How come there are more sections identifying Shia beliefs and practices? This is clearly a call to Shiism.
Striver, why are you going to all the Islam series articles and replacing them with another template???? -- a.n.o.n.y.m t 00:56, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
I'm not sure how I feel about this template yet, but replacing the existing template on a bunch of pages is inappropriate - I think they should all be reverted until more people have looked at and discussed this template. Turnstep 03:03, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
It is improper to mix Shia and Sunni beliefs together as if they were part of one community. If you are going to mix these two together then why not mix all of the sects in one page. Each section should be separate.
Beliefs is spelled wrong. Otherwise, er...like I said before, the others might get really angry about this template when they get here...
As for me, I have no comment at the moment, but I do think you did some good hard work on it. :) -- a.n.o.n.y.m t 01:08, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
Not only is it misspelled, it reduces Islam to "belief" and completely ignores history and practice. It also leaves out the Ibadis, which is unfair. It is an abomination. Zora 01:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
I am sorry. My name is stupid. Which template are u talking about? -- Svest 01:44, 30 October 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up™
I am not a fanatic. I am not OBL. I just want to know why! -- Svest 03:06, 30 October 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up™
Zora has decided to invent a new rule: A template can not be added to a article, for example Qiyamah [1], without here pov being overriden... so, lets override it:
All in favor of adding this template to Qiyamah:
Opposed:
Add me to Zora! Why? Because this is the first time I am hearing about the template. Can we discuss it first? -- Svest 03:26, 30 October 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up™
User:Zoe has listed the template for deletion. To vote go here [2]. -- a.n.o.n.y.m t 03:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
The spelling error was kindly fixed. Now users still need to vote at the link provided in order for this to be kept or deleted. So far it's 66% keep. -- a.n.o.n.y.m t 15:46, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
Can you inform us guys where the template would be used? Cheers -- Svest 23:24, 30 October 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up™
You cannot just have a Sunni and Shia template. It suggests that Islam condones division and free religious thought and opinion so long as one believes in Allah when it clearly does not. Everyone who claims Islam is not Muslim and thats just a simple fact. If we were to suggest that certain groups were within the realm of Islam because of their claim then you must add Farakanism to the template. After all, they claim Islam. The purpose is to teach ISLAM and not everyone's personal view of what they believe Islam to be. So again, adding Shiism and Sunni together is an error and contributes to the non-muslims misunderstanding that Islam is divided into two major groups. Islam is one and therefore ONLY ONE viewpoint should be expressed. Zora's claim that there is no central authority to define beliefs is incorrect. Muslim beliefs are defined in their holy book and in the guidance of their Prophet. No need to sugar coat anything here. How is a non-Muslim supposed to learn what Islam really is? Is it Sunni or Shia? Is it Sufism or is it Ahmadiyyah? Is it this or that? Is it left or right? etc. When Muhammad taught Islam he did not teach various paths leading to the center rather he taught one Islam and that same Islam still exists today and shall exist when we are all gone. Those editing this forum have a great responsibilty ahead of them. Either you will guide the people to that which is correct or you will lead the people astray. Now setting up other forums about the history of this sect and that sect is something totally different then teaching about ISLAM.
Sunni Muslims, at least, have tolerated a wide range of belief. As long as a Muslim prayed, paid zakat, kept Ramadan, and did Hajj, he/she was accepted as a Muslim. Declaring other Muslims to be non-Muslims was discouraged, as fitna. Some academics have said that this makes Islam an orthopraxy more than an orthodoxy.
Emphasizing belief over practice is inherently contentious. Chosing which groups get to be on the template and which don't is inherently contentious. If you add ALL the groups recognized as Muslim, or claiming to be Muslim, you're going to have a template a foot long. You're going to have to add Ibadis, all the varieties of Salafis and Wahhabis, Barelvis, Deobandis, all the Shi'a sects, etc. etc. What about the Ahmadis? The Qur'an Alone Muslims? Differences within the Qur'an Alone Muslims? What about the various schools of fiqh and kalam?
