User talk:Miotroyo~enwiki

Hi! Please leave me messages here. ----Miotroyo (talk) 21:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help?

Hola amigo!

I am preparing to creat a new article "Buddhism in Mexico" but I need your helps to find some sources, articles, etc...everything about Buddhism or Buddhists in your country Mexico. Because as far as I know that nowadays, many Mexicans have converted to Buddhism from the presentations of White American Buddhists and from the influence of culture of Chinese, Japanese communities ar living in Mexico City; over tens of Buddhist centers have built (it exclusive tens of small private Chinese temples or pagodas where they worship Buddhist and Taoist deities everyday). Please help me find some reliable media sources. Muchas gracias!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 21:34, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK! Because I am the author of Buddhism in Brunei. But could you help me to find some Spanish informations and local media about Buddhism in Mexico. I don't know much Spanish but I think you could find some things here:

http://www.buddhanet.net/wbd/country.php?country_id=3

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 21:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! you mean if I can help you with Spanish sources, ok, I'll try, give me some time.--Miotroyo (talk) 21:45, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course! Maybe I will creat Buddhism in Mexico after 1 month at least. Is that enough time for you?

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 21:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I want to know more about History of Budhism in Mexico (how Buddhism came to Mexico?) and The development of Budhism in Mexico; these are main points but as more as better.

http://www.buddhanet.net/wbd/country.php?country_id=3

Best wishes to you and your family!

Muchas gracias! Adiós!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 21:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's enough time! Are there already any articles on Buddhism in other Latin American countries?

Miotroyo (talk) 21:52, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are some examples:

And you can visit my User Page, I've created over ten article of Budhism in some countries [1].

Bye! See ya!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 21:59, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it could help.

Are you living in Mexico City?

First Mexican Noviceat the Dhamma Vihara

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 22:13, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hist ory of Buddhism

Thanks for asking me about this. The point is that what was translated into Persian was a version of a Sanskrit collection of fables probably originally called the Pancatantra. Some of these stories are certainly found also in the standard Jataka collection. The question is, what was their original source? If you can find a reliable source that says they originated as Jataka stories before they appeared in any other form, then you can say that in the article, but even then it would be misleading to say (the) Jataka stories were translated, because they don't appear as jatakas in the translation. Peter jackson (talk) 09:56, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of atheists

Hello Miotroyo. Thanks for your question. I do not doubt that Damián A. Fernández Beanato is an atheist. Still, it must be confirmed by a reliable source. Online forums aren't typically reliable sources. If a newspaper or magazine quotes him as saying he's an atheist, that would be good enough. He should not be identified as an atheist unless a reliable source says he is, especially since he is a living person. Cheers. Nick Graves (talk) 02:54, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ref: Hi

Sorry, it slipped, I'm usually after them myself (accents). I.m actually User:Moebiusuibeom-en but have problems signing in, cheers 64.237.165.247 (talk) 02:37, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing the date at Robot

I transferred the fix up to the first occurrence of R.U.R. in the article, and deleted the second occurrence. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 20:56, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad to be of help. By the way, I always believed that Asimov had been the first in using the word in its modern sense--Miotroyo (talk) 23:20, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's true for the word "robotics", and I guess it's true for "robot" only if you think that R.U.R and the discussions it engendered were not about "modern" robots, but it was certainly about the concept of machine-men. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 12:19, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Saivism

Dear Miotroyo:

Thanks for the message and making me the expert on all branches of Hinduism. How did you know that I would know? Saivities believe that God, expressed as Shiva is basically without form, attributeless, like the God of Judaeo-Christian traditions or Allah in Muslim traditions. But for the grace of human devoteees, He appears with form, in order for us to concentrate. (note, like Jesus (form) and God (formless) in Christianity)

The question of non-dualism and dualism permeates all denominations of Hinduism, not just Saivism. It's a very important issue, like the problem of evil in all religious traditions.

Dualism holds that God and the universe are separate and distinct entities. (see Dvaita for example.

Non-dualism or Monism holds that the universe and God are one and the same, but due to Maya, the individual soul feels separate from God. (see Advaita and more specifically, but I believe that Kashimir Saivism holds this view..

QUALIFICATION ADDED TODAY: tHIS IS ONLY TRUE OF ADVAITA HOLDING THE VIEW OF MAYA; KASHIMIR SHAIVISM, A SHAIVITE THEISTIC SCHOOL DOES NOT BELIEVE IN MAYA. ADVAITA IS NOT A SHAIVITE MONIST SCHOOL; IT IS ONE OF MANY MONISTIC SCHOOLS IN HINDUISM BROADLY.

The middle ground is qualified non-dualism, where the universe is part of God but God is more than the universe. (panentheism and Vishishtadvaita. Note that Vishishtadvaita is generally associated with Vaishnavism.

Hope this helps.

