Please post your comments and suggestions for this article.

Comment by Robin V on June 26th, 2011 at 6:31 pm

Find the sentance ending: “….with different conceptions of the nature of the relationship, and the degree of identity, between the individual self (atman) and the absolute (brahma).”

The correct reference is BRAHMAN and NOT BRAHMA. Please research this and correct it ASAP as this is misleading. Also, I believe it would be customary to capitalize all these references, i.e., ‘Atman’, ‘Brahman’, etc just as one capitalizes ‘God’, or ‘Jehova’, etc.

Thank you, otherwise, for your efforts.

Comment by Robin V on June 26th, 2011 at 6:41 pm

Find the sentance that ends: “…and the concept of the self (atman) as the agent of its own actions (karma) and, therefore, the recipient of the fruits, or consequences, of those actions (phala).” — again – capitalize Atman. But also, this is a terrible explaination of the Atman. Please do yoru research and reconstruct this definition. The primary function of the Atman is it’s relationship as the personalized instance of the Brahman that is the ‘soul’ and connector of every human to God, the absolute, the source, etc.

I’m not sure why you even saw fit to rewrite the Wikipedia materia which in this case is quite good.

Also, I don’t get why you include references and don’t bother to include footnotes to a. assist the reader and b. improve your credibility.

This is the 3rd correction, let’s say suggestion I’ve had to make to improve the accuracy and quality of the submission and I have to say at this point I’ve virtually lost faith in the accuracy, validity, etc of this material as a research tool for my paper.

Thanks anyway — I don’t have time for this. Best wishes and good luck!

Comment by Keisuke Noda on June 29th, 2011 at 8:19 pm

Hi Robin,
Thank you for your comments. Minor edit part has been fixed. When we make a major revision of the article, we want to take your comments into consideration. Your remarks are greatly appreciated.

Leave a Reply

return to top