|WikiProject Biography||(Rated Start-class)|
|WikiProject Islam / Salaf|
This article seems to present the legends concerning Shaiba ibn Hashim as completely factually accurate. For example, though we know that Abreha (Abraha) died sometime in the 570s, there's no evidence he actually invaded Mecca; if he did, it's preposterous to assume that he was killed by being stoned by birds.
Yom 20:58, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
- Just a further note, but it appears Abreha actually died in the 550s and that Mecca was under Aksumite control before 570 (for Abraha's conquests, see Events in Arabia in the 6th Century A. D., by Sidney Smith, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London © 1954. School of Oriental and African Studies) — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 01:10, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Further note: The whole well of Zamzam story sounds very much like a folklore/legend, but it is presented as factually acccurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 01:59, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Fourth Sunni Caliph
Correct if I'm wrong, but isn't it widely known that Ali was the fourth caliph , not abdtul muttalib. I don't know where came from. Can someone source this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 17:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
You are absolutely correct. Abdul Muttalib was never a caliph in the lineage of caliphs in Islamic history, in fact he was not a Muslim at all! He had died decades before his grandson Muhammad claimed the prophethood of God and evangelized his new faith of Islam.
The fourth caliph (Khalifa or successor to the Prophet Muhammad in heading the Islamic congregation, similar to the Popes succeeding Christ in Christianity) in the line of Khulafa Al Raashideen meaning the enlightened and divinely guided caliphs, was indeed Ali son of Abi Taalib the son of Abdul Muttalib! He succeeded the caliphate of Uthmaan Ibn Affan the third caliph in the sequence of Khulafa Al Raashideen. Lutfullah (talk) 00:08, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Lutfullah
What amazes me is the fact that Wikipedia has named and indexed this article as Abdul Mutallib instead of Abdul Muttalib the name of the person which it informs about! Lutfullah (talk) 00:08, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Lutfullah
- No need to be amazed. It's an error. They happen. Now it's corrected. Drmies (talk) 16:44, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
I am new to this discussion and so don't want to jump in and make drastic changes. And I am not sure what the Wikipedia policy is on which name should be the primary for a historical figure. I will try to look it up. But this person is universally referred to as Abdul Muttalib. Few people are even aware of his birth name.