Talk:Ja'far al-Sadiq

message: Abu Hanifa was born in 699, while as-Saqiq was born in 702. Isn't it then a little hard to think of Abu Hanifa learning under as-Sadiq? Maybe he only attended some lectures as an equal. -- 213.6.12.131 (talk) 15:37, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The thing is, as-Sadiq (AS) started attending lectures by al-Baqir (AS) at a very young age. I believe at this period, Abu Hanifa was perhaps only memorizing hadith and Qur'an. There are written stories about Hanifa and as-Sadiq's (AS) period as well. --Enzuru 19:48, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Do the stories tell that as-Sadiq regularly taught Abu Hanifah (in the same way they tell, for instance, Malik ibn Anas taught ash-Shafi'i)? -- 213.6.40.28 (talk) 02:39, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see this link: A refutation of Ansar's allegation that 'Abu Hanifa was NOT a student of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (as) --Enzuru 03:58, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

text: Abu Hanifa was taught by Ja'far al-Sadiq (peace be upon him) for 2 years at least!--79.69.104.119 (talk) 17:42, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

text:  The above statement is clearly supported by Abu Hanifa's own books!--88.111.126.79 (talk) 13:52, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abu Hanifa 

message: Since Hamidah Khatun is notable and separate, why would we merge her article into this one? unsigned comment by Emilyzilch (talk)
* The Hamidah Khatun page makes no claim of notability other than possibly the stuff of WP:ONEVENT. If the subject of that page in fact is generally notable, such notability must be claimed (and ultimately demonstrated). Bongomatic (talk) 05:31, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger of [[Hamidah Khatun]]

message: I have a book that goes into the issue of Ismail's life and imamate, about how many thought he would be the Imam, and after as-Sadiq's death, the confusion that ensued. It has hadith from Twelver books, though it does not have a hadith with a specific declaration of nass, it certainly goes to great lengths to show there was a sufficient amount of confusion. --♥pashtun ismailiyya 08:19, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I also have one, this one from the Ismaili scholarly institute, a fat tome by Farhad Daftary called Ismaili Literature. It goes into the whole Twelver-Ismaili then Ismaili-Qarmatian thing in great detail. I mean, clearly there were proto-Ismailis who believed the nass because there was a large and organised da'wah based out of Salamaniyyah. As for Twelvers, well, I know they also agree that Isma'il really died, but whether they believe he was ever nassed or was just "in line" is unclear to me. Nonetheless, the basic situation is that scholars from both sides disagree on who succeeded Ja'far, which is the basic point we are trying to make. Ogress smash! 08:27, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There are several opinions on the matter from the Twelver side, but one of the more prominent ones was put forth by Al-Shaykh al-Saduq, called badah, meaning God changed His will, if I understand correctly. Badah can be found in Twelver books of hadith as well. Anyway, the idea is that originally Allah willed Ismail to be Imam, however, He later willed Musa to be the Imam, hence made Ismail die. This idea is still held by some Twelver, but it's rarer now, most Twelver deny Ismail was ever even near the Imamate. I believe the Bábi used badah as one argument against Khatme Nabuwwat. --♥pashtun ismailiyya 09:17, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ismail's nass 

message: It says on this page that Jaf'ar as-Sadiq(as) was a polymath. Could someone please produce a reference for this. And if there is a reference, can you post it on the polymath discussion page since we should try to get Imam as-Sadiq(as) onto that page. They are demanding a viable source.--IsaKazimi (talk) 00:13, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The term polymath is more of a Western term than one that can be found elsewhere. I spent some time looking and have been unable to find any reliable source that refers to him as such. However, I see many sources referring to his student Jabir ibn Hayyan as one. --♥pashtun ismailiyya 00:51, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes i couldn't find one that described Imam as-Sadiq(as) as a polymath either. I thought maybe if we could find seperate ones that describe him as an expert in all the individual fields mentioned...then that would be sufficient since it would still show him to meet the criterea of a polymath.--IsaKazimi (talk) 16:24, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Nah, that's against Wikipedia rules, read up on WP:SYNTH. --♥pashtun ismailiyya 17:17, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh ok. fair enough.--IsaKazimi (talk) 19:17, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Polymath

