Jump to content

Talk:Ibn Taymiyya

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Red-tailed hawk (talk | contribs) at 04:12, 30 August 2023 (→Requested move 22 August 2023: moved). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Requested move 1 May 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 14:22, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ibn Taymiyyah → Ibn Taymiyya – Ibn Taymiyya is the correct Arabic spelling and the WP:COMMONNAME for this theologian. Ibn Taymiyya largely overcomes Ibn Taymiyyah in the Google Ngrams results. What I think much more reliable in any case is Google Scholar, which shows 10,700 results for Ibn Taymiyyah and 15,100 results for Ibn Taymiyya. Cheezhai talk 12:34, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 03:26, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: The Ngrams and scholar results are far from overwhelming, and demand closer inspection of sources. The contention that "Ibn Taymiyya" is the correct Arabic spelling is also wrong. "ابن تيمية" technically ends in a Taa Marbouta denoting a gently aspirated "h" at the end. Both spellings have widespread academic usage, so the move is somewhat unnecessary. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:19, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: Iskandar323, can you clarify what do you mean by "the ngrams are far from overwhelming" because "Ibn Taymiyya" dominates the results by a large percentage. Also, Ibn Taymiyya is the correct Arabic spelling, the info in the Taa Marbouta article says "the word رِسَالَة is pronounced as risāla(h) in pausa but is pronounced risālatu in the nominative case". As such, تيمية would be pronounced as Ibn Taymiyya(h). Wikipedia's prominent articles such as Mu'awiya (معاوية) and Mughira (مغيرة) Mu'awiya use rather than Mu'awiyah and Mughira rather than Mughirah. The "h" is not always included in reliable sources. Another bonus point I would like to add is that most of the all books/journals/scholarly works on this article use Ibn Taymiyya rather than Ibn Taymiyyah.
    • Makdisi, G. Ibn Taymiyya: A Sufi of the Qadiriya Order (1973)
    • Michot, Yahya. Ibn Taymiyya: Against Extremisms (2012)
    • Rapoport, Yossef Ibn Taymiyya and His Times (2010), just to name a few. (See the References section)
    Cheezhai talk 16:37, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, Taymiyya(h), as it explains, involves a lightly aspirated 'h', transforming into a 't' when followed by a suffix. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:23, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose. One does not seem to dominate the other. There is a slight advantage of "Ibn Taymiyya" over "Ibn Taymiyyah" in google scholar, but it is more than reversed in general google searches (after filtering Wikipedia itself out). A cursory inspection seems that "Ibn Taymiyya" spelling seems to be gaining favor in specialized scholarly works, but more general works use the "Ibn Taymiyyah" spelling (e.g. Britannica). Since Wikipedia is written for general audiences, and not specialized scholars, I'd prefer to stick to the spelling that is more recognizable for our readers. (And there's no issue of momentum, or inevitability of displacement of one by the other - indeed, limiting Google Scholar searches to the last ten or five years, the gap narrows rather than widens!, e.g. from 2015, "Ibn Taymiyyah" has 6060, and "Ibn Taymiyya" has 6,130. That's pretty evenly matched.) Walrasiad (talk) 06:04, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Ibn Taymiyyah/Archive 1#Name of article for previous discussion on this issue (in 2006!). I was for the title change then (would have done it myself, except tangled redirects prevented me), but I'm not sure I have any strong opinion now... AnonMoos (talk) 10:44, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested Move 5 May 2022

The section "Duration of Hellfire" should be removed due to Ibn Taymiyya not holding the view that hellfire was not eternal even for the disbelievers as he states in his books

"The Salaf of this nation, its Imams, and the whole Ahlus-Sunnah w'al-Jamā'ah are agreed that there are some things from the creation that will not come to an end in their entirety like Paradise, Hellfire, the Throne, and others.".

— Ibn Taymiyya, Bayān Talbīs al-Jahmiyya, page 851 of Volume I

And also in Minhaj as-sunnah 1/146-149:

"For the bliss of Paradise and punishment of the Hellfire are permanent"

— Ibn Taymiyya, Minhaj as-sunnah, page 146-149 of Volume I

Coper seether 123 (talk) 05:13, 5 May 2022 (UTC) — Preceding signed comment added by Coper seether 123 (talk • contribs) 16:04, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Too long

This page is WP:TOOLONG. The floor is open to brainstorming as to the best ways to potentially trim, or - more efficaciously, if possible - WP:SPLIT off some amenable sub-sections of the page. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:26, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 22 August 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. Proposed move was unopposed in this discussion and a rationale was provided with new information that addresses issues brought up by individuals who opposed moving the page in a prior discussion. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:12, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ibn Taymiyyah → Ibn Taymiyya – So I ironically opposed this a year ago is the RM above this on the page, due in part to what I thought was the stricter transliteration at the time. However, Wikipedia's in-house default transliteration, per WP:MOSAR, did not actually support my argument at the time, and does not take a clear stand, but it does give "al-Qahira" and "al-Qaeda" as examples of usages that simplify the final taa marbouta in the exact same manner - and simplicity is something that can also be argued for from the perspective of concision, naturalness and recognizability, together with consistency with the likes of Ibn Battuta, which has the same final letter. In addition to this, we have the aforementioned arguments about actual prevalence, including no 'h' being more common on Ngrams, and marginally more common in Google Scholar, with 16k+ hits to 13k+ hits. In addition to this, a book search for both spellings throws up "Ibn Tamiyya" more prominently, not least in the 2019 work Ibn Taymiyya by Jon Hoover, a notable specialist who is referenced extensively on the page, as well as the 2015 Ibn Taymiyya and His Times by Rapoport and Ahmed (also referenced extensively on the page). We then have the 2020 work Ibn Taymiyyah on Reason and Revelation and the 2018 The Biography of Ibn Taymiyya. Overall, the trend seems more than sufficient to move the page given the seeming lean towards dropping the 'h' seen in Wikipedia's in-house transliteration style. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:46, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ibn_Taymiyya&oldid=1172915843"