This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Morality in Islam article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that an image or photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Couldn't this article be merged with Islamic ethics? Topher385 ( talk) 17:41, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Noticed the above exchange after adding the banners. What exactly is the difference between the scope of these two articles? Eperoton ( talk) 17:29, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Merge but rename something similar to "Ethics and morality in Islam" Kernosky talk2me! 19:21, 20 August 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kernosky ( talk • contribs)
Ethics means philosophical reflection upon moral conduct, while morality pertains to specific norms or codes of behavior. Questions of ethics, therefore, involve such subjects as human nature and the capacity to do good, the nature of good and evil, motivations for moral action, the underlying principles governing moral and immoral acts, deciding who is obliged to adhere to the moral code and who is exempted from it, and the implications of either adhering to the moral code or violating it. Morality encompasses the values and rules that govern human conduct…
User:Swingoswingo,
User:XLPeeker99p9,
User:Oskimua, and
User:Janosik-Ruzalka are all banned Sockpuppets who were involved in disruptive and dishonest editing for which the editor was banned. See
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Swingoswingo/Archive. Also see the editor's
non-conformist position which proves the editor is
not here to contribute but to spread their propaganda. In this article, one of their disruptive edits was to remove the Quranic verses saying All are
WP:PRIMARY sources; but as a fact, these verses were used not as sources, but as texts of the article which is a common practice. They stand on their own, and they do not interpret other content. Thus, it is not a case of WP:PRIMARY. -
Ascetic
Rosé 13:37, 23 February 2018 (UTC).
Putting aside the weasel word 'probably', this statement links to a page with numerous examples that clearly contradict it.
If the two sources really do support the statement as written, I would suggest they be disqualified from use on Wikipedia for being arrant nonsense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.154.142.74 ( talk) 00:35, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
I agree that this sentence is problematic. First of all, religions predating the life of Prophet SAW also discuss treatment of animals, particularly Buddhism, and Hinduism that subscribe to ahimsa. The two sources may support this statement, but they are opinion. Although, it may be true that the Prophet was the first to raise such treatment to a legal level, rather than only a moral precept. However, that would require a scholarly comparative legal study, which I am not aware of at this time. For example, Hittite codes mention animals, but generally in the context of property. Treatment of animals in Islam has a hukm shari'i, and mistreatment could be subject to ta'zir punishment by a court, although I have never heard of any modern Sharia courts dealing with the issue, perhaps because the enforcement authorities do not care. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say, "Some Muslims hold that Muhammad was probably etc." or just take it out. M. Ali Sadiqi Malis61 ( talk) 02:28, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi,
I came across this promising Draft:Hermeneutics of feminism in Islam (relating to women's rights) and myself supported the same editorially too. IMO since topic potential is vast many Reliable sources on Google scholar seem to be available hence the article needs more editorial hands for some more update and expansion along with appropriate references.
Pl. do join to update and expansion, your help will be most welcome.
Thanks and regards
Bookku ( talk) 15:00, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
VenusFeuerFalle Wiqi55
Have been trying to rewrite the article and had a couple of editors reverting some of my edits.
VenusFeuerFalle
reverted Nov 30 with the edit note:
academyll.org as an independend lecture club, with a pdf on a dialogue can hardly be a reliable source for exploring morals within a religious system. The section should further summarize the article, not make specific references to one source (also, making references to a holy scripture, without backing up its meaning or context by a secondary source runs danger to be considered Original Research) MOS:LEAD WP:OR. THe claim about magic is even wrong, since miracles are also "magic".
I am backing off for now. I admit academyll.org isn't the best source; and although my Islamic teacher told us that Islam holds that magic is both real and forbidden, and a Lebanese TV psychic was sentenced to death in Saudi Arabia in 2009 for "sorcery", further research has found sources suggesting some magic is not forbidden in Islam.
I will continue to work on the article. My problem with the article is that it reads more like da‘wah rather than providing much information on Islamic doctrine on morality.
The principle and fundamental purpose of Islamic morality is love: love for God and love for God's creatures.
sound very appealing to Western nonbelievers, but is this "principle and fundamental purpose" highlighted in Sharia? Tafsir? Does it dominate other sentiments in the Quran and hadith? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia after all.
Another issue for me is why the lead doesn't give some important background. What is the Islamic word for "morality"? Is there a difference between Akhlaq and morality? (I put the disambiguation note at the top of the two articles but it probably is just a placeholder based on the evolution of the two articles.) Islam already a body of laws that commands and forbid known as sharia. Is there a difference between sharia, and what is moral in Islam? These are some questions the article has to explore IMHO and I hope to do that. -- Louis P. Boog ( talk) 18:32, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
The very long Virtues section is problematic. Some of the virtue subsections seem to be more or less duplicates or at least overlapping (Honesty, Truthfulness, Fulfilment of promise, Sincerity). At least one source used many times (Leaman, Oliver (2006). The Qur'an: An Encyclopedia. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 9780415326391) does have entries on the various virtues (FORGIVENESS, SABR), but at least in many places makes no mention of "morality" or ethics, it imply indicates that this is what Muslims should do.
Consequently I'm going to be doing some serious trimming. -- Louis P. Boog ( talk) 02:01, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Ethical characteristics Discuss 119.160.116.208 ( talk) 10:46, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
English speech 103.154.54.41 ( talk) 16:27, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
The introduction tries to frame islamic morality into soemthing positive only naming soft values. What about polygamy, child marriages, child sex, child brides, 72 virgins in afterlife, so called "muta", a marriage with a time limit?? 80.131.61.105 ( talk) 18:40, 27 November 2022 (UTC)