Jump to content

Talk:Kaaba: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m who built it and why
Reverted 1 edit by 202.47.33.85 (talk) to last revision by Lowercase sigmabot III
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
This is to the best of my knowledge and needs checking; any scholars of Islam want to take a look at this? [[User:The Anome|The Anome]] 08:55 25 Jun 2003 (UTC)
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Religion |importance=Top |Interfaith=yes}}
{{WikiProject Islam |importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Saudi Arabia |importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Architecture |importance=Top}}
}}
{{Notcensored}}


{{User:MiszaBot/config
|algo=old(31d)
|archive=Talk:Kaaba/Archive %(counter)d
|counter=4
|maxarchivesize=270K
|archiveheader={{talk archive navigation}}
|minthreadstoarchive=1
|minthreadsleft=4
}}


{{merged-from|Tawaf|9 August 2020}}
Presumably at the antipodal point to the Kaaba, the Qibla is in all directions?
{{OnThisDay|date1=2020-10-31|oldid1=986098131}}


== Semi-protected edit request on 17 September 2024 ==
:Interesting question. I reckon this point to be in the South Pacific, 230 miles from the nearest land, which is the [[Pitcairn Islands]]. -- [[User:Heron|Heron]]
:My squint at a globe put it about midway between [[Tahiti]] and Pitcairn, in [[French Polynesia]]. Rummaging on the 'net[http://www.traveljournals.net/explore/french_polynesia/] I found the nearest land to be Tematangi or Bligh Is., 140.62W 21.64S[http://islands.unep.ch/IKM.htm#1804] [[User:142.177.18.54|142.177.18.54]] 18:57, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)


{{edit semi-protected|Kaaba|answered=yes}}
Sounds like the answer may rest on the Islamic reckoning of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. On the other hand, one might be able to derive the answer by seeing which airlines serve Mecca from that point in the South Pacific. [[User:168...|168...]] 19:27 25 Jun 2003 (UTC)
In this sentence:


Islamic sanctities received great attention from the Circassian sultans during the period in which they ruled the Islamic world (1382–1517 CE), with the Kaaba receiving significant attention.
----


please remove the CE. It's obvious from the context: if this were BCE, it would be 1517-1382, not the other way around, and since Muhammad was born in the sixth century CE, there weren't any Islamic sanctities in 1382 BCE because Islam didn't exist yet. [[WP:ERA]] says "In general, omit CE or AD, except to avoid ambiguity or awkwardness", so CE should be omitted. [[Special:Contributions/123.51.107.94|123.51.107.94]] ([[User talk:123.51.107.94|talk]]) 01:36, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
If someone knows the exact coordinates of Kaaba, maybe they could put that into the article. That would make it possible to compute the qibla from any other location whose coordinates are known.
:{{not done}} In most cases your analysis would be correct but in this article, CE is being distinguished from AH, not from AD. --[[User:JMF|𝕁𝕄𝔽]] ([[User talk:JMF|talk]]) 10:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
::But according to [[Hijri year]], the current AH year is 1445 or 1446. If you don't generally use AH, you'll assume that this means AD unless it says otherwise. If you do generally use it, you'll know that 1382 was just a few decades ago (when there weren't sultans ruling the Islamic world) and 1517 is in the future. [[Special:Contributions/123.51.107.94|123.51.107.94]] ([[User talk:123.51.107.94|talk]]) 01:46, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
:::I can see the logic of that argument and in general we try to avoid attaching an era notation when no ambiguity arises (to avoid nonsense like "2024 AD"). But in this case I believe that the correct way to resolve it is to give the date in both notations, hence "{{tq|during the period in which they ruled the Islamic world (784{{ndash}}924{{nbsp}}AH, 1382–1517{{nbsp}}CE)}}", which I have now done. Of course another editor may agree with you and disagree with me: if so I will concede the point. --[[User:JMF|𝕁𝕄𝔽]] ([[User talk:JMF|talk]]) 13:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)


== Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2024 ==
:One reference [http://www.irbs.com/lists/navigation/0008/0039.html] states 21° 25' 24" N, 39° 49' 24" E, and other less precise references approximate this closely. Does anyone have exact coordinates from a system such as GPS? -- [[User:The Anome|The Anome]] 07:53, 18 May 2004 (UTC)


{{Edit semi-protected|Kaaba|answered=yes}}
==Inside the Kaaba?==
I want to edit this section in Background :


"In her book Islam: A Short History, Karen Armstrong asserts that the Kaaba was officially dedicated to Hubal, a Nabatean deity, and contained 360 idols which probably represented the days of the year.[27] However, by the time of Muhammad's era, it seems that the Kaaba was venerated as the temple of Allah, the High God,"
As the Kaaba is a building, what is inside it? Does anyone ever go in? If anyone reading knows these things it would be good to see them included in the article. — [[User:Trilobite|Trilobite]] [[User_talk:Trilobite|(Talk)]] 17:39, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)


why?
The Ka'aba is not completely empty. The building is opened twice a year for a ceremony known as "the cleaning of the Ka'aba." This ceremony takes place roughly 15 days before the start of Ramadan and the same period of time before the start of the annual pilgrimage. The inside of the building is clad and floored with marble to about half its hight and covered with a green cloth with gold embroidered verses of the Qu'ran for the rest. On a cross beam there are a number of lamps and there is also a small table for incense burners, otherwise there is nothing else. The marble cladding is perfumed with scented oil, the same used to perfume the black stone. A number of tablets with Qu'ranic inscription are inset in the marble. The keys to the Ka'aba are held by the Sheibani family who have had this honour since the time of the prophet. Members of the family greet visitors to the inside of the Ka'aba on the occasion of the cleaning ceremony. A small number of dignatories and foreign diplomats are invited to participate in the ceremony. Inside the Ka'aba visitors pray in the direction of the outside walls. Normally there is no other occasion when people can enter the building except when the Kiswa or black cloth covering the Ka'aba is changed during the Hajj. The Governor of Mecca leads the team who ritually clean the structure during the ceremony with simple brooms. Source: I have had the honour of participating in this simple but moving ceremony and praying inside the structure.[[User:Wildbe|Wildbe]] 09:13, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
the Kaaba can only be used to refer to the house of allah in itself, it doesn't have any other meaning, now the problem here is, this place couldn't be called el Kaaba before it was even built, and calling it that, causes some people to have a false assumptions about muslims worshipping others dietys in allah own house which is extremely offensive,


instead it should be something like this:
:Excellent questions. Perhaps any experts reading could also clarify how "50 ft. high by 35 ft long by 40 ft" makes a cube... Do we need to change that to "roughly cuboid"? [[User:Hajor|–''Hajor'']]


"In her book Islam: A Short History, Karen Armstrong asserts that the grounds in which the Kaaba was built upon was officially dedicated to Hubal, a Nabatean deity, and contained 360 idols which probably represented the days of the year.[27] However, by the time of Muhammad's era the Kaaba was built as the temple of Allah, the High God,"
It's Clearly not a perfect Cube, and inside is just calligrapic artwork from the Qur'an. It's centuries old and priceless. It's Fairly small, and I've always wondered how 300 odd 'idols' could fit in there, but apparently they did. You can go in but it's not advised to do so on hajj, because it's too crowded and dangerous, so if you wanna see it you should go on an Umrah tour.


as a Muslim and an Arabic speaker, I can tell you that the Kaaba is not a land again its the house of allah in itself and its important to distinguish between the kaaba in itself and the ground that it was built upon. [[User:Adam.R12|Adam.R12]] ([[User talk:Adam.R12|talk]]) 05:41, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
:{{not done}}:<!-- Template:ESp --> please read [[WP:VERIFY]] and feel free to reopen the edit request if you can find a [[WP:RS|reliable source]] that supports your proposed change. [[User:M.Bitton|M.Bitton]] ([[User talk:M.Bitton|talk]]) 09:36, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
:Just to be clear: what you say is most probably true. But for this high-profile article, every assertion needs supporting evidence. So when you find that evidence and it supports clearly what you say, then it can be incorporated. --[[User:JMF|𝕁𝕄𝔽]] ([[User talk:JMF|talk]]) 12:32, 23 October 2024 (UTC)


== Did you ever gone to the Kaaba sharif? ==
:The 360 idols were located at the Kaaba, but not inside the 'sanctuary'. They were placed in niches on the inside of the surrounding wall.
:The idea that they formed a 'zodiac "machine"' of some sort is too vague for me: What is a zodiac machine?


I'll go when I'm able to go. Im not currently in the "traveling" situation 😃 [[User:Haraf13|Haraf13]] ([[User talk:Haraf13|talk]]) 13:18, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
==Qibla==


:This a talk page to discussion on the improvement of the article. This is not a forum or discussion page about the travel plans. [[User:Xoocit|Xoocit]] ([[User talk:Xoocit|talk]]) 22:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
While the first Qibla was Jeusalem, it could not have been in the direction of the Al-Aqsa mosqua, as that did not exists at the time (As we know it). The "farthest Masjid, or place of worship" the Jewish Temple of Soloman, or Temple Mount, and during the night voayge the Hadiths say the Jews mocked him and asked him to descripe what he saw there and he supposedly described it perfectly, and they supposedly converted.


