Jump to content

Talk:Javed Ahmad Ghamidi

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

Article - Move

[edit]

If searched on google for "Javed Ahmad Ghamidi", we get 9470 results:[1] and if we search google for "Javed Ahmed Ghamidi", we get 830 results:[2]. Hence, I believe that this article should be moved to Javed Ahmad Ghamidi. TruthSpreaderTalk 13:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

TruthSpreader, Ali Sina debated with Ghamidi, atleast partially in this debate. Why was the link taken off? Explain why the link should not be here or is not relevant. http://www.faithfreedom.org/debates/Ghamidip6.htm We could change the wording to say "Debate with Khalid Zaheer with assistance from Ghamidi", or something to that effect. For sure, Ghamidi had some communication with Ali Sina in that debate and so it should be there. --Matt57 02:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even though FF website says that Ghamidi is involved, we don't know that to which degree he is involved. I personally don't think that Ghamidi would even spend time for FF, and Khalid Zaheer is running this debate from himself. As the situation is quite vague, I don't find it relevant to this very article. But if you want to start a new article: Khalid Zaheer, it is upto you. TruthSpreaderTalk 03:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would start it, but I dont have any information on him plus I dont think he's as notable as Ghamidi. Ghamidi surely participated in this debate atleast to some extent as you can see and in my opinion, you have attempted to censor which is expected. And yes, Ghamidi did spend time on Ali's challenge. Its clear from the letter. Ali doesnt have to boast about Ghamidi. He's debated with Grand Ayatollahs. I'll check up more on this. --Matt57 17:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is not Ghamidi who needs to promote himself, it is Sina who wants to put big names in his showcase to prove his credibility. And there is no censorship rather a matter of accuracy, as you've already put the reference on Sina's article. TruthSpreaderTalk 04:01, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ghamidi's methodology

[edit]

This article presents the views of Ghadimi on certain laws (such as Penal laws or Social laws) but what about his methodologies? I mean the article doesn't explain what is different in his *approach* that makes him ending up with different conclusion that others end up with. --Aminz 08:58, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article tells in itself. It can be seen easily that Ghamidi doesn't follow ijma of scholars. Secondly, Ghamidi has a different way of looking at Sunnah (which is very opposite to the approach which traditionalist scholars took after Imam Shafi'i i.e. hadith is equal to Sunnah). Thirdly, he believes that the only ambit of hadith is to tell that how to perform certain task (from Qur'an or Sunnah) in a best possible way i.e. only Qur'an and Sunnah can add something in religion and nothing else. And for every Sunnah, it has to prove that this practice reached us through perpetual adherence of the whole ummah i.e. presence of practice in all times after the prophet.
Ghamidi's conclusions are based on his hermeneutics. But still occasionally, he refers top (Sunni) scholars in his writings to support his conclusions. His criticism of traditional understanding in number of areas can be read in his book Burhan. Which includes:
  1. Research on Diyya
  2. Law of Evidence (Discussion mainly on number of witnesses e.g. traditionally woman's testimony is considered half)
  3. Punishment of stoning (A review of all the hadith related to rajm and concluding that none of them is strong enough to challenge the Qur'anic ruling)
  4. Penal laws - some further discussions
  5. Mistake of Interpretation (some verses which are used by Islamists)
  6. Islam and Sufism (completely different two religions)
  7. A request to Ahl "Bayt" (criticism on those who take "Bayt" (oath) for obedience e.g. Sufis and Israr Ahmed)
  8. A request to Minhaj-ul-Quran (pointing mistakes of Tahir-ul-Qadri)
  9. Islamic revolution (Ghamidi believes that there is no concept of revolution in Islam)
  10. Limitations of Dawah (criticism mainly on Tablighi Jamaat)
  11. Mistakes in essays (answers to many groups who have criticized Ghamidi's writings)

--TruthSpreaderreply 09:43, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Criticism Missing

[edit]

I think this article needs inclusion of criticism on his methodologies as well. Just to keep this article neutral on all prespectives. Don't get me wrong, this is wht I have learnt from his student as a student. 203.81.197.126 18:55, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

source for kakazai

[edit]

Can anybody give me a source to him being a kakazai, he was against pathans to the extent i know. or there is need for the kakazai part to be removed. Saladin1987 11:08, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Personally, it doesn't matter to me whether Javed Ghamidi is Kakazai or not as I don't agree with his interpretation of Islam. Nevertheless, Punjabi-Pathans live almost in every corner of Punjab and yes including PakPattan, Sahiwal. The truth of the matter is there are plenty of Punjabi-Pathans who live in Sahiwal by itself. The reference (Here is another reference from Pakistan Herald) about Javed Ghamidi being Kakazai has been added from his fans' website. Thank you. McKhan (talk)
Saladin asked me to look at this. We have very strict standards for sourcing of WP:BLPs, and fan sites should never be used as sources. If he says this on his official site, fine. If he's interviewed somewhere else, probably. If it's in a reliably published book, probably. Best thing to do now is to bring any new sources here for discussion, not simply add it with a new source. The Pakistani Herald page is just one of many news media pages which just copy our articles, so again not a reliable source by our criteria at WP:RS. Dougweller (talk) 15:14, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Khan" in name

[edit]

@Imyousufzai: is there any published source for the Khan in Ghamidi's name? If not, shouldn't it be removed? — AhmadF.Cheema (talk) 03:28, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Javed Ahmad Ghamidi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:14, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Javed Ahmad Ghamidi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:56, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Javed Ahmad Ghamidi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:38, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Date of birth?

[edit]

User:Farhansaiyed says that he is the "secretary of [Javed Ahamd Ghamidi's] organization". The user changed the date of birth to 7 April 1952. However, Ghamidi's official website notes it as April 18, 1951. Which one is correct?

--AhmadF.Cheema (talk) 21:02, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 7th is as per his passport. I can privately provide copy. Farhan Saiyed - President & Executive Director - AL-Mawrid United State & Ghamidi Center of Islamic learning Farhansaiyed (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:43, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It would help if you can correct the date on the official page. — AhmadF.Cheema (talk) 20:00, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spellings of Ahmed should be corrected.

[edit]

He does not write his name with Ahmad. Every official document has Javed Ahmed as his name.

Again, would be helpful if the official page was corrected. Other official places which use Ahmad are his Facebook page including at least one post, his Twitter and also the YouTube channel which is linked from his Facbook page. — AhmadF.Cheema (talk) 20:00, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

[edit]

Several sections in the article, like Javed_Ahmad_Ghamidi#Sources_of_Islam, Javed_Ahmad_Ghamidi#Taliban_and_Islamism etc are currently not in prose form. Is there a reason for that? I think prose would be more encyclopedic. Pinging @AhmadF.Cheema: and @GorgeCustersSabre: who have recently copy-edited this article (and thank you both for your work!).VR talk 14:06, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear VR, you are absolutely right about the unusual format. Thank you kindly. George Custer's Sabre (talk) 14:18, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Renaissance (journal)" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect Renaissance (journal) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 16 § Renaissance (journal) until a consensus is reached. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:49, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Javed_Ahmad_Ghamidi&oldid=1207410108"