Talk:Twelver Shi'ism/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Twelver Shi'ism. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Aren't the Shi'ites in Lebanon also Twelvers? My understanding was that when Shah Ismail wanted to convert Persia to Shi'ism, he had to import imams from Lebanon, and that it was the previous center of Twelver Shi'ism...at any rate, that should probably be mentioned. john k 07:26, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I don't know, but the story tells us that the Shia of lebanon are in fact decendents of the Iranian merchants who went and settled there.Babakexorramdin 17:12, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

My understanding was that Shah Ismail got Twelver Shiites from Lebanon to help him convert Iran in the 16th century. john k 21:27, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

This would be very unlikely, because he had to go through the territories of the Ottoman Empire in a time when Safavids were not at their top and the Ottomans were much more powerfull. Iran under Shah Abbas was powerfull and for a time had conquered Iraq. I do not know where this story has come from, but I have not come across it in the Persian sources. Safavid's ancestor Sh. Safi himself had established a Shiite school of thought in Iran. Safavids, before getting too strobg-relied on the military services of Turkic-speaking tribes which were driven out of Anatolia. I believe that these tribes were related to the Alevi of Syria and Turkey, in a way or other. And I believe that most likely the first version of Safavid Shiism was some kind of Sufi shiism and not very different from Alevism, and also ismaili as they were widespread in Iran. But later on the more conservative elements within clergy wins and twelver is establisghed. Just to note that the twelve Imam tradition is also present within Alevism. they however do not rely so much oon clergy. The clergy again was at work to secure its position in Iran. Like they did during the Sassanid times. Babakexorramdin 10:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Of what I've learned, yes, the shi'as of Syria have been around much longer than the current Iranian population:) --Muslimguy 77 05:04, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

The Shia of Syria are Alevi, like those in Turkey. However Turkey does have a Twelver Shia population, in Kars and Ardahan region, where the rural people still speak Azeri. Babakexorramdin 17:12, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

In the first part of this article, it refers to the twelvers being "orthodox" Shia. I think that's a bit ambiguous, are they or aren't they?

They are the "mainstream" denomination with the largest population, and the least divergence from Sunnism. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.6.254.34 (talk) 09:59, 24 December 2006 (UTC).

It's really avant-garde to be using this glottal stop symbol in normal running text: ˤ

Wikipedia is not supposed to innovate -- but follow mainstream academic practices.

This is obviously not an English alphabet character and should be replaced by the normally-used apostrophe. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.6.254.34 (talk) 09:57, 24 December 2006 (UTC).

Nice Article, lots of good information. As a history major a lot of this I already knew but there were a couple interesting bits of new knowledge that seem legitimate. I'd like there to be more sourcing though —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.82.227.246 (talk) 17:08, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

The percentages in the article are confusing because it does not say who is included. For example, in Iran, does Ithna-'Ashariyya make up 90% of the entire population (Muslim and non-Muslim), Muslims only, or Shia Muslims only? I checked the source of the percentages, but it was not clear either. -- Kjkolb 23:40, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

This is mentioned as a difference between the Shi'a and Sunni which does not seem to be true: "Moreover, according to Shīˤa, an Imam or a Caliph can not be democratically elected and has to be nominated by God." To the best of my knowledge, Omar, the second caliph, is selected by Abubakr, the first caliph and not by an election! Othman, third caliph, is also selected in another way. Therefore, apparently we can mention this as a difference between Shi'a and Sunni. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.128.138.228 (talk) 01:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

The picture shown in the article is not a depiction of an Imam but the depiction of Prophet Muhammad:

File:Shia Imam.jpg

Pictures of the prophet are quite common in Iran and other Shia communities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.83.141.39 (talk) 06:52, 19 December 2007

The page Jafari contains info about the Twelvers, as these are interchangeable terms. One of these two pages are thus redundant. I suggest that the text in Jafari is incorporated into this text and that the Jafari page redirects to the Twelver page.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.177.244.33 (talk) 16:47, 19 February 2004

Maybe you can merge them and list one for deletion at Wikipedia:Votes for Deletion - Texture 16:55, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I've merged the Jafari article into the Twelver article, and added new info. I set the Jafari page to redirect to the Twelver page. I have not added the Jafari article to the votes for deletions page as the term is very common and is thus suitable for redirecting.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.177.244.38 (talk) 16:33, 20 February 2004

Someone should add a link to the Persian Wikipedia article, at fa:تشیع اثنی عشری. --Alexanderj (talk) 00:02, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done PhilKnight (talk) 00:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Should this article be at Twelver instead? It seems to me like it should be, but I'm no expert and there's every chance that Twelvers might come under the exceptions to the singulars-in-titles convention. -- Perey 17:15, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

• This article should be under the name that is used by Twelver Shia Muslims which is "Ithna Ashariyyah". Armyrifle 13:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Actually, the accompanying article belongs under the accurate title that is most common among, and thus most useful to, English-speakers. I.e., something close to the Twelver Shi`ism that it now has.
    --Jerzy•t 19:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
    

