Talk:Third eye/Archive 1

I'd like to voice my dissatisfaction with this page, which is such a mess. Some of the reasons will be found here:

http://tibeto-logic.blogspot.com/

85.130.164.243 14:04, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

The mind's eye article attempts to describe the third eye, but clearer differentiation is in order; the two are not synonymous. Ideally, salvageable material from mind's eye should be relocated to third eye. — Ringbang 04:09, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

The change "a part of" to "in part to" is actually an accuracy issue; but also neutrality. --Dren 21:39, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Protest

The person who is in charge of the screening of this page should be immediately resigned. The reasons are clear: If you think some aspects or descriptions are not neutral, the idea "third eye" itself is a very controversial thing and a very biased concept. It should be immediately discarded from Wiki.

This topic is not suitable for an academic discussion.

If you have practiced mediation for sufficient long time, you will realize the importance of "functionailies" and "how to use third eye" sections. You may even expand the content.

Focusing on philosphy academic discussion is stupid. This topic is not only for philosphy. It has its reality.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 155.69.43.20 (talk) 12:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC).

Metaphorical Inappropriate

strictly speaking, the 'third eye' refers to actual organic physiological changes brought about by meditation or shaktipat, so it is not primarily metaphorical but refers to a real bodily change. Also related to kundalini and metanoia.

Shiva is not the God of distruction,like all Gods he destroys the evils.Hinduism has one God which is shapeless with no form and divided itself into Brahma,Vishnu and Shiva.

external link

This aeriagloris link is awful. There's nothing there. It's crap. I'm removing it. - AlexanderSmith 16:12, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Dismabiguation

Well I looked at the disamiguation page, which is a recent addition and I propose third eye defaults to this page with a link to the dismbiguation as apposed to defaulting to that page. The main reasoning being that currently the pageis relatively minor links with in the wiki and are less likely to be relevent to someone searching for third eye. I however am only an armchair wikiteer and will leave correcting this to someone more knowledgable as I have very little idea where to start.--68.231.174.183 09:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

What you propose is the way things are now, so the work has already been done. Spacepotato 09:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

NPOV

This sentence is not NPOV, so I added 'allegedly'. "The third eye is often associated with visions, clairvoyance, precognition, and out-of-body experiences, and people who have {allegedly} developed the capacity to use their third eyes are sometimes known as seers."AuroraMae

Is the section "Pratical Experiences" in keeping with the tone and neutrality of Wikipedia? Dbijeau 22:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC) The section "Techniques" is harly an improvement. Major rewrite or deletion? Dbijeau 23:07, 12 March 2007 (UTC) Why do you think techniques is hardly an improvement? Why do you think Practical Experiences is not neutral? Have you practiced to the degree so that you can see images?

WP:NPOV and WP:NOT are what's important here. mike4ty4 07:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Merge

Hi, I hope that it is ok to place some additional information about how the Pineal Gland is a Dormant Sensory Organ thankyou. --Jefuab (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

You want the pineal gland article for the majority of this, as it's mostly about the gland rather than the concept of a "third eye" - in fact, most of the points you raised have already been covered in the pineal gland article.

I've merged the Blavatsky and Lovecraft references into the relevant sections of this article and cut the rest. --McGeddon (talk) 11:08, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Greek philosophy

It would be nice if someone were to add something about the Greek philosophers. This message [1] and its responses would provide a good starting point if anyone is interested. Pollinosisss (talk) 19:49, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Mormonism

I've removed the section on Mormonism from this article, for three reasons: (1) Mormon beliefs in a "spiritual eye" are only vaguely similar to the concept discussed here (I'm not even sure how much we actually believe in something called a "spiritual eye"); (2) the source cited, Widtsoe's book A Rational Theology, uses the concept of a third eye as an analogy; and (3) this book hasn't been in use by the LDS Church for a long time, and none of the more recent teaching materials I am familiar with have retained this idea.

Admittedly there are those more knowledgeable than I on this topic, and I invite them to correct me if I'm wrong. I've thus preserved the text that I removed, in case it should be reinstated:

"In Mormonism the third eye is called the spiritual eye. However, no Latter Day Saint has ever founded a system of Mormon mysticism or yoga to teach adherents how to develop their spiritual eye."

99.24.249.237 (talk) 19:27, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Fludd image

Does this image from the article actually reference the third eye? We could use a little more context for it, ideally with some content in the article body explaining Fludd's theory of the third eye, should one exist. --McGeddon (talk) 12:05, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

No response in five months, so I've removed the picture. --McGeddon (talk) 13:07, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

New content

I've added some new content sourced from Man, Myth and Magic, and it introduces some contradictory information with respect to which chakra is associated with the third eye. According this source, it is the sahasrara chakra, but another source indicates it is the ajna chakra. Every other source that I have read (but don't currently have available for research) equates the third eye with the ajna chakra, to the best of my recollection.

Can anyone shed some light on this apparent conflict? — MrX 16:34, 18 August 2012 (UTC)