at its central motivating tendencies and how these are expressed in its religion, spirituality, art, literature, and politics. The first section of the book provides a general defense of Indian culture from disparaging criticism due to the misunderstanding of a foreign perspective, and its possible destruction due to the aggressive expansion and infiltration of Western culture. This section is interesting in the light it sheds on the nature of both Eastern and Western civilizations, how they have developed over the centuries, how they have influenced each other throughout the ages, and the nature and significance of these exchanges in the recent period. The principle tenet of the exposition is that India has been and is one of the greatest civilizations of the world, one that stands apart from all others in its central emphasis, or rather its whole foundation, based on spirituality, and that on its survival depends the future of the human race—whether it shall be a spiritual outflowering of the divine in man, or a rational, economically driven, and mechanized association of peoples.

Interpretation of the Vedas

One of the most significant contributions of Sri Aurobindo was his setting forth an esoteric meaning of the Vedas. The Vedas were considered by some to be composed by a barbaric culture worshiping violent gods. Sri Aurobindo felt that this was due to a failure by both Eastern and Western scholars to understand Vedic symbolism.

Sri Aurobindo believed there was a hidden spiritual meaning in the Vedas. He viewed the Rig Veda as a spiritual text written in a symbolic language in which the outer meaning was concerned with ritualistic sacrifices to the gods, and the inner meaning, which was revealed only to initiates, was concerned with an inner spiritual knowledge and practice, the aim of which was to unite in consciousness with the Divine.

In this conception, Indra is the god of mind lording over the Indriyas, that is, the senses. Vayu represents air, but in its esoteric sense means prana, or the life force. So when the Rig Veda says "Call Indra and Vayu to drink Soma Rasa" the inner meaning is to use mind through the senses and life force to receive divine bliss. Agni, the god of the sacrificial fire in the outer sense, is the flame of the spiritual will to overcome the obstacles to unite with the Divine. So the sacrifice of the Vedas could mean sacrificing one's ego to the internal Agni, the spiritual fire.

Sri Aurobindo's theory of the inner spiritual significance of the Vedas originally appeared serially in the journal Arya between 1914 and 1921, but was later published in book form as The Secret of the Veda. Another book, Hymns to the Mystic Fire, is Sri Aurobindo's translation of the spiritual sense of many of the verses of the Rig Veda.


The Future Poetry

In Sri Aurobindo's theory of poetry, written under the title The Future Poetry, he writes about the significance that art and culture have for the spiritual evolution of mankind. He believed that a new, deep, and intuitive poetry could be a powerful aid to the change of consciousness and the life required to achieve the spiritual destiny of mankind which he envisioned. Unlike philosophy or psychology, poetry could make the reality of the Spirit living to the imagination and reveal its beauty and delight and captivate the deeper soul of humanity to its acceptance. It is perhaps in Sri Aurobindo's own poetry, particularly in his epic poem Savitri, that we find the fullest and most powerful statement of his spiritual thought and vision. _______ Shrikanthv (talk) 21:39, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

WP:HONORIFIC

I just ran the search "Aurobindo was" through GB and was surprised by the results; somewhere between 2/5 or 1/2 of the hits didn't use Sri. According to WP:HONORIFIC we're only supposed to use them when there's no recognition at all with the name without. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:56, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Sri Aurobindo was how he referred to himself. — goethean ॐ 16:43, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Yes. He started this in 1926 when he was 54, and started the ashram. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:36, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
What difference does that make? If Billy Connolly started referring to himself as Saint Billy would that mean we would name the Wikipedia article as that? In ictu oculi's point stands, and the article should be at Aurobindo Ghosh. It was moved to this title in 2009, without discussion. Skinsmoke (talk) 01:50, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Why hasn't this article being moved yet? I think it's quite clear it should be done plus there are many instances of "Sri" usage in the rest of it. I'll give it some for time for anyone to object and only then proceed. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 18:11, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

It should clearly be moved (over redirect, which needs an admin). See wp:NCIN for more detail on applying wp:HONORIFIC in similar cases. LeadSongDog come howl! 16:51, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Is this true?

