Talk:Sufism in Pakistan

I politely request (so as not to invite any retribution for whistleblowing which it is not although it might be mistaken as one when the intention here is similar to having a dialogue about well known open secrets) the Indian editors not to edit Sufism in Pakistan in a way that Hazrat Lal Shahbaz Qalandar, who was an orthodox saint is made to look like the founder of Qalandariya (which is something different even though he does have many Hindu followers now) as well as the most important Sufi saint in Pakistan, even more important than Bahauddin Zakariya, Jalaluddin Shurkh-Posh Bukhari  and Fariduddin Ganjshakar. Why are we the majority Ahle Sunnat/Sunni/Barelvi/muslims always made to look like non-muslims and anyone who is as islamic as to keep money in Islamic banks is labelled a kharijite (or wahhabi, deobandi, ibadi), or rafidhas of all kinds, or a mu'tazilite, when it is actually India that doesn't let Pakistan have a Barelvi bank? Why does the similar situation of either you are like us or you are other than yourself have to play out everywhere if politics is ultimately for the good? signed by m-shahruz-z.competscoffee M-shahruz-z (talk) 14:28, 30 January 2022 (UTC)


 * we are muslims/sunni by deen of the hanafi, maturidi, Shadhili-Burhaniyya schools although this post is from an individual. we believe uk is friend of muslims. we also believe india, eu/catholics, china, usa/jews, those among christian ahle kitab who are sinners (but not like catholics) and kharijites and rafidhas and mu'tazilites (in decreasing order of bitterness), particularly india, are not supporters of muslims. signed by m-shahruz-z.competscoffee M-shahruz-z (talk) 10:48, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I have noticed my wrong use of language and want to apologize for it. When I said Hazrat Lal Shahbaz Qalandar has many Hindu followers now, what I meant was many Hindu claim to be his followers now, not that Hazrat Lal Shahbaz Qalandar was not a serious muslim. All true awliya of Allah are very serious about studying and following deen and sunnah. signed by m-shahruz-z.competscoffee M-shahruz-z (talk) 10:54, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Significant observation — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.111.198.27 (talk) 16:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Sufism in India
These articles overlap almost entirely. FunkyCanute (talk) 11:34, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

But not entirely. And think of the political consequences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.239.203.7 (talk • contribs)


 * Support 's suggestion. The history sections duplicate content, and Sufism in Pakistan actually expands its scope to all of South Asia right in the first sentence. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 12:35, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I suggest that all pre-Partition history be under the article Sufism in India. "Sufism in Pakistan" should be either a section under Sufism in India (covering post-Partition) OR an article covering post-Partition Pakistan, with a note saying in effect: "For the history of Sufism before Partition, see Sufism in India."Oliver Puertogallera (talk) 09:36, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Agree that they should be kept separate, but the Pakistan article should be simplified and a post-partition Template:about added. ✅ Klbrain (talk) 17:01, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Polite request not to vandalize this article.
I politely request (so as not to invite any retribution for whistleblowing which it is not although it might be mistaken as one when the intention here is similar to having a dialogue about well known open secrets) the Indian editors not to edit Sufism in Pakistan in a way that Hazrat Lal Shahbaz Qalandar, who was an orthodox saint is made to look like the founder of Qalandariya (which is something different even though he does have many Hindu followers now) as well as the most important Sufi saint in Pakistan, even more important than Bahauddin Zakariya, Jalaluddin Shurkh-Posh Bukhari  and Fariduddin Ganjshakar. Why are we the majority Ahle Sunnat/Sunni/Barelvi/muslims always made to look like non-muslims and anyone who is as islamic as to keep money in Islamic banks is labelled a kharijite (or wahhabi, deobandi, ibadi), or rafidhas of all kinds, or a mu'tazilite, when it is actually India that doesn't let Pakistan have a Barelvi bank? Why does the similar situation of either you are like us or you are other than yourself have to play out everywhere if politics is ultimately for the good? signed by m-shahruz-z.competscoffee M-shahruz-z (talk) 14:30, 30 January 2022 (UTC)


 * we are muslims/sunni by deen of the hanafi, maturidi, Shadhili-Burhaniyya schools although this post is from an individual. we believe uk is friend of muslims. we also believe india, eu/catholics, china, usa/jews, those among christian ahle kitab who are sinners (but not like catholics) and kharijites and rafidhas and mu'tazilites (in decreasing order of bitterness), particularly india, are not supporters of muslims. signed by m-shahruz-z.competscoffee M-shahruz-z (talk) 16:12, 30 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I have noticed my wrong use of language and want to apologize for it. When I said Hazrat Lal Shahbaz Qalandar has many Hindu followers now, what I meant was many Hindu claim to be his followers now, not that Hazrat Lal Shahbaz Qalandar Rahmatullahi was not a serious muslim. All true awliya of Allah are very serious about studying and following deen and sunnah. signed by m-shahruz-z.competscoffee M-shahruz-z (talk) 10:57, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

All course
I instead in all courses 103.138.11.12 (talk) 18:22, 8 March 2024 (UTC)