This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Maimonides article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 730 days |
This
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
An editor created a section called "Views" with the only subsection "Circumcision". This is the content, moved here for comments:
As regards circumcision, I think that one of its objects is to limit sexual intercourse, and to weaken the organ of generation as far as possible, and thus cause man to be moderate. Some people believe that circumcision is to remove a defect in man's formation; but every one can easily reply: How can products of nature be deficient so as to require external completion, especially as the use of the fore-skin to that organ is evident. This commandment has not been enjoined as a complement to a deficient physical creation, but as a means for perfecting man's moral shortcomings. The bodily injury caused to that organ is exactly that which is desired; it does not interrupt any vital function, nor does it destroy the power of generation. Circumcision simply counteracts excessive lust; for there is no doubt that circumcision weakens the power of sexual excitement, and sometimes lessens the natural enjoyment: the organ necessarily becomes weak when it loses blood and is deprived of its covering from the beginning. Our Sages (Beresh. Rabba, c. 80) say distinctly: It is hard for a woman, with whom an uncircumcised had sexual intercourse, to separate from him. This is, as I believe, the best reason for the commandment concerning circumcision. [2]
Maimonides had many views on many things, and we can't use this article to enumerate every single opinion. His opinion on the reason for circumcision sounds old-fashioned to modern ears, but I actually doubt that he was alone in holding of this view. I've therefore moved it here for now. JFW | T@lk 19:43, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: Check date values in: |archive-date=
(
help)
per these sources: https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Repentance.8.6?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en. https://www.nysun.com/arts/there-was-none-like-him/21221/.
Previous changes to article should be made.
The sentence "On his tomb is inscribed "From Moses to Moses there was none like Moses"." can easily be verified by googling pictures from his grave. It is also mentioned here: https://he.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1187235. Debresser ( talk) 22:31, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
This section is not informative and it's missing sources. I removed it and copied the contents below for discussion: It was always known that some plants or substances kill. Citing that from Maimonides adds nothing particular about his contribution to the knowledge of poisons and death.
In a separate work recently when? translated from Arabic, Maimonides warns against lethal drugs which he calls poisons. According to this work these poisons will cause the most severe apathies, and the decay of the human being's vigor right up to death. [1] Nahum Neharkaspi ( talk) 18:29, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
References
Musa ben maimon historical name is musa not moshe as stated by the attached source and all historical sources, His full historical name is Abū ʿImran Mūsā ibn Maymūn ibn ʿUbayd Allāh
Ikhnatoun (
talk)
12:55, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Another fact about maimonides
“Arabic was the native language of Maimonides”
Eastern Wisedome and Learning: The Study of Arabic in Seventeenth-Century England
By G. J. Toomer, Professor Emeritus of the History of Mathematics Brown University Associate in the History of Science Department G J Toomer
Published by Oxford university press
Ikhnatoun (
talk)
03:01, 25 December 2022 (UTC) <---
blocked
sock of
User:Amr.elmowaled
::“while Moshe/Moses gets 150k.”
The Encyclopedia of Jews in the Islamic World from Brill uses “Moses ben Maimon.” This is fine for English. Let’s just use this and avoid WP:OR إيان ( talk) 23:41, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
* agree. Moses ben maimon
User:Ikhnatoun <---
blocked
sock of
User:Amr.elmowaled
Maimonides' Arabic name is أَبُو عَمْرَان مُوسَى بْن مَيْمُون بْن عُبَيْد ٱللّٰه ٱلْقُرْطُبِيّ, Abū ʿImrān Mūsā bin Maimūn bin ʿUbaidallāh al-Qurṭabī.
The debate unfolded in the form of back-and-forth edits between GordonGlottal and me. I posited that his name should be translated "'Father of Amram', Moses son of Maimon son of Obadiah, the Cordoban". GordonGlottal posited that it should be translated "Moses 'son of Amram' son of Maimon of the Obadians, the Cordoban".
