![]() | Media on Ram Bahadur Bomjon's controversies was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 26 August 2017 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Ram Bahadur Bomjon. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
"Bomjon's undisputed ability to remain nearly motionless in the same position day after day". It is not undisputed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hg2014 ( talk • contribs) 23:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
The eNewspaper MumbaiMirror.com has published a much better picture of Ram in a recent article on his disappearance. As a matter of fact it is the closest look of his face that we can see. Its a shame the picture is copyrighted. Do you suppose we should ask them for a "fair use" permission? - mskadu 12:50, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
This picture was one of the earliest; I found it in a news release and copied and printed it way back in November. But you're right, it's the best one I've seen and it's good to have it here.
Hugh Higgins 18:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I'd like some scientific insights about the metabolism Reply to David Latapie 00:54, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
Como o garoto não esta sendo vigiado a noite, creio que está se alimentando nesse periodo. A fé ludibria as pessoas.
Rodrigo Cavalcanti
What was that you said?-- Mimbster 10:47, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
It is supposed to be portuguese, but it is that cursed dialect spoken in Brazil. Correctly translated: "As the boy is not being watched at night, I believe that he is eating during that time. The faith blinds/cheats the people. Flamarande 12:36, 12 March 2006 (UTC)Bomjan ‘reappears’ briefly
USEFUL INFORMATION: THERE ARE NO DIALECTS SPOKEN IN BRAZIL.. WE SPEAK ONLY ONE LANGUAGE: PORTUGUESE.The Babelfish translator just wasn´t accurate enough in its translation but the person who translated it, did it perfectly!
Bomjan: briefly appeared and disappeared again
BY UPENDRA LAMICCHANE
NIJGADH, March 19 - Chairman of Om Namobuddha Committee, that looks after the area where 'Buddha Boy' Ram Bahadur Bomjan meditated for 10 months, reportedly without food and water, before disappearing last week, claimed today that Bomjan briefly appeared in a forest, talked to committee members and disappeared again promising to return after six years.
Bomjan was spotted at 8 a.m. Sunday morning some three kilometers Southwest of the meditation spot, claimed chairman Bed Bahadur Lama.
"We had reached there looking for him," Lama said. "He was standing beneath a tree attired in yellow."
According to Lama, a team of seven people had reached there looking for the 'Buddha Boy' who reportedly vanished after reappearing for half an hour. "He said he would reappear after six years. He has asked monks to perform prayers in the meditation spot," Lama claimed.
Bomjan reportedly told the team that he had reappeared to take leave of the committee, as he had left without informing them. "I left because there is no peace here," Lama quoted Bomjan as saying. "Tell my parents not to worry about me."
According to Lama, the team offered a khada to Bomjan and conversed with him. "He asked people not to worry about him and said that he is still in Nepal," Lama said.
"However, he said that no one could find him. He also said that he has camped in an undisclosed place where he reached after walking for five days and five nights," Lama further said.
Meanwhile, the committee members today screened a video which they claimed they had filmed during Bomjan's brief reappearance.
Posted on: 2006-03-19 19:26:24 (Server Time)
Can somebody tell me what a "khada" is?
I wish somebody would also inform us where and when the "video" of Ram Bomjon was shown, and whether everybody, including his parents, agree that it is really he. Very sketchy reporting on all this so far! Hugh Higgins 20:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Google khata or khatag or go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khata 71.174.87.4 00:45, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
USEFUL INFORMATION: THERE ARE NO DIALECTS SPOKEN IN BRAZIL.. WE SPEAK ONLY ONE LANGUAGE: PORTUGUESE.The Babelfish translator just wasn´t accurate enough in its translation but the person who translated it, did it perfectly! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
201.9.249.152 (
talk)
03:05, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
*sigh*
My date for his birthday was off by a year? That's disappointing. -_-
‣ᓛᖁ
ᑐ
00:12, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
For several reasons:
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mskadu ( talk • contribs)
Read Wikipedia:Stub. "A stub is an article that's obviously too short, but not so short as to be useless." Labelling this a stub is flat-out wrong, and you should avoid doing that for any article longer than one paragraph. As for the items of cleanup you have mentioned, I will fix those four things myself (except for the second one, which I don't understand). Ashibaka tock 01:26, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I get what you're thinking. Buddhism is not the sort of religion that sponsors prophecies or myths; you're thinking of Hinduism, or something. As for Bara district or a Chinese reaction, I don't know anything unfortunately, but the websites linked to suggest this article is pretty complete. Ashibaka tock 07:16, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Well .. Yes and No. I dont really know a lot of Buddhism (not that i am very knowledgeable about Hinduism). Anyway, you seem to have done my long-pending job of merging the two articles. Cool! Though prompted by this discussion i did manage to do some reading on Buddha. Especially interesting are the Marks of Buddha - mskadu 20:49, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
I deleted the following paragraph from the text:
"According to Buddhist beliefs, Bomjon is not a reincarnation of any previous Buddha. Once a person reaches the state of enlightenment ( bodhi) and becomes a Buddha, he is never reincarnated. To become a Buddha means ending the continuous cycle of birth, death, and rebirth that it is believed the mind goes through until reaching enlightenment. Any human being can become a Buddha by realising the true nature of existence but when one reaches this point, by definition, the cycle of reincarnation is extinguished."
For some Buddhists this is exactly what a Buddha is: Someone who reaches the state of breaking free of the cycle of birth, death, and rebirth, but then chooses from concern for humanity, to return to a human form. It is also very confusing since the term reincarnation is used and then incarnation, without explaining what would be incarnated [sic].
I also deleted the word "Buddist" for the heading leaving just "Beliefs" as this is a very wide and generalized statement such as saying "Christian" beliefs and stating only a decidedly Catholic or Protestant, or sub denomination opinion.
In the following paragraph I left in the reference to the "historical" buddha, but it is confusing. While this would be the first historically recorded buddha, but there have been subsequent, including the incarnation of Maitreya, mentioned in the following sentence.
And in these comments, there is the statement "Buddhism is not the sort of religion that sponsors prophecies or myths; you're thinking of Hinduism, or something." I think you are making a gross generalization and may be thinking of the Zen school.-- Emnipass 15:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)Emnipass
I have been getting Google updates on this story from the first. There are only a very few press articles about this boy, or Rinpoche, this amazing being. I am surprised that there are not more, and that there is no good investigative reporting about him or about the people who know him and believe in him. Clearly it's a story which merits a book, and the book would be a good seller. It is amazing even that no one seems to know if he is called "Bomjon" or "Banjan." Surely this ought not to be hard to verify, but it seems the reporters on the story have not even been in Nepal to interview key people.
This Wikipedia article chimes well with what I have read already in the world press - precious little. It is the best article I have seen, the best summary, and has a few points of information I had not read before. Congratulations to the contributors.
Now we need more!
Hugh Higgins 06:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Nice clarification, thanks much. Some of the papers have been recording the name as "Banjan" and I am glad to see that it is "Bamjan" because intuitively I felt like pronouncing it "Bomjon" as most of the papers put it. Now I will have to add "Bamjan" to Google search! I may be missing articles. Yes the disappearance is amazing, I don't expect much quick clarification because the press is definitely asleep on this story. Hugh Higgins 19:25, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
I was trying to find a webpage recording the longest that one can survive without food/water. Couldnt find it on Guiness book site. Can anyone verify this? Either that or we remove the reference to the record. - mskadu 23:48, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
I really doubt anybody knows. It could be said all the evidence is "anecdotal," but human life is "anecdotal"! There are hundreds and hundreds of stories in India of saints, sadhus and yogis who survived for long times without eating, sometimes supposedly years. Whether to believe that or not is one's own decision. Then there have been Catholic saints who supposedly lived eating nothing but the Eucharistic wafer. A 40-day fast such as that Jesus endured has been undergone by many, but now when I hear that I wonder what kind of fast they mean - really nothing but water, or some fruit juice, or what? A yogi is not going to subject himself to fasting in a cage so scientists can test him! Not if he has any self-respect. And military prisoners who want to fast to death are force-fed. It's a topic with very few standard answers.
