Talk:Perfect Master

Old comment

Many people have use the term "Perfect Master". Rather than attempt to explain the variations between all these people as it pertains to definitions given, let's leave that to the articles about these persons. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 15:40, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look up the word Syncretism and you'll have a better idea why this page is important. chris 19:26, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Usually disambiguation pages are used to link to different articles that have the same title to help people find the one they meant. For instance db templates usually read "for other uses of the term..." In this case it was assuming everyone knew what a 'perfect master' is and linked to so-and-so's term for that concept. That sounds more like adding ambiguity than removing it. Change it back if you don't agree. In truth only the Meher Baba article and the Masonic article use this term at all. Shamak (talk) 23:42, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hai only Subramanya Siva Balan is the Perfect Master, http://www.nisargachetana.org/projects.html check this out,he is able to Transmi,enlighten people & spiritually evolve things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.245.6.123 (talk) 15:42, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disambig

moved from my talk page ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:06, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jossi, When you find time I'd like to discuss the Perfect Master dmg page with you. I know you have worked hard on it. Someone tagged the article as needing work and I think I see why. I don't know if Meher Baba coined the word "perfect master" but he is the only one that I can verify used this precise term. Dmg pages I think are for multiple occurances of the same term. The way the dmg page is now it is more like the reader is expected to assume to know the meaning of the term from its sound, and then procedes to point to a concept that parallels that idea best from several traditions. My proposal is for an improved version of the Perfect Master (Meher Baba) article to replace the current Perfect Master dmg page and then have a link to a literal dmg page like "Perfect Master (disambiguation)" at the top of the page. Please discuss. I don't want to do anything without your approval. But I see none of these other articles are really articles on that term. Also the PM Baba page could be improved to include other references besides Baba's use, but with the same connotation. So I'm saying replace "Perfect Master" with an article and have also a dmg page. Tommytocker (talk) 15:00, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect Master is used as per the this page by many people, groups, religions, etc. The term should be kept in a ~~disambig~~ page and not linked to any specific article. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:06, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Tommytocker (talk) 16:19, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you keep wanting to link the word "perfect master" from "Meher Baba." This will not let them know what they are linking to? Tommytocker (talk) 16:27, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:32, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done? Jossi, I was wanting to work with you? Why are you edit-warring? You are misleading the person by putting the wrong name to the link. Tommytocker (talk) 16:34, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry? I thought that I was addressing your concern. Please clarify it so I can address it better. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 17:30, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm so glad you got back to me. My concern is that the article "Perfect Master (Meher Baba)" ought to be linked from the word "perfect master" rather than "meher baba" so people will know where they are being directed to. As it is you have the term "perfect master (meher baba)" piped from the term "meher Baba" which will make people not know there is an article by the name "perfect master." That kind of defeats the purpose of a dmg page. Tommytocker (talk) 17:33, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect Master (Meher Baba) should be merged to Meher Baba, as proposed on that article's talk page. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 18:39, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jossi; Tommy asked me to review and comment -- like this will be a good thing? Meher Baba used the term Perfect Master in a very specialized way that is extremely detailed and esoteric, and of interest, I think, to very few people. I have commented at the Perfect Master (Meher Baba) that I believe merging is inappropriate; rather that the proper response is to improve or delete it entirely. Either it is relevant on its own or it's not.

I think the disambig sentence here is poorly constructed, which is why you are having a problem with the dab link. I will try to refine it; tell me what you think. --Nemonoman (talk) 01:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the term was specialized by Meher Baba, I see no reason why it cannot be described in the Meher Baba article. Please discuss in that article's talk page. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:45, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why have an edit war over something so straight forward?

The following is from Wikipedia:Disambiguation:

Partial title matches

Do not add links that merely contain part of the page title, or links that include the page title in a longer proper name, where there is no significant risk of confusion. Only add links to articles that could use essentially the same title as the disambiguated term. Disambiguation pages are not search indices.

