Talk:Shia Islam

No pictures

Why is there no pictures of Imam Ali or Imam Hussein or Imam Reza shrines? You put picture of mecca, and bahrain shias but not Iraqi/Iranian Shia pictures?

Please fix this immediately,and put a Imam Reza picture up.

Iranians are credited very much for keeping the faith alive, as well as building these mosques, it is upmost importance and of respect to give credit where it is due.

Put the pictures up please.

And thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.80.105.24 (talk) 06:41, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Number of Shi'a in Yemen

Here are sources stating the number of Shi'a in Yemen. Please include these statistics in the article.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/wideangle/episodes/pilgrimage-to-karbala/sunni-and-shia-the-worlds-of-islam/1737/

http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/topic,45a5199f2,45a5f8b22,488f180d1e,0.html

http://www.khaleejtimes.ae/displayarticle.asp?xfile=data/middleeast/2009/September/middleeast_September406.xml&section=middleeast&col=

http://www.islamicweb.com/beliefs/cults/shia_population.htm

Shia Population in Pakistan

I have repeatedly try to highlight the fact that the actual estimated Shia Muslim Population of Pakistan is far more then the given lame facts by UNCHR or CIA FACTBOOK. I am a have now finally provided references supporting my claim of the fact that Shia's in Pakistan make up about 25% or above, out of the total Muslim Population of Pakistan. Let me be clear about this that though Muslim are about 97% of Pakistan in this regard we are only estimating the Muslim population and the sect's in Pakistan. Hence the Shia are estimated to be more then 30 million out of 160 million. In future i would provide further references supporting my claim. I would likely mention two links supporting this. 1)http://www.imamreza.net/eng/imamreza.php?id=3591 and 2)http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=106508&sectionid=351020401---> the last paragraph.

According to the 2007 Pakistan Inter-Faith Society Dialogue in Karachi out of the total 100% of Muslims in Pakistan Shia Muslims are around 25-30%. Pakistan Bar-Council meeting with the Census Commission of Pakistan under the Interior Ministry repeated the fact that Shia Muslims were One-Third of Pakistan's population. And so it is acknowledged by many and also accepted by the Shia community of Pakistan. I came to know this through the Newspapers. <ref name="DAWN NEWS">

I would kindly request you all to stop changing the facts by relying on decades old facts from the CIA factbook and UNCHR. Kindly look for further independent references in this regard free from any political or religious pressures. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paki90 (talk • contribs) 22:56, 11 October 2009

The statistics in question are neither "decades old" nor "lame facts" by either UNCHR or the CIA; they were published in October 2009 by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, a strictly non-advocacy organization. Since the Pew report, 'Mapping the Global Muslim Population: A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World's Muslim Population', would appear to be the epitome of a reliable, third-party, published source, I have reverted the article back. — Kralizec! (talk) 00:40, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

It seems we need a thorough revision in our policy of accepting single source for demographics (I myself have following this practice since the day I created democraphics sub-section on this articele and have been thorouhly defending the stance). We can have look on different sources and have average/mean/etc so that it can incorporate various estimates. We'll need statistical knowledge for this but I think this approach will result in more balanced and suufficing estimate of the Shia population. --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi^talk! 07:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

