Doug Weller (talk | contribs) →To Doug Weller: Reply Tag: Reply |
|||
Line 181: | Line 181: | ||
:{{Ping|Doug Weller}} Pinging for user. ― [[User:Blaze Wolf|<b style="background:#0d1125;color:#51aeff;padding:1q;border-radius:5q;">Blaze Wolf</b>]][[User talk:Blaze Wolf|<sup>Talk</sup>]]<sub title="Discord Username" style="margin-left:-22q;">Blaze Wolf#6545</sub> 19:31, 1 September 2022 (UTC) |
:{{Ping|Doug Weller}} Pinging for user. ― [[User:Blaze Wolf|<b style="background:#0d1125;color:#51aeff;padding:1q;border-radius:5q;">Blaze Wolf</b>]][[User talk:Blaze Wolf|<sup>Talk</sup>]]<sub title="Discord Username" style="margin-left:-22q;">Blaze Wolf#6545</sub> 19:31, 1 September 2022 (UTC) |
||
::Because I was only looking at Androvie’s sources. I’m off to bed now. I’ll try to look tomorrow. [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 20:02, 1 September 2022 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:02, 1 September 2022
Error: The code letter muh-im
for the topic area in this contentious topics talk notice is not recognised or declared. Please check the documentation.
Template:Vital article
This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Aisha's age
If we assume that the story of Muhammad's marriage to Aisha at the age of 9 is correct, there must be at least one text from which it can be understood that she was a child, such as: "My hand does not reach ..." Or "she's young" or "I want my mom" but there's nothing like that. 212.237.118.150 (talk) 03:14, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Facts
She was not part and parcel of Ahlul Bait 197.237.238.164 (talk) 16:59, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Ahl al-Bayt is our article about this. If there's sectarian disagreement about this, I think un-labeled use in the infobox is suboptimal. I'd prefer to clarify that her inclusion is a common Sunni belief or cut it entirely (as the infobox is mostly for uncontested, basic facts). Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:55, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Rejection of LivingIslam as a source
Dear @Doug Weller
Can you explain why LivingIslam is not reliable?
It's an article by Gibril Haddad, a reputable Islamic scholar, refuting the arguments made by the ones claiming that Aisha was not 9 year-old when consummated.
He stated that nowhere did Tabari report that "Abu Bakr's four children (including Aisha in that context) were all born in Jahiliyya (before the dawning of Islam)".
If you can point out where Tabari reported that, what book of his, what volume, what page; then please do.
If you can't then please don't revert my edit, because that would be vandalism.
Also, even if LivingIslam is not acceptable as a source, why did you reject all my edits which included the addition of sources from Sunnah.com, the actual Tabari's book, Ibn Hisham's biography of Muhammad (in arabic), etc.?
Are those also considered unreliable as sources to you?
Androvie (talk) 02:30, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Androvie First how do you justify changing "Some hadiths" to "Traditional hadiths" ?
- Then you change "differ" to "fairly consistent'.without changing the source (which doesn't use the word "traditional" by the way.
- I'm not sure that sunnah.com actually backs the bit about her recollection, but The History of Al-Tabari Vol. 9 does.
- LivingIslam itself isn't an rs, eg [https://www.livingislam.org/english.php] would be useless. Who is the author of [https://www.livingislam.org/ir/d/aam2_e.pdf]? Doug Weller talk 11:13, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for your reply.
- The author of that LivingIslam article is Shaykh Gibril F. Haddad. It's written multiple times there:
- https://www.livingislam.org/ir/d/aam2_e.pdf
- Please read first before claiming something is not reputable. He was listed amongst the inaugural "500 most influential Muslims in the world,"
- Sunnah.com is a very well-known website for finding hadiths including from Sahih al-Bukhari. And the sentence of this wiki that talks about Aisha's recollection mentioned "as transmitted in Sahih al-Bukhari", it was already there before I edited it. Then why does it have to be Tabari's report that must be used as a source there?
- About "differ" one that I changed to "fairly consistent", I've read the book, there is not a single sentence there saying that, "Islamic sources of the classical era differ among themselves about her precise age at the time of marriage and consummation"
- Best regards, Androvie (talk) 12:57, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Then why does it have to be Tabari's report that must be used as a source there?