Is this true: QUOTE: 'By the end of two years of probation, Aurobindo had no interest in ICS exam and came late to the horse riding exam purposefully to get himself disqualified for the service'

Why write a lie which even Ghose himself wouldn't have said. It is a well known fact that Ghose couldn't ride a horse. 117.204.95.188 (talk) 13:25, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes its true , please go through the refernce link and page 31 of the book and you will find the truth Shrikanthv (talk) 14:06, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Re-work for GA

I have started to rework on the page for attaining GA status again, so any help would be usefull and please discuss here before making any changes directly Shrikanthv (talk) 11:32, 6 February 2014 (UTC) Talk:Sri Aurobindo/GA2

Had really lost touch with wiki process have corrected it out thanks for the help Shrikanthv (talk) 06:29, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Indicscripts

As per Wikipedia:INDICSCRIPTS, native scripts should not be added. Shrikanthv (talk) 13:38, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Sri Aurobindo/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Royroydeb (talk · contribs) 19:44, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Lead

  • "Maharshi" - It is not an English word, so its translation should be present in brackets.
  • "King's College, Cambridge"- in which country?
  • "He was imprisoned by British India"? I think "British government" or even "British" would be perfect.

RRD13 (talk) 13:37, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

-"Done"- Removed the word maharshi as no original sources were found refering to him as maharshi, added king's college details , updated details of british India Shrikanthv (talk) 07:09, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Early life

  • Who were his siblings? As far as I know he had a brother named Barin Ghosh.

-"Done" : updated Shrikanthv (talk) 07:08, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Rangapur should be linked.

-"Done" : updated Shrikanthv (talk) 07:08, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

RRD13 (talk) 13:42, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

  • The sentence is hapazard. The name of her sister should be there along that of his brothers joined by and.

RRD13 (talk) 12:34, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

-"Done" : reworded sentence to be more consize Shrikanthv (talk) 06:23, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

England

  • Who took them to England?
  • The names of the subjects should start in capital letters and should be appropriately linked.
  • Please mention where St Paul's School is located.
  • ". He also acquired some familiarity with German and Italian"- I cannot understand what it says.
  • Instead of K.D. Ghosh, please write "His father".

RRD13 (talk) 12:52, 19 March 2014 (UTC) -Done - added information, changed capital letters, language detials added , chanded to his father and also some vague informtion was shifterd to specific information Shrikanthv (talk) 07:15, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Baroda

  • "working first in the Survey and Settlements department, later moving to ..." please mention the years in which he shifted his work to other departments.
  • The sentence sounds bad - two "works"
  • "prakash" - it should be capital, a name.
  • The poetry is in which language?

RRD13 (talk) 06:35, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

-Done updated info, poetry was in English Shrikanthv (talk) 07:49, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Calcutta

  • In the previous sections' headers' we have the dates. Why not in this case?
  • "repeatedly visited Bengal" - when?
  • How can a person be influenced by his own studies?
  • He helped establish a series of youth clubs. He helped found the Anushilan Samiti of Calcutta in 1902" - make it "He helped establish a series of youth clubs like the Anushilan Samiti of Calcutta in 1902"
  • "Congress" - Congress. (How can a casual leader know it is a political party?)
  • If I am not wrong the Congress meetings were held annually in a city to review the progress made. In 1906, it was held in Calcutta headed by Dadabhai Naoroji. I think it should be mentioned.
  • "hardliners"- isnt it extremists?

RRD13 (talk) 06:36, 24 March 2014 (UTC) Done Merged The sections of Baroda and Calcutta as it seems he was moving between cities during these days , he was was influnced by his ... changed to studies , wording corrected, hardliners changed to extremists and last statment reworded for correct picturisation of the situtaion Shrikanthv (talk) 12:14, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Conversion from politics to spirituality

  • Why did the trial occur? How was he involved with the bombings? All these needs to be explained.
  • The spelling of CR Das is wrong. Moreover he should be appropriately linked.
  • "Afterwards" - date?
  • "Vivekananda"??? - "Swamiji or Swami Vivekananda"
  • Reword the first sentence of the third paragraph.
  • Again "Brahmananda".
  • "Bande" - "Vande" (B is used by the Bengalis not by Indians)
  • "Chandarnagore" - wrong spelling.

RRD13 (talk) 12:41, 24 March 2014 (UTC) Done- Most of the infor added and dates added, correct city name added and tagged to existing wiki article Shrikanthv (talk) 14:31, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Pondicherry

  • "philosophical monthly magazine" make it "philosophical magazine published monthly".
  • "A series of work" - are these works articles/ poems or anything else?
  • Why "Sri"? What does it mean?
  • Where did he sign his name?
  • Only one sentence about his death?

RRD13 (talk) 10:45, 25 March 2014 (UTC) Done - changed most of the things added info on Sri and tagged it, did not really find where he first actually signed with sri first time, the authors only mention about first usage. expanded death details Shrikanthv (talk) 07:27, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Mirra Richard

  • Why a level 2 heading?
  • She was of which nationality?
  • In which state is the city located?

RRD13 (talk) 10:55, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Done : removed redundant aurovilla details as it was created much later by the mother and compressed the information on ashram and the mother on same para, its a union terretory so I am unable to mention it as a seperate state and city Shrikanthv (talk) 07:48, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Philosophy and spiritual vision

  • Who is Peter Heehs?
  • The Life Divine section is uncited.
  • "Man is born an ignorant" - why capital m? It should be "man is born as an ignorant...."
  • Are the 3 points said by him?
  • There is problem with the 29 reference.
  • Savitri should be included in this section only.

RRD13 (talk) 09:12, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Done: all done! RRD13 Shrikanthv (talk)

Rest

  • In all places where any person has been named like "Abc did.." make it "(Historian) Abc....."
  • Is there any need for a section of quotations?
  • Include Savitri section in Literary works.

RRD13 (talk) 09:16, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Done : Done!RRD13Shrikanthv (talk) 09:39, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Sourcing

We should not be using sources published by an advocacy group much at all in this article. Alas, we seem to be using them a lot. Such groups/publishers are not generally reliable. - Sitush (talk) 16:12, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

We also seem to have a massive WP:CITEVAR problem. Has all this come in since the GA review or what? - Sitush (talk) 16:14, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
The lead seems overcited to me. I'm not even convinced that any citations are needed at all there. See WP:LEAD. - Sitush (talk) 10:57, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


will have a look, regarding lead sitush , i was having an edit war when they started added information like , Bangali Brahmin...etc. , so had to really cite much of lead section to be currently what it is Shrikanthv (talk) 07:05, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Distances

Something does not feel quite right in the paragraph containing "In 1879, his father took Sri Aurobindo and his two elder brothers to Manchester, England for a European education. The brothers were placed in the care of the Reverend W.H. Drewett and his wife, in London ..." Manchester is > 200 miles away from London and back then the commute by railway would have taken up the entire working day. It seems unlikely that they were taught by and lived with the Drewetts and simultaneously were studying at Manchester. It is probably a phrasing issue but it is confusing and needs to be resolved. - Sitush (talk) 11:03, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Changed was not noticed before , updated correct information Shrikanthv (talk) 07:22, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Section blanking

I have removed this section out of the article, think it does not belong to the biography page, and may be spams from organizations claiming lot of things, the insitution like ashram has already been stated. Do discuss if this is necessary here

