Talk:Rayhana bint Zayd

Her life

They are very few, contradictory and even written with very bad Arabic grammar, there is doubt cast over every detail of her life. This is a very interesting subject, but confusing to say the least. FrummerThanThou 22:27, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure. But please let use good quality sources rather than personal opinions. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 23:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

This is article is still under construction. It is hard to furnish sources for everything on the go, so please tag any statements with {fact} individually before reverting them entirely. I will be creating a death of Mohammad sometime soon, so will be able to merge loose details if needed. FrummerThanThou 00:54, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Best would be if you first find the sources and then add the text. The current version is well sourced and it is OK to stay as a stub. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 00:56, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Material added need to be supported by sources. The burden to provide such sources is on the editor adding material, not on the editor wanting to remove material. See WP:V. If you want, you can work on a sandbox in the username space such as User:FrummerThanThou/Rayhana Bint Zayd], rather than in here. Of course, if you have good material supported by sources that you want to add, that would be most welcome. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:33, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

• Question: in attempting to source the fact that her identity is very confusing, do i need to find conflicting stories or a quote from a scholar that it is so? FrummerThanThou 05:41, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Concubibe

I changed "concubine" to the more specific MMA. Concubinage includes situations that is punishable by Islamic Law, MMA is simply more accurate and informative. --Striver 00:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Dubious other tradition

The Sirat-e-Halbiyyah does mention her as his wife but says nothing about her refusal to veil herself. This is either plagiarism from some other book or the author of Note 2 has written falsely in the name of the book. Since the argument here is about the credibility of the book itself that claims those things, it's also important to check the credibility of the user who posted note 2 and contents relating to it. I can post scanned pages relating to Rayhana from the book.FlexibleCogito 16:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC) FlexibeCogito

Nur al-Din al-Halabi is not a reliable source. If there is indeed a rival Muslim tradition that Rayhana became Muhammad's wife, it must be sourced to widely accepted Muslim biographies of Muhammad, hadith etc. Beit Or 12:40, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Why is Halabi not a reliable source? His work is published by Idarah Qasmiyyah Deoband, from the Deobandi school of thought. He is also a medieval scholar. The fact that he wrote a multi-volume biography, larger than ibn Hisham, and that his work has survived, been reproduced, and even translated into foreign languages is enough to warrant his scholarship. Bless sins 15:48, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Being published by the Deobandis further undermines any possible claims to reliability. You must demonstrate that his claims were or are widely accepted among Muslims before you can write anything on "an alternative tradition". Beit Or 15:57, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

How does bieng published by a popular school of thought undermine the reliablity? The fact that his work has survived through centuries, and is translated into other languages, is evidence to his notability in the Muslim World.Bless sins 16:38, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Being supported by the extremists is not a good argument in favor of reliability. Your other arguments are far-fetched. There hundreds, if not thousands, of Muslim works like this one. Show me it reflects a curent of thought significant enough to be included in the encyclopedia. Beit Or 17:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Where on earth did you get "extremist" from? Sorry, Beit Or, but there are very few works that have survived and have been published and moreover, translated into ohter languages. Also, what is "curent of thought" supposed to mean?Bless sins 22:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Here are some sources.

This is what Ibn Ishaq says (Guillaume, OUP, p. 466).

The apostle had chosen one of their women for himself, Rayhana d. Amr b. Khunafa, one of the women of B. Amr b. Qurayza, and she remained with him until she died, in his power. The apostle had proposed to marry her and put the veil on her, but she said: “Nay, leave me in your power, for that will be easier for me and for you.” So he left her. She had shown repugnance towards Islam when she was captured, and clung to Judaism. So the apostle put her aside and felt some displeasure. While he was with his companions, he heard the sound of sandals behind him and said, “This is Tha'laba b. Sa'ya coming to give me the good news of Rayhana’s acceptance of Islam,” and he came up to announce the fact. This gave him pleasure.

This is what Ibn Saad says about Rayhana in the Tabaqat (vol. 8, Bewley, Ta-Ha, p. 93).

So the Messenger of Allah freed her and married her and set up the Screen for her.

He also cites this tradition, apparently from Rayhana herself (p. 92).

When I became a Muslim, the Messenger of Allah set me free and married me and gave me a dower of 12.5 uqiyyas as he gave as a dower to his wives. He wedded me in the house of Umm al-Mundhir.

And this one (p. 93).

The Messenger of Allah freed her and married her. She was among his wives ...

But in contradiction is this one (p. 93).

