به
نام خداوند
جان و خرد
کزین
اندیشه برتر
برنگذرد
A Study about the Persian Cultural Legacy and Background of the
Sufi Mystics Shams Tabrizi and Jalal al-Din Rumi
By Rahgozari Minutalab
October 2009, Open Source. The author is not associated with any modification
of the current article but any author is free to use the materials within this
article.
Note PDF version is recommended here:
http://www.azargoshnasp.net/Pasokhbehanirani/PersianPoetRumi.pdf
|
منگر به هر
گدایی که تو
خاص از
آن مایی |
مفروش خویش
ارزان که تو
بس گران
بهایی |
|
|
به عصا شکاف
دریا که تو
موسی زمانی |
بدران قبای
مه را که ز نور مصطفایی |
|
|
بشکن سبوی
خوبان که تو یوسف جمالی |
چو مسیح دم
روان کن که تو نیز
از آن هوایی |
|
|
به صف اندرآی
تنها که سفندیار
وقتی |
در خیبر است
برکن که علی مرتضایی |
|
|
بستان ز دیو
خاتم که تویی
به جان سلیمان |
بشکن سپاه
اختر که تو
آفتاب رایی |
|
|
چو خلیل رو
در آتش که تو خالصی
و دلخوش |
چو خضر خور
آب حیوان که
تو جوهر
بقایی |
|
|
بسکل ز بیاصولان
مشنو فریب غولان |
که تو از شریف
اصلی که تو از بلند
جایی |
|
|
تو به روح بیزوالی
ز درونه باجمالی |
تو از آن
ذوالجلالی
تو ز پرتو
خدایی |
|
|
تو هنوز
ناپدیدی ز
جمال خود چه
دیدی |
سحری چو
آفتابی ز
درون خود برآیی |
|
|
تو چنین
نهان دریغی
که مهی به
زیر میغی |
بدران تو میغ
تن را که مهی و خوش
لقایی |
|
|
چو تو لعل
کان ندارد چو
تو جان
جهان ندارد |
که جهان
کاهش است این
و تو جان جان
فزایی |
|
|
تو چو تیغ
ذوالفقاری
تن تو غلاف
چوبین |
اگر این
غلاف بشکست
تو شکسته دل
چرایی |
|
|
تو چو باز پای
بسته تن تو چو کنده
بر پا |
تو به چنگ خویش
باید که گره ز
پا گشایی |
|
|
چه خوش است
زر خالص چو به آتش
اندرآید |
چو کند درون
آتش هنر و گهرنمایی |
|
|
مگریز ای
برادر تو ز شعلههای
آذر |
ز برای
امتحان را چه
شود اگر درآیی |
|
|
به خدا تو را
نسوزد رخ تو
چو زر
فروزد |
که خلیل
زادهای تو ز
قدیم آشنایی |
|
|
تو ز خاک سر
برآور که
درخت سربلندی |
تو بپر به
قاف قربت که شریفتر
همایی |
|
|
ز غلاف خود
برون آ که تو تیغ آبداری |
ز کمین کان
برون آ که تو
نقد بس روایی |
|
|
شکری
شکرفشان کن
که تو قند نوشقندی |
بنواز نای
دولت که عظیم
خوش نوایی (دیوان
شمس) |
TABLE OF CONTENT
Introduction
and reason for this article
Some
distortions due to nationalistic reasons
Shams
Tabrizi and his background
Tabriz
in the pre-Mongol and Ilkhanid era
The
Tabrizi Iranian language as a special case
Example of
Shams Tabrizi speaking the North West Iranic dialect of Tabriz
On
the importance of Safinaye Tabriz
On
the name of Tabriz and its districts
Shams
Tabrizi of Ismaili origin? Conclusion
Hesam
al-Din Chelebi and other Rumi companions
Baha
al-Din Walad and Rumi’s parents.
On
Vakhsh and Balkh and the languages of these areas
Contribution to Persian culture and Baha
al-Din Walad’s native language.
Conclusion on Baha al-Din Walad
The
Persian lectures, letters and sermons of Rumi and his everyday language
Response
to an invalid arguments with regards to the Diwan
Invalid Argument: “Rumi was a Turk because he has some
verses in Turkish”
Invalid Argument:
Rumi uses some Turkish words in his poetry
Invalid argument: Rumi has traces of Central Asia
Turkish in his poetry
Invalid argument: Rumi’s usage of the word Turk shows
he was a Turk
Persian
poetry images and symbols: Turk, Hindu, Rum, Zang/Habash
Which
Turks are described in Persian Poetry?
Views
on ethnicity in the Mathnawi
Sultan
Walad’s admits he does not know Turkish and Greek well
Sultan
Valad’s view on the Turks
The
Origin of Sama and a response to a false claim
On Rumi’s
cultural predecessor and The Mawlawiya’s Spiritual lineage
Appendix
A: Nick Nicholas: Greek Verses of Rumi & Sultan Walad
" If the Turk, the Roman, and the Arab are in love,
They all know the same language, the beautiful tune of Rabab "
Recently, UNESCO in the year 2007 declared the Persian poet Rumi as one of the world’s universal cultural icon. The Afghanistani, Iranian, Turkish governments all laid claim to Rumi’s heritage and tried to maximize their association with the Persian poet Rumi. Obviously such an association brings about a national prestige despite the fact that Rumi is a universal figure. Also recently, especially with the demise of the USSR, there has been an increase in pan-Turkist nationalist activism in various Altaic-phone regions and a many Persian cultural figures like Avicenna, Biruni, Nasir al-Din Tusi, Eyn al-Qodat Hamadani, Bayazid Bistami, Suhrawardi, Nizami Ganjavi and etc. have been falsely claimed to be Turkic without any serious argument. Many of these like Biruni and Nezami lived in an era when the area they were born in was Iranian. Due to penetration and incursions of Turkic nomads, eventually some of these Iranian speaking regions like Khwarizmia, Arran and Sherwan, Sogdiana, Marv and etc. became Turkified in speech the same as the Greek and Armenian languages gaveaway to Turkic speakers in Anatolia, and Egypt gave away to Arabic. At the time of the mentioned figures, which are claimed today for nationalistic reasons by some of the new countries, all of these men were of Iranian ancestry but more importantly, they all contributed to Iranian culture and have important Persian works. Some of these extravagant claims are impossible (like Eyn ol-Qodat Hamadani, Suhrawardi, Bistami who was of Zoroastrian descent and Nasir al-Din Tusi) that there is no need to respond to them.
On the other hand, figures like Nizami Ganjavi and Biruni were born in areas that are today Turkified or Turcophone. This was not the case during the time of these authors, but many people who study these figures do not have correct information and background on the chronology of the linguistic Turkification in Central Asia, Caucasus and Azerbaijan region of Iran.
For example, during the time of Biruni, the area of Khwarizm spoke the Iranian Chorasmian language.
I refer to the short but very significant contribution of the late French Orientalist to the al-Biruni Commemoration Volume published in India(L. Massignon, "Al-Biruni et la valuer internationale de la science arabe" in Al-Biruni Commemoration Volume, (Calcutta, 1951). pp 217-219.):
In a celebrated preface to the book of Drugs, Biruni states:
'' And if it is true that in all nations one likes to adorn oneself by using the language to which one has remained loyal, having become accustomed to using it with friends and companions according to need, I must judge for myself that in my native Chorasmian, science has as much as chance of becoming perpetuated as a camel has of facing Ka’aba. “
Indeed al-Biruni has recorded months and other names in the Iranian Chorasmian, Soghdian and Dari-Persian languages and he states equivalently:
و أما أهل خوارزم، و إن کانوا غصنا ً من دوحة الفُرس
Translation: And the people of Khwarizm, they are a branch of the
Persian tree
(Abu Rahyan Biruni, "Athar al-Baqqiya 'an al-Qurun al-Xaliyyah"(Vestiges of the past : the chronology of ancient nations), Tehran, Miras-e-Maktub, 2001)
The late eminent philologist Professor David Mackenzie on
the old Iranian Chorasmian Language(Encyclopedia Iranica, "The Chorasmian
Language", D.N.Mackenzie) states:
“The earliest examples have been left by the great Chorasmian scholar Abu Rayhan Biruni. In his works on chronology and astronomy (ca. 390-418/1000-28) he recorded such calendrical and astronomical terms as some of the traditional names of days, months, feasts, and signs of the zodiac.”
While showing perfect knowledge of the native Chorasmian calendar, as well as other Iranian calendars (Persian, Sogdian) and also Hebrew, Arabic, Greek calendars, Biruni is clear for example that he does not other calendars(like those of the Turks) as well:
"As to the months of other nations, Hindus, Chinese, Tibetians, Turks, Khazars, Ethiopians and Zangids, we do not intend, although we have managed to learn the names of some of them, to mention them here, postponing it till a time when we shall know them all, as it does not agree with the method which we have followed hitherto, to connect that which is doubtful and unknown with that which is certain and known "(Athar)
Biruni collected the months and calendars of many nations, which are recorded in his book.
On the order of the old-Turkic (old Uighur, which he calls
toquz-oghuz) month names, which are just ordinals (readily recognizable in any
variety) jumbled, he adds a note that:
“I have not been able to learn how long these months are, nor what they mean, nor of what kind they are”(Athar, pg 83).
However, a modern Western scholar whom we rather not name did not know about the East Chorasmian Iranian language and just based on modern geography, has mistaken Biruni’s Iranian Chorasmian language for Turkic. She did not for example read about this Iranian language in the Encyclopedia of Islam, Encyclopedia Iranica, Iranian language sources or other linguistic sources. That is sometimes negligence of the history of the region produces mistakes and this is due to the fact that many scholars of literature do not have a grasp of the history of the region (Middle East, Caucasus and Central Asia) during the medieval era. So that mentioned Western author for example mistakenly thought that the Chorasmian Iranian language at the time of Biruni must be the same as the language spoken in Chorasmia (in modern Uzbekistan/Turkmenistan) today.
Another example is Avicenna. For example, Avicenna whose father was a native of Balkh (the same place where Rumi’s father was possibly born) and his mother was from Bukhara (her name was Sitareh which is Persian for star and even today the majority of inhabitants of Bukhara are Iranian Persians(Tajiks)).
Avicenna in the book
of “The Healing: (Ash-Shifa) in Chapter 5 (Concerning the caliph and Imam:
the necessity of obeying them.
Remarks on politics, transactions and morals) states:
“…As for the enemies of those who oppose his laws, the legislator must decree waging war against them and destroying them, after calling on them to accept the truth. Their property and women must be declared free for the spoil. For when such property and women are not administered according to the constitution of the virtuous city, they will not bring about the good for which the property and women are sought. Rather, these would contribute to corruption and evil. Since some men have to serve others, such people must be forced to serve the people of the just city. The same applies to people not very capable of acquiring virtue. For these are slaves by nature as, for example, the Turks and Zinjis and in general those who do not grow up in noble climes where the condition for the most part are such that nations of good temperament, innate intelligence and sound minds thrive”(Chris Brown, Terry Nardin, Nicholas J. Rengger, “International Relations in Political Thought: Texts from the Ancient Greeks to the First World War”, Published by Cambridge University Press, 2002, pg 156-157).
Let us look at the original Arabic of this sentence as well:
و انه لابد من ناس یخدمون الناس، فیجب ان یك.ن هؤلا یجبرون علی خدمه اهل المدینه الفاضله، و كذلك من كان من الناس بعیداً عن تلقی الفاضیله فهم عبید‘’ بالطبع، نثل الترك والزنح، و بالجمله الذین نشأوا فی غیر اقالیم الشریفه التی اكثر احوالها ان ینشأفیها حسنه الامزجه صحیحه القرایح و العقول
In another phrase, Ibn Sina states: “In the languages we
know…” and then he brings an example of Persian and Arabic. Had he known any other languages, then he
would have given examples as well. Thus
he did not even speak Turkish and all his works are in Persian and Arabic.
The statement of Avicenna with this regard is given here from his book Ishaarat (Dehkhoda dictionary):
لكن اللغات التى نعرفها قد خلت فى عاداتها عن استعمال النفى على هذه الصورة.... فیقولون بالعربیة لاشىء من ح ب... و كذلك ما یقال فى فصیح لغةالفرس هیچ ح ب نیست
As per Nizami Ganjavi, there exists a detailed article on
how USSR nation building and modern ethno-nationalism have forged the most
baseless arguments (even false verses) in order to deprive of his Iranian
heritage:
Doostzadeh, Ali.
“Politicization of the background of Nizami Ganjavi: Attempted de-Iranization
of a historical Iranian figure by the USSR", June 2008 (Updated
2009).
http://sites.google.com/site/rakhshesh/articles-related-to-iranian-history
(see PDF file)
http://www.archive.org/details/PoliticizationOfTheBackgroundOfNizamiGanjaviAttemptedDe-iranizationOf
Sufficient to say, his mother was Iranic Kurdish(Iranic speaking), he was raised by a Kurdish uncle and his father-line goes back before the coming of the Seljuqs and is of Iranian Anyhow, there is no doubt that culturally, mythological relics, poetry (he considered himself a successor of Ferdowsi) he was Iranian and his stories are rooted in Iranic/Persian folklore. An important manuscript that shows the Iranian culture of the Caucasus before its Turkification in language has come down to us by the Persian poet Jamal Khalil Shirvani:
Mohammad Amin Riyahi. “Nozhat al-Majales” in Encyclopedia Iranica
This article attempts to address the background of Rumi as well as the fact that people have tried to deprive him of his Iranian heritage. Note when we say Iranian, we mean it in the ethno-cultural-linguistic sense rather than citizenship of modern Iran. Thus this term covers the totality of Iranian speaking civilizations and those that have been greatly affected by it enough to be absorbed and melted in to it.
We start by quoting a Turkish scholar with this regard.
Even according to the Turkish scholar Talat. S. Halman:
“Baha ad-din (Rumi’s Father) and his family eventually settled in Konya, ancient Iconium, in central Anatolia. They brought with them their traditional Persian cultural and linguistic background and found in Konya a firmly entrenched penchant for Persian culture. In terms of Rumi’s cultural orientation – including language, literary heritage, mythology, philosophy, and Sufi legacy –the Iranians have indeed a strongly justifiable claim. All of these are more than sufficient to characterize Rumi as a prominent figure of Persian cultural history”(Rapture and Revolution, page 266).
Although Professor Talat S. Halman does not delve into ethnic genealogy of Rumi, he remarks:
“The available documentary evidence is so flimsy that no nation(Iranian/Persian, Arabic, Turkish) can invoke jus sanguinis regarding the Rumi genealogy” and he also mentions: “Rumi is patently Persian on the basis of jus et norma loquendi”.
Thus there is no dispute about Rumi’s culture, literary heritage. And even his native language as mentioned was Persian. However some people try to point to genealogy and we shall look at this issue in this article. The problem with that approach is that the genealogies of many people are not known in the 13th century. And if it is known, up to what ancestor is this genealogy known? We will explore the genealogy issue in this article as well, but if genealogy was a concern, than majority of Anatolian Turks are not of Turkic genealogy but resemble Greeks, Armenians, Kurds and other natives of Anatolia. DNA evidence thus far has established:
“Another important replacement occurred in
Turkey at the end of the eleventh century, when Turks began attacking the
Byzantine Empire. They finally conquered
Constantinople (modern Istanbul) in 1453.
The replacement of Greek with Turkish was especially significant because
this language belongs to a different family—Altaic. Again the genetic effects of invasion were
modest in Turkey. Their armies had few
soldiers and even if they sometimes traveled with their families, the invading
populations would be small relative to the subject populations that had along civilization and history of economic
development. After many generations
of protection by the Roman Empire, however, the old settles had become
complacent and lost their ability to resist the dangerous invaders”(Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza , in “Genes, People and
Languages”, 2000, pg 152).
So when speaks about the 13th century, one is clearly speaking about culture and native language. If a person’s native language is Persian and their father’s native language is Persian, then that is sufficient to say they were genealogically Iranian. The genealogy of Rumi is not really known well beyond his great grandfather (Ahmad Khatibi) , although some later sources had claimed it went back to the Caliph Abu Bakr. This point is discussed later on this article and we show that this is not accepted by modern scholars.
This study is concerned with the cultural identity and ethnic background of Jalal al-Din Rumi. Although there is no disagreement among serious Rumi scholars about his Persian cultural identity, there have been some groups within nationalist pan-Turkist circles trying to downplay his Persian cultural identity, language and ethnicity. Their politicized theory rests on three or four invalid and false arguments which we shall respond to in detail in this article:
A) Rumi wrote Persian because it was more
poetic or common.
B) Rumi was genealogically Turkish
C) Rumi has a few scattered
Mual’ammas in Turkish and uses archaic Central Asian Turkish words so he was
Turkish
D) Sama’ was Turkish phenomenon
Thus there have been some people from Turkey or Turkic language background who advocate a Turkic genealogy for Rumi. We will show there is no proof of this and all indicators is that Rumi had an Iranic(Persian or other Iranian language group) background. Note, as it is well known, cultural identity, ethnicity (defined by native language and culture) and genealogy are different issues. For example many people in the non-Arabic Muslim world claim descent from the Prophet of Islam (SAW) but culturally they are no different than those who do not have such a background. On the other hand, most Egyptians are descendant of ancient Egyptians rather than Arabs of Arabian peninsula, however culturally they identify themselves as Arabs. Most Turkish speakers of Anatolia are closer genetically to their Greek neighbors than to the Turkic people of Central Asia. In other words, their cultural identity defines their ethnicity and not their 20th ancestor. Given there is hardly if any pure backgrounds in the Middle East, then cultural identity will supersede genealogy when assigning a poet to a particular civilization. Thus repeating for emphasis what the Turkish professor Talat Halman has stated: “Baha ad-din (Rumi’s Father) and his family eventually settled in Konya, ancient Iconium, in central Anatolia. They brought with them their traditional Persian cultural and linguistic background and found in Konya a firmly entrenched penchant for Persian culture. In terms of Rumi’s cultural orientation – including language, literary heritage, mythology, philosophy, and Sufi legacy –the Iranians have indeed a strongly justifiable claim. All of these are more than sufficient to characterize Rumi as a prominent figure of Persian cultural history”(Rapture and Revolution, page 266) and d he also mentions: “Rumi is patently Persian on the basis of jus et norma loquendi”.
As per modern scholars, virtually all the Western sources we have looked at identify Rumi as a Persian poet and a native Persian speaker. Few scholars however have taken the legendary claim that his father’s lineage goes back to the first Caliph Abu Bakr and we shall discuss this issue later. However if this legendary claim was correct, Rumi would still be considered a native Persian since he was a native Persian speaker and of Iranian cultural orientation.
Among the Western scholars, one can quote Franklin who clearly states:
Franklin Lewis, Rumi Past and Present, East and West, Oneworld Publications, 2000.:
“How is it that a Persian boy
born almost eight hundred years ago in Khorasan, the northeastern province of
greater Iran, in a region that we identify today as Central Asia, but was
considered in those days as part of the greater Persian cultural sphere, wound
up in Central Anatolia on the receding edge of the Byzantine cultural sphere,
in which is now Turkey, some 1500 miles to the west?” (p. 9)
Annemarie Schimmel also remarks on Rumi’s native tongue in the “ The Triumphal Sun: A Study of the Works of Jalaloddin Rumi”, SUNY Press, 1993, p. 193:
"Rumi's mother tongue was
Persian, but he had learned during his stay in Konya, enough Turkish and Greek
to use it, now and then, in his verse"
And even Halman agrees although he tries to provide justifications for Western scholars although Western scholars have looked at other reasons besides culture and background (for example sedentary population of Vakhsh or the Balkhi language and Aflaki’s Manaqib and its clear references to various ethnic groups and etc.). Halman states(pg 266):
“In the West
scholars have always accepted Rumi as a Persian on the basis of his exclusive
use of the Persian language and because he remained in the mainstream of
Persian cultural heritage. No account
seems to have been taken of the Turkish and Afghan claims, except some
occasional references such as the one by William Hastie in his introduction to The
Festival of Spring, featuring his translations from Rumi’s Divan:
The Turks claim Jelaleddin as
their own, although a Persian of royal race, born of Balkh, old Bactra, on the
ground of his having sung and died in Qoniya, in Asia Minor…Whence he was
called Rumi “the Romans,” usually rendered “the Greek,” as wonning wihin the
confies of old Oriental Rome.
“
Obviously the native language, exclusive use of Persian language and also mainstream Persian cultural heritage are sufficient to describe Rumi as a Persian poet. This author (writer of this article) claims Iranian ethnicity and speaks Persian as a native language and lnows his ancestors up to three generations back who spoke Fahlavi-type Iranian dialect. However we do not know our 20th ancestor. Thus if genealogy is of concern, then it can have bearing on ethnicity only to the point where such a genealogy is known consciously to that person and that genealogy is different from the culture and language of the person who knows that genealogy. In the case of Rumi, his father was a native Persian speaker (as shown later in the article) and one concludes that genealogically he is Persian up to the ancestors we know. However as mentioned, ethnicity is defined by culture, mythological orientation and native language.
We should make a point on the Afghan claim here. Rumi according to most up to date scholarly sources was born in Vakhsh Tajikistan, although Vakhsh itself was part of the greater province of Balkh at that time. However, when we talk about Persian/Iranian in this article, we are not talking about modern nation-states or citizenships. Rather we are taking the viewpoint of Persian culture, Persian native language and Persian background (which is mainly defined by native Persian language since today most Anatolian Turks are not genetically related to the Turkic groups of Central Asia and are closer genetically to Greeks and many native Persian speakers might not be descendants of the Achaemenids but rather various groups who adopted the Persian language and culture).
In this sense, the term Iranian/Iranic/Persian covers the main groups of Afghanistan (Pashtuns, Tajiks, Nuristanis, and Baluchs) and the term “Turk” covers Oghuz Turks, Kipchak Turks and etc. That is generally, despite the shared Islamic civilization, we can state that several majors groups existed (although by no means an exhaustive list):
1) Iranians (‘Ajam, Tajiks, Tats, Persians, Kurds) which covers all Iranic speakers. 2) Turkic groups (to which we should add Islamicized Mongols who became Turcophones). We should note some sources have mistaken the Soghdians and other Iranic speakers for Turks due to geographical proximity 3) Arab speaking Muslims, most of these whom lived in territories that was not Arabic speaking before Islam and hence many scholars consider them Arabicized 4) Indian Muslims covering all Indic languages 5) Berbers of Africa. 6) Caucasian groups such as Daghestanis, Lezgins and etc. 7) (and other groups of course in East Asia, Africa, China and etc.)
So to say Rumi was an Afghan or Turkish based on where he lived is actually retroactively misplacing history and an anachronistic usage of modern boundaries for a time when such boundaries did not exist and there was no concept of nation-state or citizenship based on set borders. At that time even, there was no Ottoman empire and so Rumi cannot be an Ottoman. So from a geographic point of view, Rumi as shown by his culture was part of the Iranian zone of Islamicate culture.
In this article, we examine more than cultural, linguistic, heritage and genealogical background of Rumi. We also examine the background of close friends of Rumi, mainly Shams Tabrizi and Hesam al-Din Chelebi. We provide an overview of the usage of the term “Turk” in three majors: Diwan Shams Tabrizi (where misinterpretations have taken place), the Mathnawi and finally the Manaqib al-‘Arifin. We also overview Rumi ‘s father (Baha al-Din Walad) and Sultan Walad’s (Rumi’s son) literally output. The study shows that Rumi’s everyday language (not just poetic language) was Persian and thus his native language was Persian. His cultural heritage was Persian. His genealogy is also discussed and based on the work of his father, we also show that his father’s native language was Persian and hence Rumi’s genealogy is also Persian. On his particular genealogy, there have been some that have claimed he was a descendant of the Caliph Abu Bakr and we examine this claim as well. However from our point of view since Rumi’s native language was Persian and his literary output was in Persian, then he is an Iranian cultural icon and eventually the genealogy of most figures in the 13th century Islamic world cannot be traced back to more than their great grandfather (Ahmad Khatibi in the case of Rumi). And going back further, the genealogy of all humans go back to caveman and possibly a single man and women in Africa and the only firm statement is that the genealogy of Rumi which is through his father was Persian as they were native speakers of Persian and Persian was their mothertongue.
The Seljuqs and the Seljuqs of Rum (1077 to 1307) were the dynasty that controlled Konya at the time of Rumi. While the Seljuq’s father-line was Turkish (in the sense of Altaic tribes of Central Asia and specifically the Oghuz tribes), they were completely Persianized after they rose to power. From the point of view of culture, identity and administration, the Seljuqs are Persian and one can see that Sultan Walad disparages Turks in one of his poems (see the section on Sultan Walad) while he praises the Seljuq ruler Sultan Mas’ud. Similarly, Rumi disparages the Oghuz tribes but at the same time he was in favor with the Seljuqs. Thus the Seljuqs despite their Altaic father-line were completely Persianized in language and culture by the time of Rumi and the Seljuq Sultanate of Rum.
With this regard, the eminent historian Rene Grousset states:
"It is to be noted that the Seljuks, those Turkomans who became sultans of Persia, did not Turkify Persia-no doubt because they did not wish to do so. On the contrary, it was they who voluntarily became Persians and who, in the manner of the great old Sassanid kings, strove to protect the Iranian populations from the plundering of Ghuzz bands and save Iranian culture from the Turkoman menace"(Rene Grousset, The Empire of the Steppes, (Rutgers University Press, 1991), 161,164)
And many other authors and historians agree.
Stephen P. Blake, "Shahjahanabad: The Sovereign City in Mughal India, 1639-1739". Cambridge University Press, 1991. pg 123:
"For the Seljuks and Il-Khanids in Iran it was the rulers rather than the conquered who were "Persianized and Islamicized".
Even their lineage was slowly changed according to some sources.
M.A. Amir-Moezzi, "Shahrbanu", Encyclopaedia Iranica, Online Edition:
"... here one might bear in mind that turco-Persian dynasties such as the Ghaznavids, Saljuqs and Ilkhanids were rapidly to adopt the Persian language and have their origins traced back to the ancient kings of Persia rather than to Turkish heroes or Muslim saints ..."
John Perry states:
“We should distinguish two
complementary ways in which the advent of the Turks affected the language map
of Iran. First, since the Turkish-speaking rulers of most Iranian polities from
the Ghaznavids and Seljuks onward were already Iranized and patronized
Persian literature in their domains, the expansion of Turk-ruled empires served
to expand the territorial domain of written Persian into the conquered areas,
notably Anatolia and Central and South Asia.
Secondly, the influx of massive Turkish-speaking populations
(culminating with the rank and file of the Mongol armies) and their settlement
in large areas of Iran (particularly in Azerbaijan and the northwest),
progressively turkicized local speakers of Persian, Kurdish and other Iranian
languages. Although it is mainly the
results of this latter process which will be illustrated here, it should be remembered
that these developments were contemporaneous and complementary.
…
Both these processes peaked with the accession of the Safavid Shah Esma'il in
1501 CE. He and his successors were
Turkish-speakers, probably descended from Turkicized Iranian inhabitants of the
northwest marches. While they accepted and promoted written Persian as the
established language of bureaucracy and literature, the fact that they and
their tribal supporters habitually spoke Turkish in court and camp lent this
vernacular an unprecedented prestige.”(John Perry. Iran & the
Caucasus, Vol. 5, (2001), pp. 193-200. THE HISTORICAL ROLE OF TURKISH IN
RELATION TO PERSIAN OF IRAN)
According to Professor Ehsan Yarshater (“Iran” in Encyclopedia Iranica):
A Turkic nomadic
people called Oghuz (Ghozz in Arabic and Persian sources) began to penetrate
into the regions south of Oxus during the early Ghaznavid period. Their
settlement in Khorasan led to confrontation with the Ghaznavid Masud, who could
not stop their advance. They were led by the brothers Tögrel, Čaghri, and
Yinal, the grandsons of Saljuq, whose clan had assumed the leadership of the
incomers.
Tögrel, an able
general, who proclaimed himself Sultan in 1038, began a systematic conquest of the
various provinces of Persia and Transoxiana, wrenching Chorasmia from its
Ghaznavid governor and securing the submission of the Ziyarids in Gorgan. The
Saljuqids, who had championed the cause of Sunnite Islam, thereby ingratiating
themselves with the orthodox Muslims, were able to defeat the Deylamite
Kakuyids, capturing Ray, Qazvin, and Hamadan, and bringing down the Kurdish
rulers of the Jebal and advancing as far west as Holwan and Kanaqayn. A series
of back and forth battles with the Buyids and rulers of Kurdistan, Azerbaijan,
and Armenia ensued; and, although the Saljuqids occasionally suffered reverses,
in the end their ambition, tenacity, and ruthlessness secured for them all of
Persia and Caucasus. By the time Tögrel triumphantly entered Baghdad on 18
December 1055, he was the master of nearly all of the lands of Sasanian Iran.
He had his title of Sultan confirmed by the caliph, and he now became the
caliph’s protector, freeing the caliphate from the bond of Shiite Buyids.
After nearly 200
years since the rise of the Saffarids in 861, this was the first time that all
of Persia and its dependencies came under a single and powerful rule which did
not dissipate and disband after a single generation. Tögrel (1040-63) was
followed by his nephew Alp Arslan (q.v.; 1063-73). He was a warrior king. In
his lifetime the realm of the Saljuqids was extended from the Jaxartes in the
east to the shores of the Black Sea in the west. He captured Kottalan in the
upper Oxus valley, conquered Abkhazia, and made Georgia a tributary, and he
secured Tokharestan and Čaghanian in the east. In 1069 he crowned his
triumphs with his defeat of the eastern Roman emperor, Romanos Diogenes, by
sheer bravery and skillful planning; after extracting a huge tribute of
1,500,000 dinars he signed a peace treaty with the emperor for 50 years. This
victory ended the influence of Byzantine emperors in Armenia and the rest of
Caucasus and Azerbaijan, and spread the fame of the Saljuqid king in the Muslim
world.
