Talk:Alevism/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Relation with Yazidism, Ahl-i-Haqq and Yârsânism

The relation with these sect/belives/religions should be add to the main article. There is strong link between them. jam, haq, musical tradition, monogamy, Sufism,... there are much more relation between alevism and ahl-e-haq than shia or sunnies. for example this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y%C3%A2rs%C3%A2nism

This is an valid request. I confirm this. Westberlin1985 (talk) 08:54, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Pictures

The page lacks visuality. Here are some basic pictures that can be added to increase readibility. I cannot upload a file to that I am not an established user. Someone please upload them.

A popular portrait of Ali hangs on almost all Alevi family's wall:http://www.kocak.dk/images/HZ.%20ALI.jpg[1] Alevis performing cem ritual : http://www.dogushaber.com/dogus/resimler/semah.jpg[2] http://www.kenthaber.com/Resimler/2005/08/31/00012495.jpg[3]

For Alevi art: http://img20.yukle.tc/images/4945celalabbas1kh1.jpg[4] There are no pictures here. Every single link is dead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.36.230.2 (talk) 14:42, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Relations with other Muslim groups

The section is heavily biased towards the Alevi's viewpoint. It would be nice if you trim it off, and try to summarize the Alevi/Sunni dispute rather than siding witht the Alevi totally, dedicating only a few words for why the Sunnis see the Alevi as wrong, and two three paragraphs to why the Alevi sees the Sunnis as wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.176.220.156 (talk) 07:16, 17 July 2009 (UTC) Can you be more specific? What is incorrect in the article? By definition every sect or religion believes it is the only true one and all others are incorrect. We cannot go into too much detail on the differences without adding too many paragraphs. It needs to stay brief and neutral but you need to be more specific. Thanks BilgeHan1 (talk) 23:12, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Bias

This is still a very bias article from when I last checked it. One line inparticular: 'They are considered kafir by a vast majority of Sunni Scholars. Accordingly, Alevis suffered oppression and massacres at the hands of religious fanatics for centuries.' The term fanatic is a derogatory term and thus makes the line not neutral. I have edited that part out.--IsaKazimi (talk) 13:10, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
The whole entry was unnecessary anyway. So it is a good thing you took it out. I am curious however. How is it a bias to call those who massacred Alevis in the name of religion as religious fanatics? Did you want to call them your average moderate believer? Joe5323 (talk) 01:05, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Not at all, however a degoratory term suggests bias and bias invalidates the article. In the same way we would not label Hitler as a 'psychopath' on his page, would we?--IsaKazimi (talk) 19:10, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

We would if it were the scholarly consensus. A better comparison would be with Mormonism, which most other Christian denominations would reject as heresy. However, these same Christian denominations also disagree about one another--are we to add "considered heretical by other Christians" to the page on Roman Catholicism? (Surely not.) Does it depend solely upon numbers? (That seems unfair as well.)

On the other hand, it is important to note that the Alevi often do receive such labels from outside Muslim groups. In that case, we have to be careful to identify who has said what. "Islam" cannot have an opinion (at least not that we can neutrally identify), only people and books (or perhaps councils) can say anything.

Remember, though, that the Ayatollah Khomeini is reported to have said nice things about them! (I would like to see the exact quote.) Dawud (talk) 08:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Shi'a view

No, Shi'a do not believe that whoever says the Shahadah is a Muslim. Like the Ahl al-Sunnah, it depends on other believes of the group in question. For example, the Ahmadiyya say the Shahadah. They are not considered Muslims however because they believe in another prophet after Muhammed (s.a.w.) and the same goes for the Alevis. People who believe in a distortion in the Qur'an, amongst other things, are unlikely to be consider Muslims by any mainstream Muslim scholar. Ayatullah Khomeini doesn't represent all Shi'a aswell, so his fatwa is only true to those who follow him (which most do not at present). The most prominent Shi'a scholars of our time (e.g. Ali Sistani, Sadiq Shirazi, Jawad Tabrizi etc.) do not consider Alevis to be within the fold of Shi'a Islam or Islam in general for that matter.--IsaKazimi (talk) 13:10, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Moved that Paragraph to a Sub-Section

Since many Shi'as like yourself and many Alevis agree that Alevis should not be classified as Shi'as, I moved this paragraph to an existing sub-section. If you look at the section called "Relations with other Muslim Groups", it has a sub section called Relations with Shi'as.

But in general I would say it does not matter what others label Alevis (e.g. Muslim or Shi'a). What is important is what majority Alevis say about themselves. They consider themselves as true Muslims. No one has the authority (except God if there is one) to decide who is a true Muslim, or Christian, or Budhist, etc... Joe5323 (talk) 20:47, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but the Aleviyyah are not unified in their identity. Some say they are Muslim, others say they are Alevi and some just identify themselves as Kurdish. I have also, removed the word 'traditional' in the line mentioning Khomeini's fatwa, because this is an incorrect interpretation of it. 'traditional' gives the impression of orthodoxy. Khomeini just meant that he considers the Aleviyyah to be technically Shi'a in terms of theology. The word 'traditional' did not appear in his edict though --IsaKazimi (talk) 19:03, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Overcrowding the Introduction with Islam Classification

Past and current governments in Turkey have denied the unique character of Alevis. The state collects taxes from all religious groups and then spends all that money on Sunni mosques, imams, education and etc... As a matter of fact, the budget of the Office of Religious Affairs is more than combined budget of many other ministries. They imply that Alevis like all Muslims should go to mosques instead of Cem Evi, and their children should learn Sunni version of Islam, and that Sunni trained imams should provide spiritual leadership to Alevis. Therefore this is a sensitive and controversial subject for all Alevis.

In the introductory paragraph, the second sentence states that Alevi is one of the many Islamic groups. Then there is plenty of information under the "Relations with Other Muslim Groups" that talks about Shia classification.

Ironically the people who are trying to overcrowd the introduction section with more than necessary references to Islam and Shia classification are the same people who criticize Alevis for not going to mosques and for not following the Namaz praying. There is only one possible explanation for this. They like to deny the unique nature of Alevi beliefs so Alevi identity can be denied and Alevis can be assimilated.

Here is a fact to ponder about: There are much more major differences between Shia's and Alevis, than there are between Shia's and Sunnis. Joe5323 (talk) 20:19, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, i totally agree. I think the distinction between Alevi'ism and Shi'ism should be made more apparent. In my opinion, Alevi'ism is a cultural Kurdish religion that draws some influence from Shi'a and Sufi values. However, a entirely unique religion in itself. However, your description of the State enforcement of Sunni Islam is misleading. Only a year or so ago, the court ruled in favour of a Alevi family who challenged the system in schools of offically teaching the Sunni version of Islam as a compulsory subject.--IsaKazimi (talk) 01:36, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the support. I have couple of corrections. Most Alevis are Turks and also many Alevis are Kurds (same with Sunnis). FYI. The court ruling you are talking about was not a Turkish court but the European Court of Human Rights (in 2007). The religious education is still compulsory. Nothing changed. This article is a great read on the subject.

http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/articles/eav102607aa.shtml

As a matter of fact, Alevis are organizing a mass demonstration in Istanbul on the 8'th of November to protest the widespread discrimination against Alevis by the state.

Joe5323 (talk) 02:30, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, it was an interesting article. We also shouldn't forget the discrimination practicing Sunni Muslims can face in Turkey too. As a matter of interest, could you inform me as to how the Jaf'eri Twelver Shi'a are treated in Turkey? I know there are quite a few from the Azeri population.--IsaKazimi (talk) 10:08, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Women are not allowed to enter official buildings and universities with head scarves. Other than that I am not familiar with any obvious discrimination against Sunnis or Caferis. Any religious doctrine that is not in line with government's Office of Religious Affair's version of course is subject to lack of support from the immense budget and resources the government employs. However the Caferi Imams these days (unlike in the past) are also paid salaries by the Office of Religious Affairs. Caferi Mosques also enjoy the benefits of official sanction. Joe5323 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:30, 2 November 2009 (UTC).

