Jump to content

Talk:Muhammad

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Aec is away (talk | contribs) at 10:30, 17 March 2009 (→‎A mistake that no one can deny). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Controversial (history) Template:Pbneutral

Good articleMuhammad has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 7, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
January 8, 2006Good article nomineeListed
March 30, 2006Good article reassessmentDelisted
July 5, 2008Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article


A mistake that no one can deny

Dear brother, it was good to learn about your knowledge on Mohammad as you have given much of your time to this topic. Anyhow there is one discrepancy that maybe because of low knowledge of Arabic since its not your Mother Tongue probably. Under the Heading "Traditional views" and subheading and subheading "Muslim veneration" we've got a short column for images along with description and its says "Topkapı Palace gate with Shahadah and his seal. The Muslim Profession of faith, the Shahadah, illustrates the Muslim conception of the role of Muhammad – "There is no god but God, and Muhammad is His Messenger."Please correct it with its real meaning, which is "Topkapı Palace gate with Shahadah and his seal. The Muslim Profession of faith, the Shahadah, illustrates the Muslim conception of the role of Muhammad – "There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is His Messenger." Well I know that you must be thinking of saying Allah means GOD in Arabic and you will be right in that case but if you understandin of the Arabic Language and the then Arabs or todays Arabs you'll get to know that they used the word Allah as the name of "GOD". Hope you got my point. May Allah Bless you with the real knowledge and peace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marijusmani (talk • contribs) 14:26, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Friend, I have moved your request to the bottom of the page. It is the place we go to look for new questions. Otherwise, we might overlook your note. I see you wish to change the word "God" for the word "Allah" in the image caption. Please observe that the caption translates the entire quote into English for the benefit of our English readers. It is possible that our English readers may not know that "Allah" translates to "God". Some might even believe "Allah" is a different god, much like the Hindus have many gods. For that reason, we took care to translate each word into English as accurately as possible. This will make its meaning clear for English readers, and it will not confuse those who read and speak Arabic fluently. Indeed, those individuals can read the word in its proper form in the Arabic version of this article. Rklawton (talk) 14:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, using "Allah" in English-language articles instead of "God" could feed anti-Islamic prejudice. I have observed that many Christians make a point of saying "Allah" when referring to God's name as spoken by Muslims, as a subtle way of expressing that "Allah" is a "false" or "fake" God, i.e. that Islam itself is "false" or "fake". Assuming good faith here, I doubt the requester wants to encourage that kind of prejudice within wikipedia. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 15:42, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