Tommytocker (talk) 17:14, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this page is a disambiguation page anymore. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 17:31, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean. Above you say " The term should be kept in a disambig page and not linked to any specific article." to which I replied "Okay" thinking we had come to an agreement by my accepting your opinion. Tommytocker (talk) 17:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I corrected my comment. See above ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 18:39, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alpha Sort

Shouldn't Divine Light Mission go at the top? Sort on the D, yes, not the M? (I'm assuming Meher Baba is an M, not a B for sorting?)

Not really. The name of the person starts with "P". But it is no big deal. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:44, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As an former technical editor, I'm easily confused. Are you sorting the entries by

Person or group differentiating the term Perfect Master

OR

By the specific term or article identified by the naming person or group? Also, you seem pretty sharp on this sort of thing -- is there a style for this sort of list in MOS somewhere??--Nemonoman (talk) 18:34, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There were two people in the Divine Light Mission who were called "Perfect Masters", Guru Maharaj Ji (Hans Ji Maharaj) and his son, Guru Maharaj Ji (Prem Rawat). Both had additional titles and nicknames. It seems simpler to sort on "Divine Light Mission". ·:· Will Beback ·:· 18:55, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This page needs fleshing out

Hey, This page needs fleshing out! Incarnation seems like a good model to follow. Also see Rainbow flag. These are pages where there are several senses for different cultures just like this one and yet they go into depth and often have another page they link to for further details on top of it. I have read a lot of the recent discussions here and at Perfect Master (Meher Baba) and Meher Baba and this is silly. Wikipedia is for everyone to edit and this information ought not be hiding in anothe page right? So I will start on this. I don't see how anyone could have any objection. Why is the Baba stuff hidden there? It makes me a little sick as I know a Baba follower very well and they have these ideas. They're okay in my book. DeanaG (talk) 01:38, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem in expanding the article to include information about the term as is used in different religions and movements. But it should be done in a way that does not give prominence of one specific use of the term. Specific information about each religion can be found in the article about that religion, per WP:SUMMARY ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:44, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! This is looking a LOT better. Great. :') I'll keep working on it too. DeanaG (talk) 01:59, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Translations

I have translated this article into Spanish but I do not know how to add the language on the left bar (add "English" in the Spanish page and "Español" in the English page) Can anyone help me and tell me how to do it or where to find the instructions?, sorry Wikipedia is almost infinite--Pedrero (talk) 01:54, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's easy... add [[es:Maestro Prefecto]] here; and add [[en:Perfect Master]] to the es.wikipedia page. You can place these at the bottom of the page. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:37, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic, it works, I am very happy to know at last, thanks. Do you think I could and should add the part that is in Spanish and not in English? Are you the same as JoséFM of the Spanish Wikipedia--Pedrero (talk) 21:10, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No... ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 21:02, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Jossi, "no" to my 1st or 2nd question or both? Did you read my enlargmente? What do you think? Of course I like the article and would like to keep working on it, perhaps pictures or images of the perfect masters generally accepted in yoga, which are most of them, as in the west there has been only Jesus or almost, I don't know, but many in India. Someone removed the photos of the Spanish article of Prem Rawat and left only one 4 years old. Imagine if all biographies had only one picture of the person as a 4 year child only. I tried to learn to insert pictures without success. Perhaps you could do it?--Pedrero (talk) 21:12, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Order