== Kaaba: Demand for Deletion of Blasphemous Imaged of the Last Prophet Muhammad (Peace be Upon Him) ==
==Abraham==
{{atop
| result = No per [[WP:NOTCENSORED]] and [[WP:NPOV]]. — '''[[User:Czello|<i style="color:#8000FF">Czello</i>]]''' <sup>''([[User talk:Czello|<i style="color:#8000FF">music</i>]])''</sup> 07:25, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
}}


Subject: Request for Immediate Removal of Blasphemous Images from the "Kaaba" Wikipedia Page
From the article:
''"According to tradition, the Kaaba was built by the prophet Ibrahim (Abraham) and his son Ishmael. However, there is no evidence of this."''


Dear Wikipedia Team,
:Surely there could be a more sensitive way of phrasing this. After all, tradition is evidence of sorts, even if unreliable and not determinative. -- [[User:Cimon avaro|Cimon]] 01:52, Nov 27, 2004 (UTC)


I hope this message finds you well. My name is [Your Name], and I am writing as a member of the Muslim community deeply concerned about the presence of pictorial depictions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and his blessed companions on the Wikipedia page titled "Kaaba" (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaaba).
:I said to myself: given the central place of the Kaaba in muslim practice, this must be in the scripture, not just "according to tradition". So, I googled my way to an [http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/QURAN/ online version of the Quran], where I found [http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/QURAN/22.htm chapter 22. The Pilgrimage] and in it the following verses:
::26. Behold! We gave the site, to Abraham, of the (Sacred) House, (saying): "Associate not anything (in worship) with Me; and sanctify My House for those who compass it round, or stand up, or bow, or prostrate themselves (therein in prayer).
::27. "And proclaim the Pilgrimage among men: they will come to thee on foot and (mounted) on every kind of camel, lean on account of journeys through deep and distant mountain highways;
::28. "That they may witness the benefits (provided) for them, and celebrate the name of Allah, through the Days appointed, over the cattle which He has provided for them (for sacrifice): then eat ye thereof and feed the distressed ones in want.
::29. "Then let them complete the rites prescribed for them, perform their vows, and (again) circumambulate the Ancient House."
::30. Such (is the Pilgrimage): whoever honours the sacred rites of Allah, for him it is good in the Sight of his Lord. Lawful to you (for food in Pilgrimage) are cattle, except those mentioned to you (as exception): but shun the abomination of idols, and shun the word that is false,-
:Clearly verses 26 and 29 can be interpreted as a claim that the Kaaba was built by Abraham. I don't have access to a more modernized translation nor to the original, nor do I read Arabic, so ''I'' will have to leave it at that, but to me it seems that the quotation from the article is not just insensitive but wrong. &mdash;[[User:Miguel|Miguel]] 03:44, 2004 Nov 27 (UTC)


These images, located under the 'History' tab, are <nowiki>'''</nowiki>highly offensive and blasphemous to Muslims around the world, as any visual representation of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is strictly prohibited in Islam<nowiki>'''</nowiki>. The specific images in question are:
::That Prophets Abraham and Ishmael have built the Kaaba is clearly stated in the Quran in Surat [[Al-Baqara]], Ayas 127-129 [http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html#002.127]. You are right, the wording is insensitive and quite unnecessary indeed, since in most of the articles about religion there can be no material proof except the respective tradition. --[[User:Abdousi|Abdousi]] 06:29, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>1. "Muhammad at the Ka'ba" from the Siyer-i Nebi, showing Muhammad with a veiled face, c. 1595.<nowiki>'''</nowiki>
== Qibla redirect to kaaba is incorrect ==


<nowiki>'''2. A miniature from 1307 CE depicting Muhammad fixing the black stone into the Kaaba.'''</nowiki>
I was looking for Qibla and I was redirected to Kaaba. This is incorrect. Kaaba is current Qibla. Doesn't mean it was qibla for all time qibla should have a small informative article on Qibla with links to 'Aqsa' and 'Kaaba'.


These images not only disrespect our beliefs but also deeply hurt the sentiments of millions in the Muslim community, including myself. The existence of these images on a public platform like Wikipedia fosters misunderstanding and disrespects our faith, which is rooted in profound reverence for our beloved Last Prophet (Peace be Upon Him). We kindly request that these images be removed from the Wikipedia page immediately, without any delay or further explanation.
[[User:Zain engineer|Zain]] 21:30, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)


We understand that Wikipedia requires supporting evidence for high-profile articles. <nowiki>'''</nowiki>In this case, the prohibition of visual depictions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is well-documented in Islamic teachings and widely recognized by scholars and religious authorities. Numerous fatwas based on Qur'anic scripture and hadith traditions from all schools of thought strictly prohibit drawing images of the last Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and his blessed companions, deeming such acts as blasphemy. This prohibition is rooted in Islamic teachings that emphasize the importance of avoiding idolatry and misrepresentation. Scholars unanimously agree that there is no permissibility whatsoever for visual representations of the Last Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) or his blessed companions, as such depictions are considered blasphemous and fundamentally incompatible with Islamic teachings.<nowiki>'''</nowiki>
:Go on then!


Furthermore, surveys indicate that a significant portion of Muslims find such depictions offensive. The Journal of Islamic Thought and Civilization highlights that Muslims believe visual depictions of all prophets should be prohibited, particularly those of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), as they hurt their emotions and go against their faith (Journal of Islamic Thought and Civilization). We urge you to consider the sensitivity of this matter and its impact on millions of Muslims worldwide.
== architectural history ==


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>Addressing Wikipedia's FAQ:<nowiki>'''</nowiki>
If we ignore the legend that Abraham built the Kaaba, Muslim historical tradition says that the first Kaaba in this place was built in the early sixth century by the tribe of Gurhum. Its shape was that of a rectangle, with a semi-circle attached to one of the shorter sides. It was not nearly as high as the modern Kaaba.


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>1.Wikipedia is not censored:<nowiki>'''</nowiki> While Wikipedia aims to provide a neutral point of view, it is essential to consider how these images offend deeply held beliefs. The presence of such content does not foster an inclusive environment for all users.
The second Kaaba was built in 608 by the people of Mecca, and had the same shape, size and orientation: towards Jerusalem. It was higher than the first, about nine meters. Six pillars supported the roof. It had two doors on opposite sides, and probably some windows. It was destroyed during the failed Umayyad seige of Mecca in 683.


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>2.Historical accuracy:<nowiki>'''</nowiki> The images in question are historically inaccurate, as acknowledged by Wikipedia. The artists who created these works lived centuries after Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and could not have seen him. Using inaccurate images perpetuates misconceptions rather than providing educational value.
The third Kaaba was built immediately afterwards by az-Zubair. This time, a roughly square portion of the rectangle was built higher than the rest of the building. This part was now as high as the Kaaba of today (about 15 meters). Its roof was supported by three pillars, it still had two doors, and a number of windows. Inside, the square part was connected to the remainder by a wide arch.


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>3.Offense to Muslims:<nowiki>'''</nowiki> Wikipedia recognizes that depictions of Muhammad are offensive to many Muslims. This offense affects millions globally and cannot be dismissed as a minor issue. Suggesting that users change their settings to hide images is not a viable solution; such representations on a public platform like Wikipedia perpetuate disrespect and harm.
The fourth Kaaba is the one we see today. (It has been completely rebuilt several times, but no more major architectural changes were made.) It was built to the order of the Umayyad Khalif Abdelmalek around 692. Abdelmalek set out to build the Kaaba to the prophet Muhammad's own specifications. The semi-cirular part was torn down to a hight of a few feet. The low wall that was left standing can still be seen today. The part between the square and the semi-circle was removed altogether. The arch was bricked up, as were all the windows and the door on the south-west side. The lowest two meters of the other door were also bricked up, so that today one needs a ladder to go through it.


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>4.Preventing idolatry:<nowiki>'''</nowiki> The traditional prohibition against images of prophets serves to prevent idolatry—a principle that should be respected in any educational context. The presence of these images on Wikipedia violates this fundamental religious principle.
I think this may be a bit too much detail though.
P.S. The last rebuild was in 1627.


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>5.Comparison to other figures:<nowiki>'''</nowiki> While Wikipedia may use images of historical figures like Jesus, it is crucial to note that any depiction of Prophet Muhammad (Peace be Upon Him) is universally forbidden in Islam. This distinction makes comparisons inadequate and unjustifiable.
== Major revision ==


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>6.Separate link for images: <nowiki>'''</nowiki>Creating a separate link for these images is also not an acceptable solution. The core issue remains that any depiction of Prophet Muhammad (Peace be Upon Him) is considered blasphemous in Islam, and there is no allowance for such visual representations under any circumstances. The existence of these images on a public platform like Wikipedia is inherently offensive and harmful.
I removed some material re idols, as I don't believe that it's academically verifiable. I think it might just be Muslim tradition, though I could be wrong. I removed material about Mecca as a great center of international trade, as that is now believed to be pious exaggeration. If we're not going to give all sides of it, we should just leave it out. That's better done in the article on Mecca, in any case.


