Talk:Rumi/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Both Persian and Tajik must be used as the ethnicity of Rumi

Rumi's homeland-Balkh region-has the native population of Tājīks who were called "Persian" at the time. I can give many sources to prove that Tājīks are the native inhabitants of Balkh region. Both "Persian" and "Tājīk" must be used as the ETHNICITY of Rumi to AVOID CONFUSION (even though Tājīks are part of Persian people, but they are called Tājīk today). Those who deny this fact, they seem as if they are stealing the cultural heritage of the native population of the region and this is totally unacceptable. Artacoana 11:50, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Decisions in Wikipedia is just based on reliable sources, not idea of users. Sources say Rumi was a Persian. --Aliwiki (talk) 13:25, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Tajiks are East-Persians, so by calling Rumi for a Persian also includes tajiks. --85.165.212.65 (talk) 14:43, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Turkey.Konya064.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Turkey.Konya064.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:42, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

pronunciation

It would be great if this wiki page helped people to pronounce rumi's first and last name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.80.128.108 (talk) 17:28, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

 Added. --Z 19:28, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

sean stone rumi doc

Sean Stone, the 27-year-old son of director Oliver Stone, has become a Shiite Muslim during a visit to Iran; he is working on a documentary about the 13th-century Persian Muslim poet and mystic Rumi.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/shortcuts/2012/feb/15/sean-stone-muslim-religion-hollywood — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.68.252 (talk) 21:07, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Mevlana.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Mevlana.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Mevlana.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 03:50, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 14 March 2012

The usage of New Persian is superfluous. Being a native Persian speaker, it sounded very weird to me. The current Persian (or Dari) language is in fact the "New" or "Modern" Persian which started to flourish around 1000 years ago in Khorasan.

MaxNajma (talk) 18:28, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Not done: PLease detail what you would like to change in a 'please change X to Y' manner and provide a reliable source. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 23:12, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Why just 'Rumi' as the title heading?

I turned up here following a reference to Jalau'l-Din Rimi in Scott Peck's Further Along the Road Less Travelled, and was surprised to find myself in an article headed Rumi. I imagine you are going to answer that this is the name he is know as within the community - but would a forwarder to this article therefore be appropriate? Ender's Shadow Snr (talk) 12:54, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

There is one at Jalal ad-Din Rumi — goethean ॐ 16:36, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Ecumenical?

The article seems to have a quarrel with the "portrayal in the West [of Rumi] as a proponent of non-denominational spirituality" and scoffs at people who in the eyes of the authors, propagated this view. Even to the extend that Coleman Barks, who - it's even mentioned in the article - has done more then anyone else to make the name Rumi known in the West, is not cited among the translators. I think this reflects a 'partial' view - although I am well aware that it is very hard to say anything about Rumi that isn't partial, apart from the historical facts (and I am glad that the article is NOT limited to reciting the the historical facts).

My main quarrel would be with this text in the article: "However, despite the aforementioned ecumenical attitude, and contrary to his contemporary portrayal in the West as a proponent of non-denominational spirituality, a number of Rumi poems suggest the importance of outward religious observance, the primacy of the Qur'an." These words, I think, reflect the urge to place, to fixate, Rumi in some or other pigeon hole: "he may have said this and that, but what he REALLY thought was ..." I think this is just one opinion amongst others; there are no historical grounds for this claim. More importantly: I think these attemtps to 'claim' Rumi are selling him short. In my opinion, if he expressed himself, as he did quite often, in ways which at first sight seem contradictory, this very contradiction is an essential part of his thinking and of his legacy. Personally, I do not even see a contradiction here. My sufi teacher used to point his muslim mureeds continually towards the Koran. But me, a (wandering and wondering) jew, he directed towards Torah and Talmud and he stimulated me to adhere to the rules and rituals of my faith. Not for a moment did I or anyonyone else of his mureeds see these diverse advices as 'contradictory'. Please forgive me this personal digression; I only meant to illustrate that even the use of the word 'contrary' in the above sentence reflects an opinion one could argue with.

I would propose to replace the aforementioned text, and the preceding paragraph under the heading of "Universality", which seems written as a prelude to the subsequent denial of this 'universality'. I would propose:

"One of the most quoted sentences of Rumi's is: 'Christian, Jew, Muslim, shaman, Zoroastrian, stone, ground, mountain, river, each has a secret way of being with the mystery, unique and not to be judged' and one of his (in the West) most recited poems begins with: 'Muslims! What can I do? I have lost my identity! I am not a Christian, Jew, pagan, or Muslim. I am neither an Easterner nor a Westerner, neither a land nor a sea person. Nature can't fully account for me, nor can the whirling cosmos.' These quotations may give a sense of the universality of Rumi's concept of 'the Beloved' and and his recognition of, and respect for, the many paths of the seeker."

I also protest against the over-long an over-detailed introduction depicting Rumi as 'a poet' from a bygone era. The Rumi I know is far more then a poet and he is not dead at all; he is a living inspiration and guidance for many. I sorely miss this actual relevance in the introduction and in the article itself. I'll try to come up with something better, but let's first see if anyone responds to this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mabelis (talk • contribs) 19:20, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I am not an editor but I like to make a comment or two. You made a thoughtful critique and I think everyone here will agree with some of the points you made. But my question to you is 1) Do you read Persian? and 2) What translations of his works have you read and how do you know the translations are correct? It seems that you are contradicting yourself when you claim that "he may have said this and that, but what he REALLY thought was ..." because you are doing the same however, in your case, I am not sure if you can read Rumi's work in the original (and yes there is a world of difference between reading a translation or what we would call a version of Rumi's work and his actual work in Persian). Again, no one is debating the universality of Rumi's concept of the Beloved but there are certain references that only make sense within the framework of a particular such as Islam. For example, the Sufis (including Rumi) refer to God as the Friend (dust). This is based on the Qur'anic verse yuhibbuhum wa yuhibbuhunah (God loves them and they love Him, 5:45). The conclusion I draw from your analysis is that I think you are making a separation between the universal and particular whereas they are really interrelated and one concept. i.e. the particular is found in the universal and the universal is found in the particular — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.68.252 (talk) 20:54, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Farsi or Persian?

i think that the use of the word farsi to describe the language of Rumi,is more approriate.i lived in iran.nobody said they spoke Persian.they said they spoke Farsi.Persian is a western imposition,and inditcates a trend toward deislamification of Iran in western media.followers of Zoraster are called Pars in India.i like them.i have no problem with them.but possibly unintentionally the author of this article is giving the United states policy on Iran towards calling it Persia instead of Iran and calling Tahk-te-jamshid Persepolis for purposes of undermining the importance of Islam in Iran the help it desires. would Rumi want that?i very much doubt it. in the same vain to call the inhabitants Persians or even Iranians is also a weird westernisation.please say:Iranis.they speak "farsi" also 'bahlk' should have a capital 'B'. persian cats and carpets are o.k.but people????i say no. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.66.121.19 (talk) 05:08, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

This is nonsense! the proper name of this language in English is Persian. 'de-Islamification' and Western imposition is ridiculous. Nobody in Poland calls their language Polish, they call is 'polski'. so we should stop using Polish as it would be a Western imposition?

Also followers of Zoroaster in India are called Parsee not Pars or Persian. You need to study more and improve your English language much more than this. BrokenMirror2 (talk) 20:56, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Let's replace POV with a Neutral Point of View

This article contains POV.

Let's observe and evaluate from a neutral point of view:

It's known that Rumi was a Persian poet on the basis of his exclusive use of the Persian language and because he remained in the mainstream of Persian cultural heritage (which means Persianate). It's a debatable matter that he might be of Turkish/Afghan/Arab origin as well as Persian. He adopted Persian literature as Persian was the lingua franca at the time of Rumi. However, it doesn't make him Persian or anything.

On the other hand, as a result of their researches, Halman and Warner says: "...resulting from shifting populations and mass conversions to Islam. One must also consider, at least speculatively, that Rumi's family, living in Balkh, perhaps regarded itself as neither Persian nor Turkish nor Arab nor anything else for that matter but as Muslim, refusing to be assimilated or to identify themselves as Persian or Turkish any more than did the Greeks, Armenians, or Jews in Balkh." (Halman & Warner, Rapture and Revolution: Essays on Turkish Literature, Syracuse University, 2007, p.265)

In the same book, 266, continues: "In the West, scholars have always accepted Rumi as Persian on the basis of his exclusive use of the Persian language and because he remained in the mainstream of Persian cultural heritage. In the Encyclopaedia of Islam, B. Carra de Vaux and H. Ritter, in separate entries," make no reference to Rumi as Persian or Turkish, in fact, no reference at all to the question of nationality."

In the following poem, Rumi emphasizes himself Turk;

"Bigane megirid mera z'in kuyem

Der kuy-i şuma hane-i hod miçuyem

Düşmen neyem er çend ki düşmen rüyem

Aslem Türk'est egerçi Hindi miguyem"

which means in English;

"Don't isolate me from this village,

I look for my place in your village,

You think me an enemy, but I'm not,

I'm Turk though I write Persian."

However, Persians attribute metaphorical and figurative meanings to this poem. Anyway, it's also a debatable subject by men of letters.

Rumi also knows and writes in Turkish though Turkish was not a lingua franca at his time. The following poem is also taken from one of his Turkish poems:

"Gelesin bunda sana yek garezim yok işidürsen,

Kalasan anda yavuzdur yalunuz kanda kalursan?

Çalab'undur kamu dirlik, Çalab'a gel ne gezersen?

Çelebi kullarun ister, Çelebi'yi ne sanursan

Ne ağuzdur, ne ağuzdur ağuzundan kığırılmak,

Kulağun aç kulağun aç bola kim anda değürsen"

Rumi also contrast Turks with other ethnic groups, and praise Turks in most of his poems. For instance, the following sentence:

"Show activity and act like a Turk, not softness and the way of the Tajiks!"

Why does he praise Turks and try to show them strong, powerful and beautiful?

He also says about himself:

"Leave the word a Hindu, see the Turks of inner meaning:

I am that Turk who does not know a Hindu, who does not know."

On the other hand, Rumi lived in Turkey, and contributed to Turkish society first of all. Therefore, most of the contemporary authors call him as "Turkish mystic poet", not "Persian mystic poet" because he didn't live in Persia and never be a part of Persian society. Let's look what others say:

Annemarie Schimmel says: "He was, as is claimed of Turkish origin." (Annemarie Schimmel, The Triumphal Sun: A Study of the Works of Jalāloddin Rumi, SUNY Press, p.371)

Leiser and Köprülü says: "Rather than cite a great many names, it suffices to mention only the immortal poet of the Mathnawi, the great Turkish sufi Mawlana Jalal al -Din al-Rumi." (Mehmet Fuat Köprülü,Gary Leiser, The Origins of the Ottoman Empire, SUNY Press, Berg, 2007, p.70)

Hume says: "Dervishes, traces its origin to the thirteenth-century Ottoman Empire. The Order was named after its founder, Turkish mystic poet Jelaluddin Mevlana Rumi (1207-73)." (Lynne Hume, Portals: Opening Doorways to Other Realities Through the Senses, p.66)

Sultanova says: "Mawlaviyya traces its origins to the famous Turkish mystic and poet al-Rumi (1207-73). The orders name comes from the Arabic word Mawlana (our master), a title given to al-Rumi by the order. Mawlana was born in Balkh (nowadays northern Afghanistan) and later moved to the Turkish town of Konya, the home of the famous 'whirling dervishes'." (Razia Sultanova, From Shamanism to Sufism: Women, Islam and Culture in Central Asia, I.B.Tauris, 2011, p.30)

Cobb says: "the works of the Turkish poet and Sufi mystic, Rumi Mevlana." (Ronald Lee Cobb, Islam, What You Need to Know in the Twenty-First Century: A Primer for Peace, AuthorHouse, 2011 p.19)

Schaub and Schaub say: "The Turkish poet and philosopher Mevlana Rumi provides a graphic analogy to illustrate this kind of personal blindness." (Bonney Gulino Schaub, Richard Schaub, Dante's Path: A Practical Approach to Achieving Inner Wisdom, Penguin, 2003 p.37)

Another study emphasizes: "[POEM 2 - F I827] Dush and qush are imperative forms from the modern Turkish duşmak and koşmak respectively. Mowlana occasionally used Turkish words and sometimes wrote in Anatolian Turkish." (Mystical Poems of Rumi, University of Chicago Press, 2009, p.412)

An encyclopedia mention him as the major mystical poet of Persian literature, but not a Persian mystic poet: "Born in the city of Balkh in present-day northern Afghanistan, Jalal al-Din Rumi is usually known as Mawlana (Our Lord; Turkish Mevlana) in the East and is renowned as the major mystical poet of Persian literature." (The Greenwood Encyclopedia of Folktales and Fairy Tales: Q-Z, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2008, p.816)

We should care about the fact that Persian was the lingua franca and the language of literature at the age of Rumi, like the Latin language.

Anyway, I believe that we shouldn't mention ethnicity for Rumi because this matter is debatable and nobody is sure about his ethnicity, maybe Afghan, Persian, Turkish or Indian. In the meantime, he never calls Persian, or there aren't any references to mention him as Persian. We just encounter with personal opinions of the modern authors.

As a neutral point of view, we should remove the ethnicity of Rumi, or put the other probabilities as well, such as Turkish, Afghan or Arab.

Alternatively, from a neutral point of view, I recommend to change the (POV) sentence to a (NPOV) sentence:

"a 13th-century Persian Muslim poet, jurist, theologian, and Sufi mystic."

to

"a 13th-century Muslim poet, jurist, theologian, and Sufi mystic of Persian literature.

I hope a neutral editor of Wikipedia encourage to convert that sentence without the fear of nationalistic Persian vandals here.

I hope each editors, who read this, share his/her idea, and explain why he/she agree or disagree. Thanks. 81.213.117.125 (talk) 21:31, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

• Agree It must be emphasized that Persian was the literary and scientific language of the Moslem World in the 13th century. But This alone doesn't make Rumi a Persian poet. (Isaac Newton wrote Principia in Latin. Does this make him a Latin scientist ?) Rumi's most productive years were in Turkey and he can be considered as a Turkish poet as well. Thus the suggestion put forward by 81.213.117.125 seems like a logical comprimise. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 23:59, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

More importantly, the Turkish people considers him as one of its own... --E4024 (talk) 06:43, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

• Agree I have researched and found that the International Mevlana Foundation uses the description of "the great Anatolian mystic, poet" in their website. They also explain why they use "Anatolian" in their website, instead of using any sort of ethnicity. The view and opinion of International Mevlana Foundation is important because it has been founded and maintained by the Mevlana's own family in Turkey. They also give reference to the own words of Mevlana:

Come, come over, more over, how long this brigandage?

As you are me and I am you. How long this discrimination of you and I?

We are light of GOD! Why this separation among us? Why light escapes from light?

We are all from the same yeast, our brains and heads too.

But under this bowed sky we see double?

The foundation also emphasizes that Mevlana belongs to everyone. And they explain "When someone is born in a different place than where he became famous, it is usually with the latter place that he is associated with. The famous composer George Frideric Haendel was born in Halle, Germany as a German citizen, but he became famous in England and nowadays he is mostly known as an English composer, his name is spelled in the Anglicized way as Handel and he is buried at the Westminster Abbey. Nevertheless, we have specifically refrained calling Mevlana Turkish, or Afhgani. Instead, we used the name of the geographic area where he lived, wrote and died. Mevlana was born on 30 September 1207 in Balkh, in present day Afghanistan. He died on 17 December 1273 in Konya in present day Turkey." So they prefer using the title "Anatolian", which is also the same meaning with "Rumi". Here, we don't discuss the ethnicity of Rumi, which has been always debated by scholars. I believe we can remove "Persian Muslim" and just use "Anatolian", which is also appropriate with the Rumi philosophy (no race). Gabriel Stijena (talk) 16:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Right, not Anatolian, UNIVERSAL; a Turkish contribution to the universal culture... --E4024 (talk) 18:07, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I will grant I have not read all the archives, referred to in the banner on the top which claims a past consensus for "Persian heritage". However, I'm inclined to agree with 81.213.117.125 (if possible I'd suggest you register to get a permanent name, as your contributions are quite helpful) that the lede is not the place to dig into the controversy, and that "Persian literature" might be a reasonably workaround. Explaining the different sides of the controversy might be helpful later in the article, but really clutters the lede for the average reader who probably doesn't care about a nationalist brawl over claiming a writer.

I will point out though that the specific phrase "a 13th-century Muslim poet, jurist, theologian, and Sufi mystic of Persian literature" is not ideal since the "of Persian literature" can be misread as "is a fictional figure in Persian literature". I would suggest instead that the very first sentence simply be: "Rumi (30 September 1207 – 17 December 1273) was a poet, jurist, Islamic theologian, and Sufi mystic." Perhaps alternately "poet, Islamic jurist and theologian, and Sufi mystic." The "13th-century" is redundant because 1207-1273 CE clearly puts him him in that period. I would suggest that following that there could be a brief (briefer than what there is now) description of "born... moved to... ended up in Rum thus the name".