Because something published by the State University of New York (SUNY) Press has a lot more credibility than the website.-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:31, 27 August 2022 (UTC)- Don't you know that Sahih al-Bukhari wasn't written by Tabari?
- This is the sentence before I edited it looked like.
- Aisha herself recollected to have been married at seven years of age — as transmitted in Sahih al-Bukhari Androvie (talk) 15:00p, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- It is worth adding that just because someone is influential does not mean that they are well informed (for example David Cameron made laughably ill-informed statements about World War II).-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:33, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- I said the website is not an RS in itself, it depends on what you want to use. I never used the word "reputable." Sorry I asked again about the author. If you want to use him you should attribute it to him. I see we now have "both the date and her age are subject to controversy and discussion among scholars;" in the lead and in the Age at time of marriage section you put "Islamic sources of the classical era are fairly consistent among themselves about Aisha's precise age at the time of her marriage and consummation" I don't care what Tabari didn't say. But Spellberg does seem to back that so ok, he seems to suggest that among the early writers it was just Ibn Sa'd who questioned the dates, but that really needs more research. And yes, influential does not mean they are a reliable source. I hope you see that. Doug Weller talk 13:55, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- Well, the author, Gibril Haddad himself used the website to host his arguments.
- The problem here is that this wiki article about Aisha stated (before I edited it) that Tabari reported that Aisha was born before the Dawning of Islam.
- Where Gibril Haddad holds that nowhere did Tabari report that.
- So if you can point out where Tabari reported that then please provide us with in what book, what volume and what page Tabari reported that. Androvie (talk) 15:11, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has a policy of verifiability. (See Wikipedia:Verifiability.) This means that statements in the article are meant to be backed by citations to reliable sources. So what statements in the article are you challenging? Do you dispute that those statements backed up by reliable sources? Have you read the sources cited?
- As regards Gibril Haddad - not our problem.-- Toddy1 (talk) 18:30, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry for butting in but I saw the changes and looked into this. It is a complicated web of citations so it’s difficult to find.
- This ("born before the dawning of Islam") is cited to Ali, who in turn cites:
- Spellberg, Politics, Gender, and the Islamic Past, 197–198, n. 4. which says:
- Aisha was born four or fives years after Muhammad's prophetic mission began, according to Ibn Sa'd Tabaqat 8:79. However, a slightly later chronicle suggests that Aisha was born in the jahiliyya, the period before the revelation of Islam to Muhammad.
- This directs readers to: "see al-Tabari, Ta'rikh, 4:2135 and its contradiction within the same chronicle, Ta'rikh, 4:1262"
- This is actually volume 11 in the English translation, about page 141.
- "All of these four of his children were born in al-Jahiliyyah from his two wives whom we have named" (The other reference Spellberg mentioned is from vol 7 of the English version, page 7, quoting Aisha: "the Messenger of God married me when I was seven")
- In the Haddad link above it states that Abu Bakr only married his wives at that time and nowhere did Tabari say that his children were born then. Looking at the Arabic original, I can see why this is his impression, as it can also be translated as "All of these four of his children were born from his two above-named wives, who we named/listed during al-Jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic period)", meaning these wives who were listed above as marrying him during that period (versus his later wives, who are mentioned directly after that). The modifier is unclear due to the insertion of the phrase "whom we have named" in the middle of the sentence. However, as far as I know there is only one translation of Tabari’s work into English so the first one is the one that all English scholars have been working off of. Gibril Haddad is a native Arabic speaker and so he probably read it in Arabic rather than the English translation.
- I have included the Arabic original here in case people are curious. https://ia802207.us.archive.org/9/items/WAQ17280/trm03.pdf
- Here I will write out what it says if it may be of use: فكل هؤلاء الأربعة من أولاده ، ولدوا من زوجتيه اللتين سميناهما في الجاهلية
- It’s on pg 426 of the pdf.
- I hope that is helpful.
- Dragoon17 (talk) 21:19, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you so much.