We acknowledge the FAQ section on the Talk:Muhammad page but believe that this request warrants special consideration due to its unique nature. The presence of these images does not contribute to the educational value of the article but rather perpetuates significant cultural and religious offense.
I also removed a para about the wonder of the Kaaba that I thought was too pious Muslim POV. I reorganized into sections and added some material that one editor had put into the talk page. It's a big reorg and could probably be improved. [[User:Zora|Zora]] 20:55, 10 May 2005 (UTC)


<nowiki>'''Examples of Content Removal from Wikipedia '''</nowiki>
Given that all Muslims have to go, according to their religion, to Mecca, once in their lives, it seems extremely plausible that it would become a great centre of international trade, simply due to the large numbers of wide rangingly foreign people present there. [[User:81.156.176.226|81.156.176.226]] 19:04, 24 July 2005 (UTC)


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>1.John Seigenthaler Wikipedia Hoax (2005):<nowiki>'''</nowiki> A false and defamatory article about journalist John Seigenthaler was posted on Wikipedia and removed after being identified. This instance illustrates Wikipedia's commitment to maintaining content integrity by removing material that is harmful or misleading.
: I guess I wasn't clear. I'm referring to the pre-Muslim Mecca. Mecca has never been a trade depot SINCE Muhammad. Patricia Crone wrote a book contra the old "Mecca was the most powerful city in Arabia" concept. [[User:Zora|Zora]] 01:06, 25 July 2005 (UTC)


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>2.Essjay Controversy (2007):<nowiki>'''</nowiki> Contributions from a prominent Wikipedia editor who falsified his credentials were scrutinized and subsequently removed, demonstrating that Wikipedia actively removes content undermining its reliability.


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>3.Wiki-PR Scandal (2012): <nowiki>'''</nowiki>Manipulated content created by a company using sockpuppet accounts was removed, showcasing Wikipedia's efforts to prevent abuse of its platform.
Zora, the whole idea of Banu Ummayad resisting Islam is due to that they feelt their idols being the source of the trade. If you are going to ommit that, you are ommiting a big part of how Muslims see on the Ummayad motivation on why they opposed monotheism. If you feel its non-sens, give it a "muslims belive", dont delet it. I mean, the caravans going to yemen and syria, the non-war month... its all part of the kabaa. --[[User:Striver|Striver]] 03:00, 25 July 2005 (UTC)


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>4.Orangemoody Investigation (2015):<nowiki>'''</nowiki> Fraudulent content posted by a group of blackmailers using sockpuppet accounts was removed, highlighting Wikipedia's proactive stance against harmful content.
: The article may not include as much detail as you want, but there are enough links to other articles that people can explore if they want more. We can't squeeze all of the history of Islam 600-632 in there! Do you want to suggest some links that should be there and aren't? (Be warned in advance that I don't think the Sunni/Shi'a conflict should be shoehorned into here!)


Relevant Policies
: It was the Quraysh as a whole, not just the Umayyads, who resisted Islam. [[User:Zora|Zora]] 03:50, 25 July 2005 (UTC)


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>Wikipedia's Policy on Images:<nowiki>'''</nowiki>


According to your guidelines, <nowiki>'''"images that would bring the project into disrepute... may be removed by any user."'''</nowiki> The continued presence of these offensive images directly contradicts this policy as they clearly offend a significant portion of users.
Well, it can just be stated that the Kabaa and its idols is belived by Muslims to be the economical base of the Ummayad. Furthermore, Banu Hashim is also a part of Quraish and they resisted the Ummayad.


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>Wikipedia's Policy on Offensive Material:<nowiki>'''</nowiki>
--[[User:Striver|Striver]] 17:35, 25 July 2005 (UTC)


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>1.According to Wikipedia:<nowiki>'''</nowiki> Offensive material, while Wikipedia aims to include material that may offend, it explicitly states that "offensive words and offensive images should not be included unless they are treated in an encyclopedic manner." The inclusion of these blasphemous images does not meet this criterion as they serve no educational purpose but rather cause harm.
: Striver, not all of the Banu Hashim were originally Muslim, just some of them. Furthermore, there were more branches to the Quraysh genealogy than just Abd Shams (of which the Umayyads were just a sub-clan) and Hashim. There were also Nawfal and al-Muttalib. [[User:Zora|Zora]] 23:51, 25 July 2005 (UTC)


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>2.Neutral Point of View:<nowiki>'''</nowiki> As outlined in Wikipedia's Guide to Deletion, all content must adhere to a neutral point of view (NPOV). The presence of these offensive images violates this policy by failing to respect a significant portion of your readership who find such content unacceptable.
==Pictures?==


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>3.Speedy Deletion Policy: <nowiki>'''</nowiki> This policy states that pages can be deleted without discussion if they meet criteria for speedy deletion due to being obviously inappropriate for Wikipedia (Wikipedia:Deletion policy). Given their blasphemous nature, these images qualify for immediate removal under this guideline.
Are there any pictures showing the Kaabaa without it's black coverings? [[User:Commking|Commking]] July 11 2005


