Talk:Qarmatians

Ismaili or Not?

As I know anti-Shia figure such as Mahmud of Ghazni consider them as Shia while Ismaili Hujjat, Nasir Khusraw, didn't consider them Shia in his Safarnama. --Seyyed(t-c) 06:17, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

They are not Ismaili, not at all. They were not even Muslim. They changed the qibla to fire, attacked Mecca and stole the Black Stone, and promulgated distinctly pagan traditions and teachings. They were properly a millenialist Muslim-influenced sect, no more Muslim than Aum Shinrikyou are "Buddhist". em zilch (talk) 06:21, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Encyclopedia Britannica calls them Ismaili. I don't think emilyzilch knows more than Britannica. GreenEcho (talk) 16:35, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

You're tracing my edits to harass me? Very uncool - and very telling of your perspective.

As for the situation at hand, why not examine the evidence: they rejected Islam openly and tried to defile Mecca to prove their point. They openly identified themselves as a new religion. It's in the quotes and cites. Calling them Ismaili is misleading at best. em zilch (talk) 18:30, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Just making sure you don't intentionally add your disinformation to Wikipedia. So first, you were questioning John Esposito and Mordechai Nisan's credibility, and now, Britannica is wrong too? Wow. That's sad. GreenEcho (talk) 18:40, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

First, step off. Your hostility is unacceptable. You are taking this personally and personal issues are not appropriate.

Second, There are cites on this page that discuss this very issue. Read the cites. Some scholars dispute that the Qarmatian founders were even Seveners in the first place; others note that while they may have had instruction in the Sevener faith, they believed in a replacement of Islam with Persian religion - qibla of fire, desecration of the Haram ash-Sharif and Mecca to "destroy" Islam, stealing the Black Stone. Read the cites on the page, I'm not going to repeat them in the Talk page. The consensus of the scholars can be read that "they likely had some Ismaili origin", so I reworded to note that.

Finally, yes, I take the word of specialist scholars over that of an encyclopaedia, just as I think Esposito - and even Nissan - has less of a handle on Druzism than a Druze scholar writing the introduction to a comprehensive bibliography of Druze primary and secondary texts. em zilch (talk) 21:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Britannica defines a Qarmatian as "a member of the Shīʿite Muslim sect known as the Ismāʿīlites". Respect what the sources say and don't add your personal analysis. GreenEcho (talk) 21:37, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Hardly. The sources disagree! I remind you that an encyclopedia is not the end-all, be-all of scholarly consensus. If you read the Qarmatian page, you'd note that "the desecration of Mecca and the stealing of the Black Stone was to symbolise the 'end of Islam" (Farhad Daftary, The Assassin Legends: Myths of the Isma’ilis)" and Saunders' statement that “they may not have been Ismailis at all at the outset, and their conduct and customs gave plausibility to the belief that they were not merely heretics but bitter enemies of Islam.” (Saunders p130). I also have at my fingertips Mystics, Monarchs & Messiahs", which also notes, "Islam was to be abrogated, for a complete revelation of past hidden esoteric truths was to take place.... The Isfahani Messiah abolished the Shari'a and sanctioned the worship of fire and the cursing of Muhammad and his family... the truth meant a return to a Persian past." (pp.276-277) I will add this to the page. em zilch (talk) 23:05, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

---

ERASED the insults to the well-intentioned utopian quarmatians by a fundamentalist ismaili, who dislikes them and heavily bias (-; -- 14:27, 17 February 2011 77.210.10.102

Qarmatians in Multan (Pakistan) 985-1175 CE?

I'm seeing some references to the Qarmatians having fled to Multan (in modern Pakistan) after having been driven out of Egypt, and clashing with Sunni Muslims and sun worshippers out in the east. Is this generally accepted in academic circles? Is it worth covering in this article? MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:03, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Religious beliefs

"There is a general tendency in the Sunnite and Shiite sources, when referring to the Ismailis, often erroneously call them Qarmatians without perception of the distinction between them."

This is an article about the Qarmatians and this is everything the section has to offer about their religious beliefs? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.114.174.194 (talk) 08:47, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Possible Plagiarism

There's a passage in this article that appears to be lifted almost word-for-word from Slavoj Zizek's The Year of Dreaming Dangerously. From the article: The Qarmatians aimed to build a society based on reason and equality. The state was governed by a council of six with a chief who was a first among equals.[8] All property within the community was distributed evenly among all initiates. The Qarmatians were organized as an esoteric society but not as a secret one. Their activities were public and openly propagated, but new members had to undergo an initiation ceremony involving seven stages. From The Year of Dreaming Dangerously: The Qarmatians' goal was to build a society based on reason and equality. The state was governed by a council of six, with a chief who was first among equals. All property within the community was distributed evenly among all initiates. Although the Qarmatians were organized as an esoteric society, they were not a secret one: their activities were public and openly propagated.

