![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page needs to be cleaned up to adhere to NPOV and a general statement needs to be added about the source or sources for biographical information on Hamza. Ibn Ishaq? Dejo 03:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Added {{tone}}{{POV}}{{sources}}: Islamic hagiography, no comprehensive historical approach, uncritical aggregation of quotes, lack of sober synthesis, no reliable sources per WP:SOURCES. This article is an embarrassment to WP, as are most articles on Islam, written by acolytes. -- tickle me 12:11, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
I think chavi has a point in arguing that no Wikipedia article should read like scripture in the sense that Wikipedia should express neutrality with respect to religion. However, I suspect that chavi and Tickle me do not realize the difficulty of describing Companions of Muhammad bin Abdullah in an objective way. The primary sources on these people were written, almost exclusively, by Muslim authors. I have studied this field for years and I have never seen a chronicle of these times written by a non-Muslim contemporary of people like Hamza.
Another issue is that many Muslims feel Wikipedia, in general, shows a lack of respect toward Islam. Some of this comes from the fact that Wikipedia displays pictures of Muhammad bin Abdullah on his page, despite a barrage of protests from the Muslim community. The upshot is that some Muslims are trying to compensate for that situation by making other pages on Islam conform with religious teachings. Muslims do not need to lie about or even be non-objective about Islamic history, yet they are doing so because of a complex mix of religion, politics, and emotion.
One aspect in which Wikipedia is succeeding is including Shia perspectives in many of its articles on Islam. This shows a respect for the diversity of Islam. It also shows that Wikipedia has knowledge about Islam that can educate Muslims too. Ibnsina786 ( talk) 16:39, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
As for this sentence, "Al-Aaswad ibn Abdalasad al-Makhzumi, who was a quarrelsome ill-natured man, stepped forth and said, ‘I swear to God that I will drink from their cistern or destroy it or die before reaching it." The description of al-Makhzumi as "a quarrelsome ill-natured man" is unnecessary. It's too subjective for Wikipedia. -- Ibnsina786 ( talk) 16:52, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
The historical facts that had been written here, which is that Hamza still acted like elite meccans is wrong because he was the son of AbdalMuttalib ibn Hashim. There was no conversion of Hamza into Islam as he already knew Muhammad as the seal of prophets —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.36.13.170 ( talk) 12:28, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I have done significant work on this article, but I think some issues still remain.
I agree with the complaints below and I hope the article is now not quite so "embarrassing" to Wikipedia. However, contributions from other editors would be highly desirable.Petra MacDonald 03:45, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
No mention of genocide, oppression, or other atrocities in Iran — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.93.254.111 ( talk) 03:25, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:BURDEN I had requested the Reliable source for this exceptional claim that this puppet belongs to Hamza ibn Abdul-Muttalib. But @ Edward321:'s unexplained reverts shows that We are having a case of WP:Like and WP:GAMING. SpyButeo ( talk) 05:38, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
@ Edward321: I have removed the puppet image due to mixup. Kinda hilarious to be frank lol because I used to see these puppets all the time. I'll just explain it here. There are two people (I am not sure if people or men is the right word btw, perhaps figures?) in Islam who are named Hamza. One of them is the person who is described in this article, a real person, who lived in the real world and whose existence, achievements etc etc are all well documented in literature both eastern and western. this person was a normal human being, he lived like a normal man and died like one. Even hagiographic accounts of this person are quite "tame". However there is another figure in muslim literature who is "based" on Hazrat Hamza R.A. This person is fictional, his accounts are like romances of the middle ages, with almost nothing to do with the Real man except maybe taking his name and his relation to the Holy Prophet SAW. Basically he is a character in stories like Allahdin, or Superman. This "Superman of muslims" has exploits which are mentioned in a very large book called the Hamzanameh. It is an Iranian book with copious amounts of imagery, very beautiful to read I can assure you. When this book was read by people outside Iran it led to various other "spin off tales". one of these is the Malay epic Hikayat Amir Hamzah, loosely based on the hamzanameh, but with Malaysian elements. This epic was sometimes performed in the official court of the Malaysian emperor, not for spreading Islam, but for entertainment, like going to the movies and watching Superman. So we can see that this puppet has nothing to do with this real world figure to be frank, we do not put Superman's picture in the article about judaism even though he is based on the exodus of Jews from Europe and how they came to the USA. I am sure that you can use google search to look up all of this information and AGF, but if you require sources I can provide you with many supporting this. I wrote this reply without using sources because it is common knowledge in eastern cultures. Regards FreeatlastChitchat ( talk) 07:29, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
There is both legitimate and false controversy over Hamza's date of birth.
Since scholarly sources argue for both 567 and 569, it is only fair to cite both. However, the argument for the younger age is very weak. There is nothing to say that Thuwayba could not have nursed another child between Hamza and Muhammad, or that she didn't give birth to another child of her own.
