Talk:Share International

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 11 May 2008. The result of the discussion was KEEP (no consensus).

Some of the following could be added here. It is from the deleted article transmission meditation.

Transmission Meditation is a kind of meditation, popularized by the group Share International. Adherents claim that it is a potent form of service to humanity and also a method for spiritual growth.

The practice was introduced by Benjamin Creme in the 1970s. A stated raison d'être for this practice is to function as energy-distributors for the so-called Masters of wisdom, by maintaining a cognitive focus on the Ajna centre for hours. Creme claims that it is a process where very potent cosmic energies (of Love, Light and Power) which the Masters of wisdom control, use to step down the energies so that they can be safely used by men and women of good will in order to speed the transformation of the world into a place where global cooperation, sharing, justice, brotherhood and love become major characteristics. The Masters of wisdom send the energies through the energy centers (chakras) of the meditators, and then direct the energies out into the world where they can do the most good. The meditation starts off with the Great Invocation, and then sitting quietly for an extended period keeping their attention focused on the Ajna center - the chakra located in between the eyebrows.

The transmission group consists of three people or more willing participants. Children under the age of 12 should not participate in transmission meditation due to the high levels of pure energy and children having not yet sufficiently developed their chakra centers. Transmission meditation is, however, a very safe form of meditation, as the participants are in the hands of the so called Masters of wisdom, who supposedly regulate the amount of energy sent through each individual. They claim to know exactly how much each individual can safely withstand. It is important to understand, however, that this belief is disputed by some other spiritual seekers, e.g. Biblical Christians who warn it may have the potential for spiritual harm. Biblical Christians believe this practise is guided by entities who misrepresent themselves and their intentions.

[edit] The Great Invocation

From the point of Light within the Mind of God Let light stream forth into the minds of men. Let Light descend on Earth.

From the point of Love within the Heart of God Let Love stream forth into the hearts of men. May Christ return to Earth.

From the center where the Will of God is known Let purpose guide the little wills of men – The purpose which the Masters know and serve.

From the center which we call the race of men Let the Plan of Love and Light work out And may it seal the door where evil dwells.

Let Light and Love and Power restore the Plan on Earth.



The Great Invocation belongs to all humanity and not to any religion or group. It is a world prayer, which has been translated into more than 75 languages & dialects. In Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim & Jewish translations of the Great Invocation, the name by which the Coming One (the Christ) is known, is used: Maitreya Buddha, Krishna, the Kalki Avatar, the Imam Mahdi, or the Messiah. He prefers to be known simply as “the Teacher”.

Contents

[edit] Sources see Talk:Benjamin_Creme#Sourcing

See more sources here. Talk:Benjamin_Creme#Sourcing Andries (talk) 07:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sourcing for "Anti-Christ?" section

This can be sourced to some extent to Mick Brown's Sprititual Tourist. I do not have access to the source right now, but will have it in a few days. Andries (talk) 09:55, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Here is a book that call Share International's version of the Maitreya an Anti-Christ. I do not know the background of the book. Sufi? Or Christian apologetic? Source: Legends of the End: Prophecies of the End Times, Antichrist, Apocalypse, And ... by Charles Upton published 2005 by Sophia Perennis ISBN 1597310212

[edit] Merged article talk page discussion

See Talk:Maitreya_(Share_International) for merged article talk page discussion. Andries (talk) 10:18, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Is this article blatant advertizing?

The article that is quite short contains the following sourced statements

1."These beliefs and claims have been described as fantastic and outlandish by the British journalist Mick Brown."
2."Some Christian pastors maintain that the Share International version of Maitreya is the Anti-Christ."

This proves that the article is not blatant advertizing. Andries (talk) 13:10, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

The tone of the article as a whole comes across as advertizing, even with these two short "criticism" sentences. It really needs a major re-write. For one thing, many of the statements about the group and its history are completely unsourced. If this is a notable group, surely someone not connected with the group has discussed it in a neutral tone. Has there never been a newpaper article that discusses the group? Blueboar (talk) 22:46, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
I dunno, but I am quite sure that the religious scholars have treated the group. Andries (talk) 22:52, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
I do not think that undersourcing is a balance issue, but I will look into the tone of the article. Andries (talk) 22:56, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
I think all is now sourced. Andries (talk) 20:32, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

It all sounds very sane and rational to me. Far Canal (talk) 01:48, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unreliable source?

http://www.skepticfiles.org/ignor/naconspr.htm I think this is okay for statements that are corrobated by reliable sources, but not for statements (like that Creme is rich) for which no other sources exist. Andries (talk) 17:35, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Your reaction to this is interesting. I was not aware that being called "wealthy" was in insult. My own view is that his willingness to put his own money into funding Share International is the most favorably thing I have read about him; and it actually makes me feel more sympathetic to the man, because it proves his sincerity. It does not make the article better, but it is difficult for me not to respect such sincerity. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 18:10, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
I have removed the words you objected to. Since I can not confirm the reliability of the source, you can remove the rest from that source, without my objecting. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 21:46, 24 May 2008 (UTC)