Talk:Brahmo Samaj

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
	This article is maintained by the Indian history workgroup.
More information about this article... ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hindu philosophy, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Hindu philosophy. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Hinduism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Guidelines: Manual of Style - Naming conventions How you can help: Notice board - Discussion board
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance for this Project's importance scale.

Contents 1 Membership numbers 2 Baised and opinionated 3 Leaders of Samaj/What is the Samaj? 4 Recent edits 4.1 Merge request 5 Response 6 Added references and made some revisions

[edit] Membership numbers

Can we include an estimate of the number of members? I Can't find any info on that anywhere. Prater 10:46, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

---

First of all, Debendranath was the father of Rabindranath and leader of Brahmo Samaj, not Dwarakanath. Secondly, I am not sure if atleast The Adi Brahmo Samaj rejected the vedas, the whole ideology was based on Upanishads, which are often consedered parts of Vedas. --ppm 7 July 2005 18:33 (UTC)

---

Raja Ram Mohan Roy was one of the first Indians to visit Europe? what are you guys smoking? --Someones life 01:40, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Baised and opinionated

"Its adherents have returned to traditional hinduism as they realised the hollowness of their new religion when compared to one thousands of years old."

That is absurd and judgmental.

jareer--203.81.213.80 19:39, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Leaders of Samaj/What is the Samaj?

This all seems very simplified. I haven't studied it that much, but my understanding is:

1828 Rammohun Roy founded Brahmo SABHA, followed on his death (1833) by Vidyavagish (NOT DEBENDRANATH)

Then Brahmo Samaj formed when this merged with Debendranath's Tattvabodhini Sabha (unsure on date)

Keshub did not take over, but split from the organisation to form the Brahmo Samaj of India (although this became bigger: the 'Adi' or 'Original' Brahmo declined)

Then the Sadharan Brahmo Samaj split off when Keshub's 14 year old daughter married a 16 year old son of old school Maharajas with polygamy and use of images in worship - this would have been illegal under the Native Marriages Bill that Keshub himself fought for if the Maharaja had been held under it: also they were annoyed by the increasing cult of Keshub as a kind of 'Great Man' prophet figure.

This is from an essay I wrote based on David Kopf The Brahmo Samaj and the Shaping of Modern India Julius Lipner Brahmabandam Upadhyay Manilel Parekh The Brahma Samaj (A short history) [this last is an insider view] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Obvious Child (talk • contribs).

Do you have some published sources that we can cite for the above? ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 16:42, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

As in published on the Internet?

I tend to rely on books.... I could dig up some quotes from them if that helps —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Obvious Child (talk • contribs) 17:44, May 14, 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Recent edits

I welcome all the new additions, but please note that to comply with Wikipedia content policies, material added to articles need to be supported by reliable sources. See WP:V and WP:CITE. As it stands now, most of the material added reads as an essay rather than an encyclopedi article, and may be construed as original research, unless citations are provided. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 16:51, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge request

I agree - I've made a few edits and am suggesting that the pages on Bengal Renaissance and Brahmo Samaj be merged since it is impossible to talk about one with the other, which might help in this respect. -Classicfilms 17:18, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

See discussion here. -Classicfilms 18:22, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Response

Not necessarily, Brahmo Samaj and Bengal Renaissance are different social movements, although they occasionally overlap. Religious revival in Hinduism through Ramakrishna Mission, or through Christian learning in Bengal as well as ushering a spirit of intellectual enquiry and flowering of architecture and literature may not be necessarily linked to the Brahmo Samaj, but they constitute part of the Bengal Renaissance. It is best that they remain separate articles. LordGulliverofGalben

See response here. -Classicfilms 01:48, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Added references and made some revisions

There is something wrong technically. The full edit is not appearing on the article.

I had avoided the references earlier because of my apprehension about copyrights. As these are required, I have done so now and I hope that I am within the copyright limits. If not please advise and I shall have to clip the quotes even further but that would spoil the effect that is required.

P.K.Niyogi 05:31, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

It looks like the formatting problems are linked to the way in which you set up your references - you might want to go back and fix the formatting of your references. If you do that, the full edits should appear. --Classicfilms 06:05, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

The problem is fixed now. There were several instances where <ref/> had been used as a closing tag instead of </ref>. Thanks for the improvements, P.K.Niyogi! — Elembis 08:36, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Elembis - Thanks for fixing up. I shall be careful in future. P.K.Niyogi 14:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I would like to redo some parts of the article making it more encylopaedic from the essay type it is presently in, but am held back by the notices for reference. I request ≈ jossi ≈ to kindly review the notices, now that references have been inserted. -- P.K.Niyogi 03:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)