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

Islam Mid‑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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. India Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary. The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.) Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary. Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there.

--CopyToWiktionaryBot 23:56, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The term Shahid is also used in punjabi language with reference to a martyrdom i.e. Shahid Bhagat Singh.

There appears to have been a section for the citations, but was removed? Further, 72.227.189.182 deleted a paragraph in re: the 1983 USMC barracks bombing in Lebanon. Perhaps there should be a list of examples including 1983 Beirut barracks bombing in the Modern Era section?Vedek Wren (talk) 21:29, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted that section, because I've never heard such things as public opinion. i'm a Muslim living in a Muslim country. 78.154.36.48 12:48, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"The suicide bombers are called "Shahids" and after their death attain the rank of a Martyr".

This article portrayed (?) that sentence in giving out the false idea that any suicide bomber is a shaheed. True, some people do regard them as shaheed, but in the context of Islam, they are not shaheed. That is clearly a biased statement, completely opinionated and false. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.30.183.66 (talk • contribs) 22:08, 9 October 2007

It is something debated by islamic scholars. --Doctorkc (talk) 07:55, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Both 'shahid' and 'martyr' as used in contemporary discussion includes acts of Islamic extremism up to and including suicide bombings.

Refusing to include this in the pages, or even suggesting the possibility, and censoring those who try, is bias, dhimmitude and intellectual dishonesty of the worst sort.

Wikipedia joins a long list of moral cowards who shamelessly grovel before the gods of political correctness and enable the whitewashing of Islamic extremism's clear and present danger.50.10.99.70 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:37, 29 April 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Currently working on making this page as academically straightforward as possible by creating a more comprehensive reference list and eliminating any bias from the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by ECallahan13 (talk • contribs) 16:44, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What about the first shahid? I heard it was a women named Sumejja.

I disagree with the phrase, "it is also used by Arab Christians to describe persons killed on duty or during wars. In this case, the term equals the term martyr."

The Christian concept of martyr does not include all heros. There is a difference. For example, Joan of Arc would not have been considered a martyr had she fallen in battle. She would have simply been a hero. It is only the fact that she was convicted of heresy and burned at the stake that makes her a martyr.

In other words, the Christian concept of a martyr is one who dies for their beliefs. It does not include those that are killed on duty or during wars.

72.177.66.122 17:59, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I quite agree, that's why I edited the text to reflect this difference between the Islamic and Christian concept of martyrs. I added some remarks on the so-called "success" of the Lebanon attack, because i think that to get the US more deeply involved in the ME and beyond is not exactly a success. At the time, I was not logged in, can i change that in 'history'? or somewhere else?

VNCCC (talk) 16:54, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see my work has been completely undone and any and all references to Christianity removed. Do we deal with each other in this way in Wikipedia? I have a talk page, you know. So please, before radical removals, send me a message. Now here's my message to Dchall, also to be found on on his talk page:

And why, pray tell me, is the following too much POV and the rest of the article is not?

"Their handiwork has given rise to an explosion of defense spending and many an actual war. Both factors contribute to the rise of the industrialized countries and the further disenfranchise of the third world. The occasional success of Lebanon has thus led to a structural polarization in what was supposed to become a global village after the fall of the Berlin Wall.

It is believed that once in the after life, the martyr receives one thousand virgins of his liking.The whole world now suffers under these misguided believers ( some of them children under the overpowering influence of older men: a form of pedophilia ) who actively seek death to declare their Faith, instead of encountering death as an unwilled side effect ("incidental cost") of their verbal declarations of their belief and refusals to recant.

This is the case of the Christian martyr. The Roman Catholic Church beatifies martyrs, but holds no beliefs as to how their live in the wold to come is, or will be. Other Christian denominations also hold such martyrs in high regard. Amongst the modern ones are those who opposed Nazism in Germany and occupied countries. However, all those who used violence in doing so are never considered martyrs. Christianity has always chosen life over death, as witness its stance against abortion and what is so wrongfully called 'euthanasia' nowadays.

Thus, the Muslem shaheed must never be confused with the Christian martyr."

If nobody in the near future slaps my wrists here, I will re-insert my edit (maybe leaving out the Oh-so-sensitive p-word), before starting an undo-war.

VNCCC (talk) 17:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've done some copyediting. It seems that the Christian concept of the martyr, while of course not the same as the shahid, is still parallel. This however is not the article to get down into the weeds with the differences between them. Also, I restored the Islam template and the "See also" section. // Chris ^{(complaints)•(contribs)} 03:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for the comment, Chris/Dchall. I still have to check your copyediting but I can in principle agree that the two concepts have parallels. However, it seems to me that the incidental death by the hands of others, as opposed to the sought-after death , even by one's own hand, separate the two concepts of martyr by a gulf so wide that the divergence has to be pointed out.

You may well be right that this is not the article to get into that matter all too deeply. But, once the parallel is drawn, the divergence must be noted as well. Could we agree on something like 'some similarities" (between the C. and M. type?

Also, I'd like to see more about the translation or derivation from the Greek. Most modern languages simply took over the Greek word from the Greek Bibles, thus 'martyr', 'martelaar' etc. by lack of a better term. How is that for Arabic?

If I undid a template, I'm sorry: Chalk it up to bad eyesight at the end of the working day.

-Checked the editing, looks good. I added Hiz'b'llah to the list of active operators but have no reference. Can someone fix that (if you agree that H. belongs in the list) ?

-The article now has" See also: Istishhad and Christian martyrs" at the top and a "SEE ALSO etc. ( list)" at the bottom; isn't it easier to go with only one?

Hope to hear from you again,

VNCCC (talk) 17:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to add that martyr comes from the greek martyr and it actually means witness... so the introduction is quite redundant —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.140.64.231 (talk) 13:12, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I found something wrong with the 'misconception' section. I came across a Sahih Bukhari Hadith which states the oppisite of the section.

Volume 2, Book 23, Number 434: Narrated Jabir:

When the time of the Battle of Uhud approached, my father called me at night and said: "I think that I will be the first amongst the companions of the Prophet to be martyred. I do not leave anyone after me dearer to me than you, except Allah's Apostle's soul and I owe some debt and you should repay it and treat your sisters favorably (nicely and politely)." So in the morning he was the first to be martyred and was buried along with another (martyr). I did not like to leave him with the other (martyr), so I took him out of the grave after six months of his burial and he was in the same condition as he was on the day of burial, except a slight change near his ear.

Could this please be added, so it is a factual section? Thank you.

(86.11.104.56 20:24, 17 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Another point: Could someone please substantiate the claim that most Muslims in the world view suicide bombing operations as murder? I've only seen statistics that show that the majority of Muslims in the USA disapprove of the tactic as unIslamic, while I've also seen polls from palestine, where a majority believe it is a justified Islamic tactic against Israel. I'm going to take that sentence out and just not have the article make generalizations about people's feelings without backing it up with data.

Isn't it commonly believed (or, at least it is a misconception that it is commonly believed) that martyrs get houri? (although the houri article says that all Muslims get houri, not just martyrs) Should this be mentioned in the article? --

131.215.166.209 23:52, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's Not just Martyrs.

78.154.36.48 12:55, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What does it all mean? Do only martyrs get houri, or do others as well? Please, give some reference(s), like tried above ('the houri article says'). And what is the answer to the question: 'Should this be mentioned in the article?' Here, too: please give reasons.