- Then it's true what Gibril Haddad said, which means there are no contradicting reports among early Islamic sources that Aisha was married when she was 6-7 and consummated when she was 9-10. Androvie (talk) 23:59, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- If you continue with challenging the reliability of Spellberg et al, based on your interpretation of primary sources, I will ask that your ability to edit this page be revoked. If you think Spellberg mis-cited his sources etc., go publish a rebuttal in a peer-reviewed venue and we will see. TrangaBellam (talk) 05:33, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- I do not see what the fuss is all about and Dragoon17, your variant translation is ridiculous. Blankinship is a scholar of repute and his own footnote goes,
TrangaBellam (talk) 05:51, 28 August 2022 (UTC)This statement appears to contradict the alleged age of Aishah of nine years at the time of the consummation of her marriage to the Prophet in Shawwal I (April-May 623), for which see al-Baladhuri, Ansab, I, 409-11; Ibn Hajar, Isabah, IV, 359-60. Even if she was born at the end of the Jahiliyyah period, in 609 C.E., she would have been at least thirteen solar years old by the year I/622-23.
- Lol, I put the original arabic text into Bing Translator and this is what came out. "All of these four of his children, born of his two wives, whom we named in ignorance."
- Seems to match what Gibril Haddad and Dragoon17 said.
- Thus, the reports of Aisha's age at marriage in the books of Tabari are not contradictory at all. :) - Androvie (talk) 06:07, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks but Wikipedia accepts peer reviewed scholarship. Not Bing Translate or blogs by Islamic muhaddiths. Esp. when they go against scholars like Khalid Yahya Blankinship, Kecia Ali, and Denise Spellberg. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:19, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- So, western scholars can be quoted regarding the history of Islamic figures, but Islamic scholars (ulama) can't? lol. How funny. Androvie (talk) 06:26, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, that is how we operate. For example, such a stance appears to have prodded the launch of WikiIslam etc. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:33, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Lol, red herring fallacy, what does this have to do with wikiislam?. It's Islamic Scholars (ulama) saying about an Islamic figure, and you reject that because some western scholars draw conclusions from a mistranslation of Islamic book. Lol. And who are you to claim that's how Wikipedia operate, you're just playing admin all along after all. lol. I'll skip this man for now and wait if there's any admins or reasonable person who can moderate the issue. Androvie (talk) 06:46, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Androvie I’m an Admin but we normally have no authority over content unless there are policy violations. Doug Weller talk 09:47, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. Btw, may I ask? In case there is a mistranslation of part of the content of a non-English book that causes contradictions within it and disapproval from some scholars, shouldn't we attribute the problematic part to the translator or/and the authors of the secondary sources who cite the translation, and provide the other view as well, so that readers can evaluate? Androvie (talk) 15:56, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Androvie I’m an Admin but we normally have no authority over content unless there are policy violations. Doug Weller talk 09:47, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Lol, red herring fallacy, what does this have to do with wikiislam?. It's Islamic Scholars (ulama) saying about an Islamic figure, and you reject that because some western scholars draw conclusions from a mistranslation of Islamic book. Lol. And who are you to claim that's how Wikipedia operate, you're just playing admin all along after all. lol. I'll skip this man for now and wait if there's any admins or reasonable person who can moderate the issue. Androvie (talk) 06:46, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, that is how we operate. For example, such a stance appears to have prodded the launch of WikiIslam etc. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:33, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- So, western scholars can be quoted regarding the history of Islamic figures, but Islamic scholars (ulama) can't? lol. How funny. Androvie (talk) 06:26, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks but Wikipedia accepts peer reviewed scholarship. Not Bing Translate or blogs by Islamic muhaddiths. Esp. when they go against scholars like Khalid Yahya Blankinship, Kecia Ali, and Denise Spellberg. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:19, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- ...Arabic is my native language. It is an unclear modifier. I was answering a question about sources and Mr. Haddad's paper, I am not trying to cast doubt on Mr. Blankenship or say that he is wrong. Simply that the two individuals interpreted a vague sentence differently.
- As an aside, I take issue with your characterization of Mr. Haddad. He is published in several peer-reviewed journals and has non-self-published books, in Arabic and English (usually as GF Haddad). He is referenced and cited by other authors. You may look at this on Google Scholar/Books. As for whether or not this LivingIslam site is useful for wiki purposes I do not know as I have never looked at it, but I do not think it is fair or reasonable to characterize him as an "ultraconservative" (he is not) with no relevant expertise.
