Talk:Islamic state

Islamic State vs. Islamic Republic?

I considered merging Islamic state with Islamic republic. "Islamic state" (as it stands in this article) could be the introdutory section to Islamic Republic - an article which currently has zero explanatory or historical discussion of the origin of the concept. Both these terms in their modern sense originated with the same thinkers (Sayyid Qutb of Egypt, Maududi of India, Khomeini of Iran, etc.).

On the other hand, Saudi Arabia is a "Kingdom", which is arguably a state that is as "Islamic" and shari'a-based as Iran or Pakistan. Also, there may be Islamic revolutionary movements which call for states that are not "republics", but have failed. Let's keep Islamic state separate from Islamic republic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Runningya (talk • contribs) 18:08, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Why is Syria marked in orange, meaning "other" in the map? It should be light green. Islam is the official religion. See Article 3 of the Constitution: The religion of the President of the Republic is Islam; Islamic jurisprudence shall be a major source of legislation; — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.101.135.103 (talk) 09:00, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

some jumbled brainstorming text excerpts for expansion, mostly from WP

Islamic fundamentalism is a religious ideology which advocates literalist interpretations of the sacred texts of Islam, Sharia law, and an Islamic State. [1] I http://www.brucegourley.com/fundamentalism/islamicfundamentalismintro2.htm

Journalist's Appeal: Please keep the phrase "Islamic fundamentalism" out of the published version of this page. This is a plea, to maintain NPOV, as per Wikipedia standards. The Associated Press Style Guide advises that the term "fundamentalism" not be applied to groups which do not self-identify as such. WP does not have this guideline (yet) but it seems reasonable to follow AP. Runningya (talk) 13:06, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

One general feature of Islamist revolutionary movements is that they advocate creation of "the Islamic state", though this often means "Islamisation" of the modern nation-state.

One of the main proponents was Maulana Maududi http://www.jamaat.org/overview/writings.html

--The modern political ideal of the Islamic state--

In addition to the legitimacy given by medieval scholarly opinion, nostalgia for the days of successful Islamic empire simmered under later Western colonialism. This nostalgia played a major role in the Islamist political ideal of Islamic state, which primarily means a state which enforces traditional Islamic laws. The Islamist political program is generally to be accomplished by re-shaping the governments of existing Muslim nation-states; but the means of doing this varies greatly across movements and circumstances. Many Islamist movements, such as the Jamaat-e-Islami in Bangladesh, have found that they can use the democratic process to their advantage, and so focus on votes and coalition-building with other political parties. Other more radical movements such as Jamatul Mujahideen Bangladesh embrace militant Islamic ideology, and may even resort to Islamist terrorism.

In the face of the tremendous poverty, corruption and disillusionment with conventional politics, the political ideal of the Islamic state has been criticized by many espousing liberal movements within Islam as being utopian and not offering real solutions, for example by Ziauddin Sardar.

Fundamentalist Islamic ideology is based upon two “pillars”: the conviction that Islamic law (the sharia) is the only valid system for regulating human life (individual, social and political), and the conviction that a true and faithful Muslim society can only be achieved through an Islamic state

faced with Communist encroachments in Pakistan in the late 1960s, the Jama’at-i Islami eventually abandoned cooperative efforts and sought to establish a strict Islamic state identity in opposition to the Bhutto regime. <Xref>Guazzone, Laura, ed., The Islamist Dilemma: The Political Role of Islamist Movements in the Contemporary Arab World (Berkshire, UK: Ithaca Press, 1995), 10.</Xref><Xref>http://www.brucegourley.com/fundamentalism/islamicfundamentalismintro2.htm#_edn5 Introduction To Islamic Fundamentalism] by Bruce Gourley</Xref>

--Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi--

Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi was an important early twentieth-century figure in India, then, after independence from Britain, in Pakistan. Strongly influenced by Deobandi ideology, he advocated the creation of an Islamic state governed by sharia, Islamic law, as interpreted by Shura councils. Maududi founded the Jamaat-e-Islami in 1941 and remained at its head until 1972. His extremely influential book, "Towards Understanding Islam" (Risalat Diniyat in Arabic), placed Islam in modern context and enabled not only conservative ulema but liberal modernizers such as al-Faruqi, whose "Islamization of Knowledge" carried forward some of Maududi's key principles. Chief among these was the basic compatibility of Islam with an ethical scientific view. Quoting from Maududi's own work:

Everything in the universe is 'Muslim' for it obeys God by submission to His laws... For his entire life, from the embryonic stage to the body's dissolution into dust after death, every tissue of his muscles and every limb of his body follows the course prescribed by God's law. His very tongue which, on account of his ignorance advocates the denial of God or professes multiple deities, is in its very nature 'Muslim'... The man who denies God is called Kafir (concealer) because he conceals by his disbelief what is inherent in his nature and embalmed in his own soul. His whole body functions in obedience to that instinct… Reality becomes estranged from him and he gropes in the dark.

dialog on this issue amongst Muslim activists and intellectuals has yielded no clear consensus on what a modern Islamic state should look like. Islamic religious scholars and institutions have struggled to define the applicability of centuries-old doctrines within the context of a modern society, and Islamic scholarship is generally thought to have failed to keep pace with scientific, technological, and social progress. Many questions on the form a modern Islamic caliphate would take, such as whether the concept of the caliphate is compatible with the modern nation-state construct, have received minimal attention in traditional Islamic scholarly circles. Mainstream Islamic institutions in Muslim countries today have generally not made the restoration of the caliphate a top priority and have instead focused on other issues. Most regimes have actually been hostile to such a call.

One transnational group, the Hizb ut-Tahrir, has tried to recruit the world's Muslims to a renewed caliphate. They have published a draft constitution at [1].

--Conflicts with the secular state--

Islamic fundamentalism's push for Sharia and an Islamic State has come into conflict with conceptions of the secular, democratic state, such as the internationally supported Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This conflict centers on following issues:

• rejection of the priority of universal rights and civil law upon religious group rights and religious law, and more specifically
• rejection of the equality of men and women (i.e. they are unequal in specific aspects like how they think and act but are still equal overall)
• rejection of the separation of "church" and state;
• rejection some of religious rights, such as the right of Muslims to leave the religion, while the right to be a non-Muslim in Muslim lands is still allowed.

As a result of this sharp conflict, many doubt whether fundamentalist Islam is compatible with modern liberal democratic states.

--See also--

Modern_Islamic_philosophy
Islamic_fundamentalism
Islam_as_a_political_movement
Rights_of_Non_Muslims_in_Islamic_State_(book)
Islamism
Caliphate
Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam

Somalia

How can somalia be considered "islamic state religion" if there is no state in the first place?--Ssteiner209 (talk) 22:17, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Somalia is a state, despite the fact that its government exerts next to no control, and it has none of the functioning apparatus of a normal state. A failed state is still a state Grunners (talk) 16:05, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Islamic state

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Islamic state's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "newname":

• From 2014 Northern Iraq offensive: Iraq crisis: Isis declares its territories a new Islamic state with 'restoration of caliphate' in Middle East - Middle East - World - The Independent
• From Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant: Withnall, Adam (29 June 2014). "Iraq crisis: Isis changes name and declares its territories a new Islamic state with 'restoration of caliphate' in Middle East". The Independent. Retrieved 29 June 2014. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 08:05, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Requested move (2014)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (BRD has worked well here.) Andrewa (talk) 16:55, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

---

Islamic state → Islamic state (government) – With the rise of the Islamic State (IS), formerly Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL/ISIS) there is a failed discussion to move that page to Islamic State. Part of the problem was the existence of this article with the same name. With this group dominating the news and political discourse I'm suggesting that this page be renamed to avoid confusion. ~Technophant (talk) 09:17, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose. Wikipedia can distinguish by capital letter. So whatever is proposed or happens to the ISIL/ISIS article has nothing to do with this article. This issue at the ISIL/ISIS article is that "the Islamic State" and "an Islamic state" are two concepts easily confused -- and that remains an issue regardless of the title of this article. La crème de la crème (talk) 09:58, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:DIFFCAPS. First, with a lowercase "s", it is not a proper name but a common noun. Second, it remains the WP:PRIMARY TOPIC of the term, and is in use as such as recently as within the past few hours (see, e.g, "Boko Haram... had declared war on all forms of Western education and lifestyle and vowed to turn Nigeria into an Islamic state", September 7, 2014 at 1:54 pm UTC; "He also criticized the silence of certain Arab and Islamic states over Israel's atrocities against Palestinians..."), 47 minutes ago). bd2412 T 16:45, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose as per everything above. This move is not required for the other one. Red Slash 18:37, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose, as above. RGloucester — ☎ 20:03, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose - as above. The WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of the uncapitalized version remains the concept of an Islamic state. When ISIS is being referred to, the S is always capitalized. If it is determined that ISIS is the primary topic of the capitalized version, WP:DIFFCAPS allows for them to be distinguished by capitalization. TDL (talk) 22:39, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose - This falls under the category of "unnecessary disambiguation"... --IJBall (talk) 02:54, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose for reasons as stated and as WP:OFFICIALNAME See: ar:الدولة_الإسلامية_في_العراق_والشام. Our Arabic Wikipedian counterparts use Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. As best as I can work out (with a liberal use of machine translation) they do not have a parallel to Islamic state but this only confirms our present use of titles. Gregkaye ✍♪ 13:28, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
• Comment The only thing that I Strongly oppose is a move from Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant to Islamic state as it should always be known by its longer title in Wikipedia. See: Democratic Republic of the Congo, Federated States of Micronesia and Kingdom of the Netherlands. A search on ISIL OR "islamic state" reveals a lot of hits for the meaning Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant under "Islamic State". A possibility would be to move Islamic state to Islamic state (government) and convert Islamic state into a redirect page to Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. I think it may mislead people searching the internet for ISIL under the name "Islamic State" to see that Wikipedia has an article under that title. Gregkaye ✍♪ 16:42, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
  • With this capitalization? Even if there are people calling it "Islamic State", I don't know of anyone calling it "Islamic state". bd2412 T 16:53, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose Apart from The Militants Formerly Known As ISIL, the primary topic is the concept of an Islamic state that they identify as an example of. Also, the proposed disambiguation doesn't make much sense. —innotata 05:34, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The Islamic State - this isn't it

"The Islamic State", I think, used to direct to the page for The Islamic State. Now it goes here, a page which doesn't appear to have any content relevant to it. The page for The Islamic State (renamed to something that is not the group's current name) agrees that the group is called The Islamic State, but other people don't like that name. Since when does liking a group's name have anything to do with whether it is, in fact, the group's name?

In any case, people looking for The Islamic State will be sent here to this page, so it ought to either include The Islamic State as a subsection, or it should direct people to the correct page, using the group's own English name for itself, not a name chosen by others. 24.57.218.21 (talk) 20:02, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

There is already a hatnote at the top of the page to that effect. Cheers! bd2412 T 20:41, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

"The Islamic State" refers to a specific "Islamic State" and should redirect to Islamic state (disambiguation). GregKaye 13:59, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

There is no The Islamic State (evidently referring to ISIL). Legacypac (talk) 22:24, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

The Prophetic State in Medina was 'Nabawate', Not Caliphate, Which Followed It

The text in the article: "The term caliphate refers to the first system of government established by Muhammad in 622 CE, under the Constitution of Medina." is inaccurate. The prophet created 'Ad-Dawla An-Nabawwiyah' (الدولة النبوية) in Medina in 1 H (622 C), while the caliphate 'al-khilafah' (الخلافة) or literally 'successorate' (a word needed to be coined to give the closest meaning of the word in Arabic), succeeded it after the prophet's death a decade later in 11 H (632 C). The difference between the two is that in the former. the Nabawate, was pioneering: the prophet defined the principles of shoura & justice in state in Islam as per the God's revelation which was according to His Will & please Him to admit the believers to His Paradise; while the latter, the caliphate, simply followed it with 'ijtihad' (mental self-striving) on basis of Koran, tradition, ijmaa & qiyas in matters which were encountered a new.78.93.211.105 (talk) 08:35, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

modern Islamic State

Where does the modern Islamic State expression comes from? It is used in the lead of the article.

Then it appears in two sections:

• 1 The historical Islamic state
• 2 The modern Islamic state

And it says: «The very term, 'Islamic State', was never used in the theory or practice of Muslim political science, before the twentieth century," according to Pakistani scholar of Islamic history Qamaruddin Khan. The modern conceptualization of the "Islamic state" is attributed to Abul A'la Maududi (1903–1979)».

This makes

• I do not understand why the first title should be The historical Islamic state rather than historical.
• I do not understand why to choose the unique section title modern Islamic state instead of a several concrete sections title such as executive power / parliamentary role / judicial system.
• I do not understand which period is covered by the modern term?

Additionally I wonder if there is no missing a international involvment section to link to Organisation of Islamic Cooperation and Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam.

