Talk:Barry Long
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
I have been with Barry Long on two occasions when he was in Germany. The first time around he came across as "not authentic" but many friends of mine insisted it must be my intepretation so I gave it a second shot. I should have known better as my intuition usually is quite on the spot. He is something but not what he proposes to be. As opposed to E. Tolle whom I never even met - but his first audio CD convinced me within minutes of his true enlightenment (not really convinced in a mental way but in an intuitive way). To state that Tolle was a disciple of Long is putting the cart before the horse. I have encountered many "enlightened" ones, real ones and fake ones, I usually tell them apart quite easily. I just need to tune in.
Contents |
[edit] 'Barry Long's Teaching's'
The explanation demonstates a simple yet fundamental misunderstanding of BL's message. The only advice he gave was to still the mind and love each other. He propounded no belief system, therefore cannot be considered to have started any 'cult'. He had no 'followers' (unless they misunderstood what he was going on about).
He denounced 'belief' full-stop as irresponsible and indeed precarious (cult members take note!) Did he charge a fee for his sessions?! To even refer to this in relation to his teaching suggests the 'historian' has little interest in a serious appraisal of Barry Long's work.
[edit] "Continued controversy"
I'm not sure if I would describe two individual articles (Vineeto & Tapert) and posting by a few individuals on Blog of Death as 'continued controversy'. Any comments? 212.32.118.160 21:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Have allowed 6 days for any comments on the above and as none have been made have made the following changes:
Removed paragraph on 'continued controversy' and links associated with it.
Why? The information is still available through the link to the 'Blog of Death' and the 'What is Enlightenment' article at the end of the page. To call these items 'continued controversy' and link to them both within the article and at the end is to give them more prominence than they deserve. Indeed, some of the comments on the Blog of Death have become farcical. 212.32.81.3 21:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "Continued Controvery 2"
I happened not to look at this article during those 6 days but, yes, I have some comments.
There is more material on the web questioning and critiquing Mr Long's teaching than that which you mention. There is for example the letters page from WIE magazine following the interview of Barry by Andrew Cohen. Even if that were the total of such material, that would not mean that there is no continuing controversy. Those documents clearly show that there is. There is also discussion and controversy in "spiritual" circles and meetings which doesn't get onto the web and therefore cannot be referenced here, save as hearsay.
If this Wikipedia article and the Barry Long Foundation's website were the only two websites giving information about Barry Long, would that mean that there was no information about Barry Long? No, it wouldn't. Obviously it would mean the opposite. Hopefully you see your faulty logic.
Providing one link to all the WIE material on Barry long was helpful. Thanks. I have added a separate link to the letters sent to WIE in response to the Cohen-Long interview since this is not referenced by the page to which you link.
I don't see the validity of removing the link to Maggie Tapert's article. She has an informed and strongly held view on Barry's teaching which may be interesting to those using this page for research. Her piece is clearly a polemic, but then so is the majority of this Wikipedia article, cut-and-pasted as it is from one of Barry's publications.
It is indeed a real pity that the Blog of Death page has degenerated into such silliness. There are some detailed, seriously intended and well informed critiques on that webpage which have unfortunately become obscured.
I think that it is quite valid to include a one-line reference (or two lines, depending on the width of your screen and the font size that you use) to the continued controversy surrounding some of Barry's teaching and some of his actions, in the middle of several hundred lines of uncritical (although accurate as far as it goes) precis of his teaching and direct cut-and-paste of Barry's words. Indeed not to include mention of the controversy, which is a simply verifiable fact, would leave this article in danger of bias.
I have therefore reinserted a similar line to the one removed, taking into account the changes in links at the bottom of the page. I think, on reflection, that it is confusing to include these comments in with the section on Barry's teaching, so I have separated the line with a title.
It is, by the way, very common in Wikipedia to have links referenced both in the body of the article and at the bottom of the page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.133.8.24 (talk) 17:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC).
[edit] Gurus listing
Don't just revert without some explanation. I'm with the person who removed the gurus listing. Read the article Guru -- it has a specific meaning that's inapplicable here. We have no evidence that Long himself or any of his followers called him a guru or used that term. Or that he had much involvement with Hinduism, Buddhism or Sikhism, the three religions that use that term.