LETS BE VERY CLEAR: As an Alevi myself, yes we do have unique customs and traditions distinct from Sunnis and Twelver Shi'a, but we are Shia nevertheless. We venerate Imam Ali and his lineage, more so than Twelvers and this is the reason why some Twelver (or Jafari as they are also called), tend to shy away from sayting we are orthodox. Within Islam, Alevi's have developed some practices that can be considered on the cusp, but as supporters of Imam Ali and also following the core teaching of Shia Islam, ver are very much Shia Muslims. We will celebrate Muharram with more fervor than in Iran, and though our stayle of prayer might be different, it is in line with praying to Allah. So please let's not play politics (since that won't change anything). Aleve's are Shia, though not the kind who are the majority in Iran, Iraq or Pakistan. Like the Bektashi or the Alawites in Syria, we are a unique community under the umbrella of those who love the Prophet's family. Thanks, Muhammad.

I doubt you are an Alevi. Either way, no one is saying Alevis should not be classifieds as Shi'as or Muslims. However insisting on doing it over and over in the introduction section is not necessary. In my opinion these actions themselves are politicaly motivated to de-emphasize the major differences in philosophy and customs. When Alevis demanded official recognition for their place of worship (Cem Evi) and for their religious leaders (dede), the response from the government was "if Alevism is to love Ali we are all Alevis". It is very interesting that you, in your above paragraph,are also trying to simplify Alevism as "those who love the Prophet's family". One sentence in the introduction is enough!

Please show me one Alevi WEB site where they emphasize the Shia classification. Here is the most traditional Alevi institution where they have an article called the "What are the Differences Between Alevism, Shi'ism and Sunnism" http://www.cemvakfi.org/blddetay3.asp?ID=145.

By the way, if you are an Alevi I hope to see you in Kadikoy demonstration on the 8'th :-) BilgeHan1 (talk) 06:38, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Muhammad: "Now you are doubting my religion! *L* ... Thanks friend. I will not be joining the demo on Nov 08, since I have certain views on that issue. I am a proud Alevi Shi'a Muslim. My Sunni brethren here in NY, as well as in Ankara refer to my beliefs the same way. Thanks again." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.53.78.141 (talk) 20:02, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I am sorry if my doubt offended you. It is just that in my experience I never met an Alevi family that named their children as Muhammad. The name Alevis usually use is Mehmet. Also Turkish usage is a Muhammet or Muhammed, but not Muhammad. Also the way you described Alevism matches the Sunni politically correct explanation of Alevism. I apologize again if I offended you. BilgeHan1 (talk) 01:17, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Muhammad: "Not a problem. My family was settled in Dubai in the 70s, so my name is spelt this way (also in my passport!)." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.53.110.144 (talk) 17:42, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Whatever else we may say about the Alevis, at least we may be sure that they are a diverse group, who often disagree about what it means to be Alevi. Most see themselves as Muslims; a few do not (and propose a variety of alternative identities ranging from shamanism to socialism). Some say they are Shi'is, but even these are divided as to how similar they are with Iranian Shi'ism. Others say they are Sunnis, or neither Sunni nor Shi'i. Their relationship with Bektashi Order, Yazidism and the Ahl-i-Haqq, and/or the Alawi of Syria is equally confusing, admitting of no simple answer. Dawud (talk) 08:30, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Silan: I am also an Alevi, and I can confirm that I DO NOT see myself as a Muslim, I mean, the we don't follow any of the fundamental pillars which you are required to follow in order to be Muslim. Yes we have influences as we have lived under Islamic countries for many years, yet we also have influences from Judaism or Christianity, PLEASE don't distinguish all Alevis as Muslim, this further created the ongoing divide between Alevis themselves. please visit the Britainia Alevi Federation's website for valid information. This resource and Wikipedia is banned within Turkey, hence why some are limited in both their knowledge of their own faith, and search for the answer of a oppressing government leading to further assimilation. It is heartbreaking to see this as a debate as it is a loss in our already fragile and small community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.171.163 (talk) 23:31, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Introduction

I think the 'key characteristics' segment in the introduction should be moved. That is too detailed according to Wikipedia standards. See WP:Manual_of_Style#Section_headings.--IsaKazimi (talk) 20:44, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I have moved it to the 'beliefs' section because that is the most appropiate section in my opinion. However, people are free to modify it if they feel it belongs somewhere else. (except the introduction of course).--IsaKazimi (talk) 20:48, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I completely and strongly disagree. Key characteristics is essential part of the introduction that captures the humanist principles all Alevis proudly share. BilgeHan1 (talk) 18:54, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I am not denying that they are important. However, not suitable for an introduction i'm afraid. No introduction can contain a point that requires bullet points to outline it. That is way too detailed for an introductory point. In the same way that the Five Pillars of Islam would never be included in the introduction of the Islam page. Wikipedia defines the introduction as: 'Headings provide an overview in the table of contents and allow readers to navigate through the text more easily'. Thus, the key characteristics is inappropiate for an introduction.--IsaKazimi (talk) 19:40, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Also, the humanistic aspect of Alevism has already been outlined in the introduction: 'Modern Alevi theology has been profoundly influenced by humanism and universalism.'--IsaKazimi (talk) 20:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I saws no such rules. You can see the article "About Wikipedia" (click on the left) and see the introduction is not that brief. I am afraid you are confusing the introduction with contents. The contents come after the introduction which is a quick summary of the subject. The key characteristics are essential part of introduction where the reader is given a quick glance of the philosopy behind Alevism. I think they are not only perfect of the introduction, they are the most important part of the introduction.BilgeHan1 (talk) 23:45, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh forgive me, i misread that quote. However, that does not change the fact that no introduction has outlined in bullet points, the key characteristics of the topic in question. The introduction is just supposed to give a brief summery of Alevism. As I have said, the humanistic aspect of Alevism is already stated. Readers can then scroll down to read an expansion on that point. If you feel it neccassary, you can make a separate subheading going into detail about the humanistic ideals of Alevism. However, as I have previously said, an introduction cannot contain a point that requires bullet points to outline it. This is the main problem.--IsaKazimi (talk) 08:05, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I do not think there is such rule as you can not have bullet points in introduction. The alternative would be a regular paragraph and it would not read as well as bullet points. This entry sets the stage very well to introduce the unique character of Alevism. Joe5323 (talk) 15:52, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, let us go through this logically. Wikipedia standards state that :The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article . Before I go through each 'characteristic', is it possible for the quotes that follow each one to be referenced? Are these quotes from some official text? Or are they just made up by one of the editors?

1) Love and respect for all people (“The important thing is not religion, but being a human being”)

This is already covered by ' Modern Alevi theology has been profoundly influenced by humanism and universalism. '. Thus, this characteristic is no longer relevent to the introduction. If you wish, a seperate sub-heading can be made to focus on the humanism of Alevism.

2) Tolerance towards other religions and ethnic groups (“If you hurt another person, the ritual prayers you have done are counted as worthless”)

Same as the first point. Also, covered by the mentioning of secularism in the introduction which automatically connotates the idea of tolerance.

3) Respect for working people ("The greatest act of worship is to work”)

This could stand on a point by itself which possibly a little expansion. i.e. What type of work?

4) Equality of men and women, who pray side by side. Monogamy is practiced.

The feministic aspect of Alevism can be made into a broader point. The point about women and men praying together has already been made further down.--IsaKazimi (talk) 16:44, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Here is a great article where you will have a better understanding of Alevism and also you can find above proverbs. http://www.alevibektasi.org/xalevis1.htm. Proverbs, songs (poems) are extremely important to Alevis in describing what they believe and who they are and this was the preferred method of transfering the belief system from one generation to the next. Keeping Alevi writings during Ottoman rule was extremely dangerous, hence the reason for oral tradition.

As far as the above points they illustrate the main point of Alevism: they see God in every human being. “The greatest holy book to be read is a human being.”