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>4.Content Integrity Maintenance: <nowiki>'''</nowiki> Content that undermines Wikipedia's reliability or trustworthiness can be removed proactively by editors or administrators (Wikipedia:Content Integrity). Allowing these offensive images undermines your credibility as an encyclopedia committed to accuracy and respect.
: Possibly, but I don't know where one would go to find PUBLIC DOMAIN pictures of that type. [[User:Zora|Zora]] 05:20, 11 July 2005 (UTC)


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>5.Adherence to Neutrality: <nowiki>'''</nowiki> Wikipedia has a strong stance against Holocaust denial and antisemitism, clearly reflected in the Holocaust denial page, which debunks false claims and provides historical evidence. This commitment to neutrality and respect for deeply held beliefs should be extended to the depiction of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) as well.
== Kaaba as Hindu temple ==


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>Handling of Other Sensitive Topics:<nowiki>'''</nowiki>
One editor -- I believe it must be Tuxthepenguin, sometimes editing as an anon -- seems to believe that the Kaaba was a Hindu temple, and periodically edits the Kaaba page to add this belief.


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>1.Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: <nowiki>'''</nowiki>Wikipedia handles content related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with sensitivity and neutrality, ensuring a balanced representation of different perspectives.
Wikipedia tries to be NPOV, and include the arguments from all ''widespread'' beliefs, but this belief is so minority as to be imperceptible to those who don't share it. I have NEVER EVER seen it advanced by anyone other than the anon. It is non-notable, and doesn't deserve inclusion. Tux, if you can make thousands of converts and be featured in Time magazine, come back and add the info re your beliefs. Otherwise, please don't try to use the article as a soapbox. [[User:Zora|Zora]] 21:43, 21 July 2005 (UTC)


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>2.Abortion: <nowiki>'''</nowiki>Wikipedia presents diverse viewpoints on abortion respectfully, acknowledging the sensitivity of the topic.
== Why? ==


<nowiki>'''</nowiki>3.Censorship and Internet Freedom: <nowiki>'''</nowiki>Wikipedia respects local laws and cultural sensitivities, demonstrating its commitment to respecting different cultural and religious practices.
Does anyone know why the Ka'aba was built in the first place?
Obviously there will be a difference between secular academic views and religious views, but neither are in the article [[User:81.156.176.226|81.156.176.226]] 18:57, 24 July 2005 (UTC)


In light of these considerations and your own policies, I urge you to take immediate action to remove these offensive images from the "Kaaba" page and review your guidelines regarding sensitive religious content moving forward.
== Kaa'ba built by ... and for ... ?==


Thank you for your understanding and swift action on this matter.
From what I can gather, Allah (God) ordained a place on Earth to be a focal point of worship; Adam built this place of worship (not sure if it was called the Kaa'ba at this stage). Later, Abraham and Ishmael rebuilt it and Abraham is considered the true founder of the Holy Shrine (according to the Qur'an) - according to the link I've added. I'm not going to put this into the article (yet), as I want to check the details of this and finding other reliable sources --[[User:Mpatel|Mpatel]] 17:33, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Sincerely, Yasha Ullah Afghan [[Special:Contributions/202.47.33.85|202.47.33.85]] ([[User talk:202.47.33.85|talk]]) 05:41, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
{{abot}}
: For the longer answer, see [[Talk:Muhammad/FAQ]]. --[[User:JMF|𝕁𝕄𝔽]] ([[User talk:JMF|talk]]) 10:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 05:17, 28 December 2024

Semi-protected edit request on 17 September 2024

[edit]

In this sentence: 

Islamic sanctities received great attention from the Circassian sultans during the period in which they ruled the Islamic world (1382–1517 CE), with the Kaaba receiving significant attention.

please remove the CE. It's obvious from the context: if this were BCE, it would be 1517-1382, not the other way around, and since Muhammad was born in the sixth century CE, there weren't any Islamic sanctities in 1382 BCE because Islam didn't exist yet. WP:ERA says "In general, omit CE or AD, except to avoid ambiguity or awkwardness", so CE should be omitted. 123.51.107.94 (talk) 01:36, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done In most cases your analysis would be correct but in this article, CE is being distinguished from AH, not from AD. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But according to Hijri year, the current AH year is 1445 or 1446. If you don't generally use AH, you'll assume that this means AD unless it says otherwise. If you do generally use it, you'll know that 1382 was just a few decades ago (when there weren't sultans ruling the Islamic world) and 1517 is in the future. 123.51.107.94 (talk) 01:46, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can see the logic of that argument and in general we try to avoid attaching an era notation when no ambiguity arises (to avoid nonsense like "2024 AD"). But in this case I believe that the correct way to resolve it is to give the date in both notations, hence "during the period in which they ruled the Islamic world (784–924 AH, 1382–1517 CE)", which I have now done. Of course another editor may agree with you and disagree with me: if so I will concede the point. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 13:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2024

