Jump to content

Talk:Abd Allah ibn al-Zubayr

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2001:4dd7:8308:0:4049:e96f:7389:5239 (talk) at 11:34, 24 September 2018 (Denouncement of the unproven allegations by the mut'ah children. Please provide independent sources!). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Untitled

Was he really a Sahaba? Did he really see the Profet? --Striver 21:01, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, he did. --Islamic 00:06, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, when was he born? --Striver 11:03, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
1 AH. He was the first born after Hijra. --Islamic 14:29, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, great info. Do you have a source to back it up so we can add it to the article? --Striver 15:20, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The source is Tahdhib al-Tahdhib (تهذيب التهذيب) by Ibn Hajar. The birth year is disputed in general, but being the first born after Hijra is not disputed. See also: http://dictionary.al-islam.com/arb/Dicts/SelDict.asp?RDF=1&TL=1&Theme=26&DI=26 --Islamic 14:12, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a terrible article. Completely un-encyclopedic— Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.66.74.24 (talk) 23:17, 16 November 2014

Why being like this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.93.117.69 (talk) 10:03, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]


The family tree has some inaccuracies. Zubayr Ibn Al_Awwam was not from the Banu Hashim as shown, instead from the Banu Asad as the lineage runs from the father's side. Zubayr's father was Al-Awwam who was from the Banu Asad clan. In this family tree he is shown to be a descendant of Saffiyah (Prophet's [PBUH] aunt and hence from Banu Hashim) but he actually descends from his father's side. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.83.42.135 (talk) 16:26, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing inaccurate about it - Banu Asad is a subtribe of Banu Hashim. Imprecise, perhaps, but not inaccurate. 216.170.214.67 (talk) 21:06, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The story of hanging the body on the cross and saying (Isn't it time for this warrior/knight...etc) is attributed to the story of Martyrdom of Zaid (Zayd), the son of imam Ali bin Al-Husayn. Not Abdullah bin Al-Zubayr. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lonelytj (talkcontribs) 17:04, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dates need to be consistent

There are two different birth years in the article. Even if disputed, they should be consistent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Droopyfeathers (talkcontribs) 21:55, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Family

Why do you keep restoring this defective passage? Why do you keep saying that he (Abdullah ibn Zubayr) is born out of Mut'ah? His mother Asma was married to his Father Zubayr without any time limits. Mut'ah is an invention the Shia brought up centuries after the time of the companions of the Prophet (pbuh). Zubayr and Asma were married before the Hijra and Zubayr divorced here years after the Hijra out of free will. In contrast a Mut'ah, which is only practised by the Shia, means that there should have been a contract at the time of marriage, which limits the marriage to a certain time period and automatically dissolves the marriage after that period. There is no single proven source and the Shia sources which are included in the reference do not have any supported Narration chains, nor any single non-Shia source which could strengthen their offensive claim. In Islam everything must be proven either with written record or at least many unrelated eye-witnesses and strong narration chains. Can you provide any single written record of the incident to strengthen your defamations? Why does Wikipedia let these offender defaming our Religion and the honour of our great companions just because they give shia-self-written-books xyz as resources ? What kind of encyclopedia is that, where anybody can come up with unproven resources defaming people with what is merely a non-proven allegation? It heavily discredits Wikipedia as a reliable source of knowledge and the people should warn each other from taking information out of a such unreliable source. I won't delete this part again, because it will be restored by those Shia-fanatics anyway, and wikipedia is doing nothing against these vandalism. I will just boycott wikipedia now and hopefully there will be an encyclopedia in the future which does not focus on quantity of articles but rather on QUALITY and 100% correctness of them!