# Talk:Amr ibn al-As

"Imam Shafi'i said that the testimony of four companions will not be accepted and those four are Muawiya, Amr ibn al-As, Mugheera and Ziyad. This view of Imam Shafi'i has also been attributed to him by his student Abu al-Fida". That is not correct. That statement has no Isnad. Abul Fidah (BTW, he is not his student!) said: "روي" which is a word that is usually used when that attribution is false. In fact it is Shafi accepted the testimony of the three in his books. Ziyad is not even a Sahabi. --Islamic 05:22, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Ok, ill buy that. Ill copy it here for future rerferences.

--Striver 12:46, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
HINT: Me checking Wikipedia is enough to see that Abu Fida was born 1273, and Imam Shafii died at year 820.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.147.18.194 (talk) 08:30, 12 December 2013 (UTC) 
It says in the article that Misr, the Arabic word for Egypt, comes from the place that El-'As named.  This is probably not true, as Misr is an old word for Egypt in many other languages (in the Hebrew Bible, Egypt is referred to as mitzraim, with the root m-tz-r, corresponding to the Arabic m-S(Saad)-r. tz corresponds to the saad.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.45.252.70 (talk) 19:41, 30 June 2008 (UTC) 

I see that there's some reverting going on here.  Could folks please move this to the talkpage, and talk about what the disagreement is?  Also, please stop referring to each other as vandals.  See What vandalism is not.  Thanks, Elonka 04:52, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I just removed some bogus info on here.  I checked the source in sunan abu dawood and this is what it really said 

2877 

	 Narrated Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As: Al-'As ibn Wa'il left his will that a hundred slaves should be emancipated on his behalf. His son Hisham emancipated fifty slaves and his son Amr intended to emancipate the remaining fifty on his behalf, but he said: I should ask first the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him). He, therefore, came to the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and said: Apostle of Allah, my father left in his will that a hundred slaves should be emancipated on his behalf and Hisham has emancipated fifty on his behalf and fifty remain. Shall I emancipate them on his behalf? The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) said: Had he been a Muslim and you had emancipated slaves on his behalf, or given sadaqah on his behalf, or performed the pilgrimage, that would have reached him. 
We can't  use wikipedia to misinform and inflame secterian divides.  I've found a few of these and I'm going to start checking all of the sources on pages like this.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.80.174.56 (talk) 01:51, 28 May 2009 (UTC) 
I have heard he was invited by Ali bin Abi talib for a dual during the battle of siffin, can anybody present reliable information about that encounter?
thanks in advance.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.160.46.14 (talk) 16:15, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 
I can't see what is this portion got to do with other parts of the paragraph:
"This did a couple of things in the community: Ali and Mu’awiyah were placed on the same level, whereas Ali had previously had a more temporal claim to power because of his close relationship with the prophet. But since his submission to this deal put both Mu’awiyah and Ali on the same level, Ali was also allowed to take the title Commander of the Faithful."
What is meant by the first "This"? The quoted paragraph is about Tahkim, why is it there in Muhammad's era?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.147.18.194  (talk)  08:26, 12 December 2013 

In the "Later life" section, there's a small, isolated sentence that says, "He died during Muawiya's reign." But it says Amr died in 682, whereas Mua'wiyah died in 680.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.217.108.193 (talk) 14:47, 4 February 2013 (UTC) 

I doubt this sentence.

ʻAmr ibn al-ʻĀs was married to Umm Kulthum bint Uqba but he divorced her when she embraced Islam.
The referenced source (http://www.eslam.de/begriffe/u/umm_kulthum_bint_uqba.htm) simply states "Sie war ehemals verheiratet mit Amr ibn Aas" ("She was formerly married to Amr ibn Aas") without citing any authoritative source.
Ibn Saad's Tabaqat (p. 163 in Bewley's translation of vol. 8) states that he did not marry Umm Kulthum until about 653, when he became her fourth husband, and that she died only a month later.Petra MacDonald 10:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petra MacDonald (talk • contribs)  

The way the info is delivered it is almost like bullet point and not proper prose. 1. He married XX then divorced her. 2. He converted to Islam. 3. He lead the believers in pray. It does not flow from sentence to sentence.--Inayity (talk) 07:46, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Ref: Usama Anwar Ukasha, Muslim secular Egyptian scholar and well know writer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_Anwar_Okasha).
(http://mufakerhur.org/?p=11173)  says: 

Salma daughter of Harmalh, was a prostitute ( who had a flag) "red flag used by prostitutes at that time as a sign for sex place". She is the mother of Amr Ibn Al A's son of Wael, She was a slave to Abdullah son of Jadaan who freed her. on that day she slept with AbuLahab so of  Abdel Muttaleb and Umaia Son of Khalaf and Hisham so of AL Mugheera and Abu Sufian son of Harb and Al-A's Son of Wael AL Sahmi.They All claimed Amr as a son but she decided to link him to AL-A'S son of Wael who was spending on her a lot.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Syrian10 (talk • contribs) 19:57, 29 August 2016 (UTC) 

