Talk:Meher Baba

No Discussion

Meher Spiritual Center, Samadhi of Meher Baba, and Involution (Meher Baba) were all redirected by one editor without discussion. Is this how Wikipedia works now? Dazedbythebell (talk) 12:11, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Just brought back the burial site article, it seems an important article in the Wikipedia Meher collection. If the other two bold moves are controversial you are free to revert. Another seemingly important page to the collection is Silence Day, where a deletion request is still ongoing. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:04, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

The burial shrine page was deleted again and I brought it back and there's been some grumbling, so I opened up a discussion at its talk page. I'm not a follower, but would think that this page about Baba's burial site would be important to them and an attempt to save it would at least be worth discussing. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:36, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

• You forgot to mention that several others had been deleted at AfD recently or are up for deletion, such as God-realization (Meher Baba) which has been nominated for deletion and is well into its relisting period. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:36, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
• The God-realization page has been deleted. Dazedbythebell (if you are still here), maybe you can work up a summary of the page (just ask for it back from an admin) to put on both the Baba page and the book page. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:38, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Gentle note

I see that there has been discussion about the reliability of sources. Just to say that I'm adding some content and referencing sources which as far as I can tell are reliable and independent. I'm happy to be corrected if mistaken; I just want to improve the article, and not looking to step on any toes. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 13:36, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Just to say that a lot of my new content might fall foul of WP:OVERCITE, but this is just to allay any concerns about sourcing and I intend for them to be rearranged neatly in the future. These citations can be used elsewhere in the article too. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 06:05, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Avatar

I propose a minor change in the opening sentence in the lead paragraph. It currently says "Meher Baba . . . was an Indian spiritual master who said he was the Avatar, or God in human form, of the age." There is no doubt Baba said he was the Avatar. It is in many sources. However, the way it is now worded is misleading to a cold reader because Baba taught that every person is God in human form. In fact every bug is God in bug form in his teaching. It's his whole theme. God-realization is the goal, not becoming God which we all already are. So, I looked for how Baba actually worded what he meant in his Discourses. On p. 268 of the current edition it says "This new influx of the creative impulse manifests, through the medium of a divine personality, an incarnation of God in a special sense-the Avatar." More than one person has told me that this use of the phrase "God in a special sense" is significant. Therefore, I propose changing the opening sentence to, "Meher Baba . . . was an Indian spiritual master who said he was the Avatar, or God in a special sense, of the age." Or some such modification that clarifies this important distinction. Dazedbythebell (talk) 15:46, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Obvious lie in note 140

I'd like to point to a piece of blatant misinformation in the purported citation from Brill's New Age Handbook. In note 140 the citation reads:

"Kemp, Daren; Lewis, James R., eds. (2007). Handbook of New Age. Brill. ISBN978-90-04-15355-4. Meher Baba came from a Zoroastrian background. He took a vow of silence in 1925, claiming to be the avatar for the present age, just like Krishna, Buddha, Jesus and Muhammad had been in their time and place. His messianic teachings are recorded in Paul Brunton's A Search in Secret India (1951/1934)."

I'd like to challenge any human being, or alien for that matter, to show me where it is claimed, or who has ever claimed, that Muhammad, peace be upon him, was regarded as an avatar -- whatever that may be. Either this Baba guy lied or the author cited from the Handbook lied. And why include this specific quote in the note, when most notes simply mention the source only?

A need for the relevant page has already been noted at the end of the note. Delete this nonsensical note that doesn't even mention the source page. ~2026-39162-64 (talk) 22:55, 10 July 2026 (UTC)