Talk:Mu'in al-Din Chishti

message: I appreciate that it can be difficult for people whose first language is not English, but this section is deficient in grammar and hard to understand.  I also do not think it should be in an article on Khawaja Sahb, because it is not about him.  Why not move it to its own article? Gwaka Lumpa 11:05, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup Tag

message: I have reverted the unexplained blanking of "Descendant And Sajjada Nashin Dargah Moinuddin chishti". I'm not sure that this was intentional. If it was intentional, I think some explanation is in order. I don't know the subject well, but I think the deleted section is rather questionable, and it might deserve permanent deletion. Even so, some explanation would be useful to other editors.--Nemonoman 06:52, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I still can't understand a word of that section, and suggest it be cleaned up and moved to a separate article Gwaka Lumpa 16:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I am going to delete it, as it doesn't seem to contain much useful information for the article. It is about someone who claims being a descendant of Moinuddin Chishti and nothing more. I don't see how this is of any value to the article. The fact that it is all praise, and written in unintelligible English doesn not help either. --Barastert 21:33, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverting unexplained blanking 

message: This article contradicts the article Chishti Order. There (in paragraph 2) it says that Abu Ishaq Shami was the founder of the order, but in this article it says that Moinuddin Chishti founded it. Anyone know who actually founded it ? MP (talk•contribs) 22:02, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Moinuddin Chishti did not found the Chishti order. He introduced it in India where the order thrived and had profound impact.--Shahab (talk) 15:03, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. --Sarabseth (talk) 13:21, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction 

message: the first line says "moinuddin chisti was born in 1141 and died in 1236 CE.". However first line of section early life says "Moinuddin Chishtī is said to have been born in 1520, ".
 these 2 lines are contradictory. Please correct.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.177.229.6 (talk) 16:37, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth year mentioned differently 

message: I'm of the view that the branch of the religion should not be listed in the infobox as, or alongside, the religion. In this case the guy was a Sufi scholar, but should this be listed here alongside "Islam"? George Custer's Sabre (talk) 13:31, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: , if specific person is related to certain kind of sect of that religion then it should be mentioned. You can see several articles mentioning someone as shia or sunni muslim. On your own user page you wrote you are "Sunni muslim" not just "muslim". Also read religion column of Osama bin Laden, Ahmed Raza Khan Barelvi many others. Here Chisti is specifically known for Sufism, so there should be mention of it in infobox.--Human3015 Say Hey!! • 13:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Human3015, you have gone crazy. This is totally ignorance.  is right. Mawlana Chisti was both Sunni and sufi. In that time Sufism was just like an organisation (currently we can call this as a political party or group like Tabligh or Jamaat Islam). However at present Sufism may be considered as the third of 4th largest branch of Islam, like the Ahmadi one. There is a huge difference between the old sufism (which was a kind of association) and the current sufism (totally a new belief). 78.149.204.76 (talk) 15:46, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, it is a shame that his article is not updated regularly and it does not contain many sources. He is widely recognized as one of the greatest south Asians scholars in the History.--78.149.204.76 (talk) 15:51, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that sufism shouldn't be listed as his religion since sufism is a sect while Islam is the religion. (I also agree that the article is woefully lacking in reliable sources. We shouldn't be using webpages like http://muslimcanada.org/sufi/chishti.html as a source. Aren't there any good books on Chishti?)--regentspark (comment) 16:35, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said before, reliable sources will be provided asap. Here everyone agrees that Human3015 was making mistakes.78.145.28.52 (talk) 10:41, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Dear IP, it will be better if you come with an account. Anyway, first give reliable sources and then make edits. Don't give promise of reliable sources in talk, you need to give it instantly as soon as you make edits, otherwise you will get reverted. --Human3015 Say Hey!! • 16:49, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should Sufism be listed as his religion? 

message: There is no such thing as 'Sunni mysticism'. There is Tasawuf or Sufism and it is not bound by schisms in Islam. Many Sufis had Jewish and Christian disciples as well.--Wool Bridge (talk) 21:19, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Read WP:BOLD. — kashmiri TALK 11:42, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is no such thing as Sunni mysticism. There is Tasawuf or Sufism  

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Kwaja Garib Nawaj which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 03:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: On his orders the Muslim rulers forcefully converted 1 million Hindus to Islam Rajput5131 (talk) 09:27, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conversion 

message: I have a great concern which is by the entire Muslim community. The picture on this article is of Indian PM which is disgrace for the Sufi saint. Kindly remove the picture and replace it with shrine of the holy saint 119.155.7.39 (talk) 07:46, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title picture 

message: Where is the March 15, 1236 date of death sourced from? Several sources state the year being 1236, but none clearly state the month and day. Sufi wiki states May 21, 1230 (which seems unreliable based on the year being so different). Klausklass (talk) 16:59, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source of death date