The Year of Dreaming Dangerously is not cited anywhere in the article, much less after the passage itself (citation 8 points to a different source). 204.213.244.97 (talk) 19:39, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I have removed the paragraph in question. Also, Slavoj Zizek, is not a historian nor does he have any specialization for the time period in question, therefore he can not be considered a reliable source. Thanks bringing the plagiarism to our attention. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:23, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Collapse of the Qarmatians

In the "Collapse" section of the report it says "After defeat by the Abbasids in 976 the Qarmatians began to..."

It would be helpful if the report were more specific as to what "defeat" is being referenced. I have searched and been unable to find reference to any specific battle or event. As such, I find the explanation somewhat confusing.

Thanks, V Fairchild VFF0347 (talk) 19:11, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Qarmatians. 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/20070428055134/http://philtar.ucsm.ac.uk/encyclopedia/islam/shia/qarma.html to http://philtar.ucsm.ac.uk/encyclopedia/islam/shia/qarma.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:06, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

What the sources state

@Ali banu sistani:

• "ABŪ SAʿĪD JANNĀBĪ, ḤASAN B. BAHRĀM, founder of the Qarmaṭī state in Baḥrain (b. between 230/845, and 240/855, d. 300/913 or 301/913-14). A native of Jannābā on the coast of Fārs and of Persian origin..." -- Madelung, Wilferd (1983). "ABŪ SAʿĪD JANNĀBĪ". In Yarshater, Ehsan (ed.). Encyclopædia Iranica, Volume I/4: Abū Manṣūr Heravı̄–Adat

Where exactly does the article or reference state Iranian? --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:05, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Dayaram Gidumal writes that a Balochi legend is backed up by the medieval Qarmatians. The fact that the Karmatians were ethnic Baluchis is also confirmed by the Persian historian in the 16th century Muhammad Qasim Ferishta. ? Ali banu sistani (talk) 15:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

If only Ali banu sistani spent less time edit warring and attacking other users and more time on reading guidelines such as WP:RS and WP:SPS that would be great. This is more pseudo-history WP:OR nonsense. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:46, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Ali banu sistani, please refrain from commenting on other ?editors? "Luis Aragon", and refrain from using self-published sources(Lulu.com), and outdated unverifiable sources.

Also, please do not remove reliable sources and the information they cite since that is tendentious editing. Post your sources including quotes and page numbers here so they can be verified and checked to be WP:RS. Thank you.

References

Anachronism

I believe it is very anachronistic to call the Qarmatians "socialists" because the concept of socialism didn't exist back then and would be completely alien for 10th century Muslims. Calling them just utopian or even "Proto-socialists" would sound better. 2804:14D:7848:8CD9:7034:55AC:91C9:87FB (talk) 04:07, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

The earliest group which has been subject to comparisons of this type is Mazdakism, called "pre-modern communism" by its Wikipedia article. AnonMoos (talk) 00:31, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

I agree. Applying the term ‘socialist’ to them seems completely anachronistic. Not to mention the fact that the sources (the ones that are available that is) don’t seem to provide evidence of them being socialist. They were also a state that depended to a large extent on slavery which seems to to be a contradiction with what we consider to be socialism. Theworks84 (talk) 14:56, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I have to disagree on that point. Ussr, China, North Korea etc all used slavery. There's not really anything stopping socialists from creating any "class" of person they need 46.7.28.113 (talk) 01:33, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

A fair point but I would argue that what socialists states created in many cases was a modern form of serfdom, I.e the individual was bound to the state in such a way that curtailed their freedom, movement and life in general, but people still possessed limited rights. Slavery is the physical ownership of a human by another human which, at least in theory, socialism disagrees with. I think the main point though is that the term socialist is out of place as it did not exist as a concept in this time period Theworks84 (talk) 21:19, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Qaramtian invasions of Egypt separate pages

Qaramtian invasions of Egypt have been given separate pages. فضائل الصحابة (talk) 15:19, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Their dynasty

Should there be an article for the dynasty that ruled the state? Plausibly we can call it Abu-Sa'idis since the inhabitants called themselves as such.

For example: "Now, the Persian author Nasir ibn Khusraw, who visited 'Ahsa' in 1051, writes(3): "When one asks the people of that town, 'What religion are you?, they say, 'We are 'Abu Sa'idis· "; in other words, they identified themselves as followers of Abu Sa'id al-Jannabi, the founder of the "Qarmatian" state" The Abu Saidis or so-called Qarmatians of Bahrayn by François de Blois

And another one: "The Ḳarmaṭians of Baḥrayn called themselves Abū Saʿīdīs after him, and attributed to him the later constitution of their republic." al-D̲j̲annābī in Encyclopaedia of Islam by B. Carra de Vaux and M.G.S. Hodgson Amir Ghandi (talk) 09:58, 10 August 2024 (UTC)