message: The drawing is misleading as it is not original and is out of one's imagination... will have to remove it, or atleast have to move it to some other inside section.. Especially when he is one of the most respected personalities, this must be hurting to many..  —Preceding unsigned comment added by OnlyHuman (talk • contribs) 16:30, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not censored and if the images offend you then Help:Options to not see an image thanks. something lame from CBW 19:39, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no 'actual' picture available for the Imam. So to post a mere depiction of an artist (God knows if tomorrow some other artist comes and posts some other picture that is desecratory) and to post that as a PRIMARY image of a person would be incorrect.  But gosh!! There are so many discussions about the same topic in other similar articles, I feel a little let down to start another discussion here. My final argument would be: If there is an actual picture , post it (and there is none) and if not, create another article that says 'An artists description of the imam' or whatever so that normal people dont have to see this picture each time they come to this article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abbasgadhia (talk • contribs) 20:16, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture

message: According to both early Sunni and Shia books Jaafar Al Sadiq had said "Abu-Bakr begot me twice" (Al-Kâfî, Ar-Rawdah, 8:101). Many old Sunni and Shia books also said that Mohammed ibn Abu Bakr was raised by Ali (Nahjul Balagha Sermon 66) and his son Qassim ibn Mohammed ibn Abu Bakr was the grand father of Jaafar Al Sadiq. The fiqh of Qassim ibn Mohammed ibn Abu Bakr is captured in Imam Malik's book Muwatta Imam Malik and is referred to as the original fiqh of Madina by the Orientalists and used as a benchmark when comparing Sharia against other legal systems because both the Ummayads and the early Abbasids used the fiqh of Qassim ibn Mohammed ibn Abu Bakr that was captured in a book form as Muwatta Imam Malik. Qasim is extremely important in early fiqh.
 