The talk page as it had developed up to the move (back?) to Talk:Twelver Shi`ism was left behind at Talk:Ithna-'Ashariyya, but has now been merged back into this talk page. The preceding section that i have headed "Image" was the only new comment between, i think, 20:35, 22 October 2007 and today. (And, BTW, i have rescued -- from under some Rdrs at Ithna-'Ashariyya -- several hundred revisions of the accompanying article, left there in violation of the spirit of GFDL, and now temporarily at Twelver Shi`ism/Holding area; i will review the situation, and presumably then do a history merge, AKA cut-and-paste-move repair.)
--Jerzy•t 20:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

The premature hijacking of this heavily traveled page without any discussion whatsoever was ill-advised. If you want to fix an error, especially on an important page, discuss it first. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 15:34, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I am going to move it (with some agreement) using the following points:

• The article is Catholicism, not Catholic Christianity.
• We can't use an -ism, I tried this before. Someone rightfully pointed out Twelverism is just a made up word. However, the word Ismailism does exist in scholarly literature, which is in fact why I wanted to use Twelverism.

So, basically we should just use Twelver or Twelver Shi'a, which is what is prominent in scholarly literature. Whatever we decide, we need to reflect the decision on the Ismaili and Zaidi articles. --Enzuru 16:10, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Twelver is actually commonly used on Wikipedia and it redirects only to Twelver Shi`a... Just as a suggestion. I spend a lot of time changing [[Twelver]] to [[Twelver Shi`a|Twelver]], actually. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 21:42, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, I vote Twelver. It has no other referents. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 01:48, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I think, in keeping with our proud heritage of democracies in the Middle-East, your one vote should decide this issue. Go ahead and move the article. --Enzuru 05:21, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I came across this discussion from checking through the contribs of your IP-hopping friend, and noticed this page had been moved via cut-and-paste. I want to remind you that moving pages like that should never be used, because it instantly violates the GDFL. To explain, the GDFL requires all authors be given credit; this is accomplished through the edit history. When the page and edit history are separated, the authors are not given credit, and the page is no longer licensed. I've re-done the move properly, so everything is fine here. However, in the future, if you need to move a page that's blocked by a redirect, please list it in the uncontroversial section at WP:RM, where an admin can move the page. Alternatively, you could put a speedy tag on the redirect, so an admin can delete it to make way for the move. Parsecboy (talk) 12:58, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't agree with the move that was made. I don't get the point why the Shi'a was removed. The word "Twelver" itself does not show the meaning of "Shi'a Ithnā Ashariyyah". Although it is the translated word of Ithnā Ashariyyah, but it is not used among people.-- BlueDevil ^Talk 20:30, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

I made a couple points about this above. Why don't you respond to those and we can see what we need to do? --Enzuru 20:38, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

As an observation, Twelver was vacant, the previous home of this page, and Ithnā Ashariyyah is far and away the very least common term in use in English for the Twelver Shi'a. "Twelver" is actually the most common - and is the exact English equivalent of Ithnā Ashariyyah to boot! Since most of the time on Wikipedia the usage is simply "Twelver" as well (sample: "The [[Twelver]] [[Shia Islam|Shi'ah]]"), we didn't make a totally unused form, "Twelver Shi'a", which require further page link redaction. Also, remember this was a response to the sudden move of this page to one that used inappropriate characters. ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 22:12, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

We know Shi'a is a branch of Islam as it is properly designated in Wikipedia (Shi'a Islam). Therefore in order to be consistent with this, we have to put Twelver Shi'a for the name of this article to show that Twelver is branch of Shi'a and part of grater Islam. And also to show Twelver is not a tradition of Islam like Sufism. By doing this we show a distinction between the traditions and real branches.-- BlueDevil ^Talk 00:32, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

As I was getting at before, is the term Catholic Christianity ever used? Or Protestant Christianity? Or Baptist Protestant? --Enzuru 00:39, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

If we want to speak in general ,no; but if we want to be specific, yes. We say in Catholic Christianity this is such and such. Even in Persian which is spoken in Iran (mainly Twelver Shi'a) we use the term Shi'a after the word "Twelver" or "Ismaili".-- BlueDevil ^Talk 00:52, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Catholic Christianity perhaps (rarely), but going as far as Baptist Protestant? That term is never ever used, and that is basically what Twelver Shi'a is, a branch of a branch. Also, it doesn't matter how it is done in other languages, it matters how scholarly literature by the academia in English does it, that's one of the rules of Wikipedia. And they use Twelver, quite a bit. --Enzuru 01:00, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

We'd have to move a lot of pages if we add that on. You might say "Ismaili Shi'ah" in Persian 20 times a sentence, but in English, you can just say "Ismaili" or "Zaydi" or "Ibadi". ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 01:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Alright :-)-- BlueDevil ^Talk 14:51, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