The 4'th point is redundant (I agree)and can be moved to another section. Please give me until the weekend to think about it and how to improve that part. Thanks

BilgeHan1 (talk) 20:05, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Take as long as you need.--IsaKazimi (talk) 00:02, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree that these are distinctive enough to warrant mention in the introduction. However, we could get rid of the bullet points and the quotes, which are in any case unreferenced. (What ARE the sources for these? Does anyone remember?)

I am also worried about the tendency to over-generalize. For example, some aspects of Alevism suggest male-female equality, but others (such as the all-male leadership) do not. "Respect for working people" sounds like a modern formulation, possibly under socialist influence. (Historically, practically all Alevi would have been "working people," and would have assumed this to be the natural state of human affairs.) As for religious tolerance, surely this must be qualified in view of the frequent clashes between Alevi and others. When did this type of rhetoric begin to be emphasized? I suspect the 1960's. Dawud (talk) 08:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Equality?

I read that the dede doesn' permit marrying a divorced woman. So a divorced women cannot ever engage in sexual relations again. I am assuming that a divorced man can however. Also, if divorce isn't permitted, doesn't that mean a women is forbidden from leaving an abusive marriage? Alevism doesn't sound that equal to me.--IsaKazimi (talk) 17:02, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Divorcing one's spouse is also grounds for excommunication as well as marrying a divorced spouse. Both sexes are equally impacted by this rule. BilgeHan1 (talk) 19:55, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I see, the way it is said on the page places the onus on women. I will change it to make it gender-neutral.--IsaKazimi (talk) 00:04, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

How are divorce and remarriage actually handled in real life, in Alevi communities today? Surely the couple are not really shunned or whatnot. Dawud (talk) 08:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Real Turks

The original point was that the prayers are done in the language of the people. This is in contrast to almost all other non-arabic speaking Muslim practitioners around the world (including Turkish or Kurdish Sunnis) who pray in Arabic. The comment about Alevis seeing themselves as real Turks might be true for some, but this is not true for Kurdish Alevis. Also most Turkish Alevis do not use their Turkishness to make this nationalistic point since the emphasis of Alevi philosophy regards the perfect human being as some one who treats all kinds of people/nations equally (yetmis iki millete ayni gözle bakar.)

For example many Alevis also like the say they are the true Muslims. However such statements tend to be a little strong and opinionated for the introduction section. It was already getting more and more sloppy after several consecutive edits, so I restored the first paragraph to the previous version. If one needs to discuss this further, I recommend he or she creates a sub section on the subject of Language and Nationality and expand it. Regards. BilgeHan1 (talk) 03:43, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Source for quotes in lead?

The text in quotes in the beginning (“The important thing is not religion, but being a human being”, “If you hurt another person...” etc.) is puzzling. Is it supposed to be a quote? Where from? This should be clarified. --91.148.159.4 (talk) 00:07, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

During Ottoman rule, having Alevi text in one's possession was extremely dangerous. The Alevi leaders mainly relied on poetry and proverbs for the survival of the religion from one generation to another. Studying these proverbs which are still in use among Alevis is essential in understanding their characteristics. Here you will see many such proverbs http://www.alevibektasi.org/xalevis1.htm.

Joe5323 (talk) 03:40, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. So these are anonymous sayings and statements that this person collected. I think this should be clarified in the text as well, so that other readers can understand it as I do now.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 00:20, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

I would not say it quite like that :-) These sayings are unanimous and consistent in the collections of this person and of every other researcher. They are repeated in every single Alevi book, and WEB site. These sayings are universally accepted by all Alevis, and often cited as a way to teach the path to younger generations. These are not just random sayings by some Alevis. I wish we had one single original text we could quote from. But as I said the teachings were handed from generation to generation via sayings, poetry and songs and not so much via published text. Joe5323 (talk) 23:39, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

References, please. Statements such as 'these sayings are universally accepted by all-whoever' is not our standard- however true. The statement that these phrases are repeated in every single Alevi book and web site is plainly hyperbole and fallacious. Pull one of those referred to books off a shelf and cite from it.Mavigogun (talk) 15:32, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Haji Bektash Veli

He appears to have been born in Iran/Persia but besides the murkiness of his actual history, we have a reliable source that says he was born to a Turkish family. Our policy WP:VERIFY makes it clear that verifiability is what we are looking for, and whether we think there were Turks in this area centuries ago or not is irrelevant. I certainly have no idea and frankly don't care what he was, only that we follow Wikipedia guidelines and policies and don't get bogged down in nationalism. Dougweller (talk) 17:18, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

All the reliable, contemporary sources refer to him as Persian (he did, after all, speak in Persian, write in Persian, and was born in Persia!). Some Turkish nationalists have retrospectively claimed he had some Turkic connections, but this has never been proven (you keep conflating "Turkish" with Turkic, by the way). If you don't care, why are you edit-warring to insert information that contradicts the well sourced info that is already in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dohezarsersdah (talk • contribs) 20:20, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I am trying to maintain NPOV and the use of reliable sources. We have one that says he was born to a Turkish family, and so far as I know there are no sources that say he was born to any other family and if we do we should add that as well, so why you are removing this needs to be explained. You've also said that a recent source (this century) was antiquated but are using a 1909 source. Dougweller (talk) 21:12, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

We have a reliable source saying he was Persian, please don't remove it again. Go to WP:RSN if you don't think it's a reliable source, but if you don't want to be blocked, it would be wise not to replace it without consensus. If RSN says it's not a reliable source, I certainly wouldn't want to use it. I'd suggest we drop 'Turkish family' but I'm not going to get into an edit war over that. Dohezarsersdah (talk) 12:31, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Very funny. I never said we didn't have reliable sources saying he was Persian, I just think it's best to avoid nationalistic wars over this (and as his family was Turkish, it's not exactly obvious what makes him Persian). However, I do object to your changing the bit about him being born into a Turkish family into 'his family was Turkic' because that is simply not what the source says, it says "Turkish family". You can change it or I will. Dougweller (talk) 13:21, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Are we quite sure that he existed? (The stories I remember are fabulous accounts in which he turns into a lion, etc.) If so, what are the major sources for his life? --Dawud — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.240.188.188 (talk) 07:26, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Alevism or Aleviness

Aleviness should be preferred because the original Turkish term 'Alevilik' (Aleviness) to define broader Alevi phenomena rather than Alevism which is sounds more like a political ideology or a social movement. Nobody use 'Alevicilik' (Alevism) in original Turkish milieu from villagers to scholars. Please let me give an example to make it clear: as in 'Muslim-Islam-Islamism' terms, it should be 'Alevi-Aleviness-Alevism', but this is also wrong, because there is no such a thing like 'Alevism'. Thanks. Ongan (talk) 15:04, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

"Aleviness" is not a word. I have never seen it before today, despite having read many English-language writings on the Alevis. "Alevism" on the other hand is rather popular, whether you like it or not. The word does not suggest a political ideology, any more than "Buddhism" or "aneurism" do. (The distinction you made seems to be French.) Alevilik is also acceptable, though confined to specialist writings. A simple Google search will confirm my observations.

And another thing: Not all Alevis (by which I mean the Turkish and Kurdish Alevis, not the Syrian Alawi) are Bektashis; nor are all Bektashis, Alevis. "Alevi-Bektashi" is one of several Alevi identities, and should be discussed but not elevated over the others. We should not speak so much of "lineages" (silsila) as of family- and village-based folk traditions, which are now being urbanized and internationalized. --Dawud — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.240.188.188 (talk) 06:29, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Your request is not valid. There is not such term as 'Aleviness'. Westberlin1985 (talk) 08:53, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Alevi faith / Kurdish Alevism (Misleading section)

Groups with similar beliefs also exist in Iranian Kurdistan. Interestingly, both the Dersim (Zazaki / Zaza) people and the Gorani, who are both considered to belong to the Hawramani branch of the North West Iranian languages, adhere to a form of Alevi faith which resembles the religions of the Druze or Yazidi. 161.253.50.76 (talk) 23:18, 18 November 2013 (UTC) NOTE: Beware that Druze is in Islam or at least closely related, but Yazidi is a totally different religion . 68.100.172.139 (talk) 10:22, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Goran Kurds (moved to Yazdânism and Yârsânism)

Main articles: Goran Kurds and Kurdish people

There are also large communities of people of Ahl-e Haqq in some regions of Iranian Azerbaijan. The town of Ilkhichi (İlxıçı), which is located 87 km south west of Tabriz is almost entirely populated by Yâresânis. For political reasons, one of which was to create a distinct identity for these communities, they have not been called Goran Kurds since the early 20th century. They are called under the various names, such as Ali-Ilahis and Ahl-e Haqq. Groups with similar beliefs also exist in Iranian Kurdistan. Interestingly, both the Dersim (Zazaki / Zaza) people and the Gorani, who are both considered to belong to the Hawramani branch of the North West Iranian languages, adhere to a form of "Kurdish Alawi faith" which resembles the religions of the Druze or Yazidi. 161.253.50.76 (talk) 23:34, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

This is valid information. Westberlin1985 (talk) 08:08, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Merging with Alawites?

