Talk:Elijah Muhammad/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Birth

I lived in Sandersville for about 5 years. The correct location of Elijah's birth is Linton, GA, about 15 minutes outside of Sandersville.

Above is wrong. My Grandfather was indeed born in Sandersville, GA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hers241 (talk • contribs) 01:26, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

His real name.....

His real name is Robert Poole but later changed it to Elijah Muhammad

http://africawithin.com/bios/elijah_muhammad.htm http://www.gale.cengage.com/pdf/scguides/muslim/musmosqueintro.pdf http://www.encyclopedia.com/beta/doc/1G2-3404704628.html Lincoln, The Black Muslims in Amerca, p. 257 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooolway (talk • contribs) 04:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

His slave name is Poole his real name is what he recognize himself by "Elijah Muhammad". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rawiyahsphere (talk • contribs) 06:18, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

My grandfather was born Elijah Robert Poole. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hers241 (talk • contribs) 01:33, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

how'd he die

my friends tell me this man (he is not the prophet)died on the toilet.... is this true —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.108.140 (talk) 00:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

You're probably thinking of Elvis. Anyway, what's wriong with dying on the toilet. Going to the toilet is not a shameful act. I bet you do it too. We can't chose where death strikes. Paul B (talk) 21:18, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

My grandfather died in Mercy Hospital in Chicago surrounded by close family and friends. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hers241 (talk • contribs) 01:34, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

death?

"Muhammad was succeeded following his apparent death by his son Warith Deen Muhammad". Why apparent death? Is there anyone who says he didn't die? User:Paul Barlow 14:10, 18 June, 2005 (UTC)

I think Louis Farrakhan said that E.M. and Fard were taken aboard a spacecraft.

Wow. How - likely. Thanks, anyway. At least I have some idea now why this was written. Paul B 23:11, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

The spacecraft is mentioned in the Holy Bible, in the Book of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 1:15-21, Ezekiel 10:2-17)

Chapter 1:http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel%201;&version=50; Chapter 10:http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=33&chapter=10&version=50

To answer the question directly: "is there anyone who says he didn't die," Brother Minister Jabril Muhammad has written a book titled: "Is it possible that the Honorable Elijah Muhammad is Still Physically Alive?", in which Bro. Minister Jabril Muhammad brings up evidence and experiences that support the belief that the Honorable Elijah Muhammad IS still alive.

Also, when listening to Brother Minister Louis Farrakhan speak on the Honorable Elijah Muhammad's 'death', Bro. Farrakhan consistently says "When the Honorable Elijah Muhammad DEPARTED FROM US".... Rag-time4 17:37, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Farrakhan is not the foremost expert on Messenger Elijah Muhammad as he had his own agenda it would seem. Not to mention he had a funeral, and he has a grave site as seen on www.muhammadspeaks.com so the date he died should remain. We don't need false teaching in his biographic entry. --FAROOQ ALLAH (talk) 19:24, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I have recently received two emails from someone sending out a message claiming that Elijah Muhammad is "still physically alive." He is evidently reporting what he is hearing from the Nation of Islam. Based on the messages I have received, it seems like the Nation of Islam have gone beyond throwing doubt on his death, but are actually positively claiming that Elijah Muhammad is still alive, though waiting forty years to return in 2015 as the Mahdi and the Mesyh/Messiah. 70.116.90.40 (talk) 08:55, 1 June 2012 (UTC) J

Save it

My parents had the chance to meet the Honorable Elijah Muhammad. He was not the way any of you portrayed him. Just hate to see somebody on top without trying to be bring him down. Damn hypocrites.

Your parents sound like awful people. 161.113.11.16 (talk) 15:52, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes, because meeting someone once tells you more about that person than all of their writings, speeches and, most importantly, actions. GW Bush is by many accounts a charming and gracious dinner host. His speeches and actions? They tell a different story. Which isn't to say both men might be (or may have been) perfectly delightful social acquaintances - their fitness as leaders is in question because of their doubtful righteousness and indignant denial in the face of their own hypocrisy. This is not to say that Elijah Muhammad didn't provide a focus and needed venue for a cultural catharsis. However, he is certainly not unassailable. All aspects of his character and dealings should be explored for an Encyclopedia article. And, please sign your posts. strike71 (talk) 08:48, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Elijah Muhammed was a gifted man who brought hope to a lot of black people who had been left behind by the middle-class civil rights leaders. He brought hope and morality to the prisons, and confidence and discipline to the cities.

And Mussolini made sure the trains ran on time. Didn't mean he wasn't a fascist. A gifted fascist, but a fascist nonetheless. Unlike Mussolini, Elijah Muhammed focused his energy on a cultural revolution, rather than a political one. But his sexual exploitation of the young women and girls who trusted him says a lot about his true feelings about the superiority of black people. It sounds to me like women aren't included in his black nation, except as chattel. His betrayal of their trust (as well as Malcolm X) has to be included in the article. strike71 (talk) 08:48, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

He also failed to practice what he preached in terms of sexual morality, and he did a real disservice to his friend Malcolm X, who was forced out of the Nation of Islam which he had done so much for. Malcolm's embrace of traditional Islam and his increasing focus on pride rather than hate could have revitalized the Nation, but Elijah Muhammed worked against his formed protege, and between them their pride and jealousy squandered a lot of the movement's potential. This has to be shown in the article, and Elijah Muhammed has always been controversial. If you can add your own portrayal and understanding of the man, please do; it will make the article more full and give more people voices. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.163.175.13 (talk) 15:38, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

The Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad was married to those women and He said no sex outside of marriage, so he violated nothing being that he was married to the women. Malcolms embrace to so called "orthodox Islam" was probably to make The Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad jealous but Malcolm sent letters trying to get reinstated into The Nation but The Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad wanted him to stay out a little while longer but Malcolm gave up and got killed by the government before he could come back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.73.110.249 (talk) 23:39, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

He was a racist, and a Jew-hater.

All one needs to do is read through his manifesto, entitled "Message to the Blackman in America", to see a plethora or anti-white racism (of course he never clearly defines "white" people) and Jew-hatred. He regularly references the "white race" as being the spawn of devils, who intentionally deceive the "black race" from finding the "true god". He then indicated that Jews are a part of this evil "white race". This is just a taste of the racism and prejudice in his book, there is much more is one is inclined to read through it. He wore his racism on his sleeve, but predictably, there is virtually no mention of this on his Wikipedia page. Bobinisrael (talk) 20:17, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

No discussion of theology/philosophy/teachings?

Per "Due and Undue" weight, it seems odd that the focus of an article re: a religious leader is a chronological biography and there is no mention whatsoever of his theology/philosophy/teachings, particularly given the majority view of how controversial those positions are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Telecasting (talk • contribs) 02:46, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Pastiche proper summary lead

I think this is a good start toward a proper summary lead, but another editor might disagree, and it could even be fully reverted.

Here's my attempt for reference, just in case:

• Elijah Muhammad

Just passing through after viewed Malcolm X (1992 film) last night, which does a terrible job in covering the back-story of Elijah Muhammad, electing to treat him as a variously glowing/sinister mystery saint and power broker. At a key dramatic moment when his wife nee Betty Sanders says "open your eyes" the audience has no clue of anything Malcolm ought to have then known about his various associates.

I guided my pastiche toward creating exactly the summary that this movie ought to have provided, if they intended the audience to fully participate.

In this spirit, the rift with Ernest 2X McGee was too inside baseball for my taste, but another editor might consider it adding to the lead to achieve full article coverage. — MaxEnt 17:31, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Was Malcolm X expelled or did he leave?

The article was changed ( here's the diff ) from saying that Malcolm X left NOI, to saying he was expelled. A citation to establish that was not added. I don't know which is the case but in One Night in Miami, Malcolm X is portrayed as leaving. Not to mention, our article on Malcolm X characterizes the situation as Malcolm X leaving. Novellasyes (talk) 14:25, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

I reverted the edit, pending hashing out the issue here. Novellasyes (talk) 17:04, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

How many children?

The infobox says he had "at least 23". There is no footnote to that. The "personal life" section for a long time agreed that he had 23. Now, it has been edited to say "In total, it is estimated that he had 23 children of which 21 are documented." That cites out to this New York Times article. However, that NYT article doesn't substantiate in any way the idea that he had 23 children. It simply states as a plain fact that he had 21 children. Looking around, there's also this 1987 NYT article which asserts as a plain fact that he had 21 children (19 of whom were in a lawsuit and two of whom were on the other side of it]. FWIW, I object to the "had at least" formulation in the infobox because that makes it sound as if the man couldn't keep track of his own kids. Novellasyes (talk) 14:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Dr Lingua. You've added a lot of content today (February 28) to the personal life section. Mostly you have added a list of women with whom he is said to have had children. These women are referred to as mistresses. I object to that terminology. Several times, when adding information about these women and the names of the children, your edit summary says "added reference". But you didn't add any citations, footnotes or references in any of that. So, super unclear why you said in more than one of these edit summaries that you were adding references, when there are none. This is getting to be kind of a mess and I would appreciate it if you would remove that material and discuss it here and get all this straightened out first. There are other issues -- notability being a key one. (That is, whether it is a notable fact that he had a certain number of children, with whom, and their names. Is that covered in reliable sources so as to establish the notability of this information? I'm struggling to find it but you may be aware of references I'm not aware of.) Novellasyes (talk) 19:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

This is pretty well documented in Karl Evanzz's The Messenger and, maybe in a more neutral manner, in Clegg's An Original Man. Personally, I think the children and mistresses section under Personal Life is a little overplayed. It takes up a lot more real estate than much more important elements of his life. NJSamizdat (talk) 3 March 2022

Nationality in the lead.

Is there a reason for not having it? --Malerooster (talk) 23:21, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Continued edits in lead

FaChol (talk) keeps editing the lead to the article, adding descriptions of him being a "black supremacist, antisemite, and anti-white racist." While those are claims that have been made about him, there are a few reasons why I don't think they should be there. The main reason is that those claims are already in the lead section, as:

Elijah Muhammad's legacy continues to be controversial. He has been variously described as a black nationalist, a black supremacist, and a religious leader who fought for the rights of African Americans. His ideas and teachings have been credited with inspiring the Nation of Islam, black pride, and black self-reliance, while also being criticized for promoting antisemitism and racism.

and

In the 1950s and 1960s, he was accused of promoting racism and antisemitism. He was also accused of being a black supremacist and encouraging violence against whites and police.

The claim of antisemitism is noted twice in the lead (their addition being #3) but not again in the body and none with refs, as is the anti-white racism. The claims of black supremacism are pretty widely discussed, although not in this article (yet). Regardless, those descriptors are not the primary, characteristic roles he played. Also, it makes the list six items long (ie. "leader..separatist..supremacist..antisemite..anti-white racist..Messenger") which is not succinct. Just noting here in case anyone disagrees with the reverts or wants to add. - Procyonidae (talk) 02:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)