Talk:Mujaddid

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (again)
For Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to be included in this and how this entry is distinct and odd-man-out among the contemporaries is based on logic. 1. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad according to the Ahmadis is a Mujaddid. 2. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad according to Ahmadis is a Messiah. 3. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad according to Ahmadis is a Mahdi. 4. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad according to Ahmadis is a non-legislating prophet.

The list should logically exclude him because no other Mujaddid on list claimed to be Mahdi, Messiah or a Prophet.

The claim of Prophethood after Muhammad (salAllahu alaihiWaSallam) is a false claim according to Islam.

A reason why Musaylimah was rejected for being a Prophet by the Companions and waged war against him and his followers.

The insistence of some moderators to add Mirza Ghulam Ahmad needs to be specified in a separate sub-section, as "Other claimants of Mujaddid". Jssyedmadar (talk) 09:41, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * This is WP:OR and grounded in the idea that if Muslims want to vote other Muslims off the island, Wikipedia should do the same. This is completely contrary to Wikipedia policy, which mandates a neutral point of view.  Pepper Beast    (talk)  10:37, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The citations are references are from valid entities including government and research institutions, and you need to clarify why the citations are invalid or null before revoking the edits. Jssyedmadar (talk) 11:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not interested in the citations, particularly, or in irrelevancies like who's in the Muslim 500. Once again, the issue is that you are not adhering to a core policy, which is neutral point of view. This has been discussed extensively. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed to be a mujaddid, so he belongs in the list that is literally titled List of claimants and potential mujaddids. Singling out and labelling Ahmadiyya Islam as a "separate tradition" is a direct violation of NPOV. This has been discussed over and over and you have not produced any reason to change the article, so please stop edit warring.  Pepper Beast    (talk)  11:14, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * NPOV doesn't applies to exceptional cases just like how one cannot be neutral about the Nazi policies, then this would be a fallacy. If there be a valid criticism of a position along with references and citations that should not be ignored. Jssyedmadar (talk) 11:20, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * This isn't an "exceptional case", and you don't seem to have read and understood the policy in question.  Pepper Beast    (talk)  11:32, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * This is an "exceptional case" because Organization of Islamic Co-operation is a 57 member states and has permanent delegations to the United Nations and the European Union. Their references and citations are not an isolated opinion. The Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre of Jordan. headed by Jordan's King. making an publication since 2009 through its Muslim 500 report which discusses under the section "The House of Islam" adds value to the claim.
 * The NPOV cannot be applied here because the claim of Mujaddid by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is not being discarded, rather it is allowed to reside in the page but only under a separate segment, this is required so because Muslim Governments and Research Institutions of Religions & Sociology provide valuable citations on why majority of the Muslims do not consider him to be a Mujaddid. Jssyedmadar (talk) 11:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It is exceptional with respect to mainstream Islam, hence the controversy. The question is: is this a list of mujaddids as the term is understood by mainstream Muslim tradition or simply a list of mujaddids claimed by any religious group that uses this terminology? The Ahmadiyya use the right terminology, but are rejected as Muslims by mainstream Muslim society, which views Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's claim to be a mujaddid as dimly as his claim to be a Mahdi. Currently, 99% of the list is composed of figures that mainstream Muslim society has few problems with, seemingly making it a list of mujaddids as the term is understood by mainstream Muslim tradition. However, if it simply a list of mujaddids claimed by any group that uses this terminology, then the lead might need tweaking to clarify that this is not (as one might expect) a list explicitly reflecting mainstream Muslim tradition. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:51, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The tweaking is done. Thanks. Jssyedmadar (talk) 13:09, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I had meant tweaking the main lead, but actually, yes, having different lists for different denominations is not an unreasonable distinction to make. The main question then is whether all of the other individuals in the list are considered Sunni. I haven't had time to go through all the entries, but is this the case? Iskandar323 (talk) 13:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Sunni tradition is a distinct category, and one can refer to the wiki page on Sunni Islam and how it is distinct from the Shia, Ibadi and other traditions. This is necessary because for not to internally contradict wiki-article which also says
 * 1. "Mujaddids can include prominent scholars, pious rulers and military commanders."
 * 2. "The Shia and Ahmadiyya have their own list of mujaddids."
 * Concept of Mujaddid is commonly accepted by all the Sunni Schools including those with the creed of Maturidi, Ashari, Tahawi and Athari - and also the legal schools of Hanafi, Maliki, Shafii and Hanbali.
 * The Sunni tradition is an umbrella term to define anyone who is among Salafis, Deobandis, Barelwis, Sufis etc. - these details can be verified in the wikipage on Sunni Islam.
 * The concept of Mujaddid is common belief in the Sunni tradition. With such a broad definition that is not in internal contradiction, this makes all the entries in the list as among Sunni Muslims.
 * This just opened the article for better clarity and being unambiguous on who is a Mujaddid from Sunni tradition and who is a Mujaddid claimant from non-Sunni traditions with the tweak. Jssyedmadar (talk) 13:41, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * There are three entries that were to be categorized as "claimants in other traditions"
 * 1. Mulla Sadra, who was a Twelver Shia Muslim claimant for mujaddid
 * 2. Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, who was a Quranist and a modernist Muslim claimant for mujaddid (Ref: Brown, Rethinking tradition in modern Islamic thought, 1996: p.65)
 * 3. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, who was a Ahmadiyya Muslims claimant for mujaddid
 * This categorization brings clarity to the article and would ideally resolve disputing edits and could settle the matter. Jssyedmadar (talk) 14:57, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It has to be noted the very foundation reference for the wiki article to build upon is in reference to Sunni Hadith literature, therefore making it a necessity to distinguish the non-Sunni mujaddids to avoid conflicting entries in the same space which could build argumentations.
 * "Allah will raise for this community at the end of every 100 years the one who will renovate its religion for it.
 * — Sunan Abu Dawood, Book 37: Kitab al-Malahim [Battles], Hadith Number 4278"
 * This idea for segregation is borrowed from the wiki page on Prophets and messengers in Islam, where the claimants of Prophethood who are acknowledged by other traditions is listed separately Jssyedmadar (talk) 15:28, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Have you been able to check out the references for Mulla Sadra and Sir Syed Ahmed Khan to see if the sources actually call them mujaddid? I only ask because the term is actually not mentioned on the main page for either of them. FYI, plenty of Islam pages segregate by denomination. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:26, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

