Talk:Sabians/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Initial discussion
Removed from the article
- In the story of Jeses, it is Marym who is regarded as the one who received a revelation but as a woman was not considered, at the time, qualified to preach a message publicly. Inspired by her, Johia, her young relative, was encouraged to become a strict practitioner of Mose (the original religion) in order to find the rule (Mlek) of God's Word which Marym believed she had seen. Rejuvinating a priesthood dedicated to God, over the years Johian grew up to be a living encyclopaedia of God's Word. The deeper he went the more he realised that most of the religious community was misguided and failed to see & more importantly failed to help the illiterate ones see the living intelligence which lay behind it all. Meanwhile Marym sacrificed much of herself in order to bring up a child who would exemplify the way of a believer who held Johian in high regard. That child grew up to be Johian's exempliary follower Jeses. Johian did indeed find what Marym claimed to have had a vision of and saw the law without that Spirit (the 'rule' understood as messiah -the name of their religion) as a worthless & empty shell. While a man with that spirit (though he be a gentile) emmited augmentation of the law simply by living. It was in Marym's own child that Johian saw the best example of that spirit since Jeses was the man he identified as doing this. The spirit of sonship incarnate.
There is a lot of unnecessary philosophy here.
This entry really needs some external links and references. Philosophy here is not unnecessary if it describes the philosophy of the Sabians. Wetman 21:09, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I am not that sure about the authenticity of much of this info. It seems to be based on theories concerning the possible origins of islam in Arabic Jewish movements around the time the Talmud was written which one of my own students was interested in. I would be very cautious of this entry.Zestauferov 01:18, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Regarding previous editions of this section: In reference to a modern organization and the information concerning a body of priesthood called Olneby. After researching the Internet and various printed sources there are no references or scholarly information to base this information on. If such data does apply it would be of great help to have documented sources. This may be a newly emerged Sabian group and should be indicated as so. Unfortunately people take information from web encyclopedias very seriously without bothering to double-check if the facts presented are real or incorrect. All scholars and researchers should encourage the need to verify facts before promoting the spread of misinformation.
Dear 4.240.39.178, please do not revert again. If you want to include your opinions in the text you are welcom, but please try to edit the page and not re-write it beecause you are throwing the crockery out with the dishwater. The Bahai & Quranic references are very useful and if you check the history are the result of responses to requests for more info. This article is about the Quran-Bahai Sabiyah, who clearly believe in Jesus. This is not about the mandaeans. Thankyou. 210.118.226.171 17:34, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
To the poster above there is noting that stipulates the Sabians of this article are exclusive to the Quran-Bahai Sabiyah. If so then this article should be titled Quran-Bahai Sabiyah not Sabians.
The Sabians as indicated in the title are those mentioned in the Qu'ran. The previous article needed a major rewrite because the information is very incorrect and appears not to be based on any known facts. After researching the Internet and various printed sources there are no references or scholarly information to base this information on. The information provided by 210.118.226.171 appears only to be a theory, seeking to prove who the Sabians and loosely based on a wide range of bits and pieces. There are no documented sources to verify much of the information stated. I also cannot find or verify any religious group called the Quran-Bahai Sabiyah at any point in history. If there is data to verify this it would be fascinating to examine. This may be a newly emerged Sabian religious group and should be indicated as so. If the information presented is reflected of a religious organization called Quran-Bahai Sabiyah I would suggest that this information be placed in an entry entitled Quran-Bahai Sabiyah to save this entry from going back and forth.
I have placed a very rough article on the Sabians in place with references for further study-- footnotes and more details can be provided if required. I feel that as a scholar and researcher in this area among others I can give a base for others to build upon. The article needs major cleaning up, formatted, especially links added since I am not very good with links (they never work for me) and can be easily expanded upon by other researchers.