I was reading A Country Study: Afghanistan Federal Research Division, Library of Congress, Washngton, D.C., electronic file, accessed 22 October 2008, and it talked about the "Ithna Asharia" variety of Shia Muslim. When I looked it up in Wikipedia, it redirected me here, but it was not obvious why, since the English expression "Ithna Asharia" did not appear anywhere in the article. It became obvious after looking at the transliteration of the Arabic that "Ithna Asharia" meant Twelver, but most English language readers seldom look at the non-roman alphabet synonyms, and there was no one-to-one correspondence, so I added the phrase to the synonym list at the head. If the Library of Congress publication uses it, it would be nice to permit informed access that way. --Bejnar (talk) 20:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

This page is unwieldy, but it seems that the bits are disordered. There are repetitious bits and in different orders. I'm going to try to work on it, but if anyone else wants to... ناهد/(Nåhed) _speak! 21:08, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

This article is hopeless, dude. Even you know that. --Enzuru 11:57, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I added a fact tag to the usul ad-din section (or perhaps furu ad-din, cannot remember now) with the hope that I would remind myself to find a Wiki-worthy source listing the usul and furu ad-din. A possibility is "An Introduction to Shi`i Islam The History and Doctrines of Twelver" by Moojan Momen. We'll see, inshallah. Ojalá que todavía tuviera mis libros. :`( PinkWorld (talk) 06:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Pink

I was able to locate the listing of the usul ad-din and furu ad-din in Momen's text and have scribbled something of a reference at the very end of the section. I think that I have been months or perhaps even years trying to find a real source for that list. Alhamdulillah, I finally found it. One thing that I do not appreciate is Momen's description of jihad. No mention is made (at least not immediately) of the jihad al akbar, or spiritual jihad. "Jihad" itself is translated as holy war, which is a mistranslation and misunderstanding of the import and signifigance of the concept in traditional Islam, including our Shia sect. Therefore, I hope to find another Wiki-worthy source with which to describe jihad from among the usul ad-din. PinkWorld (talk) 08:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Pink

Imami refers to both Twelver and Isma'ili because both groups recognise Jafar Al-Sadiq as Imam, from which the term originates. Ja'fari also refers to Isma'ili since their legal code is again based on that of Ja'far Al-Sadiq. It would be more accurate if it read that it genrally only refers to Twelver, or some such Water Stirs (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:41, 19 April 2009 (UTC).

I don't know much about the Shiah sect of Islam and would like to know more about it. But I see a contradiction in this article. Under the headline 'Theology', the article states:

Branches of Religion (Furū al-Dīn)

* Salat (Prayer) — meaning "connection", establish the five daily prayers, called namāz in Persian and Urdu * Sawm (fast) — fasting during the holy month of Ramadhan, called rūzeh in Persian * Zakat (Poor-rate) – charity. Zakat means "to purify". * Khums ("Fifth" of one's savings) – tax * Hajj (Pilgrimage) – performing the pilgrimage to Mecca. * Jihād (Struggle) – struggling to please God. The greater, internal Jihad is the struggle against the evil within one's soul in every aspect of life, called jihād akbār. The lesser, or external, jihad is the struggle against the evil of one's environment in every aspect of life, called jihād asghār. This is not to be mistaken with the common modern misconception that this means "Holy War". Writing the truth (jihād bil qalam "struggle of the pen") and speaking truth in front of an oppressor are also forms of jihād. * ˤAmr bil-Maˤrūf – commanding what is good * An-Nahy ˤana l-Munkar – forbidding what is evil * Tawalla – loving the Ahlu l-Bayt] and their followers * Tabarra – dissociating oneself from the enemies of the Ahlu l-Bayt

This article then later goes further into explaining the raka'ah units of the five obligatory daily prayer of the Twelvers (2, 4, 4, 3, 4). However, as I remembered, the article on the subgroup 'Alevi' stated under the headline 'Relations with other Muslims groups':

The relationship between Alevis and Sunnis is one of mutual suspicion and prejudice dating back to the Ottoman period. Sunnis have accused Alevis of heresy, heterodoxy, rebellion, betrayal and immorality. Alevis, on the other hand, have argued that the original Quran does not demand five prayers, nor mosque attendance, nor pilgrimage, and that the Sunnis distorted early Islam by omitting, misinterpreting, or changing important passages of the original Quran, especially those dealing with Ali and ritual practice.

