Persian, not Turkish, but Rumi belongs to all

Sir,

I was surprised to read your articles on Rumi, properly known as Molavi in his home country Iran (‘Mystic Sufi poetry returns to Nicosia’, March 9). The description of him as “one of the biggest figures in Turkish cultural history” is deeply misleading. I believe this great mystic, poet and philosopher of the 13th Century is beyond the realm of man-made divisions such as nations and countries and stands above artificial discriminatory boundaries that has afflicted humanity thus far. But if you would insist on tying him down to a specific culture, you should check the facts. Amongst the 30,000 lines of poetry that Rumi wrote, there are perhaps a few lines in Turkish, a few hundred in Arabic and the overwhelming remainder is in his native Persian tongue.

When Rumi lived, there was no Turkey. His birthplace was Balkh in eastern Persia but due to the Mongolian attack, in his teenage years, his family moved westward and resided in Konya, for a while capital of the Seljuqs of Rum, which was a branch of Great Seljuqs of Iran. Inspiration for his two main works of mystic poetry came from his sage, Shams, another Persian from the City of Tabriz in Western Persia and even part of today’s Iran.

His work marvels, inter alia, with parables narrating Traditional Persian folklore. There is absolutely no doubt that he was Iranian and the language of his two main works in mystic poetry, more than anything else, proves that beyond the shadow of a doubt.

Rumi, like all other great men of the past, belongs to the whole of humanity and not just to one nation. The Turkish people are welcome to translate his works into Turkish (just as he has been translated into English and other languages) and to celebrate his lofty spiritual achievements. But if you would like to make a point of his nationality and culture, then facts speak loud and clear.
Farid Mirbagheri, Intercollege, Nicosia