Template talk:Twelvers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] First big changes

I made lots of edits making this have more information as well as making it look nicer, though I would like a better icon (not the sword! all Shiah groups need a unique one). I also recently made the Ismailism template, and wanted them to look somewhat the same in structure. I got rid of the useless information that applied to all Shi'ah groups, fit in all the Imams, and added Twelver religious texts and branches, as well as a See Also section.

Another thing I would like to note, is in both this "See Also" section, and the Ismaili one, we have information that is particular to only one denomination. For example, Marjas and Ayatollahs are specific to Usoolism, but is so central to them it is important to put them somewhere.

[edit] Once again, for those undoing my changes

We have a talk page, can we please discuss why there is a problem? Streamlining here is important. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Enzuru (talk • contribs)

Obviously Pink revers, Dreamz rosez, and User talk:193.188.105.227 are the same users. Ask an admin to "checkuser". In any case, he/she seems to be blocked anyway --Gerash77 15:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dispute resolution

I prefer to discus here instead of reversions. There are several issues and we should speak about them one by one. I invite other Shi'a wikipedians to come and write their idea. --Sa.vakilian(t-c) 14:51, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

We're also having a dispute resolution on the Shia Islam template too. I'd love if we can discuss that one. My changes basically were to take out Twelver-specific information from there, put them in here, and add general Shia information into it. Oh, and also make it look nice and more like the Islam template. --Enzuru 05:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Another thing I'd like to add is I made the Ismaili template from scratch, and was trying to match them up by style, the style being a bit oriented towards the Christianity templates. That was one of the reasons for this massive edit. --Enzuru 05:50, 26 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Changes made

Based on the votes I made the changes. Change it if I did anything wrong. --Enzuru 01:00, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Picture

  • Image:Almahdi.gif
  1. User:Sa.vakilian:
    1. I prefer this one because it represents all 12 Imams while the other emphasize on Ali who is known all branches of Shia as Imam.
    2. The people of west have bad idea about the "sword of Islam".
    3. It reinforces the propaganda against Muslims and Shi'a.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 14:51, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
    4. I agree with Sa.vakilian's points, but still view the sword picture as more accurate. Let westerners think what they want, we are not here to please them, this isn't WesternPedia. But anyhow, it's just a picture, and if a better is found, i wont object. --Striver - talk 17:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
    5. I have to agree with SA Vakilian here, For 2 reasons:
      1. Although the Dhulfaqar has come to signify Ali (AS), I dont think it would be an accurate representation of him, let alone the Twelver Shia. Ali (AS) was 99 parts kindness, generosity, and wisdom, and 1 part arms and aggression. That's why we aspire to these people: not because the power of their sword, but because the power of their dignity and honor.
      2. Having the current image can also qualify for the Zaidis, Ismailis, and other Shias. If there is to be an image, it would be better if we used something that signifies the 12 Imams. Something that shows that we specifically believe in the divinity and leadership of Mahdi ibn Hasan al-Askari.--Zereshk 18:48, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
  2. --Gerash77 13:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

CommentOf course we should check its copy right situation. Apparently this is the main source of this picture:[1]. Unfortunately the copyright situation of its content is unclear[2]. I sent a mail and asked their permission. --Sa.vakilian(t-c) 14:51, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I would rather this image. It looks better than the other one. --Aminz 20:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

The other picture was better, the one with the sword is already used on the Shia box. Funkynusayri 15:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Name

  • Twelverism
  1. It goes with Ismailism. And I love Ismailism. :P --Enzuru 05:31, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Twelvers
  1. User:Sa.vakilian:
    1. The other name is a neologism which is be found in google just 10 times.[3]--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 14:54, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
  2. Of cource. --Striver - talk 17:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
  3. User:Ahmadhusseini
  4. Aminz 20:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC) - Twelvers looks good :) --Aminz 20:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
  5. --Gerash77 13:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
  6. AliFazal 11:21, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ahl al-Bayt vs. Imams