Alp Arslan was
succeeded by his son Malekšah (1073-92). Both were capable rulers who were
served by the illustrious vizier Nezam-al-Molk (d. 1092). Their rule brought
peace and prosperity to a country torn for more than two centuries by the
ravages of military claimants of different stripes. Military commands remained
in the hands of the Turkish generals, while administration was carried out by
Persians, a pattern that continued for many centuries. Under Malekšah the
Saljuqid power was honored, through a number of successful campaigns, as far
north as Kashgar and Khotan in eastern Central Asia, and as far west as Syria,
Anatolia, and even the Yemen, with the caliph in Baghdad subservient to the
wishes of the great Saljuqid sultans.
The ascent of
the Saljuqids also put an end to a period which Minorsky has called “the
Persian intermezzo”(see Minorsky, 1932, p. 21), when Iranian dynasties,
consisting mainly of the Saffarids, the Samanids, the Ziyarids, the Buyids, the
Kakuyids, and the Bavandids of Tabarestan and Gilan, ruled most of Iran. By all
accounts, weary of the miseries and devastations of never-ending conflicts and
wars, Persians seemed to have sighed with relief and to have welcomed the
stability of the Saljuqid rule, all the more so since the Saljuqids mitigated
the effect of their foreignness, quickly adopting the Persian culture and court
customs and procedures and leaving the civil administration in the hand of
Persian personnel, headed by such capable and learned viziers as ‘Amid-al-Molk
Kondori and Nezam-al-Molk.
After Malekšah’s
death, however, internal strife began to set in, and the Turkish tribal
chiefs’tendencies to claim a share of the power, and the practice of the
Saljuqid sultans to appoint the tutors (atabaks) of their children as
provincial governors, who often became enamored of their power and
independence, tended to create multiple power centers. Several Saljuqid lines
gradually developed, including the Saljuqids of Kerman (1048-1188) and the
Saljuqids of Rum in Anatolia (1081-1307); the latter survived the great Saljuqs
by more than a century and were instrumental in spreading the Persian culture
and language in Anatolia prior to the Ottoman conquest of the region.
According
to the Encyclopedia of Islam:
“Culturally,
the constituting of the Seljuq Empire marked a further step in the dethronement
of Arabic from being the sole lingua franca of educated and polite society in
the Middle East. Coming as they did through a Transoxania which was still
substantially Iranian and into Persia proper, the Seljuqs with no high-level
Turkish cultural or literary heritage of their own – took over that of Persia,
so that the Persian language became the administration and culture in their
land of Persia and Anatolia. The Persian culture of the Rum Seljuqs was
particularly splendid, and it was only gradually that Turkish emerged there as
a parallel language in the field of government and adab; the Persian imprint in
Ottoman civilization was to remain strong until the 19th century.”(“Saljuqids”in
the Encyclopedia of Islam).
Jonathan Dewald, "Europe 1450 to 1789: Encyclopedia of the Early Modern World", Charles Scribner's Sons, 2004, p. 24:
"Turcoman armies coming from the East had driven the Byzantines out of much of Asia Minor and established the Persianized sultanate of the Seljuks."
C.E. Bosworth, "Turkish Expansion towards the west" in UNESCO HISTORY OF HUMANITY, Volume IV, titled "From the Seventh to the Sixteenth Century", UNESCO Publishing / Routledge, 2000. p. 391:
"While the Arabic language retained its primacy in such spheres as law, theology and science, the culture of the Seljuk court and secular literature within the sultanate became largely Persianized; this is seen in the early adoption of Persian epic names by the Seljuk rulers (Qubād, Kay Khusraw and so on) and in the use of Persian as a literary language (Turkish must have been essentially a vehicle for everyday speech at this time). The process of Persianization accelerated in the thirteenth century with the presence in Konya of two of the most distinguished refugees fleeing before the Mongols, Bahā' al-Dīn Walad and his son Mawlānā Jalāl al-Dīn Rūmī, whose Mathnawī, composed in Konya, constitutes one of the crowning glories of classical Persian literature."
The Turkish scholar Halman also states:
“Bahaddin and his family eventually settled in Konya, ancient, Iconium, in central Anatolia. They brought with them their traditional Persian cultural and linguistic background and found in Konya a firmly entrenched penchant for Persian culture. “ (Halman, 264)
Koprulu mentions:
Meanwhile, the Mongol invasion, which caused a great number of scholars and artisans to flee from Turkistan, Iran, and Khwarazm and settle within the Empire of the Seljuks of Anatolia, resulted in a reinforcing of Persian influence on the Anatolian Turks. Indeed, despite all claims to the contrary, there is no question that Persian influence was paramount among the Seljuks of Anatolia. This is clearly revealed by the fact that the sultans who ascended the throne after Ghiyath al-Din Kai-Khusraw I assumed titles taken from ancient Persian mythology, like Kai-Khusraw, Kai-Ka us, and Kai-Qubad; and that. Ala’al-Din Kai-Qubad I had some passages from the Shahname inscribed on the walls of Konya and Sivas. When we take into consideration domestic life in the Konya courts and the sincerity of the favor and attachment of the rulers to Persian poets and Persian literature, then this fact {i.e. the importance of Persian influence} is undeniable. (Mehmed Fuad Koprulu , Early Mystics in Turkish Literature, Translated by Gary Leiser and Robert Dankoff , Routledge, 2006, pg 149)
In our opinion, to claim that Rumi grew up in a Turkish environment or in a Turkish state is a nationalistic point of view and is baseless. What matters in the medieval Islamic period is that the concept of nation states did not exist. So the concept of culture and self-identity is paramount. Even Turkish scholars do agree that the Seljuqs lacked Turkish identity (how else can someone like Sultan Walad call Turks as world-burners and thank Sultan Masu’d for defeating them? Or in another poem ask Sultan Masu’d to fight against the Turks?) and were Persianized.
Without a doubt Konya and the Seljuq Sultanate of Rum was diverse and from numerical point of view, Iranian refugees were probably a minority relative to Armenians, Greeks, Turks, and etc. However from a cultural point of view, Iranian culture and literature predominated and the Seljuqs themselves lacked a Turkish identity. So Iranian culture was predominant in the Seljuq Sultanate and this was due to such refugees as Rumi’s father and the Persianization of the Seljuks. In modern Turkey, Iran and etc. the majority of the population cannot trace their lineage more than their grand-father or great grand-father. Of course DNA might help, but overall, it is culture that makes identity. For example many “Turks” in Anatolia are descendants of Greeks, Albanians, Slavs and other diverse people of the Ottoman empire who have adopted Turkish identity. The same can be said about other countries of the region. With this regard, the Seljuqs from an ethnicity and identity point of view should be considered a Persianized group despite their Altaic lineage. And the Seljuq Sultanate of Rum should be considered as a Persianate state and most of the administrators of this state were Persians and Persianized muslims.
According to C.E. Bosworth:“Similarly
such great figures as al-Farabi, al-Biruni, and Ibn Sina have been attached by
over enthusiastic Turkish scholars to their race”. ) Clifford Edmond Bosworth, "Barbarian
Incursions: The Coming of the Turks into the Islamic World." In Islamic
Civilization, Edited by D. S. Richards. Oxford, 1973. Pg 2(
and he references specifically :”See, for instance
the arguments of A.Z. V. Togan regarding the putative Turkishness of al-Biruni,
in his Umumi Turk Tarihine Giris (Istanbul, 1946), pp 88-9. “ (pg
2)
We
should note that Farabi although described as a Persian(By Ibn Abi ‘Sayba and
Al-Shahruz in the 13th century)
or Turk by Ibn Khalikan (13th century) was in all likelihood
an Iranian Soghdian from central Asia and his usage of Soghdian words and even
modified Soghdian-Arabic Alphabet in the Kitab al-Horuf provides an elegant proof.
An
article on his probable Sogdian origin can be found here:
G. Lohrasp,” Some remarks on Farabi's background: Iranic (Soghdian/Persian) or
(Altaic)?” (2009)
http://www.archive.org/details/SomeRemarksOnFarabisBackgroundIranicsoghdianpersianOraltaic
The
other two scholars, Abu Rayhan Biruni and Avicenna were Iranians and their native
language was Chorasmian and Persian respectively.
Unfortunately,
one scholar which we would rather not
mention has based his knowledge on Rumi on the same author (Zekki Velid
Togan) and has claimed “Rumi was
presumably” Turkish without writing a single article on Rumi himself. It should be noted that the term “Turk”
itself was a generic term and did not specifically refer to Altaic speakers of
today. However other scholars like C.E.
Bosworth are erudite enough not to reference just any Turkish source and
Togan’s viewpoint on Biruni shows that he is not unbiased when it comes to
claiming medieval figures.
Here we
provide examples of actual distortions in texts.
Example 1)
Mohammad Hossein Zadeyeh Sadiq (an advocate of pan-Turkist historiography who even claims that 70% of the Avesta language is Turkish and the ancient Sumerians, Elamites, Urartu, Iranian Medes were Turks and etc. and received his degree in Turkey) states in his book: “Torki Saraayaan Maktab Shams o Mowlana” (Publisher: Nedaayeh Shams, 1386 (Solar Calendar) (pg 122):
"
مولوی
علاقهی خاصی
به فرزندش
داشت و همه جا
او را به
همراه خود به محافل
و مجالس میبرد
و او را فعل
خود میدانست. افلاکی
درباره او میگوید:«حضرت
ولد از نقل
والد خود، سالهای
بسیار به صفای
تمام عمر میراند
و سه مجلد
مثنویات و یک
جلد دیوان ترکی انشاء
فرموده از
معارف و حقایق
و غرایب اسرار
عالم را پر
کرد»(حسین
محمدزاده صدیق،
"ترکیسرایان
مکتب شمس و
مولوی"، ندای
شمس، تبریز، 1386.
صفحه 122). “
Translation of
the distortion:
“Mowlana had a
special likeness for his son Sultan Walad and took him to all gatherings and
places of discourse and considered him his “action”. Aflaki says about Sultan Walad: “Meanwhile,
after his father’s death Valad lived on in tranquility for many years and he composed
three books of mathnaviyyat and one volume of Turkish collected poetry
(Divan)”
We noted that on
page 119, the author refers to the Manaqib Aflaki the Yazichi edition.
We looked at the
same book:
(شمس الدین
احمد افلاکی
العارفی،
مناقب العارفین،
سال 1362، به همت
تحسین یزیچی،
دنیانی کتاب)
And it said:
:«حضرت ولد از نقل والد خود، سالهای بسیار به صفای تمام عمر میراند و سه مجلد مثنویات و یک جلد دیوان انشاء فرموده از معارف و حقایق و غرایب اسرار عالم را پر کرد»
Thus Mohammad Zadeh Sadiq has taken the liberty to distort the
word of Aflaki and add the highlighted red word “Torki”
(Turkish) to the above phrase!!
We looked at a recent English translation as well(Shams al-Din Aflaki, "The feats of the knower’s of God: Manāqeb al-ʻārefīn", translated by John O'Kane, Brill, 2002.)
[18] “Mowlana had a
special likeness for his son Sultan Walad and took him to all gatherings and
places of discourse and considered him his “action”. Aflaki says about Sultan Walad: “Meanwhile,
after his father’s death Valad lived on in tranqullity for many years and he
composed three books of mathnaviyyat and one volume of collected poetry
” (pg 561)
So Hossein Mohammadzadeyeh Sadiq has brought a distortion to the work of Aflaki. Aflaki does not use the term “Turkish Divan” but simply “Divan”. Hence the words of Aflaki are distorted and the word “Turkish” was added as an adjective to the Divan in the book written by Hossein Mohammadzadeyeh Sadiq. Such distortion of primary sources is unacceptable in academia and scholars should be careful when looking at Turkish sources (even by scholars as such as Togan who has some good works as well).
Example 2)
According to Dr. Firuz Mansuri, another distortion has occurred by Fereydun Nafiz Ozluk. We will just list this distortion here (although we are reporting it and have not seen the original text of Nafiz Ozluk like the above example of distortion).
According to Dr. Mansuri:
از آثار
مولانا و
سلطان ولد و
تمامی نویسندگان
طریقت مولوی
در نیمهی اول
قرن چهاردم میلادی
(مثلاً افلاکی)
چنین برمیآید
که آنان کلاً
مخالف عصیان
ترکمنهای
آناطولی علیه
سلجوقیان
بودند.
در مکتوبات
مولانا و دیوان
سلطان ولد و
مناقب افلاکی،
پیروان مولویه
نسبت به
ترکمنان
قرامان اغلو و
اشرف اغلو دشمنی
نشان داده و
آثار مختلف به
جای گذاشتهاند.
بعد از مرگ
محمدبیک
قرامانلو و
شکست
ترکمنان،
سلطان غیاث
الدین مسعود
دوم به قونیه
آمد و برخت
نشست.
سلطان ولد سه
منظومه دربارهی
جلوس و تهنیت
او سروده و
اضهار وجد و
سرور کرده
است. او
در یکی از
منظومهها از
سلطان
درخواست میکند
که نسبت به
ترکانی که پیش
سلطان فرار
کرده و
از ترس جان به
کوهها و
غارها پناه
بردهاند،
ترحم نکند و
جمله را به
قصاص رسانیده
و زنده
نگذارند.
قسمتهایی
از تهنیتنامهی
سلطان ولد نقل
میشود:
به دولت
شاه شاهانی به
صولت شیر شیرانی
همه ترکان
ز بیم جان شده
در غار و کُه
پنهان
چو نبود شیر
در بیشه رود
از گرگ اندیشه
پلنگ اکنون
بشد موشی، چو
آمد شیر حق
غٌران
چو ماران
رفته در کُهها
در آن بیشه به
اندهها
همه چون
روز میدانند
که خواهی کوفت
سرهاشان
همه در گریۀ
ناله، بخون در
غرق چون لاله
گهی بر موت
خود گریان، گهی
بر خوف خان و
مان
چو رنجوران
بیدرمان بشسته
دستها از جان
به اومیدی
طمع کرده که
بوک از شه رسد غفران
گذشت از حداین
زحمت مکن شاها
توشان رحمت
حیات خلق
اگر خواهی بکن
آن جمله را
قربان
لکم اندر
قصاص خلق حیات
و این شنو از
حق
قصاص چشم
چشم آمد به
دندان هم بود
دندان
حیات اندر
قصاص آمد جهان
ازاین خلاص
آمد
نبودی هیچکس
زنده برین گرد
نامدی فرمان
خوارج را
مهل زنده اگر
میرست اگر
بنده
که خونی
کشتنی باشد سه
شرع آیت قرآن
ولد کردست
نفرین ها برون
از چرخ و پروین-ها
که یارب زین
سگان بد ببر
هم جان و هم ایمان
در
آن تاریخ نه
تنها این قصیده،
بلکه مندرجات
سایر منابع
تاریخی و ادبی
هم دلالت بر این
دارند که
شهرنشینان،
به ویژه اهالی
قونیه، از
ترکان کوچ رو
که مُخل آسایش
عمومی و مخالف
نظامی اداری
حکومت بودند،
دل خوشی
نداشتند و
نسبت به آنها
اظهار کینه و
نفرت میکردند. فریدون
نافذ اوزلوک
مترجم دیوان
سلطان ولد به
ترکی، در نخستین
بیت منظومهی
فوق، به جای
کلمهی «همه
ترکان» لغت
خوارج را
گمارده است. ایشان
با این اقدام
بیمورد و تحریف
آشکار، حس کینه
و نفرت سلطان
ولد را نسبت
به ترکان پردهپوشی
کرده و از چشم
خوانندگانی
که فارسی نمیدانند،
پنهان داشته
است.
سلطان ولد در
منظومهی دیگر
که از پیروزی
سلطان مسعود
بر ترکان سخن
رانده آورده
است.
ترکان
عالمسوز را
از غار و کوه بیشهها
آورده
در طاعت خدا
چون شاه ما
مسعود شد
(cited in Firuz Mansuri, “Mot’aleaati Darbaareyeh Tarkh, Zaban o Farhang Azarbaijan”, Nashr Hezar, Tehran, 1387 (Solar Hejri Calendar), volume 1. Pp 71-72).
According to Dr. Firuz
Mansur, “It should be noted that Fereydun Nafidh
‘Ozluk, the translator of the Diwan of Sultan Walad, has changed the word “Hameh Torkaan” to
“Khawarij” in the poem above”.
Of course the reason for this mistranslation and omission would be because the poem beseeches Sultan Masud Seljuqi who defeated the Qaramanlou (we shall described this episode in the Sultan Walad) to not let one Turk who had fled into mountains and caves escape alive. Seeing the severity of the poem and the justice sought by Sultan Walad from Sultan Masu’d, the Turkish translator Fereydun Nafidh ‘Ozluk changed the word “Hameh Torkaan” (All the Turks) to Khwarij (an Islamic sect that developed during the time of Imam Ali (AS) which became disdained for its political miscalculations, cursing of the caliphate of Ali and political and literalist beliefs). Since this author has not seen the translation of Fereydun Nafidh ‘Ozluk, we have just quoted Dr. Mansuri. However, we doubt Dr. Mansuri would make such a thing up and it is unfortunate that such a mistranslation due to nationalistic reasons can occur. The severity of this distortion is the same as the first distortion. Especially since the Qaramanlou actually banned Persian from the Divan and employed Turkish and are seen in a positive light by Turkish nationalist and of course such a severe condemnation from Sultan Walad would not go well with nationalist type translators like Fereydun Nafidh ‘Ozluk.
Example 3)
We demonstrated two episodes about Mehmet Onder quoted in Franklin. Obviously the site of the graveyard of Shams brings prestige and various places have been assumed. However no sufficient evidence exists with this regard.
Let us quote Franklin here:
“One would not usually pose the
question: “who is buried in Gowhartash’s tomb?”
Yet Mehmet Onder, the director of the Mevlana Museum in Konya, has done
precisely this (see Chapter 13 below for example of this Turkish patriot’s
polemical and uncritical evaluation of evidence.) While repairs to the so-called ”Shrine of
Shams” (torbat-e Shams), a site in Konya, were underway, Onder summoned
Golpinarli to the shrine. Onder had
discovered a small wooden door raised up a few steps above the main
structure. This trapdoor led to a stone
staircase, at the bottom of which Onder found a small crypt housing a single
plaster-inlaid sarcophagus along the edge of the left wall, directly under the
decorative wooden sarcophagus/cenotaph on the floor above.
Though there was no inscription
on this hidden sarcophagus, Onder won Golpinarli over to the opinion that I
must be the grave of Shams. Across from
this shrine traditionally associated with the name of Shams al-Din is a well,
supposedly dug in the Seljuk era.
Somewhere nearby this site, Onder claims to have found a stone
inscription from the madrase of Gowhartash. Of course, this slab has been used in the
rebuilding of a later minaret and therefore might not originally have been
associated with this site. Far more
troubling, however, is the fact that there is only one sarcophagus in the crypt
of the mausoleum. Golpinarli assumes
with Onder that the tomb belongs to Shams, leaving Gowhartash with no grave of
his own.
Naturally, we
might just as well reach one of several other conclusions: (a) this is the
grave of Gowhartash and Aflaki is wrong about Shams being buried next to him;
(b) this is not the site mentioned in Aflaki’s anecdote – Shams and Gowhartash
are buried side by side at some other unknown locations; or (c) the account of
Aflaki is entirely baseless from beginning to end. Nevertheless, Schimmel has ratified the
conclusions of Golpinarli and Onder, triumphantly concluding that “the truth of
Aflaki’s statement has been proved” (ScT 22).
She even offers an imaginary reenactment of the crime. Professor Mikail Bayram at the Seljuq
University in Konya shares this opinion, even indicating that the bones of
Shams have been found (personal interview with the author in Konya, May 15,
1999).”(Franklin, pg 189-190)
On the Turkish scholar Onder, Professor Franklin also mentions:
“Mevlana Jelaleddin Rumi(Ankara:
Ministry of Culture, 1990), a translation by P.M. Butler of a Turkish work by
Mehmet Onder of the same name (1986), was printed by a typesetter with an
imperfect knowledge of English, as the many mistakes reflect.
…
This rather unsophisticated work
has two principal goals – to assist tourists who want to know something more
about Rumi than can be gleaned from the museum brochures, and to aggrandize
Turkish culture.
..
This book published by the
Turkish Ministry of Culture, displays an extremely exuberant ignorance, or an
ethnocentric agenda. In the
introduction, Onder refers to Rumi as “the great Turkish mystic” and “a great
Turkish intellectual.”. He then turns
Rumi into a Turkish prophet, calling Mevelana “the eternal gift of the Turkish
people to all humanity” (210). In fact,
there is no reference to the minor detail that language spoken by Baha al-Din
was Persian or ‘Attar wrote his Asrar Name in Persian, nor do we learn
that Rumi composed the Masnavi in Persian until page 138, three pages after
learning that the prose preface to each book are in Arabic (but then the book
[101] even insinuates that the Koran is in Turkish!). Throughout Onder deliberately leaves us to
assume that Rumi’s other works are in Turkish, and indeed when he can no longer
contain his misplaced patriotism, bursts out with the utterly ludicrous
statement that “There is no doubt that Mevlana’s mother tongue was
Turkish, since Balkh, from which he
migrated with his father, was the cultural centre of Turkestan and
Khorasan, both regions of predominantly
Turkish population” (207). Though
Onder begrudgingly allows that Rumi was probably taught Arabic and Persian at a
very early stage in his education (208), he insists that Rumi spoke Turkish
throughout his life (whether the Kipchak or Oghuz dialect, Onder cannot tell),
not only with his family, but also “when addressing people and in his
sermons.”. Rumi chose to write “most
of his works in Persian and some in Arabic” only because it was the
convention of the day (208).
Onder’s “evidence” for
this unsupported and insupportable theory consists of the assertion that Rumi
uses an Anatolian Persian dialect (whatever that might be, it would still be
Turkish, which is from an altogether different language family, and that his Divan
and Masnavi are interspersed with “particularly high percentage” of
couplets and passages in Turkish. This
is a very creative use of statistics, since a couple of dozen at most of the
35,000 lines of the Divan Shams are in Turkish and almost all of these
lines occur in poems that are predominantly in Persian”(pg 548-549)
Note Baha al-Din Walad is Rumi’s father whom we have devoted a section to in this article. We note that not even 0.1% of all the literary output (prose and poetry) of Rumi are in Greek/Turkish combined. Furthermore, all the lectures and sermons of Rumi are in Persian not in Turkish (which negates the argument that Rumi composed in Persian because it was the convention) and the sermons/lectures/letters (Majales-i Sabe’, Maktubat and Fihi Ma Fih) are replete with Persian poetry of Attar, Sanai and etc. The sermons and lectures, in an informal yet elegant tone were recorded by Rumi’s students and again provide a sufficient proof of his everyday language being Persian. We shall examine these in another section. Unlike what Onder claims, there is not a single sermon and lecture of Rumi in Turkish. Thus “when addressing people and his sermon”, Rumi’s work is overwhelmingly Persian with the exception of two Arabic sermons in the Fihi ma Fihi (among the 69 Persian sermons). This is an elegant proof of everyday language of Rumi and a self-evident refutation of Onder. However, as shown Mehmet Onder has tried to downplay Rumi’s Persian heritage for tourists who visit Konya and has falsely claimed that Rumi’s sermons and letters are in Turkish (where-as none of them are in Turkish and they are overwhelmingly Persian with the exception of few in Arabic ).
D)
Another outright falsification is seen in a recent manuscript circulating in the internet called “Soroodhaayeh Torki Mowlana” by Mehran Bahari (2005) which was updated in 2008. The author trying to downplay Rumi’s Persian work claims on page 65:
با اینهمه در کنار آثار مولانا و فرزندش سلطان ولد به تاجیکی-فارسی، آثاری از ایشان به زبانهای عربی ادبی (فیه ما فیه)
The Turkish nationalist author tries to give the impression that Fihi Ma Fihi is in Arabic. However out of the 71 discourses, only two are in Arabic and both the Persian and Arabic are vernacular everyday spoken language rather than formal and literary. The reason this is not mentioned is of course due to the fact that it shows Rumi’s and the Mowlavi order’s everyday language was in Persian and these discourses were written down by his students of Rumi while Rumi was lecturing in Persian. There is not a single discourse in Turkish. The fact that there is not a single sermon or lecture of Rumi in Turkish has made some of these authors to downplay the overwhelming number of lectures, letters and sermons of Rumi which are in Persian. Obviously, this provides an elegant proof of Rumi’s everyday interaction with his followers and also the native language of Rumi.
Elsewhere the Turkish nationalist author tries to claim that in the 12th century, the language of Balkh was Turkish (page 70) and this is responded to later when we discuss Baha al-Din Walad. We demonstrate for example that actual works from Balkh at that time use the term “Zaban-i Balkhi” which means the language of Balkh and this “zaban-i bakhli” is shown to be a Persian dialect. There is a section in this article that proves this point conclusively. However, the Turkish nationalist author quotes a certain website (on page 70) to claim otherwise:
و مدتها قبل
از آن صاحب
فارسنامه
ناصری در توجیه
فارسی نویسی
خود مینویسد:
بنده را تربیت
پارسی است اگر
چه بلخی نژاد
است
(فارسنامه، ص ۲،
چاپ جلال الدین
تهرانی، ۱۳۱۲،
تهران).
The Turkish nationalist writer is trying to reference the
book Farsnaameyeh Nasseri written
in the Qajar era between 1821-1898! In
order to explain why the author of the Farsnaameyeh Nasseri wrote in Persian
(the actual author of Farsnaameyeh Nasseri gives no such reason and the Turkish
nationalist authors tries to put words in mouth and formulate a reason!), tThe
Turkish nationalist writer claims that the author of Nasseri explains this by:”My upbringing is
Persian though I am Balkhi”.
But in actuality, no where does the author of Farsnameyeh Nasseri explains why he wrote in Persian. Rather the correct reading of the sentence in the context of the book is “My upbringing is from Fars province although I am from Balkh”. The book is called “Fars-nameh” because it is about Ostan-e-Fars (Far province in SW Iran) but the author of Farsnama is referencing that he is originality is from Balkh. No where does the author of the Farsnama even explain in this work about why he is writing Persian (since it is obvious) and the addition “explanation of why the author wrote in Persian” has nothing to do with “Tarbiyat Parsi” (upbringing in Fars as opposed to Balkh). Thus the nationalist writer tries to use such a sentence (without correct understanding) and then claim that the language of Balkh is not Persian!
Furthermore, we doubt Farsnaameyeh Nasseri has such a quote since the author of Farsnama claims Seyyed ancestry and according to Iranica:
“The Fārs-nāma-ye
nāṣerī is itself
the main source for the biography of Ḥajj Mīrzā Ḥasan Ḥosaynī Fasāʾī and the history of his ancestors (ed.
Rastgār, pp. 924-35, 1035-58).
Fasāʾī belonged to the thirty-seventh generation of a family of sayyeds (claiming descent from the
prophet Moḥammad). Members of the family, named Daštakī (q.v.)
after the quarter of Shiraz (which later on became part of the quarter Sar-e
Dezak) where they owned houses, were prominent scholars and civil servants,
with branches in Persia (Shiraz and Fasā), Mecca, and Hyderabad (Deccan).”(AHMAD
ASHRAF and ALI BANUAZIZI, “Fars-nameyeh Nasseri” in Encyclopedia Iranica)
Rather the Turkish nationalist author probably misplaced the Farsnaameh of Ibn Balkhi (written during the Seljuq era) with the Farsnaameh of Nasser! And again the Farsnaameh of Ibn Balkhi is clear, because Ibn Balkhi himself was from Balkh but the family took residence in Fars province during the time of his grandfather. (C. EDMUND BOSWORTH, “Ebn al-Bakhli” in Encyclopedia Iranica).
The Turkish nationalist author is trying to limit the word “Persian” to the province of Fars in Iran and this is a clear distortion. So he is looking for a text that distinguishes Fars province from Balkh in order to separate these two Iranian cultural regions of that time.
It is true that Fars province means Persian/Persia, but the Persian(Iranian) people and the Persian language is prominent in Iran, Afghanistan, Tajikistan and other parts of Central Asia and Caucasus at that time. But the nationalistic author tries to limit the Persian language to “Fars province” and anyone that has said “I am from Fars not say province X” he tries to portray it as if the person is not Persian! For example if the someone said: “My upbringing is from Fars not Khorasan”, the nationalistic author would claim that means the person is not Persian (for example Ferdowsi or Asadi Tusi among countless others)!
Then the nationalist author quotes Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406) that “the city of Balkh was the capital of Turkish kingdom” and reaches the conclusion that Persians arrived there after Turks (since there is no Turkish Kingdom that had Balkh as its capital unlike the Samanids or Kiyanids but it was a major city under Turkish dynasties like Seljuqs and Khwarizmshahids). This is like saying “Qonya was the capital of the Turkish Seljuqs”, so the Greeks came to Qonya after Turks!
Also anyone that looks at the book of Ibn Khaldun knows that Ibn Khaldun has counted Sogdians (mistakenly) as Turks.