The dispute is under the section on his name which is meant, among other things, to provide a translation of his Arabic name. In Arabic, the word abu always means "father of" and never "son of" or "whose father is". GordonGlottal claimed in an edit on 01:41, 27 December 2022 that Abu Imran means "whose father is Amram" (quote: "correction in the translation of "Abu Imran" which means "whose father is Amram and is a traditional way of saying "Moses" (Biblical Moses' father was named Amram), not "Father of Amram"). It seems GordonGlottal is confusing abu with ibn/bin, the former of which means 'the father of' and is used in Maimonides' Arabic name in reference to Amram and the latter of which means "the son of" and is not used in reference to Amram. The burden of proof is on GordonGlottal to demonstrate that his translation of Abu Imran as 'son of Amram'—instead of 'father of Amram'—is a "traditional way (in Arabic) of saying "Moses" as he claims. I am not challenging whether the name means Maimonides is a descendant of Amram but whether GordonGlottal's translation is accurate. There is Musa ibn Imran (Moses son of Amram) and there is Abu Imran, Musa (Father of Amram, Moses). Maimonides is named the latter.
The following are my 6 arguments for why it should be “Father* of Amram”:
1) A simple reading of the Arabic text supports my position. “Abu Imran” word for word means "father of Amram". There is no reason beyond the text to assume that Maimonides, or anyone else called Musa (Moses) for that matter, is an exception to the rule. To argue otherwise shifts the burden of proof to GordonGlottal since he would be going beyond the apparent meaning of the text.
2) My translation is consistent with the rules of kunyas (Arabic teknonyms) which can be used either figuratively or literally. For example, Abu Ashahāma, a common Arabic epithet, means “Father of Magnanimity” and not one who is a father to a son/daughter named “magnanimity”. Likewise, "father of Amram" does not necessarily mean he had a biological son called Amram, which is what GordonGlottal is trying to avoid altogether here since Maimonides never had a son by that name—something I'm aware of. However, that does not give GordonGlottal the right to mistranslate the Arabic. According to the rules of kunyas, one can both translate his name as "father of Amram" and not denote he had a son by that name, thus satisfying both positions. In addition to mistranslating, GordonGlottal is also special pleading by using "son of Imran" not in the literal sense (since he and I know Maimonides' biological father was not called Amram but that it's a reference to his distant Biblical ancestor) and then denying me using "father of Amram" figuratively since Maimonides only son was called Avraham. As stated, "son of Amram" can be used in the sense GordonGlottal is using it. However, that's not what the original Arabic says, and again, does not give GordonGlottal the right to mistranslate the Arabic.
3) If Maimonides's name was supposed to mean “son of Imran” like GordonGlottal claims, he would have been called “Ibn Imran” instead, even if his father is not called Imran—and he isn't—because Arabic patronymics (nasab), like Arabic teknonyms, can also be used figuratively. For example, Ibn Aṣṣahrā’ means “son of the desert”, as in one born out of the desert, i.e., a desert nomad.
4) GordonGlottal has not provided a single example where “Abu X” in Arabic can ever mean the “son of X” whether literally or figuratively.
5) A kunya always precedes one’s name and follows a specific formula: Abu X + Y. X being the name of the literal/figurative child and Y being one's personal name. For example, "Abu John, Peter" means "the father of John, Peter". This is the pattern that Maimonides’ name follows. GordonGlottal has not provided a single example that violates this pattern in Arabic. Claiming Maimonides is an exception is not a proof since his name is the point of contention here. GordonGlottal needs to back up his claim by using other occurrences in Arabic.
6) GordonGlottal's translation violates Arabic syntax. A transliteration of Maimonides Arabic name is Abū ʿImrān Mūsā which is also in keeping with the rules of Arabic nomenclature. Patronyms (denoted by "ben/ibn" in Arabic) always succeed personal names, while teknonyms (denoted by "abu" in Arabic) always precede personal names. In order to justify his translation, GordonGlottal tampers with the sequence by shifting "Abu Imran" from before "Musa" to after it.