  • Imams
  1. User:Ahmadhusseini - Fatima(a.s.) was considered a member of the Beit, so Ahlul-Beit is too general, when speaking about our 12 blessed Imams.
  2. I would prefer this one, partly because the term Ahl al-Bayt is understood by our Sunni brothers differently. Imam seems less controversial. --Aminz 20:39, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
  3. Imams because all Shia sects (and to an extent all Muslims) have a belief in Muhammad (AS) and and Fatima (AS). It is redundant to list them in every group. --Enzuru 05:21, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Ahl al-Bayt
  1. User:Sa.vakilian:I prefer to write the name of all of 14 infallibles. Because the prophet and his daughter have priority over Fatima's sons.
  2. --Striver - talk 17:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
  3. --Gerash77 13:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello...can you guys please make a clear distinction between Alawittes and Shias because I feel other sects of Islam confuse the teachings of Alawittes and Shias. The main focus of Shia Islam is God, Muhammad, Ahl Al Beit which includes the Imam Ali and so on. I feel that the message that I have read doesnt say any of that. Shias just bascially believe that the Caliph or Imamate should have stayed within the Prophet's family. The picture should be one that says Allah because remember it is Allah that we worship not the sayf Imam Ali. Under the title on the right put a little picture with the sword. But remember the main focus of Shias is God, Muhammad and his family. Muhammad's progeny. Dont confuse people :P oh and by the way you guys should try "The Imams of Ahl al-Bayt" (the caliphs of the household, Muhammad's progeny).

[edit] Texts & Laws

Which texts should we write in this part?

  • Qur'an
  1. User:Sa.vakilian
  2. --Striver - talk 17:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
  3. --Aminz 20:41, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
  4. --Enzuru 05:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
  5. comment: I don't like the idea of putting other books beside Quran, and a link to List of Shia books would suffice--

Gerash77 13:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

    1. To an extent though, this is also redundant as putting Muhammad (AS) and Fatima (AS). We're Muslims, of course we believe in the Qur'an, and we're Shiah, so of course we believe in the Muhammad (AS) and Fatima (AS) as the mother of the Imams (AS). --Enzuru 16:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
  2. Ahmad Husseini
  • Nahj al-Balagha
  1. User:Sa.vakilian
  2. --Striver - talk 17:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
  3. --Aminz 20:41, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
  4. --Enzuru 05:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Usul al-Kafi
  1. Even though this doesn't count for the Alawi and Alevi... --Enzuru 05:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Mafatih Aljinan
  1. User:Sa.vakilian:This book is one of the most important book among Shia which includes praying and Doaa and Ziarat.
  • Other
  1. Aminz 20:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC)- I suggest we add links to certain famous Duas, like "Dua Kumeyl", or "Monajate Shabaniyah". I personally like these two. --Aminz 20:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
  2. I agree with Aminz. --Enzuru 05:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Major branches

I disagree with this part. On one hand Usuli, Akhbari and Shaykhism aren't separate Madhab. They're just different interpretation of Shia. On the other hand most of twelvers don't recognize Alevism and Alawism as twelvers.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 15:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

We don't recoqnize Alawits. Change the headline into "interpretations".