I don't understand... When it said that Twelvers practice the five obligatory daily prayers, which of the ten groups of Twelvers does it mean? Usuli, Akhbari, Shaykhi, Nimatullahi, Safaviya, Qizilbash, Alevism, Alawism, Bektashi, Tabarie? Or is Alevism the only one group that does not adhere to the practice of five daily obligatory prayers or are there some others? How about it if we explain all non-mainstream variations right after the mainstream explanation, that way we won't have contradictions among the articles. And if there are too many variations within the groups, then the topic should be left to the articles on each particular group. I'm just trying to investigate on the practices/rituals of all Muslims including the non-mainstream sects/subsects. So please, if someone could explain to me if there are other groups within Twelver other than the Alevis who do not adhere to the five obligatory, daily prayers. I'm so sorry I sound like a person who started to complain out of nowhere. Maybe this is what the author is already doing, or maybe I'm mistaken. Thank you so much to the people who wrote this very helpful article.Senantiasa (talk) 16:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Last time I checked, the Twelvers were a radical sect of Islam that believed that it was their duty to rush the end of times upon the world so that the Twelfth Imam(or Thirteenth, please correct me if I'm wrong) would come forth and save them. Yet there is nothing in the article that even remotely indicates this belief, what's the deal? I know that Mahmoud Ahmedinejad believes this, but there should be clarification on this, is it a core Twelver belief? So, controversy segment is a needed addition. Hyblackeagle22 (talk) 14:29, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Hyblackeagle22, I don't know where did you get this specific idea about 'Twelvers'. But its not true to a very great extent. Yes, Twelvers believe that at end of times Mahdi (The Guided One) will come and free world from atrocities of Dajjal (Anti-Christ) and Fill earth with justice and peace as it would have been filled with tyranny & war, and this believe is not specific to Twelvers as it is generic Islamic believe; Twelvers only put great weight and emphasis on it. Same concept is found in all major religions e.g. Christianity (Return of Christ), Judaism (the concept of Messiah), Hinduism (the Kalki awatar), etc. As I myself am a Muslim adherent of Shia-Twelver school, I know that we have been told that, its duty of each and every true person & follwer to assist Mahdi in his mission, but this can't be possible until Mahdi Himself shows up, ending the period of Occulation. I have never been told that its my duty to rush the end of times upon the world so that the Twelfth Imam would come forth and save us. I have been told & read that this is the event for which no one (not even Mahdi Himself) except Almighty God knows that when will it exactly occur. Although there are strings of prophesies which give insifht to event preceeding appearence of Mahdi but there is an attached disclaimer to them that these events (except 4 fixed signs) could be suspended or elongated as per God's wish. Hope I have cleared few of your doubts :) and created few more ;) feel free to respond/comment/ask. --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider^tc_s 05:59, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Lists of names in this article should be sourced in accordance with WP:BLP. As there is no way of constantly maintaining linked articles, this applies to names which have a Wikipedia article as well as those that do not. Any name listed with no verifiable citations should be removed. Refer to WP:NLIST for guidance. Fæ (talk) 09:25, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

the following claim most likely cannot be sourced and should be removed "the term Shi'a Muslim as commonly used in English usually refers to Twelver Shī‘a Muslims only."

exactly how does one know whether the source which uses the word Shi'a is actually only referring to Twelvers? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.68.252 (talk) 06:18, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

There seems to be inconsistency and lack of clarity in the main doctrines section. Under "Principles of Faith," each principle, named in what I believe is Arabic, is translated in parentheses to a single English phrase as its literal translation, followed by a brief, more in depth explanation of the meaning of that principle.

Under "Ancillaries of the Faith," Zakat is translated as "poor-rate." This does not make any sense in literal English, and especially does not make sense in light of the brief explanation. I hope someone with sources, and a better knowledge of Islam and Arabic, will please fix this.

Moreover, "Commanding what is just." and "Forbidding what is evil." are inconconsistently presented: they should be given with the original Arabic term, followed by a single phrase of translation (which is what is already there), followed by a brief explanation.

Finally, Tawalla and Tabarra should have immediate English phrase translations, again for consistency.

I have made some other, quite small, edits, but these I decided only to call attention to, hesitant as I am to make any changes or additions when I am relatively uneducated in the language and religion.

67.187.123.80 (talk) 14:22, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

What has written as the Shia thought in this section is the idea of some Jurists and theologians while the others restrict Guardianship to Judiciary issues and Umur Hasbi [1].--Seyyed(t-c) 04:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Strivingsoul, Sa.vakilian, Mhhossein, and Anders Feder:

this material are deleted with a comment that they are not related to the Twelvers.--Salman mahdi (talk) 16:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

All the Muslims in Usul al-Din are the same, but Twelvers have two more beliefs namely Divine Justice and Imamah which are derived from Tawhid and prophecy respectively; we can not bring these two without their basis and the discussion over the Iman was its introduction.--Salman mahdi (talk) 16:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I recognize it was intended as an introduction, but we don't need a lengthy theosophical proof - just the essential distinguishing features.--Anders Feder (talk) 17:05, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Andres Feder is right. Elaborating the nature of faith seems redundant in a section that should describe the pillars of faith according to Shia Islam. Only the last two sentences seem relevant but they appear to require improved phrasing. Strivingsoul (talk) 17:27, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Anders. First, you should add this information to Iman (concept). Then, you should find something which clarifies Shia view about this concept. --Seyyed(t-c) 08:21, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

