Talk:Hilya

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

Hadith authenticity[edit]

I added refimprove tag on the hadith/function section. It seems to be one-sided and doesn't give more information on the cited hadith. For instance see this quote by Mohamed Zakariya, from The Hilye of the Prophet Muhammad:

An interesting but questionable hadith, which was thought to be genuine until recently, may shed some light on the significance of the hilye. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "He who sees my hilye after me, it is as if he had actually seen me, and he who sees it out of love and desire for me, God will forbid the fire of Hell to touch him. He will be safe from the trials of the grave, and he will not be sent forth naked on the day of resurrection.” This hadith, whatever its status, refers, of course, not to the calligraphic composition of the hilye but to the physical, moral, and spiritual description of the Prophet (peace be Upon him).

Apparently, some of these ahadith are of questionable authenticity. Some or all do not refer to the calligraphic hilya. We should probably try to integrate this point in that section, or try to find more sources for the hadith in question. Wiqi(55) 06:52, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wiqi55, I came to the conclusion that these were not the same hadith, as the wordings are just too different. In addition, Zakariya seemed to cite the hadith approvingly, and at any rate appeared to have no quarrel with its sentiment. But if you can check some collections of ahadith, that would be helpful.
Of course you are correct that the Prophet was not referring to the calligraphic hilye, but to the written texts themselves (it's for that reason that I used "hilyas" in that sentence rather than "hilyeler"). This should be obvious to the reader, as the art form was only established in the 17th century. --JN466 07:00, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Gruber's sources are here: [1] (footnote 79). Perhaps that will help us track the hadith down. If it is indeed the same one, then I agree we should add Zakariya's comment about its questionable status. --JN466 07:06, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The text from Taskale & Gündüz (snippet view only in Google Books) that Gruber is quoting from happens to be available on Faruk Taskale's personal website (it includes the parts Gruber dropped):
Looking at the three texts, I do agree that both Gruber's and Zakariya's versions seem to be partial quotes from the full text given by Taskale, as well as differing translations of the same underlying text. This is a tricky situation, as the hadith was apparently considered authentic for more than 1000 years. I will at any rate add that the authenticity of the hadith is now in question, and make clearer that it referred to the written description rather than the calligraphic panel. --JN466 07:51, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing out the problem; my apologies, I should have checked further into it, rather than ignoring the alarm bell in my head. Please check if the edits are enough to fix it: [3] Best, --JN466 08:15, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I've made a minor change to better reflect Zakariya's wording, although I'm not sure if other sources shed a better light on its authenticity -- please correct me if I'm wrong. I've tried finding this hadith in online hadith collections but couldn't find anything. Also the phrase "sees my hilya after me" in Zakariya's version should be understood as "he who emulates my manners/characteristics" as opposed to seeing a physical written hilya. I'm not sure of this, but this is the impression I got from Zakariya's last comment: "This hadith, whatever its status, refers, of course, not to the calligraphic composition of the hilye but to the physical, moral, and spiritual description of the Prophet (peace be Upon him)". That said, it is not uncommon to find multiple wordings of the same hadith. Wiqi(55) 09:18, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, it looks good. --JN466 17:17, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I must say that hadith raised my eyebrows too, and I am not surprised it is disputed. Any hadithic references to hilya are surely to the plain texts, or as Wiki said yet more abstract conceptions, not the much later special calligraphic presentations of the texts, an important distinction we need to preserve in the article. Johnbod (talk) 17:23, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Two more points: first, we should avoid taking Zakariya's comment out of context; he was commenting on the short hadith (quoted above) not the long one (in article). Second, in hilya related sites/books, the short hadith is more common. The longer hadith is only found in one website (compared to 400 or so for the short one). Also the short hadith seems more genuine and often told on the authority of Tirmidhi. I couldn't find anything similar to it in Tirmidhi, so my guess is that it is not a genuine hadith, per Zakariya, but merely a local folklore ascribed to the Prophet. For both reasons given above, and because the long hadith is only known to a tiny minority, I'd suggest replacing the long hadith with the one mentioned by Zakariya. Wiqi(55) 17:45, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done --JN466 17:57, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Koltuk[edit]

The sections of the hilye that are flanking the etek (skirt) section are called "koltuk" in Turkish. Koltuk can mean several things in Turkish:[4] including "armchair", (fig:) "seat (position) of authority", "shoulder joint", "support beam", and (archaic:) "marginal, deserted place". In English articles on the topic of hilye, I have seen it translated in various ways, but I believe the correct one is the last one I gave above (defined as Kenar, tenha yer in Turkish). My reason is that in most Turkish texts on the topic of hilye, koltuk is described as the empty areas on both sides of the text that are illuminated. I have also seen it mentioned that, in addition to hilyes, in most Diwans, blank areas on the page empty of text that are illuminated are also called koltuk [5]. For now I have used "fringe" in the article here, but I am not sure if this is the best word. Perhaps "gap" or "margin"? I am open to better suggestions. --İnfoCan (talk) 20:19, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the additions, and sorry for my absence from this article over the past few weeks (related to the Muhammad images arbitration and other things). I recall that Faruk Taşkale refers to the koltuklar as "blind alleys". It's a pity that there is no agreement in the literature as to which of the possible meanings of koltuk was in the mind of the people who first used the term. "Seat" would of course go with skirt and belly to suggest an anthropomorphic nomenclature. (I always thought that "armpits" didn't make sense, although it's used in some sources ... armpits are not below the belly.) Cheers. --JN466 19:49, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Alleys", like on a tennis court, the space at the sides of the court where the ball is considered in, when playing doubles? :-) --İnfoCan (talk) 21:49, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I wrote "empty spaces" in parenthesis. The meaning is disused today, which is consistent with the term being several centuries old. That also would explain why most translators would not have been aware of this meaning. --İnfoCan (talk) 18:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Title[edit]

Should we move the article to hilye, the Turkish term? I think it might make sense, as in Arabic, the literary genre is not called hilya, but shama'il, and the whole tradition is really Turkish rather than Arabic. --JN466 19:49, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me. Johnbod (talk) 20:55, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fine by me, too. --İnfoCan (talk) 21:45, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Popularity[edit]

The level 3 section Hilye#Popularity contains information about both the literary genre and the graphic art form. Should it be split or moved as a level 2 section at the end of the article (following section Hilye#Graphic art form? --İnfoCan (talk) 18:14, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Hilya. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:25, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hilya. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:37, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hilya&oldid=1213956890"