The second point of contention has to do with my rendition of bin Ubayd Allah as 'son of Obadiah'. Doing so does not necessarily mean that Maimonides' grandfather is called Obadiah even if Obadiah appears as the third name in Maimonides nasab. It could also mean that he has a distant ancestor named Obadiah—which he does—in the same sense GordonGlottal wants to argue that Abu Imran means he has a distant ancestor named Imran, except, as demonstrated, GordonGlottal's argument is only valid when the case in question is a patronymic and not a teknonym. However, unlike GordonGlottal's case, this case is a patronymic as evidenced by the use of "bin"; therefore, the patronymic could be used to refer to a distant ancestor. The Arabic does not say “of the Obadians” like GordonGlottal claims. Rather, it literally says he is the “son of Obadiah”, regardless of interpretation. Kafei the Silent ( talk) 07:45, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
This is because Judah HaNasi was a descendent of King David. Drsruli ( talk) 23:54, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
That's really not the point. Drsruli ( talk) 13:04, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
(1) There is no mention of Asaph in the cited source [ [1]]. This should be deleted. (2) Why single out al-Ghazali here, when - if he had any positive influence at all (debatable) - it was much less than al-Farabi and Avicenna. 81.5.59.36 ( talk) 09:25, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
@ Ideophagous Please read all of the sources that I put on the Kunya page. It is crucial to understand that words can shift in meaning and also that you should expect, when reading a Medieval text in a foreign dialect, to encounter familiar words used in surprising ways. It will be impossible to accurately read anything composed more than a few decades in the past or a few miles away if you insist that your personal experience dictates the complete semantic range of every word you encounter. In this case the common word "Abu" was abstracted into a marker indicating the kunya form. "Abu" went from meaning "father of" to meaning "this phrase is of the type which commonly expresses a paternal relationship". Similarly, in English, many modern surnames take the form [profession]+son or [quality]+son. This is because the patronymic suffix lost its initial meaning ("son of") and became instead a suffix which indicated a surname ("this phrase is of the type which commonly expresses a filial relationship"). Because all the word "abu" indicates is that the phrase is a kunya, we need to rely on context to translate it in every case. Context says that Abu Yusuf Yaqub is "Jacob father of Joseph", Abu Imran Musa is "Moses son of Amram", Abu Harun Musa is "Moses brother of Aaron", and Abu Al-Afiya Musa is "Moses the Healthy". Medieval Jewish Arabic speakers themselves indicate the meaning quite clearly when the they translate it to בן עמרם in Hebrew (if you don't read Hebrew, the cognate of "ibn Imran") with regard to Maimonides, Abu Imran al-Fasi, etc. But really you should just read the sources, which are quite clear that the word abu does not mean "father" in these cases. GordonGlottal ( talk) 19:05, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
Would it be possible to add the rambams birthday in the hebrew calendar equivalent of "Nissan 14, 4895" 24.117.115.148 ( talk) 19:46, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In this phrase:
on Passover eve 1138 (or 1135)[d], until
Please remove the parentheses; the phrase makes perfect sense without them. 123.51.107.94 ( talk) 01:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In this sentence:
Aside from being revered by Jewish historians, Maimonides also figures very prominently in the history of Islamic and Arab sciences and he is mentioned extensively in studies.
please remove "and he is mentioned extensively in studies". It's such a vague statement (what kind of "study" is meant?) that I can't see any part of the article that it summarises ( MOS:INTRO), and it sounds interpolated. It breaks up the discussion of Islamic scholars, who (except for Aristotle) compose the rest of the paragraph. 123.51.107.94 ( talk) 02:03, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Second paragraph in lead is written a little flowery imo; while not explicitly MOS:EDITORIAL, it can be worded plainer and more encyclopedic. 104.232.119.107 ( talk) 00:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
125.209.140.237 ( talk) 01:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
HOW DO YOU CLAIM THAT HIS FAMILY WAS EXPELLED FIR REFUSING TO CONVERT TO ISLAM, YET HE TRAVELLED TO LIVE IN MOROCCO AND EGYPT!!!
He was expelled from Spain by the Catholic Church for not converting to Christianity. Text sites for not converting to Islam.