Clarification

Dear Miotroyo:

Let me clarify; I had rushed my answer the early morning. Hinduism is divided into four branches, Shaivism, Vaishnavism, Shaktism and Smartism, primarily. see Hindu denominations There are many non-dualistic and dualistic schools in all of the branches. There is no Advaitan Shaivite. There are many monistic schools in Hinduism and a monistic school , such as Advaita which does not focus on one aspect of God, but considers the five forms of God, to be equivalenn. more details here: http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/2003/10-12/44-49_four_sects.shtml

However, Advaita is not a Shaivite school as it considers Shiva to be one of five principals forms of God and not the only supreme God; It is the only branch of Hinduism that does not fixate on one concept of God, unlike Vaishnavism or Shaivism. There are many theistic monistic schools in Shaivism; see,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saivism and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_Shaivism These monistic schools are distinguished from the monistic school of Advaita in that they consider Shiva to be the supreme God but attributelss; by constrast, Advaita believes in monism but considers five forms of God (Vishnu, Shiva, Devi, Ganesh and Surya to be equivalent since Brahman is by nature attributeless;

From the Saivism wikipedia article, Saivism strongly leans towards monism but does have dualists; There is only branch of qualified non-dualists, such as the Lingyata sect in Saivism; by contrast, Vaishnavism generally dot lean towards monism (only one Vaishnavite school is monistic, see Vallabha Acharya; it leans towards qualified non-dualism, dualism and see also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achintya_Bheda_Abheda, which gives a brief summary of dualism and monism but distinguishes/

Here are some brief notes on differences between monists and dualists in Shaivism:

On one side were the monistic theists (monists), who stress the ultimate oneness of man and God, and on the other stood the pluralistic theists, who hold that God, soul and world are eternally separate. Herein are the positions of two subtlely but crucially different views of the cosmos and man's relationship with God. The debate is a living expression of the classical discussion about the Divine, one that is common to every religious tradition, and one that every seeker will benefit from exploring.

Just as there are three orthodox schools of thought within Vedanta philosophy (nondualism, qualified nondualism and dualism), there are two within Saiva Siddhanta (monism and pluralism (i.e., dualism)). The purpose of this resource section is to present the monistic Saiva Siddhanta philosophy -- sometimes known as Advaita Siddhanta or Advaita Ishvaravada -- and to juxtapose it briefly with pluralistic Saiva Siddhanta or Dvaita Siddhanta. This comparison is important because the pluralistic teachings are widespread, so much so that many authoritative texts proclaim Saiva Siddhanta to be wholly pluralistic and completely overlook the monistic school, which is actually far older, though less well known. Between these two schools there continues a philosophical debate that has persisted for twenty centuries and more about whether God and soul are ultimately one or two.

from

http://www.himalayanacademy.com/resources/books/dws/dws_r4_monism-pluralism.html

“Pluralistic Siddhantins hold that God, souls and world--Pati, pashu and pasha--are three eternally coexistent realities. By creation, this school understands that Siva fashions existing matter, maya, into various forms. In other words, God, like a potter, is the efficient cause of the cosmos. But He is not the material cause, the "clay" from which the cosmos is formed. Pluralists hold that any reason for the creation of pasha--anava, karma and maya--whether it be a divine desire, a demonstration of glory or merely a playful sport, makes the Creator less than perfect. Therefore, pasha could never have been created. Monistic Siddhantins totally reject the potter analogy. They teach that God is simultaneously the efficient, instrumental and material cause. Siva is constantly emanating creation from Himself. His act of manifestation may be likened to heat issuing from a fire, a mountain from the earth or waves from the ocean. The heat is the fire, the mountain is the earth, the waves are not different from the ocean. The Vedas proclaim, "In That all this unites; from That all issues forth. He, omnipresent, is the warp and woof of all created things”

http://www.himalayanacademy.com/resources/books/dws/dws_mandala-30.html

(Discussion of monism(non-dualism) and pluralistic theism (dualism)

From http://www.himalayanacademy.com/resources/books/dws/dws_table_of_contents.html

(Good book on Shaivism by western convert; gives a brief overview of Hinduism)

http://www.dlshq.org/download/download.htm

http://www.dlshq.org/download/lordsiva.htm

(specifically, Lord Siva and His worship, written by Swami Sivananda, an Advaita scholar and Smarta follower

In passing, Hinduism contains four branches which are complex and distinct. I was born in NY of Indian parents so I understand "both worlds." and learned from my parents and my own.

Have a great weekend.

Raj2004 (talk) 00:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

President

I realize that, but the other version of the article is simply false. An unconventional format that presents accurate information is far better than a conventional format that presents inaccurate information. Everyking (talk) 16:24, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The title of "President of Nepal" does not yet exist. There are plans to create a Presidency, but one does not currently exist. Everyking (talk) 16:31, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Todo Mafalda

The title of the book I referred to is "Todo Mafalda". You can see pictures of its cover in http://www.pisitoenmadrid.com/images/comic/mafaldanl7.jpg

Please check what you believe you know before editing Wikipedia. And do not edit people's comments on talk pages; that is incredibly rude and dishonest.

I was referring to a specific book, one I have on my shelf. Your change of my words has me citing a book I don't have.

Toda Mafalda has been published since 1993 by Ediciones de la Flor in Argentina; Todo Mafalda is published by Editorial Lumen in Spain-- my copy was published in 2003. Zompist (talk) 22:48, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Madeleine y vos

Flaco, lo tuyo es patético. ¿El caso Madeleine McCann no te parece notable pero vos sí? Excelente periodista debés ser. Realmente toda esta historia me resultó insólita. ¡Incluirte como habitante célebre de Villa Devoto junto a Maradona! Si me llego a cruzar con vos en alguna redacción alguna vez, me voy a reir mucho. --PeterCantropus (talk) 04:00, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Damifb for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. PeterCantropus (talk) 11:18, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And blocked. seicer | talk | contribs 12:48, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Miotroyo. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Miotroyo~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

01:50, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed

This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: Special:GlobalRenameRequest. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

16:24, 22 April 2015 (UTC)