These arguments are original research until they are sourced to a scholar. However, anyone who understands obstetrics knows that a wedding does not necessarily lead to immediate pregnancy; and anyone who understands lactation knows that a mother of twins is able to nurse both of them. Petra MacDonald ( talk) 05:19, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 10:07, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page needs to be cleaned up to adhere to NPOV and a general statement needs to be added about the source or sources for biographical information on Hamza. Ibn Ishaq? Dejo 03:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Added {{tone}}{{POV}}{{sources}}: Islamic hagiography, no comprehensive historical approach, uncritical aggregation of quotes, lack of sober synthesis, no reliable sources per WP:SOURCES. This article is an embarrassment to WP, as are most articles on Islam, written by acolytes. -- tickle me 12:11, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
I think chavi has a point in arguing that no Wikipedia article should read like scripture in the sense that Wikipedia should express neutrality with respect to religion. However, I suspect that chavi and Tickle me do not realize the difficulty of describing Companions of Muhammad bin Abdullah in an objective way. The primary sources on these people were written, almost exclusively, by Muslim authors. I have studied this field for years and I have never seen a chronicle of these times written by a non-Muslim contemporary of people like Hamza.
Another issue is that many Muslims feel Wikipedia, in general, shows a lack of respect toward Islam. Some of this comes from the fact that Wikipedia displays pictures of Muhammad bin Abdullah on his page, despite a barrage of protests from the Muslim community. The upshot is that some Muslims are trying to compensate for that situation by making other pages on Islam conform with religious teachings. Muslims do not need to lie about or even be non-objective about Islamic history, yet they are doing so because of a complex mix of religion, politics, and emotion.
One aspect in which Wikipedia is succeeding is including Shia perspectives in many of its articles on Islam. This shows a respect for the diversity of Islam. It also shows that Wikipedia has knowledge about Islam that can educate Muslims too. Ibnsina786 ( talk) 16:39, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
As for this sentence, "Al-Aaswad ibn Abdalasad al-Makhzumi, who was a quarrelsome ill-natured man, stepped forth and said, ‘I swear to God that I will drink from their cistern or destroy it or die before reaching it." The description of al-Makhzumi as "a quarrelsome ill-natured man" is unnecessary. It's too subjective for Wikipedia. -- Ibnsina786 ( talk) 16:52, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
The historical facts that had been written here, which is that Hamza still acted like elite meccans is wrong because he was the son of AbdalMuttalib ibn Hashim. There was no conversion of Hamza into Islam as he already knew Muhammad as the seal of prophets —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.36.13.170 ( talk) 12:28, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I have done significant work on this article, but I think some issues still remain.
I agree with the complaints below and I hope the article is now not quite so "embarrassing" to Wikipedia. However, contributions from other editors would be highly desirable.Petra MacDonald 03:45, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
No mention of genocide, oppression, or other atrocities in Iran — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.93.254.111 ( talk) 03:25, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:BURDEN I had requested the Reliable source for this exceptional claim that this puppet belongs to Hamza ibn Abdul-Muttalib. But @ Edward321:'s unexplained reverts shows that We are having a case of WP:Like and WP:GAMING. SpyButeo ( talk) 05:38, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
@ Edward321: I have removed the puppet image due to mixup. Kinda hilarious to be frank lol because I used to see these puppets all the time. I'll just explain it here. There are two people (I am not sure if people or men is the right word btw, perhaps figures?) in Islam who are named Hamza. One of them is the person who is described in this article, a real person, who lived in the real world and whose existence, achievements etc etc are all well documented in literature both eastern and western. this person was a normal human being, he lived like a normal man and died like one. Even hagiographic accounts of this person are quite "tame". However there is another figure in muslim literature who is "based" on Hazrat Hamza R.A. This person is fictional, his accounts are like romances of the middle ages, with almost nothing to do with the Real man except maybe taking his name and his relation to the Holy Prophet SAW. Basically he is a character in stories like Allahdin, or Superman. This "Superman of muslims" has exploits which are mentioned in a very large book called the Hamzanameh. It is an Iranian book with copious amounts of imagery, very beautiful to read I can assure you. When this book was read by people outside Iran it led to various other "spin off tales". one of these is the Malay epic Hikayat Amir Hamzah, loosely based on the hamzanameh, but with Malaysian elements. This epic was sometimes performed in the official court of the Malaysian emperor, not for spreading Islam, but for entertainment, like going to the movies and watching Superman. So we can see that this puppet has nothing to do with this real world figure to be frank, we do not put Superman's picture in the article about judaism even though he is based on the exodus of Jews from Europe and how they came to the USA. I am sure that you can use google search to look up all of this information and AGF, but if you require sources I can provide you with many supporting this. I wrote this reply without using sources because it is common knowledge in eastern cultures. Regards FreeatlastChitchat ( talk) 07:29, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
There is both legitimate and false controversy over Hamza's date of birth.
Since scholarly sources argue for both 567 and 569, it is only fair to cite both. However, the argument for the younger age is very weak. There is nothing to say that Thuwayba could not have nursed another child between Hamza and Muhammad, or that she didn't give birth to another child of her own.
These arguments are original research until they are sourced to a scholar. However, anyone who understands obstetrics knows that a wedding does not necessarily lead to immediate pregnancy; and anyone who understands lactation knows that a mother of twins is able to nurse both of them. Petra MacDonald ( talk) 05:19, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 10:07, 15 May 2019 (UTC)