@Salman mahdi: we can discuss about the relation between Iman, Fisq (فسق) and Kufr which is one of the important theological challenges from the beginning of Islam and Shia has particular viewpoint about it. This issue relates to the contemporary discussions by Abdolkarim Soroush about "religious pluralism" as well as Takfiris.--Seyyed(t-c) 04:14, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

We can also pay attention to the relevant explanation in Al-Manzilah Bayna al-Manzilatayn المنزلة بين المنزلتين – the intermediate position--Seyyed(t-c) 12:01, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Anders Feder: I saw your comments, please just be patient, I had not enough time to complete it. I will develop it, In Sha Allah.Salman mahdi (talk) 19:07, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

@Salman mahdi: You need to change your style of writing. Writing things like "God guides man through sending the messengers" as if it was factual is tendentious and can ultimately lead to you getting blocked. Mere opinions need to be carefully attributed. If you don't have time to complete your writing, you have every opportunity to write a draft outside mainspace first instead of dumping it here.--Anders Feder (talk) 12:07, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

@Anders Feder: Thanks for your helps, certainly I will take them into account.--Salman mahdi (talk) 16:55, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Anders is right. Based on WP:POV we should clearly mention the viewpoints in such cases.--Seyyed(t-c) 17:11, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

@Salman mahdi: [2]Please follow standard grammar with regards to capitalization. The name of the Islamic god, "God", should be capitalized, but regular words like "he", "his", "him", "one", "names", "attributes", "actions" and "unique" should not, except in the beginning of a sentence. Gods are nothing special as far as Wikipedia is concerned and we don't manipulate grammar in an effort to venerate them.--Anders Feder (talk) 17:22, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Anders Feder: I do appriciate your kindness, you are right, just the names of Allah can be written in capital.Salman mahdi (talk) 14:42, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

@Salman mahdi: I made a mistake here that confused you. "State" is an acceptable synonym for "say" per MOS. I tend to think "say" is more neutral, but there's no preference in MOS.--Anders Feder (talk) 10:14, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

OK, any way thanks for your especial helps.Salman mahdi (talk) 10:23, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

@Salman mahdi: This is tautological: To show the advantage of the prophecy, al-Hilli states that the prophecy is completely beneficial and free from any disadvantages. Tautologies convey no information - it's like saying: "The color of black is black." The sentence should be rewritten so it imparts real information.--Anders Feder (talk) 17:48, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, you are right, I deleted it.Salman mahdi (talk) 03:22, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

@Salman mahdi: thank for your hard attempt; I think we should summarize this article and moving the details to the sub-articles. For example we can move the following sections:

• 2.1.1 Tawhid of the Essence
• 2.1.2 Tawhid of the Attributes
• 2.1.3 Tawhid of Creatorship
• 2.1.4 Tawhid of Lordship

Theology of Twelvers and Tawhid are good place for this information.--Seyyed(t-c) 16:50, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

OK.--Salman mahdi (talk) 17:24, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

I think that its better to add TAQIYA in the article. any opinion?--m,sharaf (talk) 10:59, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

These are especial rituals of Shia which have a very important role in the history of Shia and maintaining the religion. I think they should include in the article.--Salman mahdi (talk) 12:39, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

There are several articles in Irannica as well as a section in Momen's book. You can use them to complete the article.--Seyyed(t-c) 15:03, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

I think these terms are particular to Shia and should be added to the article.--Salman mahdi (talk) 18:48, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Bada' is too technical and can be added to the relevant article: Imamah (Shi'a Twelver doctrine). Mata'e? Do you mean Mut'ah? Adding Jabr and free will to "The Justice of God (Adle Elahi)" is good idea. You can use Mutahhari's work Adle Elahi.--Seyyed(t-c) 05:47, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

I moved Bada' to Predestination in Islam.--Seyyed(t-c) 01:40, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

@Sa.vakilian and Mhhossein:The structure of the article needs to be changed.

I suggest this structure: Shia Islam

1. Twelvers
   1. Usul al-Din
      1. Tawhid
      2. Adl
      3. Nubuwah
      4. Imamah
      5. Ma'ad
   2. Theology
   3. Philosophy
   4. Jurisprudence
      1. The Roots of Jurisprudence.

