Talk:Samiri

Likeness to Abu Bakr Section

This section is not relevant to the figure of Samiri, nothing in it relates to him or who he is. The views in it are political opinions of the historical figure Abu Bakr by shia muslims. Aby Bakr was the first Khalifah in islam after the prophet (saws) and he was a Khalif before the shia sect came into existence, there opinions on him are their interpretation of history and events. The Shia sect is roughly 5-12% of the world Muslim population, so sectarian minority opinions of who Abu Bakr was are being represented as mainstream Islam. The Majority of Muslims ~90% accept Abu Bakr as the legitimate first Khalif and this is reflected academically. So this entire section should be deleted due to its irrelevance to who samiri was and for it's sectarian bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.216.100.151 (talk) 04:53, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Connection with Zimri/Lack of Scholarly Opinions regarding Samiri's Identity

This article, in my opinion, needs more scholarly commentary regarding the identity of Samiri. True, some have identified him with Zimri, but other scholars and classical Qur'anic commentators remaiBLOBVIS e needs to present and discuss these differing views. To simply equate Samiri with Zimri based solely on some similarities in their characters without addressing the diversity of opinion among the commentators does readers a great disservice.

You're right, there is nothing even approaching consensus over the link between Samiri and Zimri. I added some other opinions and possible identities. Dragoon17 (talk) 18:29, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Name

Should he be referred to as "Samiri" or "as-Samiri/al-Samiri" or "the Samiri" or something else? The Quran and most Arabic sources use the prefix (السامري) because without the prefix (سامري) it can just mean "Samaritan", but English sources seem to have no agreed-upon term. If it's kept as "Samiri", then it should be either linked to on Samaritans or a disambiguation page should be created, because right now "Samiri" redirects there. Dragoon17 (talk) 18:35, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

"Islamic figure"

Isn't it a bit strange to refer to this man as an "Islamic" figure? In the religion, the word Islam refers to the Submission to Allah, whereas this individual was known as a Kafir and Mushrik. At very least this should be changed to "Samiri (Hebrew figure)" or "(Israelite figure)".MuslimKnight786 (talk) 02:51, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

ALthough the figure itself is not a Muslim or himself portrayed as following the religion of Islam, it is a figure from the religion of Islam. Since Samiri is not a historical person, he is neither a Hebrew nor an Israelite. He is a figure from the religion called Islam.--VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 22:40, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

How can Moses have met a Samari....

when he(Moses) lived between 1400 and 1200 BC while the first Samaris exist at least 300 years later arround 900 BC??

Surah 20:85-88 therefore looks like a historical error which would indiciate and prove that the Quran cannot be from God. 80.131.59.246 (talk) 01:42, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Moses is a fictional character. The writers of his fairy tales could place him at any point in time. Dimadick (talk) 23:33, 17 October 2022 (UTC)