As much as I hate to complicate matters here, I think it is appropriate that this page be consolidated with the one on Alawites. Although there is a marked difference in both language and cultural practices according to whether we are talking about Alevis in Turkey, Syria, Persia, or other nations/regions; the commonalities in theology and the standard consonant mutation from Arabic W to Turkish V underline that we have the same subject being discussed in two Wikipedia articles, distinction only being a part of speech: "Alevism" (V)or "Alawism" (W), as the set of cultural practice and historical commemoration by a multinational religious minority, and the corresponding "Alevites" (V) or "Alawites" (W) for the individuals of the culture observing these practices.

Furthermore, the two articles are complimentary. As of year's-end 2014, the article under Alevism is far richer in definition than the one under Alawites. But here are their common points:

1. Both sections discus Etymology (V is more thorough than W and already has better links)
2. Both sections discuss History (W adds a unique section on modern history)
3. Both sections discuss Theology (W uses term Beliefs: V is far more through, but W material should be incorporated into V as Section 3.3)

...and here are their individual Strengths & Weaknesses:

1. V adds an essential perspective of the controversy of Confusion with the Bektashi Order repeating information found under Demographics (Section 6.1) in V
2. W adds modern history to the History section that is lacking from V
3. W History overall is more thorough than V, but localised only to Syrian Alawis
4. W contains important but incomplete Population information that is completely lacking from V
5. V contains a thorough Demographics section, analagous to Population
6. V adds a unique section on Society
7. V adds a unique section on Music, but is in sore need of revision and subheadings according to genre

I don't know if a full merger is necessary, but at least the Alevi as an ethnic group should have their own page as the Alawis do, then contain the ideological/mythological/theological set of Alevism/Alawism as a single page. The geopolitical difference is doesn't seem like a reason to isolate identical religious beliefs. Zeppelin42 (talk) 05:17, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Supporting evidence for my argument above from contemporary media: "When CHP Chairman Kemal Kilicdaroglu criticized the government’s Syria policy, Erdogan linked this criticism to Kilicdaroglu’s Alevi identity." The theological connection between Turkey's and Syria's (and other nations') Alevis seems part and parcel of the article's perspective. Zeppelin42 (talk) 18:47, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

References

Thank you for your information. Your merging request is valid. The Alawis Shaik family members, about whom I have been informed are giving considerable information about their origins based in present day Iraqi-Kurdistan. The belief is the same, they do have a significant difference in their scripts and practices, but this can also be seen between Kurdish Alevis and Turkish Alevis. There should be only one cluster to cover this belief and all its forms: Alevism, Alawism, Yarsanism and even (the original) Bekthasism (El-Hacc Bektash Veli was himself an Alevi). Westberlin1985 (talk) 08:13, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Turkish TV presenters joke about Alevis

The episodes of jokes non-Alevi TV presenters have allowed themselves over the years to crack about Alevis should be inserted in the parts of the article dealing with Sunni-Alevi relations.
One famous incident was a Star TV presenter suggesting (implicitly) Alevis engaged in incest. As far as I know that took place in January 1995. This is how it was reported to me by a Turkish friend of mine. It was some sort of quizz show, and in some cases the answers were provided by phone callers. The TV presenter took a phone call from a female caller and in reaction to something the caller said (I don't know in what context) about a problem between her and her father, the presenter joked (implicitly suggesting a situation of incest) "You are not an Alevi by any chance?". The caller immediately hung up and within a couple of hours thousands of Alevi youth gathered outside the TV station demanding a retraction and an apology. The presenter was taken off air and both he and the TV station apologized. He was reinstated later but his show never regained its former success because the presenter became afraid of offending people and, as a result, his show became quite tame, whereas its original success was due in large measure to the irreverent risque humour that guy was famous for engaging in. What was the name of that presenter?
For the moment, as long as the name of the presenter has not been cited yet, I don't think this falls under the Biographies of Living Persons restrictions (WP:BLP). If and when someone provides the name of the presenter then the above will have to be removed I suppose (are talk pages also under these restrictions?), unless we can come up with a reliable reference. However this episode seems to be quite well known (it certainly is so among all my Turkish friends) so this should not be too hard to find.
Cheers
Signed: Basemetal (write to me here) 10:45, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Your information is valid. There is an ongoing accousation of Alevi belief (in all of its forms) due to the hatred that Sunni scholars put forward. For example the Sunni scholars hate that the Alevis still practice not eating rabbit/hare - meat, which they consider not islamic despite the fact that the prophet Muhammed ordered all muslims to do so. Westberlin1985 (talk) 08:16, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

QUESTIONS ON RELIGIOUS MATTERS

The total Sunni population is more than 1,000,000,000 and the total Shia population is more than 100,000,000. THEREFORE: I would suggest the topic SHOULD BE DEVELOPED in the following lines by illuminating the people in the Islamic matters.

1. Praying procedures in Alevism in Anatolia? What stiles? Diffrences with Ja'faris?
2. Beliefs? How did they affected by Ismailis?
3. Beliefs? How did they affected by Safavids?
4. Explain about fasting days, durations, how the fasting begin and how is it ending?
5. What Diffrences with Zaidis and Sunnis?
6. What Diffrences with Ja'fari jurisprudence and Ismaili?
7. How is fasting procedure, how dou you perform it? Which days?
8. How many days of fasting in Ramadan, which days, and their duration?
9. What about the Hajj to Makkah?
10. What about the salat?

68.100.172.139 (talk) 10:15, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

• Relocating from my talk page: Well I am not that expert but I am an Alevi by my father's side. If you are willing to help me, we could do something about those lines. And it would be better that if you had a Wikipedia accountelmasmelih (used to be KazekageTR) 10:40, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Then you can go and do a little research about these topics and find the connections, I hope your father may give you good directions.

Fasting & Salah in alevi belief

alevi-expert: you did a lot of comments, but public want to learn about the details of Fasting & Salah in alevi belief since they are slightly different than sunnis and ja'fari. if they are much closer to nizaris, how? thanks. 128.164.157.184 (talk) 22:20, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

• By the way, you always talk about the Jem (Alevism) but each tariqah has different kind of Jem - meetings, that is something extra and not in the Quran hence not an obligatory task!!!

I do not get the point here. Jafaris are Shiites, Sunnis are Sunnis, but Alevis are Alevis, the Alevis do not belong to the Shiite-branch of Islam, they are an independent and original interpretation of Islam. The Jafaris claim to originate from the teachings of Imam Dschafer-el Sadiq, but the Alevis claim a genetical link to Imam Dschafer-el Sadiq through his son Imam Musa-i Kadhim. There are only two Cem (Jem) versions, one public and ordered one, and the second private and unordered one. Unordered means here, that the requirements of the believers are more important than the ritual-requirements of the Cem (Jem). Westberlin1985 (talk) 08:22, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

POV-Issue

I'll tell you about the POV -issue: Most of the material in this page describes Qizilbashs, that's the pov issue.

