|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Naqshbandi article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Archives: Index, 1|
This page will no longer be automatically archived, learn more.
Purported Association of Militants with Naqshbandiya
I removed a section on "Perceived Militancy" because it does not belong on a page that outlines an entire sect or sufi order. There is a page called "Islamic Terrorism" on which militant or fanatical groups and their purported links with Naqshbandi can be mentioned in a more NPOV context.
Note by way of contrast that WP entries on Jewish terrorism (e.g., Stern Gang) or Christian terrorism (e.g., anti-abortion violence) are relatively specific pages that explain how militancy was an integral part of particular groups.
In the case of Naqshbandi, the linkage of militancy is based on an identity claim by certain people some 700 years after the group's founding. In light of political implications stirred by the War on Terror, describing such a claim on the primary WP page about Naqshbandiya raises "guilt by association" POV possibilities for any WP users who come to this page via other linkages, such as Muslim poets or mystics who are labeled "Naqshbandi" on their respective WP pages. Martindo (talk) 09:38, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Tauheedia Naqshbandia Branch
Hazarat Khawaja Abdul Hakeem Ansari wrote in his book narates that he started the Oath of allegiance in 1950 during his stay at Karachi. After three years, he started the separate order of spiritual discipline in 1953 during his stay at Karachi. It is not the branch of any already existing spiritual discipline or chain. He settled at Bannu and met Hazarat Abdul Sattar, his wife and daughter after January 1955. He declared Hazarat Abdul Sattar Khan as his successor in 1968 subject to his death. He wrote and registered his will in the court of law that his spiritual discipline will not be heridatory. He died on January 23, 1977 and Hazarat Abdul Sattar Khan controlled his order.
For reference pleace consult the book: Abdul Hakeem Ansari, Khawaja (1967). Chiragh-e-Rah (جراغ راه). Gujranwala: Markaz Tameer-e-Millat. and his will written on May 1975 and got registered with signatures and the signatures of witnesses.
So, it is requested not to consider his discipline Toheedia/ Tauheedia as Tauheedia Naqshbandia Branch. It is a misconception and mess up the facts.
Syed Rahmat Ullah Shah (talk) 20:05, 18 February 2010 (UTC) Syed Rahmat Ullah Shah
Sohail Iftikhar Research Institute,
University of the Punjab,
Rewrite needed for objectivity
This article is completely unsuited to an encyclopedia; it is essentially a promotional piece written entirely from the inside point of view. It needs a complete rewrite from an objective and historical perspective, with all the POV material removed or rewritten. Languagehat (talk) 18:08, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- Agreed. The section Prediction about the Worldwide Spreading of the Naqshabandi Order is particularly problematic.Grifter1405 (talk) 00:35, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
- I've rewritten it for objectivity. My last edit, at  was undone and I don't have the will, the time, or the knowledge of wikipedia standards and proceedures to engage in a public debate about it. Someone else who is more knowledgeable about them please take over.Ernobe (talk) 21:31, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
I've removed all of the external links. As far as I can tell, each of them links to a different community and/or Naqshbandi practitioner. Such links are not allowed per WP:EL. If there is a single, centralized Naqshbandi organization that has a website, that could be linked. But Wikipedia is not a WP:LINKFARM--we're not here to provide a bunch of links to various somewhat related topics. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:25, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Need for complete rewrite
This article is filled with the naieve, enthusiastic generalizations of a 'believer'. Any serious student of Sufism would blench. It is not even worth taking it point by point. Someone else has to rewrite it. It is not up to Wikipedia's standards.
Neutrality -- POV
I didn't put the neutrality banner up. Whoever did did not discuss it here, so I just wish to clarify that the main talking point in this regard is the fact that there is evidence to suggest that the formation of the Sufi orders led to administrative divisions and wars within Islam ( see https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/handle/10822/558228 for sympathetic, neutral discussion of the issues involved ). This pertains to the other articles on Sufism as well. Ernobe (talk) 17:23, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Salafization of some Kurdish-Turkish Sufis http://www.todayszaman.com/columnist/i-hsan-yilmaz/salafization-of-some-kurdish-turkish-sufis_412802.html Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 21:08, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
The article has so many issues that I don't even know where to begin. For starters, the article spends most of its time talking about the spread of the order rather than what it is, what distinguishes it, or much of its history apart from its spreading. Some entire sections even feel like they were copy-pasted, or at least written in a clearly different tense/tone than the rest of the article. What is there is rather technical and not very helpful to a reader looking for information on the order. What should we do about this? I don't know nearly enough to rewrite the article myself! Kakurokuna (talk) 20:07, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- I re-added a crucial sentence of the intro that was mysteriously removed, but which tells you exactly what Naqshbandi is. For the rest, I don't see much in the way of difficult technical vocabulary. In fact the technical terms of the wikilinks have been translated into English in order to make the article readable. It does need additional references, but the layout is OK and it is not confusing or unclear. So, can we remove 'layout guidelines', 'confusing or unclear', and 'lead section' from the maintenance template?Ernobe (talk) 19:28, 24 March 2017 (UTC)