User # 4.240.3.226 (rewriting the Sabians article)2004-06-14 T 03:54(UTC)
Please check the History. I have not written anything. I am only reverting your sweeping re-write which I percieve has omitted certain facts. Those facts are the comments upon the Sabis from thr Quran and Bahai writings. In fact what evidence is there for the existence of a group by that name except for the Quran and Bahai writings? You seem intent on describing them as Mandaeans. But this kind of inclusionism is not helpful for an encyclopaedia. At best mandaeans deserve one sentence affirming the connection and one sentence negating the connection for NPOV and that is all. The rest of the article should concentrate on what is known about the Sabis. It is all very well & good for you to come along and say that there is no evidence for this but all I see is an attempt to cover up what the Quran and Bahai writings have to say about the matter. Are you the expert until proven otherwise? Then why are you so intent on ommitting the Quran & Bahai source info? Sabis believe in Jesus Mandaeans do not ergo they cannot be the same group. I am reverting for the last time. If you continue to refuse to build upon what the tens of previous contributors have provided prior to your arrival and insist on deleting it all in favourt of your own original research then you may be in danger of having your IP banned. 210.118.226.171 12:17, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Whoever is responsible for the original content here is in error to describe the Sabians. What was presented is a theory. This article is certainly not a neutral point of view and would be rejected by all major researchers. If this is not your information why are you so aggressively upset? Do not you want correct information presented in an encyclopedia? As for all the contributors to this article approved of the content -- this an inaccurate statement on your part. For instant all one has to do is look above on the discussion and see the post by user named Zestauferov in which he wrote: "I am not that sure about the authenticity of much of this info. …I would be very cautious of this entry."
I was sent this to confirm or deny the validity of such an article due to the fact it is now being quoted as truth on a few web sites. If I had seen this earlier I would have had corrected the information before.
Information from the Ou'ran is present and information on the Bahai is reference-- more could always be added. There was NEVER a deliberate attempt to cover up any data or to "push" a Mandaean aganeda-- this seems a little paranoid on your part. What I have presented is the simple facts. If you look at the last version I put up it said " Many scholars contend that the Sabians mentioned in the Qu'ran are those we call today the Mandaeans. " WHY DOES THIS ONE LINE BOTHER YOU SO MUCH? It is a simple a summary of facts. References have been provided.
Also do not threaten me again-- I am a little concerned over your attitude towards me as well as the Mandaean belief system, which indicates you may have some deep-seated feelings against them or anyone connected to them
I would suggest that the administrators of this encyclopedia verify which data is correct based on scholarly evidence some of which I have given references for. I would also recommend a web page for the theoretical Quran-Bahai Sabiyah. If your administrators do not want my expert advice then I would suggest the administrators solicit an expert to provide correct information on regarding the Sabians.
Hi! Zestauferov here. Just noticed my name above and thought I could make a comment here. I have checked things out and know that this article was initiated on the same computer IP 203.252.193.13 at our university which a student of mine used to introduce me to Wiki. I am pretty sure that the info was erroneous and am thankful to USAMandaeran aka 4.240.3.XXX for confirming this. I am an inclusionist, but at the same time lets not turn this page into a Mandaean article. As far as I have learned from the very extensive links (read through the compilation of 30-odd very well researched and sourced essays about Sabians which commences here http://www.antiqillum.com/texts/bg/Qadosh/qadosh021.htm), Sabians have their own intricate history. The article is looking much better.Zestauferov 03:02, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)
additional clarification by 4.240.3.xxx
Some additional information or clarafications that someone may want to add in at some date
Sabians (eans, aeans) is one of the hardest and most mixed up ancient cultures to study --The article as presented under protection is not bad-- -- -- there is still much incorrect data. I noticed a few items right off:
Sabian is a term that has been more or less inaccurately used to describe at least 3 religious groups (see Mandaeans, Harranians or Sabeans, and Sabaeans).
<<<<<<<<<The link to Sabaeans goes to a link for island of Saba-- the Sabaeans is indicated in the spelling are the Harranians. The Harranians are not Sabeans, because this spelling usually refers to Saba in Yemen. Yes it is very confusing.>>>>>>>>>>.
The term derives from the arabic term "Sabi" (plural Sabiyah) meaning proselyte (i.e. one who has converted through Baptism but also remenisennt of a word meaning light) which was an appelation for a now obscure Arabic religious group.
<<<<<The word Sabi is a colloquial Arabic word that may be Syric or Mandaic and means to immerse or plunge in. This word does not mean to convert. References can be provided. >>>>>>>>
They are first mentioned in the Quran and later appear again in the Bahai writings.