Salman mahdi (talk) 12:23, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

I can not understand how do you separate Theology, Philosophy and Usul al-Din from each other? We should add History as well.--Seyyed(t-c) 12:31, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

@Salman mahdi: So, where can we include materials such as what's included in "Notable scholars". Do you mean to have other sections not changed? Mhhossein (talk) 13:19, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

• The roots of Shia Jurisprudence is different from Sunni's. Also the doictrines of Theology and Philosophy is different. Ofcourese some especial beliefs to Shia like Tawassol, Shafa'a, Taqiya, Muta'h, Bada', Raj'a should be added.I agree with history section, too. This is my present suggestion, perhaps with increasing my studies, I suggest adding another sections.Salman mahdi (talk) 06:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

• As the article is especial for Shia, I think all the material that are comparing Shia-Sunni should be deleted. Also the section of Occultation should be added. Also the table of the list of the Twelve Imams should be deleted, because it has its own article.Salman mahdi (talk) 07:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

• Ofcourse Walayah and Ismah has an important position for shia, What we do with them?Salman mahdi (talk) 07:29, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Good ideas, however I could not find your answer to my question! I can not understand how do you separate Theology, Philosophy and Usul al-Din from each other? --Seyyed(t-c) 11:03, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps I can not understand you, too. But Theology, Philosophy and Usul al-Din of Shia and Sunni are not different?Salman mahdi (talk) 11:56, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

In my view "Usul al-Din" , "Theology" and " Philosophy" of Twelvers refer to the same things with different arguments. So all of them can merge in "Usul al-Din".--Seyyed(t-c) 08:14, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, is it good to have a subsection under Imamah, namely the succession to Muhammad?Salman mahdi (talk) 12:06, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, of course.--Seyyed(t-c) 08:12, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps it would be better to add a subsection namely velayat-e faqih under the subsection of the Occultation.Salman mahdi (talk) 14:28, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

@Salman mahdi: It seems suitable to me. Mhhossein (talk) 14:43, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I think this section,[Prayer ] is not related to this article.Salman mahdi (talk) 20:11, 19 May 2015 (UTC) It is needed to add The Terminology.Salman mahdi (talk) 05:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

1. Terminology
2. Theological Doctrine (Usul al-Din)
   1. Tawhid (Oneness of God)
      1. Zati (Essential)
      2. Sefati (attributes)
      3. Af'ali (activities)
      4. Ubudiat (the worship belongs solely to God)
   2. Adl (Gos's Justice)
      1. Justice in Creation
      2. Justice in Religious Dispensation
      3. Justice in Recompense
   3. Nubuwah (Prophethood)
      1. Wahy
      2. Angels
      3. Miracles
   4. Imamah and Walayah
      1. The Succession to Muhammad
      2. Ziarat nad Tawassul
      3. Esmah
      4. The Occultation
   5. Ma'ad (Resurrection and judgment)
      1. Raj`a
      2. Akhirah
      3. Shaf'ah
3. Shari'ah (Furu al-Din)
   1. Shahada: Declaration of faith
   2. Prayer
   3. Fasting
   4. Khums and Zakat
   5. Haj
   6. Jihad
   7. Tawalla and Tabarra
   8. Commanding the Good and Prohibiting the Evil
4. Fiqh (Jurisprudence)
   1. The sources of Jurisprudence
   2. Guardianship of the jurisprudent
   3. Taqlid: Accepting a scholar's verdict
5. History
   1. Imamat Era
      1. Emergence (583/13 BH Bi'sat- 713/95 AH Death of Imam Sajjad)
      2. Formulation (713/95 AH Imam Baghir - 765/148 AH Death of Imam Sadiq)
      3. Organizing (765/148 AH Imam Kazim - 874/260 AH Death of Imam al-Askari)
   2. Crisis and Consolidation
      1. Minor Occultation/Sufara (874/260 AH - 941/329 AH)
      2. From 941/329 AH to 991/380 AH (Death of Abul Hasan Ali ibn Muhammad al-Samarri to death of Shaykh al-Saduq)
      3. Baghdad School: Consolidation of Shia disciplines in Fiqh, Kalam, Rijal, Usul, etc (991/380 AH Al-Shaykh Al-Mufid to Death of 1067/460 AHShaykh Tusi)
   3. Jurisprudencial and theological development:
      1. Hillah School: (543 AH Birth of Ibn Idris Hilli to death of 1325/726 AH Allame al-Hilli)
      2. Jabal Amel School (1334/734 Ah Birth of Shahid Awwal to Death of 1558/966 AH Shahid Thani)
   4. Rising to power
      1. Isfahan school (1501/909 AH establishment of Safavid Dynasty and Migration of Muhaqqiq Karaki to 1698/1110 AH Deat of Muhammad Baqir Majlisi)
      2. Ikhbari-Usuli controversies (1698/1110 AH Deat of Muhammad Baqir Majlisi to Death of 1791/1205 AH Muhammad Baqir Behbahani)
      3. Najaf school (Death of 1791/1205 AH Muhammad Baqir Behbahani to Death of 1980/1400 AH Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr)
      4. Qom school, Islamic revolution and Islamic republic (1922/1340 AH establishment of Qom seminary onward)

Seyyed(t-c) 10:09, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Your recommended structure is excellent.Salman mahdi (talk) 08:06, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