Bad idea. Very bad idea. Zora 08:15, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
Why does it say Sunni Ahl Al Sunnah wa Al-Jama'ah; it sounds very redundant. If the inclusion of links to both Sunni Islam and Ahl al Sunnah wa Al Jama'ah is what we're going for, then we should break it up and write out "Sunni Islam" and place "Ahl al Sunnah wa Al Jama'ah" under it do lessen the confusion.
I should also point out that Striver made a new template (without any prior assent or discussion that I can find) and that a little discussion about its inclusion is needed before placing it on pages: Template: Prophets, salaf and caliphs. Stoa 18:01, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Good point. I suggest we remove the Ahle Sunnah wal Jama'a part and just keep Sunni Islam as the head - since this wiki is in English. How come the Sunni heading has 2 lines? It makes it look more important than all the rest - doesn't seem fair to give the whole Arabic name for Sunni Islam and not for the rest. Perhaps. the first heading should read
'Sunni 5 pillars of Islam' as one heading. Or perhaps we could make all the other boxes have 2 headings, like:
Shia Twelvers
Roots of Religion
Branches of Religion (we'd take out the shia twelvers part from that one) and
Shia Ismaili
7 pillars etc.
--
aliasad
01:51, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Done. -- Striver 01:57, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Why does the final section of the box say "Shia Druze"? From the Druze article, I gather that they are an offshoot of (Shia) Ismaili, but not that Druze are considered Shia themselves.-- ragesoss 16:17, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I have corrected that. Druze don't go to hajj or fast during Ramadan. -- 71.163.59.186 02:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC)Hodrige
this is already at the top of the article. -- Striver 00:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
I just removed the following text from the template:
-=External Links=- [http://www.shiasoft.com/Books/Islamic%20laws/ Islamic Laws] [http://www.shiasoft.com/Books/message-of-thaqalayn/18cultrl-tl.html Cultural Relations Between Christianity and Shi'i Islam] [http://www.shiasoft.com/importance-of-hijab-in-islam.html Hijab] [http://www.shiasoft.com/Books/Peshawar/PESHAW~1.DOC Shiah Islam] [http://www.shiasoft.com/Books/origins-development-shia-islam/ Origins Development Shia Islam]
It was outside of the table structure, and thus messing up all pages the template is transcluded onto. Personally, I don't think external links have any place in a template such as this. However, if someone feels that the deleted text is important and relevant, they should feel free to properly re-insert the links into the table-structure of the template. - Dave314159 05:38, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
There are different interpretation about Qadr(divine distiny) and Shia believe in Adalah beside Qadr. -- Sa.vakilian( t- c) 10:07, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Please pay attention to Islam#Predestination and also read some part of Shiit Islam by Allame Tabatabee:
decreeth [qada] a thing, He saith unto it only: Be! and it is" (Quran, II, 117), and also "(When) Allah doometh there is none that can postpone His doom [hukm]" (Quran, XIII, 41)... The Holy Quran has called this aspect the truth "Providence" (qadar) and has related it to God Almighty who is the origin of creation, as has been said, "And there is not a thing but with Us are the stores thereof. And we send it not down save in appointed measure [qadar]" (Quran, XV, 21). In the same way that according to Divine Destiny the existence of each phenomenon and even which occurs in the cosmic order is necessary and cannot be avoided, so also according to Providence each phenomenon and event that occurs will never trespass or disobey in the least degree the measure which God has provided for it.