Agree. Someone was telling me on the article of History of Sunni-Shia relations that the Alawis of Syria's Asad family have been accepted by prominent Shia clerics as a Shia branch.--Zereshk 19:04, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Alawis are considered twelvers in Lebanon, following the same principles as twelvers, but they're ancestory is diffrent, something like that, this is what I know. Ahmad Husseini 19:24, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree. I knew this one was going to be a controversial edit on my part, considering Usoolism, Akhbarism, and Shaykhism were all so close, and Alawism and Alevism is just out there. But when it comes down to it, those two certainly aren't their own thing: they are within the Twelver Shi'ah tradition, and they believe they are certainly following these Imams. Whether an Usooli Ayatollah considers them to be Twelver or not is certainly not the question here, rather it is in the broad spectrum of things: are they? Ahmadiyya is listed under Islam here despite the fact they have been unanimously by almost every denomination denounced as outside the fold of Islam. I can understand changing the name to "Interpretations", but I cannot understanding taking these two groups out. They believe in twelve Imams, and the same twelve. How they practice, and what they believe to be the nature of these Imams, is an entirely different issue, which leaves them within the fold of Twelverism. It's like how the Druze were excluded from "Islam" articles until the Ismaili articles gave them recognition I suppose. --Enzuru 05:27, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
History: http://www.geocities.com/martinkramerorg/Alawis.htm - If they want to be known as twelvers, then they must be included.--Gerash77 13:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] See also

We can add History of Shi'a Islam and Views on Shi'a Islam in this part. I also want to add Ja'fari jurisprudence and Theology of Shia. I disagree about Qom, Najaf and Ayatollah.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 15:12, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I advocate most strongly that we rename Theology of Shia to Principles of the Religion. --Striver - talk 17:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

In that case I wrote my idea in talk:Theology of Shia--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 18:21, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Ironically, in contrast to the other changes trying to bring attention away from Usoolism, these were quite Usooli-centric. I think considering the numbers of adherents Usoolism has in the Twelver world and its sheer organization, these are warranted. --Enzuru 22:51, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Theology of Shia is about Kalam while Usoolism is a branch of Ja'fari jurisprudence. So I disagree with you.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 14:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why I took out Bektashi and Ghulat

Bektashi is in itself really related to Alevism, and is more of a tariqa of Sufism than a school of belief in Twelverism. And, 'ghulat' is just a pejorative, so no use with that. --Enzuru 01:44, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yazdanism and Twelvers Sufis

On Template:Twelvers, I am considering narrowing the branches to four, which would be Usoolism, Shaykhism, Akhbarism, and then Yazdanism, or what is also known as the Cult of the Angels. Yazdanism will include as its branches Alevism, Alawism, Ahl-e-Haqq (Yarsan), and Yezidism. This will correlate with a large rewrite and organization of the Yazdani articles. Tell me what you think. --Enzuru 14:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I think we should separate the three former ones and call them Jafari's sects. All of them fallows Jafari jurisprudence . The other ones differ fundamentally. And I guess Yazdanism is an offshoot sect. I guess in Iran people know them as Satanism. Do you have any good reference which show they are Twelvers. What's your idea about 12 Qutb Sufism. As I know there were too many of them in Iran before Safavi dynasty. --Seyyed(t-c) 15:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
There are several references that both refer to these groups as both Muslim, and non-Muslim. Even among themselves, there is controversy whether to refer to themselves as such, however a majority of them do. It seems to be a theory that all three of these groups are manifestations of an older Kurdish religion, however, mainly Kurdish writers espouse this, such as Kurdistanica, so it might be nationalist propaganda. I will have to research this to be sure if I should consider them all 'Yazdani' or not. And you are correct, none of them follow Jafari fiqh, however there has been a recent movement among a minority of Alevi to do so under the influence of Usooli scholars. I'm not sure about your question about 12 Qutb Sufism, are you referring to Twelver Sufism? From my knowledge, most Twelvers in pre-Safavid Iran belonged to this Yazdani group, however the Sufis seemed to parallel alot with Sunni Sufis in basic texts and doctrines. For example, in the oldest treatise on Sufism, Kashf al-Mahjub, a special section has been set aside for proving Sufism within the tradition of the Ahlul'bayt. --Enzuru 15:18, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
There were several Sufi orders which considered 12 Imam as 12 Qutb. They agree with the 3 first caliphs but also believe in Ali as Wali. As I know Jami and Shah Nimatullah belonged to them. --Seyyed(t-c) 15:25, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Ahh, I was not aware that this belief was common in pre-Safavid Iran, thanks for teaching me this, however I know it has some resonance in modern day aqeedah. For example, Hazrat Allamah Tabatabai made a reference to it in a work of his before, claiming that both sects had a divine purpose only mystics could understand. Also, the Ahmadiyya movement has a similar belief as well, though they are an offshoot of Sunnism. --Enzuru 15:31, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Alawites are not Yazdanis. Funkynusayri 23:04, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Modification