Source: any rabbi or historian
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
2601:249:D02:9DF0:A041:A5DC:88B0:A19B ( talk) 03:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the introduction appear these words:
1138 or 1135[d], until his family
Please move note [d] after the comma. 123.51.107.94 ( talk) 04:53, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Maimonides article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 730 days |
This
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
An editor created a section called "Views" with the only subsection "Circumcision". This is the content, moved here for comments:
As regards circumcision, I think that one of its objects is to limit sexual intercourse, and to weaken the organ of generation as far as possible, and thus cause man to be moderate. Some people believe that circumcision is to remove a defect in man's formation; but every one can easily reply: How can products of nature be deficient so as to require external completion, especially as the use of the fore-skin to that organ is evident. This commandment has not been enjoined as a complement to a deficient physical creation, but as a means for perfecting man's moral shortcomings. The bodily injury caused to that organ is exactly that which is desired; it does not interrupt any vital function, nor does it destroy the power of generation. Circumcision simply counteracts excessive lust; for there is no doubt that circumcision weakens the power of sexual excitement, and sometimes lessens the natural enjoyment: the organ necessarily becomes weak when it loses blood and is deprived of its covering from the beginning. Our Sages (Beresh. Rabba, c. 80) say distinctly: It is hard for a woman, with whom an uncircumcised had sexual intercourse, to separate from him. This is, as I believe, the best reason for the commandment concerning circumcision. [2]
Maimonides had many views on many things, and we can't use this article to enumerate every single opinion. His opinion on the reason for circumcision sounds old-fashioned to modern ears, but I actually doubt that he was alone in holding of this view. I've therefore moved it here for now. JFW | T@lk 19:43, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: Check date values in: |archive-date=
(
help)
per these sources: https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Repentance.8.6?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en. https://www.nysun.com/arts/there-was-none-like-him/21221/.
Previous changes to article should be made.
The sentence "On his tomb is inscribed "From Moses to Moses there was none like Moses"." can easily be verified by googling pictures from his grave. It is also mentioned here: https://he.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1187235. Debresser ( talk) 22:31, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
This section is not informative and it's missing sources. I removed it and copied the contents below for discussion: It was always known that some plants or substances kill. Citing that from Maimonides adds nothing particular about his contribution to the knowledge of poisons and death.
In a separate work recently when? translated from Arabic, Maimonides warns against lethal drugs which he calls poisons. According to this work these poisons will cause the most severe apathies, and the decay of the human being's vigor right up to death. [1] Nahum Neharkaspi ( talk) 18:29, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
References
Musa ben maimon historical name is musa not moshe as stated by the attached source and all historical sources, His full historical name is Abū ʿImran Mūsā ibn Maymūn ibn ʿUbayd Allāh
Ikhnatoun (
talk)
12:55, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Another fact about maimonides
“Arabic was the native language of Maimonides”
Eastern Wisedome and Learning: The Study of Arabic in Seventeenth-Century England
By G. J. Toomer, Professor Emeritus of the History of Mathematics Brown University Associate in the History of Science Department G J Toomer
Published by Oxford university press
Ikhnatoun (
talk)
03:01, 25 December 2022 (UTC) <---
blocked
sock of
User:Amr.elmowaled
::“while Moshe/Moses gets 150k.”
The Encyclopedia of Jews in the Islamic World from Brill uses “Moses ben Maimon.” This is fine for English. Let’s just use this and avoid WP:OR إيان ( talk) 23:41, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
* agree. Moses ben maimon
User:Ikhnatoun <---
blocked
sock of
User:Amr.elmowaled
Maimonides' Arabic name is أَبُو عَمْرَان مُوسَى بْن مَيْمُون بْن عُبَيْد ٱللّٰه ٱلْقُرْطُبِيّ, Abū ʿImrān Mūsā bin Maimūn bin ʿUbaidallāh al-Qurṭabī.
The debate unfolded in the form of back-and-forth edits between GordonGlottal and me. I posited that his name should be translated "'Father of Amram', Moses son of Maimon son of Obadiah, the Cordoban". GordonGlottal posited that it should be translated "Moses 'son of Amram' son of Maimon of the Obadians, the Cordoban".