I find it funny that the last in chronology has been changed to the first. Chronological order is what is followed generally elsewhere. Why not here?--Pedrero (talk) 19:57, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per discussion on this page, we sorted the groups alphabetically. Chronological order is complicated because these aren't dated events. Do we even have precised dates for the founding of these groups, or their first use of the term? ·:· Will Beback ·:· 22:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the case of Meher Baba you have 1926 according to the description.AguireTS (talk) 01:26, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a couple of entries do have associated have dates. But all of them have names, making alpha sort simpler. If we had some overall source for this material that put these into a sequence then chrono order would be fine. But we don't, and there isn't necessarily a progression. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 01:30, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AguireTS: if you can find a way to do a chrono sort, please go ahead and let us see how that would work. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:16, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vedanta -- Earliest, but in no translations of the Vedas or Upanishads is the word "perfect master" actually used. Rather "satguru" (lit: true teacher) is used.
Buddhism is next as Buddhism is largely a criticism of the Vedas. Again, the term "perfect master" does not appear in the Sutras. Rather "bodhisattva" (enlightened being) is used.
Sufism follows and traces its roots back to Muhammad (6th century). The word qutub (meaning pivot point) is used rather than perfect master. Also the word "murshid" (meaning 'guide' or 'teacher' but not master) is used to describe the spiritual head of a Sufi order. The word "Sheikh" is Muslim (sometimes Sufi) and means literally "elder." Again the word "perfect master" is not used in Sufism anywhere that I'm aware of. The most famous Sufi in the west was Inayat Khan who wrote in English. The word "perfect master" does not appear in his works that I can find.
Ismaili: 8th century
Surat Shad Yoga, Sant Mat dates from 13th century A.D. Advait Mat originates with Totapuri in the 18th century. Again the term satguru (true teacher) is used.
Sikhism dates from the 15th century A.D.
Freemasonry: 16th century.
Hans Ji Maharaj: 20th century. Considered by his followers to be a satguru (true teacher).
Meher Baba: Uses the word "perfect master" in English and syncretizes it with satguru and qutum in 1926. Numerous sources. The trend of using this phrase in English to mean satguru appears to have no earlier printed source. Thus contemporary use of "perfect master" to mean fully enlightened being starts here. As a term it is found in masonry, but that is a slightly different meaning -- having to do with rank.AguireTS (talk) 14:22, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good work! ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:26, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very very much Aguire, you are fantastic. I think it is perfect now, to have something that has developped along time and history sorted out alphabetically is to me as the new female librarian who changed the books in the library and sorted them together by colours. Wikipedia is fantastic, despite some things, there is nothing like quixotesque idealistic cooperation. I think the Freemasons mean a different thing, so I would take it out of the article, I have not included it in the Spanish translation.

I don't think we should start a war about if Perfect Master is the right term or it only applies to Meher Baba or DLM, the important thing here is the function, the role, the consciousness, and the work of these more or less clearly defined kind of people, most of them have lived in India, and I think the most widespread term is Satgurú.

Since I am a translator I do not like to use English words in Spanish, but rather find or invent a translation, either we leave it in Hindi as this is mostly an "Indian thing", or if we find a translation Perfect Master is a good definition or translation, even if it has two words and 4 syllables and in hindi only 3, the shorter the better, I am probably lazy, so any suggestion for another translation is welcome if shorter. The literal translation of Satgurú is "the true Master who can take you out of darkness and into the Light". Please do not use this one.--Pedrero (talk) 04:58, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we should remove the Freemasons if they use the term "Perfect Master". It's not for us to decide which groups mean "the same thing" in their use of the term, unless we have a source that says so. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 05:37, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Traditionally on Wikipedia a word by a different meaning is linked to through a disambiguation page. I think a rank of a secret society is an entirely different meaning than a state of consciousness of a fully enlightened master in a mystical religious tradition. Freemasonry is not a mystical order aiming at enlightenment, but rather is a secret society which tries to do good in the world. I think that is two separate meanings as Pedrero is saying. LittleDoGooder (talk) 07:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The irony is that this started out as a disambiguation page. I'm not saying that the Freemasons use the term the same as the Sikhs, but it might be a stretch to say the Ismailis use the same meaning as the Divine Light Mission as the Tibetan Buddhists. This article isn't meant to convey a single meaning, but rather to provide the definitions used by any group that uses the term. If we're going to convert this into an article that compares and contrasts different meanings we'll need more and better sources. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 07:10, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks LittleDoGoder, it is nice to see someone who agrees with me (my two ex-wives rarely did), and I have read your personal page and I can't agree more with you (I would say the same even if you did not agree this time).

I suggest to add a comment on the different meanings or doctrines in diverging concepts, but I still believe the freemasons concept is different from all the rest, which may not be identical, but similar, sorry not to agree with you this time Will Beback, as I see it, we already have a source, Scottish freemasons themselves, who consider Perfect Master one more of 35 ranks, far away from all other concepts, as Aguire explains.