[edit]

I want to edit this section in Background :

"In her book Islam: A Short History, Karen Armstrong asserts that the Kaaba was officially dedicated to Hubal, a Nabatean deity, and contained 360 idols which probably represented the days of the year.[27] However, by the time of Muhammad's era, it seems that the Kaaba was venerated as the temple of Allah, the High God,"

why? the Kaaba can only be used to refer to the house of allah in itself, it doesn't have any other meaning, now the problem here is, this place couldn't be called el Kaaba before it was even built, and calling it that, causes some people to have a false assumptions about muslims worshipping others dietys in allah own house which is extremely offensive,

instead it should be something like this:

"In her book Islam: A Short History, Karen Armstrong asserts that the grounds in which the Kaaba was built upon was officially dedicated to Hubal, a Nabatean deity, and contained 360 idols which probably represented the days of the year.[27] However, by the time of Muhammad's era the Kaaba was built as the temple of Allah, the High God,"

as a Muslim and an Arabic speaker, I can tell you that the Kaaba is not a land again its the house of allah in itself and its important to distinguish between the kaaba in itself and the ground that it was built upon. Adam.R12 (talk) 05:41, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please read WP:VERIFY and feel free to reopen the edit request if you can find a reliable source that supports your proposed change. M.Bitton (talk) 09:36, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just to be clear: what you say is most probably true. But for this high-profile article, every assertion needs supporting evidence. So when you find that evidence and it supports clearly what you say, then it can be incorporated. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:32, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you ever gone to the Kaaba sharif?

[edit]

I'll go when I'm able to go. Im not currently in the "traveling" situation 😃 Haraf13 (talk) 13:18, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This a talk page to discussion on the improvement of the article. This is not a forum or discussion page about the travel plans. Xoocit (talk) 22:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kaaba: Demand for Deletion of Blasphemous Imaged of the Last Prophet Muhammad (Peace be Upon Him)

[edit]
No per WP:NOTCENSORED and WP:NPOV. — Czello (music) 07:25, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion 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.

Subject: Request for Immediate Removal of Blasphemous Images from the "Kaaba" Wikipedia Page

Dear Wikipedia Team,

I hope this message finds you well. My name is [Your Name], and I am writing as a member of the Muslim community deeply concerned about the presence of pictorial depictions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and his blessed companions on the Wikipedia page titled "Kaaba" (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaaba).

These images, located under the 'History' tab, are '''highly offensive and blasphemous to Muslims around the world, as any visual representation of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is strictly prohibited in Islam'''. The specific images in question are:

'''1. "Muhammad at the Ka'ba" from the Siyer-i Nebi, showing Muhammad with a veiled face, c. 1595.'''

'''2. A miniature from 1307 CE depicting Muhammad fixing the black stone into the Kaaba.'''

These images not only disrespect our beliefs but also deeply hurt the sentiments of millions in the Muslim community, including myself. The existence of these images on a public platform like Wikipedia fosters misunderstanding and disrespects our faith, which is rooted in profound reverence for our beloved Last Prophet (Peace be Upon Him). We kindly request that these images be removed from the Wikipedia page immediately, without any delay or further explanation.

We understand that Wikipedia requires supporting evidence for high-profile articles. '''In this case, the prohibition of visual depictions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is well-documented in Islamic teachings and widely recognized by scholars and religious authorities. Numerous fatwas based on Qur'anic scripture and hadith traditions from all schools of thought strictly prohibit drawing images of the last Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and his blessed companions, deeming such acts as blasphemy. This prohibition is rooted in Islamic teachings that emphasize the importance of avoiding idolatry and misrepresentation. Scholars unanimously agree that there is no permissibility whatsoever for visual representations of the Last Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) or his blessed companions, as such depictions are considered blasphemous and fundamentally incompatible with Islamic teachings.'''

Furthermore, surveys indicate that a significant portion of Muslims find such depictions offensive. The Journal of Islamic Thought and Civilization highlights that Muslims believe visual depictions of all prophets should be prohibited, particularly those of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), as they hurt their emotions and go against their faith (Journal of Islamic Thought and Civilization). We urge you to consider the sensitivity of this matter and its impact on millions of Muslims worldwide.

'''Addressing Wikipedia's FAQ:'''

'''1.Wikipedia is not censored:''' While Wikipedia aims to provide a neutral point of view, it is essential to consider how these images offend deeply held beliefs. The presence of such content does not foster an inclusive environment for all users.

'''2.Historical accuracy:''' The images in question are historically inaccurate, as acknowledged by Wikipedia. The artists who created these works lived centuries after Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and could not have seen him. Using inaccurate images perpetuates misconceptions rather than providing educational value.