please read the Allah article. It would generally be a good idea to read existing Wikipedia aricles before bringing up topics that have already been discussed to death several times over. --dab (𒁳) 16:05, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now, now. Assume good faith. Don't be like me and assume that these characters are just trolling. Assume, instead, that they are simply ignoranimusses. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc?
See also these "Important Definitions". Rklawton (talk) 14:54, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ahem, I wasn't assuming bad faith. I was in fact assuming cluelessness, not trolling. The annoying thing with the countless kids coming here to complain is that they are utterly clueless, both about Wikipedia and about the history of their own religion, and then talk down to editors who have researched the actual fact in painstaking details for them to read up upon if they just weren't too full of themselves to pay attention. --dab (𒁳) 12:01, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Marijusmani (talk · contribs). The Islamic deity is known in the English language as Allah, not as God. The name God is strictly reserved for the Christian deity. Aecis·(away) talk 17:51, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly. Nableezy (talk) 18:05, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Aecis is giving, tongue in cheek I presume, an impression of the "anti-Islamic prejudice" scenario alluded to by Baseball Bugs above. Needless to say, Wikipedia hasn't any more use for Christian bigotry than it has for Islamic bigotry. --dab (𒁳) 21:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What's your point, Dbachmann? Are you accusing me of anti-Islamic prejudice and Christian bigotry? In case you failed to notice, my post wasn't tongue in cheek, it was sincere. Fact of the matter is that the islamic deity is known in the English language as Allah, not as God. Calling him God creates a lot more confusion than calling him Allah. And that has nothing to do with bigotry or anything else that you're trying to read into it. Aecis·(away) talk 21:43, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not exactly. الله, Arabic for Allah, is most often translated as God. There is not a Christian monopoly on the English word God. Taken from God (word):
Capitalized, "God" was first used to refer to the Judeo-Christian concept and may now signify any monotheistic conception of God, including the translations of the Arabic Allāh, Indic Ishvara and the African Masai Engai.
God is the English translation of any languages supreme being, so long as it is a monotheistic faith's beliefs. In a polytheistic faith god would be used. Nableezy (talk) 21:56, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's the theory of the dictionary. But in the reality of everyday life (because we're writing for everyday readers, not for dictionaries), the Christian deity is called God and the Islamic deity is called Allah. Just like the Jewish deity is called Jahweh. That does not mean that the person using the names Allah or Jahweh sees them as fake or false, where Baseball Bugs got that ludicrous idea from is beyond me. And we're not talking about the Arabic word Allah here, we're talking about the English word Allah. Aecis·(away) talk 22:01, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Jewish god is called God in English, not Jahweh. thx1138 (talk) 22:05, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"English word Allah"?! There is no such English word. It's borrowed from Arabic. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:08, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ever heard of the term loanword, Amatulic? If Allah isn't a proper English word, neither is offal or Yankee or filibuster or algebra, or so many other words. Aecis·(away) talk 22:15, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Allah is the transliteration of an Arabic word, which is translated to God. Nableezy (talk) 22:21, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your poing being? Remember, as I said above, that we're not writing for the dictionaries, but for the everyday reader. Our philosophical musings are useless if they cause the reader to get the wrong impression. Aecis·(away) talk 22:31, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So what is the false impression? And we are writing for an encyclopedia, I dont understand your objection based on 'we're not writing for dictionaries'. Nableezy (talk) 22:44, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent)Let me rephrase it. We are writing for our readers. Our readers are people of flesh and blood, not dictionary books. Even if your definition and explanation are ethymologically correct, they are not in line with everyday life and everyday use of these terms. In everyday life, the name God is used to refer to the Christian deity and the name Allah is used to refer to the Islamic deity. That's what we've got to work with, because that is the way the readers will best understand what we're trying to say. And that (being understood) is ultimately our purpose and our goal. Aecis·(away) talk 22:52, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There should be no distinction between Allah and God. They are the same deity. This should be explained in the main article. Htcs (talk) 23:14, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"They are the same deity." Thank you for sharing your religious pov with us... Aecis·(away) talk 23:23, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then the problem appears to be that we dispute what God is used to refer to in 'everyday life'. The word God, in everyday life, is used to describe a singular supreme being. The word is used as the English name of any number of religions supreme deity. Not exclusively the Christian deity, or the Jewish deity, or the Muslim deity, which would be argued that they all refer to the same Abrahamic deity. It is also used in other non-Abrahamic religions that have a singular supreme deity. I do not know why you insist that the word God is only used for the Christian deity, if you could explain that it would be helpful. Nableezy (talk) 23:16, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think Aec is revealing a personal bias, with claims that "God is used to refer to the Christian deity." That is not true. Muslims who speak English also use the word God to refer to their deity, as I know from extensive personal experience. This is a non-controversial non-issue. Christianity doesn't have a monopoly on the word "god". That's the most neutral and objective word to use in this article, unless the context refers specifically to a Muslim reference to Allah. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:21, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sure Amatulic, whatever makes you feel good. Could you first explain what bias exactly I'm revealing? And could you then explain how your fallacy is relevant here? Aecis·(away) talk 23:23, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Could you answer why you say that 'God is used to refer to the Christian deity' as opposed to its definition of referring to any monotheistic faiths deity? Nableezy (talk) 23:31, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And perhaps look over the Allah, God (word) and God (specifically God#Names of God) articles. Nableezy (talk) 23:35, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why I'm saying that? Because there's a world beyond the books. A world of real people, of the readers we write for. Please think of them. If everyday use doesn't correspond to the strict dictionary definition, everyday use should be our priority, because we are writing for everyday people. And in everyday life (look outside), the word God is used to refer to the god of Christians, whereas the word Allah is used to refer to the god of Muslims. That has nothing to do with bias or anything, as some here have said, that's one of the most ludicrous and childish accusations I've come across in the past few months. Aecis·(away) talk 23:43, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My question is why do you say that everyday use of God only refers to the Christian deity? Nableezy (talk) 23:50, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Let's look at the last 80,000+ hits to God on Google News. How many of them are about the Christian god, and how many are about for instance the Jewish god or the Islamic god? And let's look at the last 13,000 hits to Allah. How many are about the Islamic god, and how many about the other deities? Aecis·(away) talk 23:55, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. There's a world of real people, and real Muslims routinly use the word "God" in English. Your claim that everyday use of God only refers to the Christian deity requires justification. You have given no justification beyond stating your own personal opinion. I get 378,000 google hits containing Allah and God together. That doesn't prove anything. The fact remains, the word "god" is the most neutral and objective term. "Allah" is specific to Islam, "God" is not. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:59, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, your 378,000 hits don't prove anything, because you need to look at the hits themselves. Have you bothered to do so? And have you bothered to look at mine? How many times did the word God refer to the Christian god and how many times to the Islamic god? And how many times did the word Allah refer to the Islamic god and how many times to any other deity? If you want to pretend that I'm busy spreading my opinion (which is a load of rubbish, but nvm), you should at least have the courtesy to explain which opinion you think I have. Aecis·(away) talk 00:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have provided actual reason for why the word God refers to things besides the Christian deity, if you could provide some that says it only refers to the Christian deity it would be appreciated. The Arabic word Allah translates to God. I do not understand why you say the word God in the English language only means the Christian God. The word God does not, in either 'everyday life' or 'real life', mean only the Christian deity. Nableezy (talk) 00:17, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I just did. Do I need to copypaste the links? Aecis·(away) talk 00:26, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No you didnt, what you provided were examples of people talking about a Christian God using the word God, which is perfectly natural. Also in that link was a rather interesting story of Christians using the word Allah to describe the Christian God. If you have something that says God is only used for the Christian deity that might help you make your case, as of yet you have not provided such a source. Nableezy (talk) 00:34, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So there are countless cases of people using the name God to refer to the Christian god, you even go so far as to call it "perfectly natural", and still you don't see the point? What kind of proof do you need? Are you only convinced when people use it that way 1 million out of 1 million times? Aecis·(away) talk 00:45, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is perfectly natural for Christians to use the word God because they are describing a singular supreme being, as it is likewise perfectly natural for Muslims to use the word God because they are describing a singular supreme being. Nableezy (talk) 00:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here's what Wikipedia has to say about it. I include it here not as an authoritative source but as a succinct articulation of the point.

