Talk:Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani Asadabadi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani Asadabadi article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Accuracy

He used the name Al-Afghani because being from the Shia world wouldn't have exactly worked in Egypt. So, he said he was from Afghanistan while really from Iran. Trying to figure out if it's the same town name but in Iran. gren グレン 05:41, 5 October 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Who is Right

I have found conflicting info who is right. http://www.afghanan.net/biographies/afghani.htm
http://afghanland.com/history/jamaluddin.html


His grandfather Sayyed Ali had stayed in Hamedan of Iran for a while when he went to perform the pilgrimage of Hajj. When he returned back to Asadabad (alternative Pashto name: Shergar), situated in Kunar Province of Afghanistan, he got famous by the title of Hamadani. His son (Jamaladdin Afghani's father), Sayyed Safdar, then moved from Asadabad to Kabul with his family. Due to the political relations imposed on him by the government, he left Kabul to As'adabad in Hamedan Province in Iran. His trip from Kabul to Hamedan of Iran occurred in 1844 when Jamaluddin Afghani was 7 years old. So he was born in Afghanistan. I have added the sources in the main page of the article. Ariana310 18:41, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New added text removed

I removed the following text added by User:Aryob:

The Moslem worlds were living under colonial suppression, internal discord and poverty, and they, badly were, in need of a leader such as Jamaluddin. No one can deny reading the history of that period, that Afghani was one of the most outstanding figures and redeemers of the East. With all the qualification that he possessed, he was a great political and unique intellectual of his time. The great French philosopher Renan says about Afghani: (Few people have produced on me a more vivid impression; it is a large measure the conversation that I had with him that decided me to chose as a subject for my lecture at the Sorbonne, the relations between the “scientific spirit and Islam……” The liberty of his thought, his noble and loyal character, made me believe, while I was talking with him, that I had before me, restored to life, one of my old acquaintances----Wicenna, Arerroes, or another of those great infidels, who represented to five centuries the tradition of the human mind.” This statement which is made by a great philosopher of Europe is enough to understand the high qualification of this Afghan genius, who was considered also by late Pandit Nehru as a great religious reformist, by doctor Iqbal and Namek Kamal as a religious revolutionary and defenders of Pan-Islamism, by Professor Edward G. Brown the author of “Persian revolution” as a man who helped to animate the fight of Moslem resistance against the expansion and Domination of European colonialism. Some people likens the great personalities of history to precious stones like rubies, amber, turquoise, emerald having special glow, shines, color and beauty, but, Jamal ud-Din was like a diamond shining and glowing from every angle. HE was a reformist, religious leader, philosopher, writer, journalist and above all a politician and emancipator of the East and Moslem world. In fact what made Jamaluddin a great hero of the east and an enemy of colonialism is indeed his political activism, who’s effects and influence spread beyond the borders of his own country Afghanistan, and touched the destiny of people from Bengal to the Atlantic shores of Africa. Considering what Afghani had accomplished as a one man, with empty hands and no support from any quarter against the formidable powers of Europe, facing many odds and intrigues of the western countries and their agents and spies, is indeed a great achievement. Contrary to the views of some contemporary writers such as the Author of ‘Afghani’ and Abdoh’ and many others like him Jamaluddin was the most dedicated and unselfish politician and the leader of the East- that while the whole Asia and the Moslem world were in a deep sleep of ignorance during the 19 th century he was fighting with a power of his pen and the strength of his spirit to emancipate his people from the European yoke. He continued his fight by every means, in every city and country, even in the heart of colonial centers such as London, Paris, Berlin, and Petersburg until he died. Although he was unable to see the fruits of his labor in his life time, but certainly all the seeds which he sowed, bore fruits soon after his death. His home land Afghanistan only 22 years after his death received independence and what he wanted form his own pupil Amir Mohammad Azam Khan was accomplished by another student of his, Mahmud Tarzi through his son-in-law Amir Amanullah during his reign. In Egypt another devoted desciple Sad Zaglole Became the father of modern Egypt, in Turkey, Namek Kamal and his follower Ataturk did what Jamal-ad- Din wanted to be done by Turks. In India his efforts to unite Hindu and Moslems to fight the British was realized, and all his political and social principles were followed by Moslem and Hindu leaders such as Abdul Kalam Azad and Alama Iqbal as well as Gandhi and Pandit Nehru. He wanted Moslem unity through “Um-ul-Qura” now this is also realized and it’s headquarter has been established in Saudi Arabia, He was in favour of Arab unity soon after the First World War the Arab League came to function on the bank of the Nile. Jamaluddin was considered ‘new traditionalist’ as well as ‘Islamic reformist; because of Afghani’s teaching today most of the Moslem reject rigid traditionalist as well as pure westernism, as once Sir Sayed Ahmad founder of Aligarh University wanted the Moslems to follow. The middle of the road policy of Jamaluddin is a proper way for the Moslems to be the followed even at present time. As I stated above, it was mainly political activities of Jamaluddin which has attracted International and world wide attention because during the 19 th century he was the greatest champion of liberty and self-determination for oppressed people of the East and a great fighter against European imperialism. To achieve this noble aim, he was following five main political principals, some times using each principal separately, and more often together. But in application of these principles in order to help his people, he followed the main British political theory which one of their great leaders once stated: “The British never had a permanent friend but she had always a permanent interest”. The political Principals followed by Afghani are as follows: He wanted to carry his views from the top, in order to achieve internal reforms as well as to resist foreign domination. Though this principal, he wanted to established a model country in order to be followed by other Asian and Moslem countries. He wanted to use France and Germany as a third power to support the Asian struggle against the British as well as Tsarist Russia. In case of failure of the above theory, he wanted to acquire the British to support the eastern nations in order to push out of Asia, the Tsarist imperialist. To get the Tsarist to help the Asians against the British. Jamaluddin wanted to use the 3 rd and fourth theories because he knew that Asia and Moslem countries are not able to match the military, technical and economic power of the West and the only way to fight the British or Tsarist Russia is to reply on the Theory of ‘Balance of Power; The most important theory upon which Afghani was relying was the theory of ‘Pan-Islamism’, or Moslem Unity “, he always wanted to use this weapon, against colonial domination for liberation of Moslems in Asia and Africa. How Afghani applied these theories and how was the results here we will examine in the following pages:

The reasons:

  • the text seems to be part of an article
  • the text must be rewritten in encyclopedic style
  • it must be wikified i.e. citing sources, personal POVs of the author must be removed, etc. Ariana310 19:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clarification Comment

Hey, I am not an expert on this subject so I did not actually edit this article, but I just want to point out that according to everything I have ever heard and read, Jamal-ud-din al-Afghani was a PERSIAN SHIA and was most likely born in Asadabad Persia(modern-day Iran) not in Afghanistan. He called himself al-Afghani and said he was an Afghan to his Sunni co-religionists because he wanted to hide the fact that he was a Shia. This seems natural given the prejudice that many Sunnis have towards Shias.

While it is possible that he was born in Asadabad Afghanistan and latter moved back to Persia when he was very young, it is also likely that he was born in Iran. Where he was born is really not that important, but what is fairly clear is that he was in fact a Persian Shia and not an Afghan.

He may have himself made up the story about being born in Asadabad Afghanistan in order to maintain his story that he was an Afghan in order to hide the fact that he was a Shia.

One last thing, the first reference on this article, the link to the Encylopedia Britannica clearly states that he was born in Asadabad Persia and that he called himself al-Afgani in order conceal the fact that he was a Persian Shia.

This seems logical. He may have felt that his Sunni co-religioinists would have been prejudiced towards him and reject his ideas, if they knew that he was in fact a Shia and not a Sunni like themselves. Umaru Ahmad 03:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

This is the disputed point over Jamaluddin Afghani.
  • Both points have been mentioned in the article: his birth in Afghanistan and his birth in Iran
  • For the point that he was born in Kunar of Afghanistan, I have added 3 reliable and non-Afghan sources.
  • It is completely irrational to say that he chose the title of al-Afghani or he lied that he was born in Afghanistan, because of his Shi'a status among other Sunni people. If you have read this point in any of his works and letters, please provide it. As soon as you provide his own statement which would justify this point, I would completely change the article. This fact is a POV and estimation of others regarding al-Afghani, which cannot have a position in wikipedia. Of course, you can add this point in the article as reporting from the third person who has written or said this case. You are free to do it.Ariana310 09:37, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Umaru Ahmad is correct. Sayed Jamal ud-Din "al-Afghani" was not an Afghan, but an Iranian. He was born in Asadabad in Iran, and he spent his childhood there. Overwhelming documentation and contemporary sources prove his Iranian origin. 90% of his political activism was concentrated on Iran. I have added two scholary sources, one from Encyclopaedia Iranica and the other from Prof. Keddie (one of the leading authorities on Jamal ud-Din al-Afghani's life and biography) to the article. I'll try to add direct references from the collection of Afshari and Mahdavi (two other imprtant scholars and experts on al-Afghani) to article. Unfortunately, I do not have direct access to the original Persian collection of his letters. As for the article, please notice that the Encyclopaedia Iranica is an authoritative scholarly work, and that its message has to be put above other sources (except for primary sources and/or written literature by notable scholars). However, in this case, it does not matter, since the Iranica article was written by Prof. Keddie, the most important Western scholar on al-Afghani's life, and is directly based on primary sources (al-Afghani's letters). Also Britannica says that he was Iranian. --82.83.129.121 22:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Iranian or Afghani?