• Because, the term alevi may be used equivalently for a Zaydi or an ismaili.
• The Title of the page should be KIZILBASHISM IN ANATOLIA and the stuff related to BEKTASHI should be carried to Bektashism and folk religion in Anatolia and Balkans.
• Bektashism and folk religion should be renamed as Bektashism and folk religion practices in Anatolia and Balkans

I repeat, ALEVI implies Zaydi or an ismaili as well. SEE: Alavids (translation to Turkish is ALEVILER) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.164.157.130 (talk) 20:22, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Well then this page needs a improvements needed tag not a POV tag please know what to use in which situations. elmasmelih (used to be KazekageTR) 21:12, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Turkish usage of the term ALEVI

It comprises the entire Shia sects, i.e. Ja'faris, Zaydis, Ismailis, Qizilbashs, Hurufis, Druzes, Qalandariyya, and Bektashis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.164.157.130 (talk) 23:33, 25 June 2014 (UTC) Alawi, as well!!68.100.172.139 (talk) 08:57, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Facts about ghulat madhhabs

Even though

1. fasting in Ramadan?....Not observed in Hurufism..
2. the Hajj to Makkah? ...Not observed in Qarmatians, Hashashins, Hurufism
3. about the salat? ..Not observed in Kaysanites Shia-Muhammerah-Khurramites sub-sects, and Hashashins during Hassan II (Imam), highly flexible in Qalandariyya and the tekke of Qutb ad-Dīn Haydar

they at least had imams who memorized and had taught Qur'an to their children.. According to Alevi Dede izzeddin dogan,

“ We should be examined under the title of Qizilbash, because Alevi-term were being used for all sects who were not Sunnis during Ottomans. ”

he said in a TV interview..i.e. Alevi implies a non-sunni in Ottoman Empire, but WHO??? That is unknown!

I like your attempt to characterize the obvious differnces, I think this is a helpful and valid request, BUT Alevis actually practice fasting in Ramadan, but they do not fast 30 days, they fast the given amount in the Koran that has been narrated by the Imams, in present day this are 3 days. Please consider that not all Alevis today are doing this, but the Alevi tradition and narratives of elder people is giving this information. Westberlin1985 (talk) 08:24, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Sivas Massacre details added

.........On July 2, 1993, Alevis were celebrating the Pir Sultan Abdal Festival. They had organized a kind of conference and some guest speakers were invited. They were planning to conduct a very friendly meeting and discussions on the issues of Alevis in Anatolia and the history of a long period of suffering of Alevis because of the political tensions between two rival states, namely the Ottomans of Anatolia and Safavids of Iran. Aziz Nesin, a humorist writer and later turned out to be an atheist were also among the guest speakers. There were some instigators in Friday's prayer who spread some rumors about Aziz Nesin who had been claimed to deliver a speech against Islam and Qur'an in the masques on Friday. Whether he did such a speech or just planning to do that surely cannot be counted as an excuse for the events, these news instigated a group of illiterate ignorant people coming out of mosques after their Friday's prayer, a mob of roughly 20,000 Sunni fundamentalists surrounded the Madimak Hotel in downtown Sivas, chanting anti-Alevi and pro-sharia slogans.......

If you are going to put all fighting in history here court proceedings and illuminate people completely about the events. Otherwise you can put these things either into a History of massacres page, or the private pages...The purpose of ALEVISM page is to illuminate people about their religious beliefs...BUT THE PAGE IS GOING TO ANOTHER DIRECTION..68.100.172.139 (talk) 05:48, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

He is right you have to add a 'summarized' textx, not the actual one.elmasmelih (used to be KazekageTR) 08:27, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Ummayad Affect

Alevi claims that islam had been changed by Ummayads.. But arabic Alawi prononuced as alevi in Turkish, if they come together with khawarij makes 1% of all islam population.

• HOW could Ummayads achieve this DUE TO Twelver-Resistance??

68.100.172.139 (talk) 15:25, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Relations with Sunnis

These claims either are not correct or not represented in proper language:

"Alevis see Sunni mentality as originating in Arabia and as contrary to "the Turkish national character."[citation needed] Some Alevis claim sunnah and hadith were Arab elite innovations, created to ensure Arab dominance of Islam and to enslave the masses through manipulation. Sunnism, according to the Alevis, is not true Islam but an aberration that by its nomianism allegedly opposes independent thought and is seen as reactionary, bigoted, fanatic, and antidemocratic."

Such a dubious and pompous style of writing Suitable for "Wikipedia gold" but not an article. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.148.35.65 (talk) 09:45, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Alevis are of Kurdish origin. The Alevi masters helped several groups over thousand years to be integrated in this belief, one major group are the Turkoman (not to be confused with (mongolic) Turkmans, this group here is called Turkoman, because they resemble Turks, mostly genetic Azeris). The Turkish Government is having a huge impact on todays views on Alevis, most attempts were of political interest, several of them to form a nationalist character in the Alevi identity, but most Alevis will accept the (ancient) origins of their belief, despite those imputations. Westberlin1985 (talk) 08:30, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

RELIGION

This page belongs to a madh'hab of shia islam. Any other political views should be written elsewhere.128.164.157.130 (talk) 22:10, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Your request is not valid. Shia is a mekteb (madhab) of Alevism, due to the fact that Alevis are of Imamite genetic origin, and the Shia is only of Imamite teachings. Westberlin1985 (talk) 08:32, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Alevi is Twelver Shia Islam

• 1) If you put all survey results in the intro-page article looks like an advertisement page
• 2) Alevi belongs to Twelver those who feel different belongs to any other place

68.100.172.139 (talk) 19:18, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your contribution. I think the use of wikipedia:reliable sources does not look like any kind of advert. Where you think people belong is not part of the editing process and is not a source from (as in wikipedia:reliable sources). Please check how wikipedia works so you can help it to improve. Once you have checked about sources, if you still feel there is a problem, please go to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution or Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Edging (talk) 22:11, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

• You may consult their religious leader İzzettin Doğan, they are islam for a thousand year. Their primary old religion is immaterial whether buddist or christian or shaman..All these notions are examined scientifically, not by university surveys...Their current status is islam i.e Alevi-Islam.. One has the freedom to choose.. but there is no Alevi-christianity since their book is qur'an..Their aqidah is tasawwufī-batiniyyah.. You may be either in one religion or out.. there is no Alevi-christianity In short, They are the original people who brought islam to anatolia i. e. sunnism as well...Therefore you cannot use a statement as a different religion...

68.100.172.139 (talk) 00:47, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps you are right and perhaps not, but wikipedia just says what different sources say, and you delete what sources say if you dont like it. Please go to wikipedia:reliable sources Edging (talk) 07:45, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

suggestion

• You have to put the view of the leadership of alevi-dedes if you are going to refer some individual views.
• There is an alevi equivalent of the sunni-Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı in Turkey. Its president is the Dede (religious figure) İzzettin Doğan and he is at the Okan University in Turkey. This institution is called as Alevi-Islam Din Hizmetleri Başkanlığı (Presidency of the Alevi-Islam Religious Services). Their web-page is in Turkish but you can request their views by e-mail. These personal views will be respected by everybody. The second Dede (religious figure) may be Fermane Altun.
• There are many associations and parties which called themselves as "Alevi" but these are not religious organizations, and their agenda is different i.e. not religious.
• Some people who call themselves as "Alevi" claims that Ali has no place in Aleviness (Alevilik) and this group is called as "Ali'siz Aleviler" i.e. "Alevis (Aleviler) without Ali" and they are non-muslims. A book is already published under this title.
• Ahl-i Haqq tariqa which is "islamic-sufi but not muslim" also called Alawis
• We've already discussed that Alevi is different from 'Alawi which is sometimes being considered as a distinct religion by some people, as well.

I believe that the article should develop by keeping these important differences in mind.

