Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enlightenment (spiritual)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 08:34, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Enlightenment (spiritual)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The article is a WP:COATRACK of original research based on WP:SYNTHESIS, covering multiple distinct definitions of the word "enlightenment" in English in a way that confuses both the concepts and the reader. Various culture's forms of religious experience should not be merged together in such an unsupported and syncretic way. Buddhist definitions of enlightenment are extremely clear about its attributes; while the Hindu concept of moksha is similar, it is not identical - the attributes of beings who have attained moksha do not include many of the qualities that Buddhists attribute to enlightenment. Buddhist sources such as Jigme Lingpa's Treasury of Precious Qualities go into detail about the distinct differences between enlightenment and liberation, an identity which is simply assumed in this article without a shred of support. The Christian meaning is different still. The article ignores sources which contrast rather than conflate the topics. This is an example of sloppy New Age thinking, conflating distinct topics which should be covered separately. If anything, an article contrasting the differences would be more honest than an article using synthesis in an attempt to pursue the New Age agenda that "it's all the same" or "all paths lead to the same place". They don't. Most of the sections are simply short summaries of their main articles that do not in any way connect the material to the word "enlightenment"; many don't even contain the word! Skyerise (talk) 12:09, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Buddhism, Hinduism,  and Spirituality. CptViraj (talk) 13:37, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete - agree it seems like WP:SYNTH, along with a big dose of personal opinion, to claim things are the same when the religions concerned say it isn't the same thing. The test for me is whether a person reading this page would know more after reading it than they did before. I don't think they would. JMWt (talk) 13:45, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete – at first glance it does seem like a well-sourced article with a long history of contributions from many authors; however, upon further reading its WP:SYNTH qualities become apparent. I think it might have been nice to have an article covering why all these disparate concepts got translated to the same word "enlightenment" in English and how they got adopted by New Age practitioners in the West, but this isn't that – in fact, it's an example of that New Age thinking itself. It assumes a connection between tons of different religious concepts purely based on the fact that English explorers in India used the same word for ideas in the many religions they encountered. Deleting this article would not result in a loss of knowledge, as there are already detailed articles on kenshō, satori, kaivalya, moksha, mahavira, and kevala jnana which are all better than the poor treatment here. Dan • ✉ 15:33, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: a classic case of WP:SYNTH. An attempt to combine unrelated aspects from Buddhism and Epistemology based on a common use of a word. Owen&times; &#9742;  16:42, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep -- This article has extensive sourcing and a robust debate over the last 14 years. It meets GNG easily with extensive literature extant (much of it in the article already) on comparative cultural concepts of enlightenment. If you actually read the sources and the Talk discussions, the WP:SYNTH argument simply does not hold water. Did anyone even try WP:BEFORE? You can't swing a cat without hitting a book on spiritual enlightenment that crosses cultural or religious boundaries! If you have objections over specifics, WP:DINC. Cheers. Last1in (talk) 19:12, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Seems to me that this is an argument for a merge to Religious syncretism or some other page. I'm sure you are correct that there are books pushing this line, it just seems to be giving undue weight to those off-the-wall ideas to give space with an easily searched term like this one, when the religions concerned say it isn't a thing. JMWt (talk) 07:43, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Neutral - but convincing arguments, though I don't think that the word "enlightenment" has such a clear-cut meaning in Buddhism; it may refer to both initial awakening or insight, and 'final' of 'full' liberation (if such a state really exists). Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!  07:34, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
 * That's only because you are mixing terms from Zen with terms from Indo-Tibetan Buddhism and considering them the same. The definitions of Enlightenment in Tibetan Buddhism are detailed, and include lists of attributes of body, speech, and mind: an Enlightened being has specific bodily indications; there is a detailed list of negative emotional states that no longer arise; a being who is merely a Bodhisattva on the 8th bhumi can understand and speak all languages, for example. The article suggests that the attributes of enlightenment and the attributes of moksha are the same; but Mahayana Buddhists define one of the qualities of a Buddha is that they choose to come back to help others; one can attain moksha without developing this attitude. Liberated beings intend not to reincarnate ever again; Enlightened beings intend to manifest within samsara to aid other beings to enlightenment. This is only the most major difference. Vajrayana recognizes the state of "personal liberation" as distinct from "enlightenment", and Jigme Lingpa gives detailed descriptions of each and the differences between them. Skyerise (talk) 11:54, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:31, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep It seems like with that logic, "spirituality" shouldn't have an article either? There is no official text for spirituality, but it's a concept that's been so widely used as to be an obvious topic of interest, where the nuances are broken down within the article. Same goes for spiritual enlightenment. Like it or not, syncretic belief systems are extremely widespread. This is a common term and a common concept. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 18:17, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
 * If you believe you can find sources for the claims made in the lead, then do so. That's the only thing that should be able to save this article, but so far no one has provided any. Skyerise (talk) 13:50, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I rewrote the Christian part of the lead and added two sources. There is definitely lots of work to be done on the article. I still think deletion is unwarranted. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 19:21, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment. That page does look like a COATRACK. We have pages Enlightenment in Buddhism, Divine light and Divine illumination. We could also have something like Spiritual enlightenment, but I do not see sources which would treat this aa a single coherent subject. If there are such sources, that might be "keep", but I do not see them. My very best wishes (talk) 20:12, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep and refactor as more of a disambiguation page. We do our readers a disservice by leaving this a red link and making it harder to find the meaning of the term on Wikipedia, but we also do them a disservice if we present enlightenment as a single concept existing in multiple traditions rather than a single English term used for a number of more or less distinct concepts.  Eluchil404 (talk) 02:02, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment: the term "enlightenment" as it relates to Asian religions, and the one used in "Age of Enlightenment" are so different, some languages do not even use the same word for both. In Chinese, for example, one uses a character associated with awakening, while the other uses a character related to uncovering a truth. The fact that both ended up using the same word in English and in some other languages is a linguistic artifact, not a shared underlying concept. At best, this should be a disambiguation page - which we already have. Owen&times; &#9742;  20:04, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTDICT. Wikipedia organizes articles by what things are, not by what they're called. This is essentially a list of usages of the word enlightenment, puffed up so that each definition reads somewhat encyclopedically at first brush. But just because one can staple together a few different usages doesn't mean that there is a coherent topic. To the extent that the juxtaposition insinuates that these are all the same thing, it's WP:SYNTH. The idea that all these varied enlightenments are the same, or aspects of the same, is itself a POV that must be treated as such. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 21:44, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: in Dharmic religions, "enlightenment" is generally used for the Jain Kevala jnana as well as the Buddhist bodhi. Hinduism part is a complete WP:SYNTH. In Enlightenment, other concepts links should be added. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 11:23, 24 December 2023 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.