Comparatively, the democracy article :

• stand that (in its history section) The term "democracy" first appeared in ancient Greek political and philosophical thought in the city-state of Athens during classical antiquity.
• does not contain a modern democracy section, although there is a modern era subsection in its history section. 86.67.202.222 (talk) 09:39, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 6 October 2015

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Islamic state → Islamic state (government) – This type of move request was made 1 year ago but that time word "Islamic state" was not commonly used for Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant(ISIS). But today term "Islamic state" (either "capital" or "small") mainly refers to ISIS. We can see many examples of use of term "Islamic state" for "ISIS" by world's leading English news papers. I will provide one example of each news, BBC, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, Telegraph, The Times of India, Dawn, Al Jazeera, The Gaurdian. These are just few examples and I can provide more. Search term "Islamic state" is for "ISIS" and not for to learn government type of same name. Thanks.-- Human3015^TALK  21:40, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose WP:RECENTISM, Islamic states have exists for centuries, the recent advent of Da'esh is recent. Further, Da'esh is also an Islamic state like other Islamic states. Also WP:DIFFCAPS, Da'esh is not properly called "Islamic state" anyways, that is an improper spelling. Furhter, as Da'esh is just one Islamic state among many, this is the proper topic to occupy all base locations. -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 02:50, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose as demonstrated over and over on the ISIL talk page the use of "Islamic State" without qualification to refer to ISIL is not widespread. This looks like a prelude to an attempt to rename the ISIL article to Islamic State, a move for which there is a 1 year moriturum on now. Please drop this. Legacypac (talk) 22:21, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

@Legacypac: This is not part of any planning to rename ISIL to Islamic State. As I gave so many examples which are exclusively using words "Islamic state" for ISIS. As I said I can give hundreds of other news which are using "Islamic state" for ISIS, also there are hundreds of non-English sources too. I just requested move because I wanted to get info about ISIS and I typed "Islamic state" on google as it is common term for ISIS but I got this page as top Wikipedia result for "Islamic state". Many people will get confuse , so I requested this move thinking that people should know that this article is not about ISIS but it is about "government type". --Human3015^TALK  23:55, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

There's a hat note at the top of the article which accomplishes that. Willondon (talk) 00:02, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose as per the countless recent requested move discussions on Talk:Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Khestwol (talk) 01:04, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
• Ok, I drop this requested move.--Human3015^TALK  01:54, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

ISIS a state/ theocracy?

Hi, can anyone help in the discussion at Talk:Theocracy#ISIL? An editor has removed ISIS from theocracy, claiming it is not a government and thus cannot be a theocracy. I find that a little strange, and so I hope some people here might have more experience and perhaps some helpful references. Thanks, SemanticMantis (talk) 19:16, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

please do something for Muslims Ruhan saruar Ripan (talk) 11:06, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

again (22/mars 2016), the us with needle - attacked bombs!

If it should be spoken to motives the terrorists and suspected terrorists. Dan, is threatened with torture and unmänschliche treatments, although moment during a long time in prison, do not represent the final motive. With only one drug (for example, prednisolone) obtain the judicial and investigative authorities almost unlimited possibilities to manipulate the physical and spiritual condition. The fear to inflict pain, etc.. Since force helps in België law. do not prohibit this torture. secretly not to children not to pregnant Frauen.Diese get prednisolone along with others. The state refused hard square the set EU Convention on Human Rights to sign.109.129.80.203 (talk) 16:42, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Isa Ibn Maryam

. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.230.12.99 (talk) 15:57, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Copy and paste

I don't see the helpfulness of this edit. It simply copies and pastes material that is already (and more relevantly) covered at Taliban. The information included does not attempt to make any connection to the idea of Islamic state, which makes it somewhat WP:COATRACK-y. Therefore I'm removing it.VR _talk 21:36, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

I don't see the helpfulness of this edit. It simply copies and pastes material that is already (and more relevantly) covered at Taliban. The information included does not attempt to make any connection to the idea of Islamic state, which makes it somewhat WP:COATRACK-y. Therefore I'm removing it.VR talk

my name is m Rizwan 101.53.241.123 (talk) 21:37, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Work

My name is m Rizwan 101.53.241.123 (talk) 21:38, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 1 April 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Elli (talk | contribs) 18:53, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

---

Islamic state → Islamic state (government) – There is an article called Islamic State (capital S) referring to the terrorist organization, and an article called Islamic state (lowercase S) referring to the government type. I do not think that these titles are meaningfully disambiguated. (WP:DAB) JohnR1Roberts (talk) 21:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

• Move to Islamic state (form of government). Islamic State could also be referred to as a government. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:58, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

*Oppose Islamic State is the WP:COMMONNAME.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:02, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

• But Islamic State is also the WP:COMMONNAME of ISIS. JohnR1Roberts (talk) 14:47, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

• Move to Islamic state (government). Thanks for pointing it out JohnR1Roberts.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 15:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose per previous two RMS in 2014 and 2015. Nothing has changed, and current situation is acceptable per WP:DIFFCAPS. Bensci54 (talk) 20:34, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose, as before, for the reasons stated before. BD2412 T 20:53, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

  I was unaware of this policy. Thanks. JohnR1Roberts (talk) 11:59, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.