God (word): "The use of capitalization, as for a proper noun, has persisted to disambiguate the concept of a singular God, specifically the Christian God, from pagan deities for which lower case god has continued to be applied, mirroring the use of Latin deus."

The reality of the matter, however, is that Nableezy will not win this argument. However, it is up to him to choose how he wishes to spend (or waste) his time. Rklawton (talk) 00:43, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You left out a bit from that definition in the God (word) article: Capitalized, "God" was first used to refer to the Judeo-Christian concept and may now signify any monotheistic conception of God, including the translations of the Arabic Allāh, Indic Ishvara and the African Masai Engai.
And are you saying that Allah is a 'pagan deity' and not a 'singular God'? Nableezy (talk) 00:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And so we see from your contribution that "God" is indeed the appropriate translation of the word "Allah." Rklawton (talk) 01:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So did I 'win this argument'? Nableezy (talk) 01:10, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks that way to me. In the discussion above, I see no basis for the assertion that the word "God" is exclusive to Christianity, even in "everyday life". The Wikipedia article God (word) appears to agree. ~Amatulić (talk) 01:55, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We see from the evidence above that "God" is the correct translation into English of the Arabic word "Allah". And this is indeed the English language Wikipedia. Rklawton (talk) 02:20, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So all we've got is one unsourced weasel claim in an unreliable source? That's your entire argument? Where does it say that the word God "may now signify any monotheistic conception of God"? Who says so? Where do they say so? Aecis·(away) talk 11:21, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Some things are just so steeped in common knowledge and common sense that the calls for "do you have a source?" sound a bit ridiculous, honestly. The idea that capital-G "God" exclusively Christian is anachronistic thinking. Tarc (talk) 11:43, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If it's that common, proving it should be a breeze. Go ahead. Aecis·(away) talk 12:01, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind, don't bother. If you guys wanna screw this article, go ahead. I don't care anymore. I've had enough of this childish ridiculing of people who dare to disagree (Dbachmann), I've had enough of the self-righteous belief that anyone who dares to disagree must be a biased bigot with anti-Islamic prejudice. Go ahead, run the project into the ground. I don't care anymore. After five years on this project, I've finally had enough. Aecis·(away) talk 12:06, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
With all due respect, screaming "I'm taking my ball and going home" because you aren't getting your way is not the most effective way to handle being on the wrong side of consensus. Resolute 13:29, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, he's screaming "you keep the ball, I'm going home." But point well taken. And he's not on the wrong side of the consensus. In fact, it's not a consensus issue. It's a "what language is this encyclopedia written in" issue. Rklawton (talk) 13:42, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've been an editor for five years, and an admin for over three. Do you seriously think this is my first discussion, Resolute? I've been on both sides of the consensus, and that has never been a problem. What is a problem, is the paranoid belief that someone who dares to disagree must have some evil scheme, some kind of bias. What is a problem is the disdain, the arrogance and the self-righteousness of you (plural) and way too many others. I'm not gonna pretend that I'm perfect, he who is without sin etc. But I refuse to be part of a community like that any longer. I became involved with Wikipedia because of the mutual respect, the honest and open discussions, the good intentions. All of that has gone, so I am gone. Aecis·(away) talk 10:30, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You want sources? Here: Britannica (Arabic: “God”), the one and only God in the religion of Islām. Etymologically, the name Allāh is probably a contraction of the Arabic al-Ilāh, “the God.” The name’s origin can be traced back to the earliest Semitic writings in which the word for god was Il or El, the latter being an Old Testament synonym for Yahweh. Allāh is the standard Arabic word for “God” and is used by Arab Christians as well as by Muslims.
Or from the wiki article on God: God is a deity in theistic and deistic religions and other belief systems, representing either the sole deity in monotheism, or a principal deity in polytheism. In Swinburne, R.G. "God" in Honderich, Ted. (ed)The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, Oxford University Press, 1995.
I'll pull out some more if you want, that was a couple of seconds searching. Could you provide a source that says the word God is only used for the Christian deity? Nableezy (talk) 15:41, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay,First, Arabic is not my first language, but I am learning it and I know about eighty percent of it. "ALLAH" is the transliteration of the Arabic word. When you brek down the word "ALLAH" in Arabic, its Al-Ilah. "Al" in Arabic, means "The" and "Ilah" means "one worth of worship". So, "ALLAH", in the English language, means God. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.202.38.142 (talk) 23:21, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