<<<<<The word Sabian was in use before Islam and appears to be the same root used in the early centuries to describe various baptizing groups. The Sabians are mentioned by many Islamic writers from the 600's AD onward. Moses Maimonides in the 11th century AD wrote of the Sabians in his study. Then from the 1500's onward the Sabians are mention by many European scholars and writers in connection with the Mandaeans or the Harranians. The Bahai's writings do not mention the Sabians until the 1800's.>>>>>
Despite their clear documentation in traditions stemming from Islam, they have becomed yet another thing for western scholars to delight in puzzling and speculating over for decades resulting in various theories and information that has a way of producing some very heated arguments.
<<<<One small clarification-- The Sabians whoever they were do not originate or stem with Islam. They were or are a pre-Islamic faith as tested to by Mohammed>>>>>
Sabi-Mandaean connections
<<<<it would be better to say Sabian-Mandaean-- sabi or subi can be taken as a insult>>>
Some scholars have suggested that the Mandaean religion originated with Sabeans, who came under the influence of early Sabian missionaries but preferred their own priesthood.
<<<This is not exactly correct. The Mandaeans may have been influenced by the Sabaeans of Harran (Sabeans are a different group entirely) and vice versa. The Mandaeans did not originate with the Sabeans (? This word indicates Saba in Yemen a completely separate group all together) or the Sabaeans of Harran since the Mandaeans predate the last mentioned group. >>>
In either case we find in the writings from about 900 AD onward that there are now two Sabians mentioned and are distinguished as the "ancient first or true Sabians", while the Harranians are called the "pseudo Sabians".
<<This sentence needs to go into the history of the Harranians. >>>
Thus various religious groups with a connection to baptism (like the Mandaeans) have sought to have the label applied to themselves in the hopes of avoiding persecution.
<< I would suggest this sentence to be left out, as it could be detrimental and is technically invalid or outdated >>>
In Bahai writings
There seems to be some interest in the Bahai writings in regards to the Sabians so I will write some information here:
The Sabians (Sabeans, Sabaeans) are mentioned in several Bahai writings, though information is sparse. These are some quotes:
"There are, historically, two distinct groups of people known as Sabaeans. One is the Sabaeans of Harrán, a "pagan" sect which flourished in the early times of Islam. Muslim writers have written extensively about the group. However, the Qur'án includes the Sabaeans as "People of the Book" three times (2:62, 5:69, and 22:17), and the Bahá'í writings list the Sabaean religion as one of the first world religions of which any record exists today and as one of the nine "true" religions surviving today. This religious group would appear to be, not the Sabaeans of Harrán, but rather a distinct religion of the Abrahamic tradition that flourished in Mesopotamia in the early centuries B.C.E., often equated with the Mandaeans. Shoghi Effendi considered Abraham to be a follower of the Sabaean religion, and elsewhere wrote that it could not be determined whether the Sabaean or the Hindu religions were older. This might seem to be a historical discrepancy, but could be resolved if the Sabaean religion is clearly identified as a form of Mandaeanism, which latter is widely acknowledged to be ancient. "<<<< http://bahai-library.com/books/rg/rg.biblio15.html.>>>>
“As to the Sabeans, they do worship the names of the stars and claim that they got their religion from Seth and Idrís; they trace their origin to Sábí, son of Idrís and also believe in Yahyá, son of Zachariah [John, the Baptist]. They do expect the Manifestation of Jesus, Son of Mary. In the Presence of the Throne they are mentioned as the Sabeans.” <<<(Á'ín-i Sábi'ín by Ruhu'llah Mihrabkhani (Institute for Bahá'í Studies in Persian, Dundas/ Ontario 1994) http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Necati.Alkan/sabeans.html) >>> THIS WEBSITE OF MINE DOES NOT EXIST ANYMORE (Necati Alkan)
"Some of the people did apprehend the purpose of the words of the son of Zachariah and some did not when after the martyrdom of the son of Zachariah some of his followers did not turn to the Manifestation of the All-Merciful, that is Jesus and strayed from the way of the Unity of God. They still dwell on earth and are known by some as the Sabeans; these people regard themselves as the followers of that Holiness but they remained deprived of their object and purpose.“ <<<<(Directives from the Guardian by Shoghi Effendi (pages 51 & 52)>>>>
“As to the religion of the Sabeans very little is known about the origins of this religion, though we Bahá'ís are certain of one thing that the founder of it has been a divinely sent Messenger. The country where Sabeanism became widespread and flourished was Chaldea, and Abraham is considered as having been a follower of that Faith. “ <<<(A Private letter by Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer dated November 10, 1939; Lights of Guidance, third revised edition 1994, no. 1694 http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Necati.Alkan/sabeans.html>>>> THIS WEBSITE OF MINE DOES NOT EXIST ANYMORE (Necati Alkan)
-4.240.3.xxx, 02:16, 15 Jun 2004
Cleaning up
This wording
- Despite their clear documentation in traditions stemming from Islam, they have becomed yet another thing for western scholars to delight in puzzling and speculating over for decades resulting in various theories and information that has a way of producing some very heated arguments.
