Talk:Kahlil Gibran/Archive 1

Nostradamus nexus
"The Prophet" plays heavily on the "immortal" quatrains (Century IV, Q30-Q31) of the discredited works of French "seer' Nostradamus. Interestingly, Gibran's full name is Gibran Khalil Gibran and to which the "number of the beast" 666 of the equally dubious Book of Revelation could easily be ascribed. The association may actually have bothered him a lot, culminating in his fiercely declaring himself not to be a Christian at his death. I'm not aware of anyone else publishing the fact of this nexus, even though one of his "disciples" Barbara Young heavily hinted to Gibran's "immortality" (etc) in her book on Gibran. Therefre I've added a comment to the above effect in "The Prophet" section under Reception and influence. --Marcus Anderson (talk) 22:52, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

--I cannot speak to the scholarship of the Nostradamus nexus as a whole, but specifically the comment on the Book of Revelation is a gratuitous slap at Christianity that ought to come out. If you want to debate the validity of the Bible, take it elsewhere. Within the confines of this article, the reader can come to his or her OWN conclusion one way or the other, without the unnecessary crack about Revelation being "dubious." 06:35, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Untitled
Khalil Gibran is inspirational fiction. The man was inspired by his belief in Chrisitanity. Kahlil Gibran —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.106.115.86 (talk) 09:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Mistake: Khalil, not Kahlil — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.36.18.220 (talk) 21:47, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

From Lebanon and not from Syria

 * I think even though Lebanon was not yet present as a state at that time, there is no need to replace "Lebanon" with "Ottoman Syria" in this article. The line that says "at the time Mount Lebanon was a sub-district in the Ottoman province of Syria" is more than enough to clarify this fact. HD1986 (talk) 09:50, 26 July 2008 (UTC)


 * For the Lebanese bro who is angry about the "part of Syria," this sentence is found in most encyclopedias when talking about Gibran (you can check up for yourself). It is necessary because Gibran was identified as "Syrian" while he was in America.HD1986 (talk) 10:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * There was no "Lebanese" designation back then, so the IP's argument is invalid. Maybe Lebanon should even be changed to Mount Lebanon throughout the article, since Lebanon links to the article about the modern state, which Gibran didn't even live to see. FunkMonk (talk) 11:46, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I see that this edit war is still going on. Would it be enough to list his birthplace as Mount Lebanon and then link to Mount_Lebanon? This link would then direct people to Ottoman Syria while still preserving our modern sense that Gibran belonged to the Lebanese people? Also, in the section on his death, it is clear from the dates provided in the Lebanon article that his death occurred before Lebanon was independent but after the formation of the Lebanese Republic under French rule. Is it correct to refer to this as Lebanon? Aristophanes68 (talk) 20:49, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Aristophanes68 (talk I appreciate your input but the war is between academics and personal politics, with the latter being waged by the other user. Ottoman Syria is historical, whereas Mount Lebanon this was a piece of Ottoman Syria. Go check the George Washington article and check where he was born, you will see that he was born in something called British North America, because when he was born the United States did not exist. There are ample indications throughout the article that mention Lebanon and that he is from modern day Lebanon. I have a suggestion we could put Mount Lebanon, Ottoman Syria that way it's extremely accurate.George Al-Shami (talk) 18:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That suggestion makes sense to me. What do others think? Otherwise, I've been trying to remove references to the area and reword them to make them more neutral. Aristophanes68 (talk) 18:48, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Check Gibran's obituary in 1931, they even thought Mount Lebanon was a sub-part of Palestine: http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/12/13/specials/gibran-obit.html

''"April 11, 1931
 * Kahlil Gibran Dead; Noted Syrian Poet


 * Kahlil Gibran, the Syrian poet and author of "Jesus the Man of Nazareth," died at 11 o'clock last night at St. Vincent's Hospital, to which he had been taken earlier in the day when he became unconscious as the result of an illness from which he had suffered for several months. Mr. Gibran had been in this country for more than twenty years and had lived at 51 West Tenth Street.


 * He was born in Mount Lebanon, Palestine, and gained a widespread reputation through his Arabic poetry and the writing of several books in English. His manuscripts were exhibited in 1928 at Poetry House, at 12 East Tenth Street.


 * Mr. Gibran became ill more than four months ago; his ailment was diagnosed as cancer of the liver. Early yesterday morning he became unconscious and was rushed to St. Vincent's Hospital in an ambulance. He did not regain consciousness and died with a sister, Marianna, who lives in Boston, at his bedside."

HD1986 (talk) 18:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Minor Additions For Interest's Sake
Gibran K. Gibran, despite geographical precisions, is Lebanese; born and bred. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.91.22.230 (talk) 20:58, 23 January 2009 (UTC) I added the information from "Juliet Thompson Remembers Kahlil Gibran", pertaining to Juliet Thompson's quote mentioning the influence of 'Abdu'l-Baha on the character of Almustafa in The Prophet. I've added a site that excerpts quotes from the book on the subject to the references if anyone's interested.

I thought I read in Bushrui's biography of Gibran that Abdul Baha was who he had partly in mind while he was writing Jesus, the Son of Man. But I guess I could be wrong.

Hodgepodge of Comments and Questions
There must be thousands of men named Khalil Gibran. Both the first name and the surname are common Arabic names, so clearly there are more than two. Khalil Gibran is no "new age" phenomenon, and he is quite well thought of by Arabs, as well as Arab-Americans, Euro-Americans, Europeans and you name it.

On one end of your note you say he's Lebanese, but at the bottom you say he is not an Arab. You can't have it both ways. He was indeed Arab.

An American of Lebanese descent

Are there two guys named Kahlil Gibran? The only one I know of (maybe I'm clueless? ;-) is the Lebanese poet. - This is him.

I'm just wondering about the romaticized account of his youth and his "being the genius of his age". How is his stature amongst Arab-speaking people? I always figure him to be somewhat more adopted by the New Age movement as some sort of a "prophet" himself.

Gibran was not an Arab. He was Lebanese. To know more about the difference read Are Lebanese Arabs?

IN REPLY... It was during the 1960's that Gibran's popularity soared when the 'New Age' people were falling over themselves to get hold of a copy of The Prophet. Until this time his success had been somewhat limited although it's true to say that in his homeland of Lebanon he was firmly established as a hero of the country. On his burial there in 1932 there was an immense procession that followed behind his coffin and to this day he is very much regarded as one of the 'sons of Lebanon'. From quite early in his career Gibran gained a certain popularity amongst many of the other Arabic speaking nations.

There is at least one other 'well known' Kahlil Gibran and this is the Boston based sculptor. Both KG (poet) and KG (sculptor) are related although I'm not sure how. KG (sculptor) is the author of the book Kahlil Gibran His Life And Work (a biography of KG the poet).

Need for Editing
I'm removing the reference of Gibran as a philosopher, as he does not seem to have a great claim to fame in that area. IMHO it is just idolization. I have also removed some other slanted parts, but IMHO it could still use some objective editing by someone familiar with Gibran's biography, removing the picturesque anecdotal material, or at least toning it down to a less idolizing tone. (This paragraph was added by 130.89.166.237)


 * Hmm. I just blew up the picture of the KG memorial in Washington, DC. Apparently the Americans recognise him as a poet and a philosopher. I'm temepted to reprise that entry. What do you think?
 * --Philopedia 22:54, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Thirty-six years before President Kennedy's 1961 Inaugural Address; Gibran, in his work The New Frontier (1925), had already prompted his brethren in the Middle East:

"Are you a politician asking what your country can do for you or a zealous one asking what you can do for your country? If you are the first, then you are a parasite; if the second, then you are an oasis in a desert."

The article states that JFK wrote his own speech (the ask not...) when in fact it was written by a Nebraskan named Ted Sorenson. Someone should fix that, but I'm having trouble with my login. (137.48.218.226 15:07, 6 February 2007 (UTC))

Ted Sorensen is a blatant ploagarist if he claimed to have penned that.

Parodies
I find the parodies section pretty lame, and I think it should be deleted. Objections? Sebastian 20:46, 2005 Mar 12 (UTC)


 * Yes. Khalil Gibran, like Longfellow's The Song of Hiawatha, is a fairly frequent target of parodies, deserved or not. He is to the twenties as New Age material is to our time: many take it very seriously, and some do not. Something or other should be said about this. Perhaps the UNIX fortune cookie entries are going too far, but the article should not be a puff piece. Dpbsmith (talk) 19:47, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Tom Sorenson used Gibran; therefore, so did John F. Kennedy

Kamila
Who is Kamila? The person's name is used, and that they are the bread-earner fo the family. Is this supposed to be the father, because the father's name was also Khalil in the article. Is that also a mistake?

IN REPLY... Kamila Rahmeh was Gibran's mother. His father's name was Khalil Gibran Saad Youssef Gibran. When the family emigrated to the US the father remained behind in Lebanon leaving Kamila to be the bread-earner.

Kamila had been married previously and from that marriage had produced one child - Peter (aka Butros) who was six years older than KG. From her second marriage she had 3 children, Kahlil was the oldest and he had 2 younger sisters named Mariana and Sultana.

Sultana died from tuberculosis at the age of 14 on 4th April 1902, Butros died of consumption on 12th March 1903 and Kamila died of cancer on 28th June 1903. Kahlil died on 10th April 1931 and was survived by Mariana. I'm not sure when she died or when his father died.

Yikes! Copyvio...
...or so it would appear.

Most of the text in this article is very close to an article on Khalil Gibran from the Cornell University Library. And has been since 24 June 2004 when 80.84.132.163 added it. Since then, minor edits have created small differences.

The Cornell Khalil Gibran article does not credit Wikipedia, so I don't think this is a case of them copying us. I don't see either a copyright notice or an indication that the material is under a free license either on the Khalil Gibran article or the Cornell Middle East and Islamic collections home page.

If it's really a copyvio, I find it a bit scary that it could have gone unnoticed for over a year.

I hope I'm wrong.

I've reverted the page to the last version that existed prior to the addition of the copied material. I don't have time now to do the work to recover and valuable material added since 24 June 2004.

Comments welcome. Dpbsmith (talk) 13:31, 30 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I've performed two edits on the page. The first tries to incorporate stuff that was added between the inclusion of the copyright data and the current state of the document.  This data is clearly non-copyright.  With the second edit, I've tried to add the information back from the source, but in a different format; I don't know if this is ok, so it isn't please remove the second edit. -- Jeff3000 17:35, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Pronunciation
I've strolled past this guy's books in the religion section of bookstores for some time and curiousity finally overtook me. I wish there was more here on why he seems so popular, when I've never heard of anybody reading him - though I have heard he is popular in the Near East before, as has been mentioned - as well as other authors occasionally referencing him. In any case, I'm not able to tell how much of the Lebanese-Arabic debate is politically motivated (i.e. nationalistic - though to be sure there are significant differences in cultural and genetic heritage [not to mention the Christians, Shi'a and Druze], I imagine many "Arab" countries have a similar situation (outside the Arabian peninsula), though to a lesser extent - the ol' Muslim vs. Arabic question. E.g. Persians, Pakistanis and Indonesians may be Muslim but they are certainly not Arab. In any case, someone objective, with expertise on the area would be appreciated here), and it reminds me of the Hindi-Urdu debate on the language front. Thus coming to the language front (finally), and not knowing anyone whom has read Gibran (who so far as it seems to me, appears like the pop-Hindu writers of recent times), I am not certain on if the 'jīm' ج here is a standard Arabic 'j' sound; or if it operates like the Egyption dialect and takes a 'g' sound. Anybody whose been around transliteration issues before will hopefully appreciate my consternation and add the IPA. Khiradtalk 09:13, 26 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm almost positive that it's pronounced /dʒ/, not /g/. I believe the Levantine dialects of Arabic use the standard ǧīm sound, unlike Egyptian.  This seems to be born out by the fact that the Bulgarian, Georgian, Italian, Kurdish, and Persian Wikipedia articles all use the /dʒ/-pronunciation as well.  The Hebrew article does seem to go for the /g/, although to be fair, I've poured over information on the Hebrew alphabet, and can't seem to find a way to actually write a /dʒ/, at least not one that's in use these days.  I can't make heads or tails of the Greek even after reading through a list of unintuitive letter combinations and permutations used for foreign sounds.  I still think the preponderance of evidence indicates the /dʒ/ pronunciation.  Go for it: /xæ'lil dʒɪ'bran/.
 * Keldan 08:56, 21 January 2006 (UTC)


 * As for his popularity, he's hardly heard of now, but he was very popular in the West in the late 60s/early 70s. His books were very popular then among university students in New Zealand, where I live, and as the books were in ready supply, there must have been a good market for them in the US and/or UK as well. Koro Neil 203.109.175.225 (talk) 15:34, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Khalil is pronounced more like halil with an almost silent letter h slipped in - ha(h)lil. The Gi in Gibran is pronounced as in the French pronunciation of the word gigolo (unlike the English pronunciation which is more like jigolo). If you want to hear the pronunciation then go to the Arab American Institute's Kahlil Gibran Spirit of Humanity Award Page (link here) and click the video link at the top of the page.


 * Here is a more stable link to a YouTube video of (what I presume is) a native Arabic speaker pronouncing the full name: Vital Voices: 2011 Kahlil Gibran Spirit of Humanity Awards Gala. Reuqr (talk) 18:14, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Let's make some order with the name issue. The original name according to the Arabic pronunciation is /xa'lil dʒʊ'braːn/ ("khah-lil joo-brahn" in an English-like spelling). The spelling "Khalil Jubran" would make more sense, however the spelling "Khalil Gibran" is the common one. Moreover, unlike what is mentioned above, the Hebrew version of the full name is ג'ובראן ח'ליל ג'ובראן ((/dʒu'braːn xa'lil dʒu'braːn/) according to the Arabic origin, as the apostrophe next to the letter ג changes the /g/ sound to /dʒ/. I think it’s better to include the proper pronunciation in IPA (/xa'lil dʒʊ'bran/) and to add a remark regarding the original Arabic full name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.8.2.226 (talk) 14:34, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Spelling
(EMM) I don't know the etiquette for editing articles like this one that actually might get attention ;), but I am confused about the spelling of Gibran's first name; I was redirected to "Khalil" from "Kahlil," but my English-language copies of The Prophet and Treasured Writings of Kahlil Gibran both spell it "Kah-". On the other hand, my French-language copy of Le Prophète spells it "Kha-".  Does the standard transliteration vary internationally? If so, how did Wikipedians decide on this spelling?  -- unsigned by 66.188.136.33


 * See the discussion in the wikiquote page -- Jeff3000 22:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Gibran's Assyrian ethnicity
the book Kahlil Gibran: His Life and World where it says that Gibran was Assyrian. which states that Khalil Gibran never stated that he was an Arab, and in his biography he is referred to as the "little Assyrian boy". The authors of the actual biography did not refer to him as an Assyrian. They quoted a person (his art teacher's friend) referring to him as a little Assyrian boy in a letter she wrote. 'And in the book, he is identified many times by the authors as Syrian not Assyrian.'' &mdash; We Assyrians are also known as Suryoyo. We have been called Syrians for over 2000 years. Before the modern Arab state of Syria, Syrian always meant Assyrian. &mdash; EliasAlucard|Talk 09:41 11 Oct, 2007 (UTC)
 * I hope this sheds some light. I'll try to keep the discussion in view and, after everyone has had a chance to air their views, I may adjust the article, if that still seems appropriate.
 * --Philopedia 00:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
 * It's funny how people still seem to think that Maronites are TOTALLY UNRELATED to us Assyrians. They are Syriacs as well just like us, and spoke the same language as we did before the Arabization. Also, Maronite is from their Church father, just like we were called Nestorians or Jacobites; it's not our ethnicity, it's a Church identity. Same goes for the Maronites. Maronite is just a Church identity. That's all. &mdash; EliasAlucard|Talk 07:33 12 Oct, 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi Elias! Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I think I'm starting to follow your line of reasoning. Being a Maronite or a Nestorian is indeed a religious designation. However, it is also very reliable (with inevitable, but insignificant exceptions) as ethnic markers. The reason is the very strong tendency to marry exclusively inside one's own community (often inside ones own family, ie first or second cousin). Besides that, from at least about 700 onward, the Assyrians and the Maronites were geographically separated.


 * Could it be that you are arguing for a connection between the two groups from before the time of the Islamic expansion? But at that time much of the middle east was Christian. So that could hardly qualify as a unique shared characteristic that would signify pressing frounds for supposing kinship. Theologically as well, Maronites, with their strong allegiance to Rome; and Nestorians, with their characteric belief in a dual nature for Christ are quite different outlooks. It is certainly true that both groups held on to their Christian faith against the background of Islamisation. But just because two groups make the same decision doesn't argue for supposing they are related.
 * --Philopedia 19:16, 13 October 2007 (UTC)


 * First off Aina.org is not a reliable source to quote; its racist and sepratist agenda is clear. And how does one define the assyrian "ethnicity"? is there an established common ancestry that link Gibran? Is there a common cultural heritage? Can you prove he has a common genetic marker or haplogroup? Is his ancestors history linked to that of "Assyruans", does he speak the same language or dialect? the answer to all these is NO. He was born in what was then known as Ottoman Syria, in the Lebanon mountain range, in a town called Bsharre, which now lies in modern Lebanon. He was raised in a family following the Maronite rite, a church that followers with different ethnic backgrounds. He spoke arabic the only SYRIAC thing in his life was the Syriac liturgy and rites which are used in Maronite masses and which are comparable to the latin passages in the churches of the west, does that make him an Assyrian, are all catholics descendants of Romans? This claim and the ASSYRIAN propaganda is preposterous. - Eli  +  11:13, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * If having ancestors who spoke Aramaic makes you Assyrian, then pretty much all people in the Levant and Mesopotamia are Assyrians, including Muslims. Yes, they may have more Arabic ancestry overall, but the Christian populations have absorbed Arab Christians from other areas too (Ghassanids, etc.). FunkMonk (talk) 17:50, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Notes on Khalil Gibran
In this section I will compile notes taken from Kahlil Gibran: His Life and Works, a biography written by his cousin's son of the same name. These notes can be incorporated into the article.


 * "In 1883 Lebanon, officially Mount Lebanon, was an autonomous province of Turkey. It was commonly known to Westerners as Syria, and Gibran himself sometimes referred to the Lebanese people as Syrians."


 * His mother was the "offspring of a priestly, and important family". And the Gibran clan was "small and undistinguished."


 * "The word of their name Jebr has been linked to the word algebra"


 * No one knows for sure where they came from... --Inahet 06:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Request for infobox
Could someone please put an infobox up for this person? Robert K S 22:13, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. Aristophanes68 (talk) 21:52, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

cause of death
The article claims Gibran's cause of death was "cirrhosis of the liver" and tuberculosis. That could use a cite. I've had a lot of exposure to Gibran and I've never seen that before. I've always heard the cause of death referred to as tuberculosis.


 * I found that at his official website biography they talk about him having cancer of liver and turning to heavy drinking to deal with the pain. Several in his family get TB but they don't mention him having it. This page talks about cirrhosis of the liver.

http://www.kahlil.org/bio.html -Crunchy Numbers 17:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Most widely sold book ever?
"The Prophet remains famous to this day as the most widely sold book in history (surpassed only by the bible), and having been translated into more than 20 languages."

This seems extraordinarily unlikely. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.135.96.182 (talk) 23:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC).

Indeed. Russell Ash's ongoing "Top 10 of Everything" series (Hamlyn) includes a best-guess estimate of the "Best Selling Books of All Time", and "The Prophet" doesn't even appear amongst the list. (#2 on Ash's list is "Quotations from Chairman Mao", the manifesto better known as "The Little Red Book".)

As the authors of "The Top 10" point out: "It is extremely difficult to establish precise sales of contemporary books and virtually impossible to do so with books published long ago....As a result, this Top 10 list offers no more than the "best guess"...and it may well be that there are many other books with a valid claim to a place on it." With specific regard to Mao's work, Ash points out that ownership was compulsory for every Chinese adult between 1966 and 1971, and many may have been distributed for free.

A claim that "The Prophet" is the second best-selling book of all time seems extremely dubious.Funkyphd 16:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Dubious? That is because at the time The Prophet was published, they don't have your "Top Ten of Everything" yet. They sell good books in good faith with good material. They don't sell solely to be acknowledged or to earn. Just like when Sonnets from the Portuguese was published and all books preceding it. --::semper fidelis:: 20:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)


 * A more reasonable claim is that it is one of the best-selling books in the USA during the 20th century, (as here) although I'm not sure how accurate that is. I've also seen him listed as one of the three best-selling poets of all time, behind Shakespeare and Laozi (as here). I'm sure some of these claims are exaggerated, and I'm sure some of them are based on old data--but I bet a lot of these claims are more limited than "of all time". I notice he's not found anywhere on Wiki's List of best-selling books, which are listed by claims and not by verifiable numbers. Aristophanes68 (talk) 22:04, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Miscellany and the spelling "Kahlil"
A few notes:

(1) The name was first misspelled Kahlil by one of KG's elementary school teachers. He was advised to keep the spelling which some found more esthetic.

(2) Of course Lebanese are Arabs. I'm not even going to look at the "Are Lebanese Arabs?" website. The question is ridiculous. They're an Arabic-speaking nation and their culture is an Arabic culture. That makes them Arabs.

(3) I'm tired of hearing that this or that book is the second-best-selling book of all time: Dante's Divine Comedy, Don Quixote, the Iliad, Wuthering Heights, Lady Chatterley's Lover, Atlas Shrugged, Quotations from Chairman Mao, and now The Prophet! Talk about silly. My guess would be the Qura'n, actually.

(4) I've looked at the statistics, and it's not true that the enormous popularity of The Prophet dates from the 1960's. It's been steadily popular since it was published. Indeed, I can say for sure that it was avidly read in the late 1950's, because I remember how many of my young friends were as hooked on it as I was.

(5) The article should make some mention the other bigtime Arabic poets and artists who were members of The Pen, like Mikhail Naimy and Ameen Rihani. Also, there should be more about KG's relationship with Mary Haskell--indeed, more about his life, period. The article stops telling us about his life when it gets past his youth. Also, let's hear a little about the artists and writers who influenced him greatly, such as Friedrich Nietzsche and Auguste Rodin and William Morris and William Blake and Henri Bergson.

(6) I know there are those who say KG's books The Prophet and Jesus The Son of Man were inspired by Abdul Baha', but there are other theories too about who inspired those books. This here Abdul Baha' theory doesn't have any written evidence--Gibran was a bigtime letter writer, and none of his letters mention Abdul Baha' as a model. The name of the Prophet, according to the first line of the book itself, is Almustafa, which is one of the titles of Muhammad; and Muhammad has been suggested as a source. As have others.

This article jumps to a good many conclusions and leaves out a lot of important stuff. Tom129.93.16.77 03:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Re: #5: I've included mentions of the Pen League and other Arab American writers. Is it enough? Aristophanes68 (talk) 21:25, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Mary Haskell
I attempted to add a few facts and clarifications of Kahlil Gibran's relationship with Mary Haskell, which can only be described as extraordinary. My source is the 1972 book "Beloved Prophet". (Sorry I goofed and made these changes anonymously as 66.63.88.90. Can't seem to merge.)

Particularly revealing was this paragraph from page 447 in the epilogue of Beloved Prophet, When Mary Haskell and biographer Barbara Young were going through Gibran's studio about a week after his death.

"'...Mary and Barbara Young had pulled out a large box. When it was opened, Mary recognized her letters to Gibran—the letters she had written when they first met, when he had gone to Paris to study, when he had left Boston for New York—those hundreds of letters spanning more than twenty years. When she realized what the letters represented, Barbara Young implored Mary to destroy them, and Mary agreed they should be burned.  Later however, she returned to the studio and removed all of them. After saying goodby to Naimy, she took the 10:20 train for Savannah.  Mary wrote Barbara Young that she could not agree to the destruction of the letters: she had always believed in Gibran, been certain of his greatness—her correspondence and their relationship were part of his history.  She placed these letters with his letters to her, all of which she had saved.  There they remained until they were given to the University of North Carolina.'" Bob Stein - VisiBone 16:29, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Gibran's father

 * The sources that i have claims that his father was imprisoned when he was 11-12 so that means it was at 1894-1895 accordding to the article his father was released at 1894 (odd...) moreover non of the sources i have mention the date of his father's release nor the fact that he chose to remain in lebannon... so does anyone has reliable source for these facts?

--Histolo2 20:30, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Spoof Kellogg
I saw a copy of a small book with this title, The Profit and by Kellogg Allbran. The illustrations were in the style of Gibran but satirising the art. It's attributed to Mad Magazine, but the book was authored by Barry Humphries the Australian satirist. As well, Kellog's Allbran is a breakfast cereal in Australia. I'll research it further and fix it if this is the case.Julia Rossi 23:24, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Parts of Kennedy speech possibly but not likely inspired by Gibran
I have just removed these lines form the article:


 * Gibran also inspired John F. Kennedy's often quoted sentence in the 1961 inaugural address with his 1925 article, "The New Frontier," which contained the epigrammatic : "Are you a politician asking what your country can do for you or a zealous one asking what you can do for your country? If you are the first, then you are a parasite; if the second, then you are an oasis in a desert."

The idea that the phrasing of JFK's Inaugural speech was inspired by lines from Gibran has appeared more and more prominently on the internet, and I just noticed that it has been placed here. Tracing a few facts a couple years ago at Wikiquote led me to reject that claim, and I am posting some dialogue between myself and anonymous IP that occurred on Wikiquote's JFK talk page in 2005 here:

'''"Ask not..." '''

When Kennedy said in his 1961 inaugural speech, "ask not what your country can do for you --ask what you can do for your country." He was quoting Lebanese-American writer Khalil Gibran. Khalil Gibran is the one who wrote this famous saying! How come Khalil Gibran never gets aknowledged for making this great saying?
 * —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.19.143.213 (talk • contribs)

Reply:

It has been reported at various places on the internet that in JFK's Inaugural address, the famous line "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country", was inspired by, or even a direct quotation of the famous and much esteemed writer and poet Khalil Gibran. Gibran in 1925 wrote in Arabic a line that has been translated as:


 * Are you a politician asking what your country can do for you or a zealous one asking what you can do for your country?
 * If you are the first, then you are a parasite; if the second, then you are an oasis in a desert.''

However, this translation of Gibran is one that occurred over a decade after Kennedy's 1961 speech, appearing in A Third Treasury of Kahlil Gibran (1975) edited by Andrew Dib Sherfan, and the translator most likely drew upon Kennedy's famous words in expressing Gibran's prior ideas. A translation by Anthony R. Ferris in The Voice of the Master (1958) exists that could conceivably have been used as an inspiration, but it is less strikingly similar:


 * Are you a politician who says to himself: "I will use my country for my own benefit"? If so, you are naught but a parasite living on the flesh of others. Or are you a devoted patriot, who whispers into the ear of his inner self: "I love to serve my country as a faithful servant." If so, you are an oasis in the desert, ready to quench the thirst of the wayfarer.

The title of Gibran's essay has been translated as The New Deal, or The New Frontier.

Other even earlier occurences of similar expressions or ideas are also known to exist, and have sometimes been cited as possible sources of inspiration:


 * It is now the moment when by common consent we pause to become conscious of our national life and to rejoice in it, to recall what our country has done for each of us, and to ask ourselves what we can do for our country in return. ~ Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Memorial Day speech in Keene, New Hampshire (30 May 1884)


 * As has often been said, the youth who loves his Alma Mater will always ask, not "What can she do for me?" but "What can I do for her?" ~ Lee Baron Russel Briggs, in "College Life", Routine and Ideals (1904)


 * In the great fulfillment we must have a citizenship less concerned about what the government can do for it, and more anxious about what it can do for the nation. ~ Warren G. Harding Speech at the Republican National Convention, Chicago, Illinois (7 June, 1916)

Occasionally it has also been stated that JFK was quoting, paraphrasing, or adapting a statement of the ancient Roman orator Cicero, but with no example provided, and research done for Wikiquote as yet indicates no clear sources or definite citations as to when or where Cicero made any such expressions. ~ Kalki 22:33, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Syriac writings?
From the article: "While most of Gibran's early writings were in Syriac and Arabic". Source? Are his Syriac writings published? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.114.242.20 (talk) 16:37, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Popularity
Pretty strong statement - "He is the third bestselling poet in history after Shakespeare and Lao Tse." Can we have other refs to confirm that from different sources? Hopefully not ones just repeating this source? Ingolfson (talk) 20:35, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The Broken Wings
The Broken Wings has also been published in English.

Transliteration
A doubt. The name خليل must be transliterated Khalil and never Kahlil. Why the page has almost always this form of Gibran's name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.19.247.212 (talk) 08:04, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe that issue is addressed here and here. Hope that helps. Aristophanes68 (talk) 21:50, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

It seems to me that the name is Kahlil Gibran, although I expect Wikipedia to note that he was *born* Khalil. Gibran is known as a writer, and predominantly as a writer in English, so the only spelling that really counts here is the name he used when signing contracts with publishers. Search on Gibran on Amazon and you'll find that in the first three pages (36 results) there are only four that use "Khalil", and most of the cover images shown are clear that he used "Kahlil" as his name for his professional endeavors. There is no need for transliteration, he was an American living at Boston where he used Roman characters.Vanhorn (talk) 08:17, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

"Pop culture" information
That section is not just plain rediculous and unnecessary, it is also simply disgusting. Does the mentioning of the likes of TV shows and similarily world-moving events of perennially noteworthy aesthetic quality so much appeal to the American mind that some folks feel always urged to add that unwanted rubbish, even if it means soiling the memotrry of a most poetic person, like in this case ? It is an indicator of the state of your "culture", apparently...

Disgusted, -- 147.142.186.54 (talk) 12:28, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

A Philosopher?
Why should Khalil Gibran be called a philosopher? Are there citations from the academic world to support this claim? My sense is that he is not taken seriously by the academic philosophical community, and therefore should not be called a philosopher in this article. Stevewunder (talk) 09:27, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

section on Political Thought could use some clarification
In light of the argument going on here about whether Gibran was Syrian or Lebanese, it would be useful if someone would expand on the comment about his support for Syrian nationalism and how it differed from Lebanese nationalism. Was he less interested in Lebanon than in Syria, or does he simply prefer the kind of nationalism practices by Syrians over those that were being practiced by Lebanese? Aristophanes68 (talk) 21:48, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

"Death of the Prophet"

 * I'm curious as to why this is listed here. AFAIK, "Death" was begun by Gibran, but completed by someone else who claimed to channel his spirit, Jason Leen. JuJube (talk) 18:12, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Mutasarrifiate vs wilayat
Hi George, I do insist on Mutasarrifiate for historical factual accuracy, It has nothing to do with politics but it does touch Lebanese Nationalism, Gibran being considered our national writer. Even though the state of Lebanon has emerged in the aftermath of WWI, Lebanese nationalism and secessionist ambitions are present since the 16 th century, but that's not the point is it?

Gibran was born in 1883, in Bsharri, in the Ottoman empire; all this is true. If he was born before 1860, i would've corroborated the fact that he was born in Ottoman Syria. But he was born 23 years after the creation of the Mutasarrifiate of Mount Lebanon which was independent in many ways of the wilayets of Ottoman Syria. So my edits are not "claims", they are more accurate and they highlight what has often been overlooked by the editors who are interested in some political doctrine saying that Lebanon is and will forever be a part of greater Syria. Eli +  06:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Why not just mention both Mount Lebanon and Ottoman Syria? It would hardly be incorrect. FunkMonk (talk) 06:57, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm willing to compromise, the way the article says both is ok by me Eli  +  07:01, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

لو لم يكن لبنان وطني لاخترتُ لبنان وطناً لي
Gibran said "If Lebanon was not my country I'd Chose it as my country", how could a Syrian Nationalist acknowledge the presence of LEBANON AS A COUNTRY.

There is clear bias in the article's Political thought section. Khalik Hawi can not be used as a reference since he'd say anything to advocate Syrian nationalist ideology. Since when can party ideology be used as an encyclopedic reference. The whole section is a mere POV and must be deleted. Eli +  10:31, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * quoting article : "he expresses his loyalty to Greater Syria and to the safeguarding of Syria's national territorial integrity. He also called for the adoption of Arabic as a national language of Syria and the application of Arabic at all school levels. When Gibran met `Abdu'l-Bahá in 1911-12, who traveled to the United States partly to promote peace, Gibran admired the teachings on peace but argued that Syrian lands should be freed from Ottoman control" That is one nice claim, problem is THERE IS NO SOURCE, yes im shouting sorry.

Rotten link http://www.kahlil.org/nationalidea.html This is so saddening, Politicizing and adding fabrications to articles of great people like Gibran is appalling and unthinkable. Eli +  10:45, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Eli +  I wanted to get back to you a long time ago, but I was very busy.  Eli  +  Gibran WAS a Syrian nationalist and we should respect his wishes and not deny that fact by inserting our bias political beliefs. When I have time I will find the proper sources, but I am telling you from my research over a number of years Gibran was devoted to keeping Syria as one country. I saw a PBS documentary about this a couple of months ago. And in the documentary they specifically state that Gibran wanted to go to the 1919 Paris Peace conference to advocate against the division on Syria into 3 countries by the English and French and in this show (History Detectives) they use a book that has a compilation of his letters as a source for Gibran's beliefs. And another thing, whenever Lebanon is mentioned before 1918 they are talking about "Mount Lebanon"; when the bible speaks about Lebanon they are talking about "Mount Lebanon"; thus when Gibran speaks of "Lebanon" he is indeed talking about "Mount Lebanon". Modern Lebanon as we know it today with its borders was created by the French. When I have time I will for that book that was sourced in the documentary. By the way  Eli  +  if you live in the US, you can see the documentary on the PBS site, but a couple of editors who live outside the US told me it doesn't work (this copyright business is annoying!!!, because I want you to see it for yourself)George Al-Shami (talk) 23:38, 30 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The source being cited, Hawi's Khalil Gibran: His Background, Character and Works, is being miscited, and doesn't support the statements attributed to it. Gibran's call wasn't for the unification of Greater Syria (a more modern concept of Syrian nationalism). It was a call for the independence of Syria from Ottoman Turkey. These are two very different forms of nationalism. To paint Gibran as the former when he is being described as the latter is misleading. The statements attributed to the book aren't in it, so I'll be removing them. ← George talk 22:08, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Khalil vs. Kahlil
I just fixed a link that was ruined when one editor decided to change all the spellings of his name to "Kahlil". Wikipedia editors that are fluent in Arabic know that his name is written as "Khalil", when translated into English, but the issue is that his name was written "Kahlil" in English, now this has to do with the fact that the publishers that first published his books made a mistake. I have one of his books and his name is indeed written as "Kahlil"; but how do we resolve this issue? We know for a fact that his name in Arabic when translated into English is "Khalil", for instance when you go to the offcial site of the NYC school named after him, you will see it's written as "Khalil" and not "Kahlil"; so how do we resolve this? because fans of GKG who don't know Arabic will continue to come to this site and change the spelling, because of the fact that they don't know Arabic. I suggest we keep a note in brackets that explain why the English spelling is wrong.George Al-Shami (talk) 23:19, 30 January 2010 (UTC)


 * We should use the English spelling Kahlil, per Wikipedia's naming conventions: "Names not originally in a Latin alphabet, such as Greek, Chinese or Russian names, must be transliterated. Established systematic transliterations, such as Hanyu Pinyin, are preferred. However if there is a common English-language form of the name, then use it, even if it is unsystematic (as with Tchaikovsky and Chiang Kai-shek)." In the example cited, the article on Tchaikovsky is located at Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky, even though that's not how one would transliterate his name in English. ← George talk 03:48, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * These examples seem not, to me, to be parallel. The spelling was simply affected by a common mistake, the transposition of Kha- to Kah-. It doesn't have anything to do with translation or transliteration rules in effect at the time, since it was already known that the kh is a distinct consonant sound (an English digraph representing the velar or pharyngeal fricatives or the velar plosive). It's a mistake that even a knowledgeable person might have made by mistyping (as teh for the). It wa a simple typing or typesetting error that got propagated. Whatever is decided, though, I'm changing the opening sentence "Khalil Gibran ... also known as Khalil Gibran", as it makes us all look like ignoramuses. rowley (talk) 23:09, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

The case of Location of Birth
Gibran Khalil Gibran was Born in 1883 in the town of Bsharre. Since 1861 the town of Bsharre was part of the Mount Lebanon Mutasarrifate. It is true that Lebanon was geographically considered part of greater Syria but the Mutasarrifate was an independent entity within the Ottoman Empire with a Mutasarif appointed directly from the Sultan and approved by European Nations. Greater Syria was a region that contained many provinces like the province of Damascus, Aleppo, Lebanon Mutasarrifate, and many others. So for an encyclopedic entry the place of birth should be mentioned as Lebanese Mutasarrifate since it accurately define the location of birth rather then the Region. Stating that Gibran is born in Greater Syria rather than the Lebanese Mutasarrifate is like saying that Napoleon in from Europe rather not France. Wikipedia is no place for Political beliefs or national pride it is an encyclopedia that should contain accurate FACTS


 * Correct only accurate facts should be placed in an encyclopedic entry and on that note we know the 1864 mustraffiye was NOT independent of the Ottoman governors. You are equating a continent with a region in the ottoman empire, that's puzzling. Asia is not listed as his birthplace. The European Union did not exist during Napoleon's time. Moreover to deny readers about reading about 1864 Mustrafiyye's place in ottoman Syria is an obvious violation of your belief in Wikipedia's neutrality. Well let's take a look at other precedents; I mentioned the George Washington article before. If you check that article, they have the name of the city, the name of the colony: colony of Virginia and the region: British America. How about we keep both links, it wouldn't be wrong.George Al-Shami (talk) 22:02, 11 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Stating Lebanese Mutasarrifate, Ottoman Syria is ok. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atmleb (talk • contribs) 00:32, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

It looks like some nutcase went to town on this article.
I don't even know where to begin trying to clean it up. Dr!ppy (talk) 08:40, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Copypasta undoubtedly with good nuggest of relevant info
Hi, this pasta was puked by an anon on the page. After its source is confirmed, some of it could be used on the article. If you want to make the page better, dig in! --Sigmundur (talk) 14:54, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

The individual is influenced by many elements in life that mold them and become customs identified to cultural norms. Many people do not have a complete understanding of their identity since their voluminous influences cannot be understood from within the culture. Lebanese society can elucidate a cultural identity. This small country changes people’s lives forcing them to speak, live and breathe Lebanese customs. This is nothing that an individual can change. Many times where a person is born (and raised) determines how they will be identified as an individual when they get older; Lebanese author, Kahlil Gibran was influenced by sundry elements in Lebanon throughout his life that prepared him to become the sophisticated person he was as an adult. This includes religion, history, education, and love. Although he resided in the United States for more than half of his life, Kahlil Gibran’s strong spiritual faith and powerfully religious language is firmly rooted in the Lebanese culture of his homeland, his birth, and his ethnicity. Gibran’s identity is based on the spiritual, physical and emotional challenges he suffered as a child and the proximity of Lebanon to opposing hostile religious forces present in nearby countries and territories. During the second half of his life, America certainly influenced the Arab-American author. Gibran also had a large impact on the Arab-American world, helping to articulate their status as a specific group with unique culture. Many other Lebanese people have battled through some of the same obstacles as Gibran; these difficulties are what ultimately formed the identity of the individuals. Kahlil Gibran was a Lebanese artist, poet, and writer born in the small town of Bsharri, Lebanon. He was born into a Maronite Catholic family and was visited regularly by priests as a child who taught him about his religion. Gibran made numerous contributions to the Arab literary world, but his works were not highly praised and valued until after his death. In the middle of his life, Gibran moved to Boston, Massachusetts where his artwork and literature was certainly admired and interpreted by Americans. Due to Lebanon’s divergent range of religions (Muslim, Shia, Sunni, Druze, Isma'ilite, Alawite or Nusayri, Christian, Maronite Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Melkite Catholic, Armenian Orthodox, Syrian Catholic, Armenian Catholic, Syrian Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Chaldean, Assyrian, Coptic, Protestant), the nation is faced with the constant threat of religious conflict. Lebanon has been greatly affected by its multi-religious society, mainly due to civil wars that broke out among conflicting religious groups (“Lebanon – Society”). Gibran said, “It has been a war not for freedom, but for more consciousness.” Gibran wished that everybody would recognize the religious tension and realize what it was doing to the country. He believed that through the war, citizens would realize that the nation should not be at conflict like this and people would protest the war. The religious tension also halted modernization and weakened loose the bonds of national loyalty (Wilson, 35). Even though there was much religious tension during the birth of Kahlil Gibran, he had strong ties to his faith (Maronite Catholic) and was mastered in the religion by a priest as a child. Being Maronite Catholic, Gibran studied The Bible. Much of his work has noticeable ties to his religion and to the Christian Bible. Along with a wide range of classical Arabic literature, Gibran studied more recent Arabic Christian writings, especially the Arabic translation of The Bible. Gibran was an expert in Christianity and this is why his works are so deeply rooted in the religion. Christianity teaches that Jesus supported people living in poverty. Gibran’s novel, The Prophet, preaches that good people do not tease the poor (Gibran, 66). Not only does the connection between religion and his writings occur here, but there also is a connection to his childhood. Gibran grew up poor. As he entered the literary arena, he wrote about the unfortunate financial times he battled as a child. Gibran’s books contain numerous religious themes rooted in strong ties that he maintained with his religion. These religious bonds were formed when he was a child. Throughout his novel, The Prophet, religious and spiritual references are highly noticeable and numerous. The religious references apparent in Gibran’s writings show that he was influenced immensely by his religion. With tension among the numerous religions, Lebanese society is divided into several sects that are recognizable by geographic lines. Christianity and Islam are the backbone of Lebanese society, but the various religions are given importance in their own customs and standards. Even though Christianity and Islam are the most popular, each religion has its own differences that make it stand out from the group. In Gibran’s eyes, the underlying unity beneath various religions overruled all their differences ("Gibran Khalil Gibran.", P.1). He believed that religious conflict was not necessary because underneath the inherent differences of beliefs and faiths, every person is essentially equal. One of Gibran’s goals was to show the simple similarities and unity between Christianity and Islam. Gibran knew the effects that conflict between these two different religions could cause and attempted to bring out the basic similarities to show that everybody is equal beneath their dissimilar veneers. He dreamed of building an edifice with a church’s dome and a mosque’s minaret. Not only would the two religions be spiritually tied, but the connection between the two religions would be physically displayed by this edifice. This dream was mainly influenced by his religion--oddly enough. Christianity promotes equality between all individuals. Gibran interpreted this and thought that people should all be treated equally no matter what religion they chose to be. In Lebanon, religion often determines social power and political identity ("Religion in Lebanon - Religious Life.",P.2). Although Gibran was raised in a family with little money, his strong religious ties influenced him to become the person that he was. His strong religious faith is visible in his life through strong religious ideas in his writings. The religious conflicts that his country underwent forced Gibran to rely on his faith to get him through the hard times in the country when many other people did not know what to do. This started him to pondering religion and he considered it from a greater perspective. This is how he acquired his idea that the unity beneath dissimilar religions overruled all their superficial differences. Gibran’s interest in the unity between all religions changed his own mysticism. Gibran united his beliefs into a convergence of several influences; Christianity, Islam, Sufism, Hinduism, and theosophy. Gibran was not attracted to organized religion and he would not argue this fact (Young, 39). The variety of religions in Lebanon influenced him to be inspired by the sheer multitude of religions. Gibran once said, “Religion? What is it? I know only life. Life means the field, the vineyard and the loom…The Church is within you. You yourself are your priest.” By this he meant that everybody creates their own version of a religion; they believe what they truly want to believe. Although he is still officially Christian many religions have influenced him due to the religious variety and conflict that was occurring in Lebanon. Lebanon has always been viewed by other countries as a highly pious nation. A Middle Eastern priest, Father Samer Nassif, once said “Everyone in the Middle East is looking to Lebanon. Ours is the only free and flourishing Christian community in their midst. If we can’t hold our place in the Middle East, which Christians can?” (Catholic News Agency). He also said that Christianity in Lebanon remained strong despite widespread immigration. Lebanon has strong ties to their Christian religion; people from other nations would even agree that in contrast, Lebanon is a the strongest religious nation. Christianity has a strong influence on Lebanese culture and the people that live in the country. People in the nation have come to be identified by their religion, since Lebanon is highly regarded and considered by its religious characteristics. Kahlil Gibran’s most popular English novel, The Prophet, shows the great influence that the Christian religion, along with his physical surroundings had on Gibran and his writings. One of the most important themes apparent throughout the book was God. The book coincides with the Christian Bible. Gibran states that the heart of God is love and that God knows each person individually and must be known by each individual. The Bible states that “whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love” (John 4:8). Gibran was undoubtedly influenced by his faith. A line from The Prophet reads: “Daily life is your temple and religion- whenever you enter take your all” (Gibran, 78). The book is based on a man (Almustafa) speaking of his ideas about issues that people of a city (Orphalese) are greatly concerned with. Towards the end of the book, a foretelling statement is made: “And an old priest said, Speak to us of Religion. And he said: Have I spoken this day of aught else?” (Gibran, 77). These words alone summarize that the entire book is fundamentally connected to religion. It is obvious that Lebanon’s strong ties to religion influenced Gibran to write his faith and convictions into his book. Gibran also grew up in a part of Lebanon that was geographically green and rich in plants, creating symbols that would be employed in his literature. In The Prophet, Gibran talks about his love of the earth and encourages the reader to have a love for the earth; “…the earth yields her fruit, and you shall not want if you but know how to fill your hands.” (Gibran, 37). Gibran absolutely loved nature and this was because of the region he grew up in. “He loved the actual soil and everything that grew from it…he cherished a collection of small stones” (Young 24). He is a man of nature, rocks, clouds, trees, streams and waterfalls. That is why these natural attributes are consistently emphasized in his artwork. After writing the book, Gibran described it by saying, “While I was writing The Prophet, The Prophet was writing me.” This strongly suggests that Gibran himself was influenced by the ideas that he expressed in his book. Not only was he simply writing his ideas in the book for others, he was learning more about himself as an individual and growing as a person. The book has made a huge impact on individuals in the United States, helping individuals better understand the Christian religion and its views on spiritual topics. In this manner, Gibran influenced the course of Christianity in the United States. Gibran changes the viewpoints by which Americans looked at Christianity. However, Gibran’s ideas were merely based on his interpretation of Christianity. The book was not strictly written on the Christian religion, it was focused on how Gibran thought that Christianity should function. He referred to the book as a part of himself for the fundamental reason that it was strictly based on his philosophies. Kahlil Gibran, along with being a successful author, was also a popular artist. Through Gibran’s artwork, traces to his homeland are clearly noticeable along with traces of American influence. In his work, Gibran displays the poetical and imaginative makeup of the Lebanese People. As a critic of his work, it is easy to see that Gibran was mentally tied to his natural ethnicity. Since he grew up with, and had been surrounded by Arabs his entire life, it is only logical that he would incorporate Arab culture and allegory into his artwork. His creations are composed of moral beauty and symbolic influences (Waterfield, 145). While looking at his work, it is clear that the man was devoted to his Christian religion along with a sense of what looks pleasant. In one of his drawings, named “Mary, the Mother of Jesus” Gibran draws an eloquent picture of a popular religious figure. The picture is like one that would be viewed in a Church. It is obvious that Gibran’s artwork had been influenced by his Christian religion. Much of his artwork seems to show portrait heads of notable people along with their individual qualities. During Gibran’s early years in the United States, a fire destroyed some of his works. Instead of being devastated about this Gibran expressed his feelings in a different way; “The fire that burned my early paintings was a gift from God. They said it was good work, but I know now that it was green work. While I was in Paris it seemed that the mist that hung between me and Me had gone to nothingness.” Gibran said this because he noticed a trend in his artwork. His artwork was starting to not show a connection to his spiritual self. Many artists may be simply concerned with making money off of their talent, but Gibran was tremendously swayed by the idea of God being a necessity in his artwork. Gibran is factual about his artwork; he paints of the real world. “It is a world, in part, of no illusions and delusions, no sophistries, evasions; a naked world, tenanted with nakedness…” (Young, 71). Many artists may try to hide the realities of the real world and make everything look pretty. But for Gibran, he depicts the world without exaggeration or alteration. His artwork is a snapshot of what he sees through his eyes. He wants the viewer to feel exactly how he feels when he looks at the work; a feature Gibran found central to successful artwork. The qualities of the East and West are also blended into his work with a happiness of expression. Gibran expresses what he feels in his artwork, and many of the ideas that he talks about in his literature have a piece of artwork to coexist with them and help tell the story through the eyes of Kahlil Gibran. There is no doubt that both his literature and his religion were the two biggest influences on his artwork. A nation’s history can be a great indicator of an individual’s social identity. Kahlil Gibran’s words were greatly impacted by the history of Lebanon. In Lebanese society, political conflict is a reoccurring problem. Until 1943 (13 years after Gibran’s death), Lebanon was not a country in its own right and it had been a part of many empires. In 1920, the state of “Greater Lebanon” was proudly announced. Many Lebanese citizens were affected because Lebanon was not a free country. Historically, Lebanon had been commandeered by several, various, outside forces. Starting with the first inhabitants of Lebanon, the Phoenicians, the country was then taken over and occupied by the Assyrians, the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Arabs, the Crusaders, the Ottoman Turks and most recently the French. All of these groups are what Lebanese culture evolved from; the culture borrowed ideas from all of these groups and that is what came to form Lebanese culture. If Lebanon was under its own rule, the people could have more power and they could make their own culture; instead of being a colonial figure, where they must adhere to rules of another land. Gibran wished, dreamed, and hoped that one day the government would not be under Syrian rule. He wanted Lebanon independent from colonial rule. These ideas, most likely, were influenced by religion. The Bible states that rights are unalienable because they are given by God. This explains why Gibran wished to be free of colonial rule; he did not want a foreign nation to have control of his homeland’s politics. Gibran expressed great hope for national independence and progress, and when the Ottomans were drawn out of Syria his exhilaration was expressed in a sketch titled “free Syria” ("The Biograpgy of Kahlil Gibran - life story”). Gibran wished his nation to become independent because Lebanon was undergoing an economic crisis and independence would grant the nation the ability to solve those severe problems.  A quote by Mohandas Gandhi perfectly explains Gibran’s philosophy: “…people…would think themselves happier even under bad government than they might be under government of a foreign power.”  What both Gandhi and Gibran were trying to get across was that people want their country to be self-controlled; freeing Lebanon would raise people’s esteems.  Gibran’s literature is a reflection of both culture and society in Lebanon.  He wrote about what he saw in Lebanon.   Most of the time, he included his philosophy of a situation; especially if he disagreed with a situation occurring in Lebanon. These representations of Lebanon were not always recent; sometimes the political history of his country would be divulged. His home country had a deep and ancient past in which Gibran was certainly very interested. One of the main economic problems that affected Gibran, along with other Lebanese people, was the wide gap between the rich and the poor. Even though he was starting to become wealthy, famous, and admired, he still had ties to his underprivileged economic counterparts in Lebanon. He understood what the poor social class in his country was suffering through and took a stand in their defense. The deprived manner in which he grew up as a child mainly motivated him to become sensitive and understanding of the poverty-filled lower class that is highly visible in Lebanon. Lebanon had one of the last surviving feudal systems. This was primarily because each village had to govern itself, making it difficult for each person to be on the same socio-economic plane. This made living in Lebanon difficult and confusing to many. Poor people were forced into overwhelmingly hateful conditions. Freeing Lebanon from colonial rule could greatly help this problem because it would give the government a chance to unite. Even after the feudal system was finally removed, traces still remained. Throughout his life, Gibran retained the conviction that Christ had come for the poor and oppressed, not to institute a vast, worldly organization like the Church. Although he studied The Bible immensely, his beliefs were not visible in the book. He did not believe that Christianity was supposed to result in the Church. It is obvious why his early work was condemned by the people of Lebanon. The ideas were foreign to many Lebanese people and although many may have secretly supported the ideas, they could not publicly support them or they were at threat of getting excommunicated from the Church. Gibran was eventually excommunicated from the Church for his personal beliefs in the purpose of Christ. As Gibran’s life and writings progressed, he gained more experience and became more understanding and sympathetic of individuals in crisis. Unlike others who would simply be relieved that they were no longer in a dreadful situation, Gibran strived to make his country a more peaceful place. Gibran focused on events that occurred in his life, but were apparent in many other people’s lives in many different parts of the world. Perhaps he formed Ar-Rabitah Al-Qalamyiah for this reason. Ar-Rabitah Al-Qalamyiah is an Arab-American cultural society that was formed by Kahlil Gibran in 1911; the organization writes in both Arabic and English and served as a literary bridge between the East and West. It established meeting points between Arab and American ideologies and contexts. Kahlil Gibran wanted to unite his homeland with America because he thought that it could benefit the people of Lebanon to communicate and learn from another country. He was greatly involved in promoting religion and peace, so through this group he sought to help these two nations communicate with each other in regards to their ideas and thoughts (Young, 62). Gibran’s ideas were influenced by the history of his nation and the history of his own life; it can be seen through both his literature and his accomplishments. The history of his nation influenced him to conclude that people must come together and communicate so that they can prevent problems that may occur. Although Gibran never attended formal schooling as a child, education still had a great influence on the texts he produced. Lebanon is a relatively well-educated country. Holding one of the highest literacy rates in the Arab world, it is natural to conclude that a majority of Gibran’s audience was intelligent and knew what he trying to express. Since Gibran could get his words to people with an in-depth focus of thought, his ideas had a nearly direct influence on the Lebanese people. In Lebanon, Christians (on average) maintained literacy rates twice that of Muslims. Consequently, Christians were a majority of his literary audience. This has a major impact on his ideas portrayed in his literature. While catering to a Christian audience, he still explained his ideas of an accepting society where religion would have no barrier on human rights. Unfortunately, that was not the case in Lebanon and religion did have a bearing on the way people treated each other. Even though Gibran would never live to see the day where civil war would end in his homeland, he made obvious symbols throughout his whole career in attempt to change people’s ideas about the war. Along with the peace that the war destroyed, it also took away Lebanon’s high educational standards. Many times, the State was unable to conduct official exams because of intense fighting that was going on. Civil war was a problem around the time that Gibran was writing to try and halt the fighting. The fact that the civil war destroyed educational standards was a huge disadvantage to Gibran and the ideas he put out. Many of his ideas were unheard of until many years after his death. While the Lebanese Civil War destroyed the educational system, many did not know what to do and some even fled the country in hope to find a more stable home. In Lebanon, girls are turned away from schooling. Gibran, being the man that he was stood up for this. He was completely against inequality and believed that girls should not be deprived of rights that men were granted. Some of his activities involving women’s education actually had breakthroughs that came to benefit the girls. Kahlil Gibran recognized the issues that eventually went on to shape his literary career. He also believed that people should go out and learn things by themselves. Similar to a method of trial and error is how the young author became to be such a well-known bestseller. Gibran writes in one of his best-selling novels “teachers only guide you” (Gibran). This was an interesting point that Gibran made in his book and it only makes since that he would make a point like this. Both the education in the Kahlil Gibran’s life and the education in Lebanon formed him to write such powerfully strong masterpieces. While some went uneducated, much of the Christian upper class could read and understand his literature. This encouraged Gibran to write primarily about topics that would appeal to his audience. In effect, he wrote mainly about the Christian religion making Christianity a major influence of his works. After living in the United States for a period of time, Gibran decided to go back to Lebanon to attend college; he wanted to rediscover his Arabic roots. Gibran chose to say little about this time period in his life and usually only spoke about external matters and the outward experiences that shaped him. There is no doubt that Gibran was happy to immerse himself in the Arabic language and literature (Waterfeild, 54). Like many Arabic people, he was proud of his language and wanted people in the Arab world to still understand his writings--and he still wanted to have an influence on them. Gibran said, “I threw away a fortune, so to speak, in college. I was among the richest youths, not only of Syria but of Egypt and Northern Africa and India – and I spent like them, or sometimes better.” By this, Gibran means that he could have been making money while he was in college because he was a talented young man (of all around) and he went to college anyways. This shows that the Arab world and an Arab education greatly influenced Gibran in a way that he was so emotionally tied to it that he came back for more. Not only do the religious aspects of Lebanon have a great impact on the identity of the people who live there, but, the fact that the nation is part of the Arab world also gives its people traits that separate them from others. People of Lebanon are known for a great sense of music and literature. They take interest in theaters, films, and various literary works. Many Lebanese people are interested in reading about what authors have to say. Because Gibran’s work was influenced by the Arab world, his words captured the interest of many Arabs. One big theme that influenced Gibran’s writing was Arabism. Arabism is the belief that all Arabs share a cultural identity and should unite politically. The belief of Arabism influenced culture in Lebanon by introducing an idea where despite people’s religious views; people become more culturally united. This idea of Arabism was noticeable in Gibran’s work and it tied in with his ideas of religious unity. Gibran clearly wanted to united the people of his country; he showed great nationalism for his country through his words. Kahlil Gibran also had an influence on modern Arabic literature. Through his stories of Lebanese religion and Arabic literature, Gibran had a major impact on the people of his country. Arabic soldiers praise Gibran for introducing Western romanticism and a freer style to Arabic poetry – “Gibranism.” Gibranism includes mystical vision, metical beauty, and a fresh approach to the “problems” of life. Gibran always seemed to touch on problems in life, many times proposing solutions to what people could do if they are ever caught in a problem. Gibran wrote like this because as he grew up he reading literature that assisted him in his successes; he wanted to provide the same literary help, to others, that he received himself. His influence on Arab literature helped Gibran better understand what the Arabic speaking people are interested in. In effect, while in the United States; the U.S. had an influence on Gibran and at the same time, Gibran had an influence on many Arab-Americans. Many Lebanese moved to the United States in search of a brighter future. Kahlil Gibran settled in Boston, Massachusetts at the age of 12 to escape poverty. Gibran always took interest and delight in the life and significance of the city in which he chose to make his home. He loved learning about new cities and their customs; he loved learning in general. There are four underlying reasons why he moved: The men’s college at “Aintura was reopened, American missions decided to move their Mediterranean printing press, Eli Smith opened a girl’s school in Beirut and the Syrian ruler initiated a wide program of education for boys  He moved in with his uncle in a Syrian neighborhood. Gibran was impressed by the great technological achievements of America, but viewed America from the vantage-point of his own culture and recognized that the picture was incomplete. He thought that America was a mechanical beast because it was flourishing with factories and businesses at the time. However, his true opinion regarding America was unsolidified because he went vacillated in his opinion numerous times. At one point he called it the best place on earth and another time he said, “This mechanical and commercial country whose skies are replete with clamor and noise” is less than ideal. Gibran’s geographical ties to his Lebanese culture were understood through his hatred of America’s mechanical society. Gibran was influenced by the geography of his flourishing green homeland. Despite his ambivalent opinion of the United States, Gibran became a man of the west and benefited from freedom, democracy and equality of opened doors as this would be possible for him in no other country. Gibran was certainly influenced by America’s literary world; the English romantic poet William Blake helped shape his artistic and literary career. In George Nicolas El-Hage’s book studying the relationship between Kahlil Gibran and William Blake, he writes about how much of Blake’s philosophy was apparent in Gibran’s writings. The three major similarities between the two authors were their nature of prophecy, their scope of the prophetic common grounds and their realizations of the prophetic vision. While Gibran read Blake’s works, he discovered that he already had a similar vision (Waterfield, 150). Gibran’s understanding of Blake forced him to become more aware of the prophetic vision. Henri Beaufort declared that Gibran was “the William Blake of the Twentieth Century”. Blake’s influence on Gibran shaped his literary career in the United States; Gibran wrote with prophetic vision. An example of Gibran writing with predictive vision is seen in The Prophet predicting the end of large cities; Gibran writes, “In their fear your forefathers have gathered you too near together. And that fear shall endure a little longer, A little longer shall your city walls separate your hearth from your fields.” It is easy to conclude from where Gibran derived this writing; Gibran was addressing the United States. He clearly did not like the large cities that were developing in America. Gibran was getting much attention at the time with his new title as “Romantic Eastern prodigy.” Wanting to escape from his role, he left Boston to leave the popularity that was surrounding his name (Waterfeild, 139). This was mainly because Gibran did not consider himself a romantic author of the East. Although he was a romantic writer and there was no denying that, Gibran did not like being in the spotlight. Throughout Gibran’s work, we see the tremendous influence of Nietzche. Fredrick Nietzche was a philosopher who wrote critical texts on morals and religion. This was the same literary genre that Gibran was pursuing at the time. Gibran wrote many texts that people could relate to through their religions. In these texts people could cultivate a better understanding for their religion, in the same way that Gibran nurtured a better understanding of his religion through Nietzche. Gibran was also attracted to John Keats’ rich imagery and emotional appeal in his poetry. Many American writers helped shape Gibran’s literary career. These authors also helped Gibran develop a greater understanding of English Literature. Since Gibran entered from Lebanon not knowing much about the English language, he did not know how to cater to English readers. Although Gibran was in the United States, he was still proposing his ideas that originated for him in his birthplace. This is what influenced many Americans. Gibran’s legacy of “unity in diversity” was also known in the English-speaking world. Like his beliefs back in Lebanon of the underlying unity between all religions, Gibran expressed themes of unity in America. Gibran struggled to resolve cultural and human conflict through this highly specialized writing. His nation of Lebanon brought the idea of unity to him and he preached the idea until his death. Gibran also had an interesting approach to solving human conflict. In his book, The New Frontier, Gibran writes “Are you a politician asking what your country can do for you or a zealous one asking what you can do for your country?” Gibran wanted everybody to serve their country in a way that would benefit the country. The quote may even sound familiar from when United States President John F. Kennedy said, “Ask not what your country can do for you-ask what you can do for your country.” It is not a coincidence that both Gibran and Kennedy had this idea; Kennedy reinforced Gibran’s idea and used it in his 1960 Presidential Inaugural Address. Along with his influence on much of the general American population, Gibran had a great influence over future generations of Arab-Americans. Gibran’s strong words gave contemporary writers a style of writing that they could be identified by. He once said, “If I die, I shall not go far from this good green Earth, not for a long, long time.”  This is true because his spirit lives on through words and ideas of many contemporary writers. His ideas are still identifiable; many Arab-American experiences are articulated by honoring diversity. This is what Gibran did; he honored diversity and sought to unite groups of different people. Barbara Young proposes an interesting question in her study of Kahlil Gibran. Young writes, “Mr. Gibran was born within a mile of the famous Cedars of Lebanon. He is emerging into citizenship of the whole new world. Is it Kahlil Gibran, the individual, who is thus emerging? Or is it the voice and genius of the Arabic people?” (Young, 81). Young touches on an interesting point. There is no other name that has come to America from the Arabic world to occupy such an extraordinary artistic place. Young further asks, “Is Gibran representing the whole Arab world’s thoughts, or just his own thought’s as an individual?”  The answer to this question is that Kahlil Gibran is representing the Arabic worlds thought’s for this reason:  Kahlil Gibran was influenced by the Arab world his whole life, he knew of nothing else but the Arab world. Upon arriving in America, he brought all the questions and theories that he originally acquired in the Arab world to the United States. The ideas were offered in a way that an Arabic person would portray their thoughts. Therefore, Gibran’s considerations and contemplations were those of the Arab world. Every person is influenced by love at some point in their life. Gibran had a unique view on love that was formed by his friendly attitude towards women and, obviously, his homeland of Lebanon. “Love is the center of life whether we like it or not,” says Andrew Sherfan in his study of Kahlil Gibran (Sherfan, 11). Love is probably one of the biggest factors that shaped Kahlil Gibran as a writer since it was underlying in his life the whole time, no matter what. Gibran’s early thought of love is more commonly a means of self-realization. Many events in Gibran’s life are for self-realization, as he seems to believe that it is the best way forward. Gibran has a lot to say on the topic of love and had a lot of experiences with love in his lifetime. Individual’s views on the topic of love are mainly formed by the experiences they encounter in their lifetime. Everything that Gibran wrote on love was clearly a product of his experiences. Gibran finds nothing more beautiful in life than being with one’s beloved (Sherfan, 54). This is seen in his own life with his wife Selma. Gibran talks about the joyous days when he met his love and contrasts them with the nights of sorrow when he was not with her. In one of his books he writes, “Nothing was more beautiful than those days of love, and nothing was more bitter than those horrible nights of sorrow” (Ibid, 32). Through this, Gibran recognized that women were influential to him. He has a friendly attitude towards women, and this was because women helped him physically and psychologically. Many women helped him along the course of his literary career. During his schooling, Gibran met Mary Haskell; he formed a friendship that would last the rest of his life with her. Haskell influenced both his personal life and his career. She introduced him to Charlotte Teller, a journalist and Emilie Michel, a French teacher who posed for him as a model. All of these women had critical influences on his career and they helped Gibran develop a deeper understanding of women and love. Although Gibran’s experiences with love seemed to all influence him positively as a person, he does have some failed experiences with love. While in Boston, he fell into the hands of a woman who led him astray. In his late teens while visiting his village, he fell in love with a girl and her parents refused a marriage request because they believed that they were of a better social class. What defined Kahlil Gibran from the rest of the numerous Lebanese writers in the world was the great influence America played in his literary and artistic development. He brought about a whole new writing group of people to America and gave them a foundation for a career. Barbara Young writes about Lebanese-American citizens highly in her book saying, “It is my privilege to know many of the most distinguished of our Lebanese-American citizens, and to realize the depth and height of the love and pride they cherish for this poet [Kahlil Gibran] who was their countryman.” (Young, 31). This excerpt in itself shows the great impact that Gibran left on the Lebanese writers of America. Two great examples of authors that he influenced are Palestinian-American author Naomi Shihab Nye and Lebanese writer Etel Adnan. The most memorable movement that Nye completed was managing to convey Arab culture and policies to an audience in the United States. This is something that helped form an entirely new source and understanding of Arab culture and identification. Arabs now have literary origins that, instead of being instituted in the Middle East, were founded in America. What Nye did as a result of Gibran was remarkable. Etel Adnan came from Lebanon to the United States in the 1950s and like Gibran, she identifies herself as a universal citizen--an outgrowth of Gibran’s philosophy. It is not a surprise that Gibran has influenced another author so immensely through his strong words; he is as well-known as Shakespeare to many Lebanese. Many of Gibran’s ideas of love came from his experiences in the field. But, some of his philosophies evolved from the marriage rules of Lebanon. In Lebanon, there are numerous requirements that two people getting married must fulfill. These prerequisites are mainly based on the religious differences that are seen through the nation. Lebanon does not allow civil marriage. On account of this, marriage must take place in the presence of either Christian or Muslim authorities. Marriage between Christians and Muslims is strongly discouraged. However, if a mixed faith couple marries in another country, their marriage will be recognized as valid in Lebanon. Gibran obviously adhered to this rule of same religion marriage. Regarding marriage, Gibran writes, “Ay, you shall be together even in the silent memory of God.” (The Prophet, 15). He is suggesting that marriage should be based on religion. Though his nation and religion influenced his beliefs and ideas, Gibran still understood that love should be joyous. Gibran believes when lovers embrace, they do not embrace each other, but rather what is between them. He writes; “Love is a burning flame, self-consuming and self-nourishing.” Gibran believes that love is not about the two individuals; love is something that stands separate and is special in that manner. Love is, however, different for every individual that experiences it; ascribing to Gibran’s philosophy of love provides only basic guidelines for individuals to follow. Although Gibran was experienced with love and had his own failed and successful attempts; like others, love was foreign and he had to experiment with it too. It is absurd to state that love has shaped every Lebanese citizen equally because it truly has not. But, it is a fact that love has shaped most Lebanese citizens. Whether it was significantly or not depends on the person and their own identity that they construct as they develop socially and emotionally. Kahlil Gibran was affected greatly by love. Every Lebanese person and every person in the world (for that matter) has one thing that significantly effects their identity and is distinct to their identity.

Kahlil Gibran learned significantly about himself as he journeyed through life. Throughout his life, he attempted to do his best at recording as much as he could on a diverse number of topics. That is who Gibran was as a person and this is how his identity developed. For many Lebanese, personal identity is based on the voluminous topics Gibran illustrated. This is why he deliberated so carefully in his writings and artwork. These topics were relevant to the people around him and he knew that he could get a response from the people if he poured out his beliefs in print. Many were influenced by him, making their identities a convergence of Gibran’s ideas (which were essentially Lebanese ideas) and their own beliefs with origins firmly rooted and developed in Lebanese Culture. It is important for individuals to have an understanding of identity forms that can help develop a better understanding for their character. Gibran demonstrated to both American and Arab audiences that strong spiritual faith and powerfully religious language leads to social, political, and spiritual amalgamation, change, and improvement. Gibran was a trailblazer in his desire to show major similarities among Christians and Muslims. As an author and individual, he lived in two distinctly different worlds at once: Arab and American. Gibran accepted and flourished in his adopted country of America. At the same time, he incorporated and used all of his freedoms and insights to promote his true passions that resided in Arab-speaking countries. When studying Gibran’s life, it is easy to see that he was influenced significantly by religion, the history of Lebanon, and love. Often, these same factors contribute to forming the identity of other Lebanese individuals. Although a majority of Lebanese did not have the chance to express their feelings through literature and artwork as Kahlil Gibran did, many of their ideas are portrayed in his works. This proves that where one grows up has the principal influences on what their philosophies will be on weighty matters and how they will be identified. Kahlil Gibran’s work, collectively, went on to become symbolic of the cultural identity of Lebanon and Lebanese individuals. His work is not the only entity that serves as a reflection of Lebanese society, though. Lebanon is truly identified by what its people want it to be identified by. Lebanon is whatever its people claim as theirs. And the people have spoken. They say claim Kahlil Gibran. Likewise, Kahlil Gibran claims them.

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: page moved as the common name and the subject's usage. As nom noted below, we do not use birth names as article names (unless they happen to otherwise be the correct title for the page as well). -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:41, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Khalil Gibran → Kahlil Gibran – This spelling is vastly more common and was used by the subject himself. —  AjaxSmack  04:03, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

This has been discussed before here and here. See this comparison of spellings in books from Google for reference. Wikipedia typically does not override "incorrect" spellings per WP:OR. Cf. Youssef Chahine and Elias Khoury. Finally, note the man's own signature. —  AjaxSmack  04:03, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.


 * Oppose. Google Ngrams disagrees with this: [] []. Zarcadia (talk) 19:12, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No it doesn't. You need to count the zeroes.  "Kahlil Gibran" is .000007% for 2000, i.e. only 5 zeroes after the decimal. "Khalil Gibran" is .0000009% for 2000 with 6 zeroes after the decimals.  If you click through to the Google Books links, you get returns of 145,000 for "Kahlil Gibran" and only 11,600 for "Khalil Gibran"  Overall, "Kahlil Gibran" is around ten times more common.  —  AjaxSmack   20:56, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Support, thanks to AjaxSmack for pointing out my short-sightedness! Google Ngrams actually fully support this claim. (btw I don't how to put a cross through my previous comments, I'm happy for someone to do that to illustrate this point) Zarcadia (talk) 21:16, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose On the grounds that the subject himself was born with the name Gibran Khalil Gibran and it is common knowledge that school administrators in Boston either made a mistake and printed his name as Kahlil Gibran or compelled him to change the spelling of his name; I would argue that this is not original research. Once the mistake happened it is obvious that Gibran went along with it, because in the Arabic publications of his book he never objected to employment of this name "Gibran Khalil Gibran". I understand the discussion is about the spelling of Khalil. I have found this source that backs the view that a spelling mistake of his name was made, http://quotationsbook.com/quotes/author/2822/; however I will look for better sources if time permits. It is also factually known that many immigrants from around the world were told/asked to change the spelling of their name by US immigration officials at the turn of the 20th century.George Al-Shami (talk) 19:29, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * "The subject himself was born with the name Gibran Khalil Gibran". I doubt it.  He was probably born جبران خليل جبران. Anyway, it's largely irrelevant what his birth name was per WP:COMMONNAME (We use Bill Clinton, not William Jefferson Blythe; Gerald Ford, not Leslie Lynch King; O. Henry, not William Sydney Porter).



Discussion

 * Any additional comments:
 * 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.

I have an observation and that is whenever a Jew spell "kha" he always spell "Kah"; it is not because of religion but common spelling among their teaching; Like they always if not corrected write "Khan" as "kahn"; so the translator or the publisher must be having influance of that common name among the "Kahn" so for "kha" he spelled "kah"; donot comapre with number of zero as it reflects the influence of particular culture one isborn and passed his childhood, teenage and till the age when certain things/teachings/name spelling seats so strong in mind that the mistake is enevitable and not attentional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.98.128.174 (talk) 04:38, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

May Ziade
No mention, but her article makes a lot of their relationship. Spicemix (talk) 21:51, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Kahlil vs. Nietzsche
I don't expect these insight from English speaking philosophers, but Kahlil basically copied Nietzsche's writing style but again introduced many of the religious components that Nietzsche was mocking about! Therefore Kahlil is certainly one step backwards, again creating religious pictures and so called "insights" that are in fact just religious blahblah. And that's exactly what New Age is all about. --178.197.236.64 (talk) 12:41, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

emigrate v. immigrate
An editor has just reverted "immigrate to the USA" on the grounds that "immigrate" refers not to the country the person moved to, but the country where the person using the word lives: "immigrate HERE". I've never heard that interpretation, but there's been a lot of reverting going on, and we should clear it up. Aristophanes 68  (talk)  15:20, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


 * The sentence says "as a young man he blank with his family to the United States; clearly the sentence is talking about the "arrival", to the US, therefore the correct verb is "immigrate". I concur with the latest edit. Here's an explanation from the web, I hope this helps, Immigrate means to settle in a country where one isn't a native. Emigrate stresses leaving; immigrate stresses arriving. For example, from the point of view of the British, you emigrate when you leave England to settle in Canada. From the point of view of the Canadians, you have immigrated to Canada and are considered an immigrant. Emigrate describes the move relative to the place of departure. Immigrate describes it relative to the place of arrival.. Emigrate, would have been correct, had the sentence stressed Gibran leaving Lebanon, but it doesn't; the sentence stresses the arrival to the US, and in that case the correct verb is 'immigrate'.George Al-Shami (talk) 04:06, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Nationality
The article states that the subject never became an American citizen, and yet he is described as Lebanese-American. Why does the article not respect his decision not to become an American? 178.135.53.2 (talk) 15:39, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

God is dead ?
Khalil Gibran was clearly so influenced by Nietzsche which manifests in many of his writings, in one quote of him after the death of his mother and sister he said something like, God was a sick old man I always tried to heal but after killing my sister and my mother he is now dead, should this be added in his religious views section ? if yes I'll search for the exact quote. Oussama atmani (talk) 01:01, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

I was also surprised to find nothing about Nietzsche. However, in most of Gibran's writings God is very much alive, and I think the particular quote you are thinking of would be rather misleading. I do wonder where it comes from though? A good analysis of Nietzsche's influence on Gibran is found in: https://www.academia.edu/2177756/De_invloed_van_Friedrich_Nietzsche_op_de_werken_van_Kahlil_Gibran 84.193.65.47 (talk) 19:50, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 25 June 2016
Khalil Gibran → Kahlil Gibran – In light of some edit warring to this person's name, I discussed with 70.127.252.226 about the evidence and support for "Khalil Gibran" rather than "Kahlil Gibran" (see Khalil Gibran). According to the IP, All his primary biographers, including Jean Gibran's newly revised biography due any moment also uses KAHLIL. The autobiography is ISBN 978-1566562492. I do get a miniscule amount more search hits for "Kahlil Gibran". I thought an RM would be courteous. Note that the interwiki links are torn between "Khalil" and "Kahlil". Relevant archived discussions: Ping User:AjaxSmack who made the previous request. — Andy W.  ( talk  · ctb) 19:23, 25 June 2016 (UTC) Actually Jubran and Gibran are both accurate. In Arabic, the pronunciation of g is J or G. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KerolosIbrahem (talk • contribs) 13:08, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Talk:Khalil Gibran/Archive 1
 * Talk:Khalil Gibran/Archive 1
 * It's ridiculous to have to repeat the same move request year after year. The onus should be on editors who want Khalil Gibran as the title to present a case through the WP:RM process here.  I have moved it back myself.  —  AjaxSmack   23:11, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Why does the infobox say Jubran instead of Gibran (besides the obvious problem of transliterating Arabic letters to Latin). Shouldn't the infobox agree with the lead? Aristophanes 68   (talk)  02:03, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Please change Kahlil to Khalil. The name is خليل in Arabic. A relatively common name. The first letter خ is often transcribed as Kh. The rest is simple: alil. With long i. So it's Khalil. The h is not a separate letter here, it is part of Kh. To put the h somewhere else is just silly. If such spelling occured somewhere, it's clearly a typo and was only repeated due to lack of knowledge of the original spelling. Anyone, just anyone speaking Arabic will tell you this. To put is as the main, or even acceptable, transcription brings shame to wiki. Of course, as it was used, you should say "sometimes erroneously transcribed as Kahlil"... I see the point if he was officially registered as Kahlil, but I don't think one should repeat mistakes even if they were in official papers Heresson (talk) 20:41, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Gibran and Fairouz
I am surprised that this article makes no mention of the poems by Gibran popularised throughout the Arab world as a result of being sung by the Lebanese singer Fairuz, most famously Aatini nnaya wa ghanni "Give me the flute and sing". This Yahoo answer gives details of Gibran's poems used by Fairuz:. I think the article would benefit from a mention, if anyone has references. Kanjuzi (talk) 06:03, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyright
What happened to the text connected to copyright? It seems to have vanished from the main article as well as history pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.97.14.55 (talk) 06:11, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 26 September 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: page moved. I am discarding the two oppose !votes as showing no understanding of the issues, and assessing strong consensus to move. Andrewa (talk) 17:51, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Khalil Gibran → Kahlil Gibran – There are still more results to be found for "Kahlil Gibran" than "Khalil Gibran" on Google. "Khalil Gibran" is not even a transcription of the name he used when publishing in Arabic because he used his full birth name (جبران خليل جبران, i.e. Gibran Khalil Gibran) as can be seen here (pages 5 and 6). So why discard the naming conventions of Wikipedia articles? Of course "Kahlil" is considered a faulty transcription by today's standards but so is "Avicenna" (for Ibn Sina)! The faultiness and alternative transcription are already explained and presented in the first note. Is it still sufficient reason to discard the conventions? – 92.184.98.85 (talk) 22:54, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Relevant archived and more recent discussions:
 * Talk:Khalil Gibran/Archive 1
 * Talk:Khalil Gibran/Archive 1
 * Talk:Khalil Gibran — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.184.104.204 (talk) 09:27, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

I suggest the following first paragraph to go with the renaming (also adding the English pronunciation of "Kahlil" given by the Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary):


 * Kahlil Gibran (born Gibran Khalil Gibran; جبران خليل جبران,, , or Jibrān Khalīl Jibrān, ; January 6, 1883 – April 10, 1931) was a Lebanese-American writer, poet and visual artist, also considered a philosopher although he himself rejected this title in his lifetime. He is best known as the author of The Prophet, which was first published in the United States in 1923 and is one of the best-selling books of all time, having been translated into dozens of languages.

Survey

 * Support. Look at his signature in the infobox. In addition to the sources found above by the nom, even the article's subject spelled his signed name "Kahlil..." Should be no contest here.  P. I. Ellsworth , ed.  put'r there 14:07, 27 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Support per nom and per procedural reasons. Note that this article was moved unilaterally to its current title without discussion only a couple of months ago from a stable title ("Kahlil").  That move was controversial and should have been discussed; the onus here should be on proponents of the "Khalil" spelling.  —  AjaxSmack  15:00, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Support — looked at some sources and per his signature. Futebul (talk) 17:51, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose Khalil is the correct English transliteration of his name, moreover the article had both spellings throughout the article. Other editors had changed the spelling to Khalil throughout the article. I also note that the nominating editor is lobbying editors that agree with him (here), he never contacted me for my vote. George Al-Shami (talk) 05:28, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Canvassing is a serious charge. I'd like to see more evidence than just three contributions on an IP's page. All three of those targeted editors have contributed before on this talk page, but this is your first edit to this page. How would the IP know to contact you? Also, where is your evidence that "Khalil" is the correct transliteration? Seems the subject of the article disagrees with that based on his own signature.  P. I. Ellsworth , ed.  put'r there 08:26, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I provided the evidence, the link; you wrote I'd like to see more evidence than just three contributions on an IP's page, seriously? The evidence is there and you reduced it to just three contributions? I have been editing this article for years. As for evidence that "Khalil" is the correct, here's our own Wiki article: . Here's another one that has the Arabic spelling and proper English transliteration . George Al-Shami (talk) 03:08, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. The article was moved without discussion in the first place, and moved incorrectly. The subject is best known by the unusual transliteration, so WP:COMMONNAME applies; the fact that the Gibran used this spelling is also relevant. All usages in the article should also be changed to the usage preferred by the subject. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106; &#x1D110;&#x1d107; 20:29, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose Reverting back to Kahlil is perpetuating a clerical trasnliteration mistake made a century ago. Gibran used Kahlil as a pen name for obvious reasons. Also his full name is Gibran Khalil Gibran ; if it were up to me I'd move it there. ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 08:00, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
 * What are the obvious reasons? --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106; &#x1D110;&#x1d107; 02:00, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * the clerical errors and the resulting name confusion. How would you identify yourself Mr. Gordon if your name was misspelled in official documents... Local registry here for example mis-entered my birth date as September 3 while I was born in August 25. As a result i am obliged to go by my registration date. ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 10:45, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * A widely accepted error is still and error, note that during three passages through Ellis Islad, he was registered as: (1)Jubran Rahmé in 1895 (2)Gibran K.Gibran which is the closest anglicization of his native name in 1902 and in the third stupid clerical error (3) he was registered as Kahlel Gebian in 1910. Furthermore, another stupidity was added to the above list in 1915 as he was listed in the then telephone directory as Gibran Kibel and his country of origin was confused when he was mentioned in a 1914 newspaper article as being Armenian. A typo in the 1930 almanac sealed the deal where he was listed as Gibran Kahlil G. Conclusion: an Error is still and error a century later, please dont perpetuate it. ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 10:45, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:COMMONNAME is how we resolve these on Wikipedia. He chose to continue using the unusual transliteration to identify himself. Why do you want to override his choice? --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106; &#x1D110;&#x1d107; 13:42, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Target history
00:39, 12 July 2019‎ George Al-Shami talk contribs block‎  44 bytes +44‎  George Al-Shami moved page Kahlil Gibran to Khalil Gibran over redirect: Per consensus reached by recent edits and note that explains that a mistake at school prompted the spelling of the subject's name "Kahlil" to be transliterated incorrectly from the Arabic name "خليل". The proper common English transliteration of خليل is spelled "Khalil". This will of course be overwritten by the move. Andrewa (talk) 17:41, 5 October 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it.</b> 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.

Citation & reference improvements
I see that there are a number of improvements that others or I can make to the citations & references.

For books & other publications:
 * Remove URLs that do not actually link to an online version of a book, specifically Google book links without a preview. I find these to be misleading, frustrating, & useless.
 * Add missing parameters to book citations: specifically, I have have & will add authors, the ISBN, the OCLC #s for linking to Worldcat, location, publisher, URLs when they link to an online version of the publication, & whatever else seems to be missing or needs clarifying
 * Adding external links for page numbers when available
 * Adding page needed when a shortened footnote references a book but does not provide a page #.

I also intend to convert the remaining footnotes to shortened footnotes. That is already the prevailing variation here, so we might as well make it consistent.

Peaceray (talk) 21:08, 14 November 2020 (UTC)


 * ✅ Peaceray (talk) 00:25, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Gibran's excommunication from the Maronite Church
I wanted to start a discussion about Gibran's relationship with the Maronite Church. The page as it stands now acknowledges that Gibran's books were burned publicly in Lebanon and that he was threatened with excommunication, but in reality, from what I can gather, he actually *was* excommunicated and had it quietly lifted after he became one of the most famous authors in Lebanon. The excommunication was acknowledged both by Gibran and his contemporaries, for instance: https://www.kahlilgibran.com/68-gibran-on-his-excommunication.html

The excommunication certainly affected Gibran and he espoused largely anti-clerical views for the majority of his life, hell, even Johnny Cash talks about Gibran's disregard for priests https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlmuTLSPoJU

In my opinion, the page as it currently stands largely sanitizes Gibran and the Church's interactions. I think it would make for a more complete article to at least acknowledge the serious rift between Gibran and the Maronite Church in the Religious Views section. Gibran is celebrated as an anti-authoritarian, anti-establishment figure, and his books often center around wanderers and outcasts. Surely an event in his own life that made *him* an alien in his own community is one that deserves some acknowledgement. Cabinet latch (talk) 20:13, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Khalil or Kahlil
May i open an open debate on the name of Khalil Gibran. Thank you. PeaceWins (talk) 03:24, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * No need to respond as a) issue has been debated and settled numerous times before and b) user has been blocked from editing. <b style="color: magenta;">Aristophanes</b><b style="color: teal;">68</b> <i style="color: teal;">(talk)</i> 15:57, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Please see Kahlil Gibran. Gibran used Kahlil for his English publications & Khalil (خليل) for his Arabic publications. As this is an English Wikipedia article, we follow Gibran's own spelling of his given name in English that he used for most of his life. Peaceray (talk) 16:19, 8 August 2021 (UTC)