-- Sa.vakilian( t- c) 10:07, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
The Sunni only "five pillars of Islam" is presented as a Muslim concept. This is pov, uninformative and even missleading. Please revert to a previous version were it is correctly presented as a Sunni concept - Shi'as do not subscribe to that listing. -- Striver - talk 00:23, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
I think we should consider changing the title of the wikilinked articles to the actual title. I already did it with the two highly unfamiliar phrases to the pages Commanding what is just and Forbidding what is evil. There are a few more that could be fixed, like Kutub, Rusul and Nabiyuun. There is no reason to esoterocise Islam so much, especially if the article in question is titled IN ENGLISH. ناهد/(Nåhed) speak! 20:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
The "Five Pillars of Islam" are, in fact, the "Five Pillars of Sunni Islam". Shi'i Muslims follow a different creed. Nota bene: while I don't like your changes, you should at least change [[Shi'a]] to [[Shia Islam|Shi'a]] so as to avoid redirects. I am not reverting you in the hopes you'll express yourself on the Talk page, Klakky. I always assume Good Faith rather than you are adding edit summaries because I noted that one of your characteristic behaviours is not to use them immediately before you began using them... the Ogress smash! 17:35, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
The first line of template:Islam ("beliefs") links to Aqidah, which redirects to Islamic theology. Which doesn't include the template. So for example on Islamic view of angels what is the point of having this template, since that page also uses the Islam template? William M. Connolley ( talk) 17:46, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
This template occupies rather more space than it needs to. It would be better for its default state to be collapsed, so that on pages such as Islamic view of angels the template doesn't occupy too much of the article. All the information remains easily available. As you can see from [4], the collapsible version is commonly used. Should you really want to uncollapse it on any given article, that should be possible William M. Connolley ( talk) 16:09, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
W complained that Text of first line is blocked. but I don't know what that means. Is it the colour bars, or something else? William M. Connolley ( talk) 16:10, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
I've just tried it on a random linux and it looked fine; the same as on windoze in fact William M. Connolley ( talk) 08:50, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Still hoping for some kind of discussion rather than just reversion from Wiqi55. Not really sure what No reply on the shared pillars issue is supposed to mean, but I'd still like to see a screen shot of the supposed "bad" state, and some kind of ustification for the non-collapsed state, given the multiple evidence of use of collapsed templates elsewhere William M. Connolley ( talk) 22:02, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
How come there are more sections identifying Shia beliefs and practices? This is clearly a call to Shiism.
Striver, why are you going to all the Islam series articles and replacing them with another template???? -- a.n.o.n.y.m t 00:56, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
I'm not sure how I feel about this template yet, but replacing the existing template on a bunch of pages is inappropriate - I think they should all be reverted until more people have looked at and discussed this template. Turnstep 03:03, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
It is improper to mix Shia and Sunni beliefs together as if they were part of one community. If you are going to mix these two together then why not mix all of the sects in one page. Each section should be separate.
Beliefs is spelled wrong. Otherwise, er...like I said before, the others might get really angry about this template when they get here...
As for me, I have no comment at the moment, but I do think you did some good hard work on it. :) -- a.n.o.n.y.m t 01:08, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
Not only is it misspelled, it reduces Islam to "belief" and completely ignores history and practice. It also leaves out the Ibadis, which is unfair. It is an abomination. Zora 01:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
I am sorry. My name is stupid. Which template are u talking about? -- Svest 01:44, 30 October 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up™
I am not a fanatic. I am not OBL. I just want to know why! -- Svest 03:06, 30 October 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up™