68.100.172.139 (talk) 04:35, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Sources show that Alevis differ on what it means, some do not consider it Islam, and some do consider it Islam. The article does not reflect this if, against sources, it just defines Alevism as a branch of Islam. Edging (talk) 19:29, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

The version prior to my edit is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alevism&oldid=640982544 If the sources cited in that version are checked, Alevism is not even mentioned in the Encyclopedia Iranica source, though it does describe Bektashi as "heterodox" and "syncretic". The http://www.majzooban.org/ does not mention Alevi, the http://bektashiorder.com/ source does not mention Alevi, the home video is not a source, and the Hazleton source offers no page so no-one can check. Overall the lead which was being used seems to be based on apparently false use of non-sources. Edging (talk) 20:13, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Dear Edging, thanks for your intersting and reliable informations. I want to add some points, that might be eye-openers. The other user above asking for Izzettin Dogan to be citied is probably one of the C.E.M. Vakfi adherants. The fact is that Alevism is islamic, but not turkish. There is a huge number of Kurdish Alevis that also claim the same facts, that the C.E.M. Vakfi is claiming, but with Kurdish history behind, and with most of the Alevi masters acceptance. It is a wide-spread lie that Alevism has nothing to do with Islam, but it is also a wide-spread lie, that Alevism has emerged from Islam itself. Please take this to your consideration. Alevis claim that the household of the prophet Muhammed were Alevis. KR, Westberlin1985 (talk) 08:40, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

ishikism

The following statement in alevism:

• Furthermore, a researcher by the name Soner Cagaptay describes Alevism as developing from a syncretism of Islam, Christianity and former Turkic religions and notes that only 44% of Alevi respondents publicly self-identified as Muslim (in 2005). Nevertheless, one should be aware of the fact that the university survey which was conducted at a specific location may not reflect the accurate results all the time, and there exists a high probability that the group who had been surveyed might belong to the non-muslim Ishikists.

Looks more appropriate for ishikism since they identify themselves as Non-Muslim Alevi implying that the origins of alevi comes from "the flame" and no connexion with Ali. 68.100.172.139 (talk) 21:27, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

This ishikism idea is your original research. I am afraid your opinion is not a reliable source (see: Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources). Please refer to the discussion in the section you began just above, to which I have replied. Edging (talk) 22:14, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

• ishikism is defined by Erdogan Cinar, I have learnt from Chinarism in wikipedia it is not my invention they are sons of Luvians but they call themselves alevi in the sense "the followers of flame" and they are non-muslims as you say...i.e. they are followers of the flame, Erdogan Cinar explained in his books this is also called as alawism without Ali (Ali'siz Alevilik) there is a book under this title..see and read Chinarism.

68.100.172.139 (talk) 01:06, 8 August 2014 (UTC) 68.100.172.139 (talk) 01:00, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

References

Fact check - Soner Cagaptay is not an Alevi, he is biased and is no reliable resource, his complete text should be removed. Ishikism has nothing to do with Alevism, it is using several Alevi metaphors to emphasize a turkish macrosystem and linked history to the Alevis. Alevism can only be described through the Master families. Westberlin1985 (talk) 08:42, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

The message of İzzettin Doğan (the President of Alevi-Islam Religious Services)

“ Alevilik nedir, Aleviliğin İslam anlayışı nedir, nasıl doğdu, nasıl gelişti? Bu soruların yanıtı ki, çok kişinin bildiğinin tersine, Aleviliğin doğuş yeri Anadolu değildir. Bu büyük bir cehalet örneğidir, yani Aleviliğin Anadolu da çıktığını söylemek. Anadolu'da bu işin kaynağını aramak bilgisizlikten kaynaklanıyor. Çünkü Anadolu bugün üzerinden yaşadığımız topraklarda belli bir tarihten önce bir tek Müslüman, bir tane de Türk yoktur. Orta Asya kökenli insanların göçebe kavimlerin oradaki kuraklık ve moğol istilası nedeniyle orada tutunamayıp yeni bir yurt arama kaygılarının sonucudur. Maveraünnehir dediğimiz, yani Siriderya ve Amuderya nehirleri arasındaki topraklarda yaşayan ve yaşamlarının tarım ve hayvancılıklar geçiren kavimlerin 100-150 sene süren göç macerasından sonra, yani Türklerin Anadolu'ya gelmeleri, Anadolu'da Türk köyü kurmaya başlamaları. Anadolu'ya gelen Türklerde beraberlerinde inançlarını ve İslamiyet'i getirdiler. Gelenler İslam'dı, bunların kendi anlayışlarını Anadolu'ya getirmeleri 10 - 11. asırda gerçekleyen bir olaydır. Ondan önce ismine Anadolu dediğimiz coğrafyada herhangi bir Türk ve herhangi bir Müslüman'a rastlamak mümkün değildir. Anadolu o zamanlar Hıristiyan'dır. ”

• The roots of Alevism stem from Turkestan - Central Asia.
• Islam was brought to Anatolia by Turks in 10th and 11th centuries by a result of migration for a period of 100 - 150 years.
• Before this event took place, there were no Muslim and Turks in Anatolia.
• Anatolia was then entirely Christian.
• We Turks brought Islam to Anatolia from Turkestan.

68.100.172.139 (talk) 08:32, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

References

Dear User, your request is not valid. Alevism did not originate in Turkestan or Central Asia. Alevism has developed in ancient Babylonian and Assyrian homelands. This is current day Iraq. This region is called among Shia and Alevi scholars as "the region of the Ahlulbayt" (the household of the prophet Muhammed). Westberlin1985 (talk) 08:45, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

About the merging proposal

I'd like to comment on this.

• Alevism: The title of this subject should be simply Alevi
  • Qalandariyya, Safaviyya-Qizilbash, Rifa'iyya-Hurufiyya, and the Bektashi tariqat are all belong to this group. They were originally emerged from Islamic-tariqat of Ahmed Yesevi, Ebu'l Vefa and Hacı Bektaş-i Veli. But, they were later influenced by some other groups, like Hurufis.
• Alawites: The title of this subject should be simply Nusairis. Their origins are totally different than those groups above. Their roots do not stem from either Anatolia or Central Asia.

Those groups defined above actually are two different Tariqat but not madh'habs.

You cannot merge the two subject since their beliefs are completely different

In addition, there are also some groups like ‘Ali-Ilahis and Ali-Illahism.

• Ali plays a role in their beliefs, but they are non-Muslims.
• Just the presence of Ali may not define the group as if they'd be a part of a Muslim groups.

68.100.170.227 (talk) 06:59, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Dear Users, your requests are not valid. Alawis are narrating their origins in present day Iraqi-Kurdistan, and there is an immanent link to current day Alevis. The beliefs are the same, but the significant difference is in scriptures and practices, but it is not more different than between Kurdish Alevis and Turkish Alevis. I for myself would consider Turkish Alevis as the most secluded version of Alevism. Westberlin1985 (talk) 08:49, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Difficult to understand

The article, starting with the beginning, is so laden with details and non-English terminology and unfamiliar references that it does little to convey to a non-Muslim, non-Turkish reader what Alevism is and what is significant about it as contrasted with Sufism, Shi'ism, or Sunnism (if I may coin an expression). I could not begin to improve it as I would have to devote myself to the library first. Please, can someone make it useful to us plain ordinary English speakers? Thanks. Zaslav (talk) 03:59, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Alevi women

In the text "sexuality and constructed", should the word be "constricted" rather than "constructed". The constricted/constructed pair is one of many in which a typo derived from inadvertently hitting an adjacent key will not be detected by spell checker. 68.225.188.213 (talk) 16:48, 24 September 2016 (UTC) Mike Sarles

Definition

Alevism represents Kızılbaş faith which is considered as a Muslim sect. But, there are a lot of different groups they call themselves as Alevi and some of them claims that they are not Muslim at all. Aleviler (translated as Alevis) includes all groups, muslim or non-muslim, christian or any other thing. The word Aleviler is used in Turkish for all Shia Muslim sects other than Sunnis. Is this explanation clear enough? Three Muslim sects: Alevi+Alawites+Shi'ites+Two non-muslim sects: Ishikism+Yarsanism. In the classical textbooks, Kaysanites, Qarmatians, Fatimid Ismailis, Nizaris and Pamiris are called as Alevi(ler) (Alevi(s).). 108.31.250.33 (talk) 00:49, 1 April 2018 (UTC)108.31.250.33 (talk) 01:31, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, but it seems, that some of the links don't work at all. However I tried to comply with your statements and included a source for the statements I could found in the sources.--VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 22:38, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