is wholly inappropriate. Someone knowledgeable should suggest something more neutral to put in its place. Miguel 15:46, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Protection not needed
I see no reason for "protecting" this article from editing. The disputes over the various claims being made are in no way heating or polemical. Let's "unprotect" the article and apply the Wikipedia's NPOV policy to the article.
We don't need to change any undisputed facts or scriptural quotations, such as the Koran's mention of Christians and others being rewarded by the Lord, free from grief and fear (2:62, 5:69, and many other verses). No one is disputing these, are they?
As for the other problems in the article, I recommend this: Simply attribute each disputed claim to the authority which asserts it.
- If there is a scholarly claim that there is only one "Sabian" group, let us say, for example, that Professor Singh U. Larr of the University of Makkah wrote in "Peoples of the Middle East" that the Sabians are, etc.
- If there is similar claim that two "Sabian" groups are being confused with each other, let us say something like Historian Bin R. Yee of the Indonesian Islamic Institute wrote that the Sabians and Sabbeans became confused in historians' minds because of, so forth and so on
Parties to this dispute, I await your response.
Ed Poor, of the Mediation Committee (Uncle Ed 21:49, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC))
Comments: my two cents worth
Dear Mr. Poor
This has been sent to me by numerous people asking me to intervene and provide commentary on this subject
The main problem is that no one knows for certain whom Mohammed meant when he specified Sabians in the Quran since there is so little reference to this group in ancient pre-Islamic records an since Mohammed also gave so few clues. It has only been through years of research and scholarly study that the group intended was the Mandaeans, whom are referred to by the Moslems as Subi or Sabians. There is a great deal of proof that weighs on the side of the Mandaeans that can take a whole book to document with references. Suffice to say the majority of scholars have determined that the Sabians of the Quran are the Mandaeans.
The Sabians listed on this site before, Quran-Bahai Sabiyah as described, are an unknown religious group that cannot be found in any reference book. The author of this article apparently has formulated a theory without any documented references on whom the Sabians are and has constructed an entire religious and cultural data based on bits and pieces pulled from literally out of the air.
The Quran-Bahai Sabiyah should be listed as a separate religious sect or as a theory that will need to stand on it's own convictions. The problem is that when this page is unprotected the author will again revert back to this nonsense theory. Notice the Quran-Bahai Sabiyah web page on Wikipedia and it's redirection to Sabians. Is it not your intention in this encyclopedia to provide correct information not a hair ball theory?
Referring to the article as it now stands there is much incorrect and false data
- 1--The link on Sabaeans links to the Island of Saba-- has nothing to do with the third Sabeans which are the people of ancient Saba in Yemen and have been thrown out by scholars on having any connection to the Sabians of the Quran
- 2--The plural of sabi (subi) is not Sabiyah but as Sabba Subba. The word is a local Arab slang used to denote the Mandaeans by their Muslim neighbors in both Iraq and Iran.
(FYI: the word Sabiyah is an Arabic word meaning "sevens" and is used mainly in reference to the Muslim Shiites or as an area of land in Kuwait or Oman regions)
- 3-- the word does not mean to proselyte-- this comes from post Islamic Arab scholars many centuries ago who probably did not know the meaning of the word. Recent study into the meaning of the word has corrected this error and the word means "those who immerse themselves" i.e. baptise.
