Talk:Nath/Archive 2

Assumptions about this article

This is a general article about the Naths and the Nath Sampradaya. Details which are specific to one panth or one teacher should go into a separate article about that panth or teacher. Historical facts and beliefs and practices which are common to all panths and teachers are what belongs in this article. If you disagree, please discuss here. —Adityanath 15:41, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Moving discussion from WP:CP

• Nath (history · last edit) from [1]. 71.116.184.140 07:07, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I am the user who added the quote from Shri Gurudev Mahendranath works. I am a member of the copyright committee of the organization (International Nath Order) which holds the copyright. We don't think that there is any question that this usage is allowed under fair use as long as the original works are referenced and linked in the references section. The same article with the same quotes has been submitted by us to several other GFDL sites. To be clear, we are not releasing the quotes under GFDL, we are acknowledging that we consider the use to be fair use. —Adityanath 13:49, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

This is a quote. It might be a little long (I don't think so), but it is clearly indicated as a quote and seems appropriate to the context. Matt 02:33, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I am in agreement with the reasoning and hence I removed Nath from copyright problems. --Gurubrahma 03:06, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

NPOV Discussion

I have to concur that the article is NPOV as it doesn't reflect the full historical context about the Nath Sampradaya but only the POV of one subchapter of a modern sect. Nath Sampradaya in its entirety is a Diaspora of gurus, sects, monasteries & luminaries reaching back to ancient times. This cannot neatly packaged or cataloged. In general there are no specific rules about who can be a guru and who cannot be a guru. Naths are very free style & open ended. Perspectives and biases of modern writers does not accurately reflect the ancient origins of this tradition, which is rich with innumerable texts from well-respected gurus and luminaries, rather than modern western pedants. Hamsacharya dan 04:21, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. Several subsects of Naths are represented. Several different academic sources have been used and cited. Several current Nath sects, both modern and ancient have been represented and their sources cited. Current editor User:Chai Walla and myself have discussed plans to include more material from these reputable academic references. Material so far is neutrallly stated. An nPOV tag is not appropriate for an article which adheres to WP nPOV standard but is simply lacking some information you consider pertinent. Please point out even a single sentence which you consider not to be neutrally stated and why. —Adityanath

For the record, I don't think the article is intentionly biased. It may not be as complete as it could be, but that is something which will be naturally remedied over time. A peek at the edit history shows that it has been significant expanded in the last month or so. There is no reason to believe that this will not continue. ---Baba Louis 20:58, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I will note that *many* people in the Nath community have experienced extensive harrassment from the International Nath Order goons. There is extensive debate about the reality of the chain of intiation claimed by the International Nath Order, and both of the direct inititates of Mahendranath have broken contact with the group based on serious doubts about the behavior of its leaders. One part of that totalitarian effort has been to prevent other groups in America claiming legitimacy, and they are completely hostile to, for example, Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath's people, which is why every time those links are re-added, they are soon re-removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.190.112.142 (talk • contribs) Shivanath

That is false. Every legitimate lineage holding Guru appears to be listed. Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath is completely welcome here, as soon as he or his followers provide the name of his initiator and panth and a source against which to verify the information. That is the general agreement of the editors of this article, who do not all belong to the INO as far as I am aware. If what you say is true, why are their a half-dozen or more Nath gurus listed along with their panth or initiator? See the top of the talk page for the agreed upon requirements for being listed as a Nath Guru on this page, just below. There is no reason to list non-Gurus, and the proof of Guruhood is to be the designated inheritor of the title from the previous lineage holder.

This whole issue has been discussed ad-naseum on the talk page. Check this page and the archives. Siddhanath does not meet the Wikipedia verifiablity requirements. There are no sources other than himself which verify his lineage or parampara. The odd thing is, Kriya Yoga is not and has never been a Nath practice. Ekajati (yakity-yak) 15:48, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Requirements for listing a Nath guru on this page

Clearly, we cannot list every Nath in existance. We can only list Nath Gurus. And to be sure that they are Gurus, we need to have the name of their initiator, their panth or sub-sect, and some reason to believe their received parampara or succession. Self-proclaimed "Naths" need to provide some reason that they should be considered Nath Gurus. —Hanuman Das 02:27, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Hanuman Das - Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath is a Nath Guru who's material is constantly being removed. Furthermore, by this standard, the International Nath Order material should be removed, because we have no evidence of who gave Mahendranath his initiations, nor which Panth he belongs to. While the link from Mahendranath to Kapilnath may be well documented, the link from Mahendranath to Lokanath is entirely speculative and has no evidence or witnesses who will attest to its reality. This debate has long raged in the nath world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.190.112.142 (talk • contribs) Shivanath

Claims by Hamsacharya dan

Hamsacharya dan said in an edit comment,

"you don't need a lineage to be a Nath Siddha. You just need to be God-realized".

