Splitting of Quote
The last edit I made  was to remove some text (B) from another quote (A) as it was already present as a quote on its own. I am not sure if the edit is right, as B may have originally been part of A and not a standalone quote. My reason for leaving B as separate is that it seems like a slightly different idea from A, and therefore merits being called a separate quote. Please can someone give their opinion on this? DarKNighT 19:08, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- First off, this article incorrectly claimed these quotes as sourced, although not a single one included a source line that allows Wikiquotians to verify it. (Just listing the works in a References section, which in itself is desirable to provide the complete bibliographic detail, is not sufficient, as it would require editors to read the entirety of all the listed works to do accuracy checking.) I have therefore changed the heading to "Attributed". Once these quotes have proper sources, including where in each work to find them, they can be sorted by order in each work (e.g., by page numbers for the cited editions). Once this has been done, consecutive quotes that stand alone individually can be split into two separate quotes (as DarKNighT has already done, but not contiguously) and still retain their proximity. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 16:25, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for your guidance, Jeffq. I came to this page looking for a quote by Sri Ramakrishna and found a typo, so I created an account to fix it. After fixing that, I found a couple more errors, and some duplication, so I tried to fix that. This is my first attempt at editing something here so I was trying hard not to mess it up. Looks like I didn't try hard enough, though :-) I will try to do what you suggested, but time is a problem for me these days :-( DarKNighT 16:33, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, DarKNighT — I didn't mean to sound so harsh. The beauty of the wiki system is that you only need contribute as you wish and have time for. Whatever you don't get to, someone else will eventually. We have an ongoing problem in folks misinterpreting the meaning of "sourced", so I can get a bit shrill about it sometimes, but that's unfair to new users. Please feel free to make changes at your own pace. Incidentally, your progress from quote searcher to editor is exactly how I (and probably most other frequent WQ visitors and editors) started here, too, so you're in good company. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 17:04, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
I understand your concern Jeff Q. I will provide sources wherever possible in the coming days. -SriniG 04:32, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
Wikiquote no longer allows unsourced quotations, and they are in process of being removed from our pages (see Wikiquote:Limits on quotations); but if you can provide a reliable and precise source for any quote on this list please move it to Ramakrishna. --Antiquary 19:44, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- Rama is the guru of Shiva, Shiva is the guru of Rama.
- If you wear fancy shoes on your feet, then you will sing or whistle like an Englishman. In whatever way you apply your mind, that way the mind will reflect. If a pundit studies Sanskrit, then from his mouth the shlokas will pour out very quickly. If you keep your mind with bad influences, you'll begin to think about bad influences. That is the way you'll begin to think; that is the way you'll begin to speak. If you keep your mind with devotees, then your mind will think about God. You'll speak about God.
- Reality with attributes, saguna Brahman, has been unanimously declared by the Vedas, Puranas, and Tantras to be Mahakali, the primordial energy of awareness. Her Energy is like the rays of the sun. The original sun is attributeless Reality, nirguna Brahman, boundless Awareness alone. Proceed to the Original through its Radiance. Awaken to non-dual Reality through Mother Kali. She holds the key.
- My Mother is the principle of consciousness. She is akhanda satchidananda; indivisible Reality, Awareness, and Bliss. The night sky between the stars is perfectly black. The waters of the ocean depths are the same. The infinite is always mysteriously dark. This inebriating darkness is my beloved Kali....
- The one goal of life is to cultivate love for God, the love that the milkmaids, the milkmen, and the cowherd boys of Vrindavan felt for Krishna. When Krishna went away to Mathura, the cowherds roamed about weeping bitterly because of their separation from Him.
- God is realized as soon as the mind becomes free from attachment. But in order to realize God one must go beyond dharma and adharma.
- Knowledge leads to unity; ignorance to diversity.
- Once a man realizes God through intense dispassion, he is no longer attached to woman. Even if he must lead the life of a householder, he is free from fear of and attachment to woman. Suppose there are two magnets, one big and the other small. Which one will attract the iron? The big one,of course. God is the big magnet. Compared to Him, woman is a small one.
- God is realized by following the path of truth. One should always chant His name. Even while one is performing one's duties, the mind should be left with God. Suppose I have a carbuncle on my back. I perform my duties, but the mind is drawn to the carbuncle.
- To be humble is to be on the first leg of the journey to purity. The humble has yet to be on the first leg of the journey to purity. The humble has yet to be pure. He is on the way to it. One cannot be pure without being humble, because there is no greater impurity than ego.
- Spiritual discipline is necessary in order to see God. I had to pass through very severe discipline. How many austerities I practised under the bel-tree! I would lie down under it, crying to the Divine Mother, "O Mother, reveal Thyself to me." The tears would flow in torrents and soak my body.
- The formless Absolute is my Father, and God with form is my Mother. God reveals Himself in the form which His devotee loves most. His love for the devotee knows no bounds.
- Disease is the tax which the soul pays for the body, as the tenant pays house-rent for the use of the house.
- If you desire to be pure, have firm faith, and slowly go on with your devotional practices without wasting your energy in useless scriptural discussions and arguments. Your little brain will otherwise be muddled.
- No book is useful, unless your own mind is open.
I removed this quote as I found it non-notable:
- The basis of the Swami's claim is a story that Swami Vivekananda's guru Paramahansa Ramakrishna (1836-86) once, in 1866, dressed up as a Muslim and then continued his spiritual exercises until he had a vision; and likewise as a Christian in 1874. If at all true, these little experiments shouldn't be given too much weight, considering Ramakrishna's general habit of dressing up a little for devotional purposes, e.g. as a woman, to experience Krishna the lover through the eyes of His beloved Radha (not uncommon among Krishna devotees in Vrindavan); or hanging in trees to impersonate Hanuman, Rama's monkey helper.
But is the story true? Ram Swarup finds that it is absent in the earliest recordings of Ramakrishna's own talks. It first appears in a biography written 25 years after Ramakrishna's death by Swami Saradananda (Sri Ramakrishna, the Great Master), who had known the Master only in the last two years of his life. Even then, mention (on just one page in a 1050-page volume) is only made of a vision of a luminous figure. The next biographer, Swami Nikhilananda, ventures to guess that the figure was 'perhaps Mohammed'... In subsequent versions, this guess became a dead certainty, and that 'vision of Mohammed' became the basis of the doctrine that he spent some time as a Muslim, and likewise as a Christian, and that he 'proved the truth' of those religions by attaining the highest yogic state on those occasions. As the alleged vision of Jesus was slightly more glorious than that of Mohammed, Ram Swarup sarcastically suggests new horizons to the 'equal truth of all religions' school: 'This difference could provide much scope for future disputants. One school may hold that while all prophets are equal, some are more equal than others.'
- Elst, Koenraad (2002). Who is a Hindu?: Hindu revivalist views of Animism, Buddhism, Sikhism, and other offshoots of Hinduism.