This review is transcluded from Talk:Amr ibn al-As/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: CPA-5 (talk · contribs) 12:08, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Claim my seat here. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 12:08, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Amr ibn al-As al-Sahmi (Arabic: عمرو بن العاص‎ Unlink Arabic.
Not sure how to unlink it as it is in the standard "lang-ar" template.
Link Medina in the lead.
Done.
appointed Amr the governor of Oman and he remained Unlink the current country Oman.
Done. Linked History of Oman instead if that works.
See a lot of "Afterward"s maybe trim 4 of them.
Done.
eastern bank of the Nile River and at the head Unlink the Nile because of common term.
Done.
stretching 5–6 kilometers (3.1–3.7 mi) along the Nile and 1–2 kilometers (0.62–1.24 mi) inland to the east The numbers are a little bit too specific.
Which ones—the kilometers or the miles or both? Al Ameer (talk) 18:09, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
The caliph and Amr engaged in a number The Caliph.
The caliph persuaded them to withdraw Same as above.
Amr was permitted by the caliph to retain personally Same as above.
Done for all 3 and more.
continuously ruled by Muslims until the present day --> "continuously ruled by Muslims until the present-day"
Done.
his was followed with westward advances Replace "with" with "by".
Done.
At the head of 4,000 cavalry and with no siege engines Replace "cavalry" with the "cavalries".
Done.
this on the basis that no body of water Merge "no body".
In this case "body" is referring to "body of water"; I don't think "nobody" would make sense here, correct?
The Egytpian Arab tradition holds that Amr was Typo of Egyptian.
Done.
westward advances by Amr as far as Tripoli --> "westward advances by Amr as far as Tripoli, Lebannon" Because there are two popular Tripolis.
It was the Tripoli of Libya but I see your point. Clarified. Al Ameer (talk) 18:09, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
Infobox

"Umar (r. 634–644)" Maybe replace 634 with 640?
Is the reign for monarchs listed in the infobox about the total term of the monarch or only the part of the term in which the article subject held office under the particular monarch? --Al Ameer (talk) 18:09, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
@Al Ameer son: I think the second one because it is a little bit odd to look at that the years when he doesn't take office are included in the governor part. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 21:43, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
@CPA-5: Done.
"Rashidun Caliphate (632–658) Muhammad (629–632)" Maybe place the years bellow the allegiances.
Let me know if I did this correctly. Al Ameer (talk) 18:09, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
Normally battles/wars should be from oldest (above) to newest (below) the infobox.
Done.
Images

Looks good to me.
Sources

Blakely's source needs a JSTOR code. Also no location and publisher?
Done.
Google Books claim that the published year is 2015, not 2016 at Elad's book?
This is a mistake by Google Books, inside the book itself it says "Copyright 2016". Al Ameer (talk) 18:09, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
The Google Books' URL of Hawting's book is dead.
Fixed.
Remove October in Hinds' date. It also needs a JSTOR code and remove the link because we should only link Google Books' URLs if they have a preview.
Added the code, rmved url. Usually the month is kept for a journal article, no?
Lecker 1989's source should have a source code I found a JSTOR and an OCLC code.
Done.
Remove the month in Raisuddin's year.
See above response.
Scanlon needs a JSTOR code, unlink the URL and remove the month in the year.
Same as above, though URL/JSTOR code done.
The Google Books' URL of McDonald is dead.
Fixed. --Al Ameer (talk) 18:09, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
I'll do this later. Stay stone. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 16:03, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Phew that's everything that I could find. The source review too me hours I even didn't know you could have a divorce in the Islam especially at that time. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 21:54, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
@CPA-5: God bless you man. Sorry for my delay. I sincerely appreciate the time you've given this review (and yes divorce was allowed from the get-go). I addressed/responded to your points above. Please let me know your thoughts or if there's anything else that needs to be done. I'll be shooting for FA in the near future. Al Ameer (talk) 18:09, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
I'll pass it. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 09:24, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

I'd reword this to "Egypt has remained Muslim majority since" to account for European and modern governments. Hcobb (talk) 19:09, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Hcobb: I meant to respond to this but it slipped. The language used was from the source, but I understand that technically there were brief periods of European rule and the modern government is not an “Islamic” government. Perhaps “dominated by Muslims” is slightly more accurate, but maybe not the best wording either. For now I have removed it altogether, because the wording you proposed also does not work: Egypt was not Muslim majority until some centuries after the conquest. —-Al Ameer (talk) 16:14, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Egypt has remained Muslim dominated ever since? Hcobb (talk) 22:30, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
@Hcobb: It would be more accurate than Muslim majority since that only became the case centuries after the conquest, but I’m not really proposing this wording either. It might just be better to drop it altogether. —Al Ameer (talk) 05:01, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

