Talk:Sadhana
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Not POV
This article seems very POV and makes a lot of claims without giving any reference. The only link that was on the page was a link to a commercial site selling malas. This is why I added the POV check template as well as the unreferenced template and the cleanup since the whole tone of this article seems inappropriate for an encyclopedia. At the very least other views should be included.TheRingess 07:13, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] About this text being POV
Whoever wrote the previous and "accussing" comment, ought to expand his/her horizon... the information given for such theme may not be very ample, but it is still good enough to understand what a Sadhana is... instead of pointing a finger, try expanding the information or providing other links for research... The Wikipedia site is one of the best one can find these days, and one ought to be grateful and applauding it! by the way... is the previous writer an expert? or just plain opinionated?
Thank you so much for the wonderful work,
Samsarin Agni
The amount of POV statements on this page seem a bit harsh. Obviously there are differences between 'Hindu' and 'Buddhist' forms of sadhana, but the universal meaning of the word remains the same in both. GourangaUK 18:17, 23 April 2006 (UTC)