Talk:Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani Asadabadi

message: 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)
thread_title:  Accuracy 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Who is Right

message: 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)
thread_title: New added text removed

message: 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)
thread_title:  Sufi scholar 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text:  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)
thread_title: Principle/Precedent for renaming to "al-Afghani"

message: Al-afghani in all none-Iranian documents, especially almost all alnguages of Wikipedia, is an Afghan, even his images in English Wikipedia is titled as al-afghani, then why English Wikipedia shoul call him Asadabadi? Isn't it an Iranian influence? Please do not forget your impartiality. If they change it a million times, I will revise a zillion times.84.13.162.105 (talk) 09:53, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Your observation only shows an inconsistency in the presentation. I am one of the people who without the slightest reservation believes that Asadabadi was an Iranian. Although an Iranian myself, this belief is not forced on me by my nationality; it is informed by sheer amount of historical facts regarding Asadabadi. The only reason that I have not undertaken to make the entry consistent, is by the realisation that any change of the kind would most likely lead to an uproar and I have simply not the time and the energy to enter into discussion with all those who do not share my conviction regarding Asadabadi. If a group of dedicated people would pledge here to support the changes required for making the entry consistent, I am prepared to initiate the work; otherwise, I am not going to let myself into a lion's den. Incidentally, could you (that is User 84.13.162.105), who remind me of User:Charsada (by "If they change it a million times, I will revise a zillion times" you betray yourself as an unreasonable person: whereas million is definite, zillion is indefinite so that by your statement you are declaring that you will change the article irrespective of whether anyone changes it or not), be so kind as to cite some of those "all none-Iranian [sic] documents"? Experience shows that these "none-Iranian documents" are almost always, if not always, figments of imagination. --BF 13:36, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Asadabadi was an Iranian. Not the issue. Issue is the standardized name, which is al-Afghani. --BoogaLouie (talk) 20:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Irainian influence

message: The German Wiki does has a handwritten document of Al-Afghani, where he ask to become a membership of the Freemansons. Never saw that before, so what do you think?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.59.204.35 (talk) 18:38, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reverted an IP edit which had deleted useful information. The same IP had also edited the German version of the article and was reverted there by an admin as well. Tājik (talk) 18:14, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

text: I have once again reverted the disadvantageous edits of the IP who had removed sources or falsified the text. Tājik (talk) 12:52, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It really baffles me how some people can change sourced texts or falsify it.  For example if no one caught the ip, people would think the false information he put is what Britannica has stated.  There needs to be better protection against such vandalism so normal users do not have to waste their time.  --Nepaheshgar (talk) 03:32, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have once again restored the correct version. This version is sourced, and the attached sources can be examined online. Tājik (talk) 10:17, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Freemanson

message: If nobody has objection, i am going to make some changes in this article (look to academic sources).Abasin-اباسین (Tofaan-توفان) 16:10, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Listen now very clearfully to me you inuit18. This Persian and Britianic are not holy!! There are enough academic sources around the world with facts about him and his origin. You can read it very clearly why one is trying to destroy him and other to claim him. So, to the neutrality of these articles becomes doubts. You are really a brainwashed person. hahah so funny men, the books are not academic sources and articles in Persianica and Britianica are academic sources...? hahaha  mashallah, i think you are the knowledged person of your family hahaha. if there was writed for example his birthplace as Asadabad, Kunar province, Afghanistan. I am sure, this brainwashed person would never ever accept it as academic sources. Think once men, two countries claims his origin and his remain are gived back to his originally country, and Britianica set his born place as one of the country (Which don't get his remains and would never get it). Don't you think once why has Britianica choice of this countries as his born place and not both. Is this not a little bite strange, don't you think so...? And about Perianica is very clearly to very one. No needs to makes my words dirty about this! So except from this brainwashed person inuit18, has any body any objection..?Abasin-اباسین (Tofaan-توفان) 01:33, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Changes