Hugh Higgins 00:00, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
I am curious as to where the reported May 9, 1989 birthdate of Ram Bamjan came from? I haven't found it in any of the press reports, but then they have not been good at giving any solid biographical information about him. I wish whoever recorded that date here would let me know its source.
As an astrologer, this is important to me. It is fascinating that the traditional birthdate of the Lord Buddha would make him Taurus, and the Wesak festival is celebrated in the month of Taurus annually. Likewise it is the birth-month of Ram Bamjan if this date is correct. It was also, of course, the month he began his prolonged meditation on May 16 or 17 (I have seen both dates) 2005.
Hugh Higgins 23:25, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Right, off topic, we may be booted out of here! Of course first I would list my own daily astrological forecast-meditation based on current planetary positions; in it I frequently mention books and teachers I have relied on and learned from.
Hugh Higgins 12:22, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Dear everyone, After speaking with Bomjon's mother personally in her own language, I had a confirmed date of birth of her son as 9th of April 1990, 3 AM. It was a full moon day. Combining the knowledge of astrology and knowing him and his actions from near, this date looks very probable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marici Punarvasu ( talk • contribs) 19:37, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
I removed the hoaxes category, imo it doesn't belong. Although the food/water bit is obviously not true, I don't think much else is disputed? sinblox (talk) 03:29, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
The POV represented in this article is far too sympathetic to the outrageous claims made by the proponents, and lacks little if any skepticism regarding the reliability of such claims. In fact, Bomjon is one of many who have made such claims, some of which have been evaluated, all of which have been determined to be hoaxes perpetuated for the sole purpose of financial gain. How these claims can be treated seriously is an insult to the intelligence of the reader. I've changed the "scientific tests" section to "skepticism" which may alleviate some of the POV and allow for further criticism. I'm not entirely convinced the NPOV tag should be removed just yet. — Viriditas | Talk 06:13, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Putting the obvious scientific complaints in the lead paragraph seems like a good solution. Maybe some parts of this are still too credulous but I'm going to remove the {{ npov}} as well as that Godawful {{ current}} box which should only be used for articles changing every minute. Ashibaka tock 12:34, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
It's ironic that someone from within Wikipedia would be shooting the organization in the foot by claiming that the Wikipedia article about Ram Bomjon is not neutral. In fact, it is the fairest article about him I have seen anywhere.
The section about his early life says in its first sentence "According to family and friends," and that is honest reporting. When one precedes an account with "according to family and friends" one is not vouching for the accuracy of every following detail but reporting what family and friends say about the subject of the article. This is eminently fair.
The section titled Skepticism is also eminently fair, reporting exactly what the doubts about the claims of not eating are, and leaving no doubt that there is no full evidence, at this point or according to our knowledge from very skimpy press reports, that Ram Bomjon has not eaten for ten months, only full evidence that he has not eaten during the day when people were able to see him.
This is a religious or spiritual phenomenon. It is not a scientific phenomenon. When reporting on religion or spirituality one reports on what people believe and what they say. One does not vouch for the "validity" of what they say because obviously in the realm of religion and spirituality there is often no outward, objective, "scientific" or scientistic way of proving anything at all. The reporter's obligation is to report what people say and believe about the subject with as little bias as possible. This the Wikipedia article does better than any I have read so far.
As an example of biased and twisted "reporting" about Ram Bomjon I present the following, the latest article about him which Google Alerts has turned up on March 21, from the Telegraph Group:
Deepening mystery of missing 'Buddha boy' By Thomas Bell in Kathmandu (Filed: 21/03/2006)
The mystery surrounding the disappearance of Nepal's 15-year-old "Buddha Boy" has deepened, after he briefly appeared to supporters then vanished again.
Footage apparently shot on Sunday shows Ram Bomjon, the would-be Buddha, meeting members of the committee that manages his hugely popular, and profitable, pilgrimage site.
This paragraph contains two whoppers which are quite frankly either lies or utterly biased and wrong statements. First, "The would-be Buddha." Ram Bomjon has stated honestly that he is not a Buddha but perhaps a rinpoche, that is, reincarnated lama, which is not entirely rare in Nepal or Tibet. He is not "a would-be Buddha" but just the opposite: He has asked his supporters not to call him a Buddha. So Thomas Bell's racism (perhaps) or biased intolerance is highly visible and disgusting. (Or else he is so utterly uninformed about what Ram Bomjon has said that he ought not to have presumed to write an article about him.)
The other whopper, which is in fact a slander, is "his hugely popular, and profitable, pilgrimage site." This is something like, in an article about the Pope, mentioning "the Pope's hugely popular, and profitable, pilgrimage site, the Vatican." The bias is so so obvious! One would not call a Christian church "hugely profitable" in an article, at the risk of offending Christian readers, though it may collect hundreds of thousands of dollars every Sunday, but it is just fine to imply that Nepalese Buddhists or Hindus are swindlers. As a matter of fact, I have seen no press reports which suggest that funds contributed spontaneously by "pilgrims" have been misused, and the government has been overseeing them. As a matter of fact, they are now "frozen" by the government, so if Ram Bomjon has been "profitable" to anyone it is the Nepalese government, which has seized the funds contributed devotedly by his followers!
Ram is shown with unkempt hair but looking healthy.
We don't know if the reporter combed his hair that morning.
Committee president Bed Bahadur Lama said Ram left his meditation place 10 days ago because of the noise made by pilgrims.
The circumstances in which seven committee members shot the video two miles from where he meditated were not clear.
Obviously Mr. Bell did not attempt to find out what the circumstances were; nor did he interview anyone who had taken the videos; he has merely read other press reports and reduced them to a few careless sentences. This is typical of the "reporting" about Ram Bomjon.
The organising committee is the principal source for many of the claims. During Ram's 10-month vigil no visitor has seen him eat or drink, but the attraction was closed to non-committee members at night.
The committee has prevented a medical team from conducting an examination of the teenager.
What is so peculiar to me is that anyone would expect that religious people would want a medical team to examine their spiritual leader. Suppose a reporter went into a charismatic Christian church: Would he insist that a medical team come into the church and examine the heartbeats, breathing, and electromagnetic fields of those who are speaking in tongues or praying with uplifted hands? No, but if the spiritual individual is a Buddhist bhikku sitting under a tree he ought to subject himself to such intrusion into his meditation and his own body. Really? Who said so?
Santaraj Subedi, the chief official in the district, said yesterday that the bank account that he had insisted the committee open had been frozen after Ram's disappearance. It contained more than £500,000.
In other words, one might say, the government has stolen the money contributed sincerely by those who wanted it to go for the support of Ram Bomjon and those who were helping him.
Mr Subedi is urgently trying to track down Ram.
If this were in order to find out what Ram wants him to do with the money, honestly and sincerely, wonderful. But we don't know, and this is just one more example of the shoddy reporting on this story.
Wikipedia has done the best job of anyone at putting together a readable, fair, and documented report on Ram Bomjon. Not knowing their names, I commend those who have contributed their time so responsibly. Hugh Higgins 10:33, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
The "Buddha Boy" has reappeared. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061225/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_nepal_boy Now edit this article with the new information provided. Knight45 12:35, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
Apparently the discovery channel ran a show last year covering this man's story, a synopsis of which, can be found here: http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=8,4446,0,0,1,0 Solebello 20:43, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
"Reincarnation of Lord Buddha". *sigh*..... Well, we have to properly incorporate this now. cool. Zazaban 23:29, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
It seems to me that the tone of this article shows a decided bias against the boy's story. Whether or not anyone believes what this boy is doing is not material to the objective presentation of facts and suppositions surrounding the events of his life.
Article should mention similar cases, as this phenomenon whereby the attention gets removed from the sensory world for long periods is not unknown, esp in autism. Ramana Maharshi and Meher Baba had similar experiences and Meher Baba chronicled many masts who suffered this absorption in the divine. It is a natural human faculty, just not usually cultivated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.248.81 ( talk) 08:14, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
I have moved the following text from the main article since it needs to be verified. It has been demoted one level for readability. - Mayuresh 15:05, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
The following English translation is a direct translation from the speach in the Hallori jungle made by the "buddha boy" Ram Bahadur Bomjon.
