Misplaced Pages

Talk:Ijtihad: 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 editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 03:38, 28 February 2005 editBrandonYusufToropov (talk | contribs)7,035 edits "Jihad"← Previous edit Latest revision as of 13:12, 15 February 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots7,425,222 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 4 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "B" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 4 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Islam}}, {{WikiProject Religion}}, {{WikiProject Theology}}, {{WikiProject Law}}.Tag: Talk banner shell conversion 
(83 intermediate revisions by 48 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{WikiProject banner shell |class=B|1=
==terminus technicus==
{{WikiProject Islam|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Religion|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Theology |importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Law |importance=Low}}
}}
{{Course assignment |term= |course= }}
{{Archives|auto=short|search=yes|index=User:ClueBot III/Master Detailed Indices/Ijtihad|bot=ClueBot III|age=365}}
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis|age=8760|archiveprefix=Talk:Ijtihad/Archive|numberstart=1|maxarchsize=75000|header={{Automatic archive navigator}}|minkeepthreads=3|minarchthreads=2|format= %%i}}
<!-- Update the bot settings if you move the page, see WP:POSTMOVE. -->


== Requested move 18 March 2022 ==
WHAT is a ''terminus technicus''? -- ]


<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top -->
:terminus technicus (lat.): technical term. Easy, isn't it? In German it is a quite common foreign expression. But I'll change it if most English readers don't understand it ;-) --]
:''The following is a closed discussion of a ]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a ] 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''' to ] per consensus. While the term "Ijtihad" is not widely known among the general public, there is broad agreement that it is common enough in academic discourse, and that the current descriptive title is unnecessary in face of reasonably established common name. Besides, Arabic terms already dominate in ] so this move would affirm consistency.<br>I will also ]ly move ] to ] per Walrasiad's suggestion. ] (]) 12:57, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
::Please do. Most English readers don't speak Latin. -- ]
----


] → {{no redirect|Ijtihad}} – Ijtihad absolutely dwarves the use of the convoluted term "Independent legal reasoning" in English-language scholarly literature about the subject. "Indendent legal reasoning" + "Islam" gets about ; ijtihad gets . Almost all the terms in Islam on the periphery of ijtihad are already named in naturalised phonetic English, such as ], ], etc. Ijtihad is a big enough concept in Islam to be treated in the same manner, just as it is in scholarly sources. Even independent of this, there would be a case for the change based on pure consistency, as ijitihad also blows away terms like taqlid in terms of usage. See taqlid on (just over a third the ijtihad tally) and . ] (]) 18:02, 18 March 2022 (UTC) <small>—&nbsp;'''''Relisting.'''''&nbsp;] (]) 21:10, 25 March 2022 (UTC)</small>
:::Beg to differ - that phrase is so standard that most English speakers DO know it.--] 15:02, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
*'''Support''' per nom.--] (]) 01:41, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
*'''Support'''. ] (]) 02:55, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
*'''Strong oppose'''. Of course you won't find exact hits for "Independent legal reasoning in Islamic law" or even "Independent legal reasoning", because it's a ''descriptive'' article title, as mentioned in ]. The proposal has not, to me, met the burden of proof that "ijtihad" has seen greater usage (in reliable English-language sources) than ''any other descriptive way of describing the concept''. ] ] 21:20, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
::But why would we use a descriptive title for something that has a name? ] (]) 00:20, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
:::Because that name doesn't exist in English? If there's a word in German ("Restorisvampenfloridangattor"?) for the ], whoopdi-doo, that's great for de.wikipedia, but our titles need to be in English. The supporters of this move, to me, need to convincingly prove that this concept is ''commonly referred to in English'' as "ijtihad". ] ] 18:36, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
::::@]: You don't find those 41,000 Google Scholar hits compelling? 'Independent legal reasoning' is not a descriptive title, it is a less common, literal translation, and those exact words ARE used, in the 700 Google Scholar hits I provided, normally presented as a translation of 'ijtihad'. Opposers of this move need to show how 'independent legal reasoning' is common. ] (]) 19:17, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
::::: Firstly, those Google Scholar numbers are ghost-hits, i.e. those references don't exist. Scanning to the end of your search, it only reaches around 1,000. Secondly, the majority of those articles are non-English (most are in Indonesian and Malay, as far as I can tell). Thirdly, Misplaced Pages articles are written for the general public, not scholars. ] (]) 03:10, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
*'''Support''' per Google Scholar hits – I tried several other combinations and none came particularly close to Ijtihad, and that seems like the best word to explain it anyway, as opposed to some translation. as well. ] ] 22:46, 25 March 2022 UTC
* '''Neutral (leaning Support)''' I very much believe article titles should be translated into English wherever possible to ease comprehension to a general audience. Nonetheless, I am leaning support in this case because ''Itjihad'' is a technical term of Islamic jurisprudence, and it is common to leave technical legal terms untranslated (think only of all the Medieval Latin and Middle English legal terms we retain in article titles untranslated, ''Habeas Corpus'', ''Mandamus'', etc.). It is frequent enough to come across this term in texts, and is helpful to those looking to find more about it. However, I stop short of "support" because its main rival "''Ijma''" is left at "]", and it would be inconsistent to move merely one article. So for consistency, either '''move both Itjihad and Ijma''', or '''leave both''' where they are. On the other hand, I should note that the parent article of Islamic jurisprudence is untranslated at "]", and the various child articles on forms of independent reasoning are also left untranslated: eg, "]" (reasoning by analogy), "]" (reasoning by public benefit), "]" (reasoning by custom) (although it seems we are missing an article on "Istiham" (juristic preference)). ] (]) 18:49, 26 March 2022 (UTC)


*'''Oppose''' The word "Ijtihad" hasn't gained currency a la "jihad." --] (]) 01:12, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
==?==


* '''Support''' the proposal due to two major reasons:<br/>
:::"usul al-fiqh" can you explain ?
:::]


1. ''Ijtihad'' is a ] in academic as well as daily discourse. One can find a normative usage of the term ''Ijtihad'' in English language encyclopaedic and academic sources, as opposed to the specific term "Independent legal reasoning in Islamic law". For example, ] (2004) has an entry named '''Ijtihad''' at pg. 134 ( ) but no such entry for "Independent legal reasoning in Islamic law"<br/>
==POV==


2. The current title is too lengthy and may be confusing to many readers to meet ] as opposed to the term ''Ijtihad''
"''This resulted in the muslims entering the dark ages, where they have been ever since.''" . Um, that doesn't sound very NPOV, does it? ] 18:39, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
] (]) 11:14, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

*<s>'''Oppose'''</s> per ] and ]; most reader familiar with Islamic Law will not recognize the word Ijtihad, but they will recognize the current descriptive title. It is also not established that the proposed title is the common name; while it is more common than the specific descriptive form in use, that doesn't mean it is more common that descriptive forms in general. ] (]) 06:23, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
:80.126.238.189; Either they did or they didn't. Ijtihad only has meaning in modern discussion if they did. I encourage everyone to read this on the topic.
*:@]: You want to argue FOR "Independent legal reasoning in Islamic law" on ]? I'm incredulous. To whom is that recognizable? Who is going to search for "Independent legal reasoning..." ? The translation is no better for recognizability than the term from which is it dubiously derived (again, just 700 Google Scholar hits). Ijtihad is overwhelmingly used AS IS in academic literature where its meaning is perfectly well understood. My second major argument was from the perspective of consistency, whereby there are plenty of comparatively lesser terms in Islam that go by their transliterated names. Ijtihad is a huge theme and its usage is supported by tertiary sources. I don't see how ] is relevant, as this is just about HOW one transliterates and Ijithad is already transliterated quite plainly. If you have an ax to grind against transliterated foreign terms in general, perhaps I could direct your attention towards , where you will find a positive wealth of ]-floating terms. ] (]) 06:58, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
:--] 09:34, 7 May 2004 (UTC)
*::As a descriptive name, I understand what it is referring to, but as Ijithad I would have no idea - although I expect there may be a better descriptive name. You do, however, have a point about consistency; if we are using the Islamic term for articles on more obscure terms then we should use it here - or use descriptive titles for all obscure Islamic terms. For the moment, I've struck my oppose and am '''neutral''' on this proposal. I will look into the Buddhist articles. ] (]) 07:20, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

<div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.</div><!-- from ] -->
== Ijtihad ==
</div><div style="clear:both;"></div>

I think a more proper translation of "ijtihad" would be "(active) initiative" (as opposed to "(passive) imitation"). The basic meaning is "effort," without necessarily having the connotation of "an effort ''against'' s.o. or something." Ijtihad is a personal effort to make a rational determination about what is right to do under given circumstances, and as such resembles the European tradition of ] in some ways.

===Edward Lane's definition===
:"... exerting the faculties (of the mind) to the utmost for the purpose of forming an opinion in a case of law (respecting a doubtful and difficult point); the seeking to form a right opinion; investigation of the law, or the working out of a solution to any difficulty in the law, by means of reason and comparison ..."

== "Jihad" ==

I'm guessing that this is the same word most often rendered in English as "jihad". Am I mistaken? That spelling does not even appear in this article. I'm not interested in arguing over the article title, but assuming it is the same word, such a common spelling should certainly appear in the article. -- ] | ] 21:14, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)

No, it has nothing to do with ]; both terms do come from the same verb "jahada", but have very different meanings. - ] 23:16, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

: That itself would probably be worth explaining. Not at all obvious to those of us who do not speak Arabic. -- ] | ] 23:33, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)

:Given that one of the meanings of "jahada" is "meditate upon something" (according to Omar's "Dictionary of the Holy Qur'an") I think it's an error to maintain in the entry that ijtihad has nothing to do with ]. It has nothing to do with WAR, of course, but then one can make the argument that ] has nothing to do with that, either, at least as far as the Qur'an is concerned. (This is a topic of much interest over at ], but that's another story.) Anyway, I'd like to propose a rewrite that pointing out that the two words come from the same root verb, and that both touch on struggle, effort, and meditation. Thoughts? ] 00:38, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

::Yes, and while you're at it, could you just explain how the form comes about - a <t> appearing in the middle of a word is odd. I know no Arabic, but I am guessing this is something like a Hebrew hithpael, where the prefix hith- gets added to a verb, and if the verb starts with sh- a metathesis takes place so that -thsh- becomes -shth-. It would help me a lot to know if this is the same (it+jehad=ijtehad?) - it's easier to remember foreign words if you know what's happening in them. --] 15:02, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

:::I'm still at kindergarten level with Arabic, but I can tell you that the words build from the beginning and the middle sometimes, not from the end as we might expect in English. So the root combination J-H-D can be manipulated in all kinds of directions, offering subtle variations on the initial concept, and permitting many orthographic liberties, including the present case. I don't know what the heck the "T" is doing in there, but I know the word derives from the root three-consonant pattern J-H-D. Here is a fair-use quote on the etymology:

::::"Ijtihad: Ijtihad has been derived from the root word Jahada. Ijtihad literally means striving or self-exertion. Ijtihad consists of intellectual exertion. Ijtihad is a very broad source of Islamic law and comes after the Quran and the Sunnah." (from http://www.ymofmd.com/books/uaf/taarud_and_ijtihad.htm)

Latest revision as of 13:12, 15 February 2024

This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconIslam Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconReligion Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconTheology Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Theology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Theology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TheologyWikipedia:WikiProject TheologyTemplate:WikiProject TheologyTheology
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconLaw Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
This article was the subject of an educational assignment.
Archiving icon
Archives

Index 1



This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 3 sections are present.


Requested move 18 March 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: Moved to Ijtihad per consensus. While the term "Ijtihad" is not widely known among the general public, there is broad agreement that it is common enough in academic discourse, and that the current descriptive title is unnecessary in face of reasonably established common name. Besides, Arabic terms already dominate in Category:Islamic terminology so this move would affirm consistency.
I will also WP:BOLDly move Consensus in Islamic law to Ijma per Walrasiad's suggestion. No such user (talk) 12:57, 18 April 2022 (UTC)


Independent legal reasoning in Islamic lawIjtihad – Ijtihad absolutely dwarves the use of the convoluted term "Independent legal reasoning" in English-language scholarly literature about the subject. "Indendent legal reasoning" + "Islam" gets about 700 Google Scholar hits; ijtihad gets 41,000. Almost all the terms in Islam on the periphery of ijtihad are already named in naturalised phonetic English, such as taqlid, jihad, etc. Ijtihad is a big enough concept in Islam to be treated in the same manner, just as it is in scholarly sources. Even independent of this, there would be a case for the change based on pure consistency, as ijitihad also blows away terms like taqlid in terms of usage. See taqlid on Google Scholar (just over a third the ijtihad tally) and Ngram. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:02, 18 March 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 21:10, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

But why would we use a descriptive title for something that has a name? Srnec (talk) 00:20, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
Because that name doesn't exist in English? If there's a word in German ("Restorisvampenfloridangattor"?) for the Restoration of the Everglades, whoopdi-doo, that's great for de.wikipedia, but our titles need to be in English. The supporters of this move, to me, need to convincingly prove that this concept is commonly referred to in English as "ijtihad". Red Slash 18:36, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
@Red Slash: You don't find those 41,000 Google Scholar hits compelling? 'Independent legal reasoning' is not a descriptive title, it is a less common, literal translation, and those exact words ARE used, in the 700 Google Scholar hits I provided, normally presented as a translation of 'ijtihad'. Opposers of this move need to show how 'independent legal reasoning' is common. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:17, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
Firstly, those Google Scholar numbers are ghost-hits, i.e. those references don't exist. Scanning to the end of your search, it only reaches around 1,000. Secondly, the majority of those articles are non-English (most are in Indonesian and Malay, as far as I can tell). Thirdly, Misplaced Pages articles are written for the general public, not scholars. Walrasiad (talk) 03:10, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Support per Google Scholar hits – I tried several other combinations and none came particularly close to Ijtihad, and that seems like the best word to explain it anyway, as opposed to some translation. Britannica uses it as well. Skarmony talk 22:46, 25 March 2022 UTC
  • Neutral (leaning Support) I very much believe article titles should be translated into English wherever possible to ease comprehension to a general audience. Nonetheless, I am leaning support in this case because Itjihad is a technical term of Islamic jurisprudence, and it is common to leave technical legal terms untranslated (think only of all the Medieval Latin and Middle English legal terms we retain in article titles untranslated, Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, etc.). It is frequent enough to come across this term in texts, and is helpful to those looking to find more about it. However, I stop short of "support" because its main rival "Ijma" is left at "Consensus in Islamic law", and it would be inconsistent to move merely one article. So for consistency, either move both Itjihad and Ijma, or leave both where they are. On the other hand, I should note that the parent article of Islamic jurisprudence is untranslated at "Fiqh", and the various child articles on forms of independent reasoning are also left untranslated: eg, "Qiyas" (reasoning by analogy), "Istislah" (reasoning by public benefit), "Urf" (reasoning by custom) (although it seems we are missing an article on "Istiham" (juristic preference)). Walrasiad (talk) 18:49, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Support the proposal due to two major reasons:

1. Ijtihad is a common name in academic as well as daily discourse. One can find a normative usage of the term Ijtihad in English language encyclopaedic and academic sources, as opposed to the specific term "Independent legal reasoning in Islamic law". For example, The Oxford Dictionary of Islam (2004) has an entry named Ijtihad at pg. 134 ( here ) but no such entry for "Independent legal reasoning in Islamic law"

2. The current title is too lengthy and may be confusing to many readers to meet WP:CRITERIA as opposed to the term Ijtihad Shadowwarrior8 (talk) 11:14, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

  • Oppose per WP:RECOGNIZABILITY and WP:UE; most reader familiar with Islamic Law will not recognize the word Ijtihad, but they will recognize the current descriptive title. It is also not established that the proposed title is the common name; while it is more common than the specific descriptive form in use, that doesn't mean it is more common that descriptive forms in general. BilledMammal (talk) 06:23, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
    @BilledMammal: You want to argue FOR "Independent legal reasoning in Islamic law" on WP:RECOGNIZABILITY? I'm incredulous. To whom is that recognizable? Who is going to search for "Independent legal reasoning..." ? The translation is no better for recognizability than the term from which is it dubiously derived (again, just 700 Google Scholar hits). Ijtihad is overwhelmingly used AS IS in academic literature where its meaning is perfectly well understood. My second major argument was from the perspective of consistency, whereby there are plenty of comparatively lesser terms in Islam that go by their transliterated names. Ijtihad is a huge theme and its usage is supported by tertiary sources. I don't see how WP:UE is relevant, as this is just about HOW one transliterates and Ijithad is already transliterated quite plainly. If you have an ax to grind against transliterated foreign terms in general, perhaps I could direct your attention towards Category:Buddhist philosophical concepts, where you will find a positive wealth of WP:UE-floating terms. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:58, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
    As a descriptive name, I understand what it is referring to, but as Ijithad I would have no idea - although I expect there may be a better descriptive name. You do, however, have a point about consistency; if we are using the Islamic term for articles on more obscure terms then we should use it here - or use descriptive titles for all obscure Islamic terms. For the moment, I've struck my oppose and am neutral on this proposal. I will look into the Buddhist articles. BilledMammal (talk) 07:20, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
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. Categories: