Talk:Shaykhism

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Shi'a Islam task force.

new page

OK, this is essentially a large part of the original Shaykh Ahmad article which had expanded beyond its remit. I have reordered it and added minor explanatory notes. Feel free to correct and expand. The article history and some of the discussions on the Shaykh Ahmad article are relevant. Please read them. Refdoc 14:50, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

title

I think this page should be moved to Shaykhism, or maybe Shaykhi movement. If not those, then move to Shaykhis (without the accent over the I). The guidelines for Islamic articles is to not use diacritics in the title. Cuñado - Talk 17:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would move it to Shaykhi to go along with the other schools of thought in Twelver Shia Islam as according to those found at Twelvers#Schools of thought within the Twelvers. I can't do it myself, because the both pages have a history. -- Jeff3000 18:14, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does this make sense?

"Shaykhism is an Islamic religious movement founded by Shaykh Ahmad in the early 19th century Persian Empire. It began from a combination of Sufi and Shi‘a doctrines of the end times and the day of resurrection. Today the Shaykhi populations retain a minority following in Iran and Iraq.[1] In the mid 18th century many Shaykhis converted to the Bábí and Bahá'í religions, which consider Shaykh Ahmad to be a religious forerunner and predecessor of their own faiths."

I know nothing about this, but it's strange that followers of a religion managed to convert from it before their religion existed. Karlusss 23:43, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for finding this out, it's been fixed now. -- Jeff3000 00:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Karim

"It appears (Karim) did not manage a significant following and appointed no successor.[citation needed]"

This is uncited and appears to be contradicted by the bit later on the article which says that Shaykhi sect today has a significant following in Iran, Iraq and the Gulf. Presumably these are descended from the Karim group? Any objections to my deleting it? AndrewRT(Talk) 23:16, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Shaykhi group split into a number of regional strands after Siyyid Kazim's death. There are Shaykhi groups and poublishing houses in Pakistan and elsewhere in the Middle East (Syria, Lebanon). This article is lacking in recent scholarship. The Kirmani Shaykhi's i.e Karim have however an establshed lineage/succession. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.213.86 (talk) 22:53, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

by the latest statistics, there are more than 10 thousands shaykhi in iran which are followers of Karim khan, and all of Iraqi shaykhis (more than 200 thousands) are his followers. so, it is absolutely a wrong sentence. i can refer to the persian article of the same page (فارسی). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.9.109.170 (talk) 18:39, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bahá'í Category

In accordance with WP:Categories I do believe that this can go in both the Twelvers category and the Bahá'í category. Would there be any objections to this? Peter Deer (talk) 13:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to recall a conversation somewhere that there would be a demarcation line with the Bab, where everything from then on would use Baha'i orthography and be part of the Baha'i pages, in a sense. I think the category is kind of inconsequential and I tend to want less categories on an article to keep things simple. That's just my opinion. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 19:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced, likely untrue claims

"The Shaykhís believed that since Muslims require the guidance of the Mahdi, there must be an individual on Earth who is capable of communicating with him. This personage would be described as the "perfect Shi'a", and Shaykh Ahmad was the first to adopt that position. Due to this unique capability, the leader of the sect attained a quasi-divinity in the eyes of his followers."

This originates from the first chapter of a self-published anti- Baha'i polemical book by a Lahore Ahmadi leader. Why is it here and why are there no sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.174.177.237 (talk) 02:26, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Variant Spelling

I've made "Sheikhism" redirect here, but that spelling seems to have some other uses as well. Anybody is welcome to make it into an actual page if you think it should be one.--Zofthej (talk) 15:42, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not working

I tried to give the source and tittle but for some reason the editing is not working... Coyote7798 (talk) 01:47, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In future, please explain the issue more thoroughly if you're asking for help; the only reason I understood this is because I just fixed the error. Jessicapierce (talk) 17:44, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pushing Babi connection/religious views into Article

@Cuñado:

I was looking at some of your edits and you seem to disregard what I said in my edit summaries regarding WP:DUE. This is not an article about Babism/Bahaism as noted by other editors above, it is an article about an Islamic, Shi'i, Ithna'Ash'ari denomination, so why are you trying to unduely mention what are completely different topics in this article? Yes I understand that those new religious movements view themselves as an outgrowth from this Muslim denomination, but that should be explored with due weight in the relevant sections in the article and on those new religious movements' relevant articles elsewhere not be foisted on the lede taking away from the main topic of the article.

Some of the sources (and at times lack of sources like here) in your edits are also contestable, where they seem to be evidencing supposed statements of fact by using the views of this new religious movement's founder figure who has a clear motive in promoting certain ideas. Even this source you use is linked to one of those new religious movement's websites.

I'm going to remove unsourced and undue content, as I did before, feel free to have a conversation with me here on why you think what I remove should be kept if you think it should. I would much prefer that to what you did last time which was merely go ahead with your edits without engaging with me, even seeming to intertwine them with other routine fixes. ParthikS8 (talk) 20:07, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

However feel free to put such information, if reliably sourced, into the "Reception in other religions" section. It is due there. And again it can be added to other articles more relevant to such statements. ParthikS8 (talk) 20:24, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Current leadership

The current article gives the leadership (under "Modern Shaykhism") as Zein al-Abedin Ebrahimi, who succeeded Ali al-Musawi.

I'm not clear how this links to the earlier succession under the "Karim Khan" section as Karim Khan Kermani --> Muhammad Khan Kirmani --> Zaynal 'Abidln Kirmani --> Abu al-Qasim Ibrahimi --> 'Abd al-Rida Khan Ibrahimi.

Are "Zaynal 'Abidln Kirmani" and "Zein al-Abedin Ebrahimi" the same person?

This source from 2021 gives what appears to be a completely different lineage:

Mirza Ali Mousa al-Ihqaqi --> Mirza Hassan --> Mirza Abdulrasool --> Abdullah son of Abdulrasool

Are "Ali Mousa al-Ihqaqi" and "Ali al-Musawi" the same person?

If anyone can help to unpick these different sources it would be much appreciated!! AndrewRT(Talk) 17:25, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]