The "spiritual writers" category is much more apt. Msalt 20:18, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- The facts:
- 1. The person who removed the 'Guru' category gave no explanation.
- 2. One of Barry Long's first public announcements was titled, 'I am guru, who are you?', the text of which is in the book 'The Way In'.
- 3. As Wiki stands, the category 'Spiritual Teacher' defaults to 'Guru'.
- 4. The 'Guru' article allows for usage other than solely within the religions stated above.
- 5. Barry Long was not only a writer. His main means of communication was speaking to the people at seminars and allowing the people to question him.
- I will leave reinstating the category giving a chance for responses. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.32.73.123 (talk • contribs) .
-
- I agree that it was wrong for Spiritual Teacher to default to Guru, so I fixed that. I might also agree that Spiritual Teacher is a better term than Spiritual Writer, but the distinction is not significant. Nearly every writer also speaks. And very few teachers don't write, certainly ones of encyclopedic importance. Is David Sedaris a comedic teacher because he gives lectures as well as writing?
-
- If you read the Guru article, while it of course references the variant uses (I've been called a computer guru), it's very clear what the general meaning of the term is. We have no sourced information that places him in the tradition of gurus. Clearly it's not appropriate to place everyone who claims to be a guru in that category.
The prime activity in this case is 'teaching' (David Sedaris is quite clearly a writer who also speaks about his writings - it would be absurd to call him a 'comedic teacher'). The writings of Barry Long are a teaching. Re: 'Guru' - A dictionary definition is 'spiritual teacher'. I would therefore place Barry Long in both 'Guru' and 'Spiritual Teachers' with 'Spiritual Teachers' being a seperate category to 'Spiritual Writers' - the difference is in fact very significant. 212.32.86.162 20:57, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
- The first definition of guru (here on the wiktionary) is "Noun guru (plural gurus) 1. A Hindu spiritual teacher. 2. A mentor" The only spiritual meaning relates to the specific religious traditions that use that term. Any other meaning is a generic term taken from that, not even religious necssarily. Seriously, have you LOOKED at the gurus listed in that category? Barry Long clearly does not belong.
- As for the broader issue of Spiritual writers vs. spiritual teachers, if you are really concerned with that I started a discussion on the Spiritual writers category talk page, where I proposed reversing the two categories. But I strong feel that one should redirect into the other. Take the Venn diagram of encyclopedia-worthy Spiritual writers, and encyclopedia-worthy spiritual teachers; the overlap is 95% or more.Msalt 04:52, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Ultimately all I am concerned with, 'Is what Barry Long says the truth for me?'. Only the individual can know that for him/herself and for that you need to go directly to his books and recordings. I'm bowing out of this discussion for now to let wiki go on its way and I'll come back later to see what has transpired. Just out of interest (just asking the questions, no judgement intended) did you (Msalt) ever attend a Barry Long seminar or video seminar. Have you read any of his books and practiced what he taught? 62.164.251.220 17:02, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Recent attempted vandalism
That was me, sorry, this is the first time I have edited a wikipedia article, went a little overboard in adding content, and then tried to restrain it a little.
[edit] Linkspam
After looking up the definition of linkspam I have undone the edit by Herrick that removed two links to wie.com pages. To me these links are a valid contribution to the article. A similar previous edit was also re-instated by another person. Looking at other edits, Herrick seems to have some concern about links to wie.com pages. Perhaps Herrick would like to explain his/her concerns. 89.240.2.29 17:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV and sources
This article is written entirely from Long's own material, does anyone outside his organization think he is important? --Peta 02:36, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
The following link [1]gives details of international publications where articles by / about him have been printed. His obituary was published in the Sydney Morning Herald [2]and possibly elsewhere. He was known to thousands of people in Australia, England, Netherlands, Scandinavia, USA and many other countries around the world. He spoke in numerous countries and his books are published in 11 languages.
Note that not all of the sources are connected with the organisation. The Barry Long Foundation International exists solely to publish and disseminate Barry Long's work. There is no membership or anything to join.
What suggestions do you have to improve the article? 89.240.7.173 10:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