But Jaafar Al Sadiq had said "Abu-Bakr begot me twice". So I looked and initially could not find another branch up from Jaffar al Sadiq back to Abu Bakr because I found it very hard to identify the women in their families. The women in their families are very modest. They are highly educated and did a very good job of teaching their children, but are hard to identify. Then I came across Abdu'l-Rahman ibn Abu Bakr's extreme opposition to Muawiya during the appointment of Yazid. And then came across Abdu'l-Rahman ibn Abu Bakr's daughter Asma who was married to Qasim and was also Jaafar Al Sadiq's grand mother. So when Jaafar Al Sadiq said "Abu-Bakr begot me twice". He meant that both of Abu Bakr's sons Abdu'l-Rahman ibn Abu Bakr and Mohammed ibn Abu Bakr were his great grandfathers.
Many of these people are buried in the Al-Baqi grave yard in Madina. Then I came across photos of a family tree diagram of these people. Photos taken at the entrance of the Al-Baqi grave yard in Madina during this years hajj. They also had these details and had all the references. The references include both Sunni and Shia books. Qassim ibn Mohammed ibn Abu Bakr is highly regarded by all early scholars. Its good that the diagram also remembers and shows some of Hassan's sons and some of Ali's sons who were killed in Karbala and are now more or less forgotten. Most family tree diagrams do not show the women, where as this shows the women and shows their mothers. I am still finding it hard to name Qasims mother. Most early books say that she is from Ali's family. Qasim's father Mohammed ibn Abu Bakr was raised by Ali and was very close to Ali. Hassan is also buried in Al-Baqi grave yard in Madina along with his mother and many of his relatives. It is said 10,000 of Muhammad's companions are also buried there as are many of his family members and relatives. 
All the books from  Sahih Al Bukhari (Volume 6, Book 60, Number 352, Narrated by Yusuf bin Mahak) to Ibn Katheer's books state that Abdu'l-Rahman ibn Abu Bakr heavily opposed Muawiya for his appointment of Yazeed. 
Sahih Al Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 352, there is a Narration by Yusuf bin Mahak:
Marwan had been appointed as the governor of Hijaz by Muawiya. He delivered a sermon and mentioned Yazid bin Muawiya so that the people might take the oath of allegiance to him as the successor of his father (Muawiya). Then 'Abdur Rahman bin Abu Bakr told him something whereupon marwan ordered that he be arrested. But 'Abdur-Rahman entered 'Aisha's house and they could not arrest him. marwan said, "It is he ('AbdurRahman) about whom Allah revealed this Verse: 'And the one who says to his parents: 'Fie on you! Do you hold out the promise to me..?'" On that, 'Aisha said from behind a screen, "Allah did not reveal anything from the Qur'an about us except what was connected with the declaration of my innocence."
Ibn Katheer wrote in his book the Al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah The Caliphate of Banu Umayyah the first Phase, Ibn Katheer, Taken from Al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah by Ibn Katheer, Ismail Ibn Omar 775  Translated by Yoosuf Al-Hajj Ahmad Page 82 that "in the year 56 AH Muawiyah called on the people including those within the outlying territories to pledge allegiance to his son, Yazeed, to be his heir to the Caliphate after him. Almost all the subjects offered their allegiance, with the exception of Abdur Rahman bin Abu Bakr (the son of Abu Bakr), Abdullah ibn Umar (the son of Umar), al-Husain bin Ali (the son of Ali), Abdullah bin Az-Zubair (The grandson of Abu Bakr) and Abdullah ibn Abbas (Ali's cousin). Because of this Muawiyah passed through al-Madinah on his way back from Makkah upon completion of his Umrah Pilgrimage where he summoned each one of the five aforementioned individuals and threatened them. The speaker who addressed Muawiyah sharply with the greatest firmness amongst them was Abdul rahman ibn Abu Bakr as-Siddeeq
Abdur Rahman bin Abu Bakr fought in the Battle of Yarmouk against the Romans in Syria. Abdur Rahman bin Abu Bakr had been one of the first to dual in that battle. Abdur Rahman bin Abu Bakr sister Asmā' bint Abu Bakr also fought in the Battle of Yarmouk and was also heavily opposed to Yazid. 
Then while I was going round old libraries in the Middle east, looking for old books I came across literature on Abdur Rahman and his family. 
Abdu'l-Rahman ibn Abu Bakr's brother Mohammed ibn Abu Bakr was raised by Ali and was also Ali's general and was killed in Egypt. Qassim ibn Mohammed ibn Abu Bakr was the son of Mohammed ibn Abu Bakr, who was the son of Abu Bakr, raised by Ali. Mohammed ibn Abu Bakr's wife was also Ali's close relative, meaning that Qassim was both the Grandson of Abu Bakr and a very close relative of Ali. 
Then on top of that Abdu'l-Rahman ibn Abu Bakr's daughter Hafsa was married to Hassan and Abdu'l-Rahman ibn Abu Bakr's other daughter Asma was married to Qassim ibn Mohammed ibn Abu Bakr. Qassim and Asma's daughter, Fatima (Um Farwa) was married to Mohammed Al Baqer and was the mother of Jaafar Al Sadiq. So I asked a Shia cleric from Isfahan in Iran and he said it was true. The Sunni's clerics also said it was true. Abdu'l-Rahman ibn Abu Bakr's and his brother Mohammed ibn Abu Bakr are both Ja'far al-Sadiq's great grandfathers. Abdullah bin Az-Zubair was also married to Hassans daughter. When Hussein was killed, Abdullah bin Az-Zubair took on Yazeed and drove his forces out of Hijaz but was later defeated. His mother Asmā' bint Abu Bakr deeply opposed Yazid. In his last hour, Abdullah asked his mother Asma what he should do. Asma replied to her son:
“You know better in your own self that if you are upon the truth and you are calling towards the truth go forth, for people more honourable than you were killed and have been killed, and if you are not upon the truth, then what an evil son you are, you have destroyed yourself and those who are with you. If you say what you say, that you are upon the truth and you will be killed at the hands of others then you will not truly be free, for this is not the statement of someone who is free... How long will you live in this world, death is more beloved to me than this state you are on, this state of weakness.”
Then Abdullah said to his mother after she had told him to go forth and fight: “I am afraid I will be mutilated by the people of Sham. I am afraid that they will cut up my body after they have killed me.” She said: “After someone has died, it won’t make any difference what they do to you if you have been killed.” Abdullah said to his mother:
“I did not come to you except to increase myself in knowledge. Look and pay attention to this day, for verily, I am a dead man. Your son never drank wine, nor was he fornicator, nor did he wrong any Muslim or non-Muslim, nor was he unjust. I am not saying this to you to show off or show how pure I am but rather as an honour to you.”
Abdullah then left by himself on his horse to take on Hajjaj. Hajjaj’s army defeated Abdullah on the battlefield in 692. He beheaded him and crucified his body. He said, “No one must take down his body except Asma. She must come to me and ask my permission, and only then will his body be taken down.” Asma refused to go and ask permission to take down her son's body. It was said to her, "If you don’t go, his body will remain like that.” She said, “Then let it be.” Eventually Hajjaj came to her and asked, "What do you say about this matter?” She replied, “Verily, you have destroyed him and you have ruined his life, and with that you have ruined your hereafter.” Asma died a few days later. 
There are a lot of family links between these people. Even Abdullah bin Az-Zubair was Husseins second cousin. It looks like blood is thicker than water. We need to improve the layout of the family tree diagrams, including Family tree of Ali. These diagrams need to be like family tree diagrams. People like Qassim ibn Mohammed ibn Abu Bakr are also very important in early fiqh and Imam Malik's book Muwatta Imam Malik is based on the work of the committee headed by Qassim. Yet these days, they are almost forgotten. We need to improve the family tree diagrams of people like Qasim.
--Johnleeds1 (talk) 22:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Ja'far al-Sadiq's family tree

