Rumi Quote Provenance Persian Originals, Exact Translation, Paraphrase, False Attribution, and the Need for a Verified Rumi Index

This article argues that the next serious stage of Rumi reception requires quote provenance rather than another anthology of attractive sayings. Modern English-language Rumi culture often moves across four unstable layers: Persian original, scholarly translation, adaptive paraphrase, and internet misattribution. Those layers are frequently collapsed into a single label, “Rumi,” even when the wording has passed through Nicholson, Arberry, Barks, Moyne, later devotional editors, social-media quote cards, or no identifiable Persian source at all. This article builds a source-controlled framework for separating exact Persian citation, literal translation, scholarly translation, popular version, paraphrase, unattributed adaptation, and false attribution. It treats Coleman Barks as a major American reception figure, not as a Persian philologist, and places his success within broader translation, market, and spiritual-reception history. The article then proposes a Verified Rumi Index: a searchable digital-humanities reference structure linking English wording to Persian editions, manuscript-aware critical corpora, translator lineage, genre, source status, confidence grade, and public-circulation notes. The purpose is not to police affection for Rumi. It is to protect Rumi from becoming a floating brand detached from Persian language, Islamic mystical context, textual history, and scholarly accountability.