What is a potential mujaddid?
From an encyclopedic perspective, I see there being only two possibilities for potential candidates for this list: individuals whom reliable secondary sources have said were mujaddid, called mujaddid or claimed to mujaddid (with the possibility of distinguishing somehow between those identified as mujaddid and those who simply claimed it for themselves); and those whom reliable secondary sources have said none of these things. In this context, what on earth is a potential mujaddid? Does anyone have an answer? And if not, can we agree to dispense with what seems to be an overly ambiguous wording, and ensure that this list only includes individuals somehow connected directly with the term mujaddid in reliable secondary sources? Iskandar323 (talk) 17:33, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree that the word potential is not particularly useful. But beyond that, I think all we can do is continue to include those who claimed to be or were claimed to be, per reliable secondary sources. It's possible we could add a little explanatory text about each claimant and their following.   Pepper Beast    (talk)  21:28, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Taqi al-Din al-Subki
Can someone add Taqi al-Din al-Subki to 7th century please Galaxy21ultra (talk) 19:52, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Il existe au Soudan en Afrique subsaharienne, plus précisément au Sénégal , Le Mudjaddid de son époque , il s’agit de Cheikh Ahmadou Mbacké Khadimoul Rassoul 41.214.76.189 (talk) 13:56, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Mahmud Efendi
Shaikh Mahmud Efendi an-Naqshbandi al-Mujaddidi al-Khalidi can be added to the Mujaddids of the 14. century. He is often claimed to be the Mujaddid of this century. The sources often say 15. century but the century starting in 1979/1980 is meant.

These would be the sources: https://www.ismailaga.org.tr/hicri-15-asrin-muceddidi https://kashmirreader.com/2022/06/29/sheikh-mahmud-effendi-the-great-orator-of-islam/ Davut al-Maturidi (talk) 14:53, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Heretic
The activities of a Mujadid is like a heretical person, for those individuals in political office.

09:37, 16 January 2024 (UTC)09:37, 16 January 2024 (UTC)43.242.178.157 (talk)\\\\\\\\\\\09:37, 16 January 2024 (UTC)43.242.178.157 (talk) 09:37, 16 January 2024 (UTC)\\\\\\\\\\\\\\09:37, 16 January 2024 (UTC)09:37, 16 January 2024 (UTC)\\\\\\

Semi-protected edit request on 13 April 2024
182.185.181.63 (talk) 08:23, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Add the name of Naseer udin Naseer in the list of renewers of 14th century.
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  (talk | contribs) 08:30, 13 April 2024 (UTC)