There are some sources saying he was born in asadabad of Hamedan in Iran and also some sources are saying he was born in asadabad of Kunar in Afghanistan. But the important thing is his thoughts. He believed in unity of Muslims(Iranian or Afghani), so why should we Muslims fight on him and for our nationality?!! Iranway (talk) 18:19, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


Al-Afghani was not born in Iran, neither was he Iranian or Shia. Al-Afghani was born in Asadabad, Afghanistan, this is explained in every school book in Afghanistan and Pakistan. If Al-Afghan was born in Iran then how on earth is it possible for Iran to deport him from his own country? If Al-Afghani committed crimes then Iran would have arrested and charged him but not deport him. The only country that did not deport him was Afghanistan because he was natural born citizen of Afghanistan.--ZmaGhurnStaKona 06:26, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I dont want to persist that he was Iranian. Afghani or Iranian... there is no difference. like two brothers! but your claim is wrong. you said: <<If Al-Afghan was born in Iran then how on earth is it possible for Iran to deport him from his own country? If Al-Afghani committed crimes then Iran would have arrested and charged him but not deport him.>> Imam Khomeini (the leader of iran's revolution) was Iranian(there is no doubt, "khomein" is the name of a place in Iran) but the same government deported him first to Iraq and then to Turkey and France. Anyway, I (as an Iranian) accept and respect the rich culture and history of my brother country Afghanistan. Iranway (talk) 17:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Afghan school books may claim that he was Afghan, but Western scholars all agree that he was Iranian. The evidence is overwhelming, most of all his own writings. The name "al-Afghani" cannot be considered a proof, because before he took that name, he was also known as "al-Istanbuli". His Shia religion is well known, and not even Afghan scholars deny that. Most of his political activity was in Iran and most of his writings targetted the Iranian Shah Nasir ud-Din Shah, although the Ottoman Sultan was way more powerful and was a bigger threat to al-Afghani's political movement. in addition, al-Afghani was for many years allied to the leaders and founders of the Babi and Bahai movements, because both of these groups had the same aims: removing the Iranian monarchy and orthodox Shiite clergy. So, no matter how you look at it, it is clear that he was Iranian by birth. The discovery of his own hand writings erased the last doubts about his nationality. Sayed Jamal ud-Din Asadabadi, a.k.a. "al-Istanbuli", a.k.a. "al-Afghani", was born in Asadabad near Hamadan in Iran.
I said why would Iran deport him if he was born in Iran? Do you know why people are deported from a country? His own hand writings do not mean anything, he could have wrote false information to avoid deportation from Iran. It shows how weak your argument is. You are just wishing that he was Iranian and Shia, but he was not. Iran does not deport their own citizens or Shias. They deport people from Afghanistan, especially if they are Sunni. Western scholars? You are going by what a couple of people in the west thought about Afghani and rejecting the truth from the people of the area where he was born at, not very smart.--ZmaGhurnStaKona 15:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
It's not that important, but still your argument is false. I told Iranian government at that time was opposite to islamic scholars, and it used to deport even Iranian Islamic leaders. Your are saying I'm wishing he was Iranian! Really it isn't that much important for me, but the truth is. What I say is not that he was Iranian 100%, but I say when there are some documents supporting this idea, we cant be careless about them. what is right is that "We are not certain about the place of his born", So, saying Jamal al-Din al-Afghani is confusing! Both ideas are supporting he was from "Asadabad", either Iran or Afghanistan. so its better to rely on truth, and avoid confusion. Iranway (talk) 17:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I do not profess to be a scholar on the early life of al-Afghani, but every time I have heard him discussed or read of his upbringing, it is always stressed that he was in fact a Persian Shi'ite by birth and later adopted the al-Afghani title so as to more broadly appeal to all Muslims. It is indeed a fair point that his origin is not of the utmost importance, but I feel this is a crucial point that must be reflected in some form in the article itself. If we are going to operate on the assumption that Afghan textbooks (or whatever source) are correct and list his place of birth as Afghanistan, then there must at least be some mention of the scholarly dispute on the subject.Meteor45 (talk) 17:38, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