- Anyway, I can see the direction this is headed in so I will refrain from commenting any further. Peace. Dragoon17 (talk) 21:44, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
It is an unclear modifier.
>>> Responding soon.He is published in several peer-reviewed journals
>>> Like being the resident-author for "Islamic Sciences"?cited by other authors
>>> Example of some prominent scholars citing him approvingly? TrangaBellam (talk) 17:28, 29 August 2022 (UTC)- Hello, as I said, I am uninterested in continuing a discussion with you as I do not think it would be productive. You may search his name on the sites I indicated if you would like to learn more about him. Feel free also to consult with other Arabic speakers if you doubt my words. Peace. Dragoon17 (talk) 20:56, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Androvie: OK, this was driving me crazy because I know that I'd seen it somewhere before. In fact I'm almost positive it was on the Arabic wiki page for Aisha at some point. So I've finally tracked it down. The pdf you linked on LivingIslam is just an archive of an old page that was from another site. The original page was on a site called SunniPath. (I found the original on wikiquote, of all places: here on archive.org)
- So, SunniPath is like a 15 year old site that no longer exists which is why that other site probably archived it. It morphed into Qibla then SeekersHub and then SeekersGuidance (current name). Faraz Rabbani is the founder of those projects. Basically people submit questions to Islamic experts on history, fiqh etc and have them answered which is why the PDF looks like a Q&A... since it is. They also have online free courses on various Islamic matters.
- Now that does not solve the reliability problem and again I am not the person to ask about this. I searched for opinions on Google Books and Scholar. Here are links to various iterations of the site SeekersHub SunniPath SeekersGuidance To me it seems fairly reliable but again, I am not an expert. Probably it depends upon the specific person answering the questions? Hopefully that puts things on the right path to resolution at least.
- (Last edit, sorry! I may have found a compromise?: [this article] in a peer-reviewed journal, albeit not in English, summarizes Haddad's statements. Perhaps this will suffice? Dragoon17 (talk) 00:45, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for taking the trouble to compile all this. Also, for the journal you brought up in your last edit, I happen to be a native Indonesian speaker so I guess reading it will be a breeze.
- I'll be reading the journal first, but if you want, feel free to edit this wiki article. :) Androvie (talk) 04:22, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, I'm done making a rough edit. If there's anything you want to improve, please feel free to do so. :) Androvie (talk) 13:17, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
Influx of sources
- Some booklet published by "Islamic Presentation Center International" and authored by the head of religious education at a Hull secondary school.
- An opinion-article by "A. Faizur Rahman", described as a Chennai-based peace activist.
- An internet forum that offers answers to questions about Islam premising upon a Salafist ideology.
- Gibril Haddad, an archconservative muhaddith with no relevant academic training.
Needless to say that none of the above sources are reliable enough to be used in any form. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:13, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Lol, What is your basis for claiming that?
- Gibril Haddad is a native Arabic speaking Islamic scholar who holds ijazas from over 150 scholars across the Muslim world.[1][2][3]. He was featured in the inaugural list of The 500 Most Influential Muslims and has been called "one of the clearest voices of traditional Islam in the Western world",[4] a "prominent orthodox Sunni"[5] and a "staunch defender of the traditional Islamic schools of law."[6]
- And you claim that he has no relevant academic training? Lol. Androvie (talk) 06:23, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for quoting from our lead but how does being a
prominent orthodox Sunni
or astaunch defender of the traditional Islamic schools of law
orone of the clearest voices of traditional Islam in the Western world
render him a scholar at par with Ali, Spellberg, Blankinship et al? In the realms of Wikipedia, "academic training" has a very narrow meaning. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:29, 28 August 2022 (UTC)- Who are you to claim Gibril Haddad is not at par with Ali, Spellberg, Blankinship et al, lol. Androvie (talk) 06:31, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- WP:SOURCETYPES:
TrangaBellam (talk) 06:38, 28 August 2022 (UTC)When available, academic and peer-reviewed publications, scholarly monographs, and textbooks are usually the most reliable sources [..] Material such as an article, book, monograph, or research paper that has been vetted by the scholarly community is regarded as reliable, where the material has been published in reputable peer-reviewed sources or by well-regarded academic presses.
