Talk:Sant Mat

Nicely Done

Having been the principle author on the old article (now turned into the contemporary sant mat article) I am impressed. Nice work, Jossi. Dave 17:03, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

New article

New article, more material to come soon. See Talk:Contemporary Sant Mat movement. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 23:58, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

When i enter "Sant Mat" at the search field at Wikipedia, just the new article appears. While the old article is gone to "contemporary sant mat movement" with all it's contributions and it's own historical paragraphs. Not even a link is placed. This article is reserched by you alone and replaces another one to be pushed into a corner: That is hard to understand. You conclude the development of Sant Mat on the use of Poems in Guru Grand Sahib, but also excerpts of Gita and so on you will find in this. You feared that your research might be looked at as an original one. I wouldn't have a problem with even that, if it was properly done. Let me give you an example: It were scholars that found out that the suras in Koran where sorted by lenght and not chronologically as one would expect. Not by just reading one book but by researching on and on( a big problem for orthodox islam for it shakes their fundamental belief). So there are contradictions in the suras and the rule is, the latter one neutralizes the former one. But which is the former one? To orthodox muslims say the one that comes later in the book. And one sura was cut in two by a khalif and added a new title. How could that be if the Koran is not changeable? A lot of questions. Similar here. If you want to hint a conclusion that seems obvious from your sight, please add it, with great caution and name it as that and find a reference of someone with the same conclusion. So what do you think of that? Is it, because this work is still in progress, but why replace the old version then right away? Thomas h 15:07, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, Thomas. Note that I am not trying to hint any specific conclusions, please assume good faith. I am just providing a stub article on the historicity of Sant Mat, based on 4 books that I researched, as I proposed on the talk page. The article is just a stub to be developed further by whoever wants to. I forgot to add the Contemporary Sant Mat movement article as a see also (although I added it to the Category:Sant Mat). We need a "See also" section and it can go there. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 16:54, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Cool. Which books? Guru Grant Sahib, Advait Mat, The Sants: Studies in A Devotional Tradition of India ,.... ? I see you are heavy engaged. I have the information from a former premie who joined Pir Vilayat Khan quite a while, that he was using a combination of music and light meditation, arms up and the little fingers were pointing to the third eye. Surat Shabd has to join in somewhere, i think. And to find out, how it came that Murshid i Kamil "survived" as "Perfect Master" e.g. down to the branch of Kirpal Singh would be very interesting. Thomas h 17:19, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

The books I used as sources are listed on the sources section. I have not finished reading them, so more is to come. Regarding Kirpal Sing and Radha Soami Satsang Beas, these can be discussed in their respective articles≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 17:35, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

here is a link that might be helpful for further investigation [1], concerning some hints about the beginning. Thomas h 22:12, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

That website contains information from the view point of the Baba_Sawan_Singh/Kirpal Sing tradition (Radhasoami Satsang Beas), very similar to the narrative presented in the Contemporary Sant Mat movement article. What we want in this article is an historical perspective of Sant Mat, and not a specific viewpoint of a movement influenced by Sant Mat. These can be discussed on their own articles. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 02:05, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

i wouldn't overrule a source just because the concluded lineage represents the Sawan Singh line. Since the sources are partly the same as the one's you have found, there might be more useful hints as well. If you stand with a certain prejudice to that or you try to perceive a certain outcome, then of course the best thing you could do, push it into some corner. If you say the Contemporary Sant Mat movement just portays that special lineage, it would be helpful for other contributors if you'd lay out what and where exactly this lineage comes off a more common perspective of Sant Mat. Thomas h 11:36, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I am not excluding that source, why would you think so? What I said is that it reflects the viepoint of the Radha Soami. The views of Baba_Sawan_Singh/Kirpal Sing tradition (Radhasoami Satsang Beas) are and can be further presented in these articles. Rather than so may discussions on form, it would be better if you can help in editing these articles. After all, that is what counts. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 13:03, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Also, please note that we are not looking in this article at a "more common perspective of Sant Mat", but looking at Sant Mat from its historicity. Lineages and sects that where influenced by Sant Mat are discussed in their respective articles such as Sikhism, Radha Soami, Radhasoami Satsang Beas, Advait Mat (still to be written), etc. as well as the myriad of articles about the gurus in these lineages. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 13:08, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Lineages and sects that where influenced by Sant Mat are discussed in their respective articles such ..., sorry i don't get it right. That implies that there is a "pure" form of Sant Mat, parallel existing from which all the other branches derive from. I don't see any way how this can be confirmed. There is so much blending of religious and cultural aspects already before the advent of Sant Mat. And even now aday we have still developments of blending Radhasoami/Sant Mat/Buddhist groups or have a look at Eckankar for example. Thomas h 19:54, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

That is why this article deals with the historicity and origins of Sant Mat, e.g. the original Sants from which the movement is believed to have originated and the main aspects of their beliefs. Then, any and all derivations or influenced movements are being dealt with in their respective articles. Otherwise this article will become a mishmash of Sufism, Sikhism, Radha Soami, Advait Mat, contemporary movements such as Eckankar, MasterPath, etc., etc. with the sometimes competing retrospective interpretations of Sant Mat as presented by each one of these religions or movements. Those interpretations/adaptations, etc. can should be discussed in their own articles. As an example of how this works, see Christianity. It presents the central beliefs and tenets, the historical context and the main branches, all in a very compact article. Then there are hundreds of articles on the different denominations (see for example List of Christian denominations) and hundreds more articles on people/places/beliefs, etc. (see Category:Christianity). Now, if you have any material that can be cited that provides some historical context such as religiuos/cultural aspects that influenced these Sants, these will be very welcome. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 21:14, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, i don't know, have you got the origin of the word "Sant Mat"? What language is it anyway? And, did Mira Bai for example considered herself as Sant Mat? Probably not, the same with Kabir and Nanak i guess. Someone must have created that term and started to group several saints ot holy people into it. I think that are basic interesting things. In contrast to christianity were we know or believe to know what the joining point is. We often have a claiming heritage with religious groups and even there must be some starting point and a reason to group such individuals as Sant Mat in behind. Thomas h 15:00, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't know the answers to these questions. Maybe you can help with the research and find out the answers yourself. I am using sources to provide an historical context and information about a group of people that are called Sants and their views that are called "Sant Mat". As I said, there is more to come (I am mid way reading several books on the subject), but I have a full-time job and also committed to fight vandalims against wikipedia and that takes time as well. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 15:33, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

"Sant Mat" is in Hindi and means literally "the point of view of the Sants" according to Linda Woodhead's Religion in the Modern World: Traditions and Transformations .≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 16:14, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

ok i found that to , the "Mat" part is common to other groups but what does "Sant" mean(i really wonder if it derived from european saint/sankt/sanct)? Thomas h 18:30, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

According to the sources I am consuting, the correct translation of Sant Mat means "the point of view of the Sants", "Sant" is very similar to the English meaning, along the lines of "spiritual teacher". Some Hinduist sects and contemporary movements that derive from Sant Mat prefer to use other translations of "Sant Mat' such as "the path of the Masters", "The Way of the Saints and Mystics", "Teachers of the Second Transcendental Path", "Holy path", and many other variations. Others even use it interchangeably with Surat Shabd, confusing both terms as being the same thing, when actually it is not the case. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 21:19, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

an astonishing matter indeed. I will also try research the meaning concerning the heritage of Sant out of the language. Mira Bai for example doesn't mention surat shabd. You may interprete it into it, when poetry tells about celestial music, but her focus point was bhakti. On the other hand, Mira Bai was once declared to be part of the Sant Mat, though this may be in question and hard to proof in reality. Concerning the Advait Mat, we have the surat shabd mentioned in the chapter Sant Mat, besides bhakti as a way to advance spiritualy. Thomas h 23:09, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Advait Mat is a subject that I am still studying. I found very little info besides the book Paramhansa Advait Mat published by a group that has an Ashram in Nagli (Utar Pradesh) where the samadhi of Swarupanand is located. The only historical thing I know about Advait Mat is that is associated with the traditional and legendary lineages of the dasnami sannyasin through Adi Shankaracharya (Sankara as he is more commonly known, was the the first person to consolidate the principles of Advaita. Note that Advait is the Hindi version of the Sanskrit Advaita, meaning "singular" or "not two" ). ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 00:19, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

the original Advaita covers the view of the unity between Atma and Brahman, reyling heavily on the practice to distinguish between the eternal and non-eternal world. In the Advait Mat we probably have (at least) a blending of Advaita and Sant Mat Thomas h 06:22, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