message: I feel that this article is very disjointed at the moment and should really be split up into smaller sections. Perhaps it would be worthwhile adding 2 new sections for the "Sunni view of al-Sadiq" and the "Shi'ite view of al-Sadiq". This would perhaps make the article more readable. RookTaker (talk) 23:46, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improvements 

message: I have recently obtained more information about the Persian book from which the one described above has been translated.   The Persian title of the book is (مغز متفکر جهان شیعه امام جعفر صادق (ع  ("Magzhe Mutafakkir Jehan Shi'a Imam Ja'far Sadiq (?)" — the question mark representing the glottal stop with which the letter ع is pronounced), which Google translate renders as "The mastermind of the Shiite [world] Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (AS)".  A translation of the  word "Jehan", meaning "world", is omitted from Google translate's translation.  The book's author is Zabih-Allah Mansuri (Persian:  ذبیح‌الله منصوری ), an Iranian journalist, and prolific author and translator of popular works in Persian.  Short English biographies of him can be found online in Encyclopedia Iranica and Eminent Persians.
Both biographies mention the fact that Mansuri's translations often included massive amounts of detail which did not appear in the works which were supposedly being translated, or that he even authored works which he misrepresented as being translations of non-existent sources.  According to the Encyclopedia Iranica biography his book,  "Maḡz-e motafakker-e jahān-e Šiʿa (The think tank of the Shiite world, 1975)"—clearly an edition of the same one identified above—, originally serialised in the Persian literary magazine Sepid o siāh (Black and White), and comprising 620 pages, was based on an original article of only 24 pages.
David Wilson (talk · cont) 14:34, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Further Information

message: Hello. I am going to improve this article a little bit using reliable sources. Hadi (talk) 08:17, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Got it. I found the sections you commented out. I will rewrite the "Religious views" section and "Imamate" section so that they won't have the problems you mentioned. Thanks. Hadi (talk) 07:22, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Improving the article

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Ja'far al-Sadiq. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100314075307/http://www.maaref-foundation.com/english/library/pro_ahl/imam06_sadiq/imam_sadiq/index.htm to http://maaref-foundation.com/english/library/pro_ahl/imam06_sadiq/imam_sadiq/index.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101203201340/http://www.maaref-foundation.com/english/library/beliefs/tawheed_al-mufadhdhal/index.htm to http://maaref-foundation.com/english/library/beliefs/tawheed_al-mufadhdhal/index.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:58, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I saw the mention of "all Shia sects" but it seemed to me that Jafar falls after the split from the Zaidiyyah branch of Shia Islam. Can someone confirm if this is correct, and instead we should say Jafar is recognized as an imam by "the Sevener (Ismali) and Twelver Shia Muslims, but not the Fiver (Zaidiyyah) sect"? MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:51, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "All Shia sects"? What about Fivers ([[Zaidiyyah]])? 