- Oh really? then do the books of Tabari meet the above criteria or not? Androvie (talk) 06:50, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- They do not which is why I had not cited Tabari directly. TrangaBellam (talk) 08:45, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Oh really? then do the books of Tabari meet the above criteria or not? Androvie (talk) 06:50, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- WP:SOURCETYPES:
- Who are you to claim Gibril Haddad is not at par with Ali, Spellberg, Blankinship et al, lol. Androvie (talk) 06:31, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for quoting from our lead but how does being a
Androvie's version | Banlhge453's version 1 & 2 | Banlhge453's version 3 | Banlhge453's version with sources acceptable to Iskandar323 |
---|---|---|---|
While a number of Muslim cast doubt on the reports of Aisha's early age of marriage by suggesting that she was up to 19 years old at the time, by cherry-picking their sources;[7][8][9] Some Muslim legal scholars (ulama) such as Muhammad al-Munajid in his website, IslamQA.info, and Gibril Haddad provide detailed rebuttals to their points by further emphasizing that reports of Aisha's age of 6-7 years at marriage and 9 years at consummation were mass-transmitted (mutawatir) via multiple authoritative chains of narration (isnad).[10][11] | Modern Muslim authors who calculate Aisha's age based on other sources of information, such as a hadith about the age difference between Aisha and her sister Asma, estimate that she was over thirteen and perhaps in her late teens at the time of her marriage.[12][13][14][15][16] | Modern Muslim authors who calculate Aisha's age based on other sources of information, such as a hadith about the age difference between Aisha and her sister Asma, estimate that she was over thirteen and perhaps in her late teens at the time of her marriage.[17] | Modern Muslim authors who calculate Aisha's age based on other sources of information, such as a hadith about the age difference between Aisha and her sister Asma, estimate that she was over thirteen and perhaps in her late teens at the time of her marriage.[18][19] |
Commment: Ah. I should apologize. I didn't actually have a problem with Banlhge453's initial addition, and had only meant to undo the second, based purely on it being sourced solely to Islam Q&A (as in the edit summary). Rolling back both was totally accidental, and I didn't realize I'd done it. Again, apologies to all. I'm perfectly happy with Barlas as a source. The Brown one is fine too. I am not fine with several aspects of Androvie's version, not least accusing any parties of cherrypicking: as we all know, all sources have bias, but this is a bit off. And then again, Islam Q&A is not a reliable source. Muhammad al-Munajid is a polemicist, but not a particularly qualified scholar. So, he only really ever reflects a highly conservative viewpoint, and not with much authority. Gibril Haddad is a much more qualified scholar, but whatever that rather strange Q&A pdf is, it falls quite a way short of our typical expectations in terms of reliable sourcing. Overall there's little to be recommended from Androvie's version, while Banlhge453's version is fine supported by Barlas and Brown. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:46, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- It's good to finally have reliable sources standing up the modern estimates - they've been flying around for a while unsourced. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:09, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Ah ha, hadn't realised it had come from Muhammad, squirrelled away under Household - that explains why it checks out. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:12, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think it's right to only promote one view, when there is an opposing view. Besides, an administrator has already said that it is okay to quote from Gibril Haddad as long as his words are attributed to him. Androvie (talk) 16:37, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- An administrator's view is not implicitly more valuable than that of another editor's, so you can dispense with that argument from authority right there, but more importantly, yes, we could quote Gibril Haddad as published in a reliable source. A pdf from livingislam.org is not that source. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:58, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- That's your opinion, at the end of the day, it's still his writing, and the admin ok'ed the using of that source, also why did you write only the claim that estimates she was not 6-7 yo when was married from your source,[20] but left out this part:
More conservative Muslim scholars objected to this rereading of the Prophet's life. They sensed the epistemological turnover behind 'Aqqad's defense of Islam. Not only did it upturn the hierarchy of authority within the Sunni scriptural canon by ignoring a clear text contained in Bukhari's august Sahih, it also broke with the Shariah consensus of marriage age. No member of Egypt's religious establishment showed more displeasure with 'Aqqad than Ahmad Shakir. In the spring of 1944 he penned a number of popular journal articles excrocriating the famous wordsmith's book on the Prophet's most active wife.