VNCCC (talk) 17:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

please give references from quran... thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.95.90.55 (talk) 12:00, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

is shahid a calque from the Greek, or is the identity of the literal meanings coincidental? 71.248.115.187 (talk) 18:37, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article is horribly incomplete and one-sided. It's perspective is very much from the viewpoint of Iranian (Shi'a) Islam and does not represent the whole Islamic world's views on martyrdom. The "Islam" section of the article, Martyr, gives much better information even though it is half the size of this article. Lastly, Wikipedia is meant to support articles from a scholarly, academic perspective. Simply quoting scripture or a cleric or the Ayatollah isn't sufficient for this article. It needs scholarly citations from both religious scholars (who may be associated with the mosque) and university scholars who are presumably not employed by the mosque (i.e. aren't religious figureheads). Otherwise, the article is in violation of POV rules. I'm tempted to place a POV tag on the top of the page, but there are already enough tags there. So to those who are invested in this article: just fix it. ask123 (talk) 01:36, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the content in this article seems to be about the single Arabic term shahid, so I have merged it here for now. Martyrdom in Islam, if recreated, needs to focus on more than a single term -- and needs to concisely explain the varied concepts of Shahid, Shahidka, Shaheeda, Shahada, Istishhad, Jihad, and relevant recitation of Takbir.   — C M B J   17:02, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've tagged the 'Modern era' section for multiple issues. I have no expertise concerning the content of the article, but this section clearly needs attention for stylistic reasons at least. AFAICT it was User:Jimherro who contributed most of the content in this edit, but this user has not made any other contributions and doesn't have an active talk page. Neurotip (talk) 22:44, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. I found that the entire History section was a copy of http://www.museumstuff.com/learn/topics/shaheed::sub::History which is a copyright web page. I have therefore deleted it. Anybody is welcome to rewrite the material here, but Wikipedia cannot include a WP:Copyright violation. - Fayenatic (talk) 23:29, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! Well spotted. I'll try and remember to check for copyvios next time. Neurotip (talk) 12:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'n not sure if there's any active editors here. Have anyone noticed that "shahid" and "shaaheed" are two diferent words (suing English and Arabic alphabets). The article needs alot of work, and it even contains the spelling of only one of the two in Arabic. I'll be working on this article soon, so I hope I'll get a comment before then :). ~ AdvertAdam ^talk 08:09, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

((help me))

I concur. The information in this article is fundamentally incorrect. Shaahid is witness; while Shaheed (pronounced "sh-heed")is martyr. Both are distinct and different words. I have no idea how to work on wikipedia, so I request somebody to correct this or put a fitting notice on the page. I cannot provide a citation as I cannot read the arabic script, since I was thought Urdu and basic Arabic in devanagari script. Thank you for your help in advance Regards. --118.95.90.55 (talk) 11:58, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need a help me on a talk page (they are for user talk pages), any editors left may have this page on their watchlist and might pop in. If not, I would suggest look at the page history, you can examine every version (click the date of a version) from it's conception to now (e.g here's the first real page - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shahid&oldid=45571228), you can also see which editors have edited and by viewing their edits decide if they might be useful to approach - in the history page, you can click the "contribs" link against an editor's name to see when they were last editing - no point placing a message on their talk page if they are long gone.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:27, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Md.Shahid samastipur saharsa — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.68.7.107 (talk) 13:44, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it looks like a move to "Shaheed" was attempted but did not reach consensus; however, within the article "shahid" and "shaheed" are used interchangeably. Personally I prefer "shaheed," as it's less ambiguous, but as long as the article remains here I'm going to change the spelling to "shahid" every time for the sake of consistency. etothei (talk) 16:14, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The page is a cfork (and also coatracking to boot). I don't care under which title or transliteration the article resides, but clearly we do not need a Shahid article and a Istishhad one any more than we need a martyrdom article on top of martyr. One is the term for the act, the other the term for the person doing the act, but the topic is one and the same. --dab (𒁳) 14:25, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Colgate University supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Fall term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from ((WAP assignment)) by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:07, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Shahid is not the same as shaheed. Shahid/Shahed, urdu, hindi, arabic and farsi, witness. Shaheed, arabic martyre. 144.46.112.8 (talk) 21:08, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]