message: Contributor 103.255.6.68 posted the letters 'Slwt' which is probably 'Salawat' (greetings of respect to Prophet Muhammad and his holy progeny). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salawat 
Posting that 'Slwt' was breaking the rules on POV. On one's own blog or on a Muslim website the Salawat would be allowed, not on Wikipedia, which is supposed to be neutral POV. CryMeAnOcean (talk) 03:18, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Slwt' explanation 

message: The source given for Sadiq's date of death (Gleave's article in Encyclopedia Iranica) does not specify a month, let alone a precise date.  Neither does the French translation of Gleave's source (Masudi's Meadows of Gold).  I suspect that the various specific dates which have been inserted into the article are merely traditional assignations with no more claim to authenticity than December 25 as Jesus' birth date. Unless a proper source can be cited for any specific date, Wikipedia should not be giving one as if it had been authoritatively established.
David Wilson (talk · cont) 00:30, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death date 

message: Copy-edited the text and addressed a range of issues (mainly failed attribution), some of which are listed below: 
* Used basic transliteration whenever possible per MOS.
* Removed those factions of Shia that are not extant from the list of successors in the info box (see the section 'Succession').
* Change the spouse name to Hamida Khatun to match the source and removed the broken link.
* Removed the description 'may be legendary' for Jabir. This is a statement that seems more appropriate for the dedicated wiki article about Jabir (and it's already linked). 
* The sentence "The traditions recorded from al-Sadiq are said to be more numerous..." is noticeably different from the source. 
* Al-Sadiq was not only a Husaynid but also a Hasanid descendent of Ali and Fatima. 
* Changed al-Sadiq's age to 'about thirty-seven' from Momen instead of 'thirty-four or thirty-seven' from Jafri given the various dates for al-Baqir's death.
* Citing Gleave for the sentence "Prior to al-Sadiq,..." seems to be a typo. Similarly, citing Taylor for "The end of the Umayyad dynasty and beginning..." seems to be a mistake. 
* Al-Nafs al-Zakiya's uprising was mentioned under the Umayyads period by mistake, see page 188 of Jafri.
* The accurate citation for "Al-Sadiq's Imamate extended over the latter half..." is the Iranica article by Gleave (and not Jafri). 
* Replaced the references to al-Mufid's work for "This conscious position of neutrality..." with a reliable secondary source after rewriting those two sentences. 
* "The transition period from the Umayyad dynasty..." and its next sentence don't seem to be in the given source, which is now replaced with similar content from Tabatabai.
* The page number for the Historical Dictionary of Islam was wrong.
* Added a source for the claim "Wasil ibn Ata, founder of the Mu'tazila school,..."
* Added a source for the Abbasid's suppression of their former Shia allies.
* "The new Abbasid rulers,..." and its next sentence don't exist in Campo.
* "Following his wife's death, al-Sadiq purchased..." considerably differs from the source, which was corrected.
* "Al-Sadiq was arrested several times by the Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs..." from Mufid (a primary source) was replaced with similar content from Tabatabai.
* Removed the sentence "Al-Sadiq's death led to uncertainty about the succession of the imamate" since it's redundant. (Succession is discussed right after 'Death'.)
* The sentence "The Shi'ite group had begun to split during the lifetime..." doesn't exist in the source and doesn't seem correct either. 
* The sentence "A final group believed that al-Sadiq had been the last imam, and that the lineage had not continued." was not in any of the given sources.
* The divisions after Musa al-Kadhim are really not relevant here (and probably also not in the given sources) and were removed. 
* The sentence "It is narrated in hadith that Ja'far al-Sadiq has said..." from al-Kulayni (a primary source) was unrelated to its context and removed. 
* The sentence "In one hadith, Abu Hanifah once said" is a from a primary source and can be safely removed without affecting the narrative.
* Citing Campo for the sentences beginning with  "According to Ya'qubi it was customary..." seems to be an error. 
* In the sentence "Shia thought starting with Sayyid Haydar Amuli,...," the last part "specially al-Sadiq" doesn't exist in the source and was replaced with "including al-Sadiq".
* The sentence "Like Sunni law, Ja'fari jurisprudence is based on the..." is not correct; the Shia pillar of 'aql is missing from the list. This was fixed.
* The sentence "Unlike the Sunnis, Shias give more weight to reasoning ('Aql), while Sunnis only allow for a kind of analogical reasoning (Qiyas)" is not in the given sources and was replaced with similar content from elsewhere. 
* The section 'Theology' is largely about al-Sadiq's views about free will plus some comments about al-Sadiq's students' contributions to theology. It seems much more reasonable to change the title of the section to 'Free will' and collect (from various sources) al-Sadiq's views about this issue here.
* The sentence ""Ketāb al-jafr", an early mystical commentary on the Quran (Tafsir), is also attributed to al-Sadiq" is incorrect. Rather the Shia belief is that Al-Sadiq inherited the book, see Al-Jafr (book).
* The quote from Amir-Moezzi about taqiya is on page 26 and not on pages 64-65, 139.
* "Practicing Taqiyya also had an esoteric significance for those who believed that their teachings..." is noticably different from what the source says.  
* "Thus Ja'far either distanced himself or did..." was covered earlier in the article and doesn't seem to fit under the theolegical discussion of taqiya.
* It's apparently Amir-Moezzi rather than Moezzi. 
* Citing Takim's article in Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World for taqiya seems incorrect.
* The link to Devin Stewart's lecture notes is broken and, in any case, is not an appropriate source. This was replaced with better sources. 
* "The doctrine was developed by al-Sadiq..." is not exactly what the source says and taqiya was likely introduced by al-Baqir and later adopted by his son, al-Sadiq.
* The attribution of al-Jafr to al-Sadiq in "Ketāb al-jafr is a commentary on the Quran which,..." is again incorrect, see above.
* The section 'Works' seems superfluous. It's already said earlier that probably none of the works attributed to al-Sadiq are authentic and the rest of the material can be safely moved to other sections, e.g., the appearance of al-Sadiq as an authority in al-Tabari's works can be moved to the Sunni section. The reference to Nosayris is not in the source (or in Gleave's article about al-Sadiq's teachings) and the rest of the sentence can be moved elsewhere. 
* In the section 'Sunni Islam', Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ and Al-Tuhaf Sharh al-Zulaf (both in Arabic) were cited to support contradictory claims. Both sources were removed.
* Citing Corbin to support the sentence "'Attar's attributed sayings..." is apparently a mistake.
* Citing Corbin for "Whether these stories are any most than myth..." is also incorrect.
* The sentence "Al-Sadiq holds a special prominence among Sufi orders due to his claimed connections to some of Sufism's earliest theologians." is incomplete as it only gives one of the few reasons given by Algar for the prominence of al-Sadiq.
* Citing Taylor for "Given his large following and established school (madrasa),..." seems to be incorrect. 
* Citing 'Attar for "Perhaps, as claimed by 'Attar, this included..." is incorrect.
* Citing Taylor for "This verse shows us that Ja'far..." is almost surely incorrect.
* Citing Corbin for "Whether these stories are any most than..." is incorrect.
* There doesn't seem to be any mention of Kalābāḏi in Taylor's article!
* Much of the section 'Sufism' seems to fail attribution after spending some time. Not being able to find the sources, most of the section was rewritten with similar content.
* Expanded the subsection about disciples.
* The inclusion of the family tree of the Ismaili Imams in this article is unnecessary. Albertatiran (talk) 11:57, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  New edits 

