Talk:Muhammad al-Jawad

Muhammad al-Jawad or Muhammad al-Taqi
Ok I am a Shii Muslim and I think that it is most common if not the only way to refer to this Imam is Al-Jawad and not Al-Taki Brokenlove 19:54, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Both are titles, al-Jawad does seem more common, but not exclusive. -- Enzuru 06:58, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Both are tiltes of Imam; in India(at least in Northern India, where I belong to) Imam is usually referred to as Mohammad-Taqi a.s..--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi (talk) 05:34, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe among Arabs and possibly Iranians, al-Jawad is the more common title. Sometimes it seems the titles get split among ethnic groups for whatever reason. I originally chose al-Taqi because it was shorter to fit into the template. -- Enzuru 06:36, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * One more apparent reason for use of At-Taqi is that it is phonetically similar to An-Naqi.--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi (talk) 06:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * In  Dua'a E Tawassul  Imam is reffered by both titles, with Taqi first & then Jawad
 * Ya Aba Ja'farin Ya Mohammadabna ' Ali-yyin Ayyohat-Taqi-yool Javado Yabna Rasoolil-lahe
 * source Dua'a E Tawassul
 * --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi (talk) 05:52, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Ninth Imam
Imam Muhammad Al-Taqi, Al-Jawwad is the ninth Shia Imam, not fifth. I changed it..., —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.71.23.46 (talk) 00:29, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Improving the article and correcting the wrong information
Hi @Edward321. In the page occurred some edits which could enhance the quality of the page and clarify the life of this person. Please describe your reason about your reverting. In addition, Al-Ma'mun was the seventh Abbasid caliph who is named in the page, I don't know why you have reverted this name to a wrong name (Al-Ma'mum). If you check all historical references, you will find out "Al-Ma'mum" is completely incorrect which you insist on protecting. Mahda133 (talk) 08:18, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jeppiz. Will the sentence be okay, If it starts with "Ma'mun had asked al-Jawad to marry his daughter...."? Mahda133 (talk) 13:18, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Muhammad al-Jawad. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120303023448/http://sufiblog.com/imam-muhammad-taqi.html to http://sufiblog.com/imam-muhammad-taqi.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:11, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:37, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * MohammadJavadSVG.svg

Summary of new edits
Copy-edited the text and summarized the content when appropriate. Also removed the content from non-academic sources, which was mostly replaced with similar content from academic sources. (One exception was (most of the content in) the section "Views".) Restructured the article in a way that seems to minimize the overlap between various sections, e.g., the two sections "Imamate" and "Life".
 * "Majlesi and Ḥarrāni recorded him as an author of mawāʿeẓ wa ḥekam, a kind of pithy religio-ethical sayings" seems to be misinterpreting the source (Medoff, 2016). Albertatiran (talk) 18:49, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

pre nomination
Hi. Happy new year. Are you going to add new information from new sources to this article or we should ask to introduce us new sources? Ghazaalch (talk) 03:14, 2 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi, and ! Happy new year to you both! Sure, I'll search for new sources. In the meantime, I agree that any input from Cplakidas would also be valuable to us. Albertatiran (talk) 14:44, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi and, I'll gladly give some input. First of all, great work, the article is unrecognizable compared to its old state. One thing that immediately comes to attention is that the sources used, although of high quality, are somewhat mis-referenced: the EI2 articles are definitely not from 2022, for example, EI2 began publication in 1960! I recommend using the relevant templates (Template:Encyclopaedia of Islam, New Edition and Template:Encyclopaedia Iranica) for citing these works, with the appropriate volumes and page numbers. (Also, please put the sources in alphabetical order.) As far as additional sources are concerned, off the top of my head I would name Twelve Infallible Men. The Imams and the Making of Shi'ism as an interesting source.
 * Otherwise I don't think there is much missing: the sources used are already those I would recommend and use myself, and AFAIK al-Jawad was not the most prominent of imams, so his treatment in Western scholarly literature is somewhat underwhelming... I have only quickly looked at the article but it appears fairly comprehensive. I am quite prepared to take on a GA review and look into it in more detail, if you want. Constantine  ✍  18:37, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the pointer, . I plan to check that book and also copy-edit the article in the coming days. Albertatiran (talk) 11:59, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi! Please have a look at the new invisible comment(s) in the article. Thanks for the suggestions. The only one that I didn't implement is the one about using Template:Encyclopaedia of Islam, New Edition and Template:Encyclopaedia Iranica. I have now cited these sources following the guidelines in their online editions ("Cite this page as..."), which is much more convenient for me (compared to a time-consuming visit to the library to find out the page numbers of each entry in the print versions). If that's not an issue, then this article can be "submitted" for review as soon as Ghazaalch is also happy with it. Albertatiran (talk) 17:51, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you . I addressed your comment. You could submit it if Cplakidas is OK with it. Ghazaalch (talk) 05:22, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Am fully OK with it. And I think I will also pick it up for review, if you don't mind. Constantine  ✍  16:23, 14 January 2023 (UTC)