Organisations and institutes

  • Sri Aurobindo International Centre of Education, an integral part of the Ashram, serves as a field of experiment and research in education. For years Sri Aurobindo considered forming an Education Centre to prepare future humanity to manifest upon earth a divine consciousness and a divine life. To give a concrete shape to his vision, the Mother opened a school for children on 2 December 1943. In 1951, a Convention at Pondicherry resolved to establish an International University Centre in the town as a fitting memorial to Sri Aurobindo. Accordingly, the Sri Aurobindo International University Centre was inaugurated by the Mother on 6 January 1952. In 1959, the Mother renamed it "Sri Aurobindo International Centre of Education".[1]
  • Sri Aurobindo Centre for Advanced Research, located in Pondicherry, India, provides online advanced degree programmes (e.g., MA, M.Phil., and PhD) in Sri Aurobindo Studies. It works in collaboration with Indira Gandhi National Open University which grants the degrees. It also publishes books related to the thought and vision of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother, holds conferences, and sells CDs of talks by Ananda Reddy, its Director, on Sri Aurobindo's various major works.[2]
  • The Integral Life Foundation in Waterford, CT has published several books by Amal Kiran.[3]
  • Sri Aurobindo Society, founded by the Mother in 1960 (with her as its Executive President), is an international not-for-profit NGO, working for individual perfection, social transformation and human unity. It strives to bring change, empowerment, deeper values and excellence in various fields, including education, village development, sustainable development & renewable energy, health, management, youth, women, Indian culture, and media, films and television programmes, based on a spiritual foundation. The Society has been recognized by the Government of India as a Charitable Organization, a Research Institute, and an Institution of National Importance. The Society’s main administrative office is at Puducherry (formerly Pondicherry), India. It has members, centres and branches in all parts of India and abroad.[4]

Shrikanthv (talk) 05:00, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Article move

From the above Talk:Sri Aurobindo/Archive 1#WP:HONORIFIC, it seems clear that we should move it from "Sri Aurobindo" to just "Aurobindo" or "Aurobindo Ghosh". Any comments before it is done? -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 08:41, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

I think that the problem might be WP:COMMONNAME - some honorifics are just so common that they default. Any move would also have to consider Ghose rather than Ghosh. - Sitush (talk) 08:48, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, my typo. I think just "Aurobindo" is preferable, this was also the old title. Normal Google web search shows that "Sri" yields some more results but Google Books is the opposite; I think we can give preference to HONORIFIC over COMMONNAME for this case. Also, I was quite surprised at the result of this discussion: Talk:Agnivesh#Requested move. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 09:50, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment: This discussion is not following the formalities set by WP:RM. Just pointing it out. In case its just casual talk, carry on and ignore my comment. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:25, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The article should not be moved. "Sri Aurobindo" was the name used to refer to Aurobindo. It is the name that Aurobindo used to refer to himself. It is what he went by.[2] — goethean 12:05, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose Like Goethean and Sitush said, it is more about Common name than honorific. Bladesmulti (talk) 12:58, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

RE-work for GA

Again have started to re-work for GA , please discuss here before editing Shrikanthv (talk) 12:29, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Sri Aurobindo/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 15:48, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. Well-written, passes spot-checks for plagiarism.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. lead: ok; layout: ok; weasel: ok; fiction: n/a; lists: n/a
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. Major aspects are properly addressed.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Article is correctly focussed on the subject.
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Tone is now fine after much work in past few years.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. Not sure about Aurobindo.family.jpg, please make sure it is properly tagged and dated on Commons. Other images are ok.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
7. Overall assessment. Article is now far more defensible, is encyclopedic in tone and content and thoroughly cited. It is a pleasure to see how far it has improved since the earlier GA attempts.

Comments

I'll take this on. An immediate comment which is not part of the GA review is that it would be possible to tidy up the references by moving books mentioned repeatedly to the list of cited sources. However this is not a GA requirement. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:48, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Can you suggest me to wikipage were i can learn this to do ? Shrikanthv (talk) 07:39, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
The easiest is probably just to study the article itself, where you can see how e.g. Heehs (2008) or McDermott (1994) are cited in "Citations" and fully listed in "Bibliography". You can just do the same thing for Aurobindo (1960), for instance.

This article has clearly met the GA criteria. These criteria do not include the tidying up of citations, which would be a desirable step as already mentioned, and essential if the article is to go further.