'''3.Offense to Muslims:''' Wikipedia recognizes that depictions of Muhammad are offensive to many Muslims. This offense affects millions globally and cannot be dismissed as a minor issue. Suggesting that users change their settings to hide images is not a viable solution; such representations on a public platform like Wikipedia perpetuate disrespect and harm.

'''4.Preventing idolatry:''' The traditional prohibition against images of prophets serves to prevent idolatry—a principle that should be respected in any educational context. The presence of these images on Wikipedia violates this fundamental religious principle.

'''5.Comparison to other figures:''' While Wikipedia may use images of historical figures like Jesus, it is crucial to note that any depiction of Prophet Muhammad (Peace be Upon Him) is universally forbidden in Islam. This distinction makes comparisons inadequate and unjustifiable.

'''6.Separate link for images: '''Creating a separate link for these images is also not an acceptable solution. The core issue remains that any depiction of Prophet Muhammad (Peace be Upon Him) is considered blasphemous in Islam, and there is no allowance for such visual representations under any circumstances. The existence of these images on a public platform like Wikipedia is inherently offensive and harmful.

We acknowledge the FAQ section on the Talk:Muhammad page but believe that this request warrants special consideration due to its unique nature. The presence of these images does not contribute to the educational value of the article but rather perpetuates significant cultural and religious offense.

'''Examples of Content Removal from Wikipedia '''

'''1.John Seigenthaler Wikipedia Hoax (2005):''' A false and defamatory article about journalist John Seigenthaler was posted on Wikipedia and removed after being identified. This instance illustrates Wikipedia's commitment to maintaining content integrity by removing material that is harmful or misleading.

'''2.Essjay Controversy (2007):''' Contributions from a prominent Wikipedia editor who falsified his credentials were scrutinized and subsequently removed, demonstrating that Wikipedia actively removes content undermining its reliability.

'''3.Wiki-PR Scandal (2012): '''Manipulated content created by a company using sockpuppet accounts was removed, showcasing Wikipedia's efforts to prevent abuse of its platform.

'''4.Orangemoody Investigation (2015):''' Fraudulent content posted by a group of blackmailers using sockpuppet accounts was removed, highlighting Wikipedia's proactive stance against harmful content.

Relevant Policies

'''Wikipedia's Policy on Images:'''

According to your guidelines, '''"images that would bring the project into disrepute... may be removed by any user."''' The continued presence of these offensive images directly contradicts this policy as they clearly offend a significant portion of users.

'''Wikipedia's Policy on Offensive Material:'''

'''1.According to Wikipedia:''' Offensive material, while Wikipedia aims to include material that may offend, it explicitly states that "offensive words and offensive images should not be included unless they are treated in an encyclopedic manner." The inclusion of these blasphemous images does not meet this criterion as they serve no educational purpose but rather cause harm.

'''2.Neutral Point of View:''' As outlined in Wikipedia's Guide to Deletion, all content must adhere to a neutral point of view (NPOV). The presence of these offensive images violates this policy by failing to respect a significant portion of your readership who find such content unacceptable.

'''3.Speedy Deletion Policy: ''' This policy states that pages can be deleted without discussion if they meet criteria for speedy deletion due to being obviously inappropriate for Wikipedia (Wikipedia:Deletion policy). Given their blasphemous nature, these images qualify for immediate removal under this guideline.

'''4.Content Integrity Maintenance: ''' Content that undermines Wikipedia's reliability or trustworthiness can be removed proactively by editors or administrators (Wikipedia:Content Integrity). Allowing these offensive images undermines your credibility as an encyclopedia committed to accuracy and respect.

'''5.Adherence to Neutrality: ''' Wikipedia has a strong stance against Holocaust denial and antisemitism, clearly reflected in the Holocaust denial page, which debunks false claims and provides historical evidence. This commitment to neutrality and respect for deeply held beliefs should be extended to the depiction of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) as well.

'''Handling of Other Sensitive Topics:'''

'''1.Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: '''Wikipedia handles content related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with sensitivity and neutrality, ensuring a balanced representation of different perspectives.

'''2.Abortion: '''Wikipedia presents diverse viewpoints on abortion respectfully, acknowledging the sensitivity of the topic.

'''3.Censorship and Internet Freedom: '''Wikipedia respects local laws and cultural sensitivities, demonstrating its commitment to respecting different cultural and religious practices.

In light of these considerations and your own policies, I urge you to take immediate action to remove these offensive images from the "Kaaba" page and review your guidelines regarding sensitive religious content moving forward.

Thank you for your understanding and swift action on this matter.

Sincerely, Yasha Ullah Afghan 202.47.33.85 (talk) 05:41, 20 December 2024 (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.
For the longer answer, see Talk:Muhammad/FAQ. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kaaba&oldid=1265692708"