Jump to content

Talk:Fazl-e-Haq Khairabadi

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Recent edit about Gyan source

[edit]

Kindly explain your recent edits here. ScholarM (talk) 14:53, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

[edit]

Since when did Salafis beleive that Muhammad was not the final prophet? Assumingly this article confuses Ahmadis for Salafis. Scythian1 (talk) 05:12, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The editors of this page are posting biases against both Salafis and Deobandis. Should be mentioned these are allegations. Not realities — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmadrazakhanbarelvi (talk • contribs) 21:12, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Descendants

[edit]
Moved from Wikipedia talk:Citation needed
 – – Thjarkur (talk) 14:47, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is my humble request that the family of Mulana Fazal-e-Haq Kairabadi is not represented faithfully instead the PR team of Mr. Javed Akhtar has misrepresented the family Lineage by only mentioning Mr. Akhtar's immediate family. I request that amendment be made since Fazle-e-Haq Kairabadi's descendants are many and would like to be represented. I had an earlier version of this page which actually had everyones name on it before Mr. Akhtar's PR team removed it. Saami81 (talk) 10:24, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting a review

[edit]

@GorgeCustersSabre: @AaqibAnjum: @ParthikS8: There is a section in the article entitled "Fatawas against Deobandi theories". Can you please check it out, and then give me some feedback! I have serious doubts about this section being neutral? Thanks in advance and sorry for any inconvenience caused.--TheEagle107 (talk) 22:15, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks man for mentioning. The section was not just a POV Violation, rather a bit attack on Rashid Ahmad Gangohi as well. Such things shortly have been added at Deobandi, however they texts have been mostly misinterpreted. Gangohi has said that that "even if Allah had the ability, he won't lie and whoever believes that Allah will lie, is a kaffir" — if a neutral statement is included, that would be okay. As of now, I've removed the whole section and I hope GorgeCustersSabre and other editor would agree with me. - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 23:22, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Aaqib Anjum Aafī has done the right thing. Wikipedia cannot permit sectarianism. George Custer's Sabre (talk) 05:00, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If the content is supported by citations then it should stay. Any content which is against the references may go but removing the whole section and re-writing the article based on less-reliable sources should not be encouraged.--Fztcs 06:10, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is not of citation here, but of WP:NPOV. The whole section demeans and has misinformation about Gangohi. Can't be accepted until re-written as neutral. And please don't re-insert content against WP:NPOV - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 06:18, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NPOV doesn't mean WP:Censorship, you can't simply remove cited content. If you want you can propose new content here and then get it reviewed and place it there. Until then you shouldn't remove the content.--Fztcs 06:50, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@GorgeCustersSabre: @AaqibAnjum: @TheEagle107: As a start please could one of you indicate which statements in the section in question you object to. It would also help if you explained why you object to them.

One way of doing the former, would be to apply strikethrough to the bits you object to, and then to use bullet points to say why each of the struck-through bits in your view is wrong (and perhaps to suggest a new wording).

Khairabadi issued fatwas against the Wahabi-Deobandi doctrine of God's alleged ability to lie (Imkan-e-Kizb). Darul Uloom Deoband, founder Rashid Ahmad Gangohi stated that God has the ability to lie.[5] This doctrine is called Imkan-i Kizb.[6][5] According to this doctrine, because God is omnipotent, God is capable of lying.[6] Gangohi supported the doctrine that God has the ability to make additional prophets after Muhammad (Imkan-i Nazir) and other prophets equal to Muhammad.[6][5]
Allama Fazle Haq Khairabadi refuted these theories and wrote that according to the Qur’an and Hadith, the prophet Muhammad is the final prophet, and there can be no other prophet or "messenger" after him. To believe that there can be another Muhammad would necessitate that Allah did something apart from what he has stated in the Qur’an, that is, that Allah has lied. Lying is a flaw and it is impossible for Allah to have a flaw.[1] This reflects his deep insight to the political, social and religious environment which was emerging with the growing influence of Englishmen and at last capture of Delhi by them.[citation needed]