All the empty and near-empty sections make the article look extremely amateurish, like an unfinished homework assignment. Why can't you write the body text first and then divide it into sections if you have more than a few sentences? A meatless skeleton is not of any value to the reader.--Anders Feder (talk) 14:32, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Also, section headings should be in sentence case per MOS:HEADINGS: "headings are in sentence case, not title case". All attempts to give the subject an air of special reverence is against WP:NPOV. The text should look no different from one about catfish or herpes simplex.--Anders Feder (talk) 14:51, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your guides, I will take them into account.Salman mahdi (talk) 15:30, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Excellent.--Anders Feder (talk) 15:32, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Another observation: as far as I understand, the vast majority of Twelver/Shia theology is completely identical to Sunni theology. Restating these portions of the theology, such as the doctrine of Tawhid, is completely pointless. Anything that is common to all or most Muslims has no place in this article - it should go into the Islam article or Islamic theology or whatever. The only thing of relevance is how Twelvers differ from other schools of Islam - not the many ways they may be alike.--Anders Feder (talk) 17:08, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

@Anders Feder: Shia theology differs with Sunni one in details. Of course, there is not one Shia and one Sunni interpretation. Therefor, we should explain the details of Twelver's viewpoint. However, I think the comparison of Shia-Sunni views regarding each issue can be covered in its particular article. For example, the different interpretations about Oneness of God in Islam will be covered in that article.--Seyyed(t-c) 18:10, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

@Sa.vakilian and Mhhossein: I think the name of the Akhirah should change to the Day of Judgement. Why the Return is a subsection to Ma'ad?Salman mahdi (talk) 12:52, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

I have a suggestion; to add a section namely The Role of Shia Scholar in the growth of Islamic Sciences.Hum?Salman mahdi (talk) 15:40, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

My topical knowledge is far to limited to evaluate whether that would hold WP:DUE significance, but it sounds very specific/particulate, and perhaps not suitable for an article that is supposed to give a broad overview?--Anders Feder (talk) 15:59, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

@Salman mahdi:This is an article about Twelver's viewpoints and history, therefor it does not include "The Role of Shia Scholar in the growth of Islamic Sciences". You can add this issue in the more related articles such as Science in the medieval Islamic world, Islamic philosophy and Islamic golden age. --Seyyed(t-c) 18:10, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Ah! Much work going on here! The restructuring was vital for this article. Delighting that somebody finally brought it up. With respect to the original proposed structure, I suggest having a section titled "Scholarly fields" or "Religious sciences" to include such fields as Jurisprudence, Theology, Philosophy and Mysticism. These are the main fields that have been historically taught and practiced in Shia seminaries. We would however need reliable sources on Shia sciences/seminaries for the section, which I think must be available. Strivingsoul (talk) 19:49, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

@Strivingsoul: AgreeSalman mahdi (talk) 03:58, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

@Strivingsoul: At present, we have a section for Fiqh. "Religious sciences" is not a good title. Let's think more about it.--Seyyed(t-c) 07:06, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Why not good? I know that's not a common term in English and may sound strange to the Western audience, but that's a matter of different cultural backgrounds. We can define "Religious sciences" as sciences involved in scholarly study, understanding and interpretation of religion (they way it is defined by muslim religious scholars themselves). I can think of no better alternative than what I have already suggested: "scholarly fields". Strivingsoul (talk) 07:45, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Because "science" has a particular meaning. What is your idea about recognizing Marxism as a religion and Marx as its prophet?--Seyyed(t-c) 12:06, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Are you suggesting to decide the terms based on Western conceptions? If so, I disagree for I think that would allow for assumptions of Western thought to distort the Islamic traditional conceptions. As you might know "Religious sciences" is quite a literal translation of "Ulum-e Dīni" (or "Ulum al-Dīni" in Arabic) which encompasses such fields as ilm al-Hadith, ilm al-Usul, ilm al-Kalam, and to take the broadest meaning of the term, even Ilm al-Falsafa (Philosophy) (Note this entry on wikifiqh which defines 'Philosophy' as a form of science), and Ilm al-Irfan (Mysticism). No term other than 'science' can account for both meaning and different applications of 'ilm' in Arabic language and in Islamic traditional scholarship. Strivingsoul (talk) 05:44, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, of course. The native speaker's interpretation is the main criteria to decide. I think you have made mistake by literal translation from Persian to English. In Persian we say "Ulum Tajrobi" which means science and "Ulum Dini" which does not mean science. I suggest you to read Parsania's work on the difference between science and "Ulum Dini", particularly[3] and [4]. --Seyyed(t-c) 17:07, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm quite familiar with major distinctions between the modern notion of science and the traditional notion. But that does not change the fact that they are still both 'science' and there's basically no alternative for the term! It's like refusing to call ancient Babylon 'a city' because cities nowadays have cars and subways while the ancient Babylon didn't! Strivingsoul (talk) 18:06, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