Murder, violence, greed, anger and temptation has made the human world
a desperate place. A terrible storm has descended upon the human
world, and this is carrying the world towards destruction. There is
only one way to save the world and that is through 'dharma" (religious
practice.) When one doesn't walk the righteous path of religious
practice, this desperate world will surely be destroyed. Therefore,
follow the path of religion and spread this message to your fellows.
Never put obstacles, anger and disbelief in the way of my meditation's
mission. I am only showing you the way; you must seek it on your own.
What I will be, what I will do, the coming days will reveal. Human
salvation, the salvation of all living beings, and peace in the world
are my goal and my path. "Namo Buddha sangaya, namo sangaya." I am
contemplating on the release of this chaotic world from the ocean of
emotion, on our detachment from anger and temptation, without straying
from the path for even a moment, I am renouncing my own attachment to
my life and my home forever, I am working to save all living beings.
But in this undisciplined world, my life's practice is reduced to mere
entertainment.
The practice and devotion of many Buddhas is directed at the world's
betterment and happiness. It is essential but very difficult to
understand that practice and devotion. But though it is easy to lead
this ignorant existence, human beings don't understand that one day we
must leave this uncertain world and go with the Lord of Death. Our
long attachments with friends and family will dissolve into
nothingness. We have to leave behind the
wealth and property we have accumulated. What's the use of my
happiness, when those who have loved me from the beginning, my mother,
father, brothers, relatives are all unhappy. Therefore, to rescue all
sentient beings, I have to be Buddha-mind, and emerge from my
underground cave to do "vajra" meditation. To do this I have to
realize the right path and knowledge, so do not disturb my practice.
My practice detaches me from my body, my soul and this existence. In
this situation there will be 72 goddess Kalis. Different gods will be
present, along with the sounds of thunder and of "tangur ," and all
the celestial gods and goddesses will be doing "puja" (worship.) So
until I have sent a message, do not come here, and please explain this
to others. Spread religious knowledge and religious messages
throughout the world. Spread the message of world peace to all. Seek a
righteous path and wisdom will be yours.
Dharma Religion pretext meaning: Dharma is religion unlike religion is religion. It isn't the stories or beliefs in god or gods. It is what it is and we do what we do. The Sanskrit term Dharma (help•info) (Devanāgarī: धर्म) (Pali: Dhamma) signifies the underlying order in nature and life (human or other) considered to be in accord with that order. The word Dharma literally means 'that which upholds or supports' (from the root 'Dhr' - to hold), here referring to the order which makes the cosmos and the harmonious complexity of the natural world possible. Dharma is a central concept in Indian civilization and Dharmic Traditions where it governs ideas about the proper conduct of living. So central is it, indeed, that the symbol of the dharma - the wheel - takes central place in the national flag of India. In its most frequent usage (in the sphere of morality and ethics) dharma means 'right way of living', 'proper conduct', 'duty' or 'righteousness'. With respect to spirituality, dharma might be considered the Way of the Higher Truths. What is in the West called religion in India comes within the general purview of dharma. Thus the various Indian religions and Dharmic Traditions are so many versions of Dharma (versions of what is considered to be 'right' or in truest accord with the deepest realities of nature). A fraction of scholars called these various paths dharmic religions. Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism, are referred to in India as sanatana-dharma, Buddha-dharma, Jain-dharma and Sikh-dharma respectively. Each of these paths emphasize Dharma as the correct understanding of Nature (or God, as the origin of nature) in their teachings.[12][13][14] In these traditions, beings that live in accordance with Dharma proceed more quickly toward Dharma Yukam, Moksha or Nirvana (personal liberation). Dharma also refers to the teachings and doctrines of the founders of these traditions, such as those of Gautama Buddha and Mahavira. In traditional Hindu society with its caste structure, Dharma constituted the religious and moral doctrine of the rights and duties of each individual. (see dharmasastra). Dharma in its universal meaning shares much in common with the way of Tao or Taoism.
View video at:
[5]
Wonderful video, thank you so much for this link. It is impossible to watch it without recognizing that this man is real. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hugh Higgins ( talk • contribs) 04:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
I have removed the following paragraph:Removed Tummo paragraph
"Ram Bomjon is known to be a practitioner of Tummo meditation[citation needed], which allows his metabolism to slow to a rate at which he does not need to eat for many years[citation needed]. Although these types of retreat are common in Tibetan Buddhism, Bomjon's case is more publicized because he was meditating in a public place, whereas most other practitioners would meditate in caves or buildings[citation needed]."
There is no evidence to support any of these claims. Reidlophile ( talk) 14:28, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
The link is dead. Was it a real citation? 93.97.33.86 ( talk) 08:04, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Anyone have a description of this (presumable) instrument? Rumiton ( talk) 13:03, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps they ment Tanbur? Arvindan 01:54, 5 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Arvindan Thekkadath (
talk •
contribs)
(Moved from article page.)
Articles on his disappearance:
I'm going to change the "18 days without water..." sentence without citation to "The longest time a human has survived without food is around 2.5 months, before one dies of starvation" Documentary; Documentary about the Buddha Boy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arvindan Thekkadath ( talk • contribs) 15:09, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh! That's fine! Sorry I had failed to realize that it would not be a reliable source. Sorry, I'm quite new to wikipedia! Thanks for helping me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arvindan Thekkadath ( talk • contribs) 16:06, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Shii (tock) 03:02, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
I have deleted any reference to a website that provides potentially libelous material. Other potentially libelous material has also been removed, while keeping material not potentially libelous. Evananda ( talk) 01:26, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
But I cannot delete, resp. replace, the same link in the References chapter. It is blocked to add new corrections o links. Concerning Ram Bomjon and his Sangha, the Home Page of my website is relevant, not a text questioning their libel attempts to create an image that I am mad...
Please, remove that link or replace it with the Home Page.
Thank you. Please, stay serious, un-biased and balanced, when editing this entry, about a person wand group who have not only worshippers, but also ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marici Punarvasu ( talk • contribs) 19:58, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
I have removed potentially libelous material and links to websites from this talk page as per Wikipedia instructions for Biographies of Living Persons: "This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard." Evananda ( talk) 01:39, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
1. This part only cites a blogger's point of view. I suggest we need to look for verified sources, such as, the Discovery Channel conducted a documentary on Rom called "The Boy with Divine Power". The below part is clearly a twisting of the truth since most of the stuff are only coming from a blogger.
On 26 March 2007, news spread of Bomjon meditating underground. Inspector Rameshwor Yadav of the Area Police Post Nijgadh, found Bomjon inside an underground chamber, a bunker-like ditch seven feet square. "His face was clean and hair was combed well," Yadav said. According to him, the chamber had been cemented from all sides and fitted with a tiled roof. Indra Lama, a local deployed as Bomjon's caretaker since the beginning of his intensive meditation, said the chamber was prepared per Bomjon's request. "After granting audience a week ago, he expressed his desire to meditate inside the ground; so we built it," he said.[13] http://blog.com.np/2007/03/28/buddha-boy-update-ram-bahadur-bomjon-now-meditating-in-pit/"
This is what it should be like and was published originally on this website but was deleted: please change the above to the below:
"In 2006, Discovery Channel showed a 45-minute documentary titled The Boy With Divine Powers. One of the aims was to establish whether Ram was indeed abstaining from all sustenance, water included, by filming him continuously for four days and nights. On their first attempt, in January 2006, the film crew was required to stay outside a guarded barbed-wire fence, and their camera's infrared capabilities did not pick up evidence of a body at the base of the tree where Bomjon sat during their non-stop recording. On a second attempt a few weeks later, however, the film crew was able to film Ram continuously for 96 hours, day and night, during which time he did not change his position and did not drink any fluids or eat any food. As Discovery Channel's commentator concluded: "After 96 hours of filming, Ram has defied modern science by continuing his meditation and remaining alive."
According to scientists on the documentary, an average person would be expected to die from kidney failure after four days without drinking any fluids (although cases of inedia lasting for a whole week have been observed). The boy showed no signs of classical physical deterioration caused by dehydration. A close inspection by the film crew of the area around the tree where Ram was sitting revealed no hidden food supply or water pipes. [1]
In 2008, Min Bahadur Shakya of the Nagarjuna Institute of Exact Methods in Kathmandu, stated that Buddhist priests have yet to investigate Ram.