All the sources stating the fact are based on either 1981 or 1998 census report. Hence these sources are correct though yet old, although rough independent estimates suggest they account for one quarter (15-20%) of the population. However, Shia Muslims claim to make up one-third of Pakistan’s population of 180 million, according the to current estimates the actual Shia population is more than 30% of Pakistan on this link, here and here, since in the last census reports great number of Shia families publicly never exposed their Shia faith by practicing "Taqiyya", due to reason that they feared getting killed since during early 80s till 90s, the last two decades were bloody and the Shia's in Pakistan had to face mass execution by the hands of extremist Deobandi and Salafi organizations, many Shia groups continue to practice Taqiyya since they fear death by the hands of Anti-Shia forces that use to dominate Pakistan at that time. There was a complete lawless situation, and yes no body talked about the genocide that the Shia had to suffer by the state sponsored extremists.Overwhelming results regarding Shia execution in Pakistan. Last year i attended a "Inter-Faith Religious Harmony Convention" at the Marriott Hotel in Karachi, the convention was presided by the Judges from the Supreme Court Bar council, Secretary of Interior, Secretary of Religious affairs and many notable Scholars. In the convention they all laid emphasis on co-existence and facts regarding the total sectarian division in Pakistan and stated this; "Around 65% of Total (To be precise) Pakistani Muslims are Sunni Muslims and there is a minority 30% Shi'a Shia Ithna 'ashariyah Muslims, while remaining 5% of the Muslim population comprises Salafis, Nizari, Sufi and Zikri. Then the secretary of religious affairs (Mr. Agha Sarwar Raza Qazilbash)[1] stated that Muslims are divided into following schools: the Barelvi 39%, Shia Ithna Asharia 25%, Deobandi 21%, Ahle Hadith or Salafi 5%, Ismaili 5%, Bohra 0.25%, and other smaller sects." Now lets talk about this division, The Barelvi, Deobandi, Ahle Hadith, Salafi are sub-sects of Sunni Islam, While Shia Ithna Asharia, Ismaili, Bohra are sub-sects of Shia Islam. Then everyone talked about various problems like religious freedom, sectarian hatred, etc while one of which was Taqiyya in practice, due to which the actual Shia estimates in Pakistan has always been uncertain and is certainly more then the mentioned 25%. I hope you understand Taqqiya then hopefully you'll understand my claim and what this is all about. SyedNaqvi90 (talk) 16:35, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Reference is not clear and gives data of 1980s (atleast I understood that). --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider^tc_s 14:56, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello, i understand that you are an admin and you primarily focus on demographic and Shia related article and stubs and only accept sources meeting WP:verifiability, but brother the source over here and this link says its 30%, and fulfills both the WP:NEWSBLOG & WP:verifiability requirement you need to understand my claim. According to "Gall, Timothy L. (ed). Worldmark Encyclopedia of Culture & Daily Life: Vol. 3 - Asia & Oceania. Cleveland, OH: Eastword Publications Development (1998); pg. 612-614", Pakistan's Shia Muslim population was more then 37 million which is actually a statistical figure of the past two decades. And according to the CIA factbook Pakistani Shia Muslims are more then 20% hence PewForum 10% -15% stats are no where near to the respective 20% and 30% figures. And Pewforum states "Readers should bear in mind that the figures given in this report for the Sunni and Shia populations are less precise than the figures for the overall Muslim population. Data on sectarian affiliation have been infrequently collected or, in many countries, not collected at all. Therefore, the Sunni and Shia numbers reported here are expressed as broad ranges and should be treated as approximate estimate", and since Pakistan never really had a census based on sectarian division Pewforum's report is not a Legitimate truth, rather a rough estimate. While Shia Muslims of Pakistan claim to be one third of Pakistan's Muslim Population. You should understand my claim. Would please take my reasoning in consideration and kindly mention both facts, all have sources claiming it. While that claim of Shia in Pakistan to be one third of Pakistan, you still think thats a made up number? Please realize this, i am not lying or making stories. Regards! SyedNaqvi90 (talk) 04:06, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi, since Pakistan never really had a census based on sectarian division so any and all claim are just estimates. Pewforum is an average of all the dependable estimates it is them most recent statistics and has the widest cover of all the estimates; that is the reason it was taken as primary source for demographic data on this article. Although it is not the final record but it holds high-ground. There are various grounds which should be cosidered before taking a source as reference. As this is the case of demographics (which is not static) we need most recent verifiable source. Now that does not mean that recent source taken from some website can discard comparatively older source which is more reilable (e.g. Govt, UN, International organizations, etc.). The reference provided above was not that good for demographics (as per my view) but I did not wanted to waste the reference so I placed it in Persecution section. --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider^tc_s 06:34, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Hey, i accept your view, but what is wrong in mentioning both figures? We can mention it to be between 15% to 30%, hence satisfying both point of views. Would you please re-consider this? SyedNaqvi90 (talk) 09:56, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

While I am not opposed to the inclusion of a second set of statistics as long as they are from a reliable, third-party, published source, the numbers from the Worldmark Encyclopedia of Culture & Daily Life can hardly be considered current, especially since they are now twelves year old. Do you have any other reliable sources from within the past four or five years? — Kralizec! (talk) 14:04, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Well i am glad that you are willing to accept this, here are two sources full filling the reliable, third-party, published source criteria, this link and this one. You may also consider this link. Though I'll soon update you with few more recent sources. Till then you can use these. Thank you! SyedMANaqvi 03:25, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