indeed. This has been up at Allah#Etymology for everyone to read for only about three years now. In view of the niceties further above, I submit that people without a grasp of the concept of monotheism should be excused from editing articles on religion until they have caught up with the intellectual history of the past 1500 years or so. --dab (𒁳) 11:28, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The assertion that Allah is not Yahweh/Jehova comes from apparent contradictions in the Quran. Please note that asserting that an entity is "one worth of worship" implies that there are others. See henotheism and monolatrism. Frotz (talk) 19:42, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Uhh, what does that have to do with using the word 'God' instead of Allah in the English Wikipedia? And you were missing the 'the' in 'one worth of worship', so saying 'the one worth of worship' does not in fact imply that others are. Nableezy (talk) 19:50, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
this is sophistry, and would belong on Talk:Allah, if anywhere. Sophistry, because casting the English translation of la ilahah as "there is no one worthy of worship" (for some reason sometimes preferred over the straightforward literal "there is no god") and then excerpting one worthy of worship to imply "one of several" is just silly. It would now be my turn to say that you are obviously not arguing based on the original Arabic but try to extract an argument from artefacts of translation. And still a very tortuous argument at that. --dab (𒁳) 11:37, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sophistry indeed, as the Bible says, "The Lord your God is a jealous god; you shall have no other gods beside him". Henotheism my arse. Glass houses and hurling stones, especially since the Arabic is unequivicable in its expression of tawhid in comparison... Ogress smash! 15:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to give my two cents on the topic: the English word God refers to the concept of 'the supreme being', regardless of how the speaker conceives this idea. It was first used by English speaking Pagans, later adopted by English speaking Christians and now used by English speaking followers of all faiths and philosophical movements as the English language has spread all over the world. Similarly, the Arabic word Allah (originally derivating from the contraction of the Arabic Al Ilah, 'The Deity') is the standart Arabic word to refer to the 'supreme being', regardless of how the speakers conceives this idea. It was first used by the Arabic speaking Pagans to refer to the supreme god they believed in, and then adopted by Arabic speaking Jews and Christians and eventually Muslims. All Arabic religion-related writings, without any exception, call the supreme being Allah. This includes Qurans, Bibles, treaties of Jewish and Christian theology, ancient Greek philosophical works, modern philosophical works and pre-Islamic Pagan poetry and whatever we might think of; just like the English word 'God'.

All this to say that 'Allah' is the exact equivalent of the English 'God'. Non-Arab Muslims usually use indiferently their native language's word for God (God, Khuda, Dieu, Dios, Gott...) and the Arabic word Allah, as Muslims tend to loan their religious vocabulary from classical Arabic. If one wants to dwelve into etymology, then Allah is the Arabic version of the other Semitic words for God, such as El, Eloh, Elohim and Alaha, all used in the Bible.

In two words, leaving the word 'Allah' untranslated when speaking English is simply either incompetence or a faith-based bias. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and therefore uses the words in their correct usage. It is not bound by popular practices and misconceptions.

One can have a look at the articles on 'Allah', 'God', 'God in Islam', 'Conceptions of God' and 'Names of God'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.247.85.103 (talk) 02:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please take our prophet Muhammed (pbuh) picture of from the article.

Please respect our faith and respect our beloved prophet Muhammed (pbuh)and sign a partition to remove the picture. The link which i have tried to post is black listed from this site, but if you type in www .petitiononline .com in google first link click on that, and then you will see another link saying depiction of muhammed (pbuh. please sign —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.69.233.3 (talk) 12:43, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Depictions of Muhammad for an interesting article on the subject. Go here if you would like to discuss the matter further. Rklawton (talk) 13:49, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Muhammad&oldid=277836882"