[2]
2. The following part uses citation that tells exactly the opposite of what is stated. Therefore, this content is not verified and seems like an allegation of a living person - This is clearly a Violations of the biographies of living persons policy. And thus should be immediately deleted.
"At the orders of Dharma Sangha a Slovak woman known as Marici was held captive for three months by his followers.[22] "
3. .
"Bamjan, who preaches against violence, hacked a local youth with a sword critically injuring him two years ago. He disappeared after the incident for nine months. Later he was found in Bagjhor forest with a sword, but no action was taken against him." A short French Television documentary shows Bomjon with a sword." The first citation is from a blogger whose source cannot be verified. This seems like an allegation to a living person -- a Violations of the biographies of living persons policy. And thus should be immediately deleted. The second citation is from a French website which makes no sense to the English audience at all.
4. "When Bamjan changed his place of meditation after the incident and shifted to Halkhoriya forest, his followers had put up a three-square kilometer wire fence in the national forest. However, District Forest Office failed to take any action." "Bamjan had beaten up 17 locals of Bara Manarwa about one-and-half year ago detaining them for 24 hours as they had entered inside his fence in search of wild shoots and fruits. The victims filed FIR against Bamjan, but no action was taken."
This part has no citation or whatsoever. Seems clearly an allegation to a living person. This is clearly a Violations of the biographies of living persons policy. And thus should be immediately deleted.
5.
"According to the 2013 Report of Amnesty International on Nepal, the prolonged political crisis currently does not enable an effective law enforcement, thus the extensive controversial behavior of Ram Bahadur Bomjon can continue often unnoticed by the wide public, the perpetrators enjoying impunity."
This part is not relevant to the topic at all. Thus, Should be delete.
6. The following part uses citation that tells exactly the opposite of what is stated. Therefore, this content is not verified and seems like an allegation of a living person - This is clearly a Violations of the biographies of living persons policy. And thus should be immediately deleted.
"She was tied up in a tent in the forest of Halkhoriya, not far from Dharma Sangha's meditation site, where she was sexually abused by Palden Dorje's follower Darshan Subba Limbu. She was released on March 25, 2012.[23] "
7. The following part was created by the same person who managed the website. This is clearly a promotion of the person's own website for personal purpose. This is clearly a violation of the policy of Wikipedia and should be deleted immemdiately.
"She later created a website about her experiences. On the same day a Nepalese woman called Maata, who had been held captive for two months under similar circumstances, was released by the followers.
8. The following part uses unverified and untrue citation. The website is clearly not a leading Nepali Avenue TV, but a hoax website for allegation. The person who put up this content should be refined from posting because of dis-integrity.
The leading Nepali Avenue TV made a documentary about the case of the two women, recorded here."
9. Again, the following material tells exactly the opposite of what the citation is about. This is clearly an allegation and a severe violation of the living person. This makes it sound like the person in question was the one who committed forgery, when in fact, according to the same source, it has nothing to with Rom at all.
"The birth certificate forgery The leading Nepali newspaper The Himalayan Times published another controversy concerning the Buddha Boy on 14 June 2012: "VDC Secretary Ansari is accused of recommending citizenship certificate to Bamjan by forging a birth certificate in the name of Dharma Sangh, a body formed for his protection. According to CDO Birendra Kumar Yadav of Bara, Ansari has been handed over to the district police office for necessary investigation in connection with the birth certificate forgery case, against which Bamjan’s family had moved the administration. Ansari has pleaded guilty. Ever since the forged birth certificate was made, the sangh has been demanding that Bamjan be issued a citizenship certificate on the basis of his recent birth registration."
10. All of the below content coming from a single source -- The Himalayan Times. If one can do a little bit of research, such as, google, this newspaper is not "The leading Nepali newspaper" at all. This newspaper represents only a narrow side of the view of the issue and mainly represent a small group of interests. Clearly, the author who put this content has selectively chosen the citations and deleted purposely other sides of the views on this page. This is clearly becoming an allegation of the living person in question. This is clearly a Violations of the biographies of living persons policy. And thus should be immediately deleted.
"The birth certificate forgery The leading Nepali newspaper The Himalayan Times published another controversy concerning the Buddha Boy on 14 June 2012: "VDC Secretary Ansari is accused of recommending citizenship certificate to Bamjan by forging a birth certificate in the name of Dharma Sangh, a body formed for his protection. According to CDO Birendra Kumar Yadav of Bara, Ansari has been handed over to the district police office for necessary investigation in connection with the birth certificate forgery case, against which Bamjan’s family had moved the administration. Ansari has pleaded guilty. Ever since the forged birth certificate was made, the sangh has been demanding that Bamjan be issued a citizenship certificate on the basis of his recent birth registration."
The 2012 violent clash The Himalayan Times writes on 14 June 2012: "To press for the fulfilment [sic] of their demand, the sangh has also hit the street of late. Yesterday, police clashed with Bamjan’s supporters who were obstructing the Pathlaiya-Nijgadh road section, which left some of Bamjan’s supporters and security personnel injured."
The leading Nepali news provider Ekantipur had detailed the incident: "BARA, JUN 12 - Twenty-four people were injured in a clash between local people and followers of Ram Bahadur Bamjan ... at Piluwa in Bara district .... along the East West Highway to press the government to provide a diplomatic passport to Bamjan by recognising his status as a 'religious guru'. It is learnt that the local youths intervened in the demonstration after Bajman's followers started smashing up parked vehicles. Police personnel from Simara, Nijgadh and Jitpur sent to clear the traffic obstruction charged batons and lobbed teargas shells to disperse the demonstrators. Police also fired a few rounds in the air. Twelve security personnel were injured when Bajman's followers clash ed with them. Police said the injured were taken to Narayani Sub-Regional Hospital in Birgunj for treatment. Witnesses said the followers of Bajman who were armed with sticks started protesting since early morning and did not pay heed to locals' request to not create any inconvenience to the public. Eventually, the local people decided to retaliate. The police also confiscated 36 bicycles, seven motorcycles and a tractor used by Bamjan's followers."
Bomjon attacks his own family members The Himalayan Times gave a detail about the incident on 3 April 2012: "Bamjan thrashed his brother after he, along with his two brothers and some others, reached the Halkhoriya jungle to urge him to initiate action against those who had ‘sexually harassed’ the Slovak woman in captivity. ... Those who had gone to meet Bamjan accused Limbu of wielding a sword to chase them away and Bamjan of thrashing the eldest brother Ganga Bahadur and holding Ganga and other two brothers (Dil Bahadur and Babulal) hostage. ... Bamjan’s sister Raj Kumari said her three brothers had visited Halkhoriya to tell Bamjan that unruly behaviour of some of his followers was tarnishing Bamjan and Sangh’s image. Bamjan’s mother and sisters had reached the Halkhoriya jungle this morning. Bamjan’s younger sister Asali Lama said even she was thrashed by Bamjan. “He beat me up when we reached there to free our brothers,” said Asali. “Guru (Bamjan) hit me on my head but said nothing.”
Attack on journalists The Himalayan Times details the incident on 22 March 2012: "Volunteers attending to Ram Bahadur Bamjan ... today beat up five journalists. Bibhu Adhikari of News 24 TV, Resham Tiwari of NTV, Prakash Lamsal of Image Channel, Binod Pyakurel of TTV and Basant Khatiwada of the Mofasal Dot Com Weekly fell victim to the wrath of the aides of Bamjan,...Following the attack, the journalists rushed to an Armed Police Force camp in Piluwa. “We were filming Bamjan’s sermon but suddenly his aides attacked us and seized our cameras,” said Adhikari." The documentary's title is Prime Story - Shanti ki Aatanka.
Buddha Boy's eviction from Halkhoriya The Himalayan Times writes on 28 June 2012: "District Forest Office, Bara on Thursday demolished illegal structures in the Halkhoria forest area after Ram Bahadur Bamjan, popularly known as the Buddha Boy, left the forest and headed to Sindhuli in the night of June 5. ... “We have started demolishing the structures illegally built by Bamjan and his henchmen in order to discourage any encroachment of forest land in future,” said district forest office chief Ramanandan Sah. The forest office has also removed the barbed-wire fence erected by the Bodhi Shrawan Dharma Sangh, a body formed to provide protection to Bamjan, around the mediation site. The forest office has also taken control of the Ratanpuri forest area, which is said to be Bamjan’s first meditation site and is learnt to be preparing to hand over the forest to a community forest."