I don't know if there is a good workaround for this which follows WP procedures, but I really do not like the current massive cluster of alternate names, Perso-Arabic spellings, IPA, etc. that take up six lines of the article before the reader even gets to the word "poet". I'd submit this is not conducive to making Wikipedia an educational experience, and nor is the frantic cluster of "Persian[1][2][3][4][5][6]" footnotes in the lede. Once the initial issue of how to structure the lede sentence is addressed, I submit we should move excess data to sections below the lede, including some of the bio details, and since his name issue is quite complicated maybe even a "Names" section right after the lede might be the place to deal with the six lines of messy hash about his nicknames, place names, pronunciation, etc? I'm also not convinced that the pronunciation guides are even that useful, since a) most readers can't read IPA, b) literally all of the words' pronunciations are pretty intuitive to an English speaker c) I have a sneaking suspicion that "Persian pronunciation" is yet another jabby way to emphasise Persian-ness, rather than helpful explanation.

Sorry for the long post, but as a newcomer to this article is explicitly shows its history as a contentious article, with the usual frantic footnoting, huge over-explanation of (what is to the average reader) minutiae, etc. I'd be happy to try to bring in some detached perspective in making at least the lede something that a casual reader in Boston or Buenos Aires could swiftly read and digest to answer "who's this Rumi poet guy I saw mentioned on a blog?" MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:59, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I understand MatthewVanitas is trying to be helpful, thanks. If people are not ready to accept Rumi as Turk (because he was not a mighty, fierce fighter?) what else can we do other than accepting compromise solutions of avoiding to add to him an alien identity... (I guess Rumi was more Martian than Persian but alas...) Although if I were MV I would not go into the casual reader in BBAA thing, as the concepts about Turks, Arabs, moslems etc are quite complicated in and around that area. Call Rumi whatever you wish, all the same they would put him in the quite wide "turco" basket; which is not a problem for me... --E4024 (talk) 22:09, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

• Agree Frankly speaking, the title is really so puzzling and distractive that any guests will have trouble in understanding the first paragraph. No need such complicated sentences... MatthewVanitas, so, I agree that the first sentence can be more simple as the way you recommend and I also give right to the fact that Rumi is a universal man. No need to mention his debated ethnicity as well, as the others suggest. Barayev (talk) 23:42, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I would suggest using the al-Farabi article as an example(for a more neutral POV lede). The al-Farabi article has a section for his origin, which includes Persian and Turkish subsections, both referenced. You will also need to get more support to remove Persian from the lede. As for me, I believe the al-Farabi example would be acceptable and would remove any ethnicity from the lede. Just my thoughts.... --Defensor Ursa 02:31, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think the lede needs to totally avoid his ethnicity, so much as just say "it's a contested issue" and then a lower section discusses it. We've done similar with some Indian castes, as to what varna they fall into; instead of a paragraph of lede saying "well according to X legend they're warriors, but the 1875 British survey says farmers, etc." we just say "their varna is disputed" and in a lower section we can summarise the varna issues. It is extremely important to note that we shouldn't be doing WP:Primary sources descriptions of the ethnic debate. That is, not "I read Poem X and I think it means he's Fooian", but rather "Those supporting claims of his Fooian ethnicity cite poem X as an example<ref>Patrick Yamamoto. ''Rumi and National Pride''. University of Tokyo Press, 1994</ref>. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:09, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and regarding the "Persian poet" thing. I'd submit that first and foremost he was a poet, and his primary writing language was Persian. Just to be clear on that, I submit the first sentence just tells what roles he played (poet, Islamic theologian, etc). The second or third sentence can say something like "He mostly wrote in Persian, a common literary language of the region, but also wrote some poems in Turkish." That way we avoid any sweeping identity statements, but still make it clear to a reader how he wrote. Later in the lede we can mention "many nations claim him as there own, and it's an issue of dispute" and way down the page maybe in its own section we can have "Here's the Foo argument, the Fao argument, the Foa argument, as detailed by detached scholars studying the dispute". Does that seem like a fair way to address the issue? MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:13, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

If there is no lamb or veal, mutton and beef are also all right for me. As long as it is not pork... (I think I am a bit hungry but MV understood me :-) IMO it is acceptable, so -for me- you may go ahead. Thanks... --E4024 (talk) 22:28, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Made a major chop

I went in and made some modifications, primarily with the intent of making the WP:Lede more accessible to a wider public, and to remove any highly contentious issue (i.e. heritage) which simply can't be discussed at length in a lede. To reduce bulk, I also created a "Name" section where we detail all the terms he is known by. It's just simply not feasible to discuss eight different names in the lede without compromising legibility. I also removed the way too glib/conclusive "Persian heritage", and instead have a sentence at the end of the first para simply saying "it's a contested issue", and noting he lived in Rum and wrote primarily in Persian.

The (somewhat) downside is that some of my moves chopped out huge wads of references. Not necessarily a huge number so much as massive walls of footnote text arguing one case or another. Let us definitely bear those in mind for going back to old drafts to check for any good footnotes, but I submit we carefully pick and avoid the following:

• Passing references: in the hotly-contested issue of "heritage", there is zero serious encyclopedic validity to some guy passingly mentioning "He was a 13th century Persian poet". That gives us no context from the academic whatsoever; if the academic does not state an actual case for one term or the other, or describe the issue in detail, he's not really investing in the debate.
• Primary sources: If it weren't impolite, I'd love to remove every argument from this Talk page that starts with "In this poem he says...". Unless you have an actual published literary scholar interpreting the poem as supporting fact X, and can say "Prof. So-and-So of Capetown University notes that in poem X", then none of us have any business trying to conduct amateur analysis. Even if Rumi states in a poem "I am Turk" or "I am Persian", it's a poem, not an application for an driver's license. We could take a few minutes and find thousands of poems and songs written in the first person which aren't literally autobiographical. Leave the analysis to the experts, or debate it for fun on literary forums, but this is not a forum.

So that's where we're at so far. Can a few folks take a look and tell me if the lede looks less controversial, more focused on basic fundamental facts, and more legible? MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:06, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I had a look at the lede; now, it seems reasonable. And also have put a new section with the Origin as it's in al-Farabi article, which is recommended by Defensor Ursa. Thanks for changes. Barayev (talk) 21:10, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism of the lead

Unfortunately due to the messed up situation in the Persian speaking lands (Iran, Tajikistan and Afghanistan), some neighbors are trying to appropriate the Persian heritage (note Afghan, Tajik and Iranian are the inheritors of this) while normal Iranians, Tajiks, Afghans are struggling with political realities. And unfortunately, unaware users try to assist this endevours.

• • I suggest authoritative articles and books on Rumi be used. Franklin calls him Persian and Encyclopaedia of Islam states Persian poet.

Google books:

• "Persian Poet Rumi" [10] (2720+ hits)
• "Turkish Poet Rumi" [11] (19 results!)
• "Persian mystic Rumi" [12] (370 results)
• "Turkish Mystic Rumi" [13] (9 results).

Please see Wikipedia's policty about weight and fix the article appropriately.

• The top current Rumi Scholar in the world is Franklin Lewis. We should quote alive scholars. We cannot throw random names of authors, whose books are not even about Rumi. The only authoritative existing biography is from Franklin Lewis. [14]..unless an equivalent authoritative biography of Rumi by a similar scholar of the same rank is written, Wikipedia should reflect the opinions of such scholars.
• As per Schimmel, she has twice referred to Rumi as a Persian mystic and his mother language as Persian:[15]. Be that it may, Lewis is the major alive Rumi scholar.
  • Franklin Lewis, Rumi Past and Present, East and West, Oneworld Publications, 2000.: “How is it that a Persian boy born almost eight hundred years ago in Khorasan, the northeastern province of greater Iran, in a region that we identify today as Central Asia, but was considered in those days as part of the greater Persian cultural sphere, wound up in Central Anatolia on the receding edge of the Byzantine cultural sphere, in which is now Turkey, some 1500 miles to the west?” (p. 9)
  • According to Franklin: “Sultan Valad elsewhere admits that he has little knowledge of Turkish”(Franklin Lewis, Rumi Past and Present, East and West, Oneworld Publications, 2000.,pg 239) ...“Sultan Valad did not feel confident about his command of Turkish”(Franklin Lewis, Rumi Past and Present, East and West, Oneworld Publications, 2000.,pg 240)
• "Persian poet Rumi" has 2000+ google books hit in google books while "Turkish poet Rumi" has about 19!. Sorry but this is not equal. Not equal weight at all!!
• The argument of the Turkish users has been responded to repeatedly here: [16]...Even Rumi's son had a poor knowledge of the Turkish language. Rumi himself mentions about Greeks and Turks: "Likewise, it is a well-known story that one day Shaykh Salah al-Din happened to hire Turkish laborers to do building work in his garden. Mowlana said: ‘Effendi’— that is to say lord—‘Salah al-Din, when it is time for building, one must engage Greek laborers and when it is time for destroying something, Turkish hirelings. Indeed, the building of the world is assigned to the Greeks,
  whereas the world’s destruction is reserved for the Turks."
  [17]. Also Rumi has a small number of Greek poems, but again he learned that in Anatolia. Else he is from Wakhsh modern Tajikistan which is still Persian speaking.
• He is also clear he is not a Turk in another verse:[18] but we should note that the verses of poetry are symbolic. As noted by Kafadar when quoting the Turkish scholar Golpiranli and such ethnonyms in the works of Rumi: “Golpiranli rightly insists that ethnonym were deployed allegorically and metaphorically in classical Islamic literatures, which operated on the basis of a staple set of images and their well recognized contextual associations by readers; there, ‘turk’ had both a negative and positive connotation. In fact, the two dimensions could be blended: the ‘turk’ was ‘cruel’ and hence, at the same time, the ‘beautiful beloved’” . And also noted by de Bruijn: “In such imagery the link to ethnic characteristics is hardly relevant, so that it may be used together with features of another ethnic type in the characterization of a single person, e.g., when Nezami describes the princess of Hend as āhu-ye tork-čašm-e hendu-zād (“a gazelle with Turkish eyes, of Indian blood” . (Kafadar, Cemal (2007), "A Rome of One’s Own: Reflections on Cultural Geography and Identity in the Lands of Rum", Muqarnas: An Annual on the Visual Cultures of the Islamic World , vol 24:7-25, Brill.)Or see De Bruijn, J.T.P. (2003), “Hindu”, Encyclopaedia Iranica, Online Edition). Please note the poem of Rumi here as well where he directly claims he is not a TUrk:[[19].] Consequently, wikipedians cannot cherry pick from poems of Rumi and give it modern intrepretations... Else his name is "Rumi" which means Greek actually but it is a poetic pen-name.
• So the arguments of the Turkish users are all original reasearch or simply quotes from non-scholarly books. Unless the weight of the scholars of those books are established, they should be disregarded immediately.
  • Annemarie Schimmel also remarks on Rumi’s native tongue in the “ The Triumphal Sun: A Study of the Works of Jalaloddin Rumi”, SUNY Press, 1993, p. 193: "Rumi's mother tongue was Persian, but he had learned during his stay in Konya, enough Turkish and Greek to use it, now and then, in his verse"..Note the author discusses the background of Rumi and makes such a statement. [20]. She has also called him a "Persian mystic"[[[21]]. Too bad she is a dead but franklin is alive...Annemarie Schimmel, “The Mystery of Numbers”, Oxford University Press,1993. Pg 49: “A beautiful symbol of the duality that appears through creation was invented by the great Persian mystical poet Jalal al-Din Rumi.
• Halmann is a Turkish scholar but he even adits: "The Turkish ambassador and scholar Halmann who is unsure of the geneology of Rumi’s father mentions that: “In terms of Rumi’s cultural orientation – including language, literary heritage, mythology, philosophy, and Sufi legacy –the Iranians have indeed a strongly justifiable claim. All of these are more than sufficient to characterize Rumi as a prominent figure of Persian cultural history..and Rumi is patently Persian on the basis of jus et norma loquendi.”(Halmann 2007:266-267). Of course that is a Turkish scholar's point of view. So Halmann cannot be constantly quoted as some unbiased scholar. He is afterall a Turkish ambassador.

• C.E. Bosworth, "Turkmen Expansion towards the west" in UNESCO HISTORY OF HUMANITY, Volume IV, titled "From the Seventh to the Sixteenth Century", UNESCO Publishing / Routledge, p. 391: "While the Arabic language retained its primacy in such spheres as law, theology and science, the culture of the Seljuk court and secular literature within the sultanate became largely Persianized; this is seen in the early adoption of Persian epic names by the Seljuk rulers (Qubād, Kay Khusraw and so on) and in the use of Persian as a literary language (Turkmen must have been essentially a vehicle for everyday speech at this time). The process of Persianization accelerated in the thirteenth century with the presence in Konya of two of the most distinguished refugees fleeing before the Mongols, Bahā' al-Dīn Walad and his son Mawlānā Jalāl al-Dīn Rūmī, whose Mathnawī, composed in Konya, constitutes one of the crowning glories of classical Persian literature."
• For an Iranian viewpoint see here: [22].

• More importantly...Wikipedia works by weight. "Persian poet Rumi" and "Persian mystic Rumi" is the most prominent in google books and google scholars. And as mentioned by Halmann, Rumi is accepted as a Persian in the West. Consequently, Wikipedia needs to reflect these facts. Wikipedia is not about being "fair" but about proper "weight" given by scholars to an opinion. --96.255.251.165 (talk) 05:25, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Also I should mention I can put 1000+ links for "Persian poet Rumi" from google books. So given the fact that the "Turkish poet" Rumi is not an opinion held by any alive Rumi scholar (including Halmann), then one needs to give proper weight to the issue. Else I urge Iranian users to bring 500+ books from google books that puts Persian to show what the proper weight in google books is. Turkish users do not have a single significant alive scholar such as Franklin to backup their point of view. [23]." Please tell me how could such a person be a Turk when he contrasts Greeks so positively against Turks (in a non-poetic setting without any symbolism)? ([24].) Thanks. --96.255.251.165 (talk) 05:28, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

• • Turkish scholar Halman states(pg 266): “In the West scholars have always accepted Rumi as a Persian on the basis of his exclusive use of the Persian language and because he remained in the mainstream of Persian cultural heritage. No account seems to have been taken of the Turkish and Afghan claims, except some occasional references such as the one by William Hastie in his introduction to The Festival of Spring, featuring his translations from Rumi’s Divan: The Turks claim Jelaleddin as their own, although a Persian of royal race, born of Balkh, old Bactra, on the ground of his having sung and died in Qoniya, in Asia Minor…Whence he was called Rumi “the Romans,” usually rendered “the Greek,” as wonning wihin the confies of old Oriental Rome.".. However please note that the arguments for Persian background of Rumi are decisive: [25] and nothing to just with language. It is culture.
• As noted by Halmann, Western scholars have not taken the Turkish claim seriously. This is evidenced by the unequal google books/scholars. Wikipedia is not a democracy but rather what counts is the opinion of modern scholars. Unless the Turkish users can point to an alive scholar that has the weight of someone like Franklin who has written the most authoritative book on Rumi's biography, then they need to desist in vandalizing this page by their nationalistic viewpoint.
• So based on the above, anything about "Turkish" is undo weight. The opinions of giants like Franklin should be quoted. The opinion of schimmel (which is contradictatory) can also be quoted but the page I gave she clearly states Rumi's mother language was Persian and another book calls him a "Persian mystical poet". I suggest that all the recent edits be undone until the weight of the scholars quoted and sources quoted are established by independent users. Franklin and Encyclopaedia of Islam are obvious ones. Thanks.
• Unfortunately, without knowledgable users, constant vandalism by Turkish users occurs in this page with the same repeated WP:OR arguments that are respnded here: [[26]], in this thread and more extensively here:[27]. Then they come and quote either a person who is dead and has contradicted herself or unknown scholars. Where-as Iranian users have consistently brought top notch scholarly sources such as Franklin Lewis, Encycloapedia Islam and etc.

Also their comparison to Latin is a dead-end..as Rumi's lectures are in Persian..Note his lectures were to his students and they are almost all in Persian (with two in Arabic) and none in Turkish. Or his Friday sermons are all in Persian. His son has claimed poor knowledge of Turkish and Greek.. --96.255.251.165 (talk) 07:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Summary #1

One can only quote scholars who write authoritatively about Rumi. The most important biography is now that of Franklin Lewis. Encyclopaedia of Islam also calls him a Persian poet. I'll respond to the proponents of the Turkish theory (absolute fringe) below and their unsound arguments. However, what I want to emphasize is Wikipedia works by weight. 2000+ and 370+ google books call Rumi a "Persian poet" and "Persian mystic" respectively. Wikipedia needs to reflect the most authoritative sources such as a Franklin and the most widely used convention. Else quote a minor random book is like quoting a minor random book that claims Obama is a Muslim. Unless a book is about the biography of Rumi himself (such as Franklin), I think it takes a back set.

Undo/Fringe viewpoint being pushed

Unfortunately, some users have not WP:RS, WP:UNDUE and WP:Weight.

• • I suggest authoritative articles and books on Rumi be used. Franklin calls him Persian and Encyclopaedia of Islam states Persian poet.

Google books:

• "Persian Poet Rumi" [28] (2720+ hits)
• "Turkish Poet Rumi" [29] (19 results!)