- 4--The word Sabians as a people has been used in many ancient writings before Islam and between Islam and creation of the Bahai religion there is a wealth of inforamtion where the word Sabians is used.
- 5--The Sabians did not stem from Islam-- they existed before as noted by Mohammed. The description of who the Sabians were became blurred with the adoption of the name by mainly various religious groups.
- 6-- Marc Edmund Jones is the founder of an astrology group in the early 1900's. The sentence quoted about is simply a description of why he chose to use the spelling Sabians as opposed the spelling Sabaeans. This sentence needs to be removed.
- 7-- They worship The Names (El-Esmea) as the stars. This is just plain FALSE-- made up
- 8--The verses here are your basic Quran, very easy to find the same translations on the Internet. The previous ones submitted by the author of Quran-Bahai Sabiyah are unique and cannot verified by an independent source. I would keep the more common translation.
- 9--The rest of the section is pretty basic-- the book Zaboor should be replaced by a "sacred scriptures" or "religious book". The Zaboor usually referrs to a specific book "the Psalms of David".
Sabi-Harran connections
- 10--Sabaean - Harranians
- 11--The Christians had a foothold in Edessa and the Sabaeans of Harran in Harran. The part of the sentence should be removed "since Sabians allegedly had a base in Edessa " unless a reference can be provided.
Sabi-Mandaean connections
- 12--Sabian Mandaeans-- sabi has been used an insult recently against the Mandaeans -- it is better to use the English word Sabian
- 13--Remove this sentence " Some scholars have suggested that the Mandaean religion originated with Sabeans, who came under the influence of early Sabian missionaries but preferred their own priesthood." or provide references as the majority of today's scholars do not agree with this old out dated theory
- 14-- Remove this sentence " Thus various religious groups with a connection to baptism (like the Mandaeans) have sought to have the label applied to themselves in the hopes of avoiding persecution."--- There is no truth to this statement -- completely false.
- 15--Remove seems-- The word Sabian does not SEEM but comes from the root word Sabi'um
In Bahai writings
- 16--Remove this sentence--"Yet according to their mention in Bahai writings, unlike the Mandaeans, "they do expect the manifestation of Jeses" " --this was added to fuel hatred toward the Mandaeans because they do not follow Jesus. There is no need for that comment.
- 17-- More information on the Bahai is needed if you are talking about all the Sabians.
Speculations on early History
- 18--A majority of this information concerns Harran and their adoption of the name Sabaean. Should be placed under: Sabaean Harranian Connections paragraph.
- 19--The paragraph that begins" Many writers, both ancient and modern," should be part of a conclusion. With the last sentence stating according to recent scholarly research the Mandaeans have been determined to be the original Sabians mentioned by Mohammed in the Quran-- or something to that effect.
There is much to be done on this simple subject
usamandaean web-master of "Mandaean World" 25 plus years researching the Mandaeans
----------------------------------------------------
All right, I've unprotected the Sabians article so the Mandaean webmaster can fix it. I will check in a few times a week to ensure that no bias or inaccuracies creep in.
Please go ahead and start making the corrections (#1-19) which you mentioned above. If anyone reverts these changes, I'll unrevert them.
He might want to look at this while he's at it. It's not exactly featured article material either. Sam [Spade] 03:16, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
To Mr. Poor
I will edit the Sabians with a rough draft that can be added to. I usually send my work to an editor (usually someone I have begged, borrowed, and pleaded with) to clean up all my mistakes-- here you will probably have to find someone to put the article into proper format etc
To Sam_Spade.
I looked at the article titled Mandaeaism-- not bad for now -- there are a lot of errors and odd items. Will help out with that also as time permits.
usamandaean-- mandaeanworld.com
What's Going On??