The presstv.com article states, "Shias say they make up one-third of Pakistan's 160 million-strong population" which is not exactly a credible source for population statistics and demographic information (otherwise a pro-Sunni source could just as easily be quoted as saying that Shias make up 1% of the population). The islamicinsights.com article looks like a good source for the 30% statistic, but it should not carry any more or less weight than other reliable, third-party, published sources that indicate other numbers (like the BBC News which states 20%). — Kralizec! (talk) 12:27, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I think we can enter two more columns to demographics data table i.e. minimum estimate/claim & maximum estimate/claim. To start with we can have blank values. Will be shortly expanding the idea/proposal. --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider^tc_s 10:37, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Well you are right about the third party claim, and i too regard that to be the case. But we can also see it from a different angle, that is, if somebody without knowing ones family members goes on giving random estimates about their actual size. Hence we should respect both point of views, and like Faizhaider said, we should further expand it by mentioning the demographic data in the table, i.e. minimum estimate/claim & maximum estimate/claim. And we should start working over expanding it, need suggestions. SyedMANaqvi 13:43, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Beliefs edit

The respect that Sunni Muslims show to ‘Ali and his descendants ("sayyids" in the East or "sharifs" in North Africa) is just one of several ways in which Shia Islam has influenced Sunni Islam.

I removed this edit as it is inherently incorrect. The Fatimids were known as Syed through witnessed accounts (and later collated as Hadiths) which confirmed the Prophet Muhammad (saaw) referred to Al-Hassan and Al-Hussain (as) as Syeds. This respected title did not originate from Shia Islam, but from their ancestor Prophet Muhammad (saaw) corroborated by the Sahabis who witnessed this statement. These Hadiths stating this case are accepted by Sunnis, especially Sufis, therefore this is not exclusive to or originating from Shia'ism.

The second paragraph

They are considered Kufr by some Sunni Muslims who reject Shia Islam as a form of innovation (bidah) who claim taking the graves of famous Imam's as a place of worship is an act of Kufr. Throughout history many of the followers and Imam's have been persucted and sometimes killed.

I have several objections:

1. No citation given.
2. Bidah doesn't necessary equals kufr.
3. Shia are several factions (like Sunnis), the above statement doesn't apply to all Shia. In addition, some Shia consider other Shia from other factons as bidah and/or kufr.
4. The reason given is not unique to Shia. Some Sunnis also take graves as a place of worship. Sole Soul (talk) 11:58, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Well it's been several weeks, so I'm just deleting it. It's unsourced and riddled with weasel words. Ka-pow! Peter Deer (talk) 16:29, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

 Done! Whoops, looks like someone beat me to it. How about that...Peter Deer (talk) 16:31, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Majority in Iraq?

The demographics of Iraq page, following Encyclopedia Britannica and the CIA World Fact Book, contradicts this assertion. How can we square this? 128.135.29.48 (talk) 21:19, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

The statistics in question are by either UNCHR or the CIA; they were published in October 2009 by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, a strictly non-advocacy organization. Since the Pew report, 'Mapping the Global Muslim Population: A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World's Muslim Population', would appear to be the epitome of a reliable, third-party, published source, I have reverted the article back. --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider^tc_s 06:35, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Careful

Can someone reword the following statement in the introduction, it misleads the reader into thinking that different branches of Islam existed prior to the rule of the following 4 caliphs.

"The Shi'a identity emerged during the lifetime of Muhammad"

There was no Shia Sunni sect during the life time of the Prophet, and this was something that came about later on. In fact Iranians were first Sunni's before converting to Shia's, especially during Safavid era. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.58.132.95 (talk) 01:37, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

This is a very twisted logic. There were no Sunnis either..there was one Islam and it was led by a variety of good/bad caliphs. Actual Islam and the notion of two sects stems from the notion that a person is not of either sect when describing them and in essence modern muslims have founded another sect which is the 'non sect sectarians'. That too is illogical as it would seem that modernity cannot comment on the past better than the actual participants did in history and those people identified Rafidis (Ahl Bayt followers) as early as the 2nd century post Hijra. Lilac 3/14/10```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilac Cotton (talk • contribs) 17:35, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't make sense

"One of the most powerful and influential Shi'i ulama of all time" also preached during this era. Working during the Safavid era, Muhammad Baqir Majlisi, worked diligently to rid Twelver Shi'ism of the influence of Sufiism (which had been closely linked to Shi'ism) and philosophy, to suppress Sunnis and other religious groups in Iran, and propagate strict adherence to obedience of Islamic law (sharia).

