User talk:Pasha Abd

Welcome!

Hello, Pasha Abd, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

and Salaam Aleikum, Pasha. (Or... wait, no, that's Arabic, and you speak Farsi. Hm. Well. You know what I mean, right?) Hope to see good work from you. DS 00:22, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tarkhan and other mysteries

Pash, got your post to my talk page. I really thought and researched the word "Tarkhan". Originally, this is what I came up with, after quite some digging, for Tarkhan:

An ancient Egyptian archelogical site.
The carpenter caste in the Sikh religion. (?)

I thought about what you wanted and it didn't relate to Russian cartoons. And then, Bam! I got it. It was Tarkan you were looking for (no h!). Tarkan or, actually, tarakan (Russ. таракан) is Russian for cockroach. I don't have any sources for Russian cartoons, though I do have some friends in Moscow who might know more. For now, enjoy this:

In other news, if you want me to clean-up or edit any of your Sufi articles, let me know.

Bye for now, Thadswanek

Oh , Thank you so much friend! you helped alot.Pasha 22:19, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Abusaeid Abolkheir

I have just read this article. Thank you for your nice work, I hope to read more soon. Cheers, Sam Spade 03:15, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much!Pasha Abd 15:18, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nice Work

Its a pleasure to see you start Esoteric interpretation of Qur'an . Hopefully , when I have time , I will be adding stuff there . For a long time editting Sufism felt like talking to myself . Good to see a person who is knowledgeable & dedicated .

Eid mubarak & best wishes . F.a.y.^{تبادله خيال}^/c 19:18, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so mych F.a.y , I feel sure we can do some good wrok together , for a start I have never been a member of a Sufi tradition and so can not have certain information that you have.Eid Mobarak! Pasha Abd 19:31, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Btw I have some questions about practical Sufism which are not related to wikipedia , I would be very happy to be able to discuss them with you.Pasha Abd 19:34, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well for a start I havent been officially a member of any Sufi tradition either . I havebeen associated with a sufi order , & I started reading sufism very early age ( around 8-10 years ) . So I am able to know somethings that arnt very much availabe on media . I will be delighted to answer your questions ( if I am able too ) . F.a.y.^{تبادله خيال}^/c 19:44, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing , sorry if I seem to be interfering with your personal choices , but if you are a muslim , its better to have muslim category on your talk page . That makes it easy to talk to all muslims or people who are interested in Islam related articles , at the same time without searching much . F.a.y.^{تبادله خيال}^/c 19:44, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Conference of the Birds

I don't know; I'd have to see the excerpt first to make that decision. Why not e-mail it to me, through the "e-mail this user" link on my talk page? DS 01:29, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Esoteric interpretation of the Qur'an

Hey, I just want to let you know that I moved your page to add the definite article ('the') since that is more standard. Also, I have not read the page but the lack of references worries me a little. Once I read it I will comment on it at some point, however, you need to cite your reliable sources so that it can't be taken as original research. I also haven't seen you around before, so welcome! gren グレン 07:10, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I read it... and, well, a lot of it really need to be cited. Can you help by giving us the sources you used to write this? gren グレン 07:25, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you , I can cite the sources , but most of the sources I used are actually books in Persian and Arabic , I am not sure but its possible that some of them are not translated to English.I shall try to cite references to reliable sites , but some of them will be in Arabic.Pasha 16:56, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I added some English and Arabic citations plus references to relevant sources , please take a look and if citations seem appropriate remove the unreferenced tag.Pasha 20:00, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Also , I feel sure about the factual accuracy of what exists in the article for now , but I admit that it needs to be extensively expanded due to vastness of the subject,I hope other editor will notice the article and help.Pasha 05:18, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I am not well versed in this subject but I thank you for your efforts to start citing it all. I have removed the unreferenced tag beacuse it's definitely not unreferenced, but it's also not fully referenced yet. One thing, could you separate "references" from "external links". References should be items that you have cited in the paper and you can use some indication of this through footnotes. External links (or further reading if you can link good books) would be ohter articles that you have not used in the creation of the article but are related. Separating those two would make it easier for other users to do fact checking and to check out all of the references. Also, I noticed one link in Arabic... if at all possible it's better to give English references since most of us don't speak Arabic, but, if you have none that will do.

One thing I have questioned is, what makes Sufi interpretations exactly "esoteric". Does it just mean that you are chronicling uncommon interpretations, or is there something (some source most specifically) that binds these all together as esoteric. What makes this title better than Uncommon interpretations of the Qur'an, Mystical interpretations of the Qur'an or Alternative interpretations of the Qur'an? Granted all of those could be called subjective as well. Just a curiosity, as I said I need to look into this more but, I want to congratulate you on a great effort in starting this. Also, if you could just be careful with your typing in the article... like, one space after periods between sentences and no spaces between a comma and the word. It's not a big deal but it's just the standard type style we use. gren グレン 07:21, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you , I did my best to cite English sources , but in two cases I could not find any reference except in Arabic because the subject was a little unusual or technical.I used esoteric as opposed to exoteric I guess it is a near translation of the words manifest and inner that Sufis originally use , the use of the term in English is very common by not a definite standard[1].What makes them esoteric is that they are presented using ones own mystic knowledge (e.g. reported seeing of the meaning of a verse in a vision or unveiling to the heart )and not simply through intellectual analysis.I actually had doubts between choosing mystic interpretation or esoteric interpretation but chose the latter because it could cover Shi'a Imams and Isma'ili interpretations which are defintely esoteric.I think Alternative interpretations cover a wider range like some very radical interpretations of some muslims , interpreting Qur'an according to a definite political ideology and attempts to extract knowledge of prophecies from the Qur'an using computer etc.Three of the links in Reference section are cited in the article , one is not and I shall move that external links , thank you for mentioning these , and sorry for those errors , I do not feel easy with this software yet.Pasha 14:32, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The words esoteric and mystic are frequently confused with each other and taken to mean simply spiritual but as far as I know , an esoteric statement is concerned with a spiritual knowledge e.g "The human soul has four levels which are associated with four words etc" while a mystic statement is concerned with a different spiritual understanding or wisdom , like transcendent unity of all things , a definite charactristic of mysticism is statements that can not be fully understood through analysis e.g. "The universe is nothing save God but God is not one with the universe" .I agree that Sufism is primarily mystic but it has many esoteric aspects ,esoteric#nuances, I shall try to create a spin off page for Sufi interpretation , because many Sufi interpretation are conventional or moderately different from that, in the article unconventional aspects were highlighted.Btw I think esoteric interpretations are different from other unconventional interpretations in two aspects first ,not conflicting usual interpretations because they are presented as additional spiritual meanings not as substitues for other interpretations and also the fact that they are traditionaly accepted as valid Islamic thoughts.If you feel that the word esoteric has negative implications or implies that these interpretations are odd things and outside an Islamic framework , we can replace it with perhaps , "mystical" , because Sufi interpretations are aspects of spirituality of Islam and there is nothing unusual or negative in them .Even such a celeberated work like Masnavi by Rumi contains so many Sufi interpretations, just look at its introduction [2].Pasha 05:38, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there