The dispute is under the section on his name which is meant, among other things, to provide a translation of his Arabic name. In Arabic, the word abu always means "father of" and never "son of" or "whose father is". GordonGlottal claimed in an edit on 01:41, 27 December 2022 that Abu Imran means "whose father is Amram" (quote: "correction in the translation of "Abu Imran" which means "whose father is Amram and is a traditional way of saying "Moses" (Biblical Moses' father was named Amram), not "Father of Amram"). It seems GordonGlottal is confusing abu with ibn/bin, the former of which means 'the father of' and is used in Maimonides' Arabic name in reference to Amram and the latter of which means "the son of" and is not used in reference to Amram. The burden of proof is on GordonGlottal to demonstrate that his translation of Abu Imran as 'son of Amram'—instead of 'father of Amram'—is a "traditional way (in Arabic) of saying "Moses" as he claims. I am not challenging whether the name means Maimonides is a descendant of Amram but whether GordonGlottal's translation is accurate. There is Musa ibn Imran (Moses son of Amram) and there is Abu Imran, Musa (Father of Amram, Moses). Maimonides is named the latter.
The following are my 6 arguments for why it should be “Father* of Amram”:
1) A simple reading of the Arabic text supports my position. “Abu Imran” word for word means "father of Amram". There is no reason beyond the text to assume that Maimonides, or anyone else called Musa (Moses) for that matter, is an exception to the rule. To argue otherwise shifts the burden of proof to GordonGlottal since he would be going beyond the apparent meaning of the text.
2) My translation is consistent with the rules of kunyas (Arabic teknonyms) which can be used either figuratively or literally. For example, Abu Ashahāma, a common Arabic epithet, means “Father of Magnanimity” and not one who is a father to a son/daughter named “magnanimity”. Likewise, "father of Amram" does not necessarily mean he had a biological son called Amram, which is what GordonGlottal is trying to avoid altogether here since Maimonides never had a son by that name—something I'm aware of. However, that does not give GordonGlottal the right to mistranslate the Arabic. According to the rules of kunyas, one can both translate his name as "father of Amram" and not denote he had a son by that name, thus satisfying both positions. In addition to mistranslating, GordonGlottal is also special pleading by using "son of Imran" not in the literal sense (since he and I know Maimonides' biological father was not called Amram but that it's a reference to his distant Biblical ancestor) and then denying me using "father of Amram" figuratively since Maimonides only son was called Avraham. As stated, "son of Amram" can be used in the sense GordonGlottal is using it. However, that's not what the original Arabic says, and again, does not give GordonGlottal the right to mistranslate the Arabic.
3) If Maimonides's name was supposed to mean “son of Imran” like GordonGlottal claims, he would have been called “Ibn Imran” instead, even if his father is not called Imran—and he isn't—because Arabic patronymics (nasab), like Arabic teknonyms, can also be used figuratively. For example, Ibn Aṣṣahrā’ means “son of the desert”, as in one born out of the desert, i.e., a desert nomad.
4) GordonGlottal has not provided a single example where “Abu X” in Arabic can ever mean the “son of X” whether literally or figuratively.
5) A kunya always precedes one’s name and follows a specific formula: Abu X + Y. X being the name of the literal/figurative child and Y being one's personal name. For example, "Abu John, Peter" means "the father of John, Peter". This is the pattern that Maimonides’ name follows. GordonGlottal has not provided a single example that violates this pattern in Arabic. Claiming Maimonides is an exception is not a proof since his name is the point of contention here. GordonGlottal needs to back up his claim by using other occurrences in Arabic.
6) GordonGlottal's translation violates Arabic syntax. A transliteration of Maimonides Arabic name is Abū ʿImrān Mūsā which is also in keeping with the rules of Arabic nomenclature. Patronyms (denoted by "ben/ibn" in Arabic) always succeed personal names, while teknonyms (denoted by "abu" in Arabic) always precede personal names. In order to justify his translation, GordonGlottal tampers with the sequence by shifting "Abu Imran" from before "Musa" to after it.