Additional work could be done on Sri Aurobindo's influence on other people and groups, and on the reception of his ideas; in these sections, the article currently "addresses the main aspects of the topic" but would with benefit be further developed to become "comprehensive".

For now I would like simply to congratulate all the editors involved for their hard work. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:13, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: I'm sorry but I think this needs to be delisted. I did a lot of work on the biographical bits some time ago but since then someone has introduced miscited material to those sections. In addition, and while I've fixed a lot of minor problems, I've found at least one instance of copyvio. It is also poor that an article that is so intertwined with a philosophy actually says almost nothing about that philosophy and how he came to derive it. It is the philosophical stuff that was always my stumbling block here: I simply do not understand what the man was trying to say and consider it to be gibberish. The source used doesn't help one bit and is arguably self-interested.
I know people have worked hard on this - including me - but it is not GA quality in my opinion, and it still needs a lot of work. - Sitush (talk) 10:40, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your many improvements. Indeed many editors have visibly put much hard work into the article; I am sorry to hear about the copyvio but am sure that alternatives can readily be found. However, we need to clearly distinguish our own attitudes to philosophies and what is said in an article. The man's life, work, influence and reception are clearly and adequately summarized here. Other people as described in the sources certainly found him important and influential. Whether we editors like the man's ideas, or even find them coherent, is not the article's problem. It is valid to use a source related to a subject to describe what the subject himself thought. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:53, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
I disagree. My "gibberish" comment relates to my inability to correct the problems. It is not intended as a judgement on the philosophy. The section on the philosophy is indeed gibberish: I'm an intelligent bloke and I've done undergraduate courses on philosophy etc, so if I cannot make sense of it then the likelihood is high that the general reader cannot do so either. Add to that the miscitations, copyvio etc and we're far from GA. I'm not sure where to take this next but I'll read up on the delisting process when I've got a few minutes. I'm not blaming anyone here, by the way, merely explaining why it fails the criteria. And the criteria includes lucid prose. - Sitush (talk) 11:04, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Fair enough. I remain convinced however that our task is limited to saying 'Aurobindo claimed X', whether the claim makes sense to us or not; and in an article on the man, we are not obliged to say much on the philosophy, so it may be best simply to cut it down. A removed copyvio should not be an obstacle either. I have edited the section on his philosophy; it is now short and frankly perfectly clear (that he believed in some kind of divine purpose to evolution, leading from matter to mind). On the citations, they are now not untidy; and the GA criteria explicitly exclude requirements for correct formatting: "Requiring consistently formatted, complete bibliographic citations. (If you are able to figure out what the source is, that's a good enough citation for GA.)" (What the GA criteria are not) Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:06, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Chiswick Chap IT's very saddening and devasting to see how is it a copyvio, still if you go through the 1st chapter of the book (that I have taken from ) if you directly qoute from it . it is a copy vio and if you interprit it, it is a synthesis of your own material. Philosophy is not Theoritical physics , I doubt any lucidity would ever be brought to it ( I do believe if you ever bring lucitdity to philosophy then it not any more philosophy but something else.) . but on a positive note I do accept it keeping the philo part chrisp, I will copy paste the philosopycall "gibberish" down here and if needed let us discuss why it is so Shrikanthv (talk) 12:45, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Chiswick Chap, you misunderstand me. I said "miscitation", not that the citation styles need fixing. My point was that we were citing a source (Heehs 2011) that not only didn't support the statement but didn't even have anywhere close to 347 pages, as the citation suggested. That, I am afraid, is very poor and it meant that I had to tag two bits at {{qn}}, using good faith that the intended source was the 2008 book rather than the 2011 paper. If you don't see that and the copyvio as a major problem then I am flabbergasted. This thing should never have been listed. - Sitush (talk) 14:26, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Ok, I see what you mean. Obviously these issues needed fixing. However from Shrikanthv's comments above, it is clear that as you say these things happened in good faith; the cv is already fixed and the faulty citation is readily fixable. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:59, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Everything is fixable if enough time and energy and sources can be found. That doesn't make it a GA. The idea is to fix the things before promotion, not after it. You'll note that I've now found still more problems, some of which I've fixed and others of which I've had to tag for now. I'm not blaming anyone but this thing is not a GA and should not have been listed as such. - Sitush (talk) 16:05, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Very true, but we are where we are. I've added quotes and citations where indicated. Also compared Wilber description with the source again; it seems a fair summary of what is said; I don't pretend to understand what Wilber actually means. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:01, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
We need not have been where we are if more care had been applied. Your recent changes do not help matters; in fact, at least one of them seems to be extremely misleading and another seems to indicate a surprising unfamiliarity with WP:RS. I could right now run up a website explaining how Bertrand Russell reacted to the thoughts of Rousseau and then expect it to appear in our Rousseau article pronto because, well, it is a website written by someone who names themselves and so it must be ok. Who is that person? What authority do they have? - Sitush (talk) 17:08, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Is the extended info for Heehs (2008) p. 347 intended to be a quotation from the source or what? I've just reformatted it but couldn't make my mind up. As said previously, I cannot see that page on GBooks. - Sitush (talk) 21:54, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