(Note four of the books are repeated,many from Turkish authors and none of them specifically deal with Rumi)

• "Persian mystic Rumi" [30] (370 results)
• "Turkish Mystic Rumi" [31] (9 results).

Please see Wikipedia's policty about weight and fix the article appropriately.

WP:UNDO is very clear. Per WP:UNDO

• If a viewpoint is in the majority, then it should be easy to substantiate it with reference to commonly accepted reference texts;
• If a viewpoint is held by a significant minority, then it should be easy to name prominent adherents;
• If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it does not belong in Wikipedia regardless of whether it is true or not and regardless of whether you can prove it or not, except perhaps in some ancillary article.

Now here are two secondary sources clearly showing that the Turkish (nationalist) viewpoint is fringe theory.

• Franklin Lewis: "On the question of RUmi's multilingualism (pages 315-17), we may still say that he spoke and wrote in Persian as a native language, wrote and converesd in Arabic as a learned "foreign" language and could at least get by at the market in Turkish and Greek (although some wildly extragavant claims have been made about his command of Attic Greek, or his native tongue being Turkish") (Lewis 2008:xxi). (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008)

• Conclusion 1: The top Rumi biographer states that the claim of Rumi being a native Turkish speaker is extragavant. (i.e. Fringe).

• Talat S. Halman, "Rapture and Revolution: Essays on Turkish Literature", editor by Jayne L. Warner, Syracuse University, 2007, p.265-266) (Please note Halman is the only author and Warner is an editor (perhaps of the series)).:"Bahauddin and his family eventually settled in Konya, ancient Iconium, in central Anatolia. They brought with them their traditional Persian cultural and linguistic background and found in Konya a firmly entrenched penchant for Persian culture. In terms of Rumi’s cultural orientation – including language, literary heritage, mythology, philosophy, and Sufi legacy – the Iranians have indeed a strongly justifiable claim. All of these are more than sufficient to characterize Rumi as a prominent figure of Persian cultural history. Such a characterization is naturally reinforced by his impact on the succeeding centuries of Persian literature and intellectual life. In the West, scholars have always accepted Rumi as Persian on the basis of his exclusive use of the Persian language and because he remained in the mainstream of Persian cultural heritage. No account seems to have been taken of the Turkish and Afghan claims, except some occasional references such as the one by William Hastie in his introduction to The Festival of Spring, featuring his translations from Rumi’s Divan:

“ “The Turks claim Jelaleddin as their, although a Persian of royal race, born of Balkh, old Bactra, on the groundoof his having sung and died in Qoniya, in Asia Minor… whence he was called Rumi “The Roman,” usually rendered “the Greek,” as wonning with the confies of Oriental Rome” ”

• Conclusion 2: Talat Halman who is actually not as biased as clearly mentioned: "In the West, scholars have always accepted Rumi as Persian on the basis of his exclusive use of the Persian language and because he remained in the mainstream of Persian cultural heritage. No account seems to have been taken of the Turkish and Afghan claims". Consequently, it is not for Wikipedia either. Based on these secondary specialist sources, the Turkish nationalist viewpoint does not belong to Wikipedia per WP:UNDO, and users have absolute right to remove them.

• Conclusion 3: Some users mention Farabi article. But there is a fundamental difference. In the Farabi article, several scholarly sources were brought that mentioned there is a difference of opinion. Also historical sources from about 800-1000 years ago seem to be stating contradictatory stuff. On Rumi, the issue is different as the claims of the Turkish viewpoint is considered extravagant and "not taken by Western scholars". By Western scholars, it is clear that it means scholars who specialiaze in Rumi and understand Persian. Not random google books that are not specialized and unrelated to the topic.

• Conclusion 4: The "Turkish" for Rumi that has miniscule number of links (all from non-scholars and books with hardly any relavence to Rumi) is from non-scholars and furthermore, even these non-scholars do not use the word "origin", but are referencing the fact that he spent most of his time there and mistakenly juxtaposing modern geography for a classical area/era. That is they are using a modern geographical identifier to identify a classical Persian mystic who used to live there and this is as wrong as claiming Herodotus was "Turkish". Anyhow these fringe links have no specially are overwhelmingly outnumbered by mainstream links (both scholarly and non-scholarly) that use Persian mystic/poet/origin.

• Conclusion 5: Only authoritative scholars on Rumi count and not a random website, pamphlet or writer who is not writing about Rumi and does not have even a knowledge of the Persian language.

Persian heritage

That portion is obvious.

• C.E. Bosworth, "Turkmen Expansion towards the west" in UNESCO HISTORY OF HUMANITY, Volume IV, titled "From the Seventh to the Sixteenth Century", UNESCO Publishing / Routledge, p. 391: "While the Arabic language retained its primacy in such spheres as law, theology and science, the culture of the Seljuk court and secular literature within the sultanate became largely Persianized; this is seen in the early adoption of Persian epic names by the Seljuk rulers (Qubād, Kay Khusraw and so on) and in the use of Persian as a literary language (Turkmen must have been essentially a vehicle for everyday speech at this time). The process of Persianization accelerated in the thirteenth century with the presence in Konya of two of the most distinguished refugees fleeing before the Mongols, Bahā' al-Dīn Walad and his son Mawlānā Jalāl al-Dīn Rūmī, whose Mathnawī, composed in Konya, constitutes one of the crowning glories of classical Persian literature."
• Franklin D. Lewis, "Rumi: Past and Present, East and West: The life, Teaching and poetry of Jalal Al-Din Rumi", Oneworld Publication Limited, 2008 pg 9: "How is that a Persian boy born almost eight hundred years ago in Khorasan, the northeastern province of greater Iran, in a region that we identify today as Central Asia, but was considred in those days as part of the greater Persian cultural sphere, wound up in central Anatolia on the receding edge of the Byzantine cultural sphere"

• Franklin Lewis: "On the question of Rumi's multilingualism (pages 315-17), we may still say that he spoke and wrote in Persian as a native language, wrote and converesd in Arabic as a learned "foreign" language and could at least get by at the market in Turkish and Greek (although some wildly extragavant claims have been made about his command of Attic Greek, or his native tongue being Turkish") (Lewis 2008:xxi). (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008)
• Franklin Lewis on Turkish scholar Onder: "There, we can only surmise that his cultural jingoism represents a conscious effort to rob Rumi of his Persian and Iranian heritage, and claim him for Turkish literature, ethnicity and nationalism") (Lewis 2008:549). (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008)

• Turkish scholar Halman states(pg 266): “In the West scholars have always accepted Rumi as a Persian on the basis of his exclusive use of the Persian language and because he remained in the mainstream of Persian cultural heritage. No account seems to have been taken of the Turkish and Afghan claims, except some occasional references such as the one by William Hastie in his introduction to The Festival of Spring, featuring his translations from Rumi’s Divan: The Turks claim Jelaleddin as their own, although a Persian of royal race, born of Balkh, old Bactra, on the ground of his having sung and died in Qoniya, in Asia Minor…Whence he was called Rumi “the Romans,” usually rendered “the Greek,” as wonning wihin the confies of old Oriental Rome."..
• Halmann is a Turkish scholar but he even admits: "The Turkish ambassador and scholar Halmann who is unsure of the geneology of Rumi’s father mentions that: “In terms of Rumi’s cultural orientation – including language, literary heritage, mythology, philosophy, and Sufi legacy –the Iranians have indeed a strongly justifiable claim. All of these are more than sufficient to characterize Rumi as a prominent figure of Persian cultural history..and Rumi is patently Persian on the basis of jus et norma loquendi.”(Halmann 2007:266-267).

• Seyyed Hossein Nasr, "Islamic Art and Spirituality", Suny Press, 1987. pg 115:"Jalal al-Din was born in a major center of Persian culture, Balkh, from Persian speaking parents, and is the product of that Islamic Persian culture which in the 7th/13th century dominated the 'whole of the eastern lands of Islam and to which present day Persians as well as Turks, Afghans, Central Asian Muslims and the Muslims of the Indo-Pakistani and the Muslims of the Indo-Pakistani subcontinent are heir. It is precisely in this world that the sun of his spiritual legacy has shone most brillianty during the past seven centuries. The father of Jalal al-Din, Muhammad ibn Husayn Khatibi, known as Baha al-Din Walad and entitled Sultan al-'ulama', was an oustanding Sufi in Balkh connected to the spiritual lineage of Najm al-Din Kubra."

• Carter Vaughn Findley, “The Turks in World History”, Oxford University Press, Nov 11, 2004. Pg 72:Meanwhile, amid the migratory swarm that Turkified Anatolia, the dispersion of learned men from the Persian-speaking east paradoxically made the Seljuks court at Konya a new center for Perso-Islamic court culture, as exemplified by the great mystical poet Jelaleddin Rumi (1207-73).

• Annemarie Schimmel, The Triumphal Sun: A Study of the Works of Jalaloddin Rumi, SUNY Press, 1993, p. 193: "Rumi's mother tongue was Persian, but he had learned during his stay in Konya, enough Turkish and Greek to use it, now and then, in his verse" (see also the section on Schimmel below).

• Richard Ettinghausen, Oleg Grabar, Marilyn Jenkins-Madina,"Islamic Art and Architecture, 650-1250 "Yale University Press, Jul 11, 2003. pg 134: "In effect then, wherever their conquests took them, the Turks, or at least their princes, carried largely Persian culture and Persian ideas, even the Persian language. The greatest Persian mystic poet, Jalal al-Din Rumi, lived and wrote in Konya in central Anatolia"

• Louis Gardet, "Religion and Culture" in the "The Cambridge History of Islam- part VIII: Islamic Society and Civilization” - edited by P. M. Holt, Ann K. S. Lambton, Bernard Lewis, Cambridge University Press (1977) , pg 586: "It is sufficient to mention 'Aziz al-Din Nasafi, Farid al-Din 'Attar and Sa'adi, and above all Jalal al-Din Rumi, whose Mathnawi remains one of the purest literary glories of Persia"

• (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008)(p9): "The Anatolian peninsula which had belonged to the Byzantine, or eastern Roman empire, had only relatively recently been conquered by Muslims and even when it came to be controlled by Turkish Muslims rulers, it was still known to Arabs, Persians and Turks as the geographical area of Rumi. As such, there are a number of historical personages born in or associated with Anatolia known as Rumi, literally “from Rome”. In Muslim countries, therefore, Jalal al-Din is not generally known as Rumi"

• (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008) (p 75): "The institution of the Madrase had come to Syria from Khorasan, where the movement to patronize the teaching of Islamic law by founding colleges began, and consequently professors from eastern Iran enjoyed a certain prestige. ..Instead something induced him [Rumi’s father] to try his luck in Asia Minor, perhaps the prospect of a professorship for himself or his sons, perhaps the promise of greater political stability, or perhaps the desire to promulgate the teachings of Islam on the frontier, where the Christian Greeks, and Armenians and the Turkmen tribes did not yet accept or observe the practice of Islam...He must, therefore, have been in search of a position for himself and his sons, a position more easily gained in the Persian-speaking lands of the Seljuks of Rum.

• (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008) (p 75):"For Baha al-Din, the ideal situation would undoubtedly have included a ruler predisposed to heed and foster his teachings, to abstain from wine and other impieties, and to uphold and spread poetry and religious learning, preferably of the Hanafi school and preferably in a Persian-speaking area."

• (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008) (p 79):“The decisive defeat of the Byzantine army at Manzikert in 1071 led to the populating of Asia Minor by Turkish tribesmen. Qelij Arsalan shaped these tribesmen into a loosely organized state during his nearly forty-year rule, corresponding to the time of the Crusades and Saladin’s rule in Syria. When he died in 1192, his sons fell to fighting amongst themselves, but Kay Khosrow I eventually consolidated power in his own hands and took control of Konya in 1205. His regnal name, and those of his successors, all harked back to the glories of the pre-Islamic Iranian kings, an indication that though Turkish in origin, the Seljuks of Anatolia consciously modeled themselves on Persian culture and royal traditions. Having replaced the Persophilic Samanid and Ghaznavid empires in eastern Iran, the Seljuk Turks consciously set about acquiring the Iranian habits of kingship, assisted by their Iranian viziers. It was to instruct the early Turkish Seljuk rulers in the ways of the pre-Islamic Iranian court traditions that Nezam al-Molk wrote his famous book on royal politics, Siasat name (also known as the Seyar al-Moluk “The manners of the Monarch”), so that they might convincingly wear the Iranian crown. As the Turkmen tribes spread westward conquering new lands, at least nominally to the glory of the Seljuks, they brought the language, culture and administration of the Persians in their wake. The populace the conquered in the former countryside of the Byzantium was, however, primarily Armenian and Greek by ethnicity, Christian by religion and agricultural by occupation. The town and cities, however, consisted of Turkish tribesmen, urbanized Turks and Iranians, many of whom had fled from the Mongols”

Summary quote for Persian heritage

Rumi's works are written in the New Persian and his Mathnawi (Masnavi) remains one of the purest literary glories of Persia and a crowning achievement of the Persian language. A Persian literary renaissance (in the 8th/9th century), alonside the development of Sufism, started in regions of Sistan, Khorāsān and Transoxiana and by the 10th/11th century, it reinforced the Persian language as the preferred literary and cultural language in the Persian Islamic world. Rumi's importance is considered to transcend national and ethnic borders. His original works are widely read today in their original language across the Persian-speaking world(Iran, Tajikistan, Afghanistan and parts of Persian speaking Central Asia). Translations of his works are very popular in other countries. His poetry has influenced Persian literature as well as Urdu, Punjabi, Turkish and some other Iranic, Turkic and Indic languages written in Perso/Arabic script e.g. Pashto, Ottoman Turkish,Chagatai language and Sindhi. His poems have been widely translated into many of the world's languages and transposed into various formats. In 2007, he was described as the "most popular poet in America."

He was born to native Persian speaking parents, likely in the village of Wakhsh, a small town located at the river Wakhsh in Persia (in what is now Tajikistan). Wakhsh belonged to the larger province of Balkh (parts of now modern Afghanistan and Tajikistan), and in the year Rumi was born, his father was an appointed scholar there..

Greater Balkh was at that time a major center of a Perso-Islamic culture and Khorasani Sufism had developed there for several centuries. Ineed, the most important influences upon Rumi, besides his father, are said to be the Persian poets Attar and Sanai. Rumi in one poem express his appreciation to Attar and Sanai:"Attar was the spirit, Sanai his eyes twain, And in time thereafter, Came we in their train" and mentions in another poem: "Attar has traversed the seven cities of Love, We are still at the turn of one street".

He lived most of his life under the PersianateSeljuq Sultanate of Rum, where he produced his works and died in 1273 AD. He was buried in Konya and his shrine became a place of pilgrimage. Following his death, his followers and his son Sultan Walad founded the Mevlevi Order, also known as the Order of the Whirling Dervishes, famous for its Sufi dance known as the Sama ceremony. He was laid to rest beside his father, and over his remains a splendid shrine was erected. A hagiographical account of him is described in Shams ud-Din Ahmad Aflāki's Manāqib ul-Ārifīn (written between 1318 and 1353). This hagiographical account of his biography needs to be treated with care as it contains both legends and facts about Rumi. For example, Professor Franklin Lewis, Chicago University, in the most complete biography on Rumi has a separate section for the hagiographical biography on Rumi and actual biography about him.

References

Franklin

The book by the University of Chicago Professor, Prof. Lewis Franklin is considered the most important biography on Rumi and is highly cited and well reviewed by many authors [32] Here is the website of Dr. Franklin: [33]

• Rumi: Past and Present, East and West. The Life Teachings and Poetry of Jalâl al-Din Rumi. Foreword by Julie Meisami (Oxford: One World Publications, 2000), xvii+686pp. Reprints 2001, 2003. Revised expanded edition, 2007. Awards: British Society for Middle Eastern Studies, British-Kuwaiti Friendship Society for the Best Book in Middle Eastern Studies published in the UK in 2000; Encyclopædia Iranica Foundation, 2001; Saidi-Sirjani Award (Hon. Mention), Society of Iranian Studies, 2004.
• Mowlavi: Diruz o emruz, sharq o gharb, Persian translation by Farhād Farahmandfar (Tehran: Nashr-e Sāles, 1383 Sh./ 2004).
• Mowlānā: diruz tā emruz, sharq tā gharb, collaborative Persian translation by Hassan Lahouti with Franklin Lewis, including author’s preface to the translation (Tehran: Nashr-e Nāmak, 1384 Sh./2005; 2nd ed., 1385 Sh./2006.
• Mevlânâ: Geçmiş ve şimdi, Doğu ve Batı (Mevlânâ Celâleddin Rumi’nin Hayatı, öğretisi ve şiiri, Turkish Trans. by (Hamide Kokuyan &) Gül Çağali Güven, ed. Safi Argapus (Istanbul: Kabalcı Yayınevi, 2010). * Rumi før og nu, Øst og Vest. Jalal al-Din Rumis liv, lære og digtning. Danish translation by Rasmus Chr. Elling. Carsten Niebuhr Biblioteket (Copenhagen: Forlaget Vandkunsten, 2010).

