Talk:Salafi movement

Persistent undoing of edits in the Sweden section
I have better things to do with my time than creating a Wikipedia account and becoming an "editor". The user 1Kwords has persistently and spitefully undone a legitimate edit of the section on Sweden, hiding behind Wikipedia policies of one form or another. The claim "Salafists in Sweden are supported financially by Saudi Arabia and Qatar" is utterly devoid of evidence. Nothing! "It was said in a newspaper article so it must be true because a newspaper article is the source in this case" is the sum of the position evident from 1Kwords' persistent, petty undoing of edits. First of all 1Kwords claimed that "Magnus Ranstorp said it" - NOT TRUE. Next, 1Kwords attempted to protest that Magnus Ranstorp is an "expert" (irrelevant). If anyone anywhere in the world wants to make the claim that Saudi Arabia or Qatar financially supports any Salafis anywhere, let them bring one of two things: either a verified document proving the transfer of money, or a person who would swear in court on oath 'yes we received money from so-and-so'. Failing that, "a newspaper said it" is a pathetic, untenable position. This whole farce serves to underline Wikipedia's junk status, and that Wiki editors are pretentious pedants who hide behind absurd policies and use said policies to pursue an Islam-hating agenda.

An article by some crazy "NewageIslam" website states: "Saudi Arabia has funded the construction of some mosques in Sweden [where? name them!]. There had also been rising number of Salafists in the country." Yet again, the claim of "financial support" is made and....there is no evidence for it. None, nothing, nil.

Please define Salafi movement
Defining the Salafi movement is necessary to speak about it. Without a clear-cut definition the article would not convey any meaning. Neutralhappy (talk) 20:22, 2 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Where is the definition missing? VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 20:29, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * With a proper definition we would be able to identify which groups belong to the Salafi movement. For that what criteria has to be met to be categorised as a group that belongs to the Salafi movement should be included in the definition.
 * Moreover the differences or similarities between Wahhabism and Salafism has to be included. This will help identify Salafi groups easily. Preparing a chart would be highly useful.
 * In the page for Wahhabism, we see several definitions for Wahhabism. Neutralhappy (talk) 07:25, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Hanafi view on music, drawing, pictures, etc
@VenusFeuerFalle

It wouldnt be accurate to assume that Salafis have a homogenous take on "music, drawing, etc". There are internal disputes within Salafi scholars over these issues. For example, the Salafist clerics like Shawkani asserted that music was permissible. Rashid Rida believed that drawing pictures of animate objects was permissible, etc.

Nor is it academically fair to imply that there is a homogenous take on music, drawing, etc. within the four schools either. However, the vast majority of positions (including the mu'tamad ,i.e, official posotion) within the 4 traditional madhabs prohibit music.

These are primary sources, and I am linking some popular Hanafite (non-Salafi) fatwa websites: 1 (states that music is prohibited in Hanafi madhab) 2 3 4 (clearly states that drawing animate objects is prohibited in Hanafi madhab)

The statement that these positions have "legal precedents within the 4 madhabs" are factually correct. That is not to suggest that neither Salafis nor the 4 madhabs have a unanimous view on these issues. This implies that these are legal differences of "Ikhtilaf", and not a doctrinal point of contention.

Shadowwarrior8 (talk) 13:54, 28 August 2023 (UTC)


 * True, it might be a prejudice and the source, after rechecking, is merely an interview about a woman who adheres to this interpretation. I would be fine if we remove this source altogether. It doesn't seem to contribute anything significant nad might create artificial sharp distinctions between Salafism and Sunnism. VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 13:50, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Revert discussion
Since the edit summary is not for discussion, here the summary in case someone has an urge to discuss this: "religious blogpages do not fall under the category of WP:RS and an explanation of the Salafs is Template:Off topic except you want to suggest that there is a relation between Salafs and Salafis, but this directly contradicts the Wikipedia guidlines and the purpose of an encyclopedia" VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 13:25, 5 June 2024 (UTC)