Talk:Saadi Shirazi

بنى آدم اعضاى يكديگرند

In all the footnotes(7,8,9) the verse is: بنى آدم اعضاى يكديگرند and not بنى آدم اعضای يک پیکرند[7][8][9] which is what's written in the article. This is a humongous mistake (if not forgery) and must be changed immediately. Does not anyone even check the references given in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spinozair (talk • contribs) 07:49, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

no one has seen this poem any where in United Nations entrance or any where in UN buildings for that matter!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.244.195.35 (talk) 11:31, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

It is said to be hanging in the United Nations, but not in the entrance hall. See this article for a photo of the carpet: Payvand News 24 August O5. Kanjuzi (talk) 13:11, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Sunni

This edit changed

"was one of the major Persian poets and literary men of the medieval period."

into

"was one of the major Persian Sunni Muslim poets and literary men of the medieval period.

References

The source, which is on management and not on Persian poetry, does not say that Shirazi was a 'major Sunni poet'; it only says he was a Sunni. The term "Sunni" is here clearly added for point of view reasons. I've removed it. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:45, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

The recent addition to the article stating that Saadi is "also estimated to be inclined to Shia" is not based on academic sources, and (in my view) the sources quoted do not give any convincing evidence. I think this addition should be removed. Kanjuzi (talk) 04:39, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Too many translations?

The Bani Adam poem seems to me to have too many translations, some of them of doubtful quality. In fact there are six. It distorts the article by giving too much weight to this one poem, famous though it is. I suggest that one or at the most two translations are enough. But which ones? I suggest that the first one is quite sufficient. Kanjuzi (talk) 13:20, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

No actually it’s good for people who don’t understand somethings so you can not say that do you understand it

86.20.170.43 (talk) 19:46, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

yekdigar or yek peykar?

An anonymous editor has changed the Bani Adam poem from bani ādam a'zāye yek peykar and (The sons of Adam are members of one body) to the alternative version bani ādam a'zāye yekdigar and (The sons of Adam are members of one another). Both versions are found in printed books. Which is correct and which should we keep in the article? The carpet which hangs in the United Nations, the 100,000-rial banknote issued by the Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Ganjoor Persian literature website, the Persian Wikipedia article on this poem, and the well-known edition of Mohammad Ali Foroughi all have the version yek digar, which seems to be the most accepted one in Iran. The Persian Wikipedia article quotes a scholar, Habib Yaghmai, who notes that all the early manuscripts, dating to AH 717 (AD 1317/8) and 724 (AD 1324) and later, have yekdigar. The [website of the Central Bank] quotes a scholar Professor Kavus Hasanli of the University of Shiraz as saying that although yek peykar is more regular and nearer to Saadi's language, he believes that, since yekdigar is the only form found in the early manuscripts, yekdigar is the original.

On the other hand, a contributor to the notes on the Ganjoor website claims that the verse is based on a hadith: "People are like one body: if a member complains, the rest of the body falls into a fever", supporting the reading yek peykar.

At any rate if yekdigar is quoted here, the English translation should match it. Kanjuzi (talk) 20:35, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

This photograph (top right lozenge) clearly shows that the carpet itself has yekdigar, despite the fact that Mohammad Javad Zarif, former ambassador to the United Nations, (photographed here standing in front of the carpet) in the Persian news article quotes the poem with yek peykar. Kanjuzi (talk) 06:20, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Missing text?

In the "Legacy and poetic style" section, the third paragraph begins "Chief among these works...", but there are no "works" mentioned previously. JohnBuuseue (talk) 19:07, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Coldplay – Persian or Arabic?

Did Coldplay write their song-title "Bani Adam" in Persian or Arabic script? It looks like Arabic to me, because of the two dots under the y, which are not used in Persian. Kanjuzi (talk) 05:07, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 2 December 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move this page to any particular title at this time, per the discussion below. Also, no consensus to move the disambiguation page. Dekimasuよ! 06:10, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

---

• Saadi Shirazi → Saadi
• Saadi → Saadi (disambiguation)

– Per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. See also Encyclopædia Britannica. Orkhonien (talk) 17:22, 2 December 2019 (UTC) —Relisting. — Newslinger talk 16:04, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Personally I can see no objection to this proposed move, especially as the other Saadis are of minor importance. Articles on other famous Persian poets are titled Rumi, Hafez, Jami, Manuchehri, Rudaki, Ferdowsi, Qaani, Omar Khayyam, Nasir Khusraw, Nizami and so on, without mentioning their place of origin. But there are some exceptions such as Hatef Esfahani and Khwaju Kermani. Kanjuzi (talk) 18:28, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose – Not clear why a primarytopic takeover here would be an improvement. Dicklyon (talk) 18:45, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

  The subject of this article is best known as "Saadi", is the first one mentioned on the page "Saadi", and is a primary topic with respect to both usage and long-term significance (again, refer to WP:PRIMARYTOPIC). If that is not a primary topic, I don't know what else is. Now if you ask me why we have primary topics on Wikipedia... I don't know, I guess it makes reading more pleasant, by getting people to the articles that most of them would be looking for?... Orkhonien (talk) 19:06, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

• Not convinced that this is WP:COMMONNAME since "Saadi Shirazi was" seems to get more results than "Saadi was" in GBooks. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:08, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

  I don't see how you get these results, since Google Books doesn't show the number of results. JSTOR and Google, however, show quite the opposite:

search	JSTOR	Google
Saadi + Shiraz − "Saadi Shirazi" − "Saadi dynasty"	108	374,000
"Saadi Shirazi"	65	131,000

Orkhonien (talk) 10:06, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

• Support. I agree that the poet is the primary topic here. Note the last line of the lead section of Persian literature: "Persian poets such as Ferdowsi, Saadi, Hafiz, Attar, Nezami, Rumi..." Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:16, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
• Alternative proposal. Actually, based on what I'm seeing in standard encyclopedic sources, WP:COMMONNAME seems to indicate a different target: Saadi Shirazi → Saʿdī:
  • Britannica: Saʿdī
  • Encyclopedia of Islam: Saʿdī
  • Encyclopedia Iranica: SAʿDI Eperoton (talk) 00:23, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose, I think current page titles better disambiguates, and is also a common name for the subject.--Ortizesp (talk) 18:48, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Mehmet II

Perhaps the best-known quotation from Saadi in the West are the lines said to have been pronounced by Mehmet II after the fall of Byzantium, The spider weaves the curtains in the palace of the Caesars/the owl calls the watches in the towers of Afrasiab. I do not know the source, perhaps somebody else does? The lines are quoted by Philip Mansel in the preface to his book about Istanbul and also by Vikram Chandra in his book Sacred Games. Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 17:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Hadith

The reader who wrote "Before we present the poem, it is important to note ..." is writing in a non-factual style and his/her change was rightly deleted. However, the fact that this poem reflects a hadith shouldn't have been deleted. The grounds on which it was deleted ("Unsourced claim. It's probably a translation of a Middle Persian poem") are rather surprising, since this assertion is itself unsourced, and no such Middle Persian poem exists; whereas the hadith does indeed have a source. Even more puzzling is the reason given by another editor who deleted mention of the hadith from the article Bani Adam, on the grounds that "Islam should not be mixed with Persian poetry". Kanjuzi (talk) 12:34, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

The hadith citation is not a source that supports that theory, it's simple a verse by Bukhari stating some theological stuff he believes in - he lived centuries before Saadi, how would he know that Saadi got inspiration from him? --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:57, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

The hadith has been deleted again on the grounds that the hadith in question is contained in a collection of hadiths by Bukhari, who lived centuries before Saadi. That is not in dispute. It also cannot be disputed that the hadith and the poem express very similar ideas and that many people, both Iranian and foreign, believe that Saadi was drawing on this hadith as a source (I have added a citation for this). It is also clear from Franklin Lewis's article on the Golestan in the Encyclopaedia Iranica that Saadi frequently quotes from the Qor'an or the hadiths, in some 40 places, according to Lewis. The hadith therefore seems to me to be very relevant to the poem. Kanjuzi (talk) 14:14, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

So basically you dont have any academic source that supports that claim? You cant use your own theories as a source. A cleric (who is from a family of Holocaust deniers [1]) is not an academic scholar. Find someone with an actual education

HistoryofIran (talk)

[2]: Spennāg mēnōy dām hamāg ēk-gōhr hēnd. *** ud aweštābišn ī hannām ī ēk tan ān ī hamāg ān tan bawēd. Translation: Those created by Spanta Maynu are parts of one body *** Hurting one part is hurting the whole body Shawarsh (talk) 14:55, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

The claim that we are making is not that Saadi took his material from a hadith, but merely that some people believe that he took it from a hadith. As well as Ahmad Khomeini, we could add the scholars Saeed Nafisi, who produced an edition of the Golestan, and Dr Mohammad Khazaeli, who stated that the similarity between the poem and the hadith was a good reason for supporting the yek-peykar variant. – By the way, Ahmad Khomeini is not related in any way by family to the Khameneis as you imply. – Since the hadith in question is no longer in the article, here it is again, so that readers can judge for themselves, and also compare it with the Middle Persian poem which Shawarsh has kindly added above: "The example of the believers (Muslims) in their affection, mercy, and compassion for each other is that of a body. When any limb aches, the rest of the body reacts with sleeplessness and fever." Kanjuzi (talk) 10:00, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Introducing image

@HistoryofIran: Hi, this picture: Thumb is an art work of an sculpture by Abolhassan Sadighi and is highly famous. This sculpture now exists in Shiraz.

See this picture is more about Golestan and less about Saadi. Introducing picture should be a picture about only one concept, and should not contain any adjacent or similar concepts as much as we can. I really think that this change should be applied and only picture of Saadi should be placed there. Thanks, Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 12:16, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi, the picture you added is blurry and less aesthetically pleasing than that of the long standing image. Moreover, it will unfortunately probably get deleted soon due to no FOP in Iran. --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:32, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran I took that picture by my mobile phone, and the sculpture is open for taking picture. Aside from blurry problem, do you really think that "it get deleted soon due to no FOP"? The sculpture exists in a square in Shiraz. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 12:37, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes unfortunately. --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:39, 27 April 2022 (UTC)