در
رابطه با سرزمین
سغد و حتی
بلخ، جایی ابن
خلدون آن را
از ممالک ترک
میداند.« بلاد سغد
در ممالک
ترکان و
ماوراءالنهر»(صفحه
18، مقدمه،
گنابادی)
«در
کرانهی
خاوری رود در
اینجا سرزمین
سغد و اسروشنه
در ممالک
ترکان دیده میشود»(صفحه
118، مقدمه ابن
خلدن، گنابادی)
And a look at Biruni states that Balkh
was the capital of Keyanian Iranian dynasty (which is taken as equivalent of
Achaemenids). Also modern historians
uniformly agree that the language of Balkh early in the Sassanid era was the Bacrtian
Iranian language. However, during the
late Sassanid era and after Islam, it was only the capital of the Arabs and
Samanids and Balkh is actually called the cradle of the Khorasani
Parsi-Dari(Persian) language by classical sources. Also many sources indicate Balkh was Persian
speaking during the time of Rumi (as we shall see in the section of Baha al-Din
Walad). There is no doubt that the area
of Balkh (today its major urban center Mazar-i Sharif is still Tajik speaking)
was Iranian long before the Turks entered the region of Central Asia and the
best proof of this is the Bactrian language (before the area switched to
Parsi-Dari)
Strabo (1st
century B.C.) states (Geography, 15.2.1-15.2.8):
The name of Ariana is further extended to a part of Persia, and of Media, as also to the Bactrians and Sogdians on the north; for these speak approximately the same language, with but slight variations.:
And
even after the Arabs, according C.E. Bosworth, "The
Appearance of the Arabs in Central Asia under the Umayyads and the
establishment of Islam", in History of Civilizations of Central Asia,
Vol. IV: The Age of Achievement: AD 750 to the End of the Fifteenth Century,
Part One: The Historical, Social and Economic Setting, edited by M. S. Asimov
and C. E. Bosworth. 1999. Excerpt from page 23: "Central
Asia in the early seventh century was ethnically, still largely an Iranian land
whose people used various Middle Iranian languages.
C. Edmund Bosworth: "In early Islamic times Persians tended to identify all the lands to the northeast of Khorasan and lying beyond the Oxus with the region of Turan, which in the Shahnama of Ferdowsi is regarded as the land allotted to Fereydun's son Tur. The denizens of Turan were held to include the Turks, in the first four centuries of Islam essentially those nomadizing beyond the Jaxartes, and behind them the Chinese (see Kowalski; Minorsky, "Turan"). Turan thus became both an ethnic and a geographical term, but always containing ambiguities and contradictions, arising from the fact that all through Islamic times the lands immediately beyond the Oxus and along its lower reaches were the homes not of Turks but of Iranian peoples, such as the Sogdians and Khwarezmians."( C.E. Bosworth, “Central Asia: The Islamic period up to the Mongols” in Encyclopedia Iranica).
We shall discuss more about Balkh later, however as shown, the Turkish national author has presented the Farsnama of Ibn Balkhi in a distorted fashion and has ignored many sources in order to claim that Balkh was inhabited by Turks before Iranians. Where-as the name Balkh itself has an Iranian etymology and its old language was Iranian Bactrian. We should also make clear by the term Turk, what is meant today is not necessarily the same as that of some Arabic writings. Today it refers to Altaic speakers but in Islamic times especially the Abbasid era, the term was used for variety of Iranian groups as well. Referring to the “Turkish” troops in Baghdad, M.A. Shaban states:
“These new troops were the so-called “Turks”. It must be said without hesitation that this
is the most misleading misnomer which has led some scholars to harp ad
nauseam on utterly unfounded interpretation of the following era, during
which they unreasonably ascribe all events to Turkish domination. In fact the great majority of these troops
were not Turks. It has been frequently
pointed out that Arabic sources use the term Turk in a very loose manner. The Hephthalites are referred to as Turks, so
are the peoples of Gurgan, Khwarizm and Sistan.
Indeed, with the exception of the Soghdians, Arabic sources refer to all
peoples not subjects of the Sassanian empire as Turks. In Samarra separate quarters were provided
for new recruits from every locality.
The group from Farghana were called after their district, and the name
continued in usage because it was easy to pronounce. But such groups as the
Ishtakhanjiyya, the Isbijabbiya and groups from similar localities who were in
small numbers at first, were lumped together under the general term Turks,
because of the obvious difficulties the Arabs had in pronouncing such foreign
names. The Khazars who also came
from small localities which could not even be identified, as they were mostly
nomads, were perhaps the only group that deserved to be called Turks on the ground
of racial affinity. However, other
groups from Transcaucasia were classed together with the Khazars under the
general description.”(M.A.
Shaban, “Islamic History”, Cambridge University Press, v.2 1978. Page 63)
However, even adding to what M.A. Shaban
has stated, some further Arabic sources have mistaken even Soghdians with
Turks. And Ibn Khaldun’s mistake of
Sogdians with Turks is exactly of this nature.
In Islamic sources, such groups as
Sogdians, Khwarizmians, Hephtalites, Alans, and even Tibetians, Mongols and
etc. have been called “Turk”, while none of these groups are Turkic
speaking(except for the Mongols who according to some linguist speak a language
that is part of the Altaic languages and can be said to be close to Turks
according to those linguists). Even the
Avesta Turanians are today seen as an Iranian people. However, the nationalist author thinks that
just because someone lived under a Turkish kingdom, then they must be
Turkish. Like for example since
Anatolian Greeks lived under the Seljuqs, then they must be Turks!
As per the etymology of Balkh, Daniel Coit Gilman, Harry Thurston Peck, Frank Moore Colby, "The New international encyclopædia, Volume 2",Dodd, Mead and Company, 1902. pg 341: "The name of province or country appears in Old Persian inscriptions (B.h.i 16; Dar Pers e.16; Nr. a.23) as Bāxtri, i.e. Bakhtri. It is written in the Avesta Bāxδi. From this latter came the intermediate form Bāxli, Sanskrit Bahlīka, Balhika ‘Bactrian,’, Armenian Bahl, and by transposition, the modern Persian Balx, i.e. Balkh"
Although today the inhabitants of Tabriz speak Azeri-Turkish and follow twelve Imami Shi’ism, this was not the case during the time of Shams Tabrizi (as shown below by many direct evidences). In the time of Shams Tabrizi, the language was a Persian based language and the people were primarily Shafi’I Muslims (the sect followed today by Western Iranians such as the Sunni Kurds and Talysh). Despite this wide difference of language and religion, some sources are not aware of this historical fact and have misplaced time/space in order to retroactively Turkify the background of Shams Tabrizi. It is a shame that some scholars who write about literature do not take the time to research the area they are writing about during that era!
The process of Turkification of Azerbaijan as mentioned was long and complex and there are still remnants of Tati and other Iranian languages in Caucasia and NW Iran. The language of Azerbaijan at the time of Shams Tabrizi was what scholars called “Fahlavi-Azari” (“Azerbaijanian Pahlavi”), which is an Iranian language.
Ebn al-Moqaffa’(d. 142/759) is quoted by Ibn Al-Nadim in his famous Al-Fihrist that the language of Azerbaijan is Fahlavi and Azerbaijan is part of the region of Fahlah (alongside Esfahan, Rayy, Hamadan and Maah-Nahavand):
ابن ندیم در الفهرست مینویسد:
فأما
الفهلویة
فمنسوب إلى
فهله اسم یقع
على خمسة
بلدان وهی
أصفهان والری
وهمدان وماه
نهاوند وأذربیجان
وأما الدریة فلغة
مدن المدائن
وبها كان یتكلم
من بباب الملك
وهی منسوبة
إلى حاضرة
الباب
والغالب علیها
من لغة أهل
خراسان
والمشرق و
اللغة أهل بلخ
وأما الفارسیة
فتكلم بها
الموابدة
والعلماء
وأشباههم وهی
لغة أهل فارس
وأما الخوزیة
فبها كان یتكلم
الملوك
والأشراف فی
الخلوة
ومواضع اللعب
واللذة ومع
الحاشیة وأما
السریانیة
فكان یتكلم
بها أهل
السواد
والمكاتبة فی
نوع من اللغة
بالسریانی
فارسی
(=اما
فهلوی منسوب
است به فهله
كه نام نهاده
شده است بر پنج
شهر: اصفهان و
ری و همدان و
ماه نهاوند و
آذربایجان. و
دری لغت شهرهای
مداین است و
درباریان
پادشاه بدان
زبان سخن میگفتند
و منسوب است
به مردم دربار
و لغت اهل خراسان
و مشرق و لغت
مردم بلخ بر
آن زبان غالب
است. اما فارسی
كلامی است كه
موبدان و علما
و مانند ایشان
بدان سخن گویند
و آن زبان
مردم اهل فارس
باشد. اما خوزی
زبانی است كه
ملوك و اشراف
در خلوت و
مواضع لعب و
لذت با ندیمان
و حاشیت خود
گفتوگو كنند.
اما سریانی آن
است كه مردم
سواد بدان سخن
رانند).
Source:
ابن
ندیم، محمد بن
اسحاق:
«فهرست»، ترجمهی
رضا تجدد،
انتشارات ابن
سینا، 1346
Ibn Nadeem, “Fihrist”, Translated by Reza Tajaddod, Ibn Sina
publishers, 1967.
A very similar explanation is given by the medieval
historian Hamzeh Isfahani when talking about Sassanid Iran. Hamzeh Isfahani
writes in the book Al-Tanbih ‘ala Hoduth al-Tashif that five “tongues”or
dialects, were common in Sassanian Iran: Fahlavi, Dari, Farsi (Persian), Khuzi
and Soryani. Hamzeh (893-961 A.D.) explains these dialects in the following
way:
Fahlavi was a dialect which kings spoke in their assemblies and it is related to Fahleh. This name is used to designate five cities of Iran, Esfahan, Rey, Hamadan, Maah Nahavand, and Azerbaijan. Farsi (Persian) is a dialect which was spoken by the clergy (Zoroastrian) and those who associated with them and is the language of the cities of Fars. Dari is the dialect of the cities of Ctesiphon and was spoken in the kings’/darbariyan/ ‘courts’. The root of its name is related to its use; /darbar/ ‘court* is implied in /dar/. The vocabulary of the natives of Balkh was dominant in this language, which includes the dialects of the eastern peoples. Khuzi is associated with the cities of Khuzistan where kings and dignitaries used it in private conversation and during leisure time, in the bath houses for instance.
(Mehdi Marashi, Mohammad Ali Jazayery, Persian Studies in North America: Studies in Honor of Mohammad Ali Jazayery, Ibex Publishers, Inc, 1994. pg 255)
Ibn Hawqal, another 10th century Muslim traveller states:
“the language of the people of Azerbaijan and most of the people of Armenia (sic; he probably means the Iranian Armenia) is Iranian (al-faressya), which binds them together, while Arabic is also used among them; among those who speak al-faressya (here he seemingly means Persian, spoken by the elite of the urban population), there are few who do not understand Arabic; and some merchants and landowners are even adept in it”.
(E. Yarshater, “Azeri: Iranian language of Azerbaijan”in Encyclopedia Iranica)
It should be noted that Ibn Hawqal mentions that some areas of Armenia are controlled by Muslims and others by Christians. Of course the land denoted as Armenia was much bigger than present Armenia.
Reference: Ibn Hawqal, Surat al-Ardh. Translation and comments by: J. Shoar, Amir Kabir Publishers, Iran. 1981.
Al-Muqaddasi (d. late 4th/10th cent.) considers Azerbaijan and Arran as part of the 8th division of lands. He states:
“The language of the 8th division is Iranian (al-’ajamyya). It is partly Dari and partly convoluted (monqaleq) and all of them are named Persian”
Al-Moqaddasi, Shams ad-Din Abu Abdallah Muhammad ibn Ahmad, Ahsan al-Taqasi fi Ma’rifa al-Aqalim, Translated by Ali Naqi Vaziri, Volume One, First Edition, Mu’alifan and Mutarjiman Publishers, Iran, 1981, pg 377
المقدسی، شمسالدین ابوعبدالله محمدبن احمد، احسن التقاسیم فی معرفه الاقالیم، ترجمه دكتر علینقی وزیری، جلد 1، چاپ اول، انتشارات مؤلفان و مترجمان ایران، 1361، ص 377.
Al-Muqaddasi also writes on the general region of Armenia,
Arran and Azerbaijan and states:
“They have big
beards, their speech is not attractive. In Arminya they speak Armenian, in
al-Ran, Ranian (Aranian); Their Persian is understandable, and is close to
Khurasanian (Dari Persian) in sound”
(Al-Muqaddasi, ‘The Best Divisions for Knowledge of the Regions’, a translation of his Ahsan al-Taqasim fi Ma’rifat al-Aqalim by B.A. Collins, Centre for Muslim Contribution to Civilization, Garnet Publishing Limited,1994. pg 334).
Al-Mas’udi the Arab Historian States:
“The Persians are a people whose borders are the Mahat Mountains and Azarbaijan up to Armenia and Arran, and Bayleqan and Darband, and Ray and Tabaristan and Masqat and Shabaran and Jorjan and Abarshahr, and that is Nishabur, and Herat and Marv and other places in land of Khorasan, and Sejistan and Kerman and Fars and Ahvaz...All these lands were once one kingdom with one sovereign and one language...although the language differed slightly. The language, however, is one, in that its letters are written the same way and used the same way in composition. There are, then, different languages such as Pahlavi, Dari, Azari, as well as other Persian languages.”
Source:
Al -Mas’udi, Kitab al-Tanbih wa-l-Ishraf, De Goeje, M.J. (ed.), Leiden, Brill, 1894, pp. 77-8.
Thus Al-Masu’di testifies to the Iranian presence in the Caucasus and Azerbaijan during the 10th century and even names a local Iranian dialect called Azari. This Azari was an Iranian language and should not be confused with the Turkish language which is called Azeri or Azerbaijani Turkish. Both names are derived from the geographical location Azerbaijan, however Azeri Turkish came in much later into the area and most likely became the predominant language of Azerbaijan in the Safavid era.
Original Arabic of al-Masudi from www.alwaraq.net:
فالفرس
أمة حد بلادها
الجبال من
الماهات و غیرها
و آذربیجان
إلى ما یلی
بلاد أرمینیة
و أران و البیلقان
إلى دربند و
هو الباب
والأبواب و
الری و طبرستن
و المسقط و
الشابران و
جرجان و ابرشهر،
و هی نیسابور،
و هراة و مرو و
غیر ذلك من
بلاد خراسان و
سجستان و
كرمان و فارس و
الأهواز، و ما
اتصل بذلك من
أرض الأعاجم فی
هذا الوقت و
كل هذه البلاد
كانت مملكة
واحدة ملكها
ملك واحد و
لسانها واحد،
إلا أنهم كانوا
یتباینون فی شیء
یسیر من
اللغات و ذلك
أن اللغة إنما
تكون واحدة بأن
تكون حروفها
التی تكتب
واحدة و تألیف
حروفها تألیف
واحد، و إن
اختلفت بعد
ذلك فی سائر
الأشیاء
الأخر كالفهلویة
و الدریة و
الآذریة و غیرها
من لغات
الفرس.
Ahmad ibn Yaqubi mentions that the
People of Azerbaijan are a mixture of ‘Ajam-i Azari (Ajam is a term that developed to mean Iranian) of Azaris and old Javedanis (followers of Javidan the son of Shahrak who was the leader of Khurramites and succeeded by Babak Khorramdin).
Source:
Yaqubi, Ahmad ibn Abi, Tarikh-i Yaqubi tarjamah-i Muhammad Ibrahim Ayati, Intisharat Bungah-i Tarjomah o Nashr-i Kitab, 1969.
Finally a source on Tabriz itself:
“Zakarrya b. Mohammad Qazvini’s report in Athar al-Bilad, composed in 674/1275, that “no town has escaped being taken over by the Turks except Tabriz”(Beirut ed., 1960, p. 339) one may infer that at least Tabriz had remained aloof from the influence of Turkish until the time”.
(“Azari: The Iranian Language of Azerbaijan”in Encyclopedia Iranica by E. Yarshater http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/v3f3/v3f2a88b.html])
The linguistic Turkification of Iranian Azerbaijan was a complex multi-state process:
From the time of the Mongol invasion, most of whose
armies were composed of Turkic tribes, the influence of Turkish increased in
the region. On the other hand, the old Iranian dialects remained prevalent in
major cities.
“Hamdallah Mostowafi writing in the 1340s calls the language of Maraqa as “modified Pahlavi”(Pahlavi-ye Mughayyar). Mostowafi calls the language of Zanjan (Pahlavi-ye Raast). The language of Gushtaspi covering the Caspian border region between Gilan to Shirvan is called a Pahlavi language close to the language of Gilan”.
Source:
(“Azari: The Iranian Language of Azerbaijan”in Encyclopedia Iranica by E. Yarshater http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/v3f3/v3f2a88b.html])
Professor. John Perry states:
“We should distinguish two
complementary ways in which the advent of the Turks affected the language map
of Iran. First, since the Turkish-speaking rulers of most Iranian polities from
the Ghaznavids and Seljuks onward were already Iranized and patronized Persian
literature in their domains, the expansion of Turk-ruled empires served to
expand the territorial domain of written Persian into the conquered areas, notably
Anatolia and Central and South Asia. Secondly, the influx of massive
Turkish-speaking populations (culminating with the rank and file of the Mongol
armies) and their settlement in large areas of Iran (particularly in Azerbaijan
and the northwest), progressively Turkicized local speakers of Persian, Kurdish
and other Iranian languages. Although it is mainly the results of this latter
process which will be illustrated here, it should be remembered that these
developments were contemporaneous and complementary.
2. General Effects of the Safavid Accession
Both these processes peaked with the accession of the Safavid Shah Esma'il in
1501 CE He and his successors were Turkish-speakers, probably descended from
turkicized Iranian inhabitants of the northwest marches. While they accepted
and promoted written Persian as the established language of bureaucracy and
literature, the fact that they and their tribal supporters habitually spoke
Turkish in court and camp lent this vernacular an unprecedented prestige.”(John
Perry. Iran & the Caucasus, Vol. 5, (2001), pp. 193-200. THE HISTORICAL
ROLE OF TURKISH IN RELATION TO PERSIAN OF IRAN)
According to Xavier Planhol, a well known scholar of historical geography (a branch that studies both history and geography and their interaction) and specialist on cultural history of Islam as well nomadicization of Iran, Central Asia and Turkey:“This unique aspect of Azerbaijan, the only area to have been almost entirely "Turkicized" within Iranian territory, is the result of a complex, progressive cultural and historical process, in which factors accumulated successively (Sümer; Planhol, 1995, pp. 510 -- 12) The process merits deeper analysis of the extent to which it illustrates the great resilience of the land of Iran. The first phase was the amassing of nomads, initially at the time of the Turkish invasions, following the route of penetration along the piedmont south of the Alborz, facing the Byzantine borders, then those of the Greek empire of Trebizond and Christian Georgia. The Mongol invasion in the 13th century led to an extensive renewal of tribal stock, and the Turkic groups of the region during this period had not yet become stable. In the 15th century, the assimilation of the indigenous Iranian population was far from being completed. The decisive episode, at the beginning of the 16th century, was the adoption of Shi ʿ ite Islam as the religion of the state by the Iran of the Safavids, whereas the Ottoman empire remained faithful to Sunnite orthodoxy. Shi ʿ ite propaganda spread among the nomadic Turkoman tribes of Anatolia, far from urban centers of orthodoxy. These Shi ʿ ite nomads returned en masse along their migratory route back to Safavid Iran. This movement was to extend up to southwest Anatolia, from where the Tekelu, originally from the Lycian peninsula, returned to Iran with 15,000 camels. These nomads returning from Ottoman territory naturally settled en masse in regions near the border, and it was from this period that the definitive "Turkicization" of Azerbaijan dates, along with the establishment of the present-day Azeri-Persian linguistic border-not far from Qazvin, only some 150 kilometers from Tehran. (in the 15 st century assimilation was still far from complete, has been the adoption of a decisive Shiism in the 16 st Century)”http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/unicode/v13f2/v13f2024i.html
The famous Sunni Shafi’I Muslims of the area like Shahab al-Din Suhrawardi, Shams Tabrizi, Shaykh Mahmud Shabistari and etc. lived in a time when Azerbaijan was far from Turkicized. Indeed Shaf’ism today is followed by the Sunni Iranian speaking Kurds and Talysh (remnants of the once wider Iranian/Persian speakers) of the area where-as the new incoming Turks were uniformly Hanafite Muslims until the region became Shi’ite. As shown below, direct evidence clearly demonstrates Tabriz still had an Iranian language during the time of the Ilkhanids and words from the Old Fahlavi-Azari Iranian dialect are recorded by Rumi through the mouth of Shams. The reader can learn more about the complex processes of Turkicization of the historical area of Arran, Sherwan and Azerbaijan in the article below:
Ali Doostzadeh,
“Politicization of the background of Nizami Ganjavi: Attempted de-Iranization
of a historical Iranian figure by the USSR", June 2008 (Updated
2009).
http://sites.google.com/site/rakhshesh/articles-related-to-iranian-history or here:
http://www.archive.org/details/PoliticizationOfTheBackgroundOfNizamiGanjaviAttemptedDe-iranizationOf accessed October 2009.
As noted, even after the Mongol invasion (the bulk of its troop being Turkish),
“Zakarrya b. Mohammad Qazvini’s report in Athar al-Bilad, composed in 674/1275, that “no town has escaped being taken over by the Turks except Tabriz”(Beirut ed., 1960, p. 339) one may infer that at least Tabriz had remained aloof from the influence of Turkish until the time”.(“Azari: The Iranian Language of Azerbaijan”in Encyclopedia Iranica by E. Yarshater http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/v3f3/v3f2a88b.html])
The language of Tabriz, being an Iranian language, was not the standard Khurasani Dari. Qatran Tabrizi has an interesting verse mentioning this in a couplet:
بلبل
به سان مطرب بیدل
فراز گل
گه
پارسی نوازد،
گاهی زند دری
Translation:
The
nightingale is on top of the flower like a minstrel who has lost it heart
It
bemoans sometimes in Parsi (Persian) and sometimes in Dari (Khurasani Persian)
Source:
ریاحی خویی، محمدامین، «ملاحظاتی دربارهی زبان
كهن آذربایجان»: اطلاعات سیاسی - اقتصادی، شمارهی
182-181
(Riyahi
Khoi, Mohammad Amin. “Molehezati darbaareyeh Zabaan-i Kohan
This
comprehensive article is also available below:
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.azargoshnasp.net/languages/Azari/26.pdf
There are extant words, phrases and sentences attested in the old Iranic dialect of Tabriz in a variety of books and manuscripts. Here are some examples:
1)
Hamdullah Mostowafi mentions a sentence in the language of Tabriz:
انگور خلوقی بی
چه در، درّ سوه
اندرین
یک جمله از زبان تبریزیان
در نزهةالقلوب
حمدالله مستوفی:" تبارزه
اگر صاحب
حُسنی را با
لباس ناسزا یابند،
گویند “انگور
خلوقی بی چه
در، درّ سوه
اندرین”؛ یعنی
انگور خلوقی(انگوری
مرغوب) است در
سبد دریده "pg 98
Translation:
“The Tabrizians if
they see a fortunate man in an uncouth clothes say: He is like a fresh grape in
a ripped fruit basket.”
Source:
مستوفی،
حمدالله:
«نزهةالقلوب»،
به كوشش محمد
دبیرسیاقی،
انتشارات
طهوری، 1336
Mostowafi, Hamdallah. Nozhat al-Qolub. Edit by Muhammad Dabir Sayyaqi. Tahuri Publishing, 1957.
2)
A mulama’poem (meaning ‘colourful’, which is popular in Persian poetry where some verses are in one language and others in another language) from Homam Tabrizi where some verses are in Khorasani (Dari) Persian and others are in the dialect of Tabriz:
بدیذم
چشم مستت
رفتم اژ دست
كوام و آذر
دلی كویا بتی
مست
دلام خود
رفت و میدانم كه
روژی
به مهرت
هم بشی خوش كیانم
اژ دست
به
آب زندگی ای
خوش عبارت
لوانت لاود
جمن دیل و كیان
بست
دمی بر عاشق
خود مهربان
شو
كزی
سر مهرورزی
كست و نی كست
به عشقات گر
همام از جان
برآیذ
مواژش
كان بوان
بمرت وارست
كرم
خا و ابری بشم
بوینی
به بویت
خته بام ژاهنام
Source:
انصافپور، غلامرضا: “تاریخ
تبار و زبان آذربایجان”، انتشارات
فكر روز، 1377
Gholam Reza Ensafpur, “Tarikh o Tabar Zaban-i
Azarbaijan”(The history and roots of the language of Azarbaijan), Fekr-I Rooz
Publishers, 1998 (1377).
3)
Another ghazal from Homam Tabrizi where all the couplets
except the last couplet is in Persian, the last couplet reads:
«وهار و ول و دیم
یار خوش بی //
اوی یاران مه
ول بی مه وهاران»
Transliteration:
Wahar o wol o Dim yaar khwash Bi
Awi Yaaraan, mah wul Bi, Mah Wahaaraan
Translation:
The
Spring and Flowers and the face of the friend are all pleaseant
But
without the friend, there are no flowers or any spring.
Source:
كارنگ، عبدالعلی: «تاتی
و هرزنی، دو لهجه
از زبان باستان آذربایجان»، تبریز،
1333
Karang,
Abdul Ali. “Tati, Harzani, two dialects from the ancient language of
4)
Another recent discovery by the name of Safina-yi Tabriz has given sentences from native of Tabriz in their peculiar Iranic dialect. A sample expression of from the mystic Baba Faraj Tabrizi in the Safina:
انانک
قدهی فرجشون
فعالم آندره
اووارادا
چاشمش نه پیف
قدم کینستا نه
پیف حدوث
Standard Persian (translated by the author of Safina himself):
چندانک
فرج را در
عالم آوردهاند
چشم او نه بر
قدم افتاده
است نه بر
حدوث
Modern English:
They brought Faraj in this world in such a way that his eye is neither towards pre-eternity nor upon createdness.
Source:
منوچهر
مرتضوی، زبان
دیرین آذربایجان،
بنیاد
موقوفات دکتر
افشار، 1384.
Mortazavi, Manuchehr. Zaban-e-Dirin Azerbaijan (On the Old language of Azerbaijan). Bonyad Moqufaat Dr. Afshar. 2005(1384).
Indeed the Safina is a bible of the culture of Tabriz which was compiled in the Il-khanid era and clearly shows the region at its height. It is also a clear proof that the language of the people was Iranian at the time and had not transformed Turkic.
A sample poem in which the author of the Safina writes “Zaban Tabrizi”(Language of Tabriz):
دَچَان
چوچرخ نکویت
مو ایر رهشه
مهر دورش
چَو
ِش دَ کارده
شکویت ولَول
ودَارد سَر ِ یَوه
پَری
بقهر اره میر
دون جو پور
زون هنرمند
پروکری
اَنزوتون منی
که آن هزیوه
اکیژ
بحتَ ورامرو کی
چرخ هانزمَویتی
ژژور
منشی چو بخت
اهون قدریوه
نه
چرخ استه نبوتی
نه روزو ورو
فوتی
زو
ِم چو واش خللیوه
زمم حو بورضی
ربوه
Sadeqi, Ali Ashraf. “Chand She’r beh Zaban-e Karaji, Tabrizi wa Ghayreh”(Some poems in the language of Karaji and Tabrizi and others), Majalla-ye Zabanshenasi, 9, 1379./2000, pp.14-17.
http://www.archive.org/details/LocalPoemsInIranicDialectsOfTabrizHamadanMazandaranQazvinInThe
6)
A sentence in the dialect of Tabriz (the author calls Zaban-I Tabriz (dialect/language of Tabriz) recorded and also translated by Ibn Bazzaz Ardabili in the Safvat al-Safa:
«علیشاه
چو در آمد
گستاخ وار شیخ
را در کنار
گرفت و گفت
حاضر باش
بزبان تبریزی
گو حریفر ژاته
یعنی سخن بصرف
بگو حریفت رسیده
است. در این
گفتن دست بر
کتف مبارک شیخ
زد شیخ را غیرت
سر بر کرد»
The sentence “Gu Harif(a/e)r Zhaatah”is mentioned in
Tabrizi dialect.
Source:
Rezazadeh, Rahim Malak. “The Azari Dialect”(Guyesh-I
Azari), Anjuman Farhang Iran Bastan publishers, 1352(1973).
7)
A sentence in the dialect of Tabriz by Pir Hassan Zehtab
Tabrizi addressing the Qara-Qoyunlu ruler Eskandar:
یك جمله از
«پیر حسن
زهتاب تبریزی»
خطاب به
اسكندر قراقویونلو:
«اسكندر! رودم
كشتی، رودت
كشاد!» (= اسكندر!
فرزندم را كشتی.
خدا فرزندت را
بكشد) (ریاحی
خویی، ص 31)
“Eskandar! Roodam Koshti, Roodat Koshaad”
(Eskandar! You killed my son, may your son perish”)
Source:
ریاحی خویی، محمدامین، «ملاحظاتی دربارهی زبان
كهن آذربایجان»: اطلاعات سیاسی - اقتصادی، شمارهی
182-181
Riyahi, Mohammad Amin. “Molahezati darbaareyeh Zabaan-I
Kohan Azerbaijan”(Some comments on the ancient language of
Also Available at:
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.azargoshnasp.net/languages/Azari/26.pdf
The word Rood for son is still used in some Iranian
dialects, specially the Larestani dialect and other dialects around Fars.
