Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:56, 25 June 2008

Shalom Aleichum

An introductory message for creation of the talk page. 'Abd el 'Azeez (talk) 12:11, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Reason for removal of content about Rayhana

The original content in this sub-section was as follows:-
Rayhana bint Amr ibn Khunafa was from the Banu Nadir tribe who married a man from the Banu Qurayza. After the Banu Qurayza were killed in the Battle of the Trench all the women were shared between Mohammed and his followers. Muhammad took Rayhana for himself and is said to have offered to make her a wife instead of a concubine. Rayhana is said to have been the Jewish woman described in Bukhari's Hadith 4.394 as having poisoned Muhammad possibly resulting in his death three or four years later. Very little is known about Rayhana.
Problems with the content are as below:-
1) Rayhana didn't outlive Mohammad. Rayhana says Not much is known about Rayhana; she died a year before Muhammad.
2) The claim above viz.Rayhana is said to have been the Jewish woman described in Bukhari's Hadith 4.394 as having poisoned Muhammad is false because Bukhari's Hadith 4.394 says

Volume 4, Book 53, Number 394

Narrated Abu Huraira: "When Khaibar was conquered, a roasted poisoned sheep was presented to the Prophets as a gift (by the Jews). The Prophet ordered, "Let all the Jews who have been here, be assembled before me." The Jews were collected and the Prophet said (to them), "I am going to ask you a question. Will you tell the truth? They said, "Yes.' The Prophet asked, "Who is your father?" They replied, "So-and-so." He said, "You have told a ie; your father is so-and-so." They said, "You are right." He siad, "Will you now tell me the truth, if I ask you about something?" They replied, "Yes, O AbuAl-Qasim; and if we should tell a lie, you can realize our lie as you have done regarding our father." On that he asked, "Who are the people of the (Hell) Fire?" They said, "We shall remain in the (Hell) Fire for a short period, and after that you will replace us." The Prophet said, "You may be cursed and humiliated in it! By Allah, we shall never replace you in it. Then he asked, "Will you now tell me the truth if I ask you a question?" They said, "Yes, O Ab Li-AI-Qasim." He asked, "Have you poisoned this sheep?" They said, "Yes." He asked, "What made you do so?" They said, "We wanted to know if you were a liar in which case we would get rid of you, and if you are a prophet then the poison would not harm you." (See http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/053.sbt.html)

This sub-section could thus be classified as WP:Original Research and hence was deleted. 'Abd el 'Azeez (talk) 12:23, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not sure why you deleted Rayhana bint Amr ibn Khunafa from Muhammad's Jewish Wives, instead of simply addressing the two problems you state, in editing accordingly. You didn't see a problem with her as both Jewish and a wife of Muhammad, right?

Now in regards to the two problems you stated above... 1) that Rayhana didn't outlive Mohammad, whereby you state instead that she died a year before Muhammad as the article on her claims. Well, another wikipedia article is not a sufficient source. There is in fact a disagreement amongst Muslim scholars on whether she died before or after Muhammad, and is a minor detail. Now, 2) in regards to Bukhari's Hadith 4.394. I didn't state she was mentioned there, rather that she was said to have been the Jewish woman who carried out the poisoning as described in this hadith. Furthermore, see Nomani, vol. II, pg. 173 as a source for her being that Jewish woman.

ephix (talk) 21:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Good questions Ephix. 1) Since there is a disagreement amongst scholars (Muslim as well as otherwise), it is essential that we as co-editors of WP ensure that we put in reliable sources as references for any claims we make. Besides, from the point of view of the article it isn't a minor detail since you've said Both Safiyya and Rayhana are said to have outlived Muhammad and returned to their Jewish people after Muhammad's death. (italics mine). We must remove this claim in order to retain Rayhana's mention. 2) Nomani might not be a reliable source with reference to Bukhari 4.394 since it seems to be making a claim which isn't there in the actual Hadith (as seen from the link I've presented above). Further, if you read Safi urRahman Al-Mubarakpuri's description in the 'The Sealed Nectar' one can see that while Prophet Muhammad's (S) severe pain at the time of death was indeed due to the poisoning at Khaibar, Mubarakpuri attributes the poisoning to have been done by one Jewess named Zainab bint Al-Harith.

We might need better and more reliable sources to attribute that allegation to Rayhana. 'Abd el 'Azeez (talk) 05:38, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Further, Rayhana belonged to the tribe of Banu Qurayzha (due to her marriage with a man from that tribe) whereas biographers of Prophet Muhammad (S) have maintained that a Jewess from the Banu Nadir tribe attempted to poison Muhammad to avenge her slain relatives (See Ibn Hisham (1955). English translation in Stillman (1979), p. 148–149.) This needs to be investigated as well before we put up the statement about poisoning (with reliable references of course) 'Abd el 'Azeez (talk) 05:47, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Whether it was Zaynab bint Al-Harith or Rayhana, we dont know. The sources we have both provided conflict which is very typical, and we can't judge which source is more credible based on our understanding of a scriptural verse, so I'm OK with however you spin the story. In the future please don't delete submitted material, rather amend details as you see fit. ephix (talk) 07:53, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Spinning stories is somewhat of a derogatory figure of speech as I see it, but I cant say if it does not sound quite as conniving to you. Hoping the terminology doesn't hurt, I'd say I deleted that content because it seemed to me to be more like a story spun (according to WP standards) since it made claims without citing any reliably strong references. I promise I'll follow the 'amend details' advice in future though. 'Abd el 'Azeez (talk) 12:24, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

That didn't sound quite so good and witty after clicking save page button. No offence intended bro. 'Abd el 'Azeez (talk) 12:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

It's OK man, looks like we're getting this rolling which is the main thing. looks we have another editor on the job. Welcome Elazeez! lol, you're contributions are valued, but um, well, we'll see. ephix (talk) 20:15, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Quote "brother" Abdel: "I'd say I deleted that content ... since it made claims without citing any reliably strong references.". Hmmm, very interesting. I can see how "reliable source"-mongers have expanded their campaign across Misplaced Pages. This article is not even a BLP. When, Itaq joins in; things are going to get even more interesting. (Lol) - Agnistus (talk) 20:55, 25 June 2008 (UTC)