"Aurobindo was influenced by studies on rebellion and revolutions against England in medieval France and the revolts in America and Italy. In his public activities he favoured non-co-operation and passive resistance but in private he took up secret revolutionary activity as a preparation for open revolt, in case that the passive revolt failed." and a fair bit more from that source is far too closely paraphrased. I've no time to fix that at the moment but we're going to have to check every source because this sort of thing is common in India-related articles. - Sitush (talk) 22:10, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Finally got hold of the complete book online here is the link , please refer to respective pages if references needed to be checked And for me it seems right. I do also see a prejudice on what is common in "Indian" articles . if the facts needs to be stated how do you put into wiki other than summarising it call it para phrasing ?! please go through the actual para with the heading "Attitude towards violent revolution " and the lines in the article simply summaries the para (please note that this book is not a Autobiography, it was corrective notes given by Aurobindo himself on the claims from his biography writers)Shrikanthv (talk) 07:39, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Reverts

can we discusss your reverts user:TheRedPenOfDoom ??Shrikanthv (talk) 08:45, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

The Gibberesh

Please find below the philo part which needs to be worked on if this is a copy vio

" Aurobindo believed that the current concept of evolution merely describes a phenomenon and does not explain the reason behind it, while he finds that life to be already present in the matter. He argued that nature (which he interpreted as divine) has evolved life out of matter and then mind out of life, in other words that evolution had a purpose. He believed that matter has an impulse to become life, and that life has a similar impulse to become mind.[48] He stated that he found the task of understanding the nature of reality arduous and difficult to justify by immediate tangible results. He describes that the current will in humans to find nature of reality has been for him arduous, difficult to justify by immediate tangible results, slow in regulating its operations and has turned him against the secret working of nature which has made him to evade the effort of enquiry of its true meaning.[5]

According to Aurobindo, the evolution being progressive manifestation by Nature has not come to end on earth and the man being the product of evolution has had impulses and goals of achieving God, Light, Freedom and immortality, this would lead to the next evolutionary stages in man. Aurobindo finds for man, the manifestation of the divine in himself and the realisation of God within and without are the highest and most legitimate aim possible to man upon earth.[6] " Shrikanthv (talk) 13:05, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Sri Aurobindo International Centre of Education". Retrieved 03/01/2013. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  2. ^ "About us". Retrieved 03/01/2013. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  3. ^ D, A (6 December 2004). "Celebrating a century". The Hindu. Hyderbad.
  4. ^ "Sri Aurobindo Society".
  5. ^ Aurobindo (2005), p. 7
  6. ^ Aurobindo (2005), p. 6

Polygot

Definitely not needed in lead section and have reverted the edit, I think there is a need for discussion as its a one author claim without any more references Shrikanthv (talk) 15:12, 4 December 2014 (UTC) the text reverted below He was a polyglot, who, apart from his native Bengali and educational English, knew ancient Greek, Latin, French, German, Italian, Spanish and other Indian languages like Sanskrit, Hindi, Marathi and Gujurati.[1]