Hey hey, whats going on here? Some guy who owns an internet site comes along boasting his authority to re-write the article with no publications to back him up, and no one here checks the last two edits he did to ensure NPOV??? Now maybe USAmandaean is genuine maybe not, but anyone can see that he has ommitted and belittled a lot of good (mainly islamic) references by comparing with the last versions. Thankyou for your extra contributions USAmandaean, but this is not the place for you to boost your POV at the expense of ommitting references which threaten your stance. Scholarship is not about the number of years we have spent building up a thesis, but the number of years we have spent seeking truth! Ommission is a testimony to disregard for evidence and thus also for finding synthesized truthZestauferov 14:06, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- I agree about the removal of links, but lets not be to saucy in our statements toward any expert, proven or otherwise, who chooses to assist in repairing this needy article. Replace the links and rigorously overview the edits, but don't be too haughty towards someone who is trying to help. POV is easy to fix, factually inaccuracy is not, IMO. Sam [Spade] 19:03, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
You're right Sam, appologies to anyone for my haughtiness. Just I had noticed a month had gone by since the last edit with no checking. All the bestZestauferov 05:51, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- The problem is I don't know anything about this subject, so I'm pretty limited. I can only really minimize strong POV and promote verification, fix grammer, spelling, etc... Even when I looked this stuff up elsewhere I didn't find much. Sam [Spade] 05:53, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I think that is all the more reason why we must be careful not to let all the ideas of the previous authors be thrown out in case the baby goes with the bathwater. I have salvaged pieces which seem to cause no problems. maybe we can cut out the redundancy and read between the lines through the comming week or so.Zestauferov 08:56, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)
You should be very careful to differentiate accounts of the Sabians in the Torah and Qu'ran from actual historical (mostly archeological) sources, the conception of the Sabians in the Qu'ran is particularly at odds with archeological evidence. Perhaps dividing the article in sections dealing with the Sabians from the various approaches would be better than attempting to mesh it all together, there's not enough evidence to make the necessary conclusions to do so. QwertyMIDX
NPOV issue and Unsourced issue
First on NPOV, there is a clear stance of bashing these groups, and a clear stance that none of them were the intended Sabians was written into the opening sentence before I removed it. We're also looking at a lack of any citations, it's merely saying that this information could have come from three sources, and you cannot say if any single bit of it came from one of those sources, which is why we need to use <ref> and </ref> tags.
KV(Talk) 20:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- The two works that are actually cited in places, one of them is not a reputable source by any means, it doesn't even have a real web-address. The second is a list of quotations that would have to be cited........... It just says that these people said these things.
I agree. Please read the link I have updated with full sourcing included in its notes. For some reason people have been purpously trying to cover up the identity of the Sabians, but though difficult to read, the highly academic and well sourced article in the link shows that the Sabians were a very well known group, half of them being Hunafa' and half of them being Mushrikoon.86.143.75.21 11:28, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- I'm seeing the same sort of reference.......... I'm going to add some references since I know some about the Harranians, this will show you what I mean.
He Said She Said Sources
I have shown using the book by Churton how sources actually work...... we need a book or documentary or some other such source in which it verifies these facts. If you wish to use these people as sources, that's fine, so long as you can give us a book, a publisher, etc, etc, and page number that fits. If this isn't done within a week, I will delete any such reference since it is not even a reference, more of another statement of fact that needs citation.
KV(Talk) 20:02, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
I think it is because we are dealing with direct tanslations from the Arabic, (IbnKathir, Bukhari, Muslim etc.) and the Eurocentric approach to substantiating fact is not the same as the Arabic. Ahadith are considered trustworthy depending upon the recorded character of the people who make th estatement. However, if we start to delet such references then one must also go through all the islamic pages and start deleting any historical claim since all Arabic history uses the same science -even if it is unrecognisable to westerners.
LOL, thanks a lot bro.
The Sabians of Harran thing is completely wrong. The Sabians were not followers of a Yazdanic religion, but only plain townsfolk who worshipped the old semetic gods of the Near East and the descendant of Greek pagan neoplatonic philosophers. The later group of Greek inspired star-worshippers could never be mistaken for Yazdanis. 20:26, 22 August 2006 User:70.125.64.154
- WP:V:
- "Verifiability" in this context does not mean that editors are expected to verify whether, for example, the contents of a New York Times article are true. In fact, editors are strongly discouraged from conducting this kind of research, because original research may not be published in Wikipedia. Articles should contain only material that has been published by reliable sources, regardless of whether individual editors view that material as true or false. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is thus verifiability, not truth.