I won't fight about keeping Alawis and Alevis in here anymore, we'll just keep groups that follow Jafari fiqh as Twelvers. Anyway, I took out information that was general Shi'ah information and put it into the redesign Shi'ah template, and also English-ized things here. --Enzuru 17:33, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Just updated the style. --Enzuru 19:32, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Rather than engage in an edit war, please put your opinions here. --Enzuru 22:00, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I'd like you discuss about the issues before inserting them. Thanks--Seyyed(t-c) 10:44, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Definitely. So let's get started:

1) Influential figures. Unlike other faiths (as Corbin noted), Twelver Shi'ah Islam, mainly because of Usulism, is a dynamic and changing faith. Hence, there are certain individuals who have left such a large imprint on the faith, the only equivalents in other religions would have to be figures Paul of Tarsus and Mahavira. We need to take these individuals into play. Here is why I have put the following people:

  • The first four individuals are essential. They were the messengers of Imam al-Mahdi (AS) during the Minor Occultation. There can't be much debate about their importance.
  • Shah Ismail founded the Safavid Dynasty, which made the Twelver branch of Shi'ah Islam dominant over the formerly larger Ismaili one, as well as made Shi'ah Islam dominant in at least one area of the world.
  • Shaykh al-Saduq, we both understand his importance. This also goes without saying.
  • Shaykh Tusi contributed half of the Four Books.
  • Mulla Sadra's views of philosophy and Shi'ah Islam were a partial driving force of the separate development of the Iranian schools in comparison to the Iraqi ones, and helped spark Khomeini's revolution in theology.
  • al-Majlisi's works are essential to modern-day Shi'asm. Though I did not generally include compilers of hadith, he is certainly an exception.
  • Shaykh Ahmad founded his entire own branch (though he did not wish to), he is like the al-Saduq of Shaykhism.
  • Khomeini and the Iranian Revolution, both should go without saying as well.

2) The other figures mentioned in the related movements section, as well as those movements, are without doubt bonded to Twelver Shi'asm in an important enough way to include in this template. 3) Principles of Religion is the translation. "Theology" is just an umbrella term. Principles and Practices of Religion are direct translations because these articles are just there for organization, they do not give the real deep details you need to know to understand the Twelver Shi'ah faith. --Enzuru 21:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I explain my view about different fields:
Ahlul'bayt is too general of a term, it applies to all of Shi'ah Islam and Islam. Leave it for those templates. --Enzuru 21:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
  • I don't think it's good place for notable figures and I'm sure we have too many problems with them. For example why do you want to put Shaykh Ahmad Ehsayee but not Mulla Muhammad Amin Estarabadi who theorized Akhbari school. Then you should put some others too. I disagree with adding notable figures due to preventing editorial war, but in my view these are the notable ones:
You are correct, this could end messy. But you know, earlier figures would be less controversial than newer ones like Khomeini and Shariati. --Enzuru 21:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Compaions: Salman, Abu zar, Miqdad and Ammar.
This is for the general Shi'ah template I think. Until we have more evidence of the contrary, leave this for the general Shi'ah, since I believe Ismaili and maybe Zaidi have the same concept. --Enzuru 21:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, we should put this on there. Good idea. --Enzuru 21:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
  • The first four individuals: They were deputies and trustworthy in fiscal issues but they weren't as knowledgeable as Kulayni or Ibn Qubba. It's sufficient to put Especial Deputies or Four deputies.
Agreed. Good idea. --Enzuru 21:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
  • In tafsir, theology and Fiqh we have several great scholars.
    • Hisham ibn Hakam
    • Sheyk Kulayni
    • Sheyk saduq
    • Sheyk Mufid
    • Sheyk Tusi
    • Khaje Nasir
    • Allame Helli
    • Shahid Awwal
    • Shahid Thani
    • Mulla Sadra
    • Feyz Kashani
    • Allame Majlisi
    • Sheykh Ansari
    • Allame Tabatabaee
  • Political figures:
    • Khaje Nasir
    • Shah Esmael I
    • Ruhollah Khomeini
Maybe we'll make a special template for "The Scholars of Shi'ah Islam"? At least we should put the political figures and movements under the History section. I put it like that in the Ismaili section, but Ismailism is a more political (because the Imams gained political power and prestige) than our Twelver faith. It's arguable. --Enzuru 21:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Does have Principles of Religion any meaning for non-Shia?