I have heard some relate that she was owned by the Messenger of Allah and he did not free her before her death.

This is what Al-Tabari says (vol. 39, Landau-Tasseron, SUNY Press, p. 165).

When the Banu Qurayzah were taken captive the Prophet took her, set her free, and married her. She was still married to him when she died.

According to Muhammad b. 'Umar [al-Waqidi]: Rayhanah remained married to the Prophet until her death on the Prophet's return from the Farewell Pilgrimage; he buried her in al-Baqi. He had married her in Muharram 6/May-June 627.

This is in apparent contradiction to what he says elsewhere (vol. 9, Poonawala, SUNY Press, p. 137).

God granted Rayhanah bt. Zayd of the Banu Qurayzah to his Messenger [as booty].

So the traditions do not agree. While the earliest source states that she was a slave (and Ibn Hisham's note 918 does not mention her), Ibn Saad and Al-Tabari knew of several variant traditions claiming that she was a wife.Petra MacDonald 04:29, 30 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petra MacDonald (talk • contribs)

CONCUBINE?

How was she Muhammad's concubine when islam very clearly condemns extra marital activities? I think concubine should be relaced by something more appropriate and nearer to the truth. Plus, some of the sources used here are biased - a more neutral approach should be taken. Personal view!

why not? Having more than four wifes is also not very Islamic even though Muhammad was allowed to have more. Why wouldn't he be allowed to have a concubine either? Things can get very flexible at times. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.61.174.236 (talk) 12:41, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Islamic law does allow men to own concubines and to have extra-marital affairs with them, see Ma malakat aymanukum.Wissamkhatib (talk) 12:27, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

this is an obvious attempt to demonize the prophet muhammed by people who i am guessing are either ravenous zionist pigs, or just your typical run of the mill pseudo intellectual tards with a mild resentment towards muslims in wake of recent events. "wiki"pedia is a joke, and i certainly don't take it as a credible source of info on any subject. sadly though the vast majority of the idiotic masses of people seem to regard it as a oracle of wisdom. (in other words, white people, bringers of such lovely human calamities as the holocaust, nuclear holocaust of japanese, likelihood of future nuclear holocausts, genocide of native americans, mass enslavement of various ethnic groups, financial subjugation and ruin of whole nations and tribes, as well as weaponized diseases... ahh yes, a dangerously pesky thing that malleable mind of the europeon male. its only resulted in... what? 300-perhaps as high as 500 million deaths in a century alone? and thats not counting the subsequent lives that have been lost aswell) anyways, to hell with you scum of the earth telling these horrific, demonstrative lies about the prophet of islam. i myself am not a muslim, but it certainly doesn't take one to detect the overtly evident contemptuous tone of these articles pertaining to anything remotely associated with those whom happen to have the current misfortune of being in the path of the ever so malevolent minds of the "civilized" west. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.149.71.235 (talk) 21:48, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

"Rayhana is said to have later converted to Islam"

Please take into account the literal translation of the Arabic version of this article which explicitly states in a translation of events: "that Prophet Muhammad "Peace Be Upon Him" was informed of "Um al Mo'menin"'s Rayhana's Embracement of Islam" on a continuation to the Story "Prophet Muhammad offered "Um al Mo'menin" Rayhana the status of becoming his wife when she accepted Islam, but she favored to remain with her current status."even after accepting Islam." This is faultily mentioned on this article as: "Muhammad took her as a maiden slave and offered her the status of becoming his wife if she accepted Islam, but she refused", explicitly giving the chance to comprehend as: That she refused both "Embracing Islam" and "The Wife status, therefore".Fdabbass1 (talk) 07:25, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Little assistance here?Fdabbass1 (talk) 18:27, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

The full text of that paragraph is "According to Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad took her as a maiden slave and offered her the status of becoming his wife if she accepted Islam, but she refused. According to his account, even though Rayhana is said to have later converted to Islam, she died as a slave." This seems to show clarification of your concern in the very next sentence. How would you suggest improving this wording? FractalFive (talk) 14:31, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Hebrew name

Why does her name need to be transliterated into Hebrew when "Rayhana bint Zayd" is a thoroughly Arabic name and her tribe did not even speak Hebrew? Wissamkhatib (talk) 12:18, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Actually the Nadir tribe did speak Hebrew at home (e.g., Ibn Saad vol. 2 p. 112). What we don't know is whether they translated their Hebrew names into Arabic when speaking to Arabs or whether the Hebrew names that they used at home were completely different.Petra MacDonald (talk) 23:11, 11 March 2016 (UTC)