Unless, the Turkish theory proponents can bring up a serious Rumi scholar (note the keyword “Rumi scholar”) discussing their viewpoint and giving it credence in academia, then they need to accept the fact that their viewpoint is fringe. Simply, they need to find a scholar on the caliber of Franklin (who knows Persian and has written a biography on Rumi that is widely acclaimed and highly cited) which shares their POV.

• Franklin Lewis: "On the question of Rumi's multilingualism (pages 315-17), we may still say that he spoke and wrote in Persian as a native language, wrote and conversed in Arabic as a learned "foreign" language and could at least get by at the market in Turkish and Greek (although some wildly extragavant claims have been made about his command of Attic Greek, or his native tongue being Turkish") (Lewis 2008:xxi). (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008)

• Franklin Lewis on Turkish scholar and cultural ambassador Onder: "There, we can only surmise that his cultural jingoism represents a conscious effort to rob Rumi of his Persian and Iranian heritage, and claim him for Turkish literature, ethnicity and nationalism") (Lewis 2008:549). (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008)

• Franklin D. Lewis, "Rumi: Past and Present, East and West: The life, Teaching and poetry of Jalal Al-Din Rumi", Oneworld Publication Limited, 2008 pg 9: "How is that a Persian boy born almost eight hundred years ago in Khorasan, the northeastern province of greater Iran, in a region that we identify today as Central Asia, but was considred in those days as part of the greater Persian cultural sphere, wound up in central Anatolia on the receding edge of the Byzantine cultural sphere"

• Franklin Lewis:”Living among Turks, Rumi also picked up some colloquial Turkish.”(Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008, pg 315)

• Franklin Lewis on Turkish scholar Onder: "There, we can only surmise that his cultural jingoism represents a conscious effort to rob Rumi of his Persian and Iranian heritage, and claim him for Turkish literature, ethnicity and nationalism") (Lewis 2008:549). (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008)

• (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008)(p9): "The Anatolian peninsula which had belonged to the Byzantine, or eastern Roman empire, had only relatively recently been conquered by Muslims and even when it came to be controlled by Turkish Muslims rulers, it was still known to Arabs, Persians and Turks as the geographical area of Rumi. As such, there are a number of historical personages born in or associated with Anatolia known as Rumi, literally “from Rome”. In Muslim countries, therefore, Jalal al-Din is not generally known as Rumi"

• (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008) (p 75): "The institution of the Madrase had come to Syria from Khorasan, where the movement to patronize the teaching of Islamic law by founding colleges began, and consequently professors from eastern Iran enjoyed a certain prestige. ..Instead something induced him [Rumi’s father] to try his luck in Asia Minor, perhaps the prospect of a professorship for himself or his sons, perhaps the promise of greater political stability, or perhaps the desire to promulgate the teachings of Islam on the frontier, where the Christian Greeks, and Armenians and the Turkmen tribes did not yet accept or observe the practice of Islam...He must, therefore, have been in search of a position for himself and his sons, a position more easily gained in the Persian-speaking lands of the Seljuks of Rum.

• (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008) (p 75):"For Baha al-Din, the ideal situation would undoubtedly have included a ruler predisposed to heed and foster his teachings, to abstain from wine and other impieties, and to uphold and spread poetry and religious learning, preferably of the Hanafi school and preferably in a Persian-speaking area."

• Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008) (p 79):“The decisive defeat of the Byzantine army at Manzikert in 1071 led to the populating of Asia Minor by Turkish tribesmen. Qelij Arsalan shaped these tribesmen into a loosely organized state during his nearly forty-year rule, corresponding to the time of the Crusades and Saladin’s rule in Syria. When he died in 1192, his sons fell to fighting amongst themselves, but Kay Khosrow I eventually consolidated power in his own hands and took control of Konya in 1205. His regnal name, and those of his successors, all harked back to the glories of the pre-Islamic Iranian kings, an indication that though Turkish in origin, the Seljuks of Anatolia consciously modeled themselves on Persian culture and royal traditions. Having replaced the Persophilic Samanid and Ghaznavid empires in eastern Iran, the Seljuk Turks consciously set about acquiring the Iranian habits of kingship, assisted by their Iranian viziers. It was to instruct the early Turkish Seljuk rulers in the ways of the pre-Islamic Iranian court traditions that Nezam al-Molk wrote his famous book on royal politics, Siasat name (also known as the Seyar al-Moluk “The manners of the Monarch”), so that they might convincingly wear the Iranian crown. As the Turkmen tribes spread westward conquering new lands, at least nominally to the glory of the Seljuks, they brought the language, culture and administration of the Persians in their wake. The populace the conquered in the former countryside of the Byzantium was, however, primarily Armenian and Greek by ethnicity, Christian by religion and agricultural by occupation. The town and cities, however, consisted of Turkish tribesmen, urbanized Turks and Iranians, many of whom had fled from the Mongols”

• Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008). pg 239:"..Sultan Valad elsewhere admits that he has little knowledge of Turkish”

• Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008). pg 240:"Sultan Valad did not feel confident about his command of Turkish”

Schimmel

The only scholarly source I saw that the Turkish users use was Schimmel. This is their source:

• “He was, as is claimed of Turkish origin.”(The Triumphal Sun: A Study of the Works of Jalaloddin Rumi, SUNY Press, 1993, p. 371) However, Schimmel is discussing Rumi studies in Turkey which claims Rumi as Turkish. Thus she is implicitly quoting the works of Turkish authors in Turkey about Rumi. This is clear from the context of those pages and section of the book which is titled:”Mowlana Jalal al-Din’s Rumi’s influence in the East and West” where the author discusses Rumi’s influences in various countries. On the pages about Turkey, Schimmel writes: “It is small wonder that the Turks were and still are extremely fond of Mowlana Jalal al-Din Rumi who took his surname Rumi, from the Romans e.g. Anatolian, area were his spent most of his life.”. Thus Schimmel is discussing the Turkish claim. But this claim is not accepted by Schimmel hereself who states: “..Turks are absolutely convinced that Mowlana was a Turk..Rumi’s mother tongue was Persian, but he had learned during his stay in Konya, enough Turkish and Greek to use it, now and then, in his verse” (Annemarie Schimmel, The Triumphal Sun: A Study of the Works of Jalaloddin Rumi, SUNY Press, 1993, p. 193).

They have also ignored these Schimmel quotes:

• Annemarie Schimmel, "The Mystery of Numbers",Oxford University Press, Apr 7, 1994. pg 51:"These examples are taken from the Persian mystic Rumi's work, not from Chinese, but they express the yang-yin relationship with perfect lucidity."
• Annemarie Schimmel, “The Mystery of Numbers”, Oxford University Press,1993. Pg 49: “A beautiful symbol of the duality that appears through creation was invented by the great Persian mystical poet Jalal al-Din Rumi, who compares God's creative word kun (written in Arabic KN) with a twisted rope of 2 threads (which in English twine, in German Zwirn¸both words derived from the root “two”)”.

Given these, the Turkish users cannot use Schimmel. Also she is a passed away scholar. So one must use alive scholars and currently, the most authoritative book on Rumi's biography is that of Franklin.

• Annemarie Schimmel also remarks on Rumi’s native tongue in the “ The Triumphal Sun: A Study of the Works of Jalaloddin Rumi”, SUNY Press, 1993, p. 193: "Rumi's mother tongue was Persian, but he had learned during his stay in Konya, enough Turkish and Greek to use it, now and then, in his verse"..Note the author discusses the background of Rumi and makes such a statement. [34]. She has also called him a "Persian mystic"[[[35]].
• Annemarie Schimmel, "The Mystery of Numbers",Oxford University Press, Apr 7, 1994. pg 51:"These examples are taken from the Persian mystic Rumi's work, not from Chinese, but they express the yang-yin relationship with perfect lucidity."

Note the last book is published in 1994. So it is the definitive opinion ("Persian Mystic). Of course, if an author gives contradictatory viewpoint, then Wikipedia should not use such a source. But as explained she is simply describing the Turkish viewpoint, and then rejecting it by has described Schimmel is not contradiction but in the first quote is just giving the Turkish viewpoint while rejecting it by her firm statement on Rumi's mothertongue)

Quote from Halman

Note this is the opinion of a Turkish cultural ambassador of Turkey and not necessarily that of Rumi scholars. But it gives a good Turkish viewpoint of the material. Quote 1 (Talat S. Halman, "Rapture and Revolution: Essays on Turkish Literature", editor by Jayne L. Warner, Syracuse University, 2007, p.265-266) (Please note Halman is the only author and Warner is an editor (perhaps of the series)). Here is the quote:

“The available documentary evidence is so flimsy that no nation can invoke jus sanguinis regarding the Rumi genealogy. Besides, an exploration into his background must take into account such additional factors as the tumultuous life of the area in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the uncertain lineage of rulers and dynasties, miscegenation, and the identity crises resulting from shifting population and mass conversions to Islam. One must also consider, at least speculatively, that Rumi’s family, living in Balkh, perhaps regarded itself as neither Persian nor Turkish nor Arab nor anything else for that matter but as Muslims, refusing to be assimilated or to identify themselves as Persian or Turkish any more than did the Greeks, Armenians or Jews in Balkh.

Bahauddin and his family eventually settled in Konya, ancient Iconium, in central Anatolia. They brought with them their traditional Persian cultural and linguistic background and found in Konya a firmly entrenched penchant for Persian culture. In terms of Rumi’s cultural orientation – including language, literary heritage, mythology, philosophy, and Sufi legacy – the Iranians have indeed a strongly justifiable claim. All of these are more than sufficient to characterize Rumi as a prominent figure of Persian cultural history. Such a characterization is naturally reinforced by his impact on the succeeding centuries of Persian literature and intellectual life. In the West, scholars have always accepted Rumi as Persian on the basis of his exclusive use of the Persian language and because he remained in the mainstream of Persian cultural heritage. No account seems to have been taken of the Turkish and Afghan claims, except some occasional references such as the one by William Hastie in his introduction to The Festival of Spring, featuring his translations from Rumi’s Divan:

“ “The Turks claim Jelaleddin as their, although a Persian of royal race, born of Balkh, old Bactra, on the groundoof his having sung and died in Qoniya, in Asia Minor… whence he was called Rumi “The Roman,” usually rendered “the Greek,” as wonning with the confies of Oriental Rome” ”

In the Encycloapedia of Islam, B. Carra de Vaud and H. Ritter, in separate enteries, make no reference to Rumi as Persian or Turkish, in fact, no reference at all to the question of nationality.

Quote 2

(Talat S. Halman, "Rapture and Revolution: Essays on Turkish Literature", editor by Jayne L. Warner, Syracuse University, 2007, p.266-267) "The Iranian claim on the grounds of the language is inctrovertible, although some Turkish writers have tried to create the impression that Rumi composed a substantial body of verse in Turkish in addition to Persian. The statistical record is clear: The Mesnevi (Persian: Mathnawi) consists of nearly 26,000 couplets; the Divan-i Kebir (Persian Divan-e Kabir) probably has about 40,000 couplets, although the figure varies greatly. Of this vast output, everything is in Persian except for a handful of poems, couplets, lines, and words Turkish, Arabic, Greek, and Hebrew. ... This is infinitesimal compared with his output in Persian. Rumi is patently Persian on the basis of jus et norma loquendi."

-- My analysis:

• Actually, Halman has probably not looked up the latest version of Encycloapedia of Islam. Since Bausani is the second author and Halman does not mention that. Here is what the current Encycloapedia of Islam states: Ritter, H.; Bausani, A. "ḎJ̲alāl al- Dīn Rūmī b. Bahāʾ al-Dīn Sulṭān al-ʿulamāʾ Walad b. Ḥusayn b. Aḥmad Ḵh̲aṭībī ." Encyclopaedia of Islam. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill, 2007. Brill Online. Excerpt: "known by the sobriquet Mewlānā, persian poet and founder of the Mewlewiyya order of dervishes"
• I suggest we can start the introduction with this and clean it up a bit.
• Halman is a good source that shows what mainstream scholarship believes. That is Rumi is Persian according to Western scholars and Halman believes this is due the language and culture.
• Halman despite being of Turkish background is taking the viewpoint that there is not enough evidence. However, I believe there is much evidence and I have brought some above (like Sultan Walad not being proficient in Turkish or the quote from Aflaki, Rumi's father using Sogdian (East Iranian) colloquial words and etc.) and the quote from Aflaki about Greeks/Turks, Rumi's usage of everyday Persian with his students, etc..
• Be that it may be..Halman is actually clear that " No account seems to have been taken of the Turkish and Afghan claims". Which means that it is WP:fringe and does not beling to Wikipedia.

--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 18:25, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

OR claims without references by propents of Turkish viewpoint

As per the repeated OR Turkish claims on this page, it has been responded to here: [[36]], and much more extensively here: A Study about the Persian Cultural Legacy and Background of the Sufi Mystics Shams Tabrizi and Jalal al-Din Rumi [37] (which has been suspiciously removed from the external links!).

it is mainly centered on three false arguments:

false argument one- Rumi's usage of allegorical symbol of Hindu, Turk, Rumi, Zangi (black)

a) Claim one: Rumi compares himself to a "Turk". Response:

• Yet these same people ignore this verse: "You are a Turkish moon, and I, although I am not a Turk, I know that much that in Turkish the word" for water is su(Schimmel, Triumphal Sun, pp 196).

• Another Turkish user above falsely translates the verse: "Aslem Türk'est egerçi Hindi miguyem" means: "I'm Turk though I write Persian".. where as the verse says "Hindi" and not Persian! Also "Hindu" and "Turk" are figurative opposites in Persian literature.

• As noted by Kafadar when quoting the Turkish scholar Golpiranli and such ethnonyms in the works of Rumi: “Golpiranli rightly insists that ethnonym were deployed allegorically and metaphorically in classical Islamic literatures, which operated on the basis of a staple set of images and their well recognized contextual associations by readers; there, ‘turk’ had both a negative and positive connotation. In fact, the two dimensions could be blended: the ‘turk’ was ‘cruel’ and hence, at the same time, the ‘beautiful beloved’” .

(Kafadar, Cemal (2007), "A Rome of One’s Own: Reflections on Cultural Geography and Identity in the Lands of Rum", Muqarnas: An Annual on the Visual Cultures of the Islamic World , vol 24:7-25, Brill.)

• And also noted by de Bruijn: “In such imagery the link to ethnic characteristics is hardly relevant, so that it may be used together with features of another ethnic type in the characterization of a single person, e.g., when Nezami describes the princess of Hend as āhu-ye tork-čašm-e hendu-zād (“a gazelle with Turkish eyes, of Indian blood” . (J.T.P. de Brujin, Hindi in Encyclopedia Iranica "In such imagery the link to ethnic characteristics is hardly relevant" Encyclopædia Iranica).

• An example: "Everyone in whose heart is the love for Tabriz Becomes – even though he be a Hindu – a rose-cheeked inhabitant of Taraz (i.e. a Turk)”(Schimmel, Triumphal Sun, 196)".

Also these people ignore the fact that Rumi has called the Ghuzz (Oguz) Turks as savages several times in the Mathnawi (which does not use allegorical symbols) and the Divan.

Or for example many negative quotes about Turks quoted by Aflaki. These are not poetry anymore and cosequently allegory and symbolism does not imply anymore. Amongst the severe ones:

• Oh ignorant Turk! Give up (tark) this idea and undertaking. Take back your Turks (torkan) to your lady (tarkan) as quickly as possible. Otherwise, you will not escape with your life. (Shams al-Din Aflaki, "The feats of the knowers of God: Manāqeb al-ʻārefīn", translated by John O'Kane, Brill, 2002. pg 229-231)
• Majd al-Din, why did you let out a shout and release your quarry from your gullet? A Turk who is a recent disciple is able to bear the burden, but you divulge the matter. Many things like this occur to abdals to God. (Shams al-Din Aflaki, "The feats of the knowers of God: Manāqeb al-ʻārefīn", translated by John O'Kane, Brill, 2002. pg 266)
• Indeed, the building of the world is assigned to the Greeks, whereas the world‘s destruction is reserved for the Turks. (Shams al-Din Aflaki, "The feats of the knowers of God: Manāqeb al-ʻārefīn", translated by John O'Kane, Brill, 2002. pg 503)
• when it is time for building, one must engage Greek laborers and when it is time for destroying something, Turkish hirelings. (Shams al-Din Aflaki, "The feats of the knowers of God: Manāqeb al-ʻārefīn", translated by John O'Kane, Brill, 2002. pg 503)
• God created the group of Turks so that they would destroy every building they saw, mercilessly and ruthlessly, and cause it to be demolished. (Shams al-Din Aflaki, "The feats of the knowers of God: Manāqeb al-ʻārefīn", translated by John O'Kane, Brill, 2002. pg 503)

See:

• Shams al-Din Aflaki, "The feats of the knowers of God: Manāqeb al-ʻārefīn", translated by John O'Kane, Brill, 2002.

false argument two - Rumi's usage of languages

b) Claim two: Rumi uses "Turkish"...

Not sufficient. Rumi also uses Greek as well and the percentage of Greek/Turkish is less than 1/3 of 1% of his poems.

• And as noted by Franklin:”Living among Turks, Rumi also picked up some colloquial Turkish.”(Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008, pg 315)

• Annemarie Schimmel, The Triumphal Sun: A Study of the Works of Jalaloddin Rumi, SUNY Press, 1993, p. 193: "Rumi's mother tongue was Persian, but he had learned during his stay in Konya, enough Turkish and Greek to use it, now and then, in his verse"..Also Rumi uses much more Arabic than Turkish.. but 97% of his poems are in Persian and less than 1/3 of 1% are in combined Greek and Turkish."

• Halman: “A refutation of the Turkish claim may be found in historical fact evinced by Turkish sources. No Ottoman Tezkire’ tush-shuara (poet’s live; Who’s Who in Poetry) lists biographical data on Rumi, thus indicating that he was not considered a Turkish poet by the Ottoman Turks themselves. Also significant is the statement of Mehmed Fuad Kopruli, generally recognized as the greatest scholar of Turkish literary history in the twentiweth century: “Although one encounters several pieces of Greek and Turkish verse in the Divan-I Kebir, these could not be considered, on the basis of their nature and numbers, sufficient to presume that he was a Turkish poet”. Golpinarli corrobates this view: “With Mevlana’s arrival from Balkh to Anatolia, a branch of Iranian literature was transported into Anatolia. The Turkish couplets and the few Turkish words he used in Mulemmas [ compound verses in two or more languages+ could never confer on him the status of a Turkish poet” (Halman, pg 268-269)

• (Talat S. Halman, "Rapture and Revolution: Essays on Turkish Literature", editor by Jayne L. Warner, Syracuse University, 2007, p.266-267) "The Iranian claim on the grounds of the language is inctrovertible, although some Turkish writers have tried to create the impression that Rumi composed a substantial body of verse in Turkish in addition to Persian. The statistical record is clear: The Mesnevi (Persian: Mathnawi) consists of nearly 26,000 couplets; the Divan-i Kebir (Persian Divan-e Kabir) probably has about 40,000 couplets, although the figure varies greatly. Of this vast output, everything is in Persian except for a handful of poems, couplets, lines, and words Turkish, Arabic, Greek, and Hebrew. ... This is infinitesimal compared with his output in Persian. Rumi is patently Persian on the basis of jus et norma loquendi."

• finally Franklin again criticized Turkish ministry of Cutlure: "This is very creative use of statistics, since a couple of dozen at most of the 35,0000 lines of the Divan-e Shams are in Turkish and almost all of these lines occur in poems that are predominantely in Persian. ((Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008, pg 549).
  • Note the Greek lines are also like these.

false argument three - "Persian was common"

c) the third wrong claim is that: "Persian was popular poetry language"..

This is again discounted by the fact that Rumi's Friday prayer sermons are recorded in Persian, his letters are in Persian and his lectures to his students are recorded in colloquial Persian. Note colloquial Persian lectures show that Rumi's everyday language is Persian.. how come he has no friday sermons in Turkish? Or no lectures in Turkish? Also Arabic was the everyday religious preaching language but Rumi chose Persian. Also the invalidity of this argument can be seen by examinaning the writings of Rumi's son who is specific in the fact the he does not know Greek/Turkish well. Rumi's colloquial lectures are in Persian and similarly his sermons. However, he does not have a single lecture or sermon in Turkish.

false argument four - geography argument

d) A fourth wrong claim: "Rumi lived in Turkey under the protection of Turkish sultans. His tomb is in Turkey and he is considered as a Moslem saint by the Turkish people. Maybe his ethnical background was Persian. But what difference does it make ? (Catherine the Great was a Russian empress. Actually she was of German origin. Do we call her a German empress ?) Anyway, after the last edition to call Rumi a Persian poet, the introductory sentence of the article became too chaotic. ( Please try to read the first sentence with four paranthesis, Arabic alphabet, birth and death dates etc. )"

There was no Turkey then. It was Anatolia and the majority of its population were likely Greeks and Armenians, hence the reason Mowlana chose the epiphet "Rumi" (meaning Greek). Also if an Arab was born in Syria under Saljuq rule, it does not make them Turkish. Bear in mind that the Saljuq rulers usually had Persian viziers and indeed the Saljuqs of Rum during the time of Rumi had the Persian Vizier Moin al-Din Parvana. While forgetting that all of Rumi’s colloquial lectures are in Persian which shows him speaking everyday Persian to his students while he does not have a single lecture, sermon or letter in Turkish). Seljuqs also controlled parts of Syria and Ottomans controlled parts of Iraq, Arabia and etc. It doesn’t mean every Arab or Kurd or etc. there has relationship to modern Turkey. Rumi had of course an influence on Turkish culture and is a universal figure. However, he is known for his poetry which is in Persian and you will need to understand Persian to understand Rumi well.

• Franklin Lewis on Turkish scholar Onder: "There, we can only surmise that his cultural jingoism represents a conscious effort to rob Rumi of his Persian and Iranian heritage, and claim him for Turkish literature, ethnicity and nationalism") (Lewis 2008:549). (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008). So the top world Rumi scholar rejects your claim.
• Grousset, Rene, The Empire of the Steppes, (Rutgers University Press, 1991), 161,164; "..renewed the Seljuk attempt to found a great Turko-Persian empire in eastern Iran..", "It is to be noted that the Seljuks, those Turkomans who became sultans of Persia, did not Turkify Persia-no doubt because they did not wish to do so. On the contrary, it was they who voluntarily became Persians and who, in the manner of the great old Sassanid kings, strove to protect the Iranian populations from the plundering of Ghuzz bands and save Iranian culture from the Turkoman menace."
• This can be supported by Rumi’s own words. "Speros Vryonis,"The Turkish State and History", Aristide D Caratzas Pub; 2 Sub edition (September 1992), p.51:"Djalal al-Din Rumi, the great Persian mystic and poet who lived most of his life in Konya is said to have had a very vivid and violent opinion of the nature of the Turkmen nomads of the Rum sultanate: “There is a well known story that the sheikh Salah al-Din one day hired some Turkmen workmen to build the walls of his garden. "Effendi Salah al-Din", said the master (Rumi), "you must hire Greek workmen for this construction. It is for the work of demolition that Turkish workmen must be hired. For the construction of the world is special to the Greeks, and the demolition of this same world is reserved for the Turks. When God created the universe, he first made the carefree infidels. He gave them a long life and considerable force in such a fashion...that in the manner of paid workmen they constructed the earthly world. They erected numerous cities and mountain fortresses...so that after centuries these constructions served as models to the men of recent times. But divine predestination has disposed of affairs in such a way that little by little the constructions become ruins. He created the people of the Turks in order to demolish, without respect or pity, all the constructions which they see. They have done this and are still doing it. They shall continue to do it day in and day out until the Resurrection!"” "

• C.E. Bosworth, "Turkish Expansion towards the west" in UNESCO HISTORY OF HUMANITY, Volume IV, titled "From the Seventh to the Sixteenth Century", UNESCO Publishing / Routledge, 2000. p. 391:

"While the Arabic language retained its primacy in such spheres as law, theology and science, the culture of the Seljuk court and secular literature within the sultanate became largely Persianized; this is seen in the early adoption of Persian epic names by the Seljuq Rulers (Qubad, Kay Khusraw and so on) and in the use of Persian as a literary language (Turkish must have been essentially a vehicle for everyday speech at this time). The process of Persianization accelerated in the thirteenth century with the presence in Konya of two of the most distinguished refugees fleeing before the Mongols, Baha al-din Walad and his son Mewlana Jalal al-din Balkhi Rumi, whose Mathnawi, composed in Konya, constitutes one of the crowning glories of classical Persian literature."

• And Turkish scholar Halman who says the evidence is flimsy: "Bahauddin and his family eventually settled in Konya, ancient Iconium, in central Anatolia. They brought with them their traditional Persian cultural and linguistic background and found in Konya a firmly entrenched penchant for Persian culture. In terms of Rumi’s cultural orientation – including language, literary heritage, mythology, philosophy, and Sufi legacy – the Iranians have indeed a strongly justifiable claim. All of these are more than sufficient to characterize Rumi as a prominent figure of Persian cultural history. Such a characterization is naturally reinforced by his impact on the succeeding centuries of Persian literature and intellectual life. In the West, scholars have always accepted Rumi as Persian on the basis of his exclusive use of the Persian language and because he remained in the mainstream of Persian cultural heritage. No account seems to have been taken of the Turkish and Afghan claims, except some occasional references such as the one by William Hastie in his introduction to The Festival of Spring, featuring his translations from Rumi’s Divan:

“ “The Turks claim Jelaleddin as their, although a Persian of royal race, born of Balkh, old Bactra, on the groundoof his having sung and died in Qoniya, in Asia Minor… whence he was called Rumi “The Roman,” usually rendered “the Greek,” as wonning with the confines of Oriental Rome” ”

• In other words: his language, literary heritage, mythology (yes he uses a lot of Shahnameh symbology), philosophy (from Khorasan) and Sufi legacy (the lineage is strictly Persian up to Ma’ruf Karkhi and then goes to the first Caliph and then the Prophet), he is in the Persian cultural sphere.
• Consequently, Rumi grew up in Persianate environment (his son even did not know Greek and Turkish that well according to his testimony) which is very different than modern Turkey.

false argument five - non-academic arguments

Unfortunately, non-academic arguments without any sources are constantly brought which violate WP:FORUM and WP:SOAPBOX.

Sultan Walad, Rumi's son did not know Turkish well per his own admission

Rumi's son Sultan Walad has claimed several times his knowledge of Turkish and Greek is weak. This despite being born in Anatolia. Note he has again about 60000+ verses of Persian and about 250 Greek/Turkish veres. “Sultan Valad elsewhere admits that he has little knowledge of Turkish”(Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008,pg 239) “Sultan Valad did not feel confident about his command of Turkish”(Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008,pg 240) Sultan
For example in his Ebteda-Nama, Sultan Walad admits twice in Persian after some of the lines in Greek/Turkish:
بگذر از گفت ترکی و رومی
که از این اصطلاح محرومی
گوی از پارسی و تازی
که در این دو همی خوش تازی

Translation:

Let go of the languages of Greek (Rumi) and Turkish (Turki)
Because you lack knowledge in these two,
Thus speak in Persian and Arabic,
Since in these two, you recite very well.

And also elsewhere in Ghazal in his Diwan, he writes:: If I knew Turkish, I would have brought one to a thousand. But when you listen to Persian, I tell the secrets much better.(Sultan Walad, ”Mowlavi-ye Digar:Shamel-e Ghazzaliyat, Qasayed, Qete’at, Tarkibat, Ash’ar-eTorki, Ashar-e Arabi, Mosammat, Robbi’yyat” Tehran, Sana’i, 1984. pg 556:)
ترکچه اگر بیلیدم بر سروزی بک ایدیدم
طتچه اگر دیلرسز گویم اسرار علا

He also says: If I had known Turkish, I would have told you, the secrets that God had imparted on Me.(Mehmed Fuad Koprulu, "Early Mystics in Turkish Literature", Translated by Gary Leiser and Robert Dankoff, Routledge, 2006, pg 253). According to Mehmed Fuad Koprulu, the Turkish poems are: Written in a very crude and primitive manner and with a very defective and rudimentary versification replete with zihaf (pronouncing long vowels short) and imalā (pronouncing a short vowel long).(Mehmed Fuad Koprulu, "Early Mystics in Turkish Literature", Translated by Gary Leiser and Robert Dankoff, Routledge, 2006, pg 206).

References

Much more evidence here

A Study about the Persian Cultural Legacy and Background of the Sufi Mystics Shams Tabrizi and Jalal al-Din Rumi [38] No need to copy & paste the whole thing.

Google books/Scholars and 50 sources+

The number for "Persian Mystic Rumi", "Persian poet Rumi" are overwhelming relative to any other adjective that denotes background. The ratio is close to 100:1..Some of these books are written by rumi scholars and some of them not necessarily from Rumi scholars ..consequently they (non-scholarly ones) only should be used if someone wants to have a contest (which is not appropriate for Wikipedia). However, in order to keep the quality of the article, each author has to be checked based on these criteria: a) Are they scholars of Rumi and know the Persian language?

b) or Are they some non-academics or a writer who has a one line sentence on a piece of work not related to Rumi?

1) Speros Vryonis,"The Turkish State and History", Aristide D Caratzas Pub; 2 Sub edition (September 1992), p.51: "Djalal al-Din Rumi, the great Persian mystic and poet who lived most of his life in Konya is said to have had a very vivid and violent opinion of the nature of the Turkmen nomads of the Rum sultanate: “There is a well known story that the sheikh Salah al-Din one day hired some Turkmen workmen to build the walls of his garden. "Effendi Salah al-Din", said the master (Rumi), "you must hire Greek workmen for this construction. It is for the work of demolition that Turkish workmen must be hired. For the construction of the world is special to the Greeks, and the demolition of this same world is reserved for the Turks. When God created the universe, he first made the carefree infidels. He gave them a long life and considerable force in such a fashion...that in the manner of paid workmen they constructed the earthly world. They erected numerous cities and mountain fortresses...so that after centuries these constructions served as models to the men of recent times. But divine predestination has disposed of affairs in such a way that little by little the constructions become ruins. He created the people of the Turks in order to demolish, without respect or pity, all the constructions which they see. They have done this and are still doing it. They shall continue to do it day in and day out until the Resurrection!"”

2) Franklin Lewis: "On the question of Rumi's multilingualism (pages 315-17), we may still say that he spoke and wrote in Persian as a native language, wrote and conversed in Arabic as a learned "foreign" language and could at least get by at the market in Turkish and Greek (although some wildly extravagant claims have been made about his command of Attic Greek, or his native tongue being Turkish") (Lewis 2008:xxi). (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008). Franklin Lewis on Turkish scholar and cultural ambassador Onder: "There, we can only surmise that his cultural jingoism represents a conscious effort to rob Rumi of his Persian and Iranian heritage, and claim him for Turkish literature, ethnicity and nationalism") (Lewis 2008:549). (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008) Franklin D. Lewis, "Rumi: Past and Present, East and West: The life, Teaching and poetry of Jalal Al-Din Rumi", Oneworld Publication Limited, 2008 pg 9: "How is that a Persian boy born almost eight hundred years ago in Khorasan, the northeastern province of greater Iran, in a region that we identify today as Central Asia, but was considered in those days as part of the greater Persian cultural sphere, wound up in central Anatolia on the receding edge of the Byzantine cultural sphere". Franklin Lewis:”Living among Turks, Rumi also picked up some colloquial Turkish.”(Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008, pg 315). "Rumi also composed a thirteen-line poem with the refrain, "you are the Agapos," from the Greek word agape, meaning 'you are the beloved'. These poems have bits of demotic Greek; these have been identified and translated in French along with some Greek verses of Sultan Valad"(.”(Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008, pg 315))

3)Ritter, H.; Bausani, A. "ḎJ̲alāl al- Dīn Rūmī b. Bahāʾ al-Dīn Sulṭān al-ʿulamāʾ Walad b. Ḥusayn b. Aḥmad Ḵh̲aṭībī ." Encyclopaedia of Islam. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill, 2007. Brill Online. Excerpt: "known by the sobriquet Mewlānā, persian poet and founder of the Mewlewiyya order of dervishes"

4)Julia Scott Meisami, Forward to Franklin Lewis, Rumi Past and Present, East and West, Oneworld Publications, 2008 (revised edition)

5) John Renard,"Historical dictionary of Sufism", Rowman & Littlefield, 2005. pg 155: "Perhaps the most famous Sufi who is known to many Muslims even today by his title alone is the seventh/13th century Persian mystic Rumi"

6) Frederick Hadland Davis , "The Persian Mystics. Jalálu'd-Dín Rúmí", Adamant Media Corporation (November 30, 2005) , ISBN 978-1-4021-5768-4.

7) Annemarie Schimmel, The Triumphal Sun: A Study of the Works of Jalaloddin Rumi, SUNY Press, 1993, p. 193: "Rumi's mother tongue was Persian, but he had learned during his stay in Konya, enough Turkish and Greek to use it, now and then, in his verse". Annemarie Schimmel, "The Mystery of Numbers",Oxford University Press, Apr 7, 1994. pg 51:"These examples are taken from the Persian mystic Rumi's work, not from Chinese, but they express the yang-yin relationship with perfect lucidity."

8) Cyril Glassé, Huston Smith, "The New Encyclopedia of Islam", Rowman Altamira, 2003. pg 235:"He was of Persian origin from Balkh, but left at an early age with his father Baha' ad-Din Walad, a scholar who had disagreements with the rulers".

9) Seyyed Hossein Nasr, “The Garden of Truth: The Vision and Promise of Sufism, Islam's Mystical Tradition”, Harper Collins, Sep 18, 2007. Pg 204:”Of Persian origin and born in Balkh, Rumi, the poet whose poems now are the most widely sold in America, spent the last forty years of his life in Konya in Anatolia.”

10) Jelaluddin Rumi, Andrew Harvey, Lekha Singh,"Call to Love: In the Rose Garden with Rumi", Sterling Publishing Company, Sep 1, 2007 - 112 pages. Backcover: “The Persian mystic Rumi, who lived and wrote in thirteenth-century Turkey, has become the most widely read poet in America today.

11) Sheila Blair, Jonathan M. Bloom, "Rivers of paradise: water in Islamic art and culture",Yale University Press, 2009. pg 53:"This idea is expressed by the Persian mystic Rumi, currently the best-selling poet in the United States: "The sea bears up one who is dead: but if he be living,.."

12)

Carl W. Ernst, "Rethinking Islam in the contemporary world", Edinburgh University Press, 2004. pg 244:"Currently, the best-known representative of Sufism is the classical Persian poet Rumi, who is often represented as someone who transcended all religions.5 Many people wonder what relationship, if any, Sufism has to Islam"

13) Richard Ettinghausen, Oleg Grabar, Marilyn Jenkins-Madina,"Islamic Art and Architecture, 650-1250 "Yale University Press, Jul 11, 2003. pg 134: "In effect then, wherever their conquests took them, the Turks, or at least their princes, carried largely Persian culture and Persian ideas, even the Persian language. The greatest Persian mystic poet, Jalal al-Din Rumi, lived and wrote in Konya in central Anatolia"

14) Tambi-Piḷḷai Isaac Tambyah, "Psalms of a Saiva Saint", Asian Educational Services, 1925, page 157:"The Persian mystic, Rumi, exclaims, "I gazed into my heart and there I saw Him who was nowhere else”.

15) Stephen Arroyo, “Person-to-Person Astrology: Energy Factors in Love, Sex and Compatibility”, North Atlantic Books, Jun 21, 2011. Pg 114: The Persian mystic Rumi, whose works have recently become widely known in the Western world for their inspirational beauty and profound spiritual insights, has written: “Love is the astrolabe of God's mysteries.”

16) Brush Dance, “A Journal with the Poetry of Rumi”, BRUSH DANCE Incorporated, Dec 1, 2001 “This beautifully designed writing journal features the poetry of 13th-century Persian mystic Rumi and the colorful and inspiring artwork of Michael Green.”</ref>.

17) William J. Duiker, Jackson J. Spielvogel, "World History: Volume 1",Cengage Learning, Dec 26, 2008 pg 245:"In this poem, the thirteenth-century Persian poet Rumi describes the mystical relationship achieved by means of passionate music and dance"

18) Mariam Naseem, "Not Without My Son: As Told to Lee Gittler Steup", AuthorHouse, Jan 19, 2010. pg 26:"I finish this chapter with the words of the oldest and greatest Persian poet, Rumi," https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Rumi+persian+poet%22&btnG=Search+Books&tbm=bks&tbo=1#hl=en&tbo=1&tbm=bks&sclient=psy-ab&q=%22Persian+poet+Rumi%22&oq=%22Persian+poet+Rumi%22&gs_l=serp.3...8097.10644.0.10813.19.19.0.0.0.0.156.1417.16j3.19.0.efrsh..0.0...1.9GrMo9DB8sQ&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=9a8fbacd776db0ec&biw=1536&bih=718

19) N. Hanif, "Biographical Encyclopedia of Sufis",Volume 3 of Biographical encyclopaedia of Sufis", Sarup & Sons, 2000. pg 18: "Shah Abdul Latif had an unflinching faith in the great Persian poet Rumi"

20) AC Hunsberger, "Nasir Khusraw, the Ruby of Badakhshan: A Portrait of the Persian Poet, Traveller and Philosopher", I.B.Tauris, 2003. page xiii: "If Nasir Khusraw is less well-known today, even in Iran, than other Persian poets such as Sa'di, Khayyam, Rumi or Hafiz, other travel chroniclers and historians such as Ibn Battuta or Ibn Khaldun"

21) Wayne Teasdale , “The Mystic Heart: Discovering a Universal Spirituality in the World's Religions”, New World Library, Mar 9, 2001. Pg 224: “The Persian mystic Rumi, one of the greatest Islamic poet sages..”

22) Charles Dudley Warner, "A Library of the World's Best Literature - Ancient and Modern - Vol.XXXII (Forty-Five Volumes); Rumi-Schrer", Cosimo, Inc., 2008. pg 2487: "The appelation Rumi, or Syrian, is given to the Persian poet Jalal al-Din because most of his life was passed at Iconium in Rumi or Asia Minor"

23) R Kane, "The Significance of Free Will", Oxford University Press, 1996, pg 3: "There is a disputation [that will continue] till mankind are raised from the dead between the Necessitarians and the partisans of Free Will. —Jalalu'ddin Rumi, twelfth-century Persian poet "

24) Fayeq Oweis, "Encyclopedia of Arab American Artists",ABC-CLIO, 2008. pg 121: "The Post-Apollo Press has also published one of the most important scholarly studies on the great spiritual master and Persian poet Jalaluddin Rumi (1207-1273) and his life and work"

25) Edward E. Curtis, "Encyclopedia of Muslim-American history",Infobase Publishing, 2010. pg 503:"Rumi, a Persian poet and theologian, inspired movement in the 13th century Turkey.."

26) Salma Khadra Jayyusi, Manuela Marín, "The Legacy of Muslim Spain", BRILL, 1992. pg 545:"Mystical poets like the Persian poet Rumi were to reach new extremes of delicacy and preciosity in seeing in the intimate union of the rose (gol) and sugar (shekar) .."

27) Thom Cavalli, "Alchemical Psychology: Old Recipes for Living in a New World", Penguin, Mar 1, 2002. pg 260: "I have often quoted the great Persian poet Rumi.." [39]

28) Zenius, "Arete", AuthorHouse, 2011. pg 171: "the Persian Poet, Rumi, may have been their greatest and Tagore may have been the top poet of the Indian sub-continent. .."

29) John L. Jackson, David Kyuman Kim, "Race, Religion, and Late Democracy",SAGE, 2011. pg 62:"Famous New Age writer Paolo Coelho made an annual trip to Iran, where he has in the past lectured on the Sufi, Persian poet Rumi"

30) Deirdre Johnson ,"Love: Bondage or Liberation? A Psycholological Exploration of the Meaning, Values and Dangers of Falling in Love", Karnac Books, Jun 30, 2010 . pg xiii: "The Persian writer Rumi, is one of the most widely read poets at the moment".

31) Geela, "The American dream: an immigrant's true life story of winning against all odds",Indiana University. pg 22: "Similarly, many great thinkers and scientists such as Albert Einstein and the great Persian philosopher Rumi have described the universe as more of a great thought than an object." [40]

32) John Baldock, "Essence of Rumi ", Chartwell Books (September 2005). pg 68: ..writings of Rumi and other Persian poets of the twelfth and.."

33) Rumi, Ehsan Yarshater, Hasan Javadi and A. J. Arberry , "Mystical Poems of Rumi", University Of Chicago Press (April 15, 2009) . " Front Matter: "... Persian mystical poet Maulänä.."

34) Wayne Teasdale and the Dalai Lama, "The mystical heart: Discovering a Universal Spirituality in the World's Religions", New World Library, 2001. pg 222: "The Persian mystic Rumi, one of the great Islamic poet sages, comments.."

35) Roger Housden , "Ten Poems to Change Your Life",Random House Digital, Inc., 2001. pg 14: "Eight hundred years earlier, the Persian mystic Rumi said:.."

36)

A. Avery, G., A Reynolds, K, "Representations of Childhood Death", Palgrave Macmillan, 2000. pg 158: "his free translations of the work of the Persian mystic Rumi".

37) Rachel Pollack, "The power of ritual",Dell Pub., 2000. pg 23:"The Persian mystic Rumi wrote of God as "the Beloved"

38) Paul William Roberts , Tauris Parke Paperbacks, Oct 17, 2006 . pg 22:"Besides major poets like the Persian Rumi, the order produced numerous Sufi masters who were, and are, believed to possess spiritual powers and the ability to perform miracles."

39) John J. K. Lee, "Receiving God's Deeper Messages: The Pilgrimage Of A Truth-seeking Christian", iUniverse, 2005. pg 77:"Persian poet Rumi expressed this insight beautifully in the following poem. The entire world, "

40) Christopher K. Germer, Sharon Salzberg , "The Mindful Path to Self-Compassion: Freeing Yourself from Destructive Thoughts and Emotions", Guilford Press, 2009. pg 91: "Consider the following poem from the Persian poet Rumi.."

41) Jan Philips, "Divining the body: reclaim the holiness of your physical self", SkyLight Paths Publishing, Mar 30, 2005. pg 7: "The Persian poet Rumi.."

42)

T. Tymieniecka,” Islamic Philosophy and Occidental Phenomenology on the Perennial Issue of Microcosm and Macrocosm”, Springer, Aug 29, 2006. “The story of true love is so sweet that it not only cannot be narrated in one paper, but, as the Persian mystic Rumi says: 26 However much we describe and explain love, When we come to love we are ashamed of it.”,

43) David J. Roxburgh , "Writing the word of God: calligraphy and the Qur'an", Yale University Press, 2008.

44) Luci Shaw, Eugene H. Peterson, "Water My Soul: Cultivating the Interior Life", Regent College Publishing. pg 130: "Rumi, Persian poet".

45) Ilʹi͡a Pavlovich Petrushevskiĭ, "Islam in Iran ", SUNY Press, 1985. pg 399: "Rumi Persian poet and mystic"

46) Bernard Grun , "The timetables of history: a horizontal linkage of people and events", Simon & Schuster, 1991. "Djelaleddin Rumi, Persian poet, founder of the Order of Dancing Dervishes" [41]

47) Y. C. Simhadri, "Youth in the contemporary world",Mittal Publications, 1989 . pg 118: "The evation of the evils of mundane political systems was summarised by the Persian philosopher Jalal-eddin Al-Rumi in these terms: “The princely all seductive terms, but behind them lie death, torment, and the loss of our life"

48) Nyogen Senzaki, Eidō Shimano, Soen Nakagawa,"Like a Dream, Like a Fantasy: The Zen Teachings and Translations of Nyogen", Wisdom Publications, Aug 31, 2005. pg 99: "Jalal-ud-Din Rumi was a Persian philosopher and poet of the early thirteenth century"

49) Alice Peck , " SkyLight Paths Publishing, May 30, 2008. pg 4: "Jalal ad-Din ar-Rumi, the Persian sage and poet mystic who wrote during the thirteenth century, sees sowing and consumption— the beginning and the end—as one, as a cycle"

50) Michael Sebastian, "1-Step Solution Just Say Hu", AuthorHouse, 2009. pg 50: "Rumi, Jalal ad-Din, 1207-73, great Islamic Persian sage and poet mystic, b. in Balkh",.

51) Seyyed Hossein Nasr, "Islamic Art and Spirituality", Suny Press, 1987. pg 115:"Jalal al-Din was born in a major center of Persian culture, Balkh, from Persian speaking parents, and is the product of that Islamic Persian culture which in the 7th/13th century dominated the 'whole of the eastern lands of Islam and to which present day Persians as well as Turks, Afghans, Central Asian Muslims and the Muslims of the Indo-Pakistani and the Muslims of the Indo-Pakistani subcontinent are heir. It is precisely in this world that the sun of his spiritual legacy has shone most brillianty during the past seven centuries. The father of Jalal al-Din, Muhammad ibn Husayn Khatibi, known as Baha al-Din Walad and entitled Sultan al-'ulama', was an oustanding Sufi in Balkh connected to the spiritual lineage of Najm al-Din Kubra."

52)

Laura Resau, : "The Ruby Notebook “,Random House Digital, Inc., Jan 10, 2012 . p149: “You know, the Persian mystic Rumi mentions a Layla in his poetry.”

53) Andrew Harvey,"Call to Love: In the Rose Garden with Rumi",Sterling Publishing Company, 2007. "The Persian mystic Rumi, who lived and wrote in thirteenth-century Turkey, has become the most widely read poet in America today"

54) Robert Whittemore,The Review of Metaphysics Vol. 9, No. 4 (Jun., 1956), pp. 681-699. "It is, however, important to note that the inspiration for Iqbal's panpsychism is not any thinker of the west but rather the famed Persian mystic, Rum"

.

References

Incase fringe viewpoint is given weight

If there is ever a need for an Iranian section (which there isn't since WP:weight applies and top scholars like Franklin/Encycloapedia of Islam must be given weight, and the other viewpoints do not have equivalent weight), one can write:

Western authoritative scholars such as Franklin Lewis have criticized Turkish authorities for trying to rob Rumi of his Iranian heritage and have dismissed the extravagant claim that his native language was Turkish. Turkish scholar Halman points to the fact that Western scholars have always accepted Rumi as Persian due to his exclusive use of the Persian language and because he remained in the mainstream Persian cultural heritage.. According to Prof. Speros Vyronis, based on a passage from Aflaki (a student of Rumi and his first biogpher), Rumi had a violent opinion of the nature of Turks. Iranian scholar Firuz Mansuri has noted that Sultan Walad belittles Turks in several poems and also has mentioned several times that his knowledge of Turkish and Greek is weak. R. Minutalab also analyzes the Ma'arif of Rumi's father and the lectures of Rumi and notes: "The language of Vakhsh in Tajikistan was also Persian as shown by the colloquial everyday language of Ma‘arif" and "that the Fihi ma Fih and the seven sermon shows that the everyday spoken language by Rumi was Persian", discounting the viewpoint that the poet only used the language for literary reasons. For further explanation on Rumi's Iranian background, one can refer to the recent monograph of Dr. Minutalab. Likewise, in mystical Persian poetry, the words Rumi, Turk, Hindu and Zangi take symbolic non-ethnic meaning and this has led to some confusions for those that are not familiar with Persian poetry, with Rumi describing himself as not a Turk, Turk, Hindu, Greek, Black. Oxford historian C.E. Bosworth has mentioned the process of Persianization was accelerated by Rumi's father and son. Overall, numerous sources have supposed Rumi as a native Persian speaker and as a Persian poet/mystic .

and 1000s+ more in google books and google scholars [42][43].--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 21:25, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

References

What concerns Wikipedia

Wikipedia is concerned about weight. Google books/scholars as well as the most authoritative living scholars such as Franklin overwhelmingly state Persian. And scholars such as Franklin have directly criticized the Turkish claim while even Turkish scholars such as Halmann claim that Western "scholars" (note scholars and not some random book) consider Rumi as a Persian poet. Of course Halmann tries to rationalize this by saying because Rumi wrote in Persian, however there are much more evidence here:[44]. So wikipedia needs to restore the correct version: [45].

Unfortunately, ignorant users have attacked this page constantly, and bring 5-6 random books from their 19 book google search whose authors have no authority in Rumi studies.. Some of the books are outright ridicolous with authors having no university and academic background, and just writing one sentence on Rumi. Else Iranian users can do a search from 2000-3000+ google books and overwhelm the punty 5-6 books written by non-experts. Until the Turkish users can suggest an alive Western scholars with the status of Franklin Lewis who has written the ultimate biography of Rumi, and such scholars as Arberry, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Julia Meisami, etc.., then they need to desist from vandalizing this page. The book of Lewis has been overwhelmingly positively reviewed as shown in www.scholar.google.com .. wikipedia consequently must also follow scholarly sources. However, even their semi-unbiased Turkish scholars such as Halmann claim that Western scholars consider Rumi as a Persian. That is sufficient than for Wikipedia and these Turkish nationalists need to find a new play ground to appropriate Persian history. For more details see here: [46]. Thank you. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 15:47, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Yogurt effect

To the above user: How nicely you have written; with sources and all. I wonder why and lament you are not a registered user. Or have you been one in the past? I would like to see you writing articles; for example all those related to Turkish gastronomy... All the best. --E4024 (talk) 13:47, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I guess nothing better to say? --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 15:42, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Halman

Mr Talat Halman (not Halmann) says, in the ref supplied, that ... (this and that) take him as Persian, not that he (the Turkish scholar Halman) does so. If you read more of Halman you will probably sense he is complaining of that situation. --E4024 (talk) 17:30, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Talat Halman says Western scholars consider him Persian. That is sufficient. I will bring Halman's full quote as well about Persian cultural heritage brought by Rumi and his father... But again Halman is a Turkish writer and cannot be put in the same league as world reknowned scholars such as Franklin. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 17:42, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I am asking admin intervention for removing the anti-Turkish POV above and for sanctions against the user. --E4024 (talk) 17:55, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Halman is not a Professor of a university, but a writer of Turkish background. With all due respect, he is governmental figure from a government that has many ethnic controversies surrounding it and pursues a strong nationalism. However, Halman actually is semi-unbiased and he states clearly that Western scholars consider Rumi to be Persian. Also let me bring the full quote of Halman here. Franklin is a Western writer and Professor of Persian literature in the university of Chicago. He has written the top authoritative Rumi biography of all time. I do not see any "anti-X" here and I am not here to engage WP:soapbox. If you think Halman is in the same league as Franklin with regards to Rumi studies, you need to prove it and not accuse others of being anti-X or anti-Y. The article cannot quote someone like Halman over Franklin not due to their ethnic background, but due to scholarship and academic background. Nevertheless, let me bring some quotes from Halman here --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 18:04, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

You're talking with your own point of view. I also observe that you have prejudices against Prof Halman, and you don't have enough knowledge about him. Halman is still teaching as a professor at a university. During his long and on-going academic career, Professor Halman has taught at Columbia University, Princeton University (1965–71) and (1972–80), the University of Pennsylvania and New York University, where he also served as Chairman of the Department of Near Eastern Languages and Literatures. Currently he is the Dean of the Faculty of Humanities and Letters at Bilkent University in Ankara, where he has been teaching continuously since 1998 when he helped found the program in Turkish languages and literature with a goal of introducing new critical approaches. Professor Halman received his B.A. from Robert College in Istanbul. In the mid-1950s he received his Master's Degree from Columbia University in Political Science, International Relations and International law. So Halman has new critical approaches, and this comes from an academic background. Thanks. Barayev (talk) 22:13, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay, then Halman is clear: "the West, scholars have always accepted Rumi as Persian on the basis of his exclusive use of the Persian language and because he remained in the mainstream of Persian cultural heritage. No account seems to have been taken of the Turkish and Afghan claims, except some occasional references such as the one by William Hastie in his introduction to The Festival of Spring, featuring his translations from Rumi’s Divan: ""The Turks claim Jelaleddin as their, although a Persian of royal race, born of Balkh, old Bactra, on the groundoof his having sung and died in Qoniya, in Asia Minor… whence he was called Rumi “The Roman,” usually rendered “the Greek,” as wonning with the confies of Oriental Rome"". So where is this great debate amongst scholars? I do not mind having a section about "politics of Rumi's origin", however him being Persian poet is supported by overwhelming scholarship today and this needs to be reflected in the introduction. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 22:44, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Displaying vice living the controversy

Simply because it is prose does not mean that it is not allegorical on some level, and even if he were quoted as saying "Turks are jerks" that would not necessarily indicate he is Persian; to assume so directly is OR on our part. If we have a cite from "Dr. Smith" saying "The Turk destroyer story and X/Y/Z indicate...", sure great, let's use that as a cite. Especially on a topic like this, WP:Secondary sources aren't just preferred, they're basically mandatory. I do agree with you that non-Rumi-ologist sources (like the "Inner Wisdom" book) are non-expert and should not be cited here. I also agree that Lewis looks pretty reputable, though we do of course want to avoid leaning too heavily on one academic, expert though he may be.

Regarding What is important is what Western scholars claim and not what Turkish or Iranian scholars claim here, I would quite disagree. If there is a controversy among reputable scholars, that should be addressed. Further, even if Western/Turkish/Iranian scholars were to agree, the fact that the issue is contested in the public discourse is quite important. Again we shouldn't cite primaries, so if some Turkish political group put out a pamphlet called "Rumi: The Greatest Turk" it'd be improper to cite that. However, if a reputable academic writes "Turkish organisations have pushed a view that Rumi is Turkish, producing a pamphlet distributed in millions of copies..." we should cite that academic's analysis of the dispute.

There's a great wiki-essay Wikipedia:Beware of the tigers that is a fun and short read that really applies here. The "tiger" (the controversy) should not be banished from the article, but should be stuffed and mounted as an objective display-piece. The problem we have now is that the "tiger" is roaming the talk page and the article. We don't need to remove the tiger from the museum (pretend there is no global dispute), we just need to portray it vice have it active. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:39, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

• I know I brought a secondary source. Speros Vyronis for the quote. I'll quote again: "Speros Vryonis,"The Turkish State and History", Aristide D Caratzas Pub; 2 Sub edition (September 1992), p.51: "Djalal al-Din Rumi, the great Persian mystic and poet who lived most of his life in Konya is said to have had a very vivid and violent opinion of the nature of the Turkmen nomads of the Rum sultanate: “There is a well known story that the sheikh Salah al-Din one day hired some Turkmen workmen to build the walls of his garden. "Effendi Salah al-Din", said the master (Rumi), "you must hire Greek workmen for this construction. It is for the work of demolition that Turkish workmen must be hired. For the construction of the world is special to the Greeks, and the demolition of this same world is reserved for the Turks. When God created the universe, he first made the carefree infidels. He gave them a long life and considerable force in such a fashion...that in the manner of paid workmen they constructed the earthly world. They erected numerous cities and mountain fortresses...so that after centuries these constructions served as models to the men of recent times. But divine predestination has disposed of affairs in such a way that little by little the constructions become ruins. He created the people of the Turks in order to demolish, without respect or pity, all the constructions which they see. They have done this and are still doing it. They shall continue to do it day in and day out until the Resurrection!"” "
• Please note, Speros Vyronis is a secondary source who is quoting a primary source and giving his intrepretation. He is a well known scholar with quite amount of publication and has written a specific article on Rumi: ((Speros Vryonis, Jr., "The Economic and Social Worlds of Anatolia in the Writings of the Mawlawi (Mevlevi) Dervish Eflaki" in "Jaye L. Warner (2001), "Cultural Horizons A Festschrift in Honor of Talat S. Halman", Syracuse Universty Press, pp 188-197.))
• As per "controversy" amongst reputable scholars, I only see two reputable Rumi alive scholars quoted here, Franklin and Encycloapedia of Islam. Franklin sees no controversy. He has written the most authoritative book on Rumi's biography. Any other book or scholar that has a different viewpoint should at least have similar stature in terms of Rumi studies. As per your claim of controversy is negated by the quote from Halman about Western scholars considering Rumi as Persian. I believe we can mention that Turks consider Rumi as Turkish in another section and I'll be happy to bring quotes such as above, as well as some of the quotes from Franklin. I can also bring Iranian scholars if you wish. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 17:50, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Mediation

I request the users that came up with a new concensus over two days (despite one standing for five years)! to enter mediation. If not, please desist from changing a concensus that has been here for five years. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 22:19, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Mediation

• According to Franklin: “Sultan Valad elsewhere admits that he has little knowledge of Turkish”(Franklin Lewis, Rumi Past and Present, East and West, Oneworld Publications, 2000.,pg 239)
• “Sultan Valad did not feel confident about his command of Turkish”(Franklin Lewis, Rumi Past and Present, East and West, Oneworld Publications, 2000.,pg 240)

Whoever has a problem with the lead, will they accept mediation of 3rd party? As the format proposed by some users has multiple flaws including WP:OR, WP:WEIGHT and also not taking into account what authoritative scholars who have written biographies of Rumi (e.g. Franklin) consider. Speros Vryonis,"The Turkish State and History", Aristide D Caratzas Pub; 2 Sub edition (September 1992), p.51: "Djalal al-Din Rumi, the great Persian mystic and poet who lived most of his life in Konya is said to have had a very vivid and violent opinion of the nature of the Turkmen nomads of the Rum sultanate: “There is a well known story that the sheikh Salah al-Din one day hired some Turkmen workmen to build the walls of his garden. "Effendi Salah al-Din", said the master (Rumi), "you must hire Greek workmen for this construction. It is for the work of demolition that Turkish workmen must be hired. For the construction of the world is special to the Greeks, and the demolition of this same world is reserved for the Turks. When God created the universe, he first made the carefree infidels. He gave them a long life and considerable force in such a fashion...that in the manner of paid workmen they constructed the earthly world. They erected numerous cities and mountain fortresses...so that after centuries these constructions served as models to the men of recent times. But divine predestination has disposed of affairs in such a way that little by little the constructions become ruins. He created the people of the Turks in order to demolish, without respect or pity, all the constructions which they see. They have done this and are still doing it. They shall continue to do it day in and day out until the Resurrection!"” This is for example one quote for Persian origin..but I can find much more from google books/scholars. Note primary source for the same quote: (Shams al-Din Aflaki, "The feats of the knowers of God: Manāqeb al-ʻārefīn", translated by John O'Kane, Brill, 2002. (pg 503)) but in Wikipedia, secondary sources are preferred). Thanks--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 16:50, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

A few points

• Your revert restored a lede which is nearly unintelligible due to having 4-6 lines (depending on screen display) of distracting information regarding the subject's name. I submit that just giving his full name, noting he's commonly called Rumi in the West, is quite sufficient for a lede, and the other name details can come following the lede. It is not helpful to the casual reader to have a mass of words before even reaching the term "poet".
• Ideally citations are not used in ledes, because the lede should simply summarise the body of the article, where we have the leisure to expand context and apply citations. Worse yet is having eight cites simply for the word "Persian". It looks unacademic, breathless, and obviously a "nuh-uh!" response. The version I wrote clearly states he wrote primarily in Persian, a fact that basically none will deny, and importantly notes that there is a dispute over his "heritage" among various modern nations.
• Of the 8 cites for "Persian", most are quite unhelpful. As noted above, "Dr. Smith" mentioning the term "Persian" in passing is not a conclusive argument, while Dr. Smith of a reputed university publishing in a reputable firm and laying out the case for Persian vs. other would indeed be a good cite.
• Speaking of good cites, you weaken your case above with frankly immaterial quotes. It is WP:OR to say "Lewis says Rumi's son didn't speak much Turkish, therefore we on Wikipedia conclude that Rumi is not Turkish." However, if there is a passage where Lewis says "details like his son's lack of Turkish language, and X, and Y, and Z, make a firm case for Rumi being Persian in heritage" that would of course be useful. The parable of the "Turks destroying" is even less helpful, since we here are not Dr Lewis and thus not qualified to conclude when Rumi is speaking literally, when metaphorically (not surprising for a Sufi), etc. If Lewis cites that passage to base an argument, sure let's cite Lewis.

Given the above, I argue we should revert to something similar to my edit, which unclutters the name issue from the lede, removes the excessive breathless, passing cites for "Persian", and specifically mentions that there is a controversy. At the very least we should revert in part just to clean up the name clutter, and address the Persian cites as a separate issue. I'm not at all trying to argue against a Persian heritage for Rumi, but instead looking for a less confrontational and better-sourced way to address it. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:10, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Your lead violates WP:OR. Because even such Turkish scholars as Halmann agree that Western scholars accept Rumi as Persian. The parable about Turks destroying is not a poem to be symbolic. It is first account witness from Rumi's student Aflaki and is quoted by a secondary source. It is not verse but prose. And I have brought a secondary source (Speros Vyronis) who has mentioned it and says Persian poet Rumi had a violent view about Turks and then quotes the line. I also agree with you that the lead is alittle bit cluttered, however we need to keep the most authoritative sources. Lewis is clear on the issue:

• Franklin Lewis: "On the question of Rumi's multilingualism (pages 315-17), we may still say that he spoke and wrote in Persian as a native language, wrote and conversed in Arabic as a learned "foreign" language and could at least get by at the market in Turkish and Greek (although some wildly extragavant claims have been made about his command of Attic Greek, or his native tongue being Turkish") (Lewis 2008:xxi). (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008)
• Franklin Lewis on Turkish scholar and cultural ambassador Onder: "There, we can only surmise that his cultural jingoism represents a conscious effort to rob Rumi of his Persian and Iranian heritage, and claim him for Turkish literature, ethnicity and nationalism") (Lewis 2008:549). (Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008)
• Franklin D. Lewis, "Rumi: Past and Present, East and West: The life, Teaching and poetry of Jalal Al-Din Rumi", Oneworld Publication Limited, 2008 pg 9: "How is that a Persian boy born almost eight hundred years ago in Khorasan, the northeastern province of greater Iran, in a region that we identify today as Central Asia, but was considred in those days as part of the greater Persian cultural sphere, wound up in central Anatolia on the receding edge of the Byzantine cultural sphere"
• Franklin Lewis:”Living among Turks, Rumi also picked up some colloquial Turkish.”(Franklin Lewis, "Rumi, "Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi", One World Publication Limited, 2008, pg 315)

I agree, we should just have two authoritative sources in the introduction and also mention Western scholars consider Rumi to be Persian.. then we can expand on the issue in the origin section if necessary. What is important is what Western scholars claim and not what Turkish or Iranian scholars claim here. The top living Rumi scholar right now is Franklin Lewis and the most important biography written on Rumi in any language is again his book. Your second sentence is OR and is designed to make things "fair", whereas Wikipedia is concerned about authoritative sources. Currently, Franklin and Encycloapedia of Islam (which says Persian poet) are considered the best sources. Specially the book from Franklin has gotten many positive google scholars review. Now contrast this with some of the sources that were brought randomly from google books such as:

• Bonney Gulino Schaub, Richard Schaub, Dante's Path: A Practical Approach to Achieving Inner Wisdom, Penguin, 2003 p.3 . --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 17:19, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I suggest we start with Encycloapedia of Islam: "Ritter, H.; Bausani, A. "ḎJ̲alāl al- Dīn Rūmī b. Bahāʾ al-Dīn Sulṭān al-ʿulamāʾ Walad b. Ḥusayn b. Aḥmad Ḵh̲aṭībī ." Encyclopaedia of Islam. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill, 2007. Brill Online. Excerpt: "known by the sobriquet Mewlānā, persian poet and founder of the Mewlewiyya order of dervishes"--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 17:29, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

No, we should not start with an encyclopedia; enyclopedias are WP:Tertiary sources. That is, aggregations of already-published research (such as Wikipedia is) rather than the research itself. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:52, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Stable version

I've restored the last stable version of the article, which had not been changed for years, before someone, unilaterally and without discussion, decided to introduce nationalistic fringe claims, not supported by the mainstream academic sources, into the article which violate WP:Fringe and WP:Weight. Kurdo777 (talk) 06:15, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. The version that started immediately with arguments about Turkish scholarship was very poorly composed. Binksternet (talk) 14:40, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

This page has been on my watchlist for years. I totally agree that the stable version that had been there for years should not have been tempered with witout a duscussion· I endorse Kurdo`s restoration of the original version·Penom (talk) 17:03, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

First sentence

I don't know why 81.213.117.125 s reasonable suggestion was refused so violently. After all it was suggested to drop the adjective of national heritage. Rumi lived in Turkey under the protection of Turkish sultans. His tomb is in Turkey and he is considered as a Moslem saint by the Turkish people. Maybe his ethnical background was Persian. But what difference does it make ? (Catherine the Great was a Russian empress. Actually she was of German origin. Do we call her a German empress ?) Anyway, after the last edition to call Rumi a Persian poet, the introductory sentence of the article became too chaotic. ( Please try to read the first sentence with four paranthesis, Arabic alphabet, birth and death dates etc. ) I suggest to simplify the first sentence and add a separate section about his names and different views about his background. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 15:47, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Response to Nedim above..--Khodabandeh14 (talk) 00:34, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Nedim; seriously, can we set aside the ethnic debate momentarily and focus on making the first sentence intelligible? The whole lede of the article screams "writing by committee and massive feuding". All but a couple of names should be moved to a Names section just to make the first para readable. Secondly, whether "Persian" appears in the lede or no, "Persian[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]" is completely inappropriate and should be reduced to no more than the two best cites. Particuarly as, as I keep saying, most of the "[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]" cites are not convincing citations, but simply an author who said "Rumi was a Persian poet". There have to be some reputable cites making a more convincing case that just chucking an adjective at the subject.

Mediation is starting to sound more and more reasonable. I'm not sure if some folks are just trying to push a frantic Persian focus at the expense of the article, or if they're just over-reacting due to the (I'm sure irritating) attempts of uninformed parties to jam in Turkish/Afghan/etc. arguments.

Again, I'm not at all trying to remove mention of Rumi's Persian ties, but the panicked nature by which they're address currently is not appropriate, nor are multi-paragraph-lenght footnotes, nor are 8 footnotes for one word, nor is taking up half the lede to explain someone's name. I don't care how "stable" some time-honoured version from 2007 was, all those features are terrible and make the article look shoddy. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:11, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

All the way, I'm against mentioning the ethnicity of Rumi on the lede. It's better to put in a different section to solve the problem. The International Mawlana Foundation calls Rumi "Anatolian poet and mystic sufi" where he lived and died. Rumi's family explain that they don't attribute any ethnicity to Rumi due to the fact that Rumi belongs to everyone. Also, they don't accept being Persian. So what's the matter? What do you discuss? To eliminate the ethnicity, which has been disputed, is the best choice here. Thanks. Barayev (talk) 20:54, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

The consensus among experts is that Rumi was Persian. His place of birth, his language, the reports about him, etc - almost everything points to a Persian origin. That's why leading experts, like for example Annemarie Schimmel, do not take any other claims serious. As for the Encyclopaedia of Islam, here is the direct quote:

• DJALAL AL-DIN RUMI B. BAHA AL-DIN SULTAN AL-'ULAMA' WALAD B. HUSAYN B. AHMAD KHATIBI, known by the sobriquet Mawlana (Mevlana), Persian poet and founder of the Mawlawiyya order of dervishes, which was named after him, was born on Rabi'i 604/30 September 1207 in Balkh, and died on 5 Djumada II 672/1273 in Konya. [...] His father, whose sermons have been preserved and printed [...] was a preacher in Balkh. The assertions that his family tree goes back to Abu Bakr, and that his mother was a daughter of the Khwarizmshah Ala al-Din Muhammad (Aflakl, i, 8-9) do not hold on closer examination [...]

--Lysozym (talk) 16:36, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Why are you people reacting like I'm trying to purge the word "Persian" from the article? I'm not, I'm trying to make the lede intelligible and professional in appearance (it is neither under the "consensus version". Secondly, why do y'all keep bringing up passing phrases with the word "Persian" in them? If you're trying to defend some imagined attack on Rumi's Persian-ness, chucking out every time someone said "Rumi, a Persian poet" is completely unhelpful of even your own case. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:44, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Then why are you introducing nationalist fringe nonsense into the lead questioning who and what he was, as if there is a disagreement among scholars about his background, when all the academic sources say otherwise? There are literally thousands of academic sources calling him Persian, this is not an issue that's up for debate. The only people say otherwise, are Turkish nationalists and fringe theorists. The same people who claim Sumerians were Turks. Wikipedia is not place for nationalist fringe theories. Why are you ignoring WP:UNDUE and WP:Weight? You could have simply made the clean-up you propose, without removing his background, and introducing weasel wording about who claims him etc. But no, you decided to make those controversial edits, replacing academically-sourced facts with your own OR, and ignoring all the old discussions on this talk page, and the fact that this page had been stable for almost 5 years. Kurdo777 (talk) 17:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Descendants of M. Celaleddin-i Rumi

Thanks for your efforts Matthew. His descendants are Turkish citizens, live in Turkey and speak Turkish and I have never heard or read them saying they have Persian origin. Here you can see a photo of his 22nd generation granddaughter Ms Esin Çelebi... --E4024 (talk) 18:18, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

With all due respect E4024, that's not really the issue we're addressing. I'm simply baffled at people interpreting my changes as anti-Persian, pro-Turkish, quasi-Martian or whatnot. I'm talking here simply about cleaning up the lede. Other issues can wait, and in my case "other issues" do not involve trying to revise the whole concept to a "Turkish side" or "Afhgan side". The immediate focus is having a clear lede. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:43, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Go ahead. I just mentioned an extra information. I did this in a separate section, not within that discussion. Here I did not say anything about the lead, except thanking your hard work in general terms. Neither I am looking for pro-Turkish changes nor I see your changes as pro-Turkish. All the best and thank you again. And apologies for disturbing you... --E4024 (talk) 18:56, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

It is claimed that the page was stable for the last 5 years. That's not true. Please check the history of the article. There are more than two thousand edits in the last 5 years. But the page is being watched by some self-appointed quards. For example in 2011 one of my edit was immediatelly cleared. What wrong did I have ? I had only added the Turkish name. But even this innocent addition was beyond any toleration. But if this is an encyclopaedia, facts should be presented impartially. Rumi was born in Tajikistan, lived and died in Turkey. Most of his works were in Persian. Thus all these people have right to embrace him. In the section I have suggested above, these details can easily be stated. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 20:00, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

First of all, thanks to MatthewVanitas for being neutral in editing the lede. I can see that his edits are completely neutral, neither Pan-Iranist, nor Pan-Turkist, but he's mediating the article on the side of neutrality. I also agree with Mr Ardoğa that this article hasn't been stable for five years (when you check the history) due to POV statements on the side of Pan-Iranist views. Therefore, I support the neutrality, and support the changes of MatthewVanitas, from a neutral point of view. Barayev (talk) 20:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

" self-appointed quards " is an accusation : it is quite natural for Iranian editors to have this article in their watch list : same as Shakespeare in watch list of English language people . --Alborz Fallah (talk) 21:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

All of you need to stop WP:Soaping. Wikipedia is not a place to promote fringe nationalist theories. We rely on the consensus of scholars on these issues. Rumi, being Persian, is an undisputed fact, supported by thousands of reliable sources as outlined here by objective Google Book and Google Scholar results [47]. That's all that matters in Wikipedia. Your personal opinions, soapboxing, nationalist chest-beating etc, have no place here. Kurdo777 (talk) 23:19, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Kurdo777. This is not a matter of dispute, because this subject is not disputed among scholars. Rumi was not born in Tajikistan, because Tajikistan did not exist back then. He was born in the vinicity of Balkh, back then a major center of Khorasan. He was not an Afghan either, because neither Afghanistan as a country existed nor did the word as such exist. The fact that he lived in Anatolia, back then mostly a Greek territory recently conquered by Persianized Turks, does neither make him a Turk nor a Greek. He himself probably only identified as a Persian-speaking Muslim - but that doesn't change the fact that he was a Persian. I agree with MatthewVanitas that the intro needs to be drastically shortened in accordance with WP:LEAD. But I see absolutely no justification in removing the undisputed fact that he was a Persian poet. All other claims - i.e. that he was an Afghan, a Mongol, an Arab, a Turk, a Greek, etc. are ridiculous claims by unreliable non-experts and must be ignored. --Lysozym (talk) 17:35, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Proposed modest changes to lede

Okay, so the initial changes I made were too bold for folks, so let's instead figure out piece-by-piece what needs to be improved in the lede. I'll post some suggestions in order, and over a few days folks can see how far down the list we have consensus for. Sound workable?

1. Easy one, the terms "AD" used in the infobox, etc. should be changed to "CE", and the term "CE" added at the end of the birth-death parentheses of the lede.
2. The lede is simply too cluttered with numerous lines of variant names before giving a single detail about the subject. How about we include one full-name, and the Western common name "Rumi" in the lede, and move all other variants and titles down to a "Names" section following the lede?
3. For the time being let us leave the "as a 13th-century Persian[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] Muslim poet" phrase in the lede, but can we all agree that having eight refs does not give a good impression to the reader? We have an entire article body to substantiate Persian issues, and excess footnotes look confusing and are unhelpful. How about we trim down to maybe 2 references which clearly and explicitly address the issue of his Persian-ness, rather than cites which simply say "he's Persian" without any further explanation?

Can we agree that we should enact at least some of these changes? #1-3? #1-2? I'd certainly hope we can at least agree on #1. Let's give it a few days for folks to weigh in, and see what changes we can agree are needed. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:29, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm neutral on #1 but I support #2 and #3. Binksternet (talk) 18:09, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I support that his debated ethnicity should be mentioned in the origin section, not on the lede. Wikipedia isn't the place to determine Rumi's ethnicity. Best regards. Barayev (talk) 20:25, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Could you also put in a !vote for 1, 2, 3, some combination thereof, or none? MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:33, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

In 2, will you mention the debated ethnicity? If not, I support 2. As I said before, it should be mentioned in a different section, maybe in Name or Origin. Barayev (talk) 20:44, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

One must follow Wikipedia Policy: 1) I am neutral between CE and AD…I might even be slightly biased towards AD. However, let follow the mainstream and most common Wikipedia policy on that. I am not sure what it is, but either AD or CE is fine. 2) On reducing the number of sources for Persian in the introduction, I think we should put all the 50 sources I have collected here []. Just kidding, I am fine with that and one can choose Encycloapedia of Islam (which directly has mentioned him as a Persian poet) and Franklin (and possibly Speros Vyronis). Franklin and Encycloapedia of Islam are two good sources. They mention “Persian poet” or Persian.. One does not need to know the reason they consider Rumi as “Persian poet”, it is quoted by these top scholarly sources and that is sufficient for Wikipedia. As per the reason why Rumi is considered Persian, that is explained in the book of Franklin somewhat but as even Halman admits, because he remained in the Persian cultural sphere, and wrote Persian. But further proof is that he derides Turks (see Aflaki above and noted by secondary sources Speros), his son did not speak Turkish/Greek well, he uses Shahnama mythology (not Turkish), came from Persian background area Wakhsh, his lectures and talks to his students are in Persian (not Turkish, which goes against the constant claim that he wrote in Persian because it was tradition, whereas his Friday sermons, and lectures to his students and conversations with Shams are all in Persian and he has absolutely not a single Turkish conversation), 99% of his output is Persian, close to 1% in Arabic and less than 1/3 of 1% in Greek and Turkish. All of these things are fairly obvious for scholars like Franklin. Just like Shakespear is not Arabic Shaykh Sabir or Newton’s Englishness is not the subject of lengthy books. Or the claim that Saladin is Turkish is not taken seriously despite constant vandalism by nationalist trolls on that page. 3) Rumi wrote his name in Persian language. Not the modern Turkish language with Latin Alphabet that did not exist nor in Ottoman Turkish which was not formed yet. Consequently, the Persian name in Perso-Arabic script is relevant. Modern Turkish language which did not exist during the time of Rumi is not relevant. Scholars who want to study Rumi must learn the Persian language, not modern Anatolian Turkish created by Ataturk through the language reformation. So Persian language has relevance. If Rumi saw his name in Persian he would understand it as he wrote it in Persian. However, he would not understand the Latin alphabet. This might be relevant as well to his popularity today [http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/LH14Ak01.html

I do not mind a culture section discussing Rumi’s Persian and Sufi culture in more detail.. His biggest influences were Attar and Sanai. He also has quoted a quite a number of Shahnama heroes. However, the “Turkish viewpoint” is fringe and does not belong to Wikipedia. For example, all the Sufi’s in his lineage are Persian..here is how his son Sultan Walad traces their spiritual lineage: Baha al-Walad, Attar, Sanai, Hallaj, Shibli, Abu Sai’d, Karkhi, Junayd Baghdadi, Bayazid Bistami ..and from there to the Prophet Muhammad. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 00:07, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia MOS allows either CE or AD, but CE has generally become the academic standard in the West. WP does say that AD/CE is unnecessary unless its absence would cause ambiguity. I argue it could in this case to avoid any confusion with AH, at least in the lede and infobox.

I'm fine with retaining the cites that are best for "Persian" in the lede, but I very much disagree that a tertiary-source reference book saying "Rumi was a Persian poet who X, Y, Z" counts as a proper reference. Firstly it's tertiary, as noted, secondly no context. If you have cites which say "the case for Rumi's identity is...", then let's use those.

So far as names, I don't have any argument with having the Perso-Arabic script version of his "primary name" and the literary name "Rumi" in the lede, but I don't see the need for lengthy IPA pronunciations in the lede nor multiple variants of his long-name or titles. Those are certainly useful info, but the first para just needs to establish an identity, not cover all contingencies.

So giving it several more days for consensus, but thus far overall positive for CE, a "Names" section, and focusing on maybe 2 of the best and most explicit references for "Persian"? MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:24, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Encyclopaedia of Islam (Leiden-Brill) is actually not a teriatary source in the way you might think. Each article is written by an expert in the specific field. It is same as Iranica. It is different than Encarta, Britannica, Wikipedia, Larouse, etc who have amaueters and nameless authors, or have non-detail information. For example the article on Rumi is written by two scholars of Persian language and literature. It is in a different league than Encarta or Wikipedia..etc. It is considered a specialized academic source. I have listed 50 sources here.. [48] I am fine with any of these two combinations as they are all well known sources: (Franklin, Encylopaedia of Islam), (Franlin, Nasr), (Franklin, Carl W. Earnest). Also, we simply have to cite what the text says: "Persian poet" or "Persian"..we do not need a book on identity. Just as for Shakespear, if it says "English poet",..one doesn't need to cite a book on Shakespear's identity (which may or may not exist). As far as I know, there has not been a book discussing Rumi's identity, as the issue of him being Persian is accepted due to variety of reasons I gave above and even Halman agrees that Rumi is accepted as Persian by Western scholars, while Franklin calls the Turkish claim extravagant. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 00:33, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

• On CE then..that is fine from viewpoint. On the IPA spelling, I am fine with that too. My only conern was removing Rumi's name in the relavent language which is Persian as most other Persian poets, their name in the native language or the language they have used. Latin alphabet based non-existent languages of the region (foreign at that time for Rumi) though should not be in the lead. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 00:41, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

I do not care if his origin is mentioned in the lead or not (even though I do not understand why the phrase "[Rumi] was a Persian poet" should be a problem), but any source that claims that he was anything other than Persians is certainly a non-reliable source that should be ignored. There is not a single (!) work by experts claiming that Rumi was not a Persian. The Encyclopedia of Islam, the most authoritative scholarly work on Islamic toppics, mentions in the first sentence that he was Persian. --Lysozym (talk) 10:49, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

I fixed the lead based on the three recommendations of Matthew. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 21:47, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Summary #2

• The users that are arguing for different viewpoints or bring example of other articles (e.g. Farabi) are wrong based on WP:UNDO as described here:[49]. The issue resembles the article such as Scythians where all currently living mainstream specialist scholars accept them as Iranian but Turkish scholars (including Turkish (and related Turkic languages) Wikipedia) claim them as Turk (or gives credence to fringe viewpoint). I have explained the issue in detail in the link and these users are urged to read WP:RS, WP:UNDO, WP:WEIGHT, WP:RS, WP:5P, WP:FORUM and WP:SOAPBOX. Specially WP:UNDO and WP:RS. As our friend said up here: "There is not a single (!) work by experts claiming that Rumi was not a Persian". Until such experts (not random quotes) are brought, then the issue is mute.
• 50+ sources have been brought here:[50] (although not all of them are Rumi scholars but some are, unlike the fringe viewpoint).
• The quotes of Franklin, Schimmel and Halman has been discussed here [51][52][53][54]
• Worst case scenario(incase fringe viewpoint is given any weight), to counter it: [55]
• A small portion on Persian heritage (incase the article needs to be improved) here:[56][57]
• OR arguments responded to here: [58][59] (and the next three/four) and more extensively here[60] --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 22:20, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Balk Province is in Afghanistan

There needs to be a correction made on this page or article. Balk province is in Afghanistan not Tajikistan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonya2012 (talk • contribs) 00:25, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

A third source could also be added to confirm this (though the second citation for "Tajikistan" does, despite confirming Afghanistan as Rumi's place of birth); Coleman Barks' The Essential Rumi also states that Rumi "was born September 20, 1207, in Balkh Afghanistan" (IX). Afghanis are so familiar with this fact that they call Rumi "Jelaluddin Balkhi." (ibid.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.212.237.243 (talk) 05:27, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 9 October 2012

Rumi's place of birth needs to be corrected. Balk province is in Present day Afghanistan NOT Tajikistan and actually has been for centuries. Correction needs to be made for Balk Province being in Afghanistan.

Sonya2012 (talk) 00:29, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

This request should be denied. It would appear "someone" has added "Balkh province" to the template. Rumi was born in Vakhsh which is in modern day Tajikistan.[61] A source from Oxford University Press. --Defensor Ursa 00:37, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Annemarie Schimmel, "I Am Wind, You Are Fire," p. 11. She refers to a 1989 article by the German scholar, Fritz Meier:

Tajiks and Persian admirers still prefer to call Jalaluddin 'Balkhi' because his family lived in Balkh, current day in Afghanistan before migrating westward. However, their home was not in the actual city of Balkh, since the mid-eighth century a center of Muslim culture in (Greater) Khorasan (Iran and Central Asia). Rather, as the Swiss scholar Fritz Meier has shown, it was in the small town of Wakhsh north of the Oxus that Baha'uddin Walad, Jalaluddin's father, lived and worked as a jurist and preacher with mystical inclinations. Franklin Lewis, Rumi Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings, and Poetry of Jalâl al-Din Rumi, 2000, pp. 47–49. --Defensor Ursa 00:56, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

I am closing this edit request there is an ongoing discussion involving at least one autoconfirmed user. Please continue to work toward a consensus on this request. Thank you. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:00, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 20 October 2012

77.168.82.205 (talk) 14:37, 20 October 2012 (UTC) Ok, this is really sad how Rumi's place of birth is placed as Tajekestan while it was indeed Balkh (that is located in Afghanistan)! Please correct this information. His ethnicity is NOT Persian either. Please stop spreading wrong knowledge!

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 15:14, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

The article must be edited as soon as possible. 1. Rumi is from Balkh from Afghanistan. Balkh is NOT located in Tajikistan. It is located in the province of Mazar e Sharif in northern Afghanistan. Rumi never lived in Iran and not an Iranian either. In Mathnawi, Rumi himself describes his birthplace in Balkh. The article erroneously places Balkh both in Tajikistan and Afghanistan. 2. It is an abomination to see how Iranians would do whatever possible to rob the cultural heritage of Afghanistan for political purposes. War has destroyed Afghanistan. Its cultural heritage must be preserved. A good example to highlight the error would be to call Mozart a German and Beethoven an Austrian. Hafiz was from Iran. Rumi is from Afghanistan. Iranians and Afghans do share common culture. However, the Iranians have misunderstood the term "Afghan" and associate Afghans with Pashtoons. Wikipedia would only undermine its credibility if it allows false scholarship to propagate on its website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farhadus (talk • contribs) 14:59, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Tajiks and Persian admirers still prefer to call Jalaluddin 'Balkhi' because his family lived in Balkh, current day in Afghanistan before migrating westward. However, their home was not in the actual city of Balkh, since the mid-eighth century a center of Muslim culture in (Greater) Khorasan (Iran and Central Asia). Rather, as the Swiss scholar Fritz Meier has shown, it was in the small town of Wakhsh north of the Oxus that Baha'uddin Walad, Jalaluddin's father, lived and worked as a jurist and preacher with mystical inclinations. -- Franklin Lewis, Rumi Past and Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings, and Poetry of Jalâl al-Din Rumi, 2000, pp. 47–49. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:58, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 26 October 2012

There appears to be a typo that needs correcting. Section 4.2 'Prose Works' Fihi MaFihi just at the end of the last paragraph "and lack the sophisticated world play" should be "and lack the sophisticated word play" Heywood123 (talk) 15:55, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Done And "wordplay", in the singular, is usually one word. For the record, the wording of that passage may be uncomfortably close to that of the cited source. I don't believe the similarity rises to the level of close paraphrase, but ideally it would be rewritten. Rivertorch (talk) 23:15, 26 October 2012 (UTC)