The second point of contention has to do with my rendition of bin Ubayd Allah as 'son of Obadiah'. Doing so does not necessarily mean that Maimonides' grandfather is called Obadiah even if Obadiah appears as the third name in Maimonides nasab. It could also mean that he has a distant ancestor named Obadiah—which he does—in the same sense GordonGlottal wants to argue that Abu Imran means he has a distant ancestor named Imran, except, as demonstrated, GordonGlottal's argument is only valid when the case in question is a patronymic and not a teknonym. However, unlike GordonGlottal's case, this case is a patronymic as evidenced by the use of "bin"; therefore, the patronymic could be used to refer to a distant ancestor. The Arabic does not say “of the Obadians” like GordonGlottal claims. Rather, it literally says he is the “son of Obadiah”, regardless of interpretation. Kafei the Silent ( talk) 07:45, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
This is because Judah HaNasi was a descendent of King David. Drsruli ( talk) 23:54, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
That's really not the point. Drsruli ( talk) 13:04, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
(1) There is no mention of Asaph in the cited source [ [1]]. This should be deleted. (2) Why single out al-Ghazali here, when - if he had any positive influence at all (debatable) - it was much less than al-Farabi and Avicenna. 81.5.59.36 ( talk) 09:25, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
@ Ideophagous Please read all of the sources that I put on the Kunya page. It is crucial to understand that words can shift in meaning and also that you should expect, when reading a Medieval text in a foreign dialect, to encounter familiar words used in surprising ways. It will be impossible to accurately read anything composed more than a few decades in the past or a few miles away if you insist that your personal experience dictates the complete semantic range of every word you encounter. In this case the common word "Abu" was abstracted into a marker indicating the kunya form. "Abu" went from meaning "father of" to meaning "this phrase is of the type which commonly expresses a paternal relationship". Similarly, in English, many modern surnames take the form [profession]+son or [quality]+son. This is because the patronymic suffix lost its initial meaning ("son of") and became instead a suffix which indicated a surname ("this phrase is of the type which commonly expresses a filial relationship"). Because all the word "abu" indicates is that the phrase is a kunya, we need to rely on context to translate it in every case. Context says that Abu Yusuf Yaqub is "Jacob father of Joseph", Abu Imran Musa is "Moses son of Amram", Abu Harun Musa is "Moses brother of Aaron", and Abu Al-Afiya Musa is "Moses the Healthy". Medieval Jewish Arabic speakers themselves indicate the meaning quite clearly when the they translate it to בן עמרם in Hebrew (if you don't read Hebrew, the cognate of "ibn Imran") with regard to Maimonides, Abu Imran al-Fasi, etc. But really you should just read the sources, which are quite clear that the word abu does not mean "father" in these cases. GordonGlottal ( talk) 19:05, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
Would it be possible to add the rambams birthday in the hebrew calendar equivalent of "Nissan 14, 4895" 24.117.115.148 ( talk) 19:46, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In this phrase:
on Passover eve 1138 (or 1135)[d], until
Please remove the parentheses; the phrase makes perfect sense without them. 123.51.107.94 ( talk) 01:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In this sentence:
Aside from being revered by Jewish historians, Maimonides also figures very prominently in the history of Islamic and Arab sciences and he is mentioned extensively in studies.
please remove "and he is mentioned extensively in studies". It's such a vague statement (what kind of "study" is meant?) that I can't see any part of the article that it summarises ( MOS:INTRO), and it sounds interpolated. It breaks up the discussion of Islamic scholars, who (except for Aristotle) compose the rest of the paragraph. 123.51.107.94 ( talk) 02:03, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Second paragraph in lead is written a little flowery imo; while not explicitly MOS:EDITORIAL, it can be worded plainer and more encyclopedic. 104.232.119.107 ( talk) 00:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
125.209.140.237 ( talk) 01:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
HOW DO YOU CLAIM THAT HIS FAMILY WAS EXPELLED FIR REFUSING TO CONVERT TO ISLAM, YET HE TRAVELLED TO LIVE IN MOROCCO AND EGYPT!!!
He was expelled from Spain by the Catholic Church for not converting to Christianity. Text sites for not converting to Islam.
Source: any rabbi or historian
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
2601:249:D02:9DF0:A041:A5DC:88B0:A19B ( talk) 03:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the introduction appear these words:
1138 or 1135[d], until his family
Please move note [d] after the comma. 123.51.107.94 ( talk) 04:53, 25 July 2024 (UTC)