message: Ǧaʕfar ṣ-Ṣādiq is a key figure in the formative period of Islamic scholarship preceding the age of the great complilations, the formation of methodological schools, etc. He is central to the Shi'i/Sunni schism, and his history enjoys little consensus. 
The article presents only the Shi'a history of the figure and presents it as accurate. These sources are also possibly more recent than other primary sources. Other sources deny the attribution of many works, practices and views to him, not the least of which, is his involvement with the imammate-theology. 
The alternative histories should be included in the body of the article, both being only summarily mentioned in the introduction with more focus on the differences given their historical and sectarian importance.
Adding the Sunni perspective and reformulating (parts of) the article as a comparison is not only important for the article as a summary of the historiographical primary sources but also its value as addressing a point in sectarian history. 2A02:908:2811:8F80:102A:7C5A:65CF:9FF0 (talk) 12:51, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Nearly all the sources in this article are academic and reliable, following the guidelines in WP:RS and WP:PST and MOS:ISLAM. If there are any indications of source bias, please be specific and list them here for discussion. I say "nearly all" because of some recent additions to the article, largely under "Works," which might be open to debate. Albertatiran (talk) 14:38, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparative perspective 

message: Imam jafar sadiq was a sunni not shia 2409:40E3:2E:1C4C:547A:E68E:85B7:2CB7 (talk) 17:12, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  He was sunni not shia please correct that 

message: Was he the fifth or sixth Isma'ili imam? The infobox and lead give different answers. The article for Muhammad al-Baqir is also like this (and possibly the other imams). I don’t know how long it’s been like this but it should be corrected. Yasinzayd (talk) 06:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fifth or sixth Isma'ili imam?