If I understand well, according to Special:Contributions/2001:8003:2613:A200::/64 Malik al-Ashtar preceded Amr ibn al-As as governor of Egypt rather than Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr. [2][3] They did, however, not provide a source in which this info can be verified. @Al Ameer son: I'm asking you since you wrote this article, does this make sense to you? ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 14:59, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

@Apaugasma: Not sure how to address in this article except in a footnote. There are two or three narratives in the Islamic sources, one placing Ashtar's appointment before Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr (al-Zuhri in Tabari) and others after (Tabari, different version in Ibn al-Kalbi and Mas'udi), but all agree that he died (or was poisoned) in Qulzum, before he could assume office in Fustat. Ibn Abi Bakr remained in charge until he was defeated and killed by Amr's side.
The Encyclopedia of Islam (1993 Reprint ed.) entry on Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr discusses briefly the three accounts. (Buhl, p. 669)
The EI2 entry on Al-Ashtar says he was appointed "governor of Egypt; it is not known precisely whether this took place immediately after the recall of Kays b. Sa'd or after the dismissal of Muhammad b. Abi Bakr who had proved himself a bad politician … However that may be, al-Ashtar never reached the seat of his appointment, for when he arrived at al-Kulzum (37/658 or 38?) he was poisoned …" (Veccia-Vaglieri 1960, p. 704)
Kennedy apparently uses Zuhri's version (i.e. appointed before Ibn Abi Bakr). (Kennedy 1997, p. 68)
Madelung cites the other version in Tabari (appointed after Ibn Abi Bakr was dismissed) and considers Zuhri less reliable and his account erroneous. (Madelung 1997, pp. 192 note 228, 265–266) Al Ameer (talk) 03:57, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for that! I added Malik al-Ashtar as a possible predecessor, summarizing the info you gave here in an explanatory footnote. I did not look at the sources here, so I hope I didn't make any mistake. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 08:51, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

I added a section to this page of the hadiths authored by Amr ibn al-As. The edit was reverted by Al Ameer son, stating "Rmv. Unencyclopedic and backed (partly) by unreliable religious source (sunnah.com). Are these hadiths and Amr's supposed authorship of them discussed in reliable sources, are they of any importance according to any modern historians or scholars?"
I made the edit writing authored by the person themself is a helpful encyclopedic addition to describing the person. If a Wikipedia user wants to learn about a historical figure, an excellent direct way to do that is to read the excerpts of writings authored by that historical figure, no? Hence, I felt that the hadiths below, which are universally attributed to Amr ibn al-As as author were worth including. As to whether or not the reference I listed is "reliable" enough, this is not a big deal - any hadith reference will list the same exact hadith. I could easily pick a hadith reference that Al Ameer son feels is of sufficient reputability.

The authorship of two hadiths are attributed to Amr ibn al-As. They are collected in the 9th-century hadith collection called Sunan Abi Dawud, which was compiled in the 9th-century by Islamic scholar Abu Dawud al-Sijistani. The specific hadiths are numbered 22 and 334 in the Book of Purification section.
Sunan Abi Dawud: Book of Purification #22
The number 22 text details a conversation that occured between Amr ibn al-As and Muhammed while he Muhammed was urinating.

Shurahbil ibn Hasana reported: I and Amr ibn al-As went to the Prophet (PBUH). He came out with a leather shield [in his hand]. He covered himself with it and urinated. Then we said: Look at him. He is urinating as a woman does. The Prophet (PBUH), heard this and said: Do you not know what befell a person from amongst Bani Isra'il (the "children of Israel")? When urine fell on them, they would cut off the place where the urine fell; but he (that person) forbade them (to do so), and was punished in his grave.
This hadith excerpt narrates an episode wherein Muhammed tells a cautionary tale to Amr ibn al-As and his companion about older Israeli customs of consequences for poor toilet etiquette.
Sunan Abi Dawud: Book of Purification #334
The number 334 text details a conversation between Amr ibn al-As and Muhammed about a sexual dream that Amr ibn al-As had.

 I had a sexual dream on a cold night in the battle of Dhat as-Salasil. I was afraid, if I washed I would die. I, therefore, performed tayammum and led my companions in the dawn prayer. They mentioned that to the Messenger of Allah. He said: 
"Amr, you led your companions is prayer while you were sexually defiled?"
I informed him of the cause which impeded me from washing. And I said: I heard Allah say: "Do not kill yourself, verily Allah is merciful to you."

The Messenger of Allah laughed and did not say anything.
This hadith excerpt narrates an episode wherein Muhammed confronts Amr ibn al-As about leading a prayer without washing according to proper Islamic custom. When confront Amr ibn al-As admits it, and explains why, including a statement he heard Allah say. Muhammed responds only with laughter. Cerebrality (talk) 00:57, 3 April 2024 (UTC)