To user:Mussav >
Why did you move the page to "Jamaluddin al-Afghani" without reading whats going on in discussion page?
1-there are some proofs that he is Iranian.
2-there are some proofs that he is Afghan.
3-Both the proofs agreed that he is from "Asadabad".
4-Calling him "afghani" is supporting only one of the present ideas about his nationality, where there are some strong documents supporting he was Iranian.
You have written "That what he was known in Egypt, Middle East, Ottoman Empire and North Africa in General." even if we dont consider what I said now, and even if what you are saying about middle east is correct, still it isnt a good reason! Middle east countries in their own languages can have his name as afghani(however it is unjust and unfair!) but what they use in US and western countries is deciding point for his name in English Wikipedia.Iranway (talk) 20:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Unjust and unfair? That's what he was known there, no one know Jamal Al-Deen Asadabad, his name and legacy in Egypt, Middle East and the Ottoman Empire is Jamal Al-Deen Al-Afghani. If you don't have any proof of that he was called Jamal Al-Deen Asadabad (his name not his born place), this page will be removed to Jamal Al-Deen Al-Afghani again. Mussav (talk) 20:33, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
There is no consensus about the place of his birth. He was born either in Asadabad of Iran or Asadabad of Afghanistan. So the title of this article shouldn't be Jamal al-Din al-Afghani but Jamal al-Din Asadabadi.Hermion (talk) 16:19, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
and i accept herimon's word and i think the article must have neutral point of view .so i think Jamal al-Din Asadabadi would be fair name.--Mardetanha talk 20:21, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Being born in Iran or Afghanistan is irrelevant to the title of this page. The title of this page should follow the most common name in English books and academic articles. he is mostly known as "Jamal-al-din al-Afghani" in English books and academic articles. Also, almost all reputable encyclopedias call him "Jamal-al-din al-Afghani" (For example, see Iranica). Alefbe (talk) 15:18, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


you are saying he is mostly known as Jamal-al-din al-Afghani, besides it is correct or wrong:
1- The word "microbe" is the most common world for "microorganism". ( microbe in google 2million results & microorganism in google 1million result )
2- But today mostly scientific resources, are trying to use "microorganism" instead of "microbe". (microbe in googlescholars 156000 results & microorganism in googlescholars 254000 results) (Also see microbe & microorganism in wikipedia)
3- why is it microorganism? because people mostly use microbe? no! because a scientific resource like an encycopedia, should use a scientific and correct word to describe something. Not what most of people use. They might use microbe side by side to avoid confusion, but the title(even in wiki) is the scientific and correct word. (In most of the today's textbooks, they use microorganism as the title of chapter) (microorganism in britannica & microbe in britannica The title is "microorganism, or microbe", we can also use "Jamal a-Din Asadabadi or al-afghani")
Iranway (talk) 17:55, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sufi scholar

An article in the New Dawn Magazine, "The Masons and the Moors", mentions him as a Sufi scholar. This is something that should be mentioned in the article if we can produce some better sourcing for the information. The article associates him with the Khwajagan and professes that he was the teacher of Madame Blavatsky. Also according to that article it is rumoured that the parents of Noble Drew Ali, the founder of the Moorish Science Temple of America were students of al-Afghani, so a strong link may exist between him and that organization as well as the Moorish Orthodox Church of America. __meco (talk) 13:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Assadabadi or al-Afghani?

fight over al-Afghani. How about we keep drop Assadabadi but put in the lead something like, "even though he is known throughout the Muslim world as al-Afghani, scholars agree Jamal al-Din was an Iranian Shia born in Asadabad"? --BoogaLouie (talk) 17:33, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

The problem is he is known all over the Muslim and non-Muslim world as al-Afghani. It may be a misnomer but this is an encyclopedia. Until the world starts calling him Al-Assadabadi, wikipedia can't. --BoogaLouie (talk) 16:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
But calling his name as "al-afghani", has some hidden message, that he is "Afghan"! But it has not been proven yet, and as an encyclopedia, wikipedia will provide false information! Iranway (talk) 20:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
That's why we should put something in the lead about, "even though he is known throughout the Muslim world as al-Afghani, scholars agree Jamal al-Din was an Iranian Shia born in Asadabad." This is an English language page and many if not most english speakers do not necessarily at all read "al-Afghani" in a name as meaning the person is an Afghan, or that al-Misri means you are Egyptian, etc. There's no hidden message in English. --BoogaLouie (talk) 21:04, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
"al-misri" for "Egyptian" is different, but any English language speaker will understand "Afghani" is related to "Afghanistan" and Afghan. It's obvious! Iranway (talk) 10:42, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
May I come in and say what I know on the subject matter? I am Iranian and from my grandparents I had always heard the name "Asadabadi" and not even once "Al-Afghani". To say that "he is known throughout the Muslim world as Al-Afghani" is not conform what I know for certain (unless of course one intends to imply that Iran were not part of the Muslim world). For completeness, my great-great grandparents (both maternal and paternal) had been contemporaries of "Asadabadi" and what my grandparents told me about "Asadabadi" consisted mainly of things that they had heard directly from their parents. In particular, since my paternal grandmother's date of birth approximately coincides with the date on which "Asadabadi" has died, what she had heard from her father could not have been about a historical person about whom facts might have been difficult to come by. As a matter of fact, if I had the opportunity for, I would be able to assemble a non-negligible amount of original historical documents in which one solely encounters the name "Asadabadi" and not "Al-Afghani". Kind regards, --BF 22:43, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
OK, I stand corrected. At least one part of the Muslim world does not know him as al-Afghani. And if what you say is true it would not be appropriate to call him Al-Afghani on the Persian language wikipedia.
So I'll correct my statement. At least in the English speaking-world he is known as al-Afghani. I've gone to the trouble of checking four dictionaries, or dictionary-type books on Islam:
Historical Dictionary of Islam (Ludwig W. Adamec);
The New Encyclopedia of Islam (Cyril Glasse);
Oxford Dictionary of Islam (John L. Esposito) and
Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World (Macmillan Reference).
All of them have an entry titled Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, not Jamal al-Din Asadabadi or Jamal al-Din al-Afghani Asadabadi.
This is an english language wikipedia, we should title the article Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, --BoogaLouie (talk) 16:48, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Dear BoogaLouie, thank you for your message. I had/have no reason to tell untruths, not here, not anywhere, in particular by the fact that falsifying historical facts is in my opinion a crime. You could find a great deal about Jamal al-Din Asadabadi in the Babi and Bahai literature; as it happens, Sayyed Jamal al-Din Asadabadi was for some time very closely associated with the Azali Babis in the Ottoman Empire (in Istanbul, Cyprus, etc.); three Azali Babis who were very closely associated with him, were extradited to Iran and the three were killed in the most gruesome way in Tabriz --- Iran constantly demanded extradition of Jamal al-Din Asadabadi to Iran, however Sultan Abdul-Hamid was not prepared to oblige; he however relented and at first put the last-mentioned three persons in jail in Trabzon, and later extradited them to Iran. One of these people was Sheikh Ahmad Ruhi, who was son-in-law of Sobh-e Azal. You may know that Mirza Agha Khan Kermani, aka Mirza Reza Kermani, who assassinated Nasser al-Din Shah, did this at the instigation of Jamal al-Din Asadabadi. You see already why Jamal al-Din Asadabadi had to be careful and not divulge his true Iranian origin. In a way, Jamal al-Din Asadabadi was at some stage the most wanted man in Iran. --BF 19:31, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 100% AFGHAN

FOR ONCE AND FOR ALL AL-Afghani was afghan from the start and afghan when he died there was never a iranian in the middle, so for those iranians who say hes from hamdam Let me ask u a question? If sayed jamaluddin afghani is from IRAN than how would you explain that he Speaks PASHTO he wrote history of afghanistan in pashto a true afghan language??????????? 71.139.6.230 (talk) 06:53, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Your argument:
1- Professor Majidzadeh was born in Iran and is Iranian.
2- He has written a book about history of iran in English.
3- So, he is from U.S. or U.k.!!!!!!!!!
Iranway (talk) 10:13, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
4- Hmm. Did he speak Pashto? Did he write a book in Pashto? Can you give us a source? Hermion (talk) 12:01, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Source???? you say did you read where he was born? In Kunar, Afghanistan where it is the heart of the pashtuns. The question is how does he not know pashto? thats should be ur question. Give it a break you persians claim everyone as your own with bogus evidence. He is known all over the world as AFGHANI and u dare call him persian loooool PLEAZ save ur selves some fresh air!!! 71.139.6.230 (talk) 05:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)Pashtun786

"It is thought Al-Afghani claimed to be an Afghan in order to present himself as a Sunni Muslim - the sect adhered to by most Muslims and most Muslim rulers -and to escape oppression by the Iranian government",[6] or to be associated with the larger branch of Islam so "reach a wider audience" " READ THE ABOVE COMPLETE CONTRADICTION If he was Shia why would he say hes sunni and say he excaped oppression by the iranian government. looooooool COMPLETE STUPID who ever wrote this article most likely was persian.71.139.6.230 (talk) 05:48, 11 April 2008 (UTC)Pashtun786

This is your first and last warning. Do not attack to other editors unless you will be banned from wikipedia. Hermion (talk) 09:22, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Please be polite. My brother, "asadabadi" or "afghani" is not as important as our brotherhood, so don't start an Iranian-Pashto fight. You should know more about the history of Persia, to be able to decide. You don't know how was the Iranian government at that time. You think only because the government was shia, and asadabadi was also shia, so they had to be friends! His aim was to unify Islamic world. As a shia Muslim, at that time it was difficult to affect the whole Muslim world.
At that time Qajar dynasty was there in Iran. They were not true shias, they were just carrying the title! Most of the Shia scholars from Qom (حوزهٔ علمیهٔ قم) were against the government. Let me give you an example, before Iranian revolution, MohammadReza shah was the king of Iran, and he was shia. But why was he against khomeini(another shia), why did he exile khomeini, first to Iraq, then to Turkey, and after that to France? wasn't he shia? The same thing was also there at that time. Islamic scholars were always(at the time of Qajar and Pahlavi) against the unlimited powers of the kings. They wanted to build up the real kingdom of people and not kings, they wanted to bring the true democracy, but it was not what kings wanted. So, they were always against them. (It was only an overview from my low knowledge without any research, but if you research, you will be sure why Iranian government was against Islamic scholars). Iranway (talk) 06:27, 11 April 2008 (UTC)


See this part of article:
<<Although al-Afghani quarrelled with most of his patrons, it is said he "reserved his strongest hatred for the shah" whom he accused of weakening Islam by granting conscessions to Europeans and squandering the money earned thereby. His agitation against the Shah is thought to have been one of the "fountainheads" of the successful 1891 protest against the granting a tobacco monopoly to a British company, and the later 1905 Constitutional Revolution.>> Iranway (talk) 06:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Title of this page

For the title of this page, it doesn't matter if he was born in Iran or Afghanistan. The name that he used was "Afghani" and he is mostly known as "Jamal-al-din al-Afghani" in English Academic texts (866 search results, compared to 64 for Asadabadi) and English books (672, compared to 58 for Asadabadi). Almost all reputable encyclopedias call him "Jamal-al-din al-Afghani" (For example, see Iranica and Britannica). Alefbe (talk) 15:18, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

(pasted from above) I've checked four dictionaries, or dictionary-type books on Islam:
Historical Dictionary of Islam (Ludwig W. Adamec);
The New Encyclopedia of Islam (Cyril Glasse);
Oxford Dictionary of Islam (John L. Esposito) and
Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World (Macmillan Reference).
Four out of four have an entry titled Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, not Jamal al-Din Asadabadi or Jamal al-Din al-Afghani Asadabadi. --BoogaLouie (talk) 17:06, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
you are saying he is mostly known as Jamal-al-din al-Afghani, besides it is correct or wrong:
1- The word "microbe" is the most common world for "microorganism".
2- But today mostly scientific resources, are trying to use "microorganism" instead of "microbe". (See microbe & microorganism in wikipedia)
3- why is it microorganism? because people mostly use microbe? no! because a scientific resource like an encycopedia, should use a scientific and correct word to describe something. Not what most of people use. They might use microbe side by side to avoid confusion, but the title(even in wiki) is the scientific and correct word. (In most of the today's textbooks, they use microorganism as the title of chapter)
Iranway (talk) 17:55, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
When scholars start a campaign to change the name to Jamal al-Din Asadabadi we should follow suit (if that's wikipedia policy). But as exemplified by the four dictionaries quoted, they have not ... and we shouldn't either. --BoogaLouie (talk) 20:42, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Who are scholars? Why should we follow the way they think? Can't we think? Iranway (talk) 21:04, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
The scholars who wrote the encyclopedias I quoted. Didn't you just say we should follow "scientific resources"? Like I keep saying Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Articles have to follow guidelines. "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" Wikipedia:Verifiability --BoogaLouie (talk) 15:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Please don't mix up the things! Of course we need sources, otherwise I can go and add in Einstein article that "he was from China"!! There is no doubt that we should always give the source, but what I said was that there is no need that we always use the secondary sources provided by scholars, but we can also use the Primary sources (of course reliable and with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy).Iranway (talk) 12:42, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I am surprised that this discussion is still going on. Please consult the following sites:
OK, what are you suprised about? Iranians inside and outside Iran prefer Asadabadi but in the arab world and most of the outside world he's still called al-afghani. --BoogaLouie (talk) 17:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
the title of this page is `Sayyid Jamal al-Din "al-Afghani" Asadabadi, Collected Works al-A`mal al-Kamilah`, not Sayyed Jamal al-Din Asadabadi.--BoogaLouie (talk) 17:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Iran Digital Library. This site gives the full text of the collected letters of Sayyed Jamal al-Din Asadabadi (collection has been done by Abol-Hassan Jamali Asadabadi and the book has a foreword by one of Iran's all-time greatest scholars, Mohammad Mohit Tabatabai)
same--BoogaLouie (talk) 17:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Dear BoogaLouie, I am very sorry to note that you see things in nationalistic terms. Whilst it is true that I am Iranian, what I wrote was not prompted by the misguided notion that I should defend the indefensible because of my nationality; as I wrote earlier, I deeply believe that manipulating historical facts is a crime. I told you what I know to be the truth, and if the truth would have been that Asadabadi was Al-Afghani, I would not have hesitated to say so. I provided you with references and I told you about what I had heard from my own grandparents. My grand parents had no reason to lie to me. To give you some indication, my maternal grandfather told me about historical events concerning the times of Amir Kabir (Amir Kabir died --- better, killed --- in 1852) as he had heard them from his father. Not surprisingly, that which I heard from my grandfather shows no deviation from the accepted history regarding the times of Amir Kabir. Note that Amir Kabir died almost half a century before Asadabadi's death.
Lastly, may I request you to be kind enough and not write into my texts? The way you responded to my comments affected the integrity of my texts — as a result, one will have difficulty to decide what text is mine and what text is yours, and I do not wish to take responsibility for the statements that are not mine. Please just write your comments outside my comments. As a matter of fact, it is morally objectionable to bring changes into texts belonging to others. Since it proved impossible to restore my original text (due to your insertions and the consequent changes in the lay-out of my original text), for the record I reproduce my original message below. I emphasise, no one is entitled to bring changes into texts due to others, no matter how slight these changes might be. --BF 18:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I am surprised that this discussion is still going on. Please consult the following sites:
— [1]. An introduction to the Collected Works of Sayyed Jamal al-Din Asadabadi.
— Iran Digital Library. This site gives the full text of the collected letters of Sayyed Jamal al-Din Asadabadi (collection has been done by Abol-Hassan Jamali Asadabadi and the book has a foreword by one of Iran's all-time greatest scholars, Mohammad Mohit Tabatabai)
— Iran Chamber Society, by Iraj Bashiri
— Encyclopaedia Iranica, by Nikki R. Keddie.
Kind regards, --BF 17:47, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Dear BoogaLouie, one remark concerning the title of the book to which you apparently have objected. You seem to distrust people to such a degree that you make up things that have no external existence. As can be testified by any person who knows the rudiments of precise writing, since I had not put my words inside quotation marks, I could not have been quoting or giving the title of the book. Please re-read my text and you will notice that I was just telling that the book concerned collected letters of Asadabadi; since I was talking about Asadabadi, it would have been strange to use the word "Al-Afghani", and since I had not put my words inside quotation marks (and in contrast to what you do, I had not typed my words in Italics), no one would have considered that I were giving the title of the work. Please note that since I am not a simpleton, I would have done things differently if I had intended to mislead. Incidentally, I always use the transliteration Sayyad and not Sayyid, since I transliterate from Farsi (not Arabic) and in Farsi Sayyid, in contrast to Sayyad, makes no sense. --BF 18:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Principle/Precedent for renaming to "al-Afghani"

First, in a very prominent book, Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age, Albert Hourani discusses his mysterious origin but calls him al-Afghani throughout his work. Additionally, even if it wasn't his original name, of which we have no knowledge, his prominence was achieved under the name al-Afghani. On wikipedia, Mark Twain's article is called that, not Samuel Clemens; George Sand as such even though the author was female; and Baruch Spinoza as that name as opposed the name he would have been called in his native Portugal, Bento de Espinosa. It really should be changed to al-Afghani. —Preceding unsigned comment added by No1cubfan (talk • contribs) 06:41, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Just one quick note. I dissent from the assertion "of which we have no knowledge". As I have mentioned in two places on this page, I do have knowledge through my grand-grandparents and that knowledge contradicts the above-quoted statement. I do not wish to enter into a discussion as to the name by which Asadabadi should be known on Wikipedia (the recent changes were not initiated by me, although it was I who included the name Asadabadi as the second name some one or two years ago), however I decline to accept that we did not know the real name of Asadabadi. Generally, I believe that since Wikipedia is written by the general public, it should contain what the general public does know, and not what some individuals, no matter how learned, may perceive to know. Let us break new grounds in writing Wikipedia and avoid becoming merely conveyors of what is already available elsewhere. At one or two occasions I have had extensive discussions here on Wikipedia concerning transliterations of certain Farsi words. In all cases it became clear to me that those individuals who pushed hardest for change were simply enforcing the transliterations as adopted by, for instance, OED and knew least about Farsi and Iran's folklores. There is simply no a priori reason why we should perpetuate the errors by others just for the sake of uniformity. Not only that, but it is morally objectionable that one should write against one's best knowledge. Why should I be writing Azari as Azeri while knowing that the latter word is both meaningless in Farsi and lacks even a single precedence in any of Iran's folklores known to me — in contrast, I can trace the history of the word Azari to some 3000 years in the past. To summarise, I rather trust my certain knowledge on specific issues than follow what others may have perceived as correct at some point in history. In the case of Asadabadi, the truth is that I cannot remember he ever being called by any name other than Asadabadi by any persons I knew, notably my grandparents. To say that I did not know his real name, would be against my best knowledge and should not be expected from me. --BF 15:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


But these kind of "inaccurate namings" in wikipedia, mostly are different. "Al-afghani" gives some wrong information to the user, unlike most of other inaccurate namings. It says he was "afghan" where as this is wrong. Wikipedia shouldn't provide wrong information to the users, where as there are hundreds of sources which are saying he was not afghan. 61.8.140.20 (talk) 19:39, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
BF- How can we do something based on what your grandparents said? This is wholly unacceptable! Your viewpoint is one of Iranian background who are clearly of the biased opinion that he was a shi'a who defected, something I'm sure your grandparents cling to. Again, the man is known as al-Afghani in scholarship. To the above poster, it does not imply that he is from Afghanistan! Does someone with the last name "French" or "English" mean that he or she is from France or England? No.--kubfann (talk) 21:37, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Dear kubfann, you will have to trust me, for otherwise whatever I say must be suspect, irrespective of whether these were related to me by my grandparents or some other individuals. Your surmise (you say you are "sure") with regard to the religious affiliation of my grandparents is also incorrect. For some reason I grew up in an environment where many of the names in Iran's history were household names; I only realised this when I started to read history books by myself. My maternal grandfather was reading history books if he was not talking about history, or when he was not working or sleeping or eating; he was just phenomenal, recalling all the names of people, places and treaties as well as dates. But aside from all things, you cannot deny the fundamental significance of the oral history to what we know today as history. If you consider the total historical records of all nations available today, they almost entirely consist of oral history, recorded at some wide intervals apart by some individuals called "historians"; the practice of having professional historians affiliated to some centres of learning is a very recent phenomenon in the history of humankind. On the question at issue, I have personally no problem if Asadabadi were Al-Afghani; I derive no sense of pride (and this applied also to my parents and grandparents) by forcefully making out all the significant historical figures as being Iranians. This particularly applies when such figures may conceivably be from Afghanistan, since amid all the historical injustices that have been done to this nation, they are in no need of my personal injustice towards them on top of all the other. What I wrote above simply amounts to what I know for certain. I can only say that I am very sorry that Asadabadi happens not to be from Afghanistan. Kind regards, --BF 03:18, 21 April 2008 (UTC)