References

An important note

I have copyedited a section regarding the Dedes. "Fake sayyids" are one of the biggest problems in the Islamic world: No matter Sunni, Shia, or Alevi; no matter Turk, Kurd, or Arab... Even ISIL terrorist Baghdadi claimed that he was a sayyid. Please also see this article: https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/kurtlerin-temel-sorunu-cakma-seyit-duzeni-10423647 212.252.83.245 (talk) 07:41, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Info from new book

@VenusFeuerFalle: I found some interesting info from the new 'The Cambridge History of the Kurds'[5] which contests the notion that most Alevis in Turkey are ethnic Turks. On page 562 it says: "The majority of the Kurds in Turkey belong to Shafiʿi and Hanafi school of Sunni Islam; for that matter, the Alevi Kurds constitute a minority of Kurdish population (cf. Andrews and Benninghaus, 1989: 110–25; Yeg ̆en, 2016: 25–37). On the other hand, within the Alevi population the percentage of the Kurds in comparison to the Turks is definitely not in the minority as some scholars have argued (Kehl-Bodrogi, 1988: 7; Shankland, 2003: 20). According to a well-known field researcher on Alevis, Hamza Aksüt, the majority of Alevis in Turkey are of Kurdish background (Aksüt, 2015)."

I didn't want to add this info unilaterally since it may be BOLD but I also remember that you reverted an edit of mine stating the article should focus on Turkish Alevism[6]. Any takes? --Semsûrî (talk) 16:55, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Oh thank you. Did not know about this. I thought most were Yazidis, which have been errorneously identified with Kurdish Alevism (in the sense of "Fire-worshipper, identifying "Alev" with flame instead of Ali). Maybe you could add your contribution to the article and tell something about Pir Sultan Abdal and how there is a difference between Kurdish and Turkish Alevism, so it is not just a "random fact" suddenly appearing in the lead-section. Thanks for you efforts to imrpove this article.--VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 19:14, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks or the reply. I'll add some info. --Semsûrî (talk) 20:24, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Semsûrî the content you removed did not say that the Turkish Alevis are the majority, so I don't understand your arguments of revert:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alevism&diff=1028007915&oldid=1028000332

It stated that adherents of Alevism in Turkey are ethnic Turks and Kurds. You removed this undisputed information and replaced it with a disputed one. I moved your content into Demoghraphics section since it is WP:UNDUE for intro (other sources in the article conflict with it). If you find more sources supporting that the Kurdish Alevis form the majority, please add them and then balance it with other contradicting estimates. Otherwise, it's better fit in the demographics section than the lead section. 46.155.107.72 (talk) 09:54, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

You can't say that the former information is 'undisputed' when an article from Cambridge from this year explicitly disputes the claim that a majority of Alevis are Turks. And I believe that it is significant enough to have in the lead, since it also should be mentioned that Turkish and Kurdish Alevis have different beliefs. Some of the references that claim that Kurds are a minority are decades old (like the Zeidan text from 1995 or Shindeldecker from 1998). The population section also mainly uses old references like Kehl-Bodrogi's text from 1997. The whole section needs to be cleaned up and more recent academic references should be used. --Semsûrî (talk) 10:12, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Agreed that more recent sources should be used. But it is a bold claim and we have only one source to support it. If you have more sources, please add them. Otherwise we need a more balanced intro, such as a balanced intro you wrote in Kurdish Alevism about the estimations. I appreciate your contributions and efforts to improve this topic area. However, the recent changes need editing. 46.155.107.72 (talk) 10:36, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

What about adding: In Turkey, different estimations exist on the Kurdish Alevi population. While Dressler stated in 2008 that about a third of the Alevi population is Kurdish, Aksüt argued in 2015 that a majority of the Alevi population is Kurdish. Would that suffice? --Semsûrî (talk) 11:11, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. 46.155.107.72 (talk) 11:13, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Regarding this part "Aksüt argued in 2015 that a majority of the Alevi population is Kurdish.[9] The Alevi beliefs among the two groups diverge and Kurdish Alevis put more emphasis on Pir Sultan Abdal than Haji Bektash Veli and also practice nature veneration." Is this something in which Kurdish Alevism differs from Turkish Alevism? Turkic people also venerate nature.--VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 16:10, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

The quote is: "Bruinessen sees especially Kurdish and Zaza Alevī practices rooted in the veneration of nature and alludes to possible influences by their Yezīdī, Nuṣayrī, and Armenian neighbours (Bruinessen, Aslını, esp. 3–7)."[7] --Semsûrî (talk) 16:34, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

I've reworded the sentence to stay loyal to the quote. --Semsûrî (talk) 16:38, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Alevi self-definition

to all whom it may concern,

1. Alevism belongs to a cluster of beliefs called "Yezdanizm"
2. Yezdanizm has several derived beliefs: Alevism, Yarsanizm, and Yezidizm.
3. Yezdanizm has a sibling-belief, called (ancient) Sabaeanizm (the Sabaeans).
4. Currently all different Sabaean branches seem to have merged to Mandaizm (present day Sabaeans).
5. The Alevi belief claims, that the househould of the Prophet Muhammed, and especially Ali were of Alevi belief.
6. The symbol used in the article, has nothing to do with Alevism, it is a symbol of Turkic assimilation attempts, to create a "turkic-origined" Alevi belief.
7. Izzettin Dogan, is of genuine Alevi master bloodline, but he is not the authority of Alevis, there are several Murshid-families, who each have their own head of family.
8. Yarsans have 12 Khan-families, which all have their own heads.
9. Yezidis have several Sheykh-families, which all have their own heads.
10. the origin of Alevi faith is in Iraq, the so called "land of the Ahlulbayt", which is the ancient teritory of Assyria and Babylonia.
11. i am writing this, from evidence-based scientific background
12. in case of any doubts, please contact the Alevi belief studies chief at the Hamburg university, and try to validate my information given here.

I am asking the wikipedia community, to integrate this information as good as possible into the article, and to remove the assimilation attempts taken by turkic-nationalists.

kind regards, Westberlin1985 (talk) 02:08, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello @Westberlin1985:

Wikipedia cites, summarizes, and paraphrases professionally-published mainstream academic and journalistic sources, without user research or user commentary. That way, almost anyone can verify the information presented at any time without having to bother whoever added it or whoever they say will vouch for that information.

Ian.thomson (talk) 02:21, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

hello Ian.thomson, thank you for the information, unfortunately, the Alevi belief is a secrecy belief, it is commonly forbidden to tell details of the Alevi belief. The Alevi belief itself is also an oral tradition, which has several books, but those are kept also in secret. The only source for information about Alevis are Alevis like me, who have investigated over years and learned by oral-tradition, or have seen Alevis, that have been allowed to see and read the books. This makes the Alevi belief an easy target for outstanders, especially the turkish-assimilation attempts are concerning us. It is the case, that Alevis have mostly kurdish-ancestry, but there is also a medium-sized Turkmen Alevi community. For the turkish groups, they usually are Bektashis, but refer to themselves as Alevis, which is not correct. This makes it for outstanders very hard to understand, why and why not to add or remove information. There is actually no modern book about the Alevi belief, that could express its dimensions, history and traditions in such a way, that it could create a valueable wikipedia article. Therefore it is very important to - at least - put the basics in the right shape. kr, Westberlin1985 (talk) 02:30, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

I'm aware of Alevi secrecy. That secrecy also means it's easy for someone to claim Kurdish ancestry and make untrue claims for attention. I do not believe you are doing that, but that possibility is just one of many reasons why we stick to professionally-published mainstream academic sources.