8)
Four quatrains titled Fahlaviyat from Khwaja Muhammad
Kojjani (d. 677/1278-79); born in Kojjan or Korjan, a village near
(Fahlaviyat in Encyclopedia Iranica by Dr. Ahmad Taffazoli, http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/v9f2/v9f232.html)
(Dr. A. A. Sadeqi, “Ash’ar-e mahalli-e
Jame’al-Alhaann,”Majalla-ye zaban-shenasi 9, 1371./1992, pp. 54-64)
The actual quatrains are available here:
http://www.archive.org/details/LocalPoemsInIranicDialectsOfTabrizHamadanMazandaranQazvinInThe
A sample of one of the four quatrains from Khwaja Muhammad
Kojjani
همه کیژی
نَهَند خُشتی
بَخُشتی
بَنا اج چو
کَه دستِ گیژی
وَنیژه
همه پیغمبران
خُو بی و چو کِی
محمدمصطفی
کیژی وَنیژه
9)
Two qet’as (poems) quoted by Abd-al-Qader Maraghi in the
dialect of Tabriz (d. 838 A.H./1434-35 C.E.; II, p. 142)
(Fahlaviyat in Encyclopedia Iranica by Ahmad Taffazoli, http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/v9f2/v9f232.html)
(A. A. Sadeqi, “Ash’ar-e
mahalli-e Jame’al-Alhaann,”Majalla-ye zaban-shenasi 9, 1371./1992, pp. 54-64.
http://www.archive.org/details/LocalPoemsInIranicDialectsOfTabrizHamadanMazandaranQazvinInThe )
رُورُم
پَری بجولان
نو
کُو بَمَن
وُرارده
وی
خَد شدیم
بدامش
هیزا
اَوُو
وُرارده
10)
A ghazal and fourteen quatrains under the title of Fahlaviyat
by the poet Maghrebi Tabrizi (d. 809/1406-
(Fahlaviyat in Encyclopedia Iranica by Dr. Ahmad Taffazoli,
http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/v9f2/v9f232.html)
(M.-A. Adib Tusi
“Fahlavyat-e Magrebi Tabrizi,”NDA Tabriz 8, 1335/1956
Also available at:
11)
A text probably by Mama Esmat Tabrizi, a mystical woman-poet of Tabriz (d. 9th/15th cent.), which occurs in a manuscript, preserved in Turkey, concerning the shrines of saints in Tabriz.
M.- A. Adib Tusi, “Fahlawiyat-e- Mama Esmat wa Kashfi be-zaban Azari estelaah-e raayi yaa shahri”, NDA, Tabriz 8/3, 1335/1957, pp 242-57.
Also availale at:
12)
An interesting phrase “Buri Buri”(which in Persian means “Biya Biya”or in English “Come! Come!”) is mentioned by Rumi from the mouth of Shams Tabrizi in this poem:
«ولی ترجیع پنجم در نیایم جز به دستوری
که
شمس الدین تبریزی
بفرماید مرا بوری
مرا
گوید بیا، بوری
که من باغم تو
زنبوری
که تا
خونت عسل گردد
که تا مومت
شود نوری»
The word “Buri”is mentioned by Hussain Tabrizi Karbalai with
regards to the Shaykh Khwajah Abdul-Rahim Azh-Abaadi:
«مرقد و مزار...خواجه عبدالرحیم اژابادی...در سرخاب مشخص و معین است...وی تبریزی اند منسوب به کوچۀ اچاباد(اژآباد) که کوچۀ معینی است در تبریز در حوالی درب اعلی...و از او چنین استماع افتاده که حضرت خواجه در اوایل به صنعت بافندگی ابریشم مشعوری می نموده اند و خالی از جمعیتی و ثروتی نبوده و بسیار اخلاص به درویشان داشته، روزی حضرت بابا مزید وی را دیده و به نظر حقیقت شناخته که درر معرف الهی در صدف سینه اش مختفی است، گفته: عبدالرحیم بوری بوری یعنی بیا بیا، که دیگران را نان از بازار است و تو را از خانه یعنی کلام تو از الهامات ربانی باشد.»
حافظ
حسین کربلائی
تبریزی،
«روضات
الجنان»،
بنگاه ترجمه و
نشر کتاب، 1344-1349 1965-1970.
Karbalai Tabrizi, Hussein. “Rawdat al-Jinan va Jannat
al-Janan”, Bungah-I Tarjumah o Nashr-i Kitab, 1344-49 (1965-1970), 2 volumes.
In the Harzandi Iranic dialect of Harzand in Azerbaijan as well as the Iranic Karingani dialect of Azerbaijan, both recorded in the 20th century, the two words “Biri”and “Burah”means to “come”and are of the same root.
Source:
كارنگ، عبدالعلی: «تاتی و هرزنی، دو لهجه از زبان باستان آذربایجان»، تبریز،چاپخانه-ی شفق، 1333
Karang, Abdul Ali. “Tati o Harzani, Do lahjeh az zabaan-i
baastaan-i Azerbaijan”, Shafaq publishers, 1333(1955) (pg 91 and pg 112)
We note already that this phrase been used Baba Taher in his
Fahlavi dialect poem and Baba Taher lived two centuries before Rumi and Shams:
بوره کز دیده
جیحونی بسازیم
بوره لیلی
و مجنونی بسازیم
فریدون
عزیزم رفتی از
دست
بوره کز
تو فریدونی
بسازیم
بوره بلبل
بنالیم از سر
سوز
بوره آه
سحر از مو بیاموز
تو از
بهر گلی ده
روز نالی
مو از
بهر دل آرامم
شب و روز
Safīna-yi Tabriz (The Vessel of Tabriz or The Treasury
of Tabriz, Persian: سفینه
تبریز ) is an important encyclopedic manuscript
from 14th century Ilkhanid Iran compiled by Abu'l Majd Muhammad b. Mas'ud
Tabrizi between 1321 and 1323. Based on
the manuscript, the book has been published in facsimile by Tehran University
Press. As it constitutes a rare Islamic
manuscript that has recently been discovered, it has generated a great deal of
interest among Islamic, Western, Iranian and Middle Eastern scholars. It is almost
perfectly preserved, and contains 209 works on a wide range of subjects, in
Persian and Arabic as well as some poetry denoted by Fahlaviyat and the Iranian
language of Tabriz. According to Professors A. A. Seyed-Gohrab and S.
McGlinn: “The Safineh: is indeed a whole treasure-house, compressed between two
covers. One of the important features of the Safinah is that it contains works
of a number of philosophers who were not known until the discovery of the
manuscript.”
The texts of the Safina-yi Tabrizi contain separate chapters covering Hadith (Prophetic(PBUH&HP) tradition), lexicography, ethics, mysticism, jurisprudence, theology, exegesis, history, grammar, linguistics, literature, literary criticism, philosophy, astronomy astrology, geomancy, mineralogy, mathematics, medicine, music, physiognomy, cosmography and geography. According to Professors A.A. Seyed-Gohrab and S. McGlinn, some of the best available texts of important works of Islamic culture and learning are contained in this work.
A sample poem in which the author of the Safina writes “Zaban Tabrizi”(Language of Tabriz):
دَچَان
چوچرخ نکویت
مو ایر رهشه
مهر دورش
چَو
ِش دَ کارده
شکویت ولَول
ودَارد سَر ِ یَوه
پَری
بقهر اره میر
دون جو پور
زون هنرمند
پروکری
اَنزوتون منی
که آن هزیوه
اکیژ
بحتَ ورامرو کی
چرخ هانزمَویتی
ژژور
منشی چو بخت
اهون قدریوه
نه
چرخ استه نبوتی
نه روزو ورو
فوتی
زو
ِم چو واش خللیوه
زمم حو بورضی
ربوه
Sadeqi, Ali Ashraf. “Chand She’r beh Zaban-e Karaji, Tabrizi wa Ghayreh”(Some poems in the language of Karaji and Tabrizi and others), Majalla-ye Zabanshenasi, 9, 1379./2000, pp.14-17.
Available
at:
http://www.archive.org/details/OnTheKarajiAndTabriziIranicDialectsFoundInTheSafinayeTabriz
We
should also mention that an unfortunate error occurred in a recent overview of
the book: A.A. Seyed-Gohrab & S. McGlinn, The Treasury of Tabriz The Great
Il-Khanid Compendium, Iranian Studies Series, Rozenberg Publishers, 2007. And it is understandable that the authors were
not linguists, the mention a Turkish
dialect (Turki and Gurji). However the actual poem is here:
http://www.archive.org/details/OnTheKarajiAndTabriziIranicDialectsFoundInTheSafinayeTabriz
Here are the exchanges given by two Iranian authors with regards to this mistake (taken from another article):
Dear. Dr. Ghoraab,
I have the book you edited Safina Tabrizi and also your
book on Nizami Ganjavi: Love, Madness and Mystic longing. Both are excellent books.
I just wanted to make a correction on your article on
Safina. Pages 678-679 of the Safina are
not about a Turkish dialect (Tabrizi and Gurji)(page 18 of your book), but they
are both Iranian dialects that predate the Turkification of Tabriz. For more information, please check these two
articles by Dr. Ashraf Saadeghi
http://www.azargoshnasp.net/languages/Azari/zabankarajitabrizi.pdf
http://www.azargoshnasp.net/languages/Azari/AshrafSadeqiasharmahalimaraqi.pdf
There are Karaji and Tabrizi languages. Both are studied in detail by Dr. Sadeghi
Tashakkor,
….
Here was the response with this regard.
From: "Seyed, Gohrab A.A.
…
I would like to thank you very much for your kind email
and your friendly words about my books. I deeply appreciate your constructive
critical note and will surely correct this in a second edition of the book.
With kind regards and best wishes,
Asghar Seyed-Ghorab
Dr. A.A. Seyed-Gohrab
Chairman of the Department of Persian Studies
Fellow of the Young Academy of the Royal Netherlands
Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW)
Leiden University
Faculty of Arts
Thus the original Tabrizi language as mentioned in the Safinaye Tabriz is an Iranian dialect and here we quote again Baba Faraj Tabrizi in this dialect.
انانک قدهی فرجشون فعالم آندره اووارادا چاشمش نه پیف قدم کینستا نه پیف حدوث
Standard
Persian (translated by the author of Safina himself):
چندانک
فرج را در
عالم آوردهاند
چشم او نه بر
قدم افتاده
است نه بر
حدوث
Modern English:
They brought Faraj in this world in such a way that his eye is neither towards pre-eternity nor upon createdness.
Source:
منوچهر
مرتضوی، زبان
دیرین آذربایجان،
بنیاد
موقوفات دکتر
افشار، 1384.
Mortazavi, Manuchehr. Zaban-e-Dirin Azerbaijan (On the Old language of Azerbaijan). Bonyad Moqufaat Dr. Afshar. 2005(1384).
We should note that based on Safinaye Tabrizi, Professor. Mortazavi also states that the language of Shams Tabrizi was the old Fahlavi dialect of Azerbaijan. Thus the Safinaye Tabriz as well as other sources mentioned clearly reflects the fact that Tabriz was an ethnic Iranic speaking cultural town at that era. This remarkable text (the actual manuscript) should be in the library of any serious Rumi scholar since it gives a complete mirror of the culture of Tabriz at that time and also helps explaining the figure of Shams Tabrizi.
The name of Tabriz in Armenian which has borrowed heavily from Middle Persian and Parthian is TavRezh. In modern Persian this is Tabriz.
According to Britannica 2009:
“The name Tabrīz is said to derive from tap-rīz (“causing heat to flow”), from the many thermal springs in the area.” ("Tabrīz." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2009. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Oct. 2009 <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/579865/Tabriz>.)
However, Britannica not always being the most reliable source, further confirmation is needed. The Dehkhoda dictionary has explained this name well:
نوشتههای
ارمنی نیز
تلفظ به فتح
اول را تائید
میکنند یعنی
تَبریز.
«فاوست» بیزانسی
(در قرن چهارم
م.) آن را «تَورژ» (Thavrezh) و
«تَورش» (Thavresh)
نوشته است.
«آسولیک» (در
قرن یازدهم م)
«تَورژ» (Thavrezh)
نوشته است.
«واردان» (در قرن
چهاردهم م.)
«تَورژ» (Thavrezh) و
«دَورژ» (Davrezh) ذکر
کرده است.
منبعهای
ارمنی تائید میکند
که نام شهر در
قرن پنجم
(بلکه چهارم) میلادی
«تورژ» (Thavrezh) بود. خط
ارمنی خصوصیات
لهجهء پهلوی
شمالی را نشان
میدهد «تَپ =
تَو» (tap به taw) و به خصوص
«رژ» (rezh) بدل از «رچ» (rec) [=ریختن]
و به نظر میرسد
که بایستی این
تسمیه بسیار
قدیمی یعنی
قبل از دورهء
ساسانی و شاید
قبل از اشکانی
باشد
In the Kurdish language “rizh” is the same as Persian “riz” and “tav” is the same as Persian “tab”. Thus both forms Tabriz/Tavrezh indeed means “heat flow” and could be related to the volcanic mountains of the area. The name seems to be from the Parthian/Sassanid era as it is attested in the Armenian form. The Parthian/Sassanids also had influence and control (through Marzabans) in the Caucasus and it is possible the name “Tiblis” in Georgia is of the same form, given that the Iranian origin Bagtariads (who were Christianized and possibly Armenicized in some areas but Armenian keeping a large number of Middle Persian) controlled for a long time. According to some authors, the name Tafrish/Tabres in Central Iran could also be related.
As it is well known, this name had existed well before the linguistic Turkification of Azerbaijan. As the name Azerbaijan itself had existed well before its Turkification and goes back all the way to the Persian Atropat.
An important fact is that the two districts of Tabriz mentioned by Shams Tabrizi. They are called Surkhab and Charandaab. Both names are Iranian of course. Surkhab means the red water. As per Charandaab, the “aab” part is obvious but the “Charaan” part needs further examination. Two possible theories are related to the Persian word “Charaan” which means to graze in greenery, and thus as an analogue to Surkhab, Charaandaab could mean Green water. Another possibility is that the word is related to the Parthian chr which in Middle Persian is chrx (wheel, circle) and the name could mean “water circle”. Be that it may, the etymology of both words Sorkhab and Charandaab are clearly Iranian. It is significant that these two districts are also the oldest district of modern Tabriz and they both have Persian names. The fact of the matter is that these two districts are the ones that mentioned in the old classical sources and provide another proof of the Iranian linguistic character of the area during the time of Shams Tabrizi.
The Maqalaat is the main written legacy that we have from Shams Tabrizi. It is a book of Shams oral teaching which was written down by Rumi’s students, probably his son Sultan Walad.
According to Lewis:
“Rumi
repeatedly refers to the asrar, or “secrets,” of Shams, which may of course
refer to his oral teachings, but may also designate a written text. If the latter, it represents the name which
Rumi gave to the collection of Shams’ writings.
Some manuscripts of these discourses of Shams are entitled the Kalemat
(“Sayings”) or Ma’aref (“Gnostic Wisdom”) of Shams. By scholarly convention, however, these notes
are now generally referred to as the Maqalat, or “Discourses”, of Shams. This is the title given to them in one
partial manuscript of the work, a copy in all likelihood written out in the
hand of Rumi’s son, Sultan Valad; if so, the copy may date to the lifetime of
Shams.
..
A critical edition of Shams’
lectures with copious annotation and indices running to slightly over 1,000
pages was published by Mohammad-‘Ali Movahhed in 1990 as Maqalat-e Shams
Tabrizi (Tehran: Khwarizmi).
..
A reading of the Maqalat of
Shams will go much further to dispel the myths about the man. Shams’ writing reveal him to have been a man
well versed in the philosophical and theological discourse of his day, though
something of an iconoclast. The Maqalat
reveals Shams as an engaging speaker who expressed himself in a Persian both
simple and profoundly moving. Foruzanfar
considered shams’ Maqalat one of the true treasures of Persian
literature, with a depth that required several contemplative rereading. In addition to its own intrinsic value,
Shams’ Maqalat constitutes the single most important primary source (aide from
Rumi’s own writings, of course) for understanding Rumi’s spiritual
transformation and his teaching”(Franklin Lewis,Rumi Past and Present: pp
136-137).
The Maqalaat shows the everyday language of Shams Tabrizi was Persian and the work itself is in informal Persian. Indeed, these lectures were noted and written down by Shams’ students:
“Fortunately, Shams did leave
behind a bod of writings or, more precisely, notes taken down by his own or
Rumi’s disciples from lectures of Shams.”(Franklin, pg 135)
The Maqalaat is the main written legacy that we have from Shams Tabrizi. It is a book of Shams oral teaching which was written down by Rumi’s students, probably his son Sultan Walad. Indeed Shams Tabrizi really loved the Persian language as he himself states:
زبان
پارسی را چه
شده است؟ بدین
لطیفی و خوبی،
که آن معانی و
لطافت که در
زبان پارسی
آمده است و در
تازی نیامده
است.
It is well known that Dowlatshah Samarqand (d. 1487) and then Nur Allah Shushtari (d. 1610) and several others have claimed that Shams Tabrizi was a descendant of the Persian Ismaili Imams of Alamut. This point of view however is rejected by most modern scholars. Early orientalist scholars including E.G. Browne have adopted this viewpoint. It may have been possible for Ismailis to do Taqqiya after the capture of Alamut and pass themselves as Shafi’ites, but there is currently no conclusive proof with this regard.
Another theory is that Shams ad-din Muhammad was the son of ‘Ali who was the son of Malikdad (Persian word meaning given by the King were Malik is an Arabic loanword and Dad is Persian for given). This theory is based on Aflaki (the author of Manaqib al’Arifin which will say more of later) who is also always not accepted by scholars in every genealogical detail.
With regards to Shams Tabrizi we examined the two aspects: cultural and ethnic. From the point of view of cultural contribution, the everyday language of Shams Tabrizi was Persian and his oral teaching is recorded in Persian. With regards to his ethnic background, he was a speaker Fahlavi Persian dialect as mentioned by the word “Buri” in one poem and also the general picture given by the language of Tabriz at that time.
As mentioned during the time of Shams Tabrizi, the people of Tabriz were Shafi’ite Sunnites and spoke the Tabrizi Persian dialect. Turks as well as Khorasani and Eastern Iranians (like Pashtuns and Persians (Tajiks) of Afghanistan and Tajikistan today) were generally Hanafis. That is while it is very rare for Turks to be Shafi’ites in history, Shafi’ism is the common rite in Western Iran and still all Iranian Sunni speakers of Western Iran such as Kurds and the Sunni Talysh follow this rite. This however was not the case in say Khorasan and Balkh and Central Asia were Hanafism (founded by an Iranian Muslim) was the prevalent rite for Iranian and Turkish Muslims of that area.
The Iranian culture of Tabriz is also fully reflected in the grand manuscript of Safinaye Tabriz. Also the fact that Shams Tabrizi is linked to the Ismaili Hassan Sabah or Malikdad shows that he was of Iranian background. His pir has also been mentioned as “Seleh-Baaf” which again shows the usage of Persian in that area at that time. Unfortunately, some modern scholars do not have enough information on Tabriz at that time, but the manuscript of Safinaye Tabriz provides a complete picture of the cultural activity and the Sufic mystism and Shafi’I Islam prevalent there. So there is no more execuses (although unfortunately some of these scholars have written about the manuscripts without looking at its finepoints and confirming it with facts in the manuscript).
In passing, we would like to mention an interesting point with regards to Rumi and Shams Tabrizi. Shams Tabrizi considered the Persian language even sweeter than Arabic:
زبان
پارسی را چه
شده است؟ بدین
لطیفی و خوبی،
که آن معانی و
لطافت که در
زبان پارسی
آمده است و در
تازی نیامده
است.
Where-as Rumi considered Arabic sweeter than Persian:
پارسی گو گرچه تازی خوشتر است – عشق را صد زبان دیگر است
Hesam al-Din Chelebi was Rumi’s favorite student and Rumi designated him as his successor. His background is clearly Kurdish as mentioned by several sources.
According to Franklin: “Rumi traces Hosam al-Din’s descent through a famous but uneducated mystic, Abu al-Vafa Kordi (d. 1107). This would mean Hosam al-Din had some Kurdish blood, which makes perfect sense, since Rumi describes his family as hailing from Urmia in Northwestern Iran”(pg 215-216).
His full name is also given as Hosam al-Din Hasan the son of Muhammad the son of Hassan(Badi’ al-Zaman Foruzanfar, Sharh-e ahval va naqd va tahlil-e asar-e Shaykh Farid al-Din Mohammad-e ‘Attar-e Nayshaburi, Tehran, Tehran University Press, 1139-40, reprinted by Zavvar publisher, 1382. (FB))
Thus we note that Shaykh Abu al-Vafa Kordi was born even prior to the Seljuq takeover of Urmia from local Kurdish and Daylamite dynasties.
This is also mentioned by Turkish authors:
“Husam al-Din Chelebi’s grandfather was a great saint, Shaykh Taj al-Din Abu al-Wafa, who was Kurdish and died in Baghdad in 1107. Although this great saint was illiterate, he was a Gnostic. Some members of the community who only valued education levels, high positions, wealth, and physical appearances asked him to preach to them in order to embarrass this great saint. Shaykh Abu al-Wafa al-Kurdi replied: “God willing, I shall preach tomorrow. Be present.” The night he supplicated sincerely to God, performed the ritual prayer, and went to bed. In his dream he saw the Prophet of Islam. The Prophet gave good news to this illiterate Kurdish saint: “God manifested Himself to him through his name ‘Alim (All knowing) and Hakim (All-Wise).”. The next day when he sat on the Kursi, or chair, to begin his sermon in the mosque, his first sentence was: “I slept as a Kurd at night and got up as an Arab in the morning”( Şefik Can, M. Fethullah Gulen, Zeki Saritoprak, "Fundamental of Rumi's Thought: A Mevlevi Sufi Perspective", Tughra; Second edition edition (December 1, 2005). Pp 78)
This is mentioned by Aflaki as well:
“The feats of the Bayazid of the
age, the Jonayd of the era, key to the treasuries of the Celestial Throne
(‘arsh), custodian of the treasure of the earth’s surface (farsh), Friend of
God on earth (ard), performer of customary practices and religious duty (fard),
intercessor for the supporters on the Day of Review (‘ard), Hosam al-Haqq va’l
Din b. Hasan b. Mohammad b. al-Hasan b. Akhi Tork, who associated himself with
the revered Shaykh [Mowlana], saying: “I went to bed a Kurd and I woke up an
Arab”. God be pleased with him and his
ancestors and how excellent his descendants!(Shams al-Din Aflaki,
"The feats of the knowers of God: Manāqeb al-ʻārefīn",
translated by John O'Kane, Brill, 2002.) (hence forth referred to as Aflaki)
Note, the translator (John O’Kane) has put [Mowlana] in brackets, where-as the
revered Shaykh is probably Shaykh Abu al-Vafa Kordi and not Mowlana.
And Rumi also calls him from Urmia and of
Kurdish descent in the introduction of the Masnavi:
صدیق
ابن الصدیق رضی
الله عنه و
عنوهم الارموی
الاصل
المنتسب الی
اشیخ المکرم
بما قال امسیت
کردیا و اصحب
عربیا
Some might point to the curious title “Akhi Tork” (mentioned
by several scholar), for Mohammad, the actual name of Hosam al-Din’s
father. However, in Persian script,
like in Arabic, the short vowels are not written and diacritic signs are used
to clarify when required.
We should first mention that this is a title and not the actual name of Mohammad. Nevertheless going with the opinion of scholars of Rumi, why was he given such a title?
According to Şefik Can, M. Fethullah Gulen, Zeki
Saritoprak, “Since Husam al-Din’s father was the
head of Akhi group living in and around Konya, he was called “Akhi Turk”. (pg
78)
The Akhi groups were fraternal brotherhoods and it seems Hosam al-Din’s father was the head of one of these guilds in Konya. Ibn Battuta (13th century) connects the word with Arabic “my brother” while other sources have connected the word with the Uighyur “generous”. In our opinion, since the guilds were a sort of brotherhood, and since the members of these groups addressed their leader as “Akhi” (my brotherhood), probably the Arabic term makes more sense. Such guilds are not seen at the time in Cenral Asia but they are in Iran and Anatolia. Be that it may, accoring to Franklin: “These brotherhoods, with their code of civic virtue and mercantile morality, but which also exhibited features of a militia or a mafia-like gang, constituted a king of alternative to the Sufi orders and their focus on ascetic and Gnostic spirituality”.(pg 216).
Thus it is likely given the location of Konya, the title “Akhi Turk” (my brother Turk) was adopted by Mohammad (Hosam al-Din’s father) and thus Hosam al-Din was also given the title Ibn Akhi-Tork (the son of Akhi-Tork). However as mentioned, a title cannot be used to resolve this matter. A clear indicator of Hosam al-Din’s Kurdish background can be ascertained by the fact that Hosam al-Din was also a Shafi’ite Sunni.
According to Franklin: “Aflaki
reports that Hosam al-Din, like Shams of Tabriz, followed the rites of the
Shafe’I school of Islamic law. One day
Hosam al-Din said that he wished to convert to the Hanafi creed, “because our
mster of the Hanafi creed”. Rumi told
him that it would better to keep his own creed and simply to follow the
mystical teachins of Rumi and guide the people to his creed of love” (pg
226)
Overall, most of the Iranians from Central Asia and Khorasan were Hanafis however the majority of Iranians from Western Iran (like Shams Tabrizi, the city of Tabriz before Safavids, Suhrawardi, Shaykh Mahmud Shabistari, , Kurds, Sunni Talysh and Hosam al-Din) were Shafi’ites. However, when it comes to Turkic Sunni Muslims, they were uniformly and overwhelmingly (not just majority but overwhelmingly and uniformly) were Hanafis (an exception is in the Caucasus were in the Northern Caucasus some tribes were converted to Shafi’ism in a much later period than that of Rumi). Here are some statements with this regard.
“The Turkmens who entered Anatolia no doubt brought with
them vestiges of the pre-Islamic inner Asian shamanistic past but eventually
became in considerable measure firm adherents of the near-universal Islamic
madhab for the Turks, the Hanafi one”(Mohamed Taher,
“Encyclopedic Survey of Islamic Culture”, Anmol Publication PVT, 1998. Turkey:
Pg 983).
Another testament to this is from traveler Ibn Batuttah who lived in the 14th century. On Turks, he provides some description of their religion: “..After eating their food, they drink the yogurt/milk of mare called Qumiz. The Turks are followers of Hanafism and consider eating Nabidh (Alcoholic beverage) as Halal (lawful in Islam).”(Ibn Batuttah, translated by Dr. Ali Muvahid, Tehran, Bongaah Publishers, 1969).
“There have sometimes been forcible and wholesale removals
from one “rite” to another, generally for political reasons; as when the
Ottoman Turks, having gained power in Iraq and the Hijaz in the sixteenth
century, compelled the Shafi’ite Qadis either to change to the Hanafi “rite” to
which they (the Turks) belonged, or to relinquish office.”(Reuben Levy, “Social Structure of Islam”, Taylor and Francis, 2000.
Pg 183).
“Hanafism was founded by a Persian, Imam Abu Hanifa, who was
a student of Imam Ja’far Al-Sadeq, ... His school held great attraction from
the beginning for Turks as well as Muslims of the Indian subcontinent. Today
the Hanafi school has the largest number of follows in the Sunni world,
including most Sunni Turks, the Turkic people of Caucasus, and Central Asia,
European Muslims, and the Muslims of Indian subcontinent “(Nasr, Seyyed
Hossein. “The Heart of Islam: Enduring Values for Humanity”.
HarperColins, 2004. Pg 68).
“On the other hand, because the Turkish rulers were so devoted to Islamic beliefs, they had accepted Hanafism with a great vigor and conviction”(Mehmed Fuad Koprulu’s , Early Mystics in Turkish Literature, Translated by Gary Leiser and Robert Dankoff , Routledge, 2006, pg 8).
This is still the case today in modern Turkey:
“Unlike the Sunni Turks, who follow the Hanafi school of Islamic law, the Sunni Kurds follow the Shafi’i school”(Federal Research Div Staff, Turkey: A Country Study, Kessinger Publishers, 2004. pg 141).
Thus we believe both the Shafi’ism whom all Sunni Kurds follow (where-as all Sunni Turks follow Hanafism like all Sunni Tajiks (Iranians) of Central Asia and Afghanistan) as well as the various testaments to the Kurdish ancestry of Hosam al-Din (whose ancestry goes back before the Seljuq era in the area) are sufficient that Hosam al-Din was also Kurdish (and hence Iranian in the ethno-linguistic sense).
On two other Rumi companions,for example Fereydun Sepahsalar and Salah al-Din Zarkub, there is not enough information although we believe these were also among the Iranian refugees that fled to Konya. Fereydun Sepahsalar is a pure Persian name and Sahal al-Din Zarkub has the title “Zarkub” as a trade. However there is not sufficient detail with this regard. Based on examination of Aflaki though, it is our opinion that for example Salah al-Din Zarkub was Persian (or possibly Kurdish). This is illustrated by this anectode:
[23]
Likewise, it is a well-known story that one day Shaykh Salah al-Din
happened to hire Turkish laborers to do building work in his garden. Mowlana said: ‘Effendi’— that is to say
lord—‘Salah al-Din, when it is time for building, one must engage Greek laborers
and when it is time for destroying something, Turkish hirelings. Indeed, the building of the world is assigned
to the Greeks, whereas the world’s destruction is reserved for the Turks. When God—He is sublime and exalted—ordered
the creation of the world of sovereignty (‘alam-e molk’), first He created
unaware-infidels, and He conferred on them long life and great strength so they
would strive like hired laborers in building the terrestrial world. And they built up many cities and fortresses
on mountain peaks and places on top of a hill such that after generations had
passed these constructions were a model for those who came later. Then divine predestination saw to it that
little by little these constructions would become completely destroyed and desolate,
and be eradicated. God created the group
of Turks so that they would destroy every building they saw, mercilessly and
ruthlessly, and cause it to be demolished.
