Talk:Secret Chiefs

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Occult Portal Secret Chiefs is supported by WikiProject Occult in order to expand, improve, and standardize articles related to the occult. Feel free to edit the article attached to this talk page and/or become a participating member.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

	Secret Chiefs is part of WikiProject Thelema, an attempt to expand, improve, and standardize articles related to Thelema. You are invited to participate by editing the article or by joining the Thelema WikiProject as a participating member.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Secret Societies, a WikiProject which aims to improve all articles related to Secret Societies.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low	This article is on a subject of low-importance within Secret Societies articles.
This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Wow. This article needs alot of work. Zos 16:22, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Once I get mroe info on this, I'm deleting most of the intro to this article. Its long and rather confusing. Zos 16:57, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Egads, the secret chiefs again! It might be worth referencing the article written by Agehananda Bharati that is directly related to this subject. [[1]] If I can find the time I will chime in as well. Chai Walla 08:28, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not adding web site sources. Zos 14:52, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I'll get around to editing the article. Agehananda Bharati was a respected author and scholar. The small article I referenced, can be found on the web for easy viewing. The article was originally published in The Bulletin of the Tibet Society, an academic journal in 1974. The views expressed in the article are quite sound, and an academic journal is usually considered a fine source.-Chai Walla 18:17, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Then you might want to cite the actual journal. Zos 19:27, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd second that. Citing "Wilson 1987 page 48" isn't going to help anyone. See {{cite journal}} for advice-- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Awaiting sources

Yemaya, please see WP:CITE. A source must be cited for all added information. I've removed your additions and placed them below until you can supply citations for the information as required by Wikipedia policy.

• However, the Golden Dawn is not supposed to be a specific order fixed in space or time, but to represent the outer ring of those who seek to become Initiates. The Golden Dawn, represents the end of process of Initiation itself, in which the Secret Chiefs are supposed to make themselves known to the would-be adept.

• Conceptually, the Secret Chiefs are ascended masters which have surpassed the great Abyss related to the Daath sephira, and form the inner ring not just of the Golden Dawn order but of any group involved in the Initiation process. They are supposed to make themselves known through methods such like posession, inspiration or massive synchronicity, a process which has been described in different cultures; as the descent to the Underworld/Hell, as Chapel Perilous in the work of Robert Anton Wilson, or as the attainment of the Knowledge and Conversation of the HGA in the Golden Dawn.

• Therefore, we have three concentric rings in the order; one composed by the Secret Chiefs, the next Inner Ring to which the Adepts -those which have been initiated- belong, and the Outer Ring of those which seek to be initiated.

[edit] Courtesy notification of report at WP:Fringe theories/Noticeboard

This is to inform editors on this page that this topic, along with a list of related topics, have been mentioned in a report at this link on the WP:Fringe theories/Noticeboard. It has been mentioned in the noticeboard report that some of the articles listed in the report may be nominated for deletion.

The report at the noticeboard was not posted by me. I'm placing this comment here as a courtesy for the editors working on this article. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 06:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Minority religious beliefs should not be treated as "fringe theories"

All one can do with any religion, let alone those apart from the mainstream, is to faithfully report their beliefs taken from the literature of the believers of their religious belief system. In doing so, we are not assesing truth claims (such as the Mormons believing that God is a physical being on another planet), one simply reports on the beliefs held, with as much accuracy as possible - with reliable sources and references.

There is no need at all to assess the truth claims of the 20th century new religions. If people were to delve into assessing the truth claims of religion, then an entry on Christianity may as well begin with assessing whether God exists. The best approach would seem to be an accurate rendition of any movement's beliefs, nature, history and activities (regardless of what a Wikipedia editor's own views are). Questioning the validity of religious beliefs isn't the role of an encyclopedia entry. Arion (talk) 13:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)