Talk:Al-Khwarizmi

Archives: 1 2 3

Tajik ,Afghan both are modern names

It is importent to specify a correct name for an importent man like Kharazmi...But Afghan or Tajik or Iranian are modern names for persians.... be carefull not to change persians great history and glory.Greater China has the same point.India too.... In the birth days of Kharazmi in Bokhara and Kharam persian people lived who forced to live in southern places after mongols-conquer.

I think because his birth place was Kharazm and Kharazm's mother-language before mongols was Persian so the best name Is :Persian Moslem Scholar —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.191.122.15 (talk) 22:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

One more instance of the "invention of zero" myth

The introduction of the article states that Latin translation of Khwarizmi's algebra "introduced the positional number system and the number zero to the Western world".

This a statemente is obviously false, or rather nonsensical, in the part that concerns number zero!

Of course, no one ever introduced "number zero" in the Western world (or any other world). The concept of number zero (although not the Arabic-origined name we call it today) is a quite natural concept, that probably all civilization on earth have always been familiar with. After you eat all the apples contained in a basket of apples, you are left with a basken containing no more (or zero) apples. That's as simple. In any case, the concept of number zero, and even specific a symbol for it, certainly existed in the mathematics of classical Greece.

What Khwarizmi's work actually brought to the West was the concept of digit zero, i.e. a special symbol acting as a placeholder for empty position in a positional number system. But changin "number zero" to "digit zero" above wouldn't work, as digit zero is a key feature of any positional number system, so if we already said that someone brought the positional number system somewhere, it is redundand and misleading to add that he also brought digit zero.

I think that we should simply remove the words "and the number zero" from the introduction. Any other ideas?

85.42.220.213 10:23, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

There are several flaws in your argument (please read this article on the history of zero both as a concept/number, sign/digit, and as a word.) The concept of "zero" clearly is not as trivial as you make it out to be, nor does a positional number system require a digit for zero, nor was the digit zero considered to be on the same level as the numbers 1, 2, 3, ... by Fibonacci and other mathematicians until c. 1600. —Ruud 22:57, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

The concept of zero is a psychology kinda of thing. Cats have a concept of zero. If a cat has a litter of seven kittens and one is missing, it knows something is up. 12.44.67.78 (talk) 16:30, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

state-Abbasiya

In the era of state-Abbasiya

the People of Bukhara Samarkand Neyshabur Khorasan was Speaking Arabic and they was Persians and Arabs too who consider themselves arabs, and they was Muslims Sunnah

I should recommend this dear friend to first learn English; then try to study valuable history books in international language (English) and not just from Arabic books or recent "Arab-donated" English history books!! If you earn so much money these days from your crude oil, doesn't just mean that all the world history should be rewritten from viewpoint of Musim Sunnies in Hejaz!!

Anybody know why....

al-Khwārizmī full name says that he is the son of Moses? ( Is that not a jewish lineage according to the name Moses). User_talk:CltFn —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 05:53, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

The name Musa is not uncommon for Muslims, as are Ibrahim, Da'ud and Isa. All are considered prophets of Islam.  --Lambiam 22:17, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the dear friend talked in Arabic that Alkwarizmi was Persian and not Arab; but I think ibstead of these unuseful debates between Persians and Arabs, it is better to refer to famous history books in this regard or at least ask famous professors in renowned US (or other countries) universities to supervise the content... All in all, Wikipedia is going to be a famous encyclopedia not just a forum to debate on racial matters!

Is Khwarizm/Khiva the same as Khorasan?

I agree with the dear friend talked in Arabic that Alkwarizmi was Persian and not Arab; but I think ibstead of these unuseful debates between Persians and Arabs, it is better to refer to famous history books in this regard or at least ask famous professors in renowned US (or other countries) universities to supervise the content... All in all, Wikipedia is going to be a famous encyclopedia not just a forum to debate on racial matters!

Was Muhammad ibn Musa a Shi'a Muslim?

A repetitive edit claims that Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi was a Shi'a Muslim. As a source the web page http://www.al-shia.com/html/eng/books/nahjulbalaga/lifelineage.htm has been suggested. It may be useful to note that this web page refers to one "Muhammad ibn al-'Abbas al-Khwarizmi (d. 383/993)". This is not the same person as Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi (d. ~850), but another Muhammad (not an uncommon name), who apparently also stemmed from Khwarizm, but lived more than a century later.  --Lambiam 22:33, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Concur with Lambian. I don't know whether this man was Shi'a, but I do know that adding new info to a Wikipedia article requires a citation that complies with WP:VERIFY. Can someone with more knowledge of this topic shed some light on the subject? Further, should this new addition contain a citation? Kindest regards, Verum (talk) 23:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Historians don't have much more to say about him than is already in the Biography section. Likely a Muslim, possibly from a Zoroastrian family. They don't give anything more exact then that. —Ruud 07:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Drastic revert

Is there a reason why this revert is so drastic, going back all the way to the revision as of 18:39, November 19, 2007 (UTC)? Are really none of the intermediate edits worth being kept?  --Lambiam 13:06, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Not really and not really. —Ruud 07:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Religion

It does not directly say that he belonged to Islam, do we have source that he did? 76.16.187.218 (talk) 01:27, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

See the quotation from Toomer in the section Biography.  --Lambiam 09:07, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Timeline of mathematics

Someone recently changed the gentleman's entry at Timeline of mathematics with commentary. Could someone more expert in that make the year 750 entry more appropriate to Wikipedia? Thanks.

Since his name is Muhammad it's obvious that at least he was known as muslim. Moreover,Persia in that time have been converted to Islam by the muslims and arabic has become the official language and the dialogue as well.

(John User:Jwy talk) 17:00, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

 Done I've rewritten the Al-Khwarizmi entry and moved it to 830 CE.  --Lambiam 08:50, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Arabic not visible

Why is the Arabic script in the first line visible when editing, but not when looking at the page itself? Badagnani (talk) 19:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I fixed it. dab (𒁳) 08:17, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Al-Khawarizmi's nationality

Is there any authenticated reference that states Al-khawarizmi was German as it is stated in the text? I think all the arguments about his nationality revolve around three axis: Turkish or Persian or Arab. If any one can support the article's argument, I would be glad to hear his analysis. Best Ahmedettaf (talk) 05:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

This was the result of vandalism. She was also not an Italian astronomer, and the word algorithm does not stem from orgami.  --Lambiam 17:04, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Is Persian different from Iranian? (129.217.230.35 (talk) 12:50, 18 April 2008 (UTC))

Notification of related discussion

There is an ongoing discussion at Talk:Algorithm on this very topic. I think it might benefit from the input of those who have already discussed related issues here. silly rabbit (talk) 12:22, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

The small abacus

You are welcome to visit our research about Al-Khwarizmi numerals at: [1] Thank you. Roberto Lyra (talk) 13:48, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

fake infomation

he was not Persian see this source from Encarta encyclopedia [2] --Bayrak (talk) 19:17, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

You can cite that source alongside the other sources , but anyway , in the western literature, they use the word Arabic and Islamic interchangeably .
Using the tag is not justifiable --Alborz Fallah (talk) 19:33, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

listen to me in that time when citizen of kingdom of islam (caliphate) talk arabic as native language so they were arabs exactly the same with sassanid empire all of them talk persian so they where persian and so on... --Bayrak (talk) 19:45, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I have reverted the tag. Khwarizmi was not a "Persian" in the modern sense of the word, but he was most certainly an Iranian. His native language was Khwarezmian, a language related to Persian, while he wrote all of his works in Arabic and worked at the House of Wisdom in Baghdad. According to al-Tabari, he was known as al-majus, which means "the Magian", a clear reference to his Iranian Zoroastrian origins. Tājik (talk) 21:45, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

you said that his native language was Khwarezmian do you have source please? and to be clear the Arabizm is culture not orign Bayrak (talk) 22:27, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

It's difficult to distinguish between "Arabism" , as a cultural entity , and Islamic culture . Anyway , as user Tajik correctly mentioned , the great historian Tabri names Kharazmi as "محمد بن موسى الخوارزمي المجوسي" that shows his immediate ancestors were Zoroastrians - and then from Iran.Writing only in Arabic is not surprising , because in that time , the Arabic was the only lingua franca of all Muslims , but that's clear that persons like Sibawayh , Tabari and Khwarizmi where Iranians who wrote in Arabic .--Alborz Fallah (talk) 09:12, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

you saying now he is iranian?!! --Bayrak (talk) 18:07, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Persia and Iran are interchangeable names . Please see (Iran naming dispute).--Alborz Fallah (talk) 22:54, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Not all iranin are persians but all persians are iranian so if we claim he was iranian that does not mean he was persian --Bayrak (talk) 23:29, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Persian means "Iranian", please see [3] and[4] for example. Abu Rayhan Biruni (a native Chorasmian) explicitly states: "The people of Khwarizm are a branch of the Persian tree". he has meant "Iranian". As to Khorasan, please look at this, for example:

The historical region extended, along the north, from the Amu Darya (Oxus River) westward to the Caspian Sea and, along the south, from the fringes of the central Iranian deserts eastward to the mountains of central Afghanistan. Arab geographers even spoke of its extending to the boundaries of India.

The quote's from: [5]. So sometimes Khwarezm has been mentioned as included in Khorasan and sometimes not, hence the term Greater Khorasan.--Raayen (talk) 12:05, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

"Iran" is the word that Iranian themselves use to name their nation . Because the other nations were more involved with the central government of Iran in the beginning of history and/or was under the influence of first Persian empires of Iranian history ( that were Persian), that was customary to name the all of Iranians as Persian . The modern distinguish between Iran and Persia took place only in 20th century , after the demand of Iranian government to use the native name of Iran in other countries , so when we use the term "Persian" , that mostly means Iranian unless it is mentioned that we are using it as an ethnic term and not in a national sense . So being Persian in history can mean the individual can be Turkic language , Tajik , Khawarazmian , Arabic language , kurdish and etc . --Alborz Fallah (talk) 12:56, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

It has been discussed many times, opinions from Professors of history in mathematics were sought and this is the final outcome that he was a Persian. --Wayiran (talk) 14:31, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

rewrite the history..! no way --Bayrak (talk) 19:37, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

also britannica see here [6] --Bayrak (talk) 19:53, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

It is mentioned in the article itself that: <Abu Rayhan Biruni (a native Chorasmian) explicitly states: "The people of Khwarizm are a branch of the Persian tree">. There are many reasons behind the Persian origin of Khwarizm people. --Wayiran (talk) 20:19, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Dont delete the sources please.. --Bayrak (talk) 20:59, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

User:Sina111 delete the sources??? --Bayrak (talk) 22:33, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

• What is important is statements from Professors of Mathematical History. Please read the archives and the resulting wording is from the concensus and feedback of Professors who study Islamic Mathematical history which is a very specialized field.
• New Britannica (2008) does not discuss background and states just "Muslim". Some Western scholars have used the terms "Muslim" and "Arab" synonymously. This shows that Muslim and Arabs were used to mean the same thing before. For example see this: Medieval Islamic Economic Thought, By Shaikh M. Ghazanfar, Published by Routledge, 2003, Page 5. He says:

""Further, the chapters interchangeably use terms such as "Arab" scholars, "Arab-Islamic" Scholars, or simply "Islamic/Muslim" scholars. While in some sense the distictions may be appropirate, our reference throughout is to the Islamic (or Muslim) scholars, whether Arab, Iranian or Persian, who wrote their discourses in the early Islamic civilization.""

So why not using "Persian" and "Muslim" interchangeably; or for that matter, Berber and "Muslim" like so?! And this: The Historians' History of the World: A Comprehensive Narrative of the Rise ... - Page 20, edited by Henry Smith Williams, World history, 1907, page 20

""Moslem philosophy (of which the most notable exponents were men of non-Arab descent, Persians, Spaniards, etc. ...""

• Encarta/Britannica are Teriatary sources. Per Wikipedia Rule: Wikipedia:RS#Primary.2C_secondary.2C_and_tertiary_sources "Wikipedia articles should be based around reliable secondary sources." Secondary sources are exactly Professors of history of Islamic mathematics who were consulted for this article. So Teriatary sources do not have the same weight as primary and secondary sources.
• Before editing, please review the archives, as the current version was accepted by Wikipedia admins and it is the concensus based upon the response of Professors in Mathematical history. This is one of the users who participated: User_talk:Nepaheshgar/Al-Khwarizmi_the_Mathematician. To change a concensus, you need strong sources and not tertiary sources.
• Khwarizmi's title al-Majoosi shows Zoroastrian background. Has there been any Zoroastrian Arab?! And the people of Khwarizm according to the native Chorasmian Abu Rayhan Biruni were a branch of the Persian tree.
• As to Khorasan, you can also read thses: Mining, Metallurgy and Minting in the Middle Ages, by Ian Blanchard, 2005, Page 557, it says: "Khiva in Khorasan", or, Stalin, by Nikolaus Basseches, 1952, Page 176, which reads: Khiva (Khorasan).--Raayen (talk) 02:52, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Fraud

if some new sources claimes that he was persian that doesnt make the case be an abosolute truth --Bayrak (talk) 02:46, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

He was ethnically Persian. Does an Arab who speaks English become an Englishman? His ancestors were Zoroastrians, even by ancient sources. Do you know of any Arab Zoroastrians? --Enzuru 00:59, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

We might create a Mesopotamian ethnicity for the prophet Muhammad, instead of Arab! The former culture minister of a country have actually done that!!--Raayen (talk) 02:16, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Muhammad was the descendant of a long line Arab speakers (unlike al-Khwarizmi), and those who are considered ethnically Arab (which Persians are not). Once again, do you know of any Arab Zoroastrians? And does an Arab who speaks English become an Englishman? --Enzuru 03:11, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

the Ethnic is language and culture not origin because there is no nation Offspring from one person , and who knows maybe al-khwarizmi was turkish who moved to persians and Convert to Zoroastrians maybe before that he was from russian origin moved to the turks and so on...

therefor when i write he was arabic i mean he was arabic native maybe from Foreign origin --Bayrak (talk) 19:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)