Androvie (talk) 20:10, 30 August 2022 (UTC)At the heart of Shakir's criticism was the question of the prophet locus of truth in Muslim life. He states and restates that Aisha's recollection of her own marriage is the lynchpin of historical and scriptural truth on this issue. Her report was categorically authenticated by the great Hadith critics of the classical era and sealed by the consensus of the medieval jurist. 'Aqqad's insinuation that she exaggerated her youth was thus tantamount to calling the Prophet's wife a liar. Against Aisha's own authenticated testimony, moreover, 'Aqqad brought nothing more than a flimsily cobbled-together argument, which Shakir contends rested on flawed premises. For example, there was no 'normal' engagement age for Arabs of the era.
- No, if it's not presented in the form of reliable publishing, we actually know very little about the veracity of a text, how it was produced, if it is accurately transcribed, if Gibril Haddad gave permission for it to be disseminated, or if it coherently reflects his scholarly viewpoint. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:31, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Why are you avoiding answering the issue of why you left out an important part of your source that I quoted above?
- btw I copied this sentence from verifiability
Androvie (talk) 20:50, 30 August 2022 (UTC)Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications.
- And as I have mentioned above, we have no real evidence that the pdf in question was self-published. We in fact know nothing about that document's origins, or by whom it was produced. Even the self-published nature of the source is an assumption with this. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:03, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
- I added no sources, but if you would like to make further suggestions from Barlas or Brown, feel free to. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:06, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
- No, if it's not presented in the form of reliable publishing, we actually know very little about the veracity of a text, how it was produced, if it is accurately transcribed, if Gibril Haddad gave permission for it to be disseminated, or if it coherently reflects his scholarly viewpoint. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:31, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- An administrator's view is not implicitly more valuable than that of another editor's, so you can dispense with that argument from authority right there, but more importantly, yes, we could quote Gibril Haddad as published in a reliable source. A pdf from livingislam.org is not that source. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:58, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think it's right to only promote one view, when there is an opposing view. Besides, an administrator has already said that it is okay to quote from Gibril Haddad as long as his words are attributed to him. Androvie (talk) 16:37, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Ah ha, hadn't realised it had come from Muhammad, squirrelled away under Household - that explains why it checks out. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:12, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
References
- ^ "Shaykh Dr. Gibril Fouad Haddad - Biography". SeekersHub.org. Archived from the original on 2 December 2015. Retrieved 9 December 2015.
- ^ "Shaykh Dr Gibril Haddad". SimpyIslam.com. Archived from the original on 15 November 2015. Retrieved 9 December 2015.
- ^ "Integrated Encyclopedia of the Qurʾān". iequran.com. Archived from the original on 20 December 2015. Retrieved 25 December 2015.
- ^ "The 500 Most Influential Muslims in the World" (PDF). Jordan: The Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre. 2009. p. 96. Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 February 2017. Retrieved 9 December 2015.
- ^ Press, Oxford University (2010-05-01). Salafism: Oxford Bibliographies Online Research Guide. Oxford University Press, USA. p. 14. ISBN 9780199804191. Archived from the original on 2017-04-23. Retrieved 2017-04-22.
- ^ Brown, Jonathan (2007-06-05). The Canonization of Al-Bukh?r? and Muslim: The Formation and Function of the Sunn? ?ad?th Canon. BRILL. p. 327. ISBN 978-9004158399. Archived from the original on 2017-07-31. Retrieved 2017-07-14.
- ^ "The truth about Muhammad and Aisha | Myriam François-Cerrah". the Guardian. 17 September 2012. Retrieved 1 August 2022.
- ^ "Hazrat Aisha was 19, not 9". Hindustan Times. 9 May 2009. Retrieved 1 August 2022.
- ^ Smirna Si. Aishah - A study of her age at the time of her marriage with Prophet Muhammad.