And they are still doing so, and day by day until the Resurrection they
will continue to destroy in this manner.
In the end, the destruction of the city of Konya will also be at the
hands of wicked Turks devoid of mercy.’
And this being the case, it turned out just as Mowlana said. (pg 503)
Now this anectode from Aflaki makes it fairly clear that neither Rumi nor Salah al-Din were Turks and felt any Turkishness. Such disparaging remarks would be unthinkable even assuming its hagiographic nature if any of these two characters were Turkish. We shall examine Aflaki in this own section.
Rumi’s father Baha al-Din Mohammad Walad was an important mystic and scholar in his own right. The most widely acknowledged study on him is that of Fritz Meier.
According to Franklin:
“Among German scholars who have devoted their attention to Sufism, the systematic and exacting standards of Hellmut Ritter, Fritz Meier, Richard Gamlich and J.C. Burgel are truly admirable. Consider, for example, the Swiss scholar Fritz Meier’s (1912-9) work on Baha al-Din Valad, Baha-I Walad: Gundzuge seins Lebens und seiner Mystic (Leiden: Brill, 1989), running to over 450 pages. Meier has done more than any other single Person in the West to clarify the biographical details and theology of Rumi’s father and thereby, Rumi himself. Meier’s thorough and precise study provides an amazing mine of carefully research and carefully considered information, as well as a wealth of insightful analysis about Rumi’s family and their area of operation” (Rumi: Past Present, east and West, pp 540-541).
According to Schimmel:
“In recent years, the most
important publication concerning Rumi’s background is the voluminous book by
the indefatigable Swiss scholar Fritz Meier, Bahad-I Walad (Leiden,
1989). This book, the result of
painstaking analysis of the life and work of Maulana’s father, finally offers
reliable about Maulana’s early days.
Meier’s finding requires changes of the first pages of our book. To sum up: Baha-I Walad did not live in Balkh
itself but in a small place north of the Oxus (present-day Tajikistan) by the
name of Wakhsh, which was the under the administration of Balkh. (That his son stated to have come from Balkh
would correspond to modern American’s claim to hail from New York while he
might have been born and raised in a small town in upstate Ney York or in Long
Island.” (Schimmel,
Annemarie. “The Triumphal Sun. A Study of the Works of Jalaloddin Rumi”. Albany:
SUNY Press, 1993. xiv)
According to Lewis:
“Baha al-Din’s
father, Hosayn, had been a religious scholar with a bent for asceticism,
occupied like his own father before him, Ahmad, with the family profession of
preacher (khatib). Of the four
canonical schools of Sunni Islam, the family adhered to the relatively liberal
Hanafi rite. Hosayn-e Khatibi enjoyed
such renown in his youth – so says Aflaki with characteristic exaggeration –
that Razi al-Din Nayshapuri and other famous scholars came to study with him
(Af 9; for the legend about Baha al-Din, see below, “The Mythical Baha
al-Din”). Another report indicates that
Baha al-Din’s grandfather, Ahmad al-Khatibi, was born to Ferdows Khatun, a
daughter of the reputed Hanafite jurist and author Shams al-A’emma Abu Bakr of
Sarakhs, who died circa 1088 (Af 75; FB 6 n.4; Mei 74 n. 17). This is far from implausible and , if true,
would tend to suggest that Ahmad al-Khatabi had studied under Shams
al-A’emma. Prior to that the family
could supposedly trace its roots back to Isfahan. We do not learn the name of Baha al-Din’s
mother in the sources, only that he referred to her as “Mama” (Mami), and that
she lived to the 1200s.”(pg 44)
Finally according to Fritz Meyer himself (we did not have access to the German and have used the professional Persian translation by Maryam Musharraf):
بها
حنفی بود و به
عنوان یک خطیبی
– لقب خانوادگیش
– شاید از خطیبیون
اصفهان به
شمار میرفت
که در منازعات
میان حنفیهای
ماتریدی و
شافعیها در
قرن 5/11 و 6/12 سهم
مهمی داشتند. (صفحه 50)
خانواده
بها "خطیبی"
نام داشت که یادآور
نام خانوادهای
از عالمان حنفی
اهل اصفهان
است.
خانواده بها
نسب خود را به
خلیفه ابوبکر
میرساندند. "ولد"
به معنی پسر
لقب بها بود زیرا
مادرش تا سنین
سالخوردگی نیز
او را با همین
نام مینامید. بها نیز
مادر خورا
"مامی" یا
"مامی" میخوانده
است. (صفحه 448)
Thus Fritz Meier suggests that the family’s genealogy goes
back to Isfahan and more specifically to the Khatibi scholars of the Hanafi
rite. At the same time, he states that
the family claimed descent from Abu Bakr (although he does not specify in our
Persian translation when such a claim was made?). However the Encyclopedia Iranica article by
H. Algar as well as the Encyclopedia of Islam on Rumi discounts this
claim.
According to the Encyclopedia of Islam
ḎJ̲alāl
al- Dīn Rūmī b.
Bahāʾ
al-Dīn Sulṭān
al-ʿulamāʾ Walad b. Ḥusayn b. Aḥmad Ḵh̲aṭībī ,
known by the sobriquet Mawlānā (Mevlânâ), Persian poet and founder of
the Mawlawiyya order of dervishes, which was named after him, was born on
Rabīʿ I 604/30 September 1207 in Balk̲h̲, and
died on 5 Ḏj̲umāda
II 672/1273 in Ḳonya. The reasons put forward against the above-mentioned
date of birth (Abdülbaki Gölpınarlı, Mevlânâ Celâleddîn 3, 44; idem,
Mevlânâ Şams-i Tabrîzî ile altmış iki yaşında
buluştu, in Şarkiyat Mecmuası, iii, 153-61; and Bir yazı üzerine,
in Tarih Coǧrafya Dünyası, ii/12, 1959, 468) are not valid. His father, whose sermons have been
preserved and printed ( Maʿārif
. Mad̲j̲mūʿa-i mawāʿiẓ wa suk̲h̲anān-i Sulṭān al-ʿulamāʾ
Bahāʾ Dīn Muḥammad b. Ḥusayn-i Ḵh̲aṭībī-i Balk̲h̲ī
mas̲h̲hūr
ba-Bahāʾ-i Walad , ed. Badīʿ
al-Zamān Furūzānfarr, Tehran 1333),
was a preacher in Balk̲h̲. The assertions that his family tree goes back to
Abū Bakr, and that his mother was a daughter of the Ḵh̲wārizms̲h̲āh
ʿAlāʾ
al-Dīn Muḥammad
(Aflākī, i, 8-9) do not hold on closer examination (B. Furūzānfarr, Mawlānā Ḏj̲alāl Dīn , Tehrān 1315, 7; ʿAlīnaḳī S̲h̲arīʿatmadārī, Naḳd-i
matn-i mat̲h̲nawī
, in Yag̲h̲mā
, xii (1338), 164; Aḥmad Aflākī,
Ariflerin menkibeleri, trans. Tahsin Yazıcı, Ankara 1953, i, Önsöz,
44).
(Ritter, H.; Bausani, A. "ḎJ̲alāl al- Dīn Rūmī b. Bahāʾ al-Dīn Sulṭān al-ʿulamāʾ Walad b. Ḥusayn b. Aḥmad Ḵh̲aṭībī ." Encyclopaedia of Islam. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill, 2009. Brill Online. Excerpt: "known by the sobriquet Mawlānā (Mevlânâ), Persian poet and founder of the Mawlawiyya order of dervishes")
According to the Encyclopedia Iranica:
BAHĀʾ-AL-DĪN MOḤAMMAD WALAD B. ḤOSAYN B. AḤMAD ḴAṬĪB BALḴĪ
(546-628/1151-1231), father of Mawlānā Jalāl-al-Dīn
Rūmī (q.v.), the great Sufi poet and eponym of the Mevlevî order,
with reference to whom he became posthumously known as Mawlānā-ye
bozorg (the elder Mawlānā). In his lifetime he was generally
known as Bahāʾ-e Walad, and often referred to in
addition by the title
solṭān al-ʿolamāʾ (king of the scholars).
According to his grandson, Solṭān Walad (d. 632/1235), the title
originated with a dream seen on the same night by all the muftis of Balḵ in which the Prophet
himself designated Bahāʾ-al-Dīn
as
solṭān al-ʿolamāʾ ; when they awoke,
they hastened to pay homage to him (Walad-nāma, ed. J. Homāʾī, Tehran, 1315 Š./1936, p. 188;
see also
Ferīdūn Sepahsālār, Resāla-ye Sepahsālār,
Kanpur, 1319/1910, p. 7 and Šams-al-Dīn Aḥmad Aflākī, Manāqeb
al-ʿārefīn, ed. T.
Yazıcı, Ankara, 1959, I, p. 7). Bahāʾ-e Walad himself records that the title solṭān al-ʿolamāʾ was given him in a
dream by an old man of luminous visage, and thereafter he insisted on using the
title when signing the fatwās he issued (Maʿāref, ed. B.
Forūzānfar, Tehran, 1333 Š./1954, I, pp. 188-89).
Bahāʾ-e
Walad says that he was approaching the age of 55 on 1 Ramażān 600/3
March 1203 (Maʿāref I, p. 354); he must therefore have been
born in 546/1151-52. His father was a scholar and ascetic of great eminence in
Balḵ, the offspring of a family that had been settled in Khorasan for
many generations. According to many writers, they were descended from the
caliph Abū Bakr (Resāla-ye Sepahsālār, p. 6; Manāqeb
al-ʿārefīn I, p. 7; Jāmī, Nafaḥāt,
p. 457). Sepahsālār does not provide a complete genealogy and the
six, seven, or eight generations mentioned by other authors are clearly too few
to bridge the six centuries that elapsed between Abū Bakr and Bahāʾ-e
Walad (see B. Forūzānfar, Resāla dar taḥqīq-e aḥwāl
wa zendagānī-e Mawlānā Jalāl-al-Dīn Moḥammad,
Tehran, 1315 Š./1936, p. 4). The two lines found in some copies of the Walad-nāma
that attribute Bakri descent to Bahāʾ-e Walad were probably
inserted in the text by a copyist (see A. Gölpınarlı’s footnote to
his translation of Walad-nāma under the title İbtida-name,
Ankara, 1976, p. 237). There is no reference to such descent in the works of
Bahāʾ-e Walad and Mawlānā Jalāl-al-Dīn or in the
inscriptions on their sarcophagi. The attribution may have arisen from
confusion between the caliph and another Abū Bakr, Šams-al-Aʾemma
Abū Bakr Saraḵsī (d. 483/1090), the well-known Hanafite jurist,
whose daughter, Ferdows Ḵātūn, was the mother of Aḥmad Ḵaṭīb,
Bahāʾ-e Walad’s grandfather (see Forūzānfar, Resāla,
p. 6).
Tradition
also links Bahāʾ-e Walad’s lineage to the Ḵᵛārazmšāh
dynasty. His mother is said to have been the daughter of ʿAlāʾ-al-Dīn
Moḥammad Ḵᵛārazmšāh (d. 596/1200), but this appears
to be excluded for chronological reasons (Forūzānfar, Resāla,
p. 7).
(H. Algar, “BAHĀʾ-AL-DĪN
MOḤAMMAD WALAD “ ,
Encyclopedia Iranica)
Franklin touches upon this point in the section “The Mythical Baha al-Din” (pp 90-91) of his book:
“The persistence of a
community of individuals residing physically in the shrine of a saint and the
schools and hospices that sometimes grew up around them, as well as the spread
of an order promulgating esoteric teachings and a reverential attitude towards
its founding fathers, naturally tend to create a legendary even miraculous vita
for them. Sultan Valad himself already
contributed to this super naturalizing tendency in his “Book of Beginnings” (Ebdeta
Nama), in which he compares Baha al-Din to the famous Sufis of the
past. This naturally leads him to
describe his grandfather’s life according to the expectations of the
hagiographical genre.
Because his pupil, Borhan
al-Din, and his son, Jalal al-Din Rumi, provide precious little information
about Baha al-Din, the brief account by Sultan Valad (SVE 187-93) offers the
earliest coherent portrait of him. The
halo of holiness which already obscures Baha al-Din the man in his grandson’s
account shines even more blindingly in the chronicle of Sepahsalar (Sep 10-21)
and in the “Acts of the Gnostics” by Ahmad Aflakii (Af 7-55). Later writes, such as Jami, Dowlatshah and
Amin Ahmad Razi, whether committed or not to the perpetuation of a mythic image
of Baha al-Din and Jalal al-Din, effectively reinforced or enhanced the popular
and miraculous reputation of their subjects by repeating the tale of the
earlier “biographers.” For decades
scholars, relying rather too credulously on these accounts, have likewise
repeated these legends, lending them an air of respectability.
The outstanding feature
in the hagiographer’s mythical portrait of Baha al-Din in his fame as a
theologian and scholar of religious law.
Though Baha al-Din may indeed have achieved some reputation in Vakhsh or
even Balkh or Samarqand, he did not enjoy wider renown as a religious scholar
or public figure, as I have been at pains to show. No mention of Baha al-Din Valad has turned up
in the sources contemporary to him, such a biographical dictionaries or the
works of other religious scholars such as Fakhr al-Din Razi. Much later sources describe him only in relation
to his famous son, not as an independent figure. Baha al-Din’s own writing, Ma’rif,
were never disseminated to a wider audience in the medieval period and he could
not, therefore have been famous as an author.
Baha al-Din’s disciples
also traced his family lineage to the first caliph, Abu Bakr (Sep 9; Af 7; JNO
457; Dow 213). This probably stems from
willful confusion over his paternal great grandmother, who was the daughter of
Abu Bakr of Sarakhs, a noted jurist (d. 1090).
The most complete genealogy offered for family only stretches back six
or seven generations and cannot possibly reach to Abu Bakr, the companion and
first caliph of the Prophet, who died two years after the Prophet, in A.D. 634
(FB 5-6 n.3). One would furthermore
expect descent from Abu Bakr, were it part of the family lore during the
lifetime of Baha al-Din, to be a source of pride and professional authority,
yet there is no mention of this in the writings of Baha al-Din or Jalal al-Din
Rumi, nor do the inscriptions on their sarcophagi mention it. Mention of this supposed lineage does turn up
in some manuscripts of our earliest biographical source, Sultan Valad’s Ebteda
Name (SVE 187), but Golpinarli speculated that a later copyist interpolated
these remarks on the basis of Aflaki (AF 8) or Sepahsalar (Sep 9). Whether or not this is so, we have seen how
Sultan Valad errs or ignores a great
many facts about his grandfather.
Ahmad Aflaki (Af 7-9)
makes the claim that Baha al-Din’s mother was the daughter of ‘Ala al-Din
Mohammad Khwarazmshah (r. 1200 – 1220), described as “the paternal uncle” of
Jalal al-Din Khwarazmshah. Jami repeats
this (JNO 458), but the chronology is impossible (FB 7), and in any case , the
portrait of her that emerges from Baha al-Din’s comments does not square with a
royal lineage (Mei 45). Furthermore, the
association of religious figures with royalty in the Iranian hagiographical
tradition (e.g., the intermarriage of the last Sassanian princess with the
‘Alid family) is typological and must therefore be viewed with extreme
skepticism.
The hagiographers likewise assert spiritual descent from famous Sufis for Baha al-Din. Aflaki (998) and Sepahsalar (9) link him, through his grandfather, with Ahmad Ghazzali (d. 1126), younger brother of the more famous Abu Hamed Ghazzali, and Jami (JNO 457) relays the suggestion that Baha al-Din may have been a disciple of the great Najm al-Din Kobra (d. 1220). Neither attribution is corroborated, explicitly or implicitly, in the writings of Baha al-Din, Rumi or Sultan Valad; this fact, in itself, almost certainly negates the possibility. The meeting with ‘Attar has been dealt with above, along with the miraculous dream about the title “Sultan al-ulama”. Through the main contours of this legendary image of Baha al-Din disoolve like a mirage under close scrutiny, the picture which emerges from the Ma’aref, of a visionary, God-intoxicated mystic who achieved wider recognition only in his seventies, is no less remarkable.” (Lewis, 90-92)
So what do we know from all these data? We only know with certainty that Rumi’s great Grandfather was Ahmad Khatibi. The claim descent from Abu Bakr the companion of the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) is dismissed by modern scholars and is seen as a later development in the history of the sect. The claim descent of Rumi’s mother or Baha al-Din’s mother to the Khwarzmshah is also dismissed by scholars due to impossibility and chronological reasons. Obviously to claim descent from royalty or the companion of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) by later followers of the sect would be a cause of prestige. Then also there is the claim of Baha al-Din Walad’s family going back to the Khatibun Hanafi scholars of Isfahan.
Thus we do not have the most exact account and are left clueless on Rumi’s father-line beyond Ahmad Khatibi. However the native language of Baha al-Din Walad is sufficient to show that the family’s native language was Persian and hence they were Persian. We did not expect in the beginning to be able to trace Baha al-Din Walad’s ancestry to Darius the Great. However the native sedentary populations of towns such as Sarakhs, Isfahan, Balkh, Vakhsh and etc. were Persians and the incoming Turkish nomads were either Iranicized or had tribal associations, none of it seen in Rumi or Baha al-Din’s work. Thus we must concentrate on culture again and in this case we examine the language of Balkh, Vakhsh and also the work of Baha al-Din Walad.
Annemarie Schimmel, "I Am Wind, You
Are Fire," p. 11. She refers to an (1989) article by the German scholar,
Fritz Meier: "Afghan and Persian admirers still
prefer to call Jalaluddin 'Balkhi' because his family lived in Balkh before
migrating westward. However, their home was not in the actual city of Balkh,
since the mid-eighth century a center of Muslim culture in Khorasan (now
Afghanistan). Rather, as the Swiss scholar Fritz Meier has shown, it was in the
small town of Wakhsh north of the Oxus that Baha'uddin Walad, Jalaluddin's
father, lived and worked as a jurist and preacher with mystical
inclinations."
Franklin Lewis, "Rumi--Past and
Present, East and West: The Life, Teachings, and Poetry of Jalâl al-Din
Rumi," 2000, paperback 2003, pp. 47-49. Professor Lewis has devoted two
full pages of his book to the topic of Wakhsh, which he states has been
identified with the medieval town of Lêwkand (or Lâvakand) or Sangtude, which
is about 65 kilometers southeast of Dushanbe, the capital of present-day
Tajikistan. He says it is on the east bank of the Vakhshâb River, a major
tributary that joins the Amu Daryâ River (also called Jayhun, and named the
Oxus by the Greeks). He further states:
"Bahâ
al-Din may have been born in Balkh, but at least between June 1204 and 1210
(Shavvâl 600 and 607), during which time Rumi was born, Bahâ al-Din resided in a
house in Vaksh (Bah 2:143 [= Bahâ' uddîn Walad's book, "Ma`ârif." See
translation below--note inserted here by Ibrahim Gamard]). Vakhsh, rather than
Balkh, was the permanent base of Bahâ al-Din and his family until Rumi was
around five years old (mei 16-35) [= from a book in German by the scholar Fritz
Meier--note inserted here]. At that time, in about the year 1212 (A.H. 608-9),
the Valads moved to Samarqand (Fih 333; Mei 29-30, 36) [= reference to Rumi's
"Discourses" and to Fritz Meier's book--note inserted here], leaving
behind Baâ al-Din's mother, who must have been at least seventy-five years old."
Thus
modern scholarship is unsure of the birth place of Baha al-Din, but has very
much agreed that the birth of Rumi in Vakhsh
(Tajikistan). Traditional hagiography
had indicated Balkh near Mazar-i Sharif in modern Afghanistan as the birth
place of Rumi. Two explanations that are
given is that: 1) Balkh was province rather than a city and Wakhsh was under
Balkh’s administration; 2) Baha al-Din was born in Balkh or was from Balkh, but
he has moved to Vakhsh to be the local religious preacher of the area.
In
general the two areas are close and the language of the urban centers was
Persian and could not have been different.
And Vakhsh itself was considered as part of Balkh province at that
time. Before the advent of Islam,
Eastern Iranian languages were dominant in Central Asia.
According
C.E. Bosworth, "The Appearance of the Arabs in Central Asia under
the Umayyads and the establishment of Islam", in History of
Civilizations of Central Asia, Vol. IV: The Age of Achievement: AD 750 to
the End of the Fifteenth Century, Part One: The Historical, Social and Economic
Setting, edited by M. S. Asimov and C. E. Bosworth. Multiple History Series.
Paris: UNESCO Publishing, 1998. Excerpt from page 23: "Central
Asia in the early seventh century was ethnically, still largely an Iranian land
whose people used various Middle Iranian languages.
C. Edmund Bosworth: "In early Islamic times Persians tended to identify all the lands to the northeast of Khorasan and lying beyond the Oxus with the region of Turan, which in the Shahnama of Ferdowsi is regarded as the land allotted to Fereydun's son Tur. The denizens of Turan were held to include the Turks, in the first four centuries of Islam essentially those nomadizing beyond the Jaxartes, and behind them the Chinese (see Kowalski; Minorsky, "Turan"). Turan thus became both an ethnic and a geographical term, but always containing ambiguities and contradictions, arising from the fact that all through Islamic times the lands immediately beyond the Oxus and along its lower reaches were the homes not of Turks but of Iranian peoples, such as the Sogdians and Khwarezmians."( C.E. Bosworth, “Central Asia: The Islamic period up to the Mongols” in Encyclopedia Iranica).
In addition to Sogdians and Khwarezmians, we may also add Hephtalites
whom modern science considers Eastern Iranian (50-60 years ago various theories
were floated around about Hephtalites) but modern has shown based on detailed
etymological analysis that they were also Eastern Iranians.
Xavier Tremblay Pour une histore de la Sérinde. Le manichéisme
parmi les peoples et religions d’Asie Centrale d’aprés les sources primaire,
Vienna, 2001, Appendix D «Notes Sur L'Origine Des Hephtalites”
or
B.A. Livinsky, "The Hephthalites" in History of
Civilizations of Central Asia - Vol. 3. South Asia Books; 1 edition (March
1999). pg 135
We should note that Muslim writers have confused Altaic speaking Turks
with some Iranian peoples like Sogdians, Hephtalites, Alans and also even
Tibetians, Chinese and Mongols.
After the Arab invasion of Persia, large numbers of Persian speakers
were brought to Central Asia and surprisingly, the Arab invasion strengthened
Persian in Central Asia at the cost of other East Iranian languages. According to FOUCHÉCOUR:
“Another factor in the evolution of Middle
Persian to Persian was the geographical spread of this language in the wake of
the Arab conquest. Following the path of the Arab invasion, Persian spread from
its own heartlands to Central Asia (Transoxania). For their conquests, the
Arabs enlisted indigenous peoples in their armies. These local populations did
not speak a standardized Persian and in many cases did not even use Persian
among themselves. Nevertheless, the Persian of the time served as a lingua
franca for these enlisted men. They were to spread this new version in the
conquered provinces, from Azerbaijan to Central Asia, to the detriment of other
Iranian languages or other dialects of Persian. Such was the case of Sogdian, a
language belonging to an age-old culture that was largely engulfed by Persian.
Thus Persian became, in due course, the court language of the first
semi-independent Muslim principalities, most notably those founded in the
Greater Khorasan.”(CHARLES-HENRI DE FOUCHÉCOUR, “Iran:
Classical Persian literature” in Encyclopedia Iranica)
Thus,
after Islam took hold, the new Persian language which was a continuation of
Khorasani dialect of Middle Persian with admixture of Sogdian, Bactrian and
other East Iranian languages and influenced by Arabic vocabulary became
predominant in the region. Especially
after the rise of the Samanid dynasty, Persian slowly absorbed Soghdian and
Chorasmian language regions.
During
Baha al-Din’s time, Balkh was still a Persian speaking region. For a clear example of this, we refer to the
book Zhakhira Khwarizmshahi. The Zakhira
Khwarizmshahi ("Treasures dedicated to the king of Khwarazm") is a
Persian medical Encyclopedia written by the Persian scholar Sayyid Zayn al-Din
Isma'il al-Husayni al-Jurjani (Gorgani) (1040-1136 A.D.).
The
Dehkhoda dictionary under Balkh makes a reference to the Zakhira Khwarizmshahi
and states:
مردم
بلخ تا زمان
مؤلف ذخیره ٔ
خوارزمشاهی (نیمه
ٔ اول قرن ششم
هجری ) به فارسی
تکلم می
کرده اند.
رجوع به ریش
بلخی و پشه گزیدگی
در ذخیره ٔ
خوارزمشاهی
شود.
Looking
in the actual manuscript of Zakhira Khwarizmi(available in Tehran University
library and University of Chicago among other major universities of the world),
this was found:
«از
ریش بلخی و
علاج ان . ریش بلخی ریشی
بود کی از سطح
گوشت دور فرو
نرود و پهن باز می
شود و با خفقان
بود و باشذ کی
غشی ارد و
باشذ کی با تب
بود و باشذ کی
بی تب بود و این
ریش اندر نواحی
بلخ بیشتر
باشد و انرا
بدین سبب ریش
بلخی گویند و
به رباط
دهستان نیز بسیار
بود و اهل بلخ
ان را پشه گزیدگی گویند .»
Thus the book provides everyday usage of the Balkhi-Persian dialect in
the region.
Other historical attestations clearly state that Balkh was a Persian
speaking region and had the best form of Dari-Persian. In the Darab Nama of Tartusi, it mentions
that the language of Balkh Dari:
در مقابل در کتاب داراب نامه طرطوسی (بکوشش ذبیح الله صفا،) آمده است:
«و آن مرد
لفظ دری داشت
و همۀ جهان
خواهند تا لفظ
دری گویند، ولیکن
نتوانند مگر
مردمان بلخ و
هر که زبان
اهل بلخ بیاموزد»
Translation:
“And that man had the Dari language, and the entire
world wants to know have the Dari language, however they cannot do this except
the people of Balkh and whoever learns the language of the people of Balkh”.
Ibn
Nadeem (d. 995 or 998 A.D.) also in his al-Fihrist mentions
ابن ندیم در الفهرست مینویسد:
فأما
الفهلویة
فمنسوب إلى
فهله اسم یقع
على خمسة بلدان وهی
أصفهان والری
وهمدان وماه
نهاوند وأذربیجان
وأما الدریة
فلغة مدن
المدائن وبها كان یتكلم
من بباب الملك
وهی منسوبة
إلى حاضرة
الباب
والغالب علیها
من لغة أهل خراسان
والمشرق و
اللغة أهل بلخ
وأما الفارسیة
فتكلم بها
الموابدة
والعلماء
وأشباههم وهی لغة
أهل فارس وأما
الخوزیة فبها
كان یتكلم
الملوك
والأشراف فی
الخلوة
ومواضع اللعب
واللذة ومع
الحاشیة وأما
السریانیة
فكان یتكلم
بها أهل
السواد
والمكاتبة فی نوع
من اللغة
بالسریانی
فارسی
(= اما فهلوی
منسوب است به
فهله كه نام
نهاده شده است
بر پنج شهر:
اصفهان و ری و
همدان و ماه
نهاوند و
آذربایجان. و
دری لغت شهرهای
مداین است و
درباریان
پادشاه بدان
زبان سخن میگفتند
و منسوب است
به مردم دربار
و لغت اهل خراسان
و مشرق و لغت
مردم بلخ بر
آن زبان غالب
است. اما فارسی
كلامی است كه
موبدان و علما
و مانند ایشان
بدان سخن گویند
و آن زبان
مردم اهل فارس
باشد. اما خوزی
زبانی است كه
ملوك و اشراف
در خلوت و
مواضع لعب و
لذت با ندیمان
و حاشیت خود
گفتوگو كنند.
اما سریانی آن
است كه مردم
سواد بدان سخن
رانند).
Translation: And Dari language is the language of Khorasan and the
people of the East and the vocabulary of the natives of Balkh was
dominant in this language, which includes the dialects of the eastern peoples.
Professor. Gilbert Lazard notes :
The language known as New Persian,
which usually is called at this period (early Islamic times) by the name of
Dari or Parsi-Dari, can be classified linguistically as a continuation of
Middle Persian, the official religious and literary language of Sassanian Iran,
itself a continuation of Old Persian, the language of the Achaemenids. Unlike
the other languages and dialects, ancient and modern, of the Iranian group such
as Avestan, Parthian, Soghdian, Kurdish, Balochi, Pashto, etc., Old Middle and
New Persian represent one and the same language at three states of its history.
It had its origin in Fars (the true Persian country from the historical point
of view) and is differentiated by dialectical features, still easily
recognizable from the dialect prevailing in north-western and eastern Iran in
(Lazard, Gilbert 1975, “The Rise of the New Persian Language” in Frye, R. N.,
The Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 4, pp. 595–632, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.)
Dari or Modern Persian is really the Khorasani dialect
of the Middle Persian language.
Al-Masudi
(d. 956 A.D.) also mentions Dari and states:
فالفرس
أمة حد بلادها
الجبال من الماهات
وغیرها وآذربیجان
إلى ما یلی
بلاد أرمینیة
وأران والبیلقان
إلى دربند وهو الباب
والأبواب
والری
وطبرستن
والمسقط
والشابران
وجرجان
وابرشهر، وهی
نیسابور، وهراة
ومرو وغیر ذلك
من بلاد
خراسان
وسجستان
وكرمان وفارس
والأهواز،
وما اتصل بذلك من
أرض الأعاجم فی
هذا الوقت وكل
هذه البلاد
كانت مملكة
واحدة ملكها
ملك واحد ولسانها
واحد، إلا
أنهم كانوا یتباینون
فی شیء یسیر
من اللغات
وذلك أن اللغة
إنما تكون
واحدة بأن
تكون حروفها
التی تكتب
واحدة وتألیف
حروفها تألیف
واحد، وإن
اختلفت بعد ذلك فی
سائر الأشیاء
الأخر
كالفهلویة
والدریة
والآذریة وغیرها
من لغات الفرس.
