Talk:Shirdi Sai Baba movement

Comments

Wieght and tone of the section on Beliefs is not encyclopedic.--Iconoclast.horizon (talk) 00:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Apart from that, this is a completely spurious article. There is no "Shirdi Sai Baba movement" to speak of. Is any such described in reliable/reputable sources? I don't think so. No references are used in the article either. Should we question the notability of this article and/or nominate it for deletion? Ekantik ^talk 02:09, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Ekantik, you talk complete nonsense! You have just made a preposterous claim that there are no followers of Sai Baba of Shirdi. If you want to write rubbish than go somewhere else! Kkrystian 11:37, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid that, in your haste to respond, you did not read what I said properly. I said that there is no movement of Shirdi Sai Baba devotees to speak of, not that he didn't have any followers. Of course he has followers but there is no organised movement. As such, I'm unsure if this article should even exist on Wikipedia, especially since a lot of the material is swiped from the main Sai Baba of Shirdi article. We may be able to salvage some things before we question whether this article should be deleted, but I'm unsure that this article is suitable for Wikipedia if a "movement" doesn't even exist.

As for your accusations of talking nonsense, I'm frankly getting very tired and bored of this behaviour. You have been told several times to remain civil and refrain from personal attacks. You continue to ignore these policies and alienate other editors. Perhaps it is you who could serve Wikipedia in a different area, especially since it doesn't seem you can understand what is being said. Please stop harassing me anyhow, if you cannot take constructive criticism. Ekantik ^talk 17:41, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

It's enough that there is a group of followers with a history and a few distinctive features that unite them all to call it a movement. The fact that it's semi-organised is another matter. Kkrystian 19:55, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I would have to concur with Ekantik. This is like writing an article on the Moses 'movement'. There is no such thing. Just because he was a religious figure and brought down the Ten Commandments there is no movement. The Shirdi 'movement', if you could honestly call it that, was rolled over into the Sathya Sai Baba faction, that's what guru lineage setup is about. You can't just expand this into every area you want to, some constantly changing Sai Baba menu. The man is dead and so is the movement that was associated with him directly and it was absorbed by the man who took his name. Movement used here simply is a bogus term for 'let's write another article'.--Iconoclast.Horizon (talk) 03:08, 6 December 2007 (UTC)\

At least there is the Sansthan, so there can be no doubt that there is a movement. Rigopoulos called it also a cult_(religious_practice), as I glanced thru the book. Other sources on the subject as listed explicitly as such in Rigopoulos book are

1. Rao, Sham D.P. Five contemporary gurus in the shirdi tradition. Bangalore Christian insitute for the study of religion and society 1972.
2. White, Charles, S.J. The Sai Baba Movement: Approaches to the Study of India Saints The Journal of Asian Studies Vol. 31, No. 4 (Aug., 1972), pp. 863-878
3. White, Charles, S.J. "Bhakti as a Religious Structure in the Context of Medieval Hinduism in the ... "Structure and the History of Religions: Some Bhakti Examples. phd dissertation
4. White, Charles, S.J the say baba movenent in The Sai Baba movement : Study of unique contemporary moral and spiritual movement by: Satya Pal Ruhela New Delhi : Arnold-Heinemann, 1985.

I understood from other sources that White lumps the Sathya Sai Baba movement and the Shirdi Sai Baba movement together. (I personally see too little similarities, historical connection, cooperation for doing so.) Andries (talk) 08:15, 8 August 2015 (UTC)