-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:05, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Toddy1, I can't propose a new text myself but the point where we disagree with this section is that the whole thing that Rashid Ahmad Gangohi said "Allah has ability to lie" and it is a part and parcel of Deobandi beliefs is wrong. However, he said, "Allah has power to do so, but will not so do and whoever believes Allah will lie is kaffir" — and the statement in this article does injustice with Gangohi's statement. It is no way right to mention half thing? I agree that people issued fatwas against him, but all that was due to misunderstandings, Gangohi himself says, he doesn't believe so. I've inserted a statement earlier at Deobandi as well, making the same sentence neutral. - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 09:13, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AaqibAnjum, that could be fixed. I would also like "Wahabi-Deobandi" changed to "Deobandi" unless there is some real evidence that Khairabadi believed that Wahhabis believed that.-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:32, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Faizhaider: In the first paragraph of the section people object to, it starts by saying that Khairabadi issued a fatwa concerning God's ability to lie. It then tries to explain Gangohi's theory concerning this. Then for some reason it has a sentence talking about God's ability to make new prophets. Was this sentence included here by mistake? Then the second paragraph starts by talking about new prophets, but goes back into talking about lying. It would be easier to understand if you put all the bits about lying in one paragraph and all the bits about new prophets in a separate paragraph.
The final sentence about "This reflects his deep insight... the growing influence of Englishmen..." only makes sense if the reader believes that Gangohi was English. -- Toddy1 (talk) 09:32, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Faizhaider: It is a bit of a stretch to claim that the cited sources supports any of the statements about Fazl-e-Haq Khairabadi in this section. Citation [1] page 43 does support that Fazl-e-Haq Khairabadi denounced someone for supporting Imkan-e-Kizb - but this was in 1822 - 4 years before Rashid Ahmad Gangohi was born. Citation [1] page 43 says that Fazl-e-Haq Khairabadi was later hanged. All the stuff about Gangohi is (a) synthesis and (b) irrelevant to what Khairabadi did in 1822. -- Toddy1 (talk) 16:06, 31 July 2020 (UTC) 16:16, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Faizhaider: Can you please explain to me why did you revert my edits (HERE) without any kind of explanation? That was really unnecessary and impolite.
I have cited two sources:
  1. Mu'jam al-Mu'allifin by Umar Rida Kahhalah.
  2. Hadiyyat al-'Arifin by Isma'il b. Muhammad Amin al-Babani al-Baghdadi.
I think these sources are acceptable, given that they're the best available.
@Toddy1: Thanks for your understanding and consideration. We don't want any edit wars here. However, I am just concerned about accuracy in the article as it stands.--TheEagle107 (talk) 16:12, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
TheEagle107, Years ago this section existed as:
Khairabadi was at the forefront of issuing fatwas against Wahabi or Salafis. He also argued against the idea of Non Finality of Prophethood. He wrote that, according to the Qur’an and Hadith, the prophet Muhammad is the final prophet, and there can be no other prophet or "messenger" after him. To believe that there can be another Muhammad would necessitate that Allah did something apart from what He has stated in the Qur’an, that is, that Allah has lied. Lying is a flaw and it is impossible for Allah to have a flaw. See this.. I can't understand that the Deobandi movement which started after 1866, how did Khairabadi wrote against them before 1861? ─ The Aafī (talk) 09:04, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that Fazl-e-Haq Khairabadi was against beliefs that were later espoused by the Deobandi movement. But the POV section made it seem as though Fazl-e-Haq Khairabadi had attacked the Deobandi movement (which he did not - because he did not have a time machine). There are points of real value - but they need to be addressed mainly in terms of his own time - though it is worth mentioning that beliefs that he attacked are mainstream beliefs today and to give an example of a mainstream group that holds those beliefs.-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:04, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Toddy1, This makes sense. I've added a section Literary works mentioning some of his works referencing from WorldCat. He has a book against Shah Ismail Dehlvi, which is esteemed by Salafis and Deobandi's both. I'll have a look and see what merits to be mentioned here. We provide information without being an advocate of any party. ─ The Aafī (talk) 11:51, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another fatwa

[edit]

There is a one sentence sentence:

Khairabadi issued Fatwa of Jihad against British government.[7][8][9]

This fails to mention, where, when and in what circumstances he did this. Of the citations [7] and [8] are easily accessible, but not very useful. Citation [8] has some sentences on the subject that make little sense (perhaps it was written in another language and badly translated). Citation [9] has fragments available online.

If all we can say is that at some unknown stage in his life he issued a fatwa of jihad against British government, then it is not worth mentioning.-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:59, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Date of death

[edit]

@AaqibAnjum: You changed the date of his death, with the edit summary "per source". Please could you provide the article with a citation to that source.-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:36, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Toddy1, I had added the source earlier at the death section. see this. Thanks — Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 10:40, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:58, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Copy edit request

[edit]

Hello @Miniapolis:, hope you are doing well, it looks like this article can be in good shape if copyedited. Hope you will look at it and will do necessary copyedits. Thank you. 37.111.217.63 (talk) 05:31, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As the top of my talk page says, I don't copyedit on demand. List it at WP:GOCE/REQ and if it's appropriate for copyediting, I or a fellow copyeditor will do it. Miniapolis 19:49, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I suspect possible Copying of content especially in the section of Fatwa Against Wahhabi/ Deobandi theories from Fazle Haq Khairabadi against their terms of use, so changing content bit to avoid copyright Violations. 37.111.218.123 (talk) 05:09, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fazl-e-Haq_Khairabadi&oldid=1207965188"