As I know, science is a modern term and there is no traditional notion for it. We should find a term with broader scope which includes the religious studies in its traditional meaning. I suggest to use "Ilm" and put "religious science" or "religious studies" in (). --Seyyed(t-c) 04:59, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

I think reserving 'science' exclusively for subjects and methods that only modern philosophers have recognized as valid (i.e. material and empirical) would result in a systematic epistemological bias and distortion to the representation of knowledge fields outside the realm of the modern civilization. Therefore for having a definition of Science that is neutral and distilled of implicit modern epistemological assumptions, it should be only defined as "a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge." Obviously the rest of the definition by Wikipedia i.e. "...in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe" is the part that reflects the bias of the modern empiricist epistemology which dismisses metaphysical and untestable subjects as valid scientific fields. The proposed generic definition unlike the Modern notion, encompasses Metaphysics and Mysticism as valid scientific fields as well as such fields as Quran, Hadith, Semantics and History which Shia scholars in particular have defined as Ulum al-Naqli or "Transmitted Sciences". Strivingsoul (talk) 05:59, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

I agree with you but wikipedia is not the place which such problems could be solved. The wikipedia is based on the common sense of the native English speaker.--Seyyed(t-c) 07:51, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

But "the common sense of the native English speaker" — even if that's a criterion to observe at all which I highly doubt — should not impose its cultural/philosophical biases on the topic (any topic for that matter). Otherwise, that would lead to the distortion of subjects by Western dominant norms/assumptions, whereas the subjects have to be presented objectively. Strivingsoul (talk) 09:11, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

In my view, we should look for the correct expression in the work of the reliable scholars who are familiar with Islamic culture and have academic authenticity to put forward a translation for it such as Seyyed Hossein Nasr.--Seyyed(t-c) 09:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Strivingsoul and Salman mahdi: I checked the sources and found that "knowledge" and "science" have been used in them. Nasr and Mutahhari have used "Religious science" in the fourth volume of The Cambridge History of Iran while Robinson has used "knowledge" in The Cambridge Illustrated History of the Islamic world.--Seyyed(t-c) 05:38, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Per WP:USEENGLISH, which also applies to section headings per MOS:HEADINGS, I propose moving the Arabic terms out of section headings and integrating them in the body text instead (thusly: [5][6]).--Anders Feder (talk) 02:59, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
As an aside, I also propose using "oneness of God" as the translation of "Tawhid" over "unity of God". The doctrine of Tawhid supposedly developed in response to things like Christian trinitarianism, and the term "oneness" accentuates the connection to this question of enumerability.--Anders Feder (talk) 03:17, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

@Anders Feder:, Thanks for your contributions, but I suppose the best translation of the Tawhid is The Unity of God, because, in addition to the Oneness of God, it also should reflect the totality of his essence, attributes, actions and names. As you have seen in the article, it is not just Oneness in number.Salman mahdi (talk) 04:27, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

"Oneness" does in fact reflect a totality or unity of parts: wikt:oneness defines it as "State of being one or undivided; unity." It is basically a synonym of "unity" where the emphasis is on the quality of being one as opposed to a multitude.--Anders Feder (talk) 04:54, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Referring to reliable sources asHistory of Islamic Philosophy by Henry Corbin and Encyclopedias1, the word Tawhid is common in English and both of them and Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World has translated it to "Unity of God".Salman mahdi (talk) 05:08, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Hmm. The 2013 edition of "History of Islamic Philosophy"[7] has "oneness", as does the Encyclopedia Britannica article you link to[8]: "Tawhid ... the oneness of God".--Anders Feder (talk) 05:25, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

But as I investigated, Unity is more than Oneness in both of them.Salman mahdi (talk) 06:16, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the usage of Tawhid instead of oneness or unity as the title of the main article, I propose to use Tawhid. It is a technical term and an not be translated easily.--Seyyed(t-c) 04:50, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

I agree with the usage in the title of the main article, because "Oneness of God" would make for a poor and ambiguous article title. Here, for the section heading, I frankly would prefer even "Unity of God" over "Tawhid", exactly because the latter is jargon. If the instances of jargon can be woven into the body text, though, that is great.--Anders Feder (talk) 05:58, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

@HyperGaruda: As source says, mustabsir means individual who convert to twelver sect of shia not other like Zaidiyyah and so on. So this article is more appropriate. Saff V. (talk) 14:47, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

@Saff V.: No, that Hudson Institute article does not say anything about Twelvers. It only speaks of "a convert to Shiism", when it discusses mustabsir. --HyperGaruda (talk) 14:53, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Ok, You are right! Saff V. (talk) 09:09, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Searching for "Mutawali" on Wikipedia redirects to this article, but nowhere does it explain why. Shouldn't it be included in the "Terminology" section? Wookieface (talk) 14:47, 25 August 2019 (UTC)