Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 17, 2008Peer reviewReviewed


Alternative English Spellings of Jihad

edit

I have found at least one and possibly two alternative English spellings to the word Jihad. The first is Jehad, evidenced by Encyclopedia Brittanica[1]. The second is the Jihath, evidenced here on a Vimeo Video[2] (warning graphic only sourced but not linked for this reason) and a PDF document that appears to go into detail about Paramilitary Groups in the area - I think that Sri Lanka has to work with in order to maintain control over the country. One of the groups is the Jihath Group and it appears to be a Jihadist group. The PDF is the fourth chapter in a work and is called "Partners in crime: SLAFs and Paramilitaries"[3]. I think this may be a transliteration issue because it might be that in some transliterations the "d" is replaced with a "th". Possibly because it is transliterated from a Desi background rather than an Arab background. I tried asking/looking around but couldn't get an answer. If anyone knows about Desi transliteration to English for Arabic please advise on if the word "Jihath" is actually the word "Jihad". I think its important because alternative spellings included are not dictionary styles in the sense that WikiPolicy wants to avoid; adding alternative spellings help reader understand what it is they are reading when they see alternative spellings elsewhere.

References

Perceptions on jihad in lede

edit

Why is the western perception on jihad validated here, rather than challenged?

"Most Western writers consider external jihad to have primacy over inner jihad in the Islamic tradition, while much of contemporary Muslim opinion favors the opposite view. The analysis of a large survey from 2002 reveals considerable nuance in the conceptions of jihad held by Muslims around the world."

Alexanderkowal (talk) 10:47, 16 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Semi-protected edit request on 9 July 2024

edit

Please add this to the 3rd paragraph of the lead and wherever else in the body: It is a sin to not send an army of Muslims to terrorise the Kuffar, once or twice a year until only Muslims or those who submit to Islam remain, in offensive jihad. Expelling Kuffar from Muslim lands is defensive jihad.[1] Kuffaar (talk) 06:21, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Not due for the lede, but it can go in the body Kowal2701 (talk) 17:57, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. PianoDan (talk) 17:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Kowal2701: in the discussion at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Divisions_of_the_world_in_Islam?searchToken=99kelod8w0homdty1augcfpcs#Removal_of_sourced_content it can be seen that The Cheesedealer has struck out his statement, so please revert your last edit here (but remove the quotation marks)!-Ganeemath (talk) 16:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
You can make that sentence, In his book, "DEFENSE OF THE MUSLIM LANDS The first Obligation After Iman", he mentions, based on his interpretation of the hadith, that it is a sin to not send an army of Muslims to terrorise the Kuffar, once or twice a year until only Muslims or those who submit to Islam remain, in offensive jihad; expelling Kuffar from Muslim lands is defensive jihad.[1]-Ganeemath (talk) 16:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

References

  1. ^ a b Azzam, Abdullah. DEFENSE OF THE MUSLIM LANDS The first Obligation After Iman. Islamic Books. p. 1. Retrieved 8 July 2024. Cite error: The named reference "n462" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).

God

edit

Kowal2701, this revert is unnecessary. God can mean any God, but the God in Islam is different. Please self revert your last edit.-Ganeemath (talk) 17:02, 19 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Muslims reject all Gods other than Allah!-Ganeemath (talk) 17:05, 19 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
There is no need in an article about an Islamic concept to specify that God is the god in Islam Kowal2701 (talk) 17:58, 19 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Furthermore, it was already linked to God in Islam. – IntGrah (talk) 18:46, 19 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Two separate articles for Arabic Term and Islamic Concept. Misleading, Non-Standard Translatory Description used

edit

Wikipedia’s introductions aren’t translatory but explanatory. The article mixes Arabic translation with Islamic concept. Two separate articles are requested. In sharp contrast, Mein Kampf’s article isn’t dominated by literal translation meaning “my struggle”. 129.137.96.13 (talk) 19:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)Reply