Hello, I dont much about her other tyan some basic information, but I know about Baal quite good. Carthage: A History could give a good insight to this semitic deity. Amir85 05:14, 10 November 20005 (UTC)

Thank you , my interest in her comes from the idea proposed by some experts that she is the only principal female deity known in history but like you I only know some basics about her.I shall try to find the book you mentioned.Pasha 13:08, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoy

Dude, youre cool. Carry on.--Zereshk 04:01, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!Pasha 04:24, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re-sufism

Well actually at the moment I am extremely busy with a lot of things in my life ( as evident on my user page...I am on vacation ). I think somethings should be modified here & there , but I wont be able to do it uptil january . I have got your mail , & for the same reason I am not able to respond to it . I will when I get time . Thanks for your responce . Farhansher 09:54, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks , I just meant that I just tried to do my best , I am quite open to criticism , I apreciate that your busy and for the same reason I didnt answer your email.I hope to talk more with you when you have time.Pasha 10:33, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Islam

Hey, I reverted because, much of it was repeating the same thing in another way... and the language used (especially in the first section) was worse. It was also not sourced in any way but said "scholars say" which is very vague and it does differ. It also asserts "Islamic law says" which is the kind of thing that is really bad when unsourced because there are so many variations and it makes it seem like there is one Islamic law... which, is of course untrue. The spacing and everything was very off as well. Having spaces then a comma then the next word and all. We have to know where this is coming from before it can be of any use really... that was my opinion. Do you agree or disagree or what? It really needs to be sourced and not have "Islam says" kind of writing... gren グレン 00:44, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You might find this book interesting... it's an old far from neutral orientalist work... but, it might provide some interesting case studies for 100 years ago. gren グレン 00:44, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Look at http://www.muhammadanism.org/Books/default.htm for all kinds of old orientalist books... they're going to be biased (the site is Christian missionary site basically) but they might have some interesting things... I like the pictures the most. User:Zereshk has been trying to work on Iran and Shia articles (I don't know if you're Muslim or even Shia, but... if you know anything it might be good). gren グレン 01:25, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Islam, justice

What is right being defined by divine law -- the parents' "because I said so" argument. This completely falls to the ground if any doubt ever enters one's mind (as I think it should) as to exactly WHO is expressing the will of God. However, if you admit that ethics is something that admits of rational discussion or moral intuition, then you can judge what purports to be the will of God by ethical standards. Frex, if someone is claiming that it's the will of God that you do something WRONG (like throwing babies into a fiery furnace, or blowing up wedding receptions), then you can doubt that this person is really speaking for God. Philosophy 101 <g>. Zora 14:23, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is Tekyeh = Khaneqah?

Hi Pasha,

Would you please address the merging issue thing that has shown up on the tekkes page? Yek nazari bedeh.

At the moment, my plate is a bit full. mer30.--Zereshk 19:48, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

btw, I'll answer your email. I'm just in the middle of something right now. I'm flyin back tomorrow morning. I'll be busy for a few days. But I'll get to you.--Zereshk 07:47, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pasha jan,

Hi. I apologize for not responding to the email. Ive been traveling, and I had some exams to tak care of.

But I want you to know that I agree with what you stated in your email.

I just received my copy of the 20 volume series of Dehkhoda's dictionary. It's a very interesting read! And pretty handy for Wikipedia articles too.

Ive been busy lately as youve probably noticed on Talk:Iran. But all is still well. You take care too.--Zereshk 05:47, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-Islamic Persian Literature, etc.

I haven't checked my talk page forever since nobody wrote me and I just checked it! Wow. Yeah, whenever you have time again it would be interesting to discuss possibilties in a wide range of subjects. I must admit, my knowledge of Sufism is quite superficial and limited to the (translated) poetry I've read and its basic symbolism. I've always been very conscious that there was probably so much I was missing, but don't know people who share my same curiousity generally. You gave me a Persian proverb, and I was wondering if you could write it in Persian for me if possible. Thanks. I'll check out the Persian literature page. I already know a few things that might be linked if they aren't already. Khirad^talk 04:42, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Persian, I can sort of make it out, with my very limited Farsi (mostly from Urdu). In any case I like things in their original language even if I can't read it! I've come across Ibn Arabi before in religion books and was really fascinated by him, and was going to ask for a book you'd recommend, thanks! Khirad^talk 01:48, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sufism

Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam is not a sufi text.khayyam did not believe in God.