- Whether or not you find it true, it is verified.
Rename
How about renaming this to Islamic view of Mandaeism, after the Mandaeism article? --Striver 17:02, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- What a ridiculous suggestion. Mandaeans are only one Nasaraean sub-sect of the Islamic Sabians.86.138.23.74 06:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Magians
And just who are they supposed to be? Zoroastrians?
-MonkStar 18:50, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Magians were Zurvanists weren't they?82.6.114.172 11:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Merge
See Talk:Mandaeism#Merge. --Pjacobi 20:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Merge with Mandeans? Or better disambiguation needed
Somewhat that knows this material better should merge this --if this community is synonymous with the Mandeans-- with the Mandeans or Mandeanism article. Are they the same community? Dogru144 15:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Sabians are not mandaeans. Mandaeans seceeded from the Sabians around 60 AD and the two communitiews have been developing in isolation from each other since then. Sabians have more in common with Babis than with any other major religion today.82.6.114.172 13:16, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Sources
Much of the discussion on this talk page is superfluous since authoritative scholarly sources by and large have not been used. There is an extensive scholarly literature on the Sabians. The following are standard works:
- D. Chwolson, D. Die Ssabier und der Ssabismus (St. Petersburg: Der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1856), 2 vols.
- Jan Hjärpe, Analyse critique des traditions arabes sur les Sabéens Harraniens (Uppsala: University of Uppsala dissertation, 1972).
- Tamara M. Green, The City of the Moon God, Religious Traditions of Harran (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1992).
- Şinasi Gündüz, The Knowledge of Life, The Origins and Early History of the Mandaeans and their Relations to the Sabians of the Qur’an and to the Harranians (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994).
- J.B. Segal, Edessa and Harran (London: School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 1963).
- Michel Tardieu, “Sábiens coraniques et ‘Sábiens’ de Harran,” Journal Asiatique, 274 (1986), 1-44.
Churton's book is not useful. No serious scholar would use it to learn about this topic. 71.146.95.252 00:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
I agree. I happen to be interested in the subject and studying religion in late antiquity at Postgrad level and, with no offense intended towards anyone who might still be a genuine practicing Sabi but, the article is absolutely hideous in its present condition, with regard to both content and presentation.131.251.0.7 19:00, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Churton's book is indeed useful. It may not be an ideal source, but it is the best source used and a credible source as per Wikipedia standards. Sure, a career academic would use actual texts written in Arabic and obscure scholarly articles that most of us do not have ready access to, but Churton is something, even if not the foremost authority on the subject. Certainly it's better than references that simply say "so and so said blah blah blah", without the work being mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by King Vegita (talk • contribs) 15:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
There is no connection between access to obscure articles or facility in Arabic and a claim that Churton is a useful source. Two of the books in the list above (Green aand Gündüz) are from major publishers and are fairly recent (1990s). Anyone can access the work of these reputable scholars. Wikipedia standards are not such that the result should be bad history.
Churton's book has an overarching thesis that seeks to tie together otherwise vaguely connected historical phenomena (Alchemists, Rosicrucians, and Freemasons). His agenda for the Sabians is to support this thesis, not to present the them in a detached manner. 71.146.64.22 08:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
At the same time, if it were not for garbled articles like this one there would be no need for academics to do some serious research to sort out the mess with a proper reception history.82.6.25.132 00:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Notice of intent to Be Bold
After the 25th of January (schedule permitting) I intend to be very bold indeed with this article and set things straight. If you have any objections please state now, or accept just criticism later.Kaz 00:48, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Not sure what you mean by "set things straight." If you mean, ensure that the article is fully compliant with WP:NPOV, WP:V, and WP:NOR, and will provide an accurate account of notable views from reliable sources, go for it. Slrubenstein | Talk 13:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Qu'ran / Hadith citations
Can someone who knows the Qu'ran and the Hadith add references to the three quotes under "Islamic reference"? The first two in particular look like the same text. If they're from different sources, that should be clarified.
Done.
and also...they should talk about sabians' history as fire worshippers and how that story was all covered up —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.108.98.177 (talk) 18:04, 19 October 2008 (UTC)