- ^ "How Old Was 'Aishah When She Married the Prophet ? - Islam Question & Answer". islamqa.info. Archived from the original on July 19, 2022. Retrieved 2022-08-28.
- ^ Haddad, Gibril Fouad (2004). ‘Ā’isha’s Age at the Time of Her Marriage (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on June 9, 2022.
- ^ Barlas, Asma (2012). "Believing Women" in Islam: Unreading Patriarchal Interpretations of the Qur'an. University of Texas Press. p. 126.
On the other hand, however, Muslims who calculate 'Ayesha's age based on details of her sister Asma's age, about whom more is known, as well as on details of the Hijra (the Prophet's migration from Mecca to Madina), maintain that she was over thirteen and perhaps between seventeen and nineteen when she got married. Such views cohere with those Ahadith that claim that at her marriage Ayesha had "good knowledge of Ancient Arabic poetry and genealogy" and "pronounced the fundamental rules of Arabic Islamic ethics.
- ^ "The Concept of Polygamy and the Prophet's Marriages (Chapter: Other Wives)". Al-Islam.org. Archived from the original on 15 March 2022. Retrieved 2022-08-29.
- ^ Ali, Maulana Muhammad (2015-04-16). Muhammad the Prophet. Ahmadiyya Anjuman Ishaat Islam Lahore USA. p. 150. ISBN 978-1-934271-15-5.
- ^ Qazvini, Ayatollah. "Aisha married the Prophet when she was young? (In Persian and Arabic)". Archived from the original on 8 August 2022. Retrieved 2022-08-29.
- ^ Brown, Jonathan (Jonathan A. C. ) (2014). Misquoting Muhammad : the challenge and choices of interpreting the Prophet's legacy. Internet Archive. London : Oneworld. pp. 146–47. ISBN 978-1-78074-420-9.
- ^ Barlas, Asma (2012). "Believing Women" in Islam: Unreading Patriarchal Interpretations of the Qur'an. University of Texas Press. p. 126. On the other hand, however, Muslims who calculate 'Ayesha's age based on details of her sister Asma's age, about whom more is known, as well as on details of the Hijra (the Prophet's migration from Mecca to Madina), maintain that she was over thirteen and perhaps between seventeen and nineteen when she got married. Such views cohere with those Ahadith that claim that at her marriage Ayesha had "good knowledge of Ancient Arabic poetry and genealogy" and "pronounced the fundamental rules of Arabic Islamic ethics.
- ^ Barlas, Asma (2012). "Believing Women" in Islam: Unreading Patriarchal Interpretations of the Qur'an. University of Texas Press. p. 126.
On the other hand, however, Muslims who calculate 'Ayesha's age based on details of her sister Asma's age, about whom more is known, as well as on details of the Hijra (the Prophet's migration from Mecca to Madina), maintain that she was over thirteen and perhaps between seventeen and nineteen when she got married. Such views cohere with those Ahadith that claim that at her marriage Ayesha had "good knowledge of Ancient Arabic poetry and genealogy" and "pronounced the fundamental rules of Arabic Islamic ethics.
- ^ Brown, Jonathan (Jonathan A. C. ) (2014). Misquoting Muhammad : the challenge and choices of interpreting the Prophet's legacy. Internet Archive. London : Oneworld. pp. 146–47. ISBN 978-1-78074-420-9.
- ^ Brown, Jonathan (Jonathan A. C. ) (2014). Misquoting Muhammad : the challenge and choices of interpreting the Prophet's legacy. Internet Archive. London : Oneworld. pp. 146–47. ISBN 978-1-78074-420-9.
To Doug Weller
Dear @Doug Weller, please explain why did you revert my latest edit on the grounds that you aren't convinced the sources are reliable, while you allow one part of Banlhge453's edit regarding Kecia Ali which is not clear on what page the information is located. The citation indicates that the pages are 133 and 155-199. On the page 133, I don't find anything like that. But the pages 155-199? that's so broad, I need him to pinpoint on what page specifically Kecia said that. Androvie (talk) 19:29, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Doug Weller: Pinging for user. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 19:31, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- Because I was only looking at Androvie’s sources. I’m off to bed now. I’ll try to look tomorrow. Doug Weller talk 20:02, 1 September 2022 (UTC)