References

  1. ^ Peter Heehs, The Lives of Sri Aurobindo: A Biography, Columbia University Press (2013), p. 43

Critics: Ramana Maharshi

Paul Brunton:

"That these differences of view exist even among illumined mystics is a striking but rarely studied fact. Why did Ramana Maharshi poke gentle fun at Aurobindo’s doctrine of spiritual planes?" [3]

I also remember a response by Ramana Maharshi on Aurobindo's planes in "Talks." Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:01, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

? I did not get the point ?, I think there were like osho too who critcised more "specifically" ? Shrikanthv (talk) 09:03, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Ramana Maharshi rejected Aurobindo's model of spiritual planes, and the "descend" of spirirtual power from above. Might be of interest here. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 09:37, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
JJ here you will be stepping into actuallity vs intellectual understanding (or " notion of knowing " ) tread that path ? (it may again tread you back you from the boundry of understanding but yes an effort is not a loss) Shrikanthv (talk) 10:32, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
The basic problem with understanding upanishads or Sri Aurobindo's, Sri Ramana Maharshi, Gurdjieff writings is that in which floor level you are viewing (a "self observatory skyscrapper") .
consider a skycraper each of them have a balcony in front and in front of the skyscraper there is a huge road some one (1st guy) standing from 10th floor loudly states here comes the red car, a person standing in 2nd floor (2nd guy) looks out sees nothing and after few minutes sees the red car! wow the guy above in the 10th floor is a magician how can he know the future!!.
now consider there is some one (3rd guy) standing on the road infront of the skyscraper he just walks in front of skyscrapper in one direction for 5 km and makes a note and then in the other direction makes a note and again in another direction makes a note , now he walks 10 km in every direction makes a note , now he has compunded a written map of how things are situated in around the building!
what difference do you see between these three guys ? Shrikanthv (talk) 09:42, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
@Shrikanthv: if I understand you correctly, you're saying that both were enlightened souls, but looking from a different plane, c.q. taking different approaches? The one (Ramana Maharshi) was merely looking, whereas the other (Sri Aurobindo) also described the territory?
What strikes me, is that Ramana Maharshi (if I understand him correctly) says that "truth" ('satya-prajna') is not something that descends from another plane, but just is. Seeing (prajna) truth (satya) = being (satya) truth (satya), so to speak. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:57, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Rajneesh ("Osho") was a fake, he plagiarized whole paragraphs of his books from other books (the person who discovered that fact, does not want to be the target of threats - but you can see this verified in the scholarly quotes on the Osho wikipedia page.) Other spiritual teachers pointed out the dubious aspect of Rajneesh and his teachings, much as Maharshi commented on Aurobindo.

To corroborate Maharshi's point, note that there are no "levels" or "hierarchies" in nature, those only come from animal social status instincts. There is nothing greater about a galaxy than a solar system - it is only bigger. Stars do not ascend to greater status or meaning.

Also, evolution is merely the reproduction of genes, and the selection of some genes by their survival. Contrary to popular views on the word "evolution", there is nothing positive implied.

Lastly, changing your name and signature to "Holy Aurobindo" is highly dubious for a spiritual teacher. Realized beings whom I have met personally characterized themselves as "no one".162.205.217.211 (talk) 02:34, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Modi

@Mihirjha27: please stop WP:EDITWARRING, and discuss your edits per WP:BRD. Your addition is problematic for several reasons:

"Narendra Modi, one of the most Popular politicians in the world and Prime Minister of India, is also influenced by ideals of the great Sri Aurobindo. In his visit to Paris in June 2015, he paid homage to Sri Aurobindo in Paris Unesco. [10]"

References

  • "one of the most Popular politicians in the world": that's a non-encyclopedic personal comment, which violates WP:NPOV and WP:SOAPBOX
  • the sentence in toto is WP:UNDUE: it's not relevant to Sri Aurobindo.

Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:55, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

World War II

I've included a new section regarding Aurobindo's support for the Allies during World War II, as well as his warnings on communism, under "Later political views". I've not included the claims that Aurobindo and the Mother influenced the war (such as the Mother appearing to Hitler as the Asura), only that they were anti-Nazi. Do people think they should be included? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.2.244.193 (talk) 16:17, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for addition, regarding communisim and hitler , both mother and aurobindo had views which have deduced by their followers according to what they heard is right , may be if multiple sources depect the same thing we can have a view, but currently it seems like cherry picking to affirm a statment. Shrikanthv (talk) 07:37, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Possible addition to legacy

Obscura write songs using his poems. Is this significant enough to be added to the legacy section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:7044:3F00:C42A:3D27:954D:A81C (talk) 23:07, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

File nominated for deletion on commons

The file c:File:Aurobindoandthemother.jpg has been nominated for deletion on Commons 
Reason: Cartier-Bresson dead 3 août 2004 - not PD 
Deletion request: link

Message automatically deposited by a robot - -Harideepan (talk) 13:17, 10 January 2018 (UTC).

Wilber citation error

This edit by Shrikanthv introduced a citation error in November 2015. We have no source for the Wilber book. There is a similar problem with the very next citation in the article as it currently stands, ie: the Sharma source. - Sitush (talk) 17:57, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Sitush, have fixed it Shrikanthv (talk) 08:02, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, Shrikanthv, that is great. In case you do not already know, this script can be added to your personal page and it shows up such errors whenever they occur. - Sitush (talk) 12:13, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Sri Aurobindo did not follow "Hinduism" later in spiritual life, please remove the label

Sri Aurobindo did not follow "Hinduism" in most of his spiritual life, please remove the label from the "hindu leader template".

I don't want to do this myself as I trust user:shrikanthv or others would be more adept at at editing this properly.


can you provide some sources ? --Shrikanthv (talk) 08:40, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Adding Sri to early years

Please refrain from Adding "Sri" in the early years of bio, as he started to sign himself with Sri and removing his family only during later years. Shrikanthv (talk) 06:50, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Supermind section and Introduction edit

Hi all,

I have added a rudimentary section on the Supermind with a link to the main article and also made some additions to the introduction section. Would anyone be willing to look over this and perhaps refine what I have done?

Kind regards, William — Preceding unsigned comment added by AscentIntoOvermind (talk • contribs) 23:51, 20 January 2019 (UTC) AscentIntoOvermind (talk) 00:06, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi would ask you to refrain from adding your real world name here!, as it may not be nice place some times , seems fine for me will have a look at the sources Shrikanthv (talk) 10:00, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

GA

How the heck was Talk:Sri Aurobindo/GA3, a call to promote? The philosophy part is shittily written, notwithstanding the lack of criticism. ∯WBGconverse 09:05, 28 May 2019 (UTC)


Hi, Please note the GA review was on 2014 and philo part was added much later by random enthusaists leading to current scenario, have to make it encyclopediac Shrikanthv (talk) 12:10, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Hindustani to servants.

QUOTE: Young Aurobindo was brought up speaking English but used Hindustani to communicate with servants END OF QUOTE

That is quite interesting. It is not a unique attribute. To servants, it is best to use the feudal languages. It can subordinate them powerfully. The Thoo, USS words are quite powerful. In the feudal languages of the southern parts of the subcontinent, the words are Nee, Ninte, Avan, Aval &c.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:d081:f491:5e9:483:6178:d361 (talk) 04:57, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

QUOTE: Although his family were Bengali, his father believed British culture to be superior. END OF QUOTE.

This is a very low-class writing, more or less insulting to his father. British culture is not one. It consists of planar language English culture (that of England) and feudal language Celtic culture (Irish, Scottish & Welsh). The writing seems to be that of some Indian Academic creep.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:d081:f491:5e9:483:6178:d361 (talk) 06:20, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sri_Aurobindo/Archive_1&oldid=1137200118"