Misplaced Pages

Talk:Abdul Qadir Gilani: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 11:45, 27 June 2006 edit68.233.38.154 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 12:08, 27 June 2006 edit undoNkv (talk | contribs)861 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 2: Line 2:
: The Qadiri order of Sufis has him as their Murshid. There are books on Tasawwuf written by him. Why do you say that he is not a Sufi Sheikh? --] 05:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC) : The Qadiri order of Sufis has him as their Murshid. There are books on Tasawwuf written by him. Why do you say that he is not a Sufi Sheikh? --] 05:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
:: What happens at the tomb of nizamuddin in delhi now does not mean that nizamuddin himself endorsed that. People later on fabricate a lot of stuff, so they take him as murshid means nothing. read abdul qadir jilani's books (fatuhul Ghayb or gunitu-talibeen and like) and you will know what his aqida was. Also, there are incidents in this article without any proof. It deserves a disputed tag ] 11:45, 27 June 2006 (UTC) :: What happens at the tomb of nizamuddin in delhi now does not mean that nizamuddin himself endorsed that. People later on fabricate a lot of stuff, so they take him as murshid means nothing. read abdul qadir jilani's books (fatuhul Ghayb or gunitu-talibeen and like) and you will know what his aqida was. Also, there are incidents in this article without any proof. It deserves a disputed tag ] 11:45, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
::: I don't think it deserves a disputed tag. I don't know of anyone who seriously disputes that he was a Sufi. I can't read his books since I don't have copies nor do I understand the language. Perhaps you could post some links as to why he shouldn't be regarded as a Sufi? --] 12:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:08, 27 June 2006

Sheikh Abdul Qadir Jilani bein attributed as a Sufi Sheikh is baseless and incorrect. The article is POV and has arguments and statements that have no proof. 68.69.58.146 04:40, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

The Qadiri order of Sufis has him as their Murshid. There are books on Tasawwuf written by him. Why do you say that he is not a Sufi Sheikh? --Nkv 05:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
What happens at the tomb of nizamuddin in delhi now does not mean that nizamuddin himself endorsed that. People later on fabricate a lot of stuff, so they take him as murshid means nothing. read abdul qadir jilani's books (fatuhul Ghayb or gunitu-talibeen and like) and you will know what his aqida was. Also, there are incidents in this article without any proof. It deserves a disputed tag 68.233.38.154 11:45, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't think it deserves a disputed tag. I don't know of anyone who seriously disputes that he was a Sufi. I can't read his books since I don't have copies nor do I understand the language. Perhaps you could post some links as to why he shouldn't be regarded as a Sufi? --Nkv 12:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC)