|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- One of the earliest and most basic texts on Islamic theology, al-Aqeedah al-Tahawiyyah (The Tahawi Doctrine of Belief), is a Maturidi text.
This assertion interested me since I know that al-Tahawai was a follow of Imam Abu Hanafi and since he wrote it why would it be a Maturidi text? Not that this article is wrong... it might be... but, I think it should be at least clarified and should cite a good source. gren 13:12, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, I also think their should be a reference for this...
Ive deleted the link to "Maturidi Creed" - no one should use the Encyclopedia for Propaganda
Additional comment inserted by SBader: Other peoples' comments should not be edited even if wrong, and I shall not do so. However as the link from "Imam Abu Hanafi" leads to "page does not exist", I must explain that it is correctly "Imam Abu Hanifah", whose followers are referred to as "Hanafi". Now both names can lead to a Wikipedia page. "Their" (should be "there")(penultimate line) and the lack of an apostrophe in "Ive"(final line) are non-misleading errors in a comment and can be ignored.SBader (talk) 20:57, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
The Text in Article 'a Maturidi ( Arabic: ماتريدي يا قحبة)' the arabic portion is vandalized
It needs to be corrected to '( Arabic: ماتريدي)' by deleting 'يا قحبة ' which is an added text not pertinent to the article, but is an abuse. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 17:23, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Correct translation of phrases.
During the post renaissance explosion of exotic studies in Europe many names and phrases were translated or transliterated without the required degree of accuracy. Avicenna, Confucius and many others including Maturidi. The latter is a phrase consisting of two words in Arabic. Ma (what) and (Turidi) (you want). I should not enter into a theological explanation of the phrase, but it is certainly two words and should be "Ma Turidi". I hesitate to edit this centuries long error, some editor will change it back with a lame excuse, but at some point someone should, not only in Wikipedia, but in the world of academe.SBader (talk) 21:15, 1 March 2016 (UTC)