(= پارسیان
قومی بودند كه
قلمروشان دیار
جبال بود از
ماهات و غیره
و آذربایجان
تا مجاور ارمنیه
و اران و بیلقان
تا دربند كه
باب و ابواب
است و ری و
طبرستان و
مسقط و شابران
و گرگان و
ابرشهر كه نیشابور
است و هرات و
مرو و دیگر
ولایتهای
خراسان و سیستان
و كرمان و
فارس و اهواز
با دیگر سرزمین
عجمان كه در
وقت حاضر به این
ولایتها پیوسته
است، همهی این
ولایتها یك
مملكت بود،
پادشاهاش یكی
بود و زباناش
یكی بود، فقط
در بعضی كلمات
تفاوت
داشتند، زیرا
وقتی حروفی كه
زبان را بدان
مینویسند یكی
باشد، زبان یكی
است وگر چه در
چیزهای دیگر
تفاوت داشته
باشد، چون
پهلوی و دری و
آذری و دیگر
زبانهای
پارسی).
“The Persians are
a people whose borders are the Mahat Mountains and Azarbaijan up to Armenia and
Arran, and Bayleqan and Darband, and Ray and Tabaristan and Masqat and Shabaran
and Jorjan and Abarshahr, and that is Nishabur, and Herat and Marv and other
places in land of Khorasan, and Sejistan and Kerman and Fars and
Ahvaz...All these lands were once one kingdom with one sovereign and one
language...although the language differed slightly. The language, however, is
one, in that its letters are written the same way and used the same way in
composition. There are, then, different languages such as Pahlavi, Dari,
Azari, as well as other Persian languages.”
Thus
the Dhakhireyeh Khwarizmshahi and the exact phrase “Zaban-i Balkhi” (The Balkhi
language) and also the fact that Dari language was associated with Balkh (even
the time of Darabnama and al-Fihrist) are sufficient proof that the language of
everyday people of Balkh was Persian.
Today also, the majority of the city of Mazar-i Sharif speaks Persian
and are Tajiks(Persians). The Turkic
minority in the area are the Turkmens who were nomadic until recently and the
Uzbeks who were not in the area until the Mongol invasion and both of these
live mainly in the villages around Mazar Sharif (the actual city being mainly
Tajik). But during the time of Baha
al-Din, books like Dhakhireyeh Khwarizmshahi provide sufficient proof of the
language prevalent language in Balkh and the phrase “Zaban-i Balkhi” in the
Dhakhireyeh Khwarizmshahi clearly points to the Balkhi languages.
However
as noted, modern scholarship states Rumi was born in Vakhsh, but Vakhsh itself
was considered part of Balkh at the time.
Vakhsh was just part of the regional administration of Balkh and thus
when the Dhakhireyeh Khwarizmshahi is speaking of “Zaban-i Balkhi”, we can
state that it is the dialect of the region of Balkh in the wider sense (which
also includes Vakhsh). Today the
inhabitants of Vakhsh are also Tajik people and pre-Islamic time, they were
likely Sogdians and Hephtalites. The
Turkic speakers in Tajikistan who make up 10-15% of the population (in 2009)
are Uzbeks who were not formed as a group in the area until after the Mongol
invasion. During the time of Baha
al-Din, Vakhsh had transitioned from Ghurid rule to that of the Khwarizmdshahi
dynasty. The name Vakhsh probably has a
Sogdian etymology and is related to the word Oxus. Minorsky and other scholars have connected
the Greek word Oxus (which is pre-Christian) to the word Vakhsh (Hudud
al-Alam). At the pre-Christian time,
the area of Central Asia was Iranian speaking (Eastern Iranian languages) and
the fact the name Vakhsh and Vakhsab was kept during the time of Rumi shows
that a linguistic shift in the area to Turkic had not occurred, since the
Turkic name for the river is Qizil-Su.
The Hodud al-‘Alam states about Vakhsh (Dehkhoda):
از
اعمال بلخ از
ختلان و آن
شهری پهناور
است بر کنار جیحون
، بسیارنعمت و
خوش هوا. ناحیتی
است آبادان و
برکرانه ٔ
وخشاب نهاده و
قصبه ٔ آن
هلاورد است و
لیوکند نیز از این ناحیت
است
That
is its major cities were Halaward and Levkand (or Lawkand). Both names are Soghdian/Fahlavi.
Although
linguistic Turkification of Central Asia, parts of Caucasus and Azerbaijan were
always favorable to Turks (due to political dominance), it is notable that both
Vakhsh and Mazar-i Sharif are still
predominantly Iranian Tajik speaking even today.
We
will examine Baha al-Din’s work (Ma’arif) and show that some rare words of
probable East Iranian origin are prevalent in the everyday language.
Thus
from this analysis of historical sources (especially Dhakhireyeh Khwarizmshahi
and al-Fihrist), we can see that the language of Balkh was Persian. The language of Vakhsh in Tajikistan was also
Persian as shown by the colloquial everyday language of Ma’arif .
We
note some very interesting colloquial Persian terms that are rarely used today
and possibly have Soghdian origin are found in the Ma’rif. The most outstanding of these (in our
opinion) from the Ma’ari are bolded below:
پرتوز
– آس کرده – آیان –
انگله – باشش – بلگ
(برگ) – پاشنه
کوفته – پتیله
–ترنجیده –
تسترغیده
(درهم فشرده)-
تنهاگانه-تواره
(دیوار-فاصله
و واسطه)- چراغ
وره (ظرفی که
چراغ در آن
نهند و برند) – خاوند
/خاونده
(خداوند) – خدوک
– در چغزیده (غم
در دل گرفته) – دژماندن
(خشمگین و
آشفته) – دیوک
زده (چیزی که
آفت دیوان
بدان رسد) – روژیدن
(ظاهر شدن) – سراغج
(مجمعه گیسو
پوش زنان) – سکلیدن
(منقطع کردن) – سیبغوله
(سیب ناخام و
نارسیده) –غیژیدن
(خزیدن) – غریژک
(لای و لجن) –
کژپایک (خرچنگ)
– فرخج
(نامناسب) –
ناوچه (کشتی
کوچک) – خنور
(کاسه و ظرف)
These
words show the colloquial style of the text in many aspects and are example of
rare Iranian words (some of them seem Soghdian) that have been encountered much
less in standard Persian. They require
meticulous linguistic analysis from Iranian linguists. For example “Balg” for Barg or Roozhidan
clearly shows the influence of the native Persian or the Balkhi language.
To
ascertain Baha al-Din’s everyday language, some people might argue that this
colloquial and informal jargon language of his is not sufficient. However we believe there is a definitive
proof that Baha al-Din’s native language was Persian and if he were not, he
would write in a more formal language.
Another proof beyond the everyday
colloquial term and formal language has to do with the way Baha al-Din
addresses his biological mother.
Obviously, a person from a specific ethnic background would call their
mother a term that they have used since they were infants. The Arabic word for mother is Umm, the
Turkish word is aanaa and the Persian term is Maam.
For
example, the Khorasani Iranian poets Ferdowsi and Naser Khusraw:
سديگر
بپرسيدش
افراسياب
از
ايران و از
شهر و از
مام و باب
(فردوسي)
وز باب
و ز مام خويش
بربودش
تا زو
بربود باب و مامش
(ناصر
خسرو(
What is clear is that Baha
al-Din Walad calls his mother “Maami” in his informal everyday jargon (a
non-native Persian speaker who learns formal Persian would not use such an
informal term). “Maam” is the Persian for
mother (see Ferdowsi/Naser Khusraw above) and an Indo-European cognate with the
similar English word. The “i” is also
similar and expresses deeper affection and everyday family language usage. Baha al-Din Walad in his writing does not use
his mother’s formal name but constantly refers to her as “Maami”.
Thus closer examination of the
colloquial language of the Ma’arif and its informal language reveals that the
Persian used in that book is the everyday language of Baha al-Din Walad. This Persian has been influenced by Soghdian
and other Eastern Iranian languages and that is why rare terms like “Roozhidan”
(interestingly modern Persian uses Rooz but Kurdish uses Roozh) are used. It of course had Arabic loan words and even
some Turkish and Greek loan words, since Persian civilization was bordered by
Arabic and Turkic civilization and has been influenced by Greek civilization as
well. But the overall colloquial Persian
language of Balkh contains many words that have now disappeared in modern
Persian but some of these words can be glanced at the Ma’arif (as shown above).
“Maami” in itself indicates
again that Baha al-Din Walad speaks Persian as his native language with his
mother and the term is something that he
has used since he was a child. Obviously
had his language been Turkish or Arabic, then one would expect terms that are
composed of “AAnaa” or “umm” rather than “Maami”.
Thus from an ethnic point of
view, Baha al-Din Walad was a native Persian speaker. We cannot trace his genealogy or virtually
many other people (say Shakespeare) more than three generations back to Ahmad
Khatibi (who was a preacher himself in native Persian speaking lands) and
obviously culture and native language is the key matter that defined
ethnicity. From the viewpoint of
culture, Baha al-Din Walad has also made a significant contribution to the
Persian language and culture.
According to Franklin:
“For Baha al-Din, the ideal situation would undoubtedly have
included a ruler predisposed to heed and foster his teachings, to abstain from
wine and other impieties, and to uphold and spread poetry and religious
learning, preferably of the Hanafi School and preferably in a Persian-speaking
area. He would have had few if any
qualms of conscience in accepting princely patronage or cultivating influence
for pious purposes under such ideal circumstances”(page
76)
And according to Bosworth, Baha
al-Din brought Persian culture with him to Anatolia.
C.E. Bosworth, "Turkish
Expansion towards the west" in UNESCO HISTORY OF HUMANITY, Volume IV,
titled "From the Seventh to the Sixteenth Century", UNESCO Publishing
/ Rutledge, p. 391:
"While the
Arabic language retained its primacy in such spheres as law, theology and
science, the culture of the Seljuk court and secular literature within the
sultanate became largely Persianized; this is seen in the early adoption of
Persian epic names by the Seljuq Rulers (Qubad, Kay Khusraw and so on) and in
the use of Persian as a literary language (Turkish must have been essentially a
vehicle for every days speech at this time). The process of Persianization
accelerated in the thirteenth century with the presence in Konya of two of the
most distinguished refugees fleeing before the Mongols, Baha al-din Walad and
his son Mawlana Jalal al-din Rumi, whose Mathnawi, composed in Konya,
constitutes one of the crowning glories of classical Persian literature."
Again, we like to go back to
emphasizing culture. Since although we
demonstrated that Baha al-Din’s native language was Persian, what matters from
a modern viewpoint is his impact on Persian language and culture. That is we may never know that Baha al-Din’s
ancestry goes back to say Darius the Great, Abraham, or Alexander the Great or
etc. Eventually it goes back to
Adam. Thus we assign to a civilization
(in this case Persian civilization) based on his native language, and also his
cultural contribution which are all in Persian.
Baha al-Din’s Ma’arif is a
religious, moral and spiritual text written in a colloquial Persian which has
many deep spiritual insights. The Masnavi
indeed has also many of these insights and they go back to the traditional
Persian Sufism of Khorasan. Although,
from the extant texts available, one has
to admit that Baha al-Din Walad from a scholarly and exoteric point of view
cannot be compared to Fakhr ad-din Razi and we believe that he fled due to the
Mongol invasion rather than any rivalry with Fakhr ad-din Razi or other
people. The comparison of him with Fakhr
ad-din Razi was possibly done to bring him to same scholarly status as that of
Razi. Obvously, from a spiritual status,
we cannot judge who had a higher rank (only God can) but from a purely
scholarly status and output, Fakhr ad-din Razi is an unparalleled scholar of
his own time.
Nevertheless, the spiritual
insights of Baha al-Din Walad are deeply rooted in traditional Khorasanian
Islamic Sufism. Here are some examples
(taken from the translation of Franklin) among the many:
The kernel of worship is
melting away the self and the rest of worship is merely the husk.
Until you pass away from this
plane of being, you will not receive being from His being.
Die before death and bury
yourself in the grave of desirelessness and rejoice.
What do we know about Baha
al-Din’s genealogy? The claimed maternal
royal descent from the Khawrizmshahs for Rumi or Baha al-Din Walad is dismissed
by scholars and as seen as a later fabrication.
Indeed Baha al-Din Walad’s mother seems like a simple Woman. The claim of descent from Abu Bakr is also
not in his writing or that of Rumi’s.
Even if such a claim was true (since many sources have stated it after
Rumi), we should note that Baha al-Din’s native language was Persian, his work
is in Persian and he was thoroughly Persianized. However, as mentioned, modern scholars have
dismissed the lineage from Abu Bakr. The
claim might have been made according to one source because Bahal al-Din’s
mother was related to a certain Abu Bakr Sarkhasi (a Hanafi scholar from
Sarkhas). Then there is the paternal
claim descent from the Khatibun families of Isfahan put forward by Fritz . The only firm knowledge we have of Baha
al-Din’s genealogy is that he is a descendant of a certain Ahmad Khatibi who
preached again in Persian speaking towns.
It seems that being a Islamic preacher ran through many generations of
Rumi’s family, because Sultan Walad and Rumi themselves gave sermons and
lectures to their followers (we shall say more about these later in the
article).
Given this information, we next
examined the Ma’arif and the languages of Vakhsh/Balkh. The colloquial style of the Ma’arif with some
very terms (many of them possibly Soghdian) show that the language of Vakhsh
was Persian at that time. We brought the
Dhakhireyeh Khwarizmshahi where the Balkh Persian is again shown to be the language
of Balkh. Indeed, Balkh according to
classical sources (Ibn Nadeem) and even the Darab-Nama (written around the time
of Rumi) is the center for the Dari-Persian.
Also the informal and family vernacular reference to his mother as
“Maami” rather than a phrase containing the Arabic “Umm” or Turkish “Anaa” is
another indicator that Baha al-Din Walad was a native Persian speaker. Indeed the only writing we have from him are
in Persian in a colloquial/formal Persian (not informal Persian learned in non-Persian
lands) and thus his contribution is directly to the Persian language and
culture. As shown later, among the
notable figures mentioned for the order by Sultan Walad, all of them are either
from Khorasanian Persian background (Attar, Sanai, Bayazid) or Iraqi Persian
background (Junayd Baghdadi, Abu Bakr Shibli, Maru’f Karkhi) or Farsi
(province) Persian background like Hallaj.
From a linguistic point of view, some of the rare Iranian terms used in
the Ma’arif are also indicators of his native Iranian language. These terms deserve more careful study. Overall we can clearly state Persian was the
native and everyday language of Baha al-Din Walad based on the informal and
everyday style of the Ma’arif and also the native term of endearment used for
his own mother “Maami”.
We already discussed the background of Baha al-Din Walad and his native Persian
language.
Obviously, Rumi’s native language was also Persian based on
his father As noted by Annemarie
Schimmel, The Triumphal Sun: A Study of the Works of Jalaloddin Rumi, SUNY
Press, 1993, p. 193: "Rumi's mother tongue was
Persian, but he had learned during his stay in Konya, enough Turkish and Greek
to use it, now and then, in his verse"
According to Franklin also:
“At some point
Sultan ‘Ezz al-Din invited Rumi as his guest to Antalya, but Rumi hid from the
messengers the Sultan had sent to escort him (Af 1020-21). It seems the story is based on some real
historical circumstance, as Rumi himself alludes to his reasons for not going
to Antalya in Discourse 23 of his Fihi ma fih (Fih 97):
“One should go to Tokat, for it is
a warm place. Antalya is warm, too, but
the people are mostly Greek (Rumian) there.
They do not understand our language, though there some even among the
Greeks who understand us!”(Franklin, 126)
Obviously, given that all of Rumi’s work, speeches, letters and writings except a couple of dozen or so couplets attributed to him (mainly in mixed verses) are in Persian, and all of his sermons and discourses recorded by his students are in Persian, then this points to the fact that Rumi stayed in Konya at that time because Persian was an important language there and widely spread then. A large number of Iranian refugees had taken refuge there. For example in the Walad-nama (see the section on Sultan Walad), after several verses in Arabic, Rumi’s Son, Sultan Walad states:
فارسی
گو که جمله دریابند
گرچه
زین غافلند و
درخوابند
Translation:
Tell the tale in Persian so that all
may understand it,
Even though they lack insight and are (spiritually)
sleep
And Rumi after couple:
And he mentions this again after writing some Arabic in another Ghazal:
اخلایی
اخلایی، زبان
پارسی می گو
که نبود
شرط در حلقه،
شکر خوردن به
تنهایی
And Rumi states the same thing with regards to Persian after some Arabic verses:
مسلمانان
مسلمانان
زبان پارسی گویم
که
نبود شرط در
جمعی شکر
خوردن به تنهایی
Oh Muslims, Oh Muslims, Let me say it in Persian
Because is it not polite to eat all the sweets by myself
in a gathering and not share it
This article is not intended to give a full biography of Rumi and scholars like Foruzanfar and Franklin have already done the latest research on this imatter. Rather we just want to point to some points that have not been looked at detail by those who try to disclaim Rumi from Persian civilization and assign him to other civilizations.
Thus from the above examples, it is sufficient to state that when Rumi states “Greek (Rumian) there. They do not understand out language,” he is explicitly stating that they do not understand Persian because as shown below, the everyday language of Rumi (his language) was Persian as well. This is not surprising since his father’s native language was also Persian.
Three major works of prose have come down from Rumi. Two of them were recorded by his students and disciples while the other one contains his letters. All three works are in Persian except two discourses in Arabic out of 71 total discourses and three letters out of 150 letters.
The first Prose work of Rumi is called Fihi Ma Fih (“What in it is in it”)
“The discourses of Rumi or
Fihi ma Fih, provides a record of seventy-one talks and lectures given by Rumi
on various occasions, some of them formal and some of them rather
informal. Probably compiled from the
notes made by various disciples, they were put together in an effort to
preserve his teaching quite likely after his death. As such, Rumi did not “author” the work and
probably did not intend for it to be widely distributed (compare the genesis of
de Saussure’s Course in General Linguistics.). As Safa points out (Saf 2:1206) the
Discourse reflect the stylistics of oral speech and lack the sophisticated
word plays, Arabic vocabulary and sound patterning that we would except from a
consciously literary text of this period.
Once again, the style of Rumi as lecturer or orator in these
discourses does not reflect an audience of great intellectual pretensions, but
rather middle-class men and women, along with number of statesmen and
rulers.
..
The notes probably reflect
only a portion what was said on any given occasion. Prayers, formal sermons and so forth have
been left out and only the meaty instructions and elucidations that the disciples
felt distinctive and worth noting were preserved.”(Franklin, pg 292)
The second prose work of Rumi is called the Majales-e Sabe’
(literally, “seven sermons or seven sessions”).
These sermons according to Franklin are:
““The Seven Sermons,” is, as its
name suggests, a small compilation of seven sermons or formal lectures of a
didactic nature (technically, “sittings” or majles) formal lectures of didactic
nature (technically, “sitting” or majles) attributed to Rumi. Unlike the Discourses, Rumi delivered these
homilies on questions of ethnics and faith on ceremonial occasions, probably in
a mosque, perhaps after Friday prayers.
…
We cannot fix the date of the
most of these sermons, though one of them may have been delivered when Rumi’s
parents were still alive. …Some of these
sermons could date from much later in life.
Rumi’s sermons typically began with an exordium in Arabic, followed by a
prayer in Persian. The sermon itself
gives a commentary on the deeper meaning of a Koran verse or a hadith. The style of the Persian is rather simple,
but the quotation of Arabic and the knowledge of history and the Hadith display
the preacher’s firm grounding in the Islamic sciences. The sermons include quotations from poems of
Sana’i, Attar, and other poets, including many lines from Rumi himself. “(Franklin, pg 293).
The best edition of the Majales
was produced Towfiq Sobhani (1986), based on the oldest manuscript (in Konya,
Turkey, dated 1352). In actuality, we
should mention that is I not surprising that Rumi gave Friday prayer sermons
because his father and ancestors (Khatibi) were also preachers.
Finally, the Maktubat is the collected letters of Rumi. There was an earlier edition by Fereydun Nafiz Uzluk (whom we mentioned also with regards to some unsound theories and possible distortions in the introduction).
According to Franklin with regards to the edition of Uzluk:
“Unfortunately, the use of an inferior manuscript, faulty editorial decisions and printing mistakes virtually nullify the usefulness of this edition. The seventeen pages of errata do include some manuscript variations, but primarily correct typographical errors; even so, Sharaf al-Din Yalet Qaya added an additional five pages of mistake to this” (pg 294).
The best edition has been produced again the Iranian scholar Towfiq Sobhani (1992). According to Franklin: “Towfiq Sobhani has thankfully made these editions obsolete and readers should henceforth refer to his edition of Maktubat-e Mowlana Jalal al-Din Rumi (Tehran: Markaz-e Nashr-e Daneshgahi, 1371/1992)” (pg 294)
According to Franklin: “Rumi’s
letters reveal that an extended community of disciples and family members
looked to Rumi as an intercessor, not only with God, but also with men of state
and influence. He sought to help them in
their economic and communal affairs, and wrote recommendation letters,
introducing individuals to potential patrons and asking for assistance. The letters testify that Rumi kept very busy
helping family members and administering a community of disciples that had
grown up around him. It should dispel
the notion foisted on us by Sultan Valad that he lived a reclusive life
withdrawn from the affairs of the world after the disappearance of Shams. In contrast with the prose of his Discourses
and Sermons, the style of the letters is consciously sophisticated and
epistolary, in conformity with the expectations of correspondence directed to
nobles, statement and kings”.(pg 294-295)
Thus we have three prose works from Rumi with the major one being Fihi ma Fih. All these works are in Persian except for: 1) The discourse 22 and 34 in Fihi Ma fih which are in Arabic, and the rest of the discourses are in Persian for a total of 71 discourses 2) The introductory short prayer in the seven sermons are Arabic before he switches to Persian 3) Out of the 150 letters of the Maktubat, about three are in Arabic, and four which consist of Arabic poems. All the rest of these prose are in Persian.
What does this tell us about Rumi’s everyday language? The informal and common folk prose of the Fihi ma Fih, and the seven sermons as opposed to the more informal and literary Maktubat clearly shows that Rumi used Persian language as his native language as well as his literary language. If his literary language was separated from his native language, then one would expect that in formal and common folk gatherings where he is guiding his disciples or in the public sermons that he is giving, he would do it so in the more widely spoken languages of Anatolia (say Greek or Turkish) or in a language used more often for religious instructions (Arabic). However, the fact that the common folk idiom of Fihi ma Fih are discourses in oral speech proves beyond any doubt that Rumi’s everyday language for himself and his followers was Persian, which was also his native language.
When confronted with the immense Persian poetry of Rumi, some nationalists who try to disclaim Rumi from his Persian heritage usually repeat the same argument.
Professor Talat S. Halman states:
“In Turkey, where language is the
primary ethnic detriment and carries a forceful national mystique, the language
question has been an emotional one. In
the introduction to his verse translation of Mesnevi, Abdullah Oztemiz
Hacitahiroglu writes: “The fact that the Mesnevi was composed in Persian and
consequently remained alien to the Turkish people has been a source of sorrow
for all Turks in all eras.” As a
result, many Turkish authors and scholars offered various explanations and
excuses. Former senator Feyzi Halici of
Konya, a well-known poet who has translated several hundred poems by Rumi and
published many poems on him, has stated in the English postscript to his book
entitled Dinle Neyden (Listen to the Reed):
It is wrongly believed in Europe
that Mevlana Celaleddin Rumi was of Persian origin. This was caused by the fact that the master
wrote in Persian. But we must bear in
mind that in [the] Middle Ages in…most
European countries the literary works were written in Latin, though each
country had her own language. So it was
in the Middle Eastern countries… “Farsi” being the common language for…literary
works, Mevlana had written his masterpieces in Persian.
Samiha Ayveri, a Turkish
Specialist of Ottoman and Islamic culture summarily states:
“There are those who think of
Rumi as the representative of Persian culture because he wrote his works in
Persian. But in that era the scholarly
language was customarily Arabic and the literary language was Persian…As is
known, Rumi was Turkish”(Halman, pg 267-268)
That Rumi belongs to the Persian cultural world is clear. We shall discuss his relationship to the Persian cultural world briefly in a later section. But for example, virtually all the Sufis that come up in Masnavi are Persians (Attar, Sanai, Kherqani, Shibli, Junayd, Hallaj, Bayazid, Abu Said..) except a few who are Arabic (Dhul-nun mesri). From a cultural myth point of view, Rumi has referenced Persian heroes like Rustam, Esfandiyar and etc. and has nothing with regards to Turkish mythology. These issues will be discussed later.
However, the best response to such nationalist nonsense that Rumi wrote in Persian because it was the literary language are these:
First of all Rumi did not like writing poetry as he has stated several times. So naturally if he did not like writing poetry, he would not use the common literally language. But if he wrote poetry, then he must have wrote it also for people that understood him. That is his inner circles besides Rumi himself were native Persian speakers.
Second, the lectures of Rumi are informal, vernacular and colloquial discussions which he gave in front of his students. These are not literary Persians (like the official letters of his in the Maktubat), but provide the best proof of the everyday spoken language of Rumi. These lectures (Fihi ma Fih) and Sermons (Majales Sabe’) establish clearly that Rumi’s everyday language was Persian and he was not just using Persian for literary value.
For example, in Konya, he gives sermons in Persian not Turkish. In the Fihi ma Fih (which were written down by his students), his lectures to his students are in Persian not Turkish or Greek, which would have reached a wider audience. As noted by Franklin and Safa: “As Safa points out (Saf 2:1206) the Discourse reflect the stylistics of oral speech and lack the sophisticated word plays, Arabic vocabulary and sound patterning that we would except from a consciously literary text of this period. Once again, the style of Rumi as lecturer or orator in these discourses does not reflect an audience of great intellectual pretensions, but rather middle-class men and women, along with number of statesmen and rulers”” (Franklin,292). Where as we note when it comes to literary Persian, we can also see it in Rumi’s official letters. As noted again by Franklin: “In contrast with the prose of his Discourses and sermons, the style of the letters is consciously sophisticated and epistolary, in conformity with the expectations of correspondence directed to nobles, statement and kings” . Thus the fact that Rumi users oral Persian (and not just written language) in a common folk fashion in the Fihi ma Fih and the Seven Sermons while using literally sophisticated Persian in the Maktubat totally negates any sort of the nationalist arguments that are quoted in Halman’s book. Indeed Rumi used Persian everyday not just as his literary language, but as a language to correspond with officials, as a language to guide his disciples and as a language of his Friday sermons. Indeed Aflaki also always mentions him speaking in Persian and few times in Arabic. We shall also show based on the book of Aflaki that Rumi’s everyday language was Persian as Rumi even curses in Persian and a person curses in his native language. His dialogues in that book are also recorded in Persian.
Third, Turkish nationalist writer Fereydun Nafiz Uzluk has come up with the baseless argument that the Seven Sermons were originally in Turkish but then translated in Persian. However this argument falls flatly in its face, because the seven sermons are replete with poetry of Attar, Sanai and other Persian poets in their context, as well their style of Persian (although not literally) are highly poetic spiritual discussions. For example let us just quote the introduction of the first sermon and let the average Persian reader be the judge:
ملکا و
پادشاها! آتشهای
حرص ما در به
آب رحمت خویش بنشان. جان
مشتاقان را
شراب وحدت
بچشان.
ضمیر دل ما
را به انوار
معرف و اسرار
وحدت، منور و روشن
دار.
دامهای امید
ما را که در
صحرای سعت
رحمت تو باز
گشادهایم به
مرغان سعادت و
شکارهای
کرامت مشرف و
مکرم گردان،
آه سحرگاه
سوختگان راه
را به سمع
قبول و عاطفت
استماع کن. دود دل بیدلان
را که از سوز
فراق آن مجمع
ارواح، هر دم
آن دود بر
تابخانهی
فلک برمیآید،
به عطر وصال
معطر گردان. قال و قیل
ما را و گقت و
شنود ما را که
چون پاسبانان
بر بام سلطنت
عشق، چوبک میزنند
از اجرای «یوفیهم
اجورهم بغیر
حساب» نصیب
مدام بخشش
فرما.
قال ما را
خلاصهی حال
گردان.
حال ما را از
شرفات قال
درگذران. ما را از
دشمنکامی هر
دو جهان نگاهدار. آنچه
دشمنان میخواهند
بر ما، از ما
دور دار.
آنچه دوستان
میخواهند و
گمان میبرند،
ما را عالیتر
و بهتر از آن
گردان.
ای خزانهی
لطف تو بیپایان
و ای دریای با
پهنای با کرم
تو بیکران.
....
....
مثلت هست
در سرای غرور
مثل یخ
فروش نیشاپور
در تموز آن یخک
نهاده به پیش
کس خریدار
نی و او درویش
بخ گدازان
شده ز گرمی و
مرد
بادل درناک
و بادم سرد
این همی
گفت و اشک میبارید
که بسی مان
نماند و کس
نخرید
(سنائی)
This is highly sweet style of
Persian and its clear it is given from the pulpit and then a piece of poetry
from Sanai is embedded within the sermon.