You can wish it is that simple... Advait Mat is not a blending of Sant Mat and Advaita vedanta... We are, again, confusing several elements: individuals that have a common background around Bhakti and God as a inner experience of sublime love (the Sants), groups that where influenced by these individuals some of which become large religions (Shuch as Sikhism), groups and splinter groups such as Radhasoami, and restrospective lineages that thse groups use as not always historically accurate devices to state their belonging to a certain tradition. All this is most definitively original research, and unless I can find some scholars that corroborate my interpretations it will not make it to any of the articles... ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 15:27, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

sure, i didn't mean it that strict. It is a development hard to follow. We sure have in this development a revitalisation of certain ancient path, technics and behaviour. Thomas h 19:13, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

found some hints concerning a northern and southern development, differences and things they have in common at [2] with a lot of footnotes and much more interesting views. It is worth to be taken into consideration i think. Thomas h 10:06, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes. There are tow Sant traditions, one in te North and one in the South. Most people (and scholars) refer to the North Sants. I am gathering a lot of material, and trying to summarize for the article in the next week or so, and as time permits. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 14:41, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Doubtful opinions have to be attributed

The article states that only the Sant Mat was able to cross boundaries between Hindus and Muslims, but what about Shirdi Sai Baba who is generally not considered as belonging to the Sant Mat. It seems that this is simply untrue. Andries

The are atributed, Andries. That is what sources are for. Note that I do not intend to write in each sentence "according to X and according to B", as long s there is a reference in the sentence itself. As for yor issue with Sai Baba, note that this article is not about contemporrary Sant Mat, or by groups that consider themselves or claim to be from the Sant Mat tradition, but about the historicity of Sant Mat. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 14:56, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Everything has to be attributed excepts facts of which there are few. You cannot state assertions as if they were facts when they are not. I admit that this article deals with Sant Mat, but the case of Shirdi Sai Baba proves that Lipner is wrong. Andries 15:02, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Everything in this article, each sentence is attributed by the sources indicated at the end of each sentence. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 15:10, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Writing this article

If any of you want to collaboarate in writing this article, you are most welcome. But please do not expect me to do all the work and then complain about it. Do some research, go to the library, bring some sources. Thank you. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 14:51, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

If this article deals with the history of Sant Mat then why does it state "The Sant tradition is the only one in medieval and modern India which has successfully crossed some barriers between Hindu and Muslim blocks"? You could also re-name it in History of Sant Mat. I admit that I do not know much about the topic and hence I only made very minor modifications to this article. Andries 15:06, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

The "modern" in that phrase is frpm Lipner's book, in which he asserts that the influence of the medieval Sants is still felt in today's India. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 15:11, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Eventually when the article is completed, we could decide how to name the article. Most probably we will end up with a Sant Mat article that starts with the historical aspects of Sant Mat, with the inclusion ummaries of related articles such as Sikhism, Radhasoami,Contemporary Sant Mat movement, etc. That could be one way, and surely may be other ways, but it is too early now to know. Let's get the basic article in place first, there is a lot of material to add. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 16:02, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Offensive/non-neutral

Writer is obviously a practicer. Article is non-neutral.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.79.148.120 (talk • contribs) Pjacobi 11:17, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Please explain. This article is about historical Sant Mat, the modern groups claiming its heritage are at Contemporary Sant Mat movement. --Pjacobi 11:18, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Please note that I am not a "practicer". Also note that the article is based on detailed research and by providing sources for the assertions made in the article. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 16:56, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Edits by anon user:203.110.81.18

I removed your edit as follows...

"Sant Mat is literally translated from Hindi as "The Way of the Sants" or "The Path of the Sants". The Sants referred to are the Sant Satgurus, the avatars (or incarnations) of the Supreme Being (emanating from the Spiritual Regions)"

...because it does not provide a source for that assertion of fact. If you find such a source you could write something along the lines of: XYZ disagrees with this translation of Sant Mat, asserting instead that Sant Mat refers to the Sant Satgurus, the avatars of the supreme being . ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 16:56, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I always thought that 'Mat' means path or way. Andries

There is a good source for this and it is on line, so I'll add that. I think even Jossi will be satisfied. Sevadar 01:13, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment from that "anonymous contributor" whose post was deleted

Guys, do you realise the consequence of this kind of circuitous thinking? If we admit only material that is "referenced", that has a "source", then we are irrevocably limiting the bounds of our discussion. Nothing new can or will be said, unless it manages to somehow slip in in between some old, referenced material. I thought that was the whole point of a venture like this (this Wiki stuff), that people who have something to say get to say if unfettered by all kinds of unnecessary rules. (Although I do agree, vandalism will certainly be an important issue.)

Incidentally, Jossi, as regards this post, you can put back what I'd written. In this case at least, I know what I'm talking about. (You were good enought to keep--although edited--my definition of a related term, which I'd put in yesterday as the same time I did this.)

I'm new to this site, and still amn't quite sure how the whole thing works (who decides, and how, what to keep in and what to keep out), but I'm liking it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.110.81.18 (talk • contribs)

Welcome to Wikipedia! Please read my comments below. I would also encourage you to get a user name (is free). I have posted some pointers in your talk page.≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 15:51, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Fetishism for sources?

Let me elaborate what I mean. This fetishism for sources and referencing may have been fine a hundred, or fifty, or twenty years back, but no more.

I put down what I put down on my own steam. Now, instead of that, had I published this as part of an article in a newspaper or magazine (which I sometimes do), and then someone else had quoted my article, then hey! you have a sourced, referenced material in front of you.

And the internet emphasizes this trend. What stops me from posting this onto a web page, perhaps even a fresh wiki article, and then getting my views an entry into the hallowed portals of referenced material.

My point is, let all statements, views, observations, stand on their own two feet. The fact that something has a "source" does not in any way add weight to it, and the fact that something isn't source doesn't detract from its value. (Not, that is, unless you use a closed universe of sources -- not practicable at all in this forum.)

What I'm driving at is, this source-fetishism is plain bull. An unsourced view is risky (it needs to be verified), but if you assume that just because a view is sourced, you can let loose your guard, you are making a very big mistake, a BASIC mistake.

This emphasis on sources simply obfuscates a very simple situation. I will go so far as to say that this source-fetishism is the result of intellectual laziness. EVERY idea needs to be examined critically. (Unless we choose to go back to the earlier universe of a closed set of sources--that may or may not be desirable, but at least it is consistent, practicable, with every forum (wiki, e.g.) deciding on its own closed user source set--but to simply accept ANY source (any book, any "author") is plain inconsistent, absurd, intenable.

A bit of a tangent from what we were originally discussing, I'm afraid, but makes sense, wouldn't you agree? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.110.81.18 (talk • contribs)

Dear Anon, I appreciate you candid comments. Note that Wikipedia is a project that is based on some principles, some of which are non-negotiable. As what you say is something that many new users say when faced for the first time with Wikipedia, I would encourage you to read the following articles to learn about the pillars upon which Wikipedia is built:

• Wikipedia:Verifiability
• Wikipedia:No original research
• Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
• Wikipedia:Reliable_sources

Once you have read these and you have gained un uderstanding of Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not I would be happy to engage you in a discussion about this, or other articles. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 15:49, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

5 main planes?

I removed the material added about "5 main planes". Please provide some context and sources for these. As these stood, it was incomprehensible and lacked context. Thanks. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 16:33, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

This article contradicts what I know

The article lumps together people that were never associated with each other, though in definition states that they were loosely associated. I do not know enough about the subject to improve it, but I would advise readers not to believe what is written in this article. I suspect that as in the case of so many other Indian religious movements, this article is partially based on romanticized idealistic legendary portrayals of India's (religious) past. Andries 12:49, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

This article is based on excellent sources that I invite you to read. I have these books and what I read is that the experts think otherwise. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 15:16, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

If you have other sources that I may have missed, you are most welcome to improve the article. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 16:18, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I would also say that mnaking statements such as "I would advise readers not to believe what is written in this article" to be an unacceptable statement. Either you accept the research work and the sources provided, or provide alternative viewpoints. 16:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I continue to be very skeptical. Dutch language sources (Schouten) that I have do not assert that there was (loose) association between the persons mentioned in this article. I think my statement is fine because it may help others to improve this article who have more time than I. May be others can do the effort to find alternative sources. Andries 18:06, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome to be as skeptical as you want to be. I consulted the most authoritative sources on this subject, and researched the subject quite substantially. I still believe your comment shows lack of respect of the work of others and in violation of the policy of WP:AGF.≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 18:10, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

You should rename this section "This contradicts what I don't know". :) ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 18:11, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I do assume your good faith. It just contradicts what I know about the great bhakti names, like Tukaram and Mirabai. There was no association between them. Everybody can be seriously wrong. Andries

Sure. That can happen, but saying that "I would advise readers not to believe what is written in this article" is different. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 18:48, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Jossi has done an excellent job in documenting historical Sant Mat. I think he glosses over its importance to Sikhism - Kabir is an essential read for every Sikh as he and all the other Saints mentioned appear in the Guru Granth Sahib - but Jossi does at least touch on Guru Nanak and even quotes some of his poetry. It is hard to make clear how such poetry happens in a religious context (in the same way the Holy Koran is poetry) and is explicitly not poetry in our sense. None-the-less, Jossi's scholarship is excellent and very well explicates the main thrust which is a Bhakti movement begun with Kabir. I have added a hint some people consider this tradition to continue and I trust he will not mind this. Sevadar 01:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words, Sevadar. It would be wonderful if you can expand by adding a section dedicated to the impact of the Sants on Sikhism. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Roots External Links

I moved these over from the contemporary sant mat movements article as IMHO they are more appropriate here. Sevadar 23:47, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Good call, Sevadar. Thanks. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 23:52, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

:I meant that it is better to keep them there. This is an article about historical Sant Mat. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Kept just one EL per sant. The see also section is much better for finding out more, than these links... ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Deletion?

The material in the lead and the material about the etymology is based in excellent sources. Please do not delete. You may want to add additional material with other viewpoints, if you wish. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 14:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

False

The article is loosely connected facts , which if repaired would emerge as Bhakti movement. The sant mat is a tradition, which is an inseperable part of Bhakti movement. It cannot exist on it's own.

The association of this tradition with modern day movements is wrong, seemingly promoted by the pioneers of such movements.Ajjay (talk) 10:05, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Quality rating

This article definitely does not qualify as an "A" class article. First, A class can only be given by an independent reviewer, not a regular editor of the article. Second, it's not nearly detailed, formatted, or edited well enough to be A class. Note, for instance, that there are no other articles at A class in WikiProject Spirituality. To be honest I'm not even sure this deserves B class, but it's not such a big deal. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:03, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, sorry. But now can you give the right class and importance to the article? --GurDass (talk) 13:21, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

See also

Could someone who knows the subject better please go through and trim the See Also section? Only very closely related articles belong there, not just any random Indian spiritual movement that occurred at the same time or had some vague connection. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:14, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

EXternal links

We need to significantly cut down the external links. Are any of those links connected to official, authorized Sant Mat organizations? Any that are not should be removed. And if they're all "official", we need to pick out the best 2 or 3 and delete the rest, per WP:LINKFARM. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:18, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Odd link in read also section

I noticed an anonymous edit to the Further reading section made a while back that seems out of place. This link has shown up on a couple of other pages connected with this material that makes me suspect that is is somewhat SPAM related.

Here is a link to the history diff. for the RSSB link.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.75.184.208 (talk) 14:06, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Help needed on Kirpal Singh

I would appreciate additional editors to weigh in on a dispute regarding Kirpal Singh#Legacy and succession. (Article history) (Relevant talk section) Sondra.kinsey (talk) 13:16, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

@Sondra.kinsey:

What help you are looking for? Haven't I explained you the importance of information you wanted to remove? You haven't reply anything. What exactly you'd like to change and WHY? You said you have no personal interest. So what is your point, if you are not familiar with this topic? I see you are very active and good in other many topics. Good luck in what you are the best. Thank you and take care. AlexShabd

Semi-protected edit request on 16 October 2022

In the sentence Sant Mat Was, change, "Was to Is" Sauhum (talk) 19:37, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. You'll need to provide sources showing that this is still an active movement. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:38, 17 October 2022 (UTC)