The demolition had been recorded by the Canada-Nepal TV and the eviction desribed on Nepalrodi.
The Sarlahi violence According to an article of The Himalayan Times from 8 July 2012, Maitriya Guru Maha Sambodhi Dharma Sangha had settled in Nepal's Sindhuli District, in 2012. From here he had moved to the Sarlahi District the same year. According to The Himalayan Times, here another violent incident made the headlines:
"Injured Mohan Gurmachhan complained that Buddha Boy’s assistants took them to Bomjan’s abode and thrashed them. Mohan said 13 youths including Sushil Lama, and Min Bahadur Biswokarma were injured in the incident... Irate locals have demanded the perpetrators offer apology and quit the village at the earliest. Area Police Office Pattharkot in-charge Santosh Shrestha said they had decided to ask Ankit Lama, one of the Bomjan’s aides, to apologise and quit the village. “We will not allow people to break the law in the name of religion,” he added."
Bomjon soon after this incident had to leave Sarlahi in 2013, settling in the Northern district of Sindhupalchok. Here he had announced the start of his New Dharma "from zero".
The reputation clearing campaign After the amount of controversies had filled the Nepali media with numerous articles, the Official Sangha of Ram Bomjon announced a widespread clear-up of the reputation of their in 2012. As a result, a considerable amount of articles published in the Nepali media, as well as critical blogs and online videos about the controversial issues of Ram Bahadur Bomjon, had been deleted, or made unsearchable. In an attempt to replace the formerly critical Himalayan Times, a new blog site had been founded by pro-bomjonists in 2013, intriguingly using a similar name (Himalayan) and blue color for their header like the above mentioned official Nepali media, calling the site The Himalayan Voice."
11. This part is completely without any citation or verification. This is clearly a Violations of the biographies of living persons policy and also Wikipedia's policy. And thus should be deleted immediately .
"Buddha Boy and Buddhism As to the present, there are no official statements available from the 14th Dalai Lama, as to what extent the controversial activity of Maitreya Guru Maha Sambodhi Dharma Sangha is in tune with the Buddhist Dharma. According to his followers the Dalai Lama had repeatedly acknowledged him. They had announced that their Guru Ram Bomjon is the expected Maitreya Buddha, whom Gautama Buddha had foretold to come to preach a new Dharma."
12. This part is completely without any citation or verification. This is clearly a Violations of the biographies of living persons policy and also Wikipedia's policy. And thus should be deleted immediately .
”The ownership dispute of the Halkhoriya Jungle One of Bomjon’s reasons to attack individuals was their alleged breaching of his private ban to enter his compound, fenced with a 13 km barbed wire fence. Yet the Halkhoriya Jungle is a Government owned land, and as such, according to the Nepali law, everyone is free to visit it and stay in it, locals being allowed to use its resources as well. According to the system of the Community Forestry system (see Wikipedia), the residents of surrounding villages had the right to enter such jungles and collect herbs, fire-wood, fruits or let their animals graze. It is well-known among villagers in the area that certain high grass suitable for grazing or a special expensive herb, like the Kurilo, as well as a rare green vegetable called Niuro Saag (Fiddlehead Fern), can be found in the area of Halkhoriya Jungle, where Bomjon's compound had been built. Bomjon’s victims had not breached the law when visiting the public jungle, which had been available for many other people in the same time of the incidents, including tens of his own followers, residing in his compound. On the other hand, the Nepali media had repeatedly pointed out that Bomjon had constructed many concrete houses on the Government owned jungle land without permission, destroying trees and water-systems. Yet the Buddha Boy’s presence also kept away hunters, poachers and illegal wood-cutters from the area, providing protection to wild animals.“
13.
Contents involves allegation, belittling, or a Violations of the biographies of living persons policy and also Wikipedia's policy, should be deleted immediately, as stated above. If I am not using the correct format when submitting this request, please kindly let me know how to correct the formats, because this piece is becoming severely negative towards the person involved and should be edited immediately.
Littleteahouse (
talk)
05:19, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. The length of the request makes it difficult, if not impossible, to comply with. Please discuss the requested edits with involved editors first in order to establish a consensus for these alterations.
Sam Sailor
Sing
18:44, 23 March 2014 (UTC)References
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
It seems like there has been a lot of text added under controversies that simply disparage "Buddha boy" and interestingly enough all of them point to one single newspaper article to make all of these pretty damning allegations. I urge Wikipedia to reconsider this content as it doesn't really add any value other than to allege incidents based on a tabloid. 199.212.27.235 ( talk) 14:45, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Please read what I wrote under "Controversies section". There are scores of sources for what happened in early 2012. Lots of info can be found on the website of Marici. Go there. Read... Rabbit1833 ( talk) 17:40, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
The section is atrocious. It contains a bunch of original research and synthesis and largely relies on The Himalayan Times and some blogs. It's particularly bad because the claims deal with a living person. I plan to remove a significant amount of the claims and the editorialising, and I would appreciate it if an established, neutral editor familiar with Nepal could say whether The Himalayan Times is acceptable as a reliable source for factual claims. wctaiwan ( talk) 22:10, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
I dont know where to start. But Wikipedia information should be unfilterted and unbiased. Regards to the sexually abused slovak, should be :" CLAIMS about sexual abuse", these accusations should not be taken as objective facts, but as what they are: CLAIMS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.138.219.229 ( talk) 16:20, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
I have removed potentially libelous material about the subject of the article from this page, as per Wikipedia "living Person Biography" warnings, "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous." Additionally material was removed that was trying to avoid Wikipedia's bots, by spelling out the name of an unsourced website devoted to spreading a negative rumor about the subject of this article, rather than keeping the address in URL format. Evananda ( talk) 01:00, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
I was the one who added that website, including the URL. But it was deleted time and again, I suppose by followers of the guru. So I mentioned the name of the site, so people could look for it themselves. That, too, was deleted. Rabbit1833 ( talk) 10:18, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Yesterday I added these lines:
..... and they were soon deleted by someone. Why? Factually it is completely correct. And it is essential to include this, because it shows that Bomjan has his dark sides as well. And deleting this is bad as well, because Wiki's purpose is to present readers with a balanced image of the subject.
So, I have put these lines back. − Rabbit1833 ( talk) 09:23, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
They are not, they are deleted there as soon as they are posted. The whole entry is getting very unbalaced and unreliable this way, like so many other Wiki entries. You won't find me on your way anymore, good luck with your noble work. Rabbit1833 ( talk) 10:22, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Well, they are in the controversies section because I've put them back. I am now going to put back this line >>>> .<<<< let's see whether it will stay...
Added one day later, on 21 july: and yes, the line about Marici's website has already been deleted, no doubt by followers of the guru. I have just added it one more time.