I would like to put the different concepts in the chronological order given by Aguire, but I am afraid to get objections and arguments, which seem to happen much more often in English than in the Spanish Wikipedia and in other languages. Can someone more neutral than me do that?--Pedrero (talk) 13:07, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will Beback, I don't want to hurt your feelings but you're not getting it. The Sikhs and Buddhists don't use this term "perfect master." It isn't even a translation of the terms they use. This is a contemporary term that has no usage in the English language prior to 1926. The term does not appear in traditional Hinduism, Sikhism or Sufism. It's a post-modern term. AguireTS (talk) 14:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell from my own reading, Meher Baba coins the term in English in 1923-1926 in describing in English what satguru and qutub are. There is absolutely no use of the word "perfect master" in any of the major religions in the past or present -- unless someone can show me an instance in print. After Meher Baba used the term to mean a satguru or qutub it was borrowed in later post-modern sources, mostly new-age and by the new religions. As for the Masons it does appear, but it denotes a rank within the society given for seniority and accomplishment and does not denote a state of mind. So it is an entirely different use of the term. Meher Baba's denotes a state of Unified consciousness. The Mason's denotes a rank within the Organization. Why they are clumped together defies me. There use to be a disambig page but someone wanted to put it together. See discussion for all the confusion. The article is written in a very weird way because it uses the term "perfect master" as if the reader knows what it means and that such and such group 'calls their perfect master an X' and so forth. Yet it smokes over the fact that these groups (like Sikhs and Sufis) don't use the term at all. Period. In short there are only two actual uses of the term "perfect master" (spelled as such) I can find and they are Meher Baba's and the Masons and they are using the term to mean two entirely different things and are not even on the same subject. One is a term for consciousness, the other a bestowed title or rank in a secular society. 14:14, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

It's a little bit disappointing that there is more information on the history and meaning of the term "perfect master" in this discussion page than on the article itself -- which largely assumes you know what a perfect master is and came just to learn what various religions call theirs. How in the world is that telling the reader what a perfect master is? The only one that tries to do so is the Meher Baba section, because Meher Baba defines it in detail in many places. The others simply refer you to terms that Meher Baba himself syncretized with the word perfect master but which those groups (like Sufis and Sikhs) don't. Is anyone understanding what I'm saying? I hear everyone going around the issue. This is NOT a term used by these groups in several cases. The term is unfamiliar to them. Only Meher Baba makes that association, and it is post-modern. So the article is simply misleading if not incorrect. AguireTS (talk) 14:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One last thing. A 33 degree Freemason (if he were sane) would never claim he was a satguru who experiences constant samadhi (Unity of Existence beyond subject and object) and has condescended to ordinary human awareness to grant enlightenment to disciples. AguireTS (talk) 14:30, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the Meher Baba material should be spun off into its own article, as that material is much more developed. I do know that the Divine Light Mission used the term quite often, but in their case it was mainly as a translation of Satguru, if I understand correctly. Perhaps this article needs a total rewrite, perhaps even going back to a disambiguation page pointing to specific treatments in different articles. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 20:10, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Meher Baba term was its own spin off term, (see here) but someone insisted it be merged in with these religions and societies, most of which either borrow the term from Meher Baba or don't use the term at all as in Sihism, Vedanta, and Sufism. AguireTS (talk) 21:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just checked to see if I'm right and I am. The Divine Light Mission first used the term "perfect master" to describe Hans Ji Maharaj in 1966, long after Meher Baba's discourses appeared in English in 1938 in India and the USA and England using the word "perfect master" prodigiously. This term is really a Meher Baba invention, and the way the article is written that is hidden from the readers for some reason -- giving the impression it is a word in the dictionary we are all aware of or a common Eastern term. It's not. It's a Meher Baba term dating from 1926. AguireTS (talk) 22:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That may be true, but unless we have a source for Meher Bab inventing the term we can't say that. What changes are you proposing for the article? ·:· Will Beback ·:· 22:11, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well at the very least remove the references to Vedanta, Sikhism, Tibetan Buddhism, and Sufism where the term "perfect master" does not appear. If in fact it does appear in substantial conventional literature of those religious groups, then site that source. I can find none. They use their own terms and there are already articles for those terms. Leave the Divine Light Mission, Meher Baba, and the Freemasons who in fact use the term that is the subject of the article. Put Freemasons first, Baba second, Divine Light Mission third. See Hans Ji Maharaj to see that the title is first used in 1966 in the Divine Light Mission (unless someone can show this to be inacurate). AguireTS (talk) 00:38, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The term is used in all the entries on this page, as per the sources provided. See WP:V for more information. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 00:43, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, the earliest mention of "perfect master" was from Parmenides (5th century BC) ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 00:51, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And earlier, yet, in the Mahabaratha, the term Sid-dha is used which is translated as "Perfect Master" ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 00:55, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then why don't you add this information to the article? People ought to know all that. You've said more here about the history of the word and its translations than appears in the article, and appear to have all the sources. So please add this. I can't as I don't have your sources and you do. AguireTS (talk) 11:48, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That seems a reasonable request if Rossi has those books.LittleDoGooder (talk) 20:30, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the DLM to the end - I haven't seen a source that says it started using the term before 1926. It wasn't incorporated until 1960. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 02:37, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hans Ji Maharaj was called as such earlier than 1960. I see if I can find some sources ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:03, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The WP bio indicates that his own guru died in 1936. I'd be surprised if Hans Ji Maharaj was caled "Perfect Master" before then. Nor could the DLM be said to exist before 1936. So chronologially, this entry should follow the entry for Meher Baba, who started using the term in 1926. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 03:16, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In which language Meher Baba wrote Meher Baba's missing book? What was the term he used in that language for "perfect master"? Was it Qutub? When it was first translated as "perfect master"? Maye those that are experts on the subject can provide some answers. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:25, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This doens't answer your questions, but in regard to the chronology of usage, TIME said in 1932:

...pious of any & all sects may soon meet with a long-haired, silky-mustached seer who calls himself Shri (Mr.) Sadguru (Perfect Master) Meher (Compassion) Baba (Father). [1]

I assume they used Meher Baba's translation rather than finding their own Hindi translator. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 03:38, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They use Sadguru, which is the title given to Hans Ji Maharaj in 1936; so it is OK to keep the chronology as is. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 05:47, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The portions of Meher Baba's missing book discovered were in the majority English in his handwriting and are online/or published. I will try to find a photo-image of a page from the original journal that contains the word "perfect master" in English.LittleDoGooder (talk) 11:46, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a screenshot of the fair-copy of Meher Baba's 1926 discourses here copied in the languages as given. This is from page 175 of P-7.pdf searchable at the bottom of this page. File:Page 173 from 1926 notebook.gif]]

Fascinating, thank you. Did he always used "perfect master" alongside qutub or satguru? ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:11, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. As far as I know.LittleDoGooder (talk) 19:21, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought so. These two terms are quite similar in what they mean, even if coming from different regions of the world. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:18, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Satguru comes from sat (true) and guru (teacher). The word qutb means literally pivot or hub (a point around which things orbit). Perfect master means a perfect master. So can you explain what you mean by "quite similar in what they mean?"AguireTS (talk) 15:14, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect Master, satguru, qutb, pir, sarkar, may have different origins, etymologies and are in different languages, but have very similar meanings if not identical. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:23, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fake References

Having checked the referenced sources for several of the entries on this page it turned out that the term "perfect master" did not actually appear. The editor who added them has resigned. If they are replaced please replace with references that have page numbers, and date of translation. Thanks. LittleDoGooder (talk) 01:23, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help us by listing the problem references? Will Beback talk 01:43, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no use of the term perfect master in the Maharbarata. Vedanta uses satguru, which translates as true teacher. Goddard uses the term Bodhisattva. Ismailis use murshid. , etc. There is equivocation here that is not justified. LittleDoGooder (talk) 02:06, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]