As far as I know, this is not true. Yes, you can be a siddha simply by virtue of having siddhis. But to be a Nath you must have a diksha guru, and to be a Nath guru you must have received parampara (i.e. be the designated successor of your own Guru). This is well-known and easily documented. Please provide documentation of the claim above if you wish to insert material based on its alleged truth. Thanks. —Hanuman Das 18:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

[2] here's a link from the Scrolls of Mahendranath website, as one example. See the 3rd and 4th questions near the beginning. Hamsacharya dan 20:19, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

You're misinterpreting it. "If you accept a Navnath Sampradaya teacher as your guru, you join his Sampradaya. Usually you receive a token of his grace—a look, a touch or a word, sometimes a vivid dream or a strong remembrance." It clearly states that you have to accept a sampradaya teacher as your guru!! Presumably someone who has done so can name the guru they accepted and who gave them a token of grace, i.e. diksha. —Hanuman Das 20:46, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

You can't get any more clear than is written [3]:

Question: How does one become a Navnath? By initiation or by succession?

Maharaj: Neither. the Nine Masters’ tradition (Navnath Parampara) is like a river—it flows into the ocean of reality and whoever enters it is carried along.

Question: Does it imply acceptance by a living master belonging to the same tradition?

Maharaj: Those who practice the sadhana of focusing their minds on “I am” may feel related to others who have followed the same sadhana and succeeded. they may decided to verbalize their sense of kinship by calling themselves Navnaths, It gives them the pleasure of belonging to an established lineage.

What are you stating is in reference to joining a sampradaya. But Maharaj makes it clear here that you do not need to join a sampradaya to be a Nath. YGS doesn't claim to be part of a sampradaya, but he claims to be a Nath, just as is written above. Don't make up your own interpretations now, and stop trying to hijack the Nath sampradaya. If you want - get a non-partisan 3rd party to comment. Hamsacharya dan 00:52, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but this is certainly a minority opinion. Like Vajrayana, the Nath tradition is an initiatory one, a succession. If you have no guru, you are not a member of it. Perhaps Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath is simply claiming to be a "Master" in Sanskrit? As I read Nisgardatta, he is simply saying that no highly formal initiation is required, but he also says clearly that a student of the tradition must have a living teacher who the student views as their guru. This is consistant with the Indian and Himalayan traditions. But saying that you need not have any guru at all? That's not what he's saying.... -Ekajati 01:20, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath is, I believe, a member of the Dharma Panth. Anyone wishing to confirm this should discuss the matter of his lineage with Hamsa Yoga Sangh. I believe that several parties checked into this matter about two years ago, including Shri Lalita Mataji (Mahendranath's direct initiate, and Kaplilnath's initiator) and somebody from the International Nath Order. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.190.112.142 (talk • contribs)

Actually, no. Hamsacharya dan claimed for a while that YGS had been initiated by Raja Sundernath, the Mahant of the Goraknath Temple at Gorakpur, who was indeed of the Dharamnath sect. [4] However, a reliable account was found that showed that Mahant Sundernath died in 1924. Since YGS wasn't born until 1944, this claim proved to be impossible. Hamsacharya Dan checked with Hamsa Yoga Sangh and returned saying that he had been mistaken, and then simply started claiming that YGS needed no initiator or lineage. At which point his name was removed as he was clearly not the successor Guru of the Dharamnath parampara. He is of course welcome to be listed as soon as some citation is provided to support that he received parampara from a living Nath guru. —Hanuman Das 22:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Unsigned comment

There are entries and disputations on this page

http://www.nathsociety.org/ember/view_forum.php?id=1&PHPSESSID=96b5a544b5470acf1b8252b135fe15bd

which suggests questions over the neutrality of authors of this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.144.45.74 (talk • contribs)

The ANS website [[5]] website contains little reliable information related to the Nath Sampradaya whatsoever. You might learn more by viewing a tribute site to the person responsible for the creation of the ANS and its website. It is pretty funny and only includes actual quotes by the special genius responsible for its formation. [[6]]. I would suggest that you read the whole mess, including page two. You should be informed if you are proposing this as any type of "source" for an encyclopedia. -Chai Walla 07:21, 3 July 2006 (UTC)