Rabbit1833 ( talk) 17:22, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
I have deleted ALL references to potentially libelous websites and material on this Talk page. This was done as per Wikipedia' instructions : "This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard." It seems to me that the user Rabbit1833 was posting the libelous material on the talk page, so as to keep the removed material somewhere on Wikipedia. Evananda ( talk) 01:13, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
I intend to report any user who continues to re-post potentially libelous material on this talk page, to Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. It is embarrassing and damaging to Wikipedia. Evananda ( talk) 01:46, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Ram Bahadur Bomjon. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 19:19, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Could some sources or statements be added to mention his breatharianism besides the categories section? At most it says that he has gone without eating or drinking for days at a time, but nothing in the article, not even unsourced claims, state that he's a breatharian or seems to indicate it. Kamusisto ( talk) 15:10, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Rumiton ( talk) 03:43, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
Exactly this happens when editors do not read articles and do not click on sources. For long years, it seems, there was the original text "slightly altered" to a more sensational number of days that the alleged scientists observed him for (from 3 meters, what kind of medical examination is that, anyway?): the author or editor entered the number of days that he allegedly stayed without food as 96! Now when you click on the source itself, in reality the Nepalnews article shows 48! The author also left out the important conclusion of the media source: "However, they were unable to approach him closer than three meters or take readings of his vital signs, other than to confirm that he was alive and breathing. The team suggested testing his blood to prove whether he has taken any food but the management committee rejected the proposal. Any physical examination of Bomjon was not acceptable to the Committee." This changes the whole picture and stops to stand as a "scientific proof" like it is presented by Bomjon's followers as well as the author/editor of this section. It seems someone tried to manipulate the source to look more "miraculous" a few years back, and no editor checked it. I also deleted the quote of George Saunders in https://www.gq.com/ as that is not a serious mainstream media to quote from on Wikipedia. It looks like an online tabloid magazine. We have plenty of serious mainstream media sources I collected in the article Media on Ram Bahadur Bomjon's controversies, to quote from.DarkAges 05:38, 27 August 2017 (UTC)KaliageDarkAges 05:38, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
The whole article was stuck in the past somewhere in 2005 - 2008, with jumping to 2010 and 2012 to mention two controversies. This creates a feeling that the person is not active anymore, what is not true. I have updated to mirror the present information about him the introductory chapter, the info template, the chapter Buddhist background and changed the 5th chapter's name to Claims of scientific proofs (Claims of media was not matching what it was). As from Bomjon's public sitting 12 years had passed with lots of events to be added, - I think it would be reasonable to compress Wandering in Bara District, Meditating in a pit, Preaching in Halkhoriya jungle, Reappearance in Ratanpuri jungle into chapters that are covering bigger time blocs. - Buddhist background had been abandoned by him and he gradually created a new religion Maitri Dharma, and in my opinion that should be described in one chapter with the Buddhist background text, to show how he gradually changed from Buddhism to Maitri religion. I would name that chapter then "Religious identity"? or Religious transformations? adding the totally latest information from the Setopati interview (in the Media on Ram Bahadur Bomjon Controversies), that he is supposed to be above Gautama Buddha and Paramatman... - Text from Meditating in a pit and Wandering in Bara District, Reappearance in Ratanpuri - these all are dealing with his famous "disappearances", and there are more such. These disappearances and changes of places could be covered in a single chapter briefly. - Text from Preaching in Halkhoriya jungle could be added to a new short chapter describing a brief list of all his preachings, as there had been many already, with adding dates and places.(like Halkhoriya, Ratanpuri, Sindhuli, Sarlahi, Lamjung, Chitwan, Bungamati) - I would add a chapter about his many centers/ashrams/compounds in Nepal with some information about when he moved there and how long he stayed (Halkhoriya, Ratanpuri, Sindhuli, Sarlahi, Sindhupalchowk, plus plans to open a new in Dhanusha District). - I have elaborated his new religion's main points in a short paragraph, but I would add I later to match with the next chapters - to the Buddhist background chapter (after renaming Religious identity?) - the Controversies chapter is too short compared to the reality. It needs to be updated wit the many other controversies,especially with the mainstream media interview claim of his follower that he had hands in the death of his sister, I think. - Last chapter Media coverage would mention the situation with media versus Bomjon and list the rich media coverage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaliage ( talk • contribs) 18:44, 28 August 2017 (UTC) DarkAges 18:49, 28 August 2017 (UTC)KaliageDarkAges 18:49, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
I am explaining here why did I undo QuickFixMe's addition that Ram Bomjon is a breatharian (a version of this is on his own Talk page): I am sorry QuickFixMe, but I had to undo your edit that Ram Bahadur Bomjon is a breatharian. Please have a look at this Talk Page above where Rumiton mentions a valid argument: Ram Bomjon himself had never claimed that he would be a breatharian. Moreover, he had been living on herbs after he disappeared in 2006, according to his own words. Herbs in Nepali jungle means 80+ types of nutritious wild edible vegetables, roots, mushrooms and fruits""On 25 December 2006, villagers in Bara district spotted Bomjon meditating. He was carrying a sword for protection in the jungle, reminding reporters that "Even Gautama Buddha had to protect himself," and claimed to have eaten nothing but herbs in the interim."(Wandering in Bara District) And I remember his own description somwhere I read, I think you find it in detailed biographies, that when he was crossing some river after the start of his meditation, he was eating a wild mango... This all is not breathariansim. Eating occasionally and starving occasionally is called "fasting". Also, I don't know how far you are updating yourself on this topic, but he had started eating, publicly, at a Puja event in April 11, 2012. But to be honest, breatharianism is a new and specific (Western!) belief system (movement?) and Bomjon had never used this concrete English word or its Nepali equivalent (is there any?) to describe his temporary fasting. If you do not agree, please discuss this issue (which had been already agreed upon as far as I know, above) with others in thsi Talk page. Thank you.DarkAges 15:52, 30 August 2017 (UTC)KaliageDarkAges 15:52, 30 August 2017 (UTC)DarkAges 15:59, 30 August 2017 (UTC)KaliageDarkAges 15:59, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
Many days of work had been deleted by Diaanee because he/she considered my updates of the very outdated and incorrect main article "plagiarism"! Without deeper studying why is in this particular case and topic so important to keep to the exact names, numbers and multiple sources, this editor labelled my painstacking work as copyright breaching. I do not agree and wish to complain. I was accused by other senior editors of exactly the opposite: that instead of faithful quotings I used my own intelligence and wrote down conclusions based on multiple sources. That was then stamped POV fork and UNDUE (not my fault that media after 2007 had not much positivity towards Bomjon, who started to attack, abduct, let raped and torture people!). Yet, this is exactly happening when one is just rushing into conclusions in topics about which they have not a clue. If they had, they would had already fixed the incorrect data (I meantion it above) in the main article, the manipulated numbers of days, the name's alleged "sanskrit" transcription (no it is Nepali), etc etc.
So it is clear to me that those who rushed to delet my updates, are no experts in this field, enough to see the situation of the main article. My only fault is that as a beginner, I thought that the proper format of quotations is NOT to add citation marks as we do it on text editors, but just to add a number behind the sentence. I saw this was used in the main article, but the original author manipulated the text to show bomjon in a better picture. When I clicked on the sources, it said different things. I wanted to be more exact, as what readers appreciate most than neutrality, faithfulness to the truth, keeping to teh facts? And now I am accused by Diannee of plagiarism! Beacuse I misunderstood the quotation system, and because I was so afraid to add any of my own conclusions, after accused by Robert McClenon of POV Fork and similar things. One can never satisfy entirely all Wikipedia editors, but I am sure there should be a rule to give a notice and a chance to repair mere formating mistakes by newcomers!
What Dianee did, totally broke my faith in any good wil in Wikipedia. I now start to see how the under-standard main article in its vague and irrational form, wit manipulated data, IS the way how senior ediors wish Wikipedia to be! Not factual, updated, well-sourced data! I cannot express my deep shock at the brutality of disrespectfulness, when deleting one's long and precize work for days, without giving any space to repair the mistake! Someone who read the history behind the article, and the reason why did I copy-pasted text from the Media on Ram Bah. B. Controversy there (it was advised in the merger sticker to do so!) - could not do such a vandal act. But reading "boring" articles of others is more difficult than to just delete entire reference lists (filled out with so much care!) and entire paragraphs! I woudl advise McClenon, baerian and Dianne to first clarify, what they actually want, between themselves. If writng texts by onw words is forbidden (viz. McClenon and Bearian), than quoting is why forbidden as well (Diannee)???