You ask us to check with the chief of Alevi belief studies at Hamburg University to verify your claims. Professors at universities get those positions through research -- the professionally-published mainstream academic sources that we require. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:35, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

I got your point, but Alevizm is not defined by academic sources, or you or me. It is defined by the Murshid-families, and they can change it as they want. The article here is actually a total confusion, and leads to disinformation. In my point of view it is not valid to be presented to anyone as "the Alevizm". The academic researches you are asking for are mostly done by turkish government paid lecturers and "scientists", who are totally biased, but this is currently shifting, because Alevis like me, especially in Turkey and Germany are creating a new scientific frame for self-definition. One of them is at the Hamburg university. I do get your point of judging me as partisan of alevism as a kurdish belief. And thats truth, because we are kurds and that is all i have seen about Alevism, Alevism ends where the kurdish territories end. All oral-tradition narratives of Murshid-families have been completely in kurdish. Only in the last 100 years, the people got trilingual (Kirmancki, Kurmanci and Turkish) and the shift to turkish oral-tradition emerged, based on the basic problem that the turkish government forbid the alevi children to learn their own language, the elders had to speak in the "new" language to transmit it. kr, Westberlin1985 (talk) 02:48, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

When the new scientific frame for self-definition that you speak of is recognized in professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources, we can summarize those sources. Until that time, this is not the platform you need. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:18, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Good, we can do that. But just tell me what this image is: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tengrian_crescent.svg and what it has to do on the Alevi page? kr, Westberlin1985 (talk) 03:28, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

That's an issue about Template:Alevism, which is linked on this page. Looking at the edit history there and Template talk:Alevism, a user changed it without providing a reliable source. I've undone that change. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:53, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Alevi people know kurdish and zaza languages like i know english its not mean im Aşkım englishman. Alevi people know kurdish because they are living in kürdistan location in many years together but Alevi people are Turks nomads HaydarHaydarHaydar (talk) 21:48, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Alevi people are with Shia Kurdish people are with Sunni and Şaafii HaydarHaydarHaydar (talk) 21:50, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Undue weight and original research issues

Alevism or Anatolian Alevism is a local Islamic tradition - This does not sound right nor is the source directly even saying this. What the source says:

"Incorporating Shiite, Sufi, Sunni and local traditions, Alevism is a strain of Islam that emerged in the medieval period." and also right after: "For some members, Alevism is simply a cultural identity, rather than a form of worship."

I am not saying this is completely wrong, but most is and that is not what the source is saying, it is mostly a interview of an Alevi from Osmancık (far from the heartlands of Alevis) which may have been an assessment of what is known and what the person is saying. As this is the lead I currently do not have any replacement. I think something that underlines most importantly their beliefs and of course their traditions without branding it as an "islamic tradition" and to better reflect what Alevis are actually saying should be replaced instead.

For example while further reading, this quote below hints at where this kind of thinking is more in line with (that we should avoid):

An Alevi citizen who declined to give his name spoke of his son's experience of religious and ethics instruction in primary school: "Alevism is not presented to pupils as an independent religion, but as a brotherhood or a kind of mystical current. Our fasts and devotions are not considered to be religious services, but traditions." (referring to the Turkish state) source

From my understanding the majority and core of what Alevism is; is a branch off/away from Islam yet it has roots from Islam stemming from the Ali story. Historically it was a means of other beliefs and people adopting it in order to continue practicing their beliefs and traditions while it was a very hostile environment for none-muslims. Such as Christians, Armenians and Kurdish Zaza peoples. This is why there is a vast and varying self-assessments from Alevis.

Alevis in the largest part reside in Dersim (Tunceli) and also spread out around the Sivas areas, the demographics map being used indicates this. Dersim also has a very large diaspora stemming from the genocide that occurred in 1937/8 and the following wars over the years. Further info on the demographics "While Dressler stated in 2008 that about a third of the Alevi population is Kurdish" and "Aksüt argued in 2015 that a majority of the Alevi population is Kurdish" yet the narrative of this article has side-lined them (ironically) and more is actually learned in Kurdish Alevism so this is essentially narrating a more favoured Turkish view of Alevism, driving out the mainstream idea of what or who Alevis are and given undue weight.

Alevi's don't have the funding and resources to create themselves institutions such as "Alevi-Islam Religious Services" to pump out work which is going to get a lot of influence from the state. What they do have is organisations such as the 'European Alevi Federation' & 'European Alevi Union' (not sure if they're both the same thing) which this article should obviously favor, considering the history and continued persecution they face by the state itself.

At the same time it seems that assimilation has caused Alevi to be too much of a blanket term and it may just simply be better to have a Turkish Alevism or Turkish Alevi Islam (in keeping with their Alevi-Islam Religious Services they have) rather than misrepresenting Alevism here like this. Especially if Kurdish Alevism is being perceived as a secondary to this, this being the main.

Another questionable claim: "Thus Alevism incorporates Turkish beliefs present during the 14th century,[13] mixed with Shia, Sunni and Sufi beliefs that were adopted by some Turkish and later Kurdish tribes.[14]" What beliefs? This seems completely contradictory to what I've read. What seems to be happening here is references to government/state level describing them as one of their own (while never treating them as such) and on a religious level making them out to be a branch of Islam while in reality never giving them any room in Turkey.

Apologies for the long writing, hopefully with better understanding can we improve the scope of these articles. --TataofTata (talk) 15:27, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for your input. I might not be able to respond to all of your objections, but I think I could regarding the last paragraph. As far as I remember, I contributed and even defended this part in the past. "Thus Alevism incorporates Turkish beliefs present during the 14th century,[13] mixed with Shia, Sunni and Sufi beliefs that were adopted by some Turkish and later Kurdish tribes." What exactly is wrong about this? What have you read about this? Since I do not see an issue, important sources might be missing. Could you help me and other potential editors out?--VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 18:52, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello @VenusFeuerFalle: I found it to be vague and specifically want to know which Turkish beliefs and mixed with Shia, Sunni and Sufi beliefs does Alevis incorporate? Before I make any opinion. I'm happy to contribute and help, but I'm trying to gather what it means by that line I quoted. Also another map regarding Alevis I found in the Minorities in Turkey article. A minority religion in Turkey is being marginalized even in its own article. --TataofTata (talk) 02:03, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your input. It is always nice to see more fellow Wikipedians who contribute to existing articles. Yes, it is unspecific. But is is also hard to determine which beliefs exactly were adapted and which were genuinly Turkic/Anatolian. Some beliefs are also merely reinterpretations. A common case, I repeatedly found in secondary literature is that Turks thought Sufis/Dervishes were some sort of Shamans, who can talk to the Divine and transmit the Will of God. Orthodox Sunnism (well, back then orthodox Sunnism mainly conisted of Sufism, I mean by "Orthodox Sunnism", the Damascene mainly Hanbalite interpretation of Islam which dominates Sunnism today) rejects that the Will of God can be communicated by saints and rely on solely on scripture (Quran and Hadiths) instead. This is one of the beliefs adapted by Turks. Other beliefs are about supernatural creatures, like the Div and Peri, which in turn were introduced to Islam early when Islam arrived in Persia (in contrast to jinn, peri and div are seen as good or evil, introducing some sort of dualism between good and evil to Muslims, probably absent within the early stage of Islam). A book I read currently (Islam and Society in Mongol Anatolia) speaks about Shia beliefs mixed with Sunni beliefs during this period, which makes it hard to distinguzish between both. For example Jafar Al Sadiq, one of the Great Imams in Shia Islam, also has been an authority for Sunnis and his teachings influenced Anatolian beliefs. I hope I was able to name some conctrete beliefs, while showing why it is hard to draw clear lines. I think many sources are vague about the exact beliefs, because many Muslim beliefs are not clear defined during the Medieval Age, but we can map some sort of differences and tell, if a belief is rather classified as Sunnism, Shia or Sufis. Based on what we call these beliefs today (for example, many Iranian beliefs are often considered Shia, while Iran was Sunni until they tried to part themselves from the beliefs of the Ottoman Empire in 1501), the beliefs of Muslims are often classified into "Sufi", "sunni", Shia" and so on. Most Muslim beliefs among Alevites, are thus beliefs we would call Sufi or Shia today.--VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 16:11, 30 September 2021 (UTC)