Zora has decided to invent a new rule: A template can not be added to a article, for example Qiyamah [1], without here pov being overriden... so, lets override it:
All in favor of adding this template to Qiyamah:
Opposed:
Add me to Zora! Why? Because this is the first time I am hearing about the template. Can we discuss it first? -- Svest 03:26, 30 October 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up™
User:Zoe has listed the template for deletion. To vote go here [2]. -- a.n.o.n.y.m t 03:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
The spelling error was kindly fixed. Now users still need to vote at the link provided in order for this to be kept or deleted. So far it's 66% keep. -- a.n.o.n.y.m t 15:46, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
Can you inform us guys where the template would be used? Cheers -- Svest 23:24, 30 October 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up™
You cannot just have a Sunni and Shia template. It suggests that Islam condones division and free religious thought and opinion so long as one believes in Allah when it clearly does not. Everyone who claims Islam is not Muslim and thats just a simple fact. If we were to suggest that certain groups were within the realm of Islam because of their claim then you must add Farakanism to the template. After all, they claim Islam. The purpose is to teach ISLAM and not everyone's personal view of what they believe Islam to be. So again, adding Shiism and Sunni together is an error and contributes to the non-muslims misunderstanding that Islam is divided into two major groups. Islam is one and therefore ONLY ONE viewpoint should be expressed. Zora's claim that there is no central authority to define beliefs is incorrect. Muslim beliefs are defined in their holy book and in the guidance of their Prophet. No need to sugar coat anything here. How is a non-Muslim supposed to learn what Islam really is? Is it Sunni or Shia? Is it Sufism or is it Ahmadiyyah? Is it this or that? Is it left or right? etc. When Muhammad taught Islam he did not teach various paths leading to the center rather he taught one Islam and that same Islam still exists today and shall exist when we are all gone. Those editing this forum have a great responsibilty ahead of them. Either you will guide the people to that which is correct or you will lead the people astray. Now setting up other forums about the history of this sect and that sect is something totally different then teaching about ISLAM.
Sunni Muslims, at least, have tolerated a wide range of belief. As long as a Muslim prayed, paid zakat, kept Ramadan, and did Hajj, he/she was accepted as a Muslim. Declaring other Muslims to be non-Muslims was discouraged, as fitna. Some academics have said that this makes Islam an orthopraxy more than an orthodoxy.
Emphasizing belief over practice is inherently contentious. Chosing which groups get to be on the template and which don't is inherently contentious. If you add ALL the groups recognized as Muslim, or claiming to be Muslim, you're going to have a template a foot long. You're going to have to add Ibadis, all the varieties of Salafis and Wahhabis, Barelvis, Deobandis, all the Shi'a sects, etc. etc. What about the Ahmadis? The Qur'an Alone Muslims? Differences within the Qur'an Alone Muslims? What about the various schools of fiqh and kalam?
Bad idea. Very bad idea. Zora 08:15, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
Why does it say Sunni Ahl Al Sunnah wa Al-Jama'ah; it sounds very redundant. If the inclusion of links to both Sunni Islam and Ahl al Sunnah wa Al Jama'ah is what we're going for, then we should break it up and write out "Sunni Islam" and place "Ahl al Sunnah wa Al Jama'ah" under it do lessen the confusion.
I should also point out that Striver made a new template (without any prior assent or discussion that I can find) and that a little discussion about its inclusion is needed before placing it on pages: Template: Prophets, salaf and caliphs. Stoa 18:01, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Good point. I suggest we remove the Ahle Sunnah wal Jama'a part and just keep Sunni Islam as the head - since this wiki is in English. How come the Sunni heading has 2 lines? It makes it look more important than all the rest - doesn't seem fair to give the whole Arabic name for Sunni Islam and not for the rest. Perhaps. the first heading should read
'Sunni 5 pillars of Islam' as one heading. Or perhaps we could make all the other boxes have 2 headings, like:
Shia Twelvers
Roots of Religion
Branches of Religion (we'd take out the shia twelvers part from that one) and
Shia Ismaili
7 pillars etc.