I think a better translation would be Principles of the Religion, which has no meaning for other religions, and is a strictly Shi'ah term. --Enzuru 21:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

--Seyyed(t-c) 04:56, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I would also like to restore how the Related Movements section was. If we can agree on the above I'll go through with everything. --Enzuru 21:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't want to make the template political, due to the negative attitude in west and among Sunnis about some political figures.--Seyyed(t-c) 05:41, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
This is an encyclopedia though, it is important to the development of contemporary Twelver Shi'asm. But, I suppose putting Shah Ismail on here would be like putting Constantine on the Christianity template. How about our other figures and changes? --Enzuru 20:38, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Also, we do not need to put Ahlul'bayt on here. It is on the Shi'ah Islam template AND the Islam template already. And Muhammad and Fatima are on the Shi'ah template too, and Muhammad applies to all Muslim groups. I think the old way is better, because it also helps people differentiate who are the Imams between the Twelvers, Ismaili, and Zaidi. --Enzuru 20:42, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
I've made the changes. As we agreed, I left out both important figures (scholars) and political figures. As we also agreed, I shortened the four to The Four Deputies and added Martyrs of Karbala. I restored the related movements section and re-separated the Fourteen Infallibles. We can have political figures, scholars, and the Fourteen Infallibles on their own three templates. I also restored the Related Movements section, I think it is important. We can still discuss and make more changes. --Enzuru 21:10, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
I think it's sufficient to mention the names of some movements and we don't need to mention their leaders or founders. Whoever wants to know more can refer to the article and find the name of the leaders. You can add Safaviya (sufi order) beside Bektashi and Nimatullahi. There is another Sufi movement which is called Zahabi.--Seyyed(t-c) 01:55, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Style

I have a few problems with the style of this box.

1) It's too big. We need to get rid of the excess space and try to compress this.

I tried to thin it out. Tell me what you think. --Enzuru 02:22, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

2) Red links on Wikipedia are a sign of dead links. Counter-intuitive linking is not good

The general policy for lack of better words is keep dead links off of templates except in the case when it is an article that is very important and will be worked on soon. This is the case for those two. --Enzuru 02:22, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

3) Background colors on Wikipedia templates are always predominantly white. This is done for many reasons but primarily because it's a good readable standard. I also see no reason to switch up the fonts.

Everything is readable, I've viewed it on several different computers, monitors, operating systems, and browsers.

4) Blending... the color seems to have been chosen because of the image--but it wasn't properly blended...

I've tried to fix this as best as I could. --Enzuru 02:22, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

--gren グレン 21:13, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Yazidi and Yazdânism

What are the relation of these two articles with Shia. The former may relate to Zarvani, an ancient religion of western Persia, and the later is derived from Sabians. I think we should have good proof to relate them to Shia. I've never heared or read their name as branches of Shia. Thus I remove them. Please tell me your source before adding them.--Seyyed(t-c) 01:48, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

You're right, sorry for putting them in there. I was thinking in terms of weird relations. --Enzuru 02:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)