Talk:Hadith of the warning

message: 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)
thread_title:  Better name 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Disputed referencing 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Evidence for year of the Banquet 

message: 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)
thread_title:  New edits 

message: :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)
replies: text: Hadith of warning →  – Correct capitalization as a proper noun Albertatiran (talk) 18:52, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

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

text: * This move doesn't seem clearly uncontroversial. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:33, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 19 July 2022 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Merger with Warning Verse