Can someone reasonable explain me, how to write about an event, when own words are not allowed, neither words of others???? Are you here playing with me some black game? This topic is so controversial and dark already, and now it seems even some editors are taking sides with the cult, rather than with the facts. Why didi Dianne delet only the quotes which were showing Bomjon in negative picture, but left intact those updates (also by me) which actually helped his image??? This is very strange to me. So I deleted even these, as I am not going to update an article with only one-sided data and take on responsibility to pull more victims to this dangerous religious group! If you do not allow me to edit FULLY, with sources from BOTH sides, then do not hijack my edits and updates for cult propaganda. I must say, I am disgusted with the unfreindliness, pride, elitism and brutal disrespect of senior editors who pick theri noses to topics about which they have no idea, and delet historically important and serious information.DarkAges 22:33, 2 September 2017 (UTC)KaliageDarkAges 22:33, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
The bottomline is clear: the Wiki-masters do not allow criticism of Ram Bomjan. They first decided that a very well researched article about the myriad controversies surrounding this man had to be removed and had to be included in the main article. And now that the author started to do exactly that, his or her work is being deleted again. What remains is the current, hugely biased article about Bomjan which omits almost everything negative about this man and his cult. To me, this is just another example of how unreliable Wiki has become.-- Mathilde2009 ( talk) 06:55, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
To User:Ian.thomson : "In the case of public figures, there will be a multitude of reliable published sources, and BLPs should simply document what these sources say. If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article—even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it. If you cannot find multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out. ... Example: A politician is alleged to have had an affair. It is denied, but multiple major newspapers publish the allegations, and there is a public scandal. The allegation belongs in the biography, citing those sources. However, it should only state that the politician was alleged to have had the affair, not that the affair actually occurred. If the subject has denied such allegations, that should also be reported. /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Categories.2C_lists_and_navigation_templatesDarkAges 10:34, 3 September 2017 (UTC)KaliageDarkAges 10:34, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
As you see, in case of BLPs it is very sensitive to paraphrase, and using direct quotes (when linking back to the source and its archive) is the safest when it comes to controversies. It is not my fault that Bomjon just happens to have a too long list of such "sensitive issues" of controversies, and instead of writing with my own word (what could be attacked by POV Fork and UNDUE allegations) I opted for emphasizing direct quotes. I was NOT AWARE how far it is accepted (what amount of quotes per article) and how it is in this particular case, when controversies unquestionably overweigh the positive information.
Ad quotation marks: And yes, it was my stupidity to rely on the format of the main article, which does not use citation marks but actually it is also all quotation (instead of 2 cases when the paraphrased version simply manipulated the numbers and information to show Bomjon in a holier picture). So I just assumed that citation marks are not a habit in Wikipedia, so I deleted them. But I always added the source of quotations! In my whole life when I am writng, I scrupulously distinguish quotes from my own words, and use citation marks. But I was still not so familiar with Wikipedia formats, and just accepted mindlessly the one I saw in this main article. After all, you left this article onlien about ten years, and seemed not to mind that it is plagiaric or even using quotations while manipulating the text. But if you took any effort to check my Media on R.B.B. C. article, there I did use quotation marks everywhere, to distinguish the quotes from my own words. Then you could have understood (seeing the blue sticker "to merge") that I was in the process of upadting this main article to be merged soon with parts of the other one. I am convinced that you simply did not take the effort and time to check all these facts, before sweaping the whole half-done edit away. That's why I call your move strongly disrespectful, but also incorrect, as before you decide, you must discuss it openly with others and also give a notice and chance to the editor. If you did this, you could have learned that I was half-way in the process, the article was not yet finished and that paraphrasing texts had been planned to be merged here from the Media on Ram B.B.C. article. I left out quotation marks not because I wanted to display the words of others as my own (what a crazy accusation, as I even do not use my civil name here, what acknowledgement woudl I get for it?) - my intention was very clear, I wished to save human beings from being misled by false and very one-sided information on the Wikipedia about this person. I have clear conscience, and I have no problem to use quotation marks at all.
A senior and experienced editor could have advised me on the proper balance between POV Fork and plagiarism, instead to find such a barbaric solution as to delete the whole thing. Please let me remind you (it seems some of you forgot) that you are not owners but "managers" in Wikipedia. I respect senior ediors fro their experience, but not those who use this as a means to show cynical deleting power of other people's big efforts to write and edit articles. I see that you and Dianne have neglected to first study, then discuss it openly with others. By the help of editors, ideally, I could have cleared out seemingly plagiarist elements and if you have given me time, I would have merged the Media on... article with this main one. But instead of friendly advice and constructive consultation, you just stampede on many weeks work.DarkAges 11:08, 3 September 2017 (UTC)KaliageDarkAges 11:08, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
If you cannot find multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out.That necessitates paraphrasing because if you can't arrive at a third statement that agrees with both sources, then the two sources are not in agreeance. That's why all of our biography articles are not just a series of quotes.
And this too: "A newcomer may save a tentative first draft to see if they are even allowed to start an article, with plans to expand it if there is no backlash. If, within a few minutes, the article is plastered with cleanup tags, assessed as "stub" or even suggested for deletion, they may give up. It is better to wait a few days to see how a harmless article evolves than to rush to criticize." /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaliage ( talk • contribs)
Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately.
Ian.thomson ( talk) 16:24, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I know, that's why I also added the Is Ram Bahadur Bomjon above the law? article link to The Himalayan Times, where there is also a mention of the sword incident. I read on Wikipedia that unreliable sources can be also shown, but only as a complementary when there are also mainstream ones. This is this case: The Himalayan Times is mainstream and the Nirlog blog is based on Naya Patrika (that is a real Nepali newspaper, but unfortunately not availabel online anymore). Just check also the main article, it is using blogs, cult-based websites and private Youtube films as its main sources, so double standard?
I rewrote it swiftly, not having time to read again the whole source article. I did this part of meticulous work the previous days, but that was deleted, as you know ... There are more than five mainstream sources about the incident on the Media on RBB Controversies article, which were prepared to be shifted here. I know the case, spoke with Nepalis about it, that's why I know they were Madeshis, and here everyone knows just by seeing the surname Choudhary. I have no problem to leave out the word Madeshis though, that is not crucial. They are a very poor ethnicum.
I have collected a long list of reliable sources (mainstream) in the Media on Ram Bahadur Bomjon's Controversies, do you have access to it? Because all these incidents have multiple sources there, five or ten! Just if you give me time, I add them here. I was in the process to do it, but today you deleted half of my work, so I have to start from zero.
This paragraph and source was from the main article, not mine. I left it here and added where it belongs (Controversies) in a good faith that they checked the sources. The Avenues TV documentary shows an interview in English with the Slovak woman, where she explicitly says, clearly, in English "yes" when the reporter asks "have you been sexually assaulted?". Obviously also shows her head was shaved. Another part of the films shows a similarly looking Nepali victim, also broken wrist, extremely thin, shaved head. Again, these sources are stil left behind in the Media on RBB Controversy article, waitng to be merged here. Give me time and I fill up with mainstream sources which call the perpetrator Bomjon and also show teh Slovak woman's photo with shaved head. Avenues TV documentaries about it show both women and the Nepali language narrator says: "Mata Ani was ruined similarly like Marichi, and also her hair was cut". I had that source in the Media on... article. That's why I wanted first to repair the main article, because that is full of errors and bad sources. If you have deleted my edits of their mistakes, then do not be surprised that the references they used in the original article don't fit. But no problem, I can fill up the sources, just need time. (though the reporter incident is supported by the Nepal Press Freedom source).
As I mentioned above and many times on Talk: I wrote a previosu article Media on Ram Bahadur Bomjon's Controversies, AfD. There you have around 5-10 reliable sources from Nepali and internatioanl media to support all these incidents. Either look it up yourself or give me chance and time to do it myself. I am repeating: you have caught me in the middle of the process of updating the main article and preparing to merge parts of the Media on.. article into it. The work was not finished when you deleted it!
OK, leave out the Tribhuvan details about the Polish attacker, that is the task of police not Wikipedia. But the "video" is actually the very film which was taken by one of those five journalists, and everyobe in Nepal would immediately understand it. That film shot had been shown on mainstream media documentaries about Bomjon in 2012, like Avenues TV. News 24 and Himalaya TV, and I did add the links to them - again - they are still on the Media on RBB Controversies. They need to be merged here. The photo shown on the reliable traditonal local newspaper Prateek Daily is not Doxing! This is the same incident, if you read Nepali you can believe. The same incident with the same Polish attacker was shown in the video shot (then reused by all mainstream TV channels in Nepal, as it was filmed by a well-known journalist, I checked all info about the five men). The same Polish guy is regularly seen around Bomjon at every single occasion, even during the visit of the ex-Prime Minister, and is well -known in Nepali realities, called by locals "Dorje meme". So no one who is at least a little informed about the story, would call this Prateek Daily photo plus the film shot of the later damaged camera Doxing. But after all he is also a living person, so I am not so sure if it is OK to name him etc.
