Talk:Hafez

message: The Timur and Hafez story is repeated twice in two sections. Can someone remove one of them or condense into only one section?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aref samadi (talk • contribs) 23:42, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repetition of Timur and Hafez Story 

message: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Types_of_hafez_poems.jpg
This fascinating graphic showing influences of Hafez would of course be even more interesting if it were legible by non-Persian speakers on his English language page : ) Anyone able to upload an English translation? Thanks
Eric Machmer   —Preceding undated comment added 03:54, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation of File:Types_of_hafez_poems.jpg into English please 

message: Why are we still denying things that everybody knows? Haiduc 01:52, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You have not provided any sources that identify him or his poetry as pederastic. SouthernComfort 02:45, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hafez and the Persian pederastic tradition 

message: I would request other editors, preferably some with knowledge of Persian, to repair the damage caused by the editor who posted "I got the data from a persian website, Surely Persian scholars who are experts in persian language know more that a foreigner!!" as justification for the tacky art and sanitizing edits. Haiduc 02:42, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, that is an acceptable compromise. I will expand the caption of the book cover to clarify its provenance. Haiduc 10:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnic takeover of article 

message: The european translator, assumed that since hafez was a follower of sufism and love in sufism had sometimes been pederastic, therefore the beloved should have been a young boy. Well, I am looking at the persian version of the verses translated by  Henry Wilberforce-Clarke, and as person whose mother tongue is persian it seems to me that the beloved was an adult female rather than a young boy. Since hafez is using pronouns to refer to his beloved and the cupbeareand and pronouns in persian are the same for both genders, one could go both ways but in persian we always use the phrase 'lock of hair of the beloved' to refer to females (since they have long hair you know). Besides anyone who is familiar with hafez poetry and have an advance understanding of medieval persian language, would know that Hafez is very unlikely to have pederastic inclinations.
I am well aware of the existance pederasty in many teachings of sufism and I have seen the pederastic sentiments in Jami and Saadi poems but Not all persian poets that follow sufism have pederastic inclinations!!.
:If you think it's incorrectly phrased, why don't you change it, instead of delete it?--Primetime 19:23, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That is not an alternative. What matters here is not the opinion of the Wikipedia editors but the scholarship on the topic. That being said, we should also note that a native speaker of Persian is a native speaker of Persian in the 21st century, and it is not reasonable to impute motives to Hafez based on the use of the language seven hundred years after his birth. Not only has the language changed - the culture has changed too, to say the least. Haiduc 23:59, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Leaving your opinions about me and my opinions about you aside, please consult this link which touches on the homoerotic conventions of the ghazal tradition. Haiduc 05:23, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  incorrect interpretation! 

message: Last time I checked, the word is divan, not diwan ("w" does not even exist in Farsi). Also, Khwaja is a very bad translitteration. the correct pronunciation would be Khajeh. I believe that it is important to promote correct pronunciation of foreign words (i.e. EYE-RAN -> EE-RON). Otherwise, besides the need for some information on the "Fall-e Hafez" tradition, this article is very informative. --69.140.122.175 (talk) 23:21, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diwan -> Divan & various other corrections 

message: While I am not particularly familiar myself with the information pertaining to the life of Hafiz, I see a lot of things that seem to assert particular things regarding his life without any sources of information or citation on the matter. This makes me extremely suspicious of its accuracy and neutrality, and I have marked one section as such and I shall be tagging the page as needing more sources and verification throughout. I would be interested in hearing anyone's thoughts on this matter especially on better and more verifiable sources to make this more encyclopedic. Peter Deer (talk) 11:11, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sadly a month has passed and I see no sources cited on the matter, and I'm going to have to remove the information based on wikipedia's verifiability policy. If someone would like to cite it they are welcome to re-include the information. May you go in God's care.  Peter Deer (talk) 14:11, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Implications about his lifestyle 

message: I have also removed the word mystic in the first line, as there is no factual evidence proving that Hafez himself was a mystic. I also recommend removing "surrealist" as a description for Hafez's poetry. Persiancowboy 22:53, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've put back the word 'mystic' as it seems to be fully justified according to the documentary evidence. See in-line citation.--Yumegusa (talk) 23:44, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Yumegusa, I don't have access to the book you sighted. However I will appreciate if you can post the quote you sighted from that page in here? Because as far as I know we have so little documentation about Hafez and his life to prove exactly who he was and whether he was a mystic Sufi or no. There are many writers and poets who are in reality very different that the person they represent in their books. Although Hafez could have very well been a Sufi, I haven't seen any evidence proving that he was.  Persiancowboy 23:58, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "Khwája Shams ud-Dín Muḥammad Háfiz-i Shírází, the Persian poet of the fourteenth century, is one of the greatest mystics and lyrical poets...". If you doubt there's been plenty written along these lines, just take a glance at http://books.google.com/books?q=hafiz+mystic&btnG=Search+Books. Is there counter-evidence? Please cite.--Yumegusa (talk) 13:40, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Mystic?

message: in the right column it is stated that "Notable ideas: Hafez's work has been translated by a number of major Western poets". I really found it disturbing and insulting to Hafez. Should we remove this sentence?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.70.24.182 (talk) 16:17, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: To be translated and read all over the world is actually one of the greatest honors an author/writer/philosopher/poet can have, especially when it traverses the East-West dichotomy. I don't feel it is insulting at all. KaraiBorinquen (talk) 13:45, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  insult? 

message: Dan Ladinsky does not know Persian, a little or a lot. I don't want to change it because I don't know how to cite it. To know that he doesn't know Persian you just need to call him on the phone and ask him. His poems are entirely made up by him. There is not one relation between one single Ladinsky poem and a single Hafez poem and Ladinsky has admitted that in a published inerview. They are "renderings" of poems by Hafiz, by Mr. Ladinsky. It's sad people don't know this. Darwin394 (talk) 14:58, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Many do know it. See the topic right above this one. Also see this blog entry. But Ladinsky's dickishness can never be overstated, and he therefore deserves all the scorn he gets, redundant though it may at times be. Personally, I doubt that Ladinsky's punishment will be complete until Andrea Dwarkin, Valerie Solanas and Edward Said have each taken their turn sodomizing him with a brick. Szfski (talk) 05:54, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Understandable and even commendable though your passion may be, Wikipedia needs to be very careful how it characterizes living persons, either in articles directly about them, or tangentially, in other articles and talk pages etc. There are a bunch of real good reasons why this is so. We should concentrate on article content rather than individuals. Nothing ad hominem. Thanks for your understanding. Rumiton (talk) 12:02, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry for the proctological barbs. Anyway, it's hard not to sound ad hominem when telling the truth requires you to call your subject a kook or a liar. This is probably a discussion best had over at the Daniel Ladinsky talk page, though. Szfski (talk) 09:36, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps, or even better, somewhere away from Wikipedia altogether. Please remember that even talk pages are public spaces. (I am still wincing about those "proctological barbs." Ouch.) Rumiton (talk) 11:04, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Ladinsky fact is wrong

message: how Meher Baba recited Hafiz ghazals until his dying day while maintaining a vow of silence? Rumiton (talk) 13:49, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably by using his magical pseudomystical bullshit powers to summon the essence of Hafiz to speak them through his mouth without actually moving his own vocal cords while Ladinsky & other acolytes hugged him like a giant swindling teddybear. Szfski (talk) 21:15, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah. I see. Might there possibly be a more scholarly explanation? Anyone? Rumiton (talk) 11:54, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Can anyone tell me

message: No takers above, looks like the contradiction needs to stand. Now...your new translation reeks of improvement, but what is a Hindu mole? Could it be the tilaka? Rumiton (talk) 10:56, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Hindu mole

message: The notion of love and sex do not interfere in the Persian literature and as such Hafiz cannot be assumed to be a homosexual, just as some westerners who read Hafiz think. Do you also assume that Rumi who wrote Divan-e Shams and mentioned his love for shams several times had a sexual relationship with him?حضرت محمود (talk) 08:34, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure what your first sentence means, but I think Hafiz is quite clear in describing the conflict his worldly, and apparently same-sex, passions created in his life of attempted piety. The love of Rumi for his master bears no comparison. Rumiton (talk) 11:19, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Love in Persian Literature 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 15 October 2011 
;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) 13:34, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Hafez2.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: Why he dressed like a Russian in this picture?
And what its mean? Hofizi Sherozi?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hofizi_Sherozi.jpg  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.162.224.118 (talk) 16:50, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There are no "accurate" renderings of Jesus, of Adam, of Ali, of any of the Twelve Apostles, or indeed of loads and loads of figures of historical and religious import. This does not mean that no depictions of them are included in encyclopedia articles. If the cultural and artistic biases of these depictions merit consideration, then cited sources on that subject should mention it in a relevant section of the article, should they not? Peter Deer (talk) 16:45, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: I don't know I got this picture from Wikimedia and put it on the article, it was already on another language article. What is Russian about it?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cauca50 (talk • contribs) 21:13, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not Russian. It is in Persian written by Cyrillic alphabet which is common in Tajiki PersianPouyakhani (talk) 15:18, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Russian Hafez? 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 30 December 2011 
;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) 17:14, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Hafez book.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: English language resources
  the third item is currently a broken link
G. Robert Shiplett 18:59, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  bad link 

message: The infobox for Hafez is classified as Saint. But he was not a saint for sure. I say we should change it to Infobox writer.Pouyakhani (talk) 06:31, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox saint 

message: Can we mention that he was a Shia please?--88.111.126.79 (talk) 13:42, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Evidence?--79.69.96.179 (talk) 17:48, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shia 

message: we should mention that he knew all 14 Qira'at The Holy Quran Kareem --88.111.126.79 (talk) 13:46, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that's why his pen name is Hafez, it should be mentioned.Pouyakhani (talk) 08:07, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  That knew the Quran of by heart or all 14 Qirat?--88.111.116.8 (talk) 18:45, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  He is kinda like THE Hafez, he knew all fourteen so that made him a significant Hafez.Pouyakhani (talk) 21:28, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  So should we mention that?--88.111.116.8 (talk) 17:20, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, as an explanation for the pen name, I think it's necessary.Pouyakhani (talk) 19:40, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok we gonna get refrences?--88.111.116.8 (talk) 15:42, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  All Qirat? 

message: There are references that cannot be followed by any means. For instance: 
*Yarshater. Accessed 25 July 2010
*Khorramshahi. Accessed 25 July 2010
*Lewisohn, p. 69.
*Gray, pp. 2-4.
There are neither links (if these are web sites), nor book titles, nor publishers, nor journal sources... I am trying to edit an article about Hafez for Bulgarian wikipedia. So, please, could somebody make these (and the similar) references complete. --Mmm-jun (talk) 15:34, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not complete references 

message: His collected works composed of series of Persian literature are to be found in the homes of most people in Iran, Afghanistan and Tajikistan, who learn his poems by heart and use them as proverbs and sayings to this day.
So, this line from the introduction, I'm guessing...the person who wrote that comes from either Iran, Afghanistan or Tajikistan. Does the article need this in the introduction, or at least in the way and at the location it is right now? 83.83.59.46 (talk) 22:04, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  I'm guessing... 

message: Regarding this edit there may be a problem with the sources: all three are Arabic, which makes them unverifiable for most English=speaking readers:
* http://www.aftabir.com/articles/view/art_culture/literature_verse/c5c1230197619_hafez_p1.php/طنز-حافظ 
* http://adab.tebyan.net/newindex.aspx?pid=4202&Keyword=طنز+حافظ 
* http://www.hawzah.net/fa/magazine/magart/3282/4773/39121# 
Also, the translations offered in this edit are not exactly correct English.
: I also found this section to be difficult to understand so I revamped it completely. My aim was to keep the general intent of the section but to provide fuller context, an English source, and a more neutral tone. Moismailzai (talk) 17:29, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irony and sources 

message: recently i added a sample poem translation from this book,  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.184.179.38 (talk) 23:46, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Which is unnecessary. The external links have plenty of the poetry. Wikipedia pages for poets are not in general comprised of samples of their work. Pinkbeast (talk) 02:01, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok, i got it,see here  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.184.174.123 (talk) 07:53, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you for your understanding. Pinkbeast (talk) 14:22, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: sample poem

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Hafez. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071015160848/http://mehrnews.com/en/NewsDetail.aspx?NewsID=393152 to http://www.mehrnews.com/en/NewsDetail.aspx?NewsID=393152
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140409063413/http://faalhafez.com/ to http://www.faalhafez.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050201034830/http://www.iranica.com/articles/v11f5/v11f5004.html to http://www.iranica.com/articles/v11f5/v11f5004.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120719231002/http://www.photoparsi.com/5/491-hafez-tomb-in-2012-nowruz to http://www.photoparsi.com/5/491-hafez-tomb-in-2012-nowruz
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:09, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I don't understand why the article starts with Hafez - not to be confused with Hafiz. Surely it IS to be confused with Hafiz, the latter most usually being a different translation of the same name?RGipps (talk) 19:07, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It links to the disambiguation page for Hafiz, which is mostly other Hafizzes and Hafezzes. The wording is perhaps a bit unsatisfactory. Pinkbeast (talk) 04:41, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I've changed it to a differently unsatisfactory wording. Pinkbeast (talk) 09:17, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: Urdu Language 119.152.152.130 (talk) 18:59, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hafiz shirazi