There is a correlation between Shiism and Sufism, however the writer states that Majlisi worked hard to rid Shiism of the influence of Sufiism which again is linked to Shiism...how does this make sense in that he suppressed sunni's and other religious groups?

suppressing a Shia philosophy embedded in Shiism, and somehow persecuting Sunnis doesn't make sense. Sorry if I interpreted this incorrectly but it definitely needs revising —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.58.132.95 (talk) 01:42, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Iranian-Americans are far more numerous in the United States than census data indicate, according to research by the Iranian Studies Group, an independent academic organization, at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). The group estimates that the number of Iranian-Americans may haved topped 691,000 in 2004—more than twice the figure of 338,000 cited in the 2000 U.S. census.[5]

According to extrapolated 2000 U.S. Census data and other independent surveys done by Iranian-Americans themselves, there are an estimated 1-1.5 million Iranian-Americans living in the U.S. in 2009, with the largest concentration -- about 72,000 people -- being in Los Angeles.[13][14] For this reason, the L.A area with its Iranian American residents is sometimes referred to as "Tehrangeles" or "Irangeles" among Iranian-Americans.[15] An NPR report recently put the Iranian population of Beverly Hills as high as 20% of the total population. Iranian communities in the U.S. also have varying religious populations among each city. Other large communities include New York; New Jersey; Washington, D.C.; Seattle, Washington; and Houston, Texas.[16] Iranian-American organizations, including the Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans and Iranian alliances across borders have banded together to form the 2010 Census Coalition, focusing on educating the Iranian-American diaspora about the 2010 Census.

How is it that, in the Shia demographics section, there are only 200-400 000 Shias living in USA. When there are clearly over million Iranian Shias living in the US. There are Jewish Iranians, Christians, Catholics, and Zoroastrians, but all of these pale in comparison to the overwhelmingly Shia majority of Iranians. In short the stats should reflect the number of Iranians living in the US and on the fact that most of them are Shiites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.58.132.95 (talk) 01:47, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Shiism criticisms

The following are criticism of Shia practices, rituals, and rites that find their origin during the age of the Safavid empire. And many scholars have said that the English are responsible for creating these when they had close relations with the Safavids and learned about the religion, thus fabricating rituals and practices that cannot be found in the Qur'an or during the life of the Imams. They also instigated the growing tension between Shia's and Sunni's by spreading lies about the oppressive first Caliphs who invaded Iran, namely Abu Bakr, Osman, etc. Although the following does not include any information on the role that the British played in creating these 'differences' between Shiism and Sunnism, I will try to find some sources in English.

Following is taken from the Ahmad Kasravi page:

He distinguished two different types of Islam: the Islam of the pious Prophet and the Islam of all the various sects that had emerged from the spread of the religion. According to Kasravi, the two were opposed to one another. Existing Islam was an institution run by the clerics, beneficial to no one and the source of great misfortune. The object of religion, he argued, was to secure the welfare of the people by finding solutions to their daily problems such as poverty, unemployment, and ill health. These he believed, were the acts which would please God.

According to Kasravi, the clergy did not perform their expected role. Instead of functioning as the enlightened shepherd who would lead his flock to spiritual and material felicity, they misled the people, perpetrated ignorance, deprivation and superstition. Kasravi reproached the clergy on several counts. He derided their role in deepening the animosity between Shi'i and Sunni Muslims. He attacked the custom of building shrines for the Imams and characterized their worship as idolatry. He accused the clergy of deceiving the people by encouraging them to go on pilgrimages as a means of attaining salvation or as a guarantee for the realization of a miracle. Kasravi argued that a reward could be expected only for a useful act. The lavish expenditure on pilgrimage, he maintained, was best spent on feeding and clothing the hungry and the poor. He mocked the concept of mediation (shafa'at), according to which on Judgment Day the Imams would request the salvation of a sinner from God and obtain it if only he were to mourn the Imams, visit their shrines and petition them with prayers (tavasol). Kasravi revolted against what he called the cult of personality of Shi'i Imams which had led to the Shi'i custom of 'people worshipping'. Thus Kasravi claimed that the faith had to be cleansed from all its impurities and called for a return to its original essence. Many of Kasravi's above mentioned criticisms of Shi'i rituals and practices as well as his view on the role of the traditional clergy, later found its echo in modernist Islamic circles and especially in the works of Ali Shariati.