That Facebook post is the official Facebook site of the website of khenpo Sonam Gyurme's BTMC Buddhist organization and monastery. I think I had seen that photo and obituary alo on soem website. I could search. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaliage ( talk • contribs)
I rewrote it swiftly, not having time to read again the whole source article-- So you admit that you were making up stuff that was not confirmed by the source! Honestly, this and the problems I list below give me no reason to trust your competence. Ian.thomson ( talk) 18:03, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
Again unbased accusation! Where are you going for these...?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaliage ( talk • contribs)
I was going to search for the link, and in the meantime you delete the very sentence I wanted to add the link to. Ian.thomson ( talk) 18:54, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
The Media on Ram Bahadur Bomjon's Controversies was deleted only today, just after you have deleted my edits to the main article, and I protested longly. So I thought it had connection with you too. They had kept it mergable until today. It seems that the whole text and linking had been mixed up now, when I am forced to put the parts back piece by peice from my saved Word versions. It is a technical mistake, because I do not have access anymore to the Media on Ram Bahadur Bomjon's Controversies AfD text, where all the mainstream sources are there. Do you have? If yes, all the missing mainstream sources are there and had been waitng to be merged here. Every single controvesry is backed up there by 5-10 mainstteam sources. I am now forced to copy my saved text from Word, in code version, and for some reason it is not working with the links, they do not adjust. The links got mixed up. So the only solution is: 1: to return my original edits you have deleted today, and start to work on them as there was a continuum of the sources and claims backing up each other. 2: to return my access to the Media on Ram bahadur Bomjon's Controversies AfD article, don't know who can do it, so that I can merge parts of that text from Wikipedia to Wikipedia, without the need to copy it to Word. I don't see any solution than this. I cannot do the work of around two weeks in a few seconds that you are now pushing me to do immediately, not giving me time. You can accuse me of what you want, it is irrelevant, because it is not based on real problems, the problem appeared after you deleted the edits and the AfD artcile and forced me to start from zero, pasting my Word copies of the text. What is this rush, when ten years no one cared about the incorrect data and bad sources in this article?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaliage ( talk • contribs)
Re-posting material that was deleted as a copyright violation again demonstrates that you lack the competence required to improve the site. That and your continued fighting against any advice and clear singular crusade which marks you as not being here to improve the encyclopedia are sufficient reason to block you. Ian.thomson ( talk) 20:18, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
Blocking Kaliage from editing Wiki by Ian.thomson and removing all the very knowledgeable material he or she has contributed to the Wiki entries concerning the dangerous cult leader Ram Bomjan, just underscores what is becoming more clear every day: Wikipedia is becoming a sanctuary for paradigms, in this case the paradigm that Ram Bomjam is a fine fellow. I'll give two more examples. There is plenty of very reliable evidence that reincarnation is real. For months I have tried to add some of that material to Wiki but there was a gang of Wiki pundits who made sure everything was removed immediately. Wiki does not believe in reincarnation. A third Wiki-paradigm: Wiki has decided Lee Harvey Oswald killed President Kennedy. The article about the Assassination just writes that, while there is hard evidence that Oswald could not possibly have been on the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository at the time of the shooting (read: The Girl on the Stairs by Barry Ernest). But to Wiki that's irrelevant, what counts is not truth but the beliefs of the Wiki masters. -- Mathilde2009 ( talk) 20:02, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
removing all the very knowledgeable material- This shows that you have no idea what's going on. I'm not the first or only person to remove Kaliage's copyright and WP:BLP violations. I restored some of the material, properly paraphrased and sourced, and have expressed interest in adding more.
in this case the paradigm that Ram Bomjam is a fine fellow- You didn't even bother to read the article before you tried throwing a hissy fit about it. Have you ever thought about doing proper research before speaking?
There is plenty of very reliable evidence that reincarnation is real- That's your faith-based opinion, mainstream science finds such claims inconclusive at best.
Wiki does not believe in reincarnation- Wikipedia doesn't take any stance on the afterlife, nor should it.
Wiki has decided Lee Harvey Oswald killed President Kennedy- No, the reality-based community did based on continuing evidence instead of sticking only to amateur interpretations of the Zapruder film.
what counts is not truth but the beliefs of the Wiki masters- No, you're just upset that the professionally-published mainstream academic and journalistic sources Wikipedia's articles are based on don't reflect your personal beliefs as reality. Get over it or get off the site. Ian.thomson ( talk) 21:42, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
You're wrong on all counts
Ian.thomson. It's hopeless to discuss this further but be assured that
(a) I researched the Bomjan material very thoroughly. I met the man in Nepal (because, as a journalist, I wanted to write an article about him), I interviewed lots of people in his surroundings (adepts and ex-adepts). Your claim that I 'have no idea what's going on' is based on nothing.
(b) Regarding reincarnation I have no faith-based opinion whatsoever. What do you know about my faith, supposing I have one? What I know for sure is that it is impossible to post material on Wikipedia which indicates that reincarnation is real. I travelled around the world for two years to research evidence for reincarnation, interviewed most of the main reincarnation researchers and wrote a book about my findings. Your claim that my conclusion (i.e. there is evidence but no proof) is based on my faith or that it is my opinion, is based on nothing.
(c) During the past thirty years I interviewed scores of JFK assassination researchers, went to Dallas, wrote many thousands of words about the assassination for my newspaper and read piles of books about it. Your claim that the Oswald-did-it paradigm is 'reality based' is based on nothing.--
Mathilde2009 (
talk)
12:51, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
It's hopeless to discuss this further- Yes, your continued presence on this site is a waste of time and bandwidth for all involved.
a)On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog. Also, you changed the subject. You made accusations about me and other editors that have no bearing on reality.
b)If you don't understand that your belief in reincarnation is faith, you don't understand what faith is. Given your other posts, you clearly don't understand what objectivity is either, so that's not unlikely.
c)Again, On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog. And there's no reason not to conclude that you only interviewed fellow conspiracy theorists to reinforce your echo chamber. Ian.thomson ( talk) 17:04, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Please see WT:RSN § Using new-ageist propaganda source discrediting me, the victim in the Ram Bahadur Bomjon article (and yet again and again) for a discussion regarding Zsuzsanna Takacs, who is mentioned in the article. — Newslinger talk 11:35, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
Is this [7] a reliable source? Simonm223 ( talk) 15:31, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
As I was that victim Zsuzsanna Takacs, I not only had been not rescued by any police, but the fact is that my release had been initiated by the heroic investigation by the 5 journalists who arrived before my release and not after, as the article claims. The main reason for their investigation was actually to find my whereabouts in Bomjon's jungle, as they had been mobilized by Lama Tcheku, in whose monastery I was staying (thus again, the article is incorrect claiming that I was in a hotel and kidnapped from that hotel). The journalists arrived on Wednesday, 21 March 2012, as the media informed that time, for example The Himalayan Times. So please, correct it, as not only the chronology, but also the sense of their arrival is altered by this mistake. Also incorrect:
1, I was not kidnapped from a hotel, but from the East-West Highway at the Halkhoriya Jungle, by the motorbike of Darshan Limbu. I did not stay in a hotel that time, but in Simara's Buddhist monastery 2, I was not rescued by the police but released by Bomjon himself after the 5 journalists incident (21th March), and other pressure from media and foreign friends, on the 24th of March. 3, I did not have "one arm broken".this mistaken wire information is based surely on the bad translation of Nepalis. I had both of my wrists broken in reality and I provided x-rays on my websites.
ZsuzsannaTakacs ( talk) 16:44, 10 January 2019 (UTC)Zsuzsanna Takacs, Bomjon's victim ZsuzsannaTakacs ( talk) 16:44, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
OK, you can shift it to the other place or delete. ZsuzsannaTakacs ( talk) 17:13, 10 January 2019 (UTC)Zsuzsanna Takacs ZsuzsannaTakacs ( talk) 17:13, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
It has been five years since a substantive comment has been made on this talk page. In January 2024 editor Isi96 tagged the article with This article's "criticism" or "controversy" section may compromise the article's neutrality. without comment here indicating the problems. In reading the article I find that the "controversies", excepting his arrest and conviction, are covered in a relatively balanced manner, i.e. X says this and "Y" says that. I have removed the tag, pending a discussion of current POV problems. -- Bejnar ( talk) 12:14, 26 June 2024 (UTC)