--
aliasad
01:51, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Done. -- Striver 01:57, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Why does the final section of the box say "Shia Druze"? From the Druze article, I gather that they are an offshoot of (Shia) Ismaili, but not that Druze are considered Shia themselves.-- ragesoss 16:17, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I have corrected that. Druze don't go to hajj or fast during Ramadan. -- 71.163.59.186 02:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC)Hodrige
this is already at the top of the article. -- Striver 00:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
I just removed the following text from the template:
-=External Links=- [http://www.shiasoft.com/Books/Islamic%20laws/ Islamic Laws] [http://www.shiasoft.com/Books/message-of-thaqalayn/18cultrl-tl.html Cultural Relations Between Christianity and Shi'i Islam] [http://www.shiasoft.com/importance-of-hijab-in-islam.html Hijab] [http://www.shiasoft.com/Books/Peshawar/PESHAW~1.DOC Shiah Islam] [http://www.shiasoft.com/Books/origins-development-shia-islam/ Origins Development Shia Islam]
It was outside of the table structure, and thus messing up all pages the template is transcluded onto. Personally, I don't think external links have any place in a template such as this. However, if someone feels that the deleted text is important and relevant, they should feel free to properly re-insert the links into the table-structure of the template. - Dave314159 05:38, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
There are different interpretation about Qadr(divine distiny) and Shia believe in Adalah beside Qadr. -- Sa.vakilian( t- c) 10:07, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Please pay attention to Islam#Predestination and also read some part of Shiit Islam by Allame Tabatabee:
decreeth [qada] a thing, He saith unto it only: Be! and it is" (Quran, II, 117), and also "(When) Allah doometh there is none that can postpone His doom [hukm]" (Quran, XIII, 41)... The Holy Quran has called this aspect the truth "Providence" (qadar) and has related it to God Almighty who is the origin of creation, as has been said, "And there is not a thing but with Us are the stores thereof. And we send it not down save in appointed measure [qadar]" (Quran, XV, 21). In the same way that according to Divine Destiny the existence of each phenomenon and even which occurs in the cosmic order is necessary and cannot be avoided, so also according to Providence each phenomenon and event that occurs will never trespass or disobey in the least degree the measure which God has provided for it.
-- Sa.vakilian( t- c) 10:07, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
The Sunni only "five pillars of Islam" is presented as a Muslim concept. This is pov, uninformative and even missleading. Please revert to a previous version were it is correctly presented as a Sunni concept - Shi'as do not subscribe to that listing. -- Striver - talk 00:23, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
I think we should consider changing the title of the wikilinked articles to the actual title. I already did it with the two highly unfamiliar phrases to the pages Commanding what is just and Forbidding what is evil. There are a few more that could be fixed, like Kutub, Rusul and Nabiyuun. There is no reason to esoterocise Islam so much, especially if the article in question is titled IN ENGLISH. ناهد/(Nåhed) speak! 20:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
The "Five Pillars of Islam" are, in fact, the "Five Pillars of Sunni Islam". Shi'i Muslims follow a different creed. Nota bene: while I don't like your changes, you should at least change [[Shi'a]] to [[Shia Islam|Shi'a]] so as to avoid redirects. I am not reverting you in the hopes you'll express yourself on the Talk page, Klakky. I always assume Good Faith rather than you are adding edit summaries because I noted that one of your characteristic behaviours is not to use them immediately before you began using them... the Ogress smash! 17:35, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
The first line of template:Islam ("beliefs") links to Aqidah, which redirects to Islamic theology. Which doesn't include the template. So for example on Islamic view of angels what is the point of having this template, since that page also uses the Islam template? William M. Connolley ( talk) 17:46, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
This template occupies rather more space than it needs to. It would be better for its default state to be collapsed, so that on pages such as Islamic view of angels the template doesn't occupy too much of the article. All the information remains easily available. As you can see from [4], the collapsible version is commonly used. Should you really want to uncollapse it on any given article, that should be possible William M. Connolley ( talk) 16:09, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
W complained that Text of first line is blocked. but I don't know what that means. Is it the colour bars, or something else? William M. Connolley ( talk) 16:10, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
I've just tried it on a random linux and it looked fine; the same as on windoze in fact William M. Connolley ( talk) 08:50, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Still hoping for some kind of discussion rather than just reversion from Wiqi55. Not really sure what No reply on the shared pillars issue is supposed to mean, but I'd still like to see a screen shot of the supposed "bad" state, and some kind of ustification for the non-collapsed state, given the multiple evidence of use of collapsed templates elsewhere William M. Connolley ( talk) 22:02, 5 April 2011 (UTC)