Talk:Hadith of the warning

On 19 July 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved to Hadith of Warning. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Better name

I think there is a better name for the article like "invitation of close families"(دعوة عشیرة).--Seyyed(t-c) 15:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a terrible piece of misinformation and distortion of facts. I will tidy this article and most likely rewrite it when i have time. Ibn Fulaan (talk) 17:03, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed referencing

There are several problems with the reference to at-Tabari's Ta'rikh:

The original Leiden edition was published between 1879 and 1901, not 1789, see http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/de-goeje. Could be a typo, of course, but...
...pages 171 to 173 of volume 1 are about a time far before Muhammad's. In fact, volume 1, part 1 (528 pages) describes the world's history from the Creation until Joshua, who lived during Moses' time. Muhammad does not come into play until volume 1, part 3 (pp 1073-1686).

If this one reference is already that problematic, imagine what could be wrong with all the other references mentioned. --HyperGaruda (talk) 13:36, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Problem solved: people really need to check references before bluntly copy-pasting them somewhere. Turns out the whole issue is a matter of small but important typos. I'll correct the ones for Tabari that I was able to verify. --HyperGaruda (talk) 14:16, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence for year of the Banquet

It is unclear in the sources when the banquet happened along with whether the prophet proactively invited any individual to Islam in the first three years - most companions heard rumours of his call to Quraysh and embraced Islam after enquiring with him. This suggests the banquet for the elites was in the first year. 1. The hadith of Afif cites an influential from Banu Hashim summarising what he understood of Muhammed's message when there were only a few Muslims, thus early on. His summary is interestingly Muhammed is promising treasures of global powers if his message is accepted. It is clearly not a personal call, but one to society. It is thus unlikely it was a personal conversation but a gathering where he was notified of this - the only two early gatherings the seera books narrate are mount safa and the banquet. Given Abu Lahab's reaction at mount safa it is possible he had already heard the message at the banquet, which preceded it. 2. The two Quranic verses revealed early in year one, qum fa'anzir and wa anzir asheeratak, asked him to arise and warn, the first mutlaq, the second more specifically regarding his clan. That would suggest the next step would have been the banquet gathering and when that failed the mount safa call to all the clans of the tribe. 3. There is no narration suggesting he proactively invited any companion in the early years when one reviews how all the companions embraced Islam https://www.islamiqate.com/.../how-did-the-companions... which would add weight to the above. 4. In fact the companions embraced Islam through hearing rumours of his discussions with the elites. Abu Bakr returning from a business trip was told by Meccans of Muhammed's claims; he went to the prophet saying, "Is what the people say true, O Muhammad, that you left our gods, underestimated our mind and considered our fathers as infidels?" Bilal heard of the prophet's claims by overhearing Umayyah bin Khalaf discussing his claims. From whence did such rumours emerge if it was not safa or the banquet? 5. Year 3 sees an interesting command, "convey what you have been commanded and turn away from the mushrikeen..." The people he is asked to turn away are those he has been calling - the elites - and focus on their followers. It would be strange if the banquet and mount safa occurred after this when he is asked to turn away from these very people... https://www.islamiqate.com/.../allah-order-prophet-from... 6. Finally when the prophet (saw) approached over 40 tribes once the Meccan dawa had been failed, the same pattern of calls repeats itself - invitation of the influentials and elites, one after the other, detailed here https://www.islamiqate.com/.../how-did-the-prophet-saw... Given he has no access to their followers, his group could not contribute to winning over public opinion or forcing their elites to rethink. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.10.96.136 (talk) 21:56, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New edits

I'd like to improve the writing, add a few new secondary sources, and expand or clarify the Shia viewpoint in some places. I'll discuss major changes (if any) here on the talk page. Albertatiran (talk) 09:47, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 19 July 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:30, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hadith of warning → Hadith of Warning – Correct capitalization as a proper noun Albertatiran (talk) 18:52, 15 July 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 20:08, 22 July 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 14:41, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Kj cheetham (talk) 08:39, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This move doesn't seem clearly uncontroversial. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:33, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – Lots of sources have "hadith of warning" or "warning hadith". The proposed capitalization violates the guidance of MOS:CAPS and the related naming convention WP:NCCAPS. Dicklyon (talk) 05:14, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Dicklyon! Thanks for the input. It's unclear to me how the proposal violates WP:NCCAPS which seems to be saying that the title should be treated as a sentence unless it's a proper noun. In this case, "Hadith of Warning" is a proper noun, similar to the "Book of Enoch." MOS:CAPS is a very long article. Could you please be more specific about your claim there too? Thanks! Albertatiran (talk) 19:24, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to help. WP:NCCAPS says to "...leave the second and subsequent words in lowercase unless the title phrase is a proper name that would always occur capitalized, even mid-sentence" (my emphasis of always). MOS:CAPS says in the lead "...only words and phrases that are consistently capitalized in a substantial majority of independent, reliable sources are capitalized in Wikipedia" (it emphasis). Dicklyon (talk) 19:56, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This helps, thanks. So my understanding is that, as before, the issue is whether other sources use "Hadith of warning" or "Hadith of Warning." If I may ask, what did you have in mind when you said there are lots of sources without capitalization? Albertatiran (talk) 11:19, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Lots" was a misstatement, now that I recall. There aren't many sources that use this term at all, but I found some using "hadith of warning" or "warning hadith", and maybe also a few capitalized. Of books that contain both "hadith" and "warning", they don't generally put them together as a "name"; the terms are descriptive. Dicklyon (talk) 14:19, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support: It seems reasonable to me to treat "Hadith of Warning" as a proper noun and capitalize it. One example, among many others, is the Verse of Purification. Albertatiran (talk) 08:52, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please consider the guidelines MOS:CAPS and WP:NCCAPS, not just what seems reasonable to you. Note that "verse of purification" is lowercase in 7 of the first 10 book hits. Dicklyon (talk) 14:25, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support: A quick Google search shows mixed usage, but it seems to me to qualify as a proper noun, referring to a specific named hadith. These are not exact equivalents, but our capitalization on the phrase "Parable of ..." is mixed, and I think I'd lean toward capitalizing named parables, the same way we would capitalize other named stories. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 12:21, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
When usage in sources is mixed, Wikipedia uses lowercase; see the guidance I quoted to Albertatiran above. Dicklyon (talk) 19:58, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose—per Dicklyon. It's outside usage that plays in here. MOSCAP requires almost entirely capped items in the sources to go with capping. Tony (talk) 08:10, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose; not at all consistently capitalized in sources, even Muslim ones. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 08:54, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merger with Warning Verse

Rubin refers to the Warning Verse (verse 26:212) as the Verse of Ashira, as mentioned in Hadith of warning. In particular, Warning Verse doesn't contain any new information that's not in Hadith of warning. Albertatiran (talk) 07:48, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]