Many times Rumi quotes Sanai, Attar and other Persian poets in these sermons
and thus clearly establishes his Persian cultural heritage and
orientation. Also Fereydun Nafiz Ozluk
and his like were not experts in the Persian language as exemplified by the
faulty edition of the Maktubat they produced.
Thus Fereydun Nafiz Ozluk’s claim is also refuted by the fact that he
must now claim that: Sanai and Attar also wrote in Turkish! and they were also
translated to Persian !
Furthermore, as mentioned the Fihi
ma Fih provides an example again of everyday colloquial but eloquent Persian.
Both texts are not in a literary form of Persian but rather in a
colloquial form and also the most important fact is their context. The sermons from pulpit and the lectures
given to his students were given by Rumi but not written by him. They were written by his students and Rumi
had no intention to produce literary work here.
Thus this clearly establishes the everyday language of Rumi, and the
everyday language of the followers of Rumi and his father was Persian. Why else would someone in Konya give sermons
in Persian or instruct his students in Persian, both in a colloquial common
language but eloquent and oratory fashion.
So again, the arguments of the proponents of the claim “Rumi wrote in
Persian because it was the literary language” are totally negated by the fact
that Rumi’s everyday spoken language as shown in the Fihi ma Fih and the Seven
Sermons was in Persian and nothing else.
And from a cultural point of view, the sermons are replete with quotes
from Persian poets like Attar, Sanai and etc. but nothing from any Turkic cultural
item. We will describe this cultural
heritage of Rumi in another section.
The two well known books of poetry by Rumi are the Mathnawi and the Diwan (also called Diwan-i Kabir). These works are very different by the fact that the Mathnawi is a didactic poetical work full of wisdom and advices where-as the Diwan-i Shams is a mystical book of longing and passion. Although hard to compare, the Mathnawi which was written after the Diwan is the seminal work of Rumi and responsible for his fame. Both books have come down to us in different manuscripts.
According to Franklin:
“The manuscripts versions differ greatly in the size of the text and orthography. Nicholson’s text has 25,577 lines though the average medieval and early modern manuscripts contained around 27,000 lines, meaning the scribes added two thousand lines or about eight percent more to the poem composed by Rumi. Some manuscripts give as many as 32000!”(Franklin, pg 306)
The Mathnawi is an immense contribution to Persian literature and culture and one of its crowning achievements. The book is in Persian except for the occasional Quranic verses and Hadeeth sayings that are embedded in the poetry. Franklin and other scholars have clearly shown that many of the stories are well rooted in the Perso-Islamic civilization, especially that of Khorasan. Some themes have come from the Kalila-o Demna which came to Iran via India during the Sassanid era and was popularized in the Perso-Arabic Islamic world through the Sassanid medium. Overall, sources such as Attar, Kaila va Demna, Tha’labi, the four discourses of Nezami ‘Aruzi, Ghazzali, Sanai and other major themes, stories and figures of the Persian-Arabic Islamic world are mentioned. Besides these, the Qur’an and Hadeeth also occupy the foremost place alongside Attar and Sanai for the sources of many of the stories and insights.
The other major work of Rumi is of course the Diwan (or Diwan-i Shams)
According to Franklin:
“The Foruzanfar’s edition of the Divan-e Shams compromises 3229 ghazals and qasidas making a total of almost 35000 lines, not including several hundred lines of stanzaic poems and nearly two thousand quatrains attributed to him” (pg 314).
A large part of the Roba’is attributed to Rumi are not his, however the overwhelming majority of Ghazals and Qasidas are not in doubt.
“With respect to the roba’is, or
quatrains, it is highly likely that many of the quatrains the manuscript
tradition attributes to Rumi are not his.
We have already seen how Rumi quotes a quatrain of Najm al-Din Daye in
his Discourses without mentioning the author’s name. The Roba’i as a genre was early on associated
with Sufi gatherings and music”(Franklin, 302)
“The number of Roba’is attributed
to Rumi varies widely, even wildly, from manuscript to another. Many of the larger collections contain
quatrains attributed to earlier poets and can be discounted as false
attributions to Rumi, but the short, pithy and essentially oral nature of the Roba’is
have appeared separate from the Divan in several publications” (Franklin, 303)
Overall,
according to Franklin:
“The printing press was only introduced to the
Muslim world two hundred years ago, and did not become the predominate mode of
publication until the last quarter of the nineteenth century. In a pre-print culture, book must, of course,
be copied out by hand, and this provides ample opportunity for scribal and
editorial errors – misreading of difficult words, deliberate “improvements” or
interpolations added by scribes, erroneous or intentional misattribution of
poems to other authors, etc. In some
cases, the manuscript tradition has amplified the corpus of various authors’
work by ten percent or more over the centuries.
Ferdowsi’s Shah name, for example, probably consisted of about
50,000 lines originally, but before modern text editors began working from the
oldest manuscripts and sifting out the lines which can be with relative
certainty be discarded as later accretions, the received text of Ferdowsi’s
poem contained about 60,000 lines. Like,
the Masnavi of Rumi contains 25,577 lines in Nicholson’s critical
edition (not 27,000 as Rypka says), but late pre-modern manuscripts and
nineteenth-century printings contain anywhere from 27,700 to as many as 32,000
lines, an accretion of between two and seven thousand lines that do not come
from the pen of Rumi.
Foruzanfar’s critical edition of the Divan-e Shams contains over 35,000 lines, and though some scholars have questioned the attribution of a large part of the Divan-e Shams to Rumi (especially the roba’is, many of which have been proven to be by other poets), radical skepticism seems unwarranted. “Franklin, pg 296).
The Divan is not a didactic
text, but rather a book of poetry on mystical love. The Dar al-Masnavi website has described it
succinctly but very well:
“The "Divan" is
the inspiration of Rumi's middle-aged years. It began with his meeting Shams-i
Tabriz, becoming his disciple and spiritual friend, the stress of Shams' first
disappearance, and the crisis of Shams' final disappearance. It is believed
that he continued to compose poems for the Divan long after this final crisis--
during the composition of the Masnavi.
The Divan is filled with ecstatic verses in which Rumi expresses his
mystical love for Shams as a symbol of his love for God. It is characteristic
of Persian Sufi poetry for it to be ambiguous as to whether the human beloved
or the Divine Beloved (= God) is being addressed. It is also an essential
feature of the particular kind of Sufism Rumi practiced that mystical
"annihilation in the spiritual master" [fanâ fi 'sh-shaykh] is
considered a necessary first stage before mystical "annihilation in
God" [fanâ fi 'llâh] can be attained. The Divan is filled with poems
expressing this first stage in which Rumi sees Shams everywhere and in
everything. Rumi's "annihilation" of his separate self was so intense
that, instead of following the tradition of including his own name in the last
line of odes/ghazals, he often uses the name of his beloved spiritual master
and friend instead. Or he appeals to (mystical) Silence [khâmosh] which
transcends the mind and its concepts.” (Dar al-Masnavi Website)
All the poetry of Rumi in the
Mathnawi are in Persian (except for a small number of Arabic Quranic and hadith phrases) and the
Diwan Shams is 99% Persian, with the exception of some Arabic, and very small
number of Turkish (about some couple of Dozen verses or so) and Greek.
As noted by Annemarie Schimmel, The Triumphal Sun: A Study
of the Works of Jalaloddin Rumi, SUNY Press, 1993, p. 193: "Rumi's mother tongue was Persian, but he had learned
during his stay in Konya, enough Turkish and Greek to use it, now and then, in
his verse"
And as noted by Franklin:”Living among Turks, Rumi also picked up some colloquial
Turkish.”(pg 315)
The number of Greek verses
according to http://www.tlg.uci.edu/~opoudjis/Play/rumiwalad.html
are 14 macaronic verses. Since one does not know how long a website
may last, we have included in the appendix the Greek verses of Rumi and his son
Sultan Walad based on this website:
http://www.tlg.uci.edu/~opoudjis/Play/rumiwalad.html (accessed 2009)
The number of Turkish verses due
to manuscript differences is unknown exactly.
But they are very small and do not make even half a percent of his
output.
According to Mehmed Foud Kopurlu, the, “Turkish work consists of about eight or ten lines of poetry”( Mehmed Fuad
Köprülü, Early Mystics in Turkish Literature, trans., ed., and with an
introduction by Gary Leiser and Robert Dankoff (London: Routledge, 2006). Pg 208)
According to Mecdut MensurOghlu: “The Divan of Jalal al-Din Rumi contains
35 couplets in Turkish and Turkish-Persian which have recently been published
me” (Celal
al-Din Rumi’s turkische Verse: UJb. XXIV (1952), pp 106-115)
According to Halman:
“The Iranian claim on the ground
of language is incontrovertible, although some Turkish writers have tried to
create the impression that Rumi composed a substantial body of verse in Turkish
in addition to Persian. The statistical
record is clear: The Mesnevi (Persian: Mathnawi) consists of nearly
26,000 couplets: the Divan-I Kebir (Persian: Divan-e Kabir)
probably has about 40,000 couplets, although the figure varies greatly. Of this vast output, everything is in Persian
except for a handful of poems, couplets, lines, and words in Turkish, Arabic,
Greek and Hebrew. Mecdut Mansuroglu, a
mteticulous Turkish scholar, found only ten Turkish poems in all of Mevlana’s
work. Sherefdin Yaltkaya, in an earlier
study, compiled a total of 103 words of Turkic origin in Mevlana’s Persian
poetry. This is infinitesimal compared
with hous output in Persian. Rumi is
patently Persian on the basis of jus et normal loquendi.”(Halman, pg 267)
However as noted, the 1952 work of
MensurOghlu mentions 35 couplets in Turkish and as far as we know, Rumi does
not have any verses in Hebrew. As per
the number of Turkic words in Rumi’s words (assuming their etymology has been
done correctly which is very hard to say since the noted scholar might not be
aware that many words of Sogdian origin have entered Turkish like Khatun or
some words like Tegin and etc. are not of Turkish origin but possibly Eastern
Saka), we will say something about that in the next section.
According to Franklin:
“a couple of
dozen at most of the 35,000 lines of the Divan-I Shams are in Turkish,
and almost all of these lines occur in poems that are predominantly in Persian”(Franklin, pg, 549)
Be that it may, due to different
manuscript edition, one can upper bound the number of Turkish verses at no more
than 100 (this is an upper bound but probably couple of dozen or so is more
correct). If we assume this upper bound,
then the number of Turkish verses are about 1/3 of one percent of the Diwan
(not counting the quatrains which are all in Persian) and if we assume the
number of MensurOghlu, it is about one tenth of one percent. Clearly an insignificant number. We will have something to say about the
reliability of these verses in the next section.
The number of Greek verses are
also insignificant. The number of Arabic
verses are slightly more although again insignificant compare to the number of
Persian verses. According to the Dar
al-Masnavi website: “In Forûzânfar's edition
of Rumi's Divan, there are 90 ghazals (Vol. 1, 29;Vol. 2, 1; Vol. 3, 6; Vol. 4,
8; Vol. 5, 19, Vol. 6, 0; Vol. 7, 27) and 19 quatrains entirely in Arabic. In
addition, there are ghazals which are all Arabic except for the final line;
many have one or two lines in Arabic within the body of the poem; some have as
many as 9-13 consecutive lines in Arabic, with Persian verses preceding and
following; some have alternating lines in Persian, then Arabic; some have the
first half of the verse in Persian, the second half in Arabic.”
All together, these should not
make more 1000 lines and thus an upper bound for the number of Arabic verses is
3%. So overall, we can say at least
96.5% of the output of the Divan-i Kabir is in Persian.
Golpinarli and Vladimir Mir
Mirughli make an important point about the Diwan: “Three poems have bits of demotic Greek; these have been
identified and translated into French, along with some Greek verses of Sultan
Valad. Golpinarli (GM 416-417) indicates
according to Vladimir Mir Mirughli, the Greek used in some of Rumi’s macaronic
poems reflects the demotic Greek of the inhabitants of Anatolia. Golpinarli then argues that Rumi knew
classical Persian and Arabic with precision, but typically composes poems in a
more popular or colloquial Persian and Arabic.”(Franklin,
316)
Both the Mathnawi and Diwan are
crowning pieces of Persian literature and an immense contribution to Persian
culture. They are universal works,
however one needs to know the Persian language and be familiar with the
Sufic-Islamic culture to fully appreciate them.
Thus although universal, one can say there would be no Rumi in its
current form without the Persian language and the Persian language would not
have been rich without Rumi.
Thus we have three major prose
works in Persian and two major books of poetry in Persian. These are Rumi’s contribution to the Persian
culture and language. His contributions
to Arabic is minor and his contribution to Greek and Turkish is negligible
(assuming that these are not later attributions).
In Turkish nationalistic writings, the author has encountered several different arguments in order to claim a Turkish cultural background for Rumi. We examine these arguments here.
The first argument can be summarized as follows: “Rumi was a Turk because he has some verses in Turkish,”
As already pointed out:
A)
As noted by Annemarie Schimmel, The Triumphal Sun: A Study
of the Works of Jalaloddin Rumi, SUNY Press, 1993, p. 193: "Rumi's mother tongue was Persian, but he had learned
during his stay in Konya, enough Turkish and Greek to use it, now and then, in
his verse"
And as noted by Franklin:”Living among Turks, Rumi also picked up some colloquial
Turkish.”(Franklin, pg 315)
B)
Rumi’s Turkish verses are miniscule. As noted, if we combine the literally output of Rumi’s Persian poetry (both Mathnawi and the Diwan) and take an upper bound, we do not even get one third of one percent of Turkish poetry from Rumi’s total output (35 verses are said out of 60,0000 verses of Diwan and Masnavi).
Also Rumi has some Greek verses and even more Arabic verses. Just because he has verses in Greek does not make him of Greek background. These Greek verses are appended to the appendix of this article. Even his chosen pen-name was “Rumi” (Greek) and the word “Rumi” in Rumi’s poetry is used for Greek rather than Anatolian Muslim (for example the famous story of the Persian, Greek, Arab and Turk arguing over the same grape).
http://www.tlg.uci.edu/~opoudjis/Play/rumiwalad.html
C)
Assuming that the Greek and
Turkish verses are reliable (in terms of manuscripts), what can we say about
them? Rumi himself had students from many
backgrounds as well as his poetry in the Divan-i Shams were recorded by his
students. He might be walking the Bazar,
town square, talking to his students and etc. and then all of the sudden in an
impulsive nature compose poetry. Given
the colloquial language that he uses, and given the fact that Greek and Turkish
were widely spoken in the region, this fact that he has some verses in Greek
and Turkish is not surprising (assuming again that the manuscripts are valid
and authentically verified). However
what is surprising is that despite coming to Anatolia at a very young age,
these Greek and Turkish verses are miniscule and do not even make one tenth of
all of Rumi’s literally output (prose and poems combined). Also as shown, even Sultan Walad who had
slightly more Greek and Turkish admits that his knowledge of these languages
(Greek and Turkish) is relatively poor.
This is discussed in a later section but it provides a sufficient proof
that the native language of Rumi’s son Sultan Walad was also Persian and not
the more widespread Greek and Turkish.
D)
All of the prose of Rumi and his
ordinary demotic lectures in the Fihi ma Fih and Seven sermons are in
Persian. Hence the Persian language was
Rumi’s native and everyday language. It
is the language he used to guide his followers and the language he used when
conversing with Shams. It was the native
language of his father and Rumi’s everyday language.
E)
According to Halman: “A refutation of the Turkish claim may be found in
historical fact evinced by Turkish sources.
No Ottoman Tezkire’ tush-shuara (poet’s live; Who’s Who in
Poetry) lists biographical data on Rumi, thus indicating that he was not
considered a Turkish poet by the Ottoman Turks themselves. Also significant is the statement of Mehmed
Fuad Kopruli, generally recognized as the greatest scholar of Turkish literary
history in the twentiweth century: “Although one encounters several pieces of
Greek and Turkish verse in the Divan-I Kebir, these could not be considered, on
the basis of their nature and numbers, sufficient to presume that he was a
Turkish poet”. Golpinarli corrobates
this view: “With Mevlana’s arrival from Balkh to Anatolia, a branch of Iranian
literature was transported into Anatolia.
The Turkish couplets and the few Turkish words he used in Mulemmas [
compound verses in two or more languages] could never confer on him the status
of a Turkish poet” (Halman, pg 268-269)
This is clear by itself and does
not need additional commentary.
F)
Finally, there have been Persians
that have actually produced Turkish works in the courts of the Timurids and
also in the Ottoman lands. And their
works are significant unlike the negligible (assuming the manuscripts are
authentic) verses of Greek and Turkish poetry.
Two examples suffice
Or the Iranian author Mirza Habib Esfahani has written in Persian and Ottoman Turkish
(“Habib Esfahani Mirza”, Tahsin Yazici, “Encyclopedia Iranica”http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/v11f4/v11f4056.html).
Excerpt: “"HABIBESFAHANI, Mirzā, Iranian poet, grammarian and translator, who spent much of his life in exile in Ottoman Turkey (1835-93). A prolific and versatile writer and translator in both Persian and Turkish, Mirzā Ḥabib is celebrated in particular for his Persian grammar, Dastur-e Soḵan. Mirzā Ḥabib’s most important work in Turkish is his Ḵaṭṭ va ḵaṭṭāṭān (Istanbul, 1305/1888), a biographical dictionary of Persian and Turkish calligraphers. He also published a Turkish translation of Gil Blas as well as his Divān in Turkish and a versified history of the Ottomans."
Another is the Iranian author Sad al-Din Masud ibn Umar ibn Abd Allah al-Taftazani.
Elias John Wilkinson Gibb, History of Ottoman Poetry, Volume 1, London, 1900. excerpt from pg 202: "..the next work in Turkish poetry is versified translation of Sa'adi's Bustan or 'Orchard' made in 755 by the great and famous Persian schoolmen Sa'd-ud-Din Me'sud-i-Teftazani."
Gerhard Endress, An Introduction to Islam, translated by Carole Hillenbrand, Columbia University Press, 1998. excerpt from pg 192: "Death of Sa'ad al-Din al-Taftazani, Persian historian and philosopher at the court of Timur"
And many other Iranian peoples, especially Kurds and also Persian immigrants to Anatolia who have written in Turkish languages.
The second argument is: “Rumi uses some Turkish words in his Persian poetry”
One wonders if this needs a response even. Rumi also uses Greek, and Arabic words in his poetry. For example the following words (and many more) are of Greek origin and had entered Persian:
دیهیم , اقلیم, لغت, دفتر, زمرد, کلید, قلم, سمندر, ارغنون, اکسیر,موسیقی,فلسفه
And there are more Greek verses. Also we should note that the Khorasani Persian used by Rumi (and later the Persian that was spoken by Iranians of Konya and Anatolia who had fled the Mongol invasion) was an area that was controlled and neighbored by Turks for a long time. According to the Professor Xavier Planhol, an expert in Historical-Geography (an extensive field which requires expertise in both of these subjects) as well an expert on nomadism in the Middle East:
“The Turks, on the other hand, posed a formidable threat:
their penetration into Iranian lands was considerable, to such an extent that
vast regions adapted their language. This process was all the more remarkable
since, in spite of their almost uninterrupted political domination for nearly
1,000 years, the cultural influence of these rough nomads on Iran’s refined
civilization remained extremely tenuous. This is demonstrated by the mediocre
linguistic contribution, for which exhaustive statistical studies have been
made (Doerfer). The number of Turkish or Mongol words that entered Persian,
though not negligible, remained limited to 2,135, i.e., 3 percent of the
vocabulary at the most. These new words are confined on the one hand to the
military and political sector (titles, administration, etc.) and, on the other
hand, to technical pastoral terms. The contrast with Arab influence is
striking. While cultural pressure of the Arabs on Iran had been intense, they
in no way infringed upon the entire Iranian territory, whereas with the Turks,
whose contributions to Iranian civilization were modest, vast regions of
Iranian lands were assimilated, notwithstanding the fact that resistance by the
latter was ultimately victorious. Several reasons may be offered.”
(Xavier
Planhol, Land of Iran, Encyclopedia Iranica)
We should note that Halman mentions 103 Turkish words in Rumi’s poetry based on the Turkish scholar Yaltkaya (1934), but no reliable etymology has been offered of these (and the manuscripts are not clear). For example many people are not aware that the word Khatun (see Encyclopedia of Islam) is considered Soghdian or many Turkic titles are actually from the Xiongnu language.
Either way, due to centuries of Turkish rule, starting from the Ghaznavids, Turkish words had penetrated the Persian language, but their number as pointed out by Professor Planhol are no more than 3% of the total historical Persian vocabulary (many of them not used anymore in modern Persian but they reached their peak during the Safavid era). This author has just picked the first 100 verses from the Mathnawi and the first 100 verses from the Ghazals. Multiplying by 10, this is about 2000 words. Not a single word among these was in Turkish. Thus the frequency of these words is also very small.
Also, the argument is also invalid because Ottoman Turkish had at least 20% Persian vocabulary, but this does not make all the native writers of that language as Persians. Overall modern Persian contains a considerable number of Arabic words, and to a lesser extent some Turkish and Greek words. Also increasingly words of Indo-European European origin (French and English) have entered the language.
The third argument is: “Rumi’s verses show some traces of Eastern Khorasani Turkish. The linguist Doerfer claims some words are close to the Khorasani Turkic in his work (Turkische Folklore-Texte aus Chorasan) and that language of Balkh was Khorasan Turkic. For example Rumi uses the feature –GAy instead of jek to indicate future tense”
This argument is invalid also as Gerhard Doefer is a linguist but not a Rumi scholar nor has he written any article on Rumi. However , this author had to search to find what Doerfer said exactly. In his book Doerfer, Gerhard, "Türkische Folklore-Texte aus Chorasan" , Wolfram Hesche. Wiesbaden : Harrassowitz, 1998. Doerfer does not mention Rumi at all except in an incoheent footnote where he states on page 15 (footnote 30):”The language of Mowlana Jalal al-Din Rumi has in some important matters some similarities with the people of Langar (in Iranian Khorasan). One should note that Rumi was from Balkh and the people of Langar were the same turban. Does Marbili here mean Marvi?”
We already see that Doerfer does not make such a claim that the language of Balkh was Khorasan Turkic. If indeed Doerfer made such a claim, he has relied on Togan to hypothesize about Rumi’s ancestry but has not stated anything firm (as mentioned in the introduction, Zekki Velid Togan was a major pan-Turkist and although some of his writings have been deemed scholarly, others have been criticized severely and we noted an example of severe criticism by Bosworth on Togan’s invalid claim of Abu Rayhan Biruni the Iranian Chorasmian). We already note the Dhakhireyeh Khwarizmshahi were “Zaban-i Balkhi” is explicitly mentioned and it is Persian dialect and provides a direct proof on the language of Balkh. Also Doerfer had not kept up to date with the most recent scholarship on Rumi and Rumi is from Wakhsh Tajikistan. Furthermore, what does a similar turban (which is available in Khorasan) from modern day have to do with the 13th century?
As per the word –gAy instead of jek, or other similar features, according to the same linguist (and not Rumi scholar): “In three places in Southeast Khoran Turkic we find Uzbek or Oghuz Uzbek dative in –GA after vowels. …The Un-Oghuz Uzbek feature suffix in –GAy has entered some areas, as has the southern Uzbek personal suffix of the first-person plural –bIz instead of –mIz, both occurring in Northeast Khorasan Turkic and Langar”( G.Doerfer, "The Turkic Languages of Iran" in Lars Johanson, Éva Csató, "The Turkic languages", Taylor & Francis, 1998. pg 279.)
However, let us note that a linguist who has not studied Rumi’s work is working with hypothesis that are not provable and imaginative. For example we just saw that Doerfer did not know that Rumi was born in Wakhsh. Furthermore, we need to mention why such a methodology is invalid.
A) There is not a single verse of Western Turkish from Iran, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan before the Mongol era. As mentioned the language of Balkh was zaban-i Balkhi which was the Persian dialect mentioned in Dakhireyeh Khwarizmshahi (see the section of Baha al-Din Walad in this article). The language of Wakhsh is also the same colloquial and informal language that one sees in the Ma’arif and as demonstrated by careful examination, this was the native language of Baha al-Din Walad.
B) So there is no really valid basis for comparison. There was numerous Turkic dialects in Anatolia , undoubtedly many which showed more Central Asian features in their every day speech relative to others. After all, many Turkish groups and tribes were pushed to Anatolia from Central Asia. They brought various Turkic dialects, many of them whom were merged or have died out. However Rumi was neither of tribal nor Turkish as demonstrated by his father’s work and his own work and came from a Persian cultural background. But he did come into contact with Turks of various dialects and backgrounds in Anatolia .
C) There is not enough of information on all of these dialects, many of them which have transformed, merged, evolved or disappeared. Rumi was in touch with speakers of some of these dialects through the cities he lived. The Seljuqs themselves where from Khorasan or Central Asia and brought with them numerous Turkic tribes who were part of their army. Indeed all the Turks that migrated to Anatolia came from Central Asia either came through the Caucasus or Iran. So naturally in their variety of dialects, some areas kept their Central Asian features longer than others. That is their evolution occurred at various rates depending on the area and these dialects were present in Anatolia. For example one would not expect the same Turkish dialect in Laranda (where Sultan Walad was born) be like that of Konya (where Rumi was productive for most of his life). Just like there was different dialects of Greek in Anatolia at the the time also.
D) So we could not expect that in the 13th century, there was a unifying Turkish dialect. Just like today there is not a unified Persian or Turkic dialect. Indeed there was not a unified and standard Turkish language in the Turkey of the 20th century (we are not counting the Ottoman language and are concerned with widely a languages). Typically, the migrant tribes showed more Central Asiatic features. Even today for example, two villages 30 miles away can speak a great variety of Kurdish. Or in Iran there is a variation between various Persian dialects spoken in different cities and also various Azeri-Turkish dialects (Tabriz and Urmia..)
E) From a linguistic aspect Iranica (once again Doerfer) mention:
Azeri belongs to the Oghuz branch of the Turkic language
family. In the eleventh century the “Tūrān defeated Ērān”
and a broad wave of Oghuz Turks flooded first Khorasan, then all the rest of
Iran, and finally Anatolia, which they made a base for vast conquests. But it is very difficult to draw a clear line
between the East Anatolian dialects of Turkish and Azeri, on the one hand, and
between Azeri and “Afsharoid” dialects or even Khorasan Turkic, on the other
hand. There is a plethora of transitional phenomena among all Oghuz
idioms. (G.
Doerfer, “Azeri Turkish” in Encyclopedia Iranica). Undoubtedly, this was even more true when there was a
variety of Turkic tribes, without a lack of mass communications and
divergences, evolutions, transformations of their dialects could have occurred
even in a few generations. Also more
importantly, the Khorasan Turkic dialects are not present in Balkh nor
Wakhsh. In actuality, many theories are
put forth on how this dialect came about, but given its close similarity to
Azerbaijani Turkish, it is likely that the Turkoman tribes (Ghezelbash) of
Eastern Anatolia who migrated to Iran during the Safavid era brought these
dialects to both Azerbaijan and Khorasan.
Later these dialects had mutual correspondences with more archaic forms
of Oghuz and Uzbek Turkic. Indeed the
Safavids moved these tribes to Khorasan (along with Kurds) to protect the frontier
against Uzbeks.
So overall finding various Central Asian Turkish features in different dialects of Turkish that were present in Anatolia is not surprising and Rumi himself had contact with different Greeks and Turks who spoke different dialects of Greek and Turkish. After all this is the 13th century, were these dialects were transplanted into Anatolia recently and there was of course divergence among these dialects and languages, say even in places like Laranda and Konya. Just like there is divergence among the Tehrani Persian, Mashhadi Persian and Isfhanai Persian and this is true specially before the era of mass communication where just a short distance created divergence in dialects.
Again we would like to emphasize that there is not a single verse of Western Turkish (Oghuz Turkish) before the Mongol invasion from Balkh or Wakhsh. Neither does Rumi’s father have a single verse of Turkish but his colloquial and informal everyday Persian provides a sufficient proof of his native language (as well as other factors covered in the previous section). Furthermore, the Ma’arif of Baha al-Din Walad clearly demonstrates the colloquial and informal language that was present in Wakhsh as he himself preaches there and lived there before coming to Anatolia. To conclude, the usage of unsound methodology (trying to say find words that might exist in the 20th century Turkish dialects of Central Asia but have almost disappeared in the 20th century Turkish dialects of Turkey due to evolution of the language and dialects) in order to study the culture and
background of Rumi only yields full of contradictions and hypothesis that cannot be proven. Specially if one does not study the prose and poetic works of Rumi, Sultan Walad and Baha al-Din Walad nor studies the history of the region (for example not knowing about Dhakhireyeh Khwarizmshahi or Rumi was born in Wakhsh) and ignores all of his works and concentrates on a word that could have been used by some Turks in Anatolia at that time which is not present today.
The fourth argument has to do with the usage of Turk in the Mathnawi and Diwan-i Shams.
The argument given is the following verses (listed by
Halman):
بیگانه
میگویید مرا
زین گویم
در
شهر شما خانهی
خود میجویم
دشمن
نیم ار چند که
دشمن رویم
اصلم
ترک است اگر
چه هندی گویم
“I
too belong to this place, don’t think
I’m a freak;
I settled in these parts, a hearth is what I seek.
To you I might seem like a foe, but I am not.