Kasravi, who at first seemed to be a reformer of Shi'ism, later hardened his position and became anti-Shi'i. In his book Shi'igari, 'The practice of Shi'ism, he bases his refutations of Shi'i beliefs on the Qur'an, the practice of the Prophet and Imam Ali. Throughout the book he remains highly respectful and reverential towards Imam Ali, Imam Hossein and their original followers. According to Kasravi, two factors were instrumental in institutionalizing the deviations and aberrations of the Shi'i faith: Imam Ja'far Sadeq, the sixth Shi'i Imam and the founder of Shi'i feqh (jurisprudence) and the Safavid dynasty. Where as Imam Hossein revolted against Mo'awiya to regain his right to caliphate, Kasravi, argues that Imam Ja'far Sadeq claimed himself to be the rightful and God-ordained imam, yet instead of struggling for his right, he chose the safety of his home. Proclaiming power without wishing to challenge the existing political power necessarily bred certain problems. According to Kasravi, the Shi'i practice of dissimulation of one's real beliefs (taqiyeh) when survival is at stake, was in fact a means of deception which legitimized falsehood. The safavid rulers who wished to prove their Shi'i zeal went to extremes to uphold established Shi'i rituals and rites. With the active collaboration of the clergy, they accentuated those aspects which Kasravi believed to be impurities. They institutionalized the custom of insulting Abu Bakr, Omar, and Osman, thereby deepening the hatred between Shi'a and Sunnis. It was also during their time that Islam became synonymous with observing certain formal rituals such as attending and weeping at mourning sessions (rowzeh-khani), going on pilgrimages and petitioning the imams with prayers. Later, Shari'ati to, identified Safavid Shi'ism as a 'polytheistic' religion. Kasravi's attack on the practices of certain Islamic jurists (faqaha) and the Safavids, under whose rule Shi'ism became Iran's official religion and the Shi'i clergy obtained power and prestige, was a challenge to the dominant perception of Islamic practices. Kasravi, however, was very careful not to question or negate any of the three fundamental basis for Islam, namely monotheism, prophethood and resurrection.

From the Shi'i community's point of view, Kasravi crossed the Rubicon when he attacked the authenticity of certain essential pillars of Twelver Shi'i thought and insulted certain highly revered Shi'i infallibles. He rejected the commonly held belief that the first three caliphs had usurped the position of Imam Ali. He challenged the concept of imamate, or the right of Imam Ali and his male lineage to the religious and temporal leadership of the Islamic community. Kasravi rejected the infallibility of the Twelve Imams, ridiculed the existence of the Twelfth Imam and consequently the central Shi'i notion of his occultation and his promised return on earth. In his writings, Kasravi demeaned several of the imams and Fatemeh, the daughter of the Prophet and Ali's wife. Kasravi repudiated the axiomatic theoretical basis of Shi'ism. His criticism was no longer directed one or another member of the clergy, certain practices or rituals, but the content, object and raison d'etre of the Shi'i faith. His discourse had became anti'Shia. Having had a traditional clerical education, Kasravi must have anticipated the traditional response of the clerical community to his discourse.

Kasravi's criticism of the mechanical, superstitious, ahistorical and dogmatic nature of Shi'ism, as it was practised in his days, left an undeniable mark on the Muslims who sought to modernize their religion. Kasravi's tumultuous life and his fate also indicated the extent and limitations of an open attack on certain rituals and practices, the clergy and ultimately certain fundamentals of the faith. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ditc (talk • contribs) 02:33, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Agreed and because Imam Ali, pbuh ordered Taqiyya (dissimulation), the criticism that Kasravi held is suspect and cannot be considered a legitimate criticism. In order for him to be at odds with the concept he would have to raise an argument about the legitimacy of taqiyya in terms of it perserving the knowledge and data of the twelve Imams. That he demeaned the prophet's daughter denotes that he is included as an enemy to Shia Islam and can never be included in a membership of those who sided with the Ahl Bayt. Lilac, 3/14/10```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilac Cotton (talk • contribs) 17:57, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

ambiguity

'The Shi'a identity emerged during the lifetime of Muhammad,[13] and Shia theology was formulated in the second century.'

second century going by by which calendar?

Better to put specifically the (Islamic) year Shia theology was established. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ditc (talk • contribs) 09:58, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

It is ludicrous to suggest such a thing because in order to suggest it, one willingly acknowledges Sunni Islam as the "true Islam" which of course is antithetical to the notion of two specific groups identified in the Quran itself of having 'existence'. Lilac, 3/14/10```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilac Cotton (talk • contribs) 17:59, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Second paragraph appears to be tampered with

The first sentence is convoluted and apears to have a biased insertion "Shia is true and thats all you need to know". Does not conform to Wikipedia's requirements of neutrality. 71.240.189.31 (talk) 17:42, 23 April 2010 (UTC)Garrett 4/23/10

Good catch! — Kralizec! (talk) 22:54, 23 April 2010 (UTC)