Talk:Iʿtikāf

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Islam High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. 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 articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

I changed duration from three days to 24 hours, this is according to malki math-hab, says muslim friends of mine. feel fre of course to correct should it be incorrect, of course since this is wikipedia --Hannes Fury (talk) 21:38, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tone and Style Needs Fixing

At the moment the tone is way off. Uses phrases like "as we'll discuss later" and "Glory be to Allah" against Wikipedia's guidelines. --Air12345 (talk)

I'tikaf should be practiced in larger mosques...

If I am not mistaken that according to Shafii madhhab, i'tikaf should be done in collective mosques, not in smaller mosques that cannot be used for Friday prayers and sermons. I think that the condition is same for all Muslim views (or at least in Sunni view). Please explain...Thanks--Muhammad Mukhriz (talk) 08:40, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sect Bias

This entire article was originally based (entirely) from the term "ehtiyat" to the significance section using only Shi'a Imams and leaders, not to mention who are throughout mentioned. Somebody please add the Sunni view and significance, ioff of the Shi'a view and excercise of Itikaf. There is still a lot of Shia References and Bias, rangingf they're are similar to the point their isn't much difference, than atleast make the article more neutral!!!! I would do it myself, but I'm sunni and I came to this article myself to learn about it. I have nothing against the Shi'a sect, but this article is too biased for aan article about a custom from two different sects, and incredibly too biased for Wikipedia. --Obaidz96 (talk • contribs • count) 09:10, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct, trying to discuss with a sunni coworker and he was laughing at the article. Putting a NPOV tag on this. 158.169.40.9 (talk) 13:04, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There seem to be numerous statements that contradict each other and are therefore confusing. For example, in the "Conditions of I’tikaf" section, it states "It is not a condition for the one who does I’tikaf to be fasting". Subsequently, in the "Prohibited acts during I’tikaf" section, under "Notes", it states "Seeing as how the person in I’tikaf is also in a state of fasting". This most definitely needs to be rectified and/or clarified.

In addition, under the section titled "Time and place of the intention of the I’tikaf and the place of I’tikaf", it states: "The preferential order of where I’tikaf should be performed is: Masjidul Haram, Masjid an-Nabi (blessings of Allah be upon him and his family), Masjid Kufa and then the Masjid of Basrah – after these, then any other “Central” and “Congregational” Masjid is permissible to perform the I’tikaf in...By stating this, it clearly means that in places like the traditional Hussainiyah or Imambargah and other places such as this, it is not correct to perform the I’tikaf – this act is limited to the four mentioned Masajid and then the Central Masjid of a city". Is the author stating that performing I’tikaf is only permissible in the aforementioned masaajids? This is not only extremely confusing, but erroneous.

Along with some very poor use of punctuation, I think this whole article needs to be re-read and re-tooled. I think more emphasis needs to be put on the spiritual aspect of the act itself, instead of the do's and dont's (though I am not saying those are not important). What is the purpose? What does one achieve? Providing historical examples would be a tremendous service and addition to this article.

Atiq1969 (talk) 03:33, 18 July 2014 (UTC)atiq1969[reply]