I am Turkish though Hindi is what I speak”(Halman, 293)
And this verse:
چه رومی
چهرگان دارم
چه ترکان نهان
دارم
چه عیب
است ار هلاوو
را نمی دانم
نمی دانم
هلاوو
را بپرس آخر
از آن ترکان حیران
کن
کز آن حیرت
هلا او را نمی
دانم نمی دانم
دلم چون
تیر می پرد
کمان تن همی
غرد
اگر آن
دست و بازو را
نمی دانم نمی
دانم
رها کن
حرف هندو را
ببین ترکان
معنی را
من آن
ترکم که هندو
را نمی دانم
نمی دانم
بیا ای
شمس تبریزی
مکن سنگین دلی
با من
که با تو
سنگ و لولو را
نمی دانم نمی
دانم
What Roman face I have, what inner Turks I have
Why does it matter, that I do know Hulaku?
Ask Hulaku in the end, to not set forth those Turks
Because from that bewilderness, I do not know Hulaku
My heart like an arrow flies, the bow of my body roars
Even though I do not know, that hand and arm, I do not
know
Let go of the Hindu words, look at the Turks of meaning
I am that Turk who does not know Hindu, who does not
know.
If taken literally, then we must note Rumi says he knows Hindi one place and he does not know in another place. However these verses are chosen selectively by those who try to detach Rumi from Persian civilization.
Since in the Diwan there are also these verses by Rumi
تو ماه ِ ترکي و من اگر ترک نيستم،
دانم
من اين قَدَر
که به ترکي
است، آب سُو
“You are a Turkish moon, and I, although I am not a Turk,
know that much,
that much, that in Turkish the word for water is
su”(Schimmel, Triumphal Sun, 196)
And
“Everyone in whose heart is the love for Tabriz
Becomes – even though he be a Hindu – a rose-cheeked
inhabitant of Taraz (i.e. a Turk)”
(Schimmel,
Triumphal Sun, 196)
And
گه ترکم و
گه هندو گه
رومی و گه زنگی
از نقش تو
است ای جان
اقرارم و
انکارم
“I am sometimes Turk and sometimes Hindu, sometimes Rumi and
sometimes Negro”
O soul, from your image in my approval and my denial”
(Schimmel, Triumphal Sun, 196)
Indeed not only these, but Rumi claims to be Rustam, Shah (King), or ask others to be like Jamshid and Kayghobad…
چو ز آفتاب
زادم به خدا
که کیقبادم
نه به شب
طلوع سازم نه ز
ماهتاب گویم
…
صیقل هر آینهام
رستم هر میمنهام
قوت هر
گرسنهام
انجم هر
انجمنم
آدم مگس
نزاید، تو هم
مگس مباش
جمشید
باش و خسرو و
سلطان و کیقباد
..
Furthermore, Rumi in his Diwan points to the Ghuzz Turks as
bringing misery:
غم
مخور از دی و
غز و غارت
وز در
من بین
کارگزاری
(دیوان
شمس)
Do not be miserable because of yesterday, plunders and
Oghuz
And look through my door for miracles
This is mentioned in the Mathnawi as well:
آن
غزان ترک خون
ریز آمدند
بهر یغما
برو دهی ناگه
زدند
دو کسی
از عیان ده یافتند
در هلاک
آن یکی
بشتافتند
(مثنوی)
Those blood-shedding Ghuzz Turks came
They entered a village for plunder
They saw two of the rich men of the village
They went swiftly to kill one of them
So where does this take us?
According to Halman: “Reading
Rumi’s ethnic and national references with an eye to finding clues about his
identity or allegiance is both confusing and frustrating”(pg 292).
However, as should be noted the Divan-i Shams is a mystical text and the metaphor of Turk, Hindu, Rumi, Abyssian are part of this language without taking any national or ethnic meaning. That is why in this article we have taken a comprehensive approach and we shall examine the Masnavi as well as Manaqib of Aflaki to show clearly that Rumi was not a Turk. The language of the Divan-i Shams is not confusing for those who are aware of its metaphorical nature. We need to explain this in an independent section (see the next section) so that confusion with this regard does not arise.
چو
کرسی نهاد از
برچرخ شید
جهان
گشت چون روی
رومی سپید
(فردوسی)
The words “Turks”(Turks), “Hindus”(Hindus),”Rums”(Greeks, Romans), “Zang/Habash”(Blacks, Ethiopians) are favorite symbols of the earliest Persian poets in forming poetic images. As we shall show, in the context of compare and contrast, as well as in other contexts, these words did not have an ethnic meaning but rather were used to contrast various moods, colors and feelings. It is very important to cross-reference the verses of various poets using such symbolic imagery for a better understanding of their usage in Persian poetry. In other words, just like one cannot study Rumi in depth without studying Sanai,Attar, Nezami and of course Ferdowsi, one cannot understand Persian poetry without proper understanding of its symbols and imagery. We study the usage of these symbols in thePersian literature among Attar, Hafez, Khaqani, Nizami, Rumi, Amir Khusraw and Sanai. Poetic symbols in Persian poetry have been studied by various scholars who had a deep understanding of the Persian language.
According to Franklin:
The raids that conquered India
in the name of Muslim rulers were carried out mostly by the Turkish dynasty of
the Ghaznavids. Turks earned reputation as brave fighters, first as
slaves, in which capacity they formed the royal guard of the caliph; then as
the rulers of eastern Iran, under the Ghaznavids and Seljuqs. The beloved is not infrequently compared to a
young Turkish warrior-prince who slays suitors right and left with haughty
charms. ((Franklin D. Lewis, "Rumi:
swallowing the sun : poems translated from the Persian", Publisher
Oneworld, 2008. , pp 175-176)
Here is a poem also translated by Franklin which uses some
of these imageries:
THAT
REDCLOACK
who rose over us last year
like the new moon
has appeared this year
in a rust-colored dervish coat
The Turk you
saw that year
busy with plunder
is the same who came this year
lîke an Arab
It's the
very same love,
though in différent garb:
He changed clothes and appeared again
It's the
same wîne, though the glass has changed
See how happy he comes in his tipsiness!
The night's
gone —
Where are my morning partners in drunken
revel
now that the torch lights up the window of
mysteries?
When the
Abyssinian age began, the fair Greek disappeare
Today it
emerges with great hosts of battle
Proclaim:
the Sun ofTruth ofTabriz has arrived!
for thîs moon of many lights
has climbed the wheeling skies of purity!(Franklin D. Lewis, "Rumi: swallowing the sun :
poems translated from the Persian", Publisher Oneworld, 2008. Pg 94)
Among Western scholars who has studied this subject in detail, the later Professor Annemarie Schimmel is noteworthy. We will quote two of her articles here before giving more examples from Persian poetry as well as various Persian poets.
We quote her paper here:
Schimmel, Annemarie. “A Two-Colored Brocade: The Imagery of Persian Poetry”, the imagery of Persian poetry. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. (pg 137-144).
Turk and Hindu
“O Venus, from your Hindu-eyes notch the arrow on the bow like a
Turk!”
Over the preceding chapters we have observed that Persian poetry
is imbued to a certain extent with images that evoke the external interplay of
Beauty and Love, or the tension between legalism and love, between intellect
and inspired madness. As with Mahmud and Ayaz, we may also discern this
tendency in another favorite combination that arose in historical and social
reality but served mostly as a poetical image whose original context was soon
forgotten: the contrast between Turk and Hindu.’Turks enjoyed an important role
as soldiers in the Abbasid Empire beginning in the mid-ninth century, and
former military slaves soon rose to become rulers (sultans) in their own right,
especially on the eastern fringes of Iran and in their homeland, Transoxania.
Indeed the idea of the Turk as the beloved first emerged, it
seems, in the days of Mahmud of Ghazna, whose love for Ayaz of the Oymaq tribe
was a model for the delight one could take in one’s love for a Turk. The
Turk was considered as beautiful as the moon, even though he might be cruel.
Soon the Turkish type of beauty became prominent both in pictures and in
poetical descriptions: a round face with narrow eyes and a minute mouth. The
most famous expression of an Indo-Persian writer’s infatuation with a “Turk”is
Amir Khusrau’s verse:
His tongue is Turkish, and I don’t know Turkish— how nice it
would be if his tongue were in my mouth!
Turkish cities in Central Asia, such as Chigil and Taraz,
became ciphers for the dwelling place of the beloved, where the lover directs
his thoughts. Thus Hafiz asks, using a fitting tajnis:
That Turk with a fairy’s countenance went away from me
yesterday — what mistake (khata) did he see, that he took the road to Khata
[Cathay]?
As for the Hindu, he is the perfect contrast to the Turk.
Like the Greeks, the peoples of Western and Central Asia regarded the Indians
as black, and the Arabs were in contact with the dark-skinned inhabitants of
southern India well before the advent of Islam. Thus the black Hindus came to
be compared to devils, both in travelogues and in mystical visions—where the angles
of course resembled Turks. Moreover, India was for the Muslims a country
benighted in blackest heathendom:
Light up the candle of monotheism,
Set forth into infidel Hindustan:
says Sana’i. The term Hindu, then, meant in the first place
“black,”but also “lowly slave”-- a slave who had to serve and obey the ruling
Turkish princes, as the first Muslim dynasties in northern India were indeed
Turks.
The beloved’s beauty mark, the black mole, the tresses, the
eyes, could all be called “Hindu”because of their blackness, but the term also
implied treacherous and faithless behavior. The “infidel tresses of Hindu
origin”lurk like highway robbers, or else they stretch across the pale ear like
a naked Hindu on a white bed. The Hindu tresses may even open a shop: “Give a
life for every hair!”And the small mole may be a Hindu child that plucks roses
from the cheek.
Images of this kind show that the apparently negative
connotation of the “black”Hindu could be transformed into something quite
lovable, and in somewhat later times Katibi Isfahani would give a delightful
description of the beloved’s face, ridiculing the narrow-minded theologian who
would rather not admit that a Hindu infidel can reach Paradise:
0 ascetic, if you deny that a Hindu finds the way toward
Kauthar
And an infidel comes to the eternal garden,
Then look how those tresses and the mole came on his face
and his
Ruby mouth: an infidel in the garden of Paradise, a Hindu at
the well of
Kauthar!
Hindustan is, then, logically, the country of blackness (and
for some poets it was even the veritable Hell, as Khushhal Khan, the Pathan
warrior, states).
A late poet, longing for his home in Iran, sighed during his
stay in India:
Like a black hair that finally turns white
Draw myself from India to Iran.
And Hazin, in a comparable situation, saw his stay in
Hindustan as proof of sad fact that the day of his life had ended in black
night.
More famous, however,
is Talib-i Amuli’s remark, on his emigration from Iran to India, that now
perhaps his bad luck (called in both Persian and Turkish “black fortune”) would
finally leave him alone:
Nobody has ever brought a Hindu as gift to Hindustan—
therefore leave your “black fortune”in Iran!
The darkness could, however, also gain a positive
meaning—was not the Water of Life hidden in darkness? Therefore Molla Shakibi
praised the Mughal Khankhanan ‘Abdur Rahim, the greatest benefactor of poets
around 1600, with the verse:
Come, cupbearer, give the Water of Life!
Draw it from the Khankhanan’s fountain!
Alexander sought it but found it not,
For it was in India and he hastened into the darkness.
In astrology, Saturn, connected with black, is called “the
Hindu of the sky”or else the Hindu doorkeeper, as it was the last planet known
to medieval observers. Hence the chapter in Nizami’s Haft Paykar about
Saturday, which is ruled, as its name says, by Saturn, takes its comparisons,
images, and stories entirely from this sphere of blackness. The Indian princess
whom Bahram Gor visits is a gazelle with Turkish—that is, dangerous—eyes, eyes
of the kind that are often called “drunken Turks,”and the black tresses on her
rosy cheeks resemble fire-worshiping Hindus.
The Muslims had a certain knowledge of the rites of
cremation as practiced by the Hindus, and Amir Khusrau in particular, who lived
in India, sometimes alludes to the custom of satti, the burning of widows.
Learn from the Hindu how to die of love—
It is not easy to enter the fire while alive.
He also describes sunrise with a related image:
The Hindu Night has died, and the sun
Has kindled the fire
to burn that Hindu.
The custom of satti formed on one occasion the topic of a
Persian epic, Nau’i’s Suz u gudaz (Burning and Melting), which was composed for
Akbar’s son Daniyal and was several times illustrated.
Cross-relations with the fire worship of the Zoroastrians
occur now and then (see also chapter 6 above). A typical example, from the late
sixteenth century, is by Yolquli Anisi, who tells his beloved:
My heart is a fire temple when I think of you,
And on it is your brand, like a black Hindu who tends the
fire.
Such mixture of images is found as early as Nizami’s Haft
Paykar.
The Hindu was the slave of the Turkish rulers, and for this
reason poets liked the idea that they would lovingly become Hindu slaves if
only their Turkish beloved would be kind to them—an idea paradoxically
elaborated in Hafiz’s often-quoted Ghazal about the “Turk of Shiraz”(see
below).
The word Turk came to designate, in India as in parts of
Europe, the Muslim in general, and the positive picture of the moonlike Turkish
beloved often also has a tinge of cruelty to it. Poets developed a large stock
of metaphors about the pillaging, drunken “Turk”who gallops through the
countryside, shooting arrows with his eyelashes to wound his admirers: perhaps
he plays polo with the severed head of a victim who enjoys being treated like
that, and he plunders (yaghma) every place. Such negative images—without the
positive aspect—can be found, for instance, in satires by ‘Ubayd-i Zakani. But
when reading these descriptions one must always keep in mind that the beloved
in traditional Persian poetry is indeed cruel and does not care for his lover,
and that the lover, in turn, seems to relish all the wounds inflicted on
him—for the beloved’s cruelty is better than outright indifference.
The mystics too made use of the Turk-Hindu contrast. Rumi
saw the whole world as a dark Hindustan that must be destroyed “in Turkish
style”so that the soul may finally be freed from material fetters. And Turk and
Hindu appear in “the Hindustan of clay and water and the Turkestan that is the
spiritual world”.
As Saturn is the “Hindu of the sky,”Mars, the martial
planet, is rightly called the “Turk of the sky.”But in the service of the
beloved both are lowly slaves, as Bayram Khan, a Turcoman general in Mughal
service, sings:
For your castle, old Saturn is the doorkeeper;
For your Hindu curls the Turk of the sky is a Circassian
slave!
Much later another poet from India would complain:
From grieving for you I have black fortune and wet eyes—
I own [the whole area of] black [fertile) soil from India to
the Oxus!
The contrast of Turk and Hindu was certainly strengthened by
the realities of Muslim history at the turn of the first millenium, but the many
possible interpretations of both terms made them a favorite for poets
throughout the centuries. With these possibilities in mind one gets closer to
the secret of Hafiz’s famous (and often misinterpreted)
verse:
If that Turk of Shiraz would take my heart in his hand,
I would give for his Hindu mole Bukhara and Samarqand.
The Shirazi Turk has a black—Hindu—mole, and for this mole,
which is traditionally seen as a black slave, the poet is willing to sacrifice
the most of beautiful cities of the Turkish empire. Besides this grand
exaggeration in which all values seem to be reversed, the verse contains three
names of cities (Shiraz, Bukhara, Samarqand), as well as three parts of the
body (hand, mole, heart), and furthermore plays on the contrast of giving and
taking, so that a whole chain of rhetorical figures is incorporated into these
seemingly simple lines which express the poet’s hope for some kindness from his
beloved. But the whole beauty of the verse is inevitably lost in translation,
especially in translations by those unaware of the delightful wordplay which
the poet—effortlessly, as it seems—puts before his readers.
The Turk also appears, though rarely, in other connections.
On a few occasions the aggressive riders from the steppes are contrasted with
the complacent, urban Tajiks, and sometimes a poet collects a veritable “league
of nations”around his friend’s face:
“The Turk of your eye carries away the heart from the Arab
and the
Soul from the Persian; the Abyssinian mole on your face
makes the Hindu a slave!”
In the eighteenth century Qani’the historian of Sind,
considered that Byzantines, Europeans, and Indians were all variously destroyed
by his beloved’s face, his down, and his lip—each of which corresponds to a
color: white, black, and red.
Besides the Turk and the Hindu one finds the juxtaposition
of Rum and Habash-Byzantium and Ethiopia—to allude to white and black, but in
this connection the meaningful symbolism that lies behind Turk and Hindu is
lacking. The Ethiopian or Negro, Zangi, is usually remembered for his curly
hair, as Sa’di says in the Gulistan:
The world is more confused than a Negro’s hair.
A similar combination of the Daylamites—mountain-dwellers
near the Caspian Sea—with curly, “broken”hair occurs in early Persian poetry.
From the late sixteenth century onward the role of the Turk
as dangerous beloved was taken over at least in part by the Firangs—the
“Franks”—that is, the Europeans and in particular the Portuguese, who from 1498
had begun to settle on the southern and western coast of India and had
plundered affluent ports, like Thatta in the Indus Delta, most cruelly. They
thus could replace the pillaging Turk, and the “European prison”became a new
image in Indo-Persian poetry. This prison sometimes seems rather colorful, and the
Europeans are generally connected with colors and pictures, for European
paintings were brought to Mughal India beginning in the days of emperor Akbar
and were copied by indigenous artists with amazing skill: hence the new
combinations in color imagery in later poetry. But the Turk and the Hindu still
survive in folk poetry, even in lullabies.
Another article by Professor Schimmel also gives remarkable examples of these symbolic images in Persian poetry in addition to supplying the original Persian alongside the English translation.
Annemarie Schimme Turk And Hindu A Literary Symbol
(Schimmel,
Annemarie. “Turk and Hindu; a literary symbol”.
Acta Iranica, 1, III, 1974, pp.243-248)
A field which is still to be elaborated is the study of
Persian symbolic language. Though scholars like Ruckert and Hammer-Purgstall,
like Ritter and Rypka and, recently, Bausani in his Storia della letteratura
Persiana (Motivi e Forme della poesia Persiana, cf. also his Persia Religiosa)
have dealt with several symbols and topoi which are preferably used in
Persian poetry — and therefore later on also in Turkish and Urdu poetry — there
is still a large field for further investigation into the development of
certain symbolic expressions.
We need not mention here the symbols taken from the Quran,
starting with the ruz-i alast (روز
الست) which is alluded to in poetry
so frequently with dush / دوش «yesterday»; or the use of Quran personalities; or the old
Iranian tradition which is interwoven in the fabric of lyrical poetry, the most
famous example being the Jam-i Jam (جام جم). Others, like the Rose and the Nightingale, gul u bulbul (گل و
بلبل) can, in their elementary
meaning, be traced very far back in the history of religions, the complaining
nightingale being only the poetical transformation of the primitive concept of
the soul-bird.
Of special interest are, however, those symbols which stem
from a certain historical person or a specific act in history — the classical
example is the figure of Mansur — al-Husain ibn Mansur al-Hallaj (d. 922), the
martyr mystic who has become, at least since ‘Attar’s time, a central symbol of
mystical love, suffering, and, though by wrong interpretation of his cry
ana’l-haqq (اناالحق), a representative of the essential unity of being not only
in Persian poetry but as well in Turkish literature and even more in Muslim
India where his name is well known to the Urdu, Sindhi and Punjabi poets, so
that even the simple villagers of the Indus valley remember him in their songs.
Persian poetry has always liked the use of pairs of
contrasting symbols, and the literatures under its influence share this
predilection. A famous example of this style is Hafiz’s oft-quoted couplet:
اگرآن
ترک شیرازی
بدست آرد دل
ما را
به
خال هندویش
بخشم سمرقند و
بخارا را
«If this Turk from Shiraz would take my heart in his hand,
I would give for his Hindu-mole Samarqand and Bukhara”
with the confrontation of Turk and Hindu. It is interesting
to follow the development of this contrast-pair in early Persian poetry.
Hammer-Purgstall has given, in the introduction of his
Geschichte der schonen Redekunste Persiens (1818) some explanations of common
Persian symbols; here we find f.i. that the eyelashes are the two battle arrays
of the Indians; the eye, too, can be called a Hindu since it is black, whereas
the beautiful white face is Turkistan; the down (khatt / خط) and the
mole (Khal / خال) are likewise compared to India and Hindus — that means,
Hindu has, in later time, become synonymous with black; Turk, Turkish is
everything white and lovable, (cf. Steingass’dictionary s.v. هندو)
Turks are already mentioned in the poetry of the early
Abbasid period — Abu Nuwas compares the bubbles of wine to Turks who shoot
their arrows, and this connection of the word Turk with the young, dangerous
but attractive hero is common in early Persian poetry too — thus, when Farrukhi
addresses his friend
ترکش
ای ترک به یک
سو فکن و
جامهء جنگ...
«Throw the quiver aside, oh Turk, and the dress of war...»
The Hindus, on the other hand — mentioned in prophetic traditions as well as
the Turks — have been mostly described in Arabic sources of old as blackish,
and Hindustan was, at least from the time of Mahmud of Ghazna, the typical
battlefield (cf. Asadi, in Shafaq, Tarikh 136 who, however, compares the
night still to a negro, Zang, not to a Hindu) for the Muslims who were, in the
Ghaznawid period, mostly of Turkish origin. Thus Sanai says in the Hadiqa:
شمع
توحید را منور
کن
قصد
هندوستان
کافر کن
Make the candle of tauhid shining,
Turn toward infidel Hindustan.
Sometimes the famous Indian swords are mentioned, and the
Muslim knew about the strange customs of Hindu ascetics, who might even burn
themselves (thus Naubakhti in the فرق الشیعه) — Biruni’s book on India then enlarged the knowledge of his
coreligionists about Indian customs.
The slaves which were brought from India were considered
ugly, mean, and blackish — in contrast to the Turkish slaves —, and in a poem
by Mukhtar-i Gaznawi (quoted by Fritz Meier in Die schone
Mahsati, p. 8) the poet says that he kept well
an ugly Hindu slave until he became good so that one could kiss him.
It may be that the famous love story of Sultan Mahmud and
Ayaz which has become a symbol in itself may have contributed to the
development of the symbol Turk’for the beloved which is very common, it seems,
in the Seljukid period. In Mahsati’s poetry (i.e. first quarter of the 12th
century) the Turk-i Tir andaz (ترک
تیر انداز) or the
Turk who uses his club for beating people are common symbols for the friend
(cf. Meier No. 5, No. 149, p. 362). At that time the theories of mystical love
developed in Iran, theories which are reflected in the work of Ahmad Ghazzall
and ‘Ain-ul-qudzat Hamadani.
The fact that here the beloved is not only beautiful but
also extremely cruel — so that the lover finds his highest happiness in being
wounded or even killed through him — seems to have made the Turk, who was
already connected with the qualities of both beauty and cruelty, a fitting
symbol of the Divine Beloved — a fact that is expressed verbally by Ruzbihan
Baqli (d. 1209) who told that he had seen his Divine Beloved in the shape of a
Turk wearing his silken headgear awry (i.e. the kajkuldh / کج
کلاه of later Persian poetry).
Ritter has drawn the attention of the reader to the fact that Abu Hamid
Ghazzall has mentioned in his Mishkat ul-Anwar that Turks at the end of the
earth are fond of perfect beauty that they prostrate before things of
overwhelming beauty. (Ritter, Meer der Seele 454, Gairdner, mishkdt 92).
By the end of the 12th century, the symbol Hindu for black
is used commonly by Nizami: — The Indian princess — described with the famous
contrast-pair as
«Gazelle with Turkish (i.e. killing) eyes, from Hindu origin»
آهوی
ترک چشم هندو
زاد
is that of Saturday which is ruled by Saturn which is
poetically called the هندوی
باریک بین or هندوی
سپهر and has, according to astrological tradition, black colour.
But Nizami has also compared the crow to the Indian:
زاغ
جز هندوی نسب
نباشد
دزدی
از هندوان عجب
نباشد
« The crow is surely of Hindu origin,
and to steal is not astonishing in Hindus » (HP 112)
And how beautifully has he, as Ritter has pointed out, used
this symbolism in his description of the fire in winter:
مجوسی
ملتی
هندوستانی
چو
زردشت آمده در
زندخوانی
«A magician from Hindustan,
like Zardusht starting with murmuring the zand». (Khosrow o Shirin) or,
آتش
افروخته ز
صندل و عود
دود
گردش چون
هندوان بسجود
« The fire lit from sandal and aloe-wood,
the smoke around it is like Hindus in prostration.»
ترکی
از نسل رومیان
نسبش
قرة
العین هندوان
لقبش
« A Turk from Byzantine origin,
whose surname is «the object of pleasure to the Hindus»», (cf. Ritter, Bildersprache 12 f.)
In ‘Attars work (d. 1220) we find again a number of allusions
to Indian and Turkish subjects — the self-sacrifice of the Hindu ascetic is
mentioned in the Ilahiname (6/9), the Hindu is several times shown as a seeker
of religious truth (cf. Mantiq ut-tair 31/2, Musibatname 19/4 where he asks
«What shall I do with the house without the Lord», i.e. the Kaeba, cf. Meer der
Seele 262, 522, 533). Even Mahmud of Ghazna whose destruction of the temple of
Somnath has become one of the famous symbols of the victory of faith over
infidelity (MT 36/6) is said to have put a little Hindu boy besides him on the
throne (A pious Hindu slave is also mentioned IN 176/13). The Hindu in the
Ilahiname (79/9) is contrasted with the beautiful princess of China, not with a
Turk. The Turk is depicted in ‘Attar’s epic in the usual way — cruel, but also
an object of love (Mus. 32/1, 33/8, IN 10/7). The picture is, however,
different when we turn to ‘Attar’s divan (ed. by Said Nafisi). Here the term
Hindu is almost exclusively used for the meant and obedient slave: the poet
often calls himself a Hindu, and tells his beloved that he would like to become
«the Hindu of the Hindu of his curling locks (467). Though once he claims to be
«not a Hindu-yi badkhu, of bad character, in the service of his beloved but
an Abessinian who bears his mark»
در
بندگیش نه
هندویم بدخو
هستم
حبشی که داغ
او دارم
He mostly declares himself to be the Hindu slave of the
Turkish beloved (465):
ترکتازی
کن بتا بر جان
و دل
تا ز
جان و دل شوم
هندوی تو
The classical locus is perhaps in 371:
بوسه
چو داد ترک من
هندوی
او شدم بجان
«Since my Turk gave me a kiss I became from the bottom of my
heart his Hindu...»
The cruelty of the Turkish beloved is alluded to in the
lines:
هست
ترک و من بجان
هندوی او
لاجرم
با تیغ در کار
آمدست
«He is a Turk and I from the bottom of my heart his Hindu,
necessarily he has come to work with his sword.» (129)
Attar uses astrological symbolism in the words (466)
گشت
هندوخان لقب
برخان چرخ
ترک
گردون تا که
شد هندوی تو
« Hindukhan became the surname of the Lord of the Heaven
since the Turk of the Heaven (i.e. Mars) became your
Hindu(slave)»,
A verse which has probably influenced Maulana Rumi’s verse
(Div.V2130)
ترک
فلک چاکر شود
آن را
که شود هندوی
او
«The Turk of the Heaven (i.e. Mars) becomes the servant of Him,
who became His (i.e. the beloved’s) Hindu.»
Though Rumi has sometimes compared black and white, good and
bad to Rumis and Abessinians (Div. Y 2428), the contrast-pair Hindu-Turk is
completely developed in his poetry — thus when the Prophet says in the Mathnawi
(I 2370)
گفته
من آئینه ام
مصقول دست
ترک و
هندو در من آن
بیند که هست
«I am the polished mirror, Turk and Hindu see in me that
what exists.»
The day is compared to the beautiful Turk with fair face
(Div. II 524):
روزی
است اندر شب
نهان
ترکی
میان هندوان
«The day is hidden in the night, a Turk in the midst of Hindus,”
and just as the infidels shout when the Muslim Turks fight
them
هندوی
شب نعره زنان
کان
ترک در خرگاه
شد
«the Hindu night is uttering loud cries since the Turk entered
the tent (Div. II 252)»
Maulavi Rumi compares, as most profane poets, the curls of
the beloved to Hindustan (Div. V 2363) but gives the whole symbolism of Turk
and Hindu a more metaphysical sense, since for him this world is the Hindustan
of polluted earthly life, and thus he can say in a description of spring that
(Div. II 570):
ز
ترکستان آن دنیا
بنهء ترکان زیبارو
به
هندوستان آب و
گل به امر شهریار
آمد
«The baggage of the nice-looking Turks from the Turkistan of
the other world
came to the Hindustan of clay and water by the order of that
prince.»
And the comparison of Sanai — the Hindustani Kafir — is
carried on further when Rumi says (Div. IV 1876):
هندویک
هستی را
ترکانه تو یغما
کن
«Like a Turk (or in the Turkish way) pillage the little
Hindu of existence...»
i.e. kill the natural worldly existence and reach the
Turkistan-i ‘adam. It may be interesting to throw a look at the symbolism of a
Persian-writing poet who lived in Hindu environment, Amir Khosrau. In his Divan
(ed. M. Darwesh, introduction Said Nafisi) the symbol of the turk-i tir andaz
is used very often (1416, 1081, 1104, 350, 243), the intoxicated Turk appears
likewise (347, 848), the rose-cheeked (308) and coquettish (289), or white
faced (1096) Turk are frequently mentioned. The Hindus are mentioned
comparatively rarely (cf. 449 the .contrast Turk-Hindu); perhaps the most
interesting example of the use of this symbol is the last verse of a Ghazal
(186)
هندوان
را زنده سوزند
این چنین مرده
مسوز
بنده
خسرو را که
ترک است آخر و
هندوی تست
«They burn the Hindus alive; do not burn such a dead, (namely)
the slave Khusrow who is a Turk, and yet your Hindu».
These few notes which should be elaborated by careful
exegesis and collection of material from early Persian poetry show that the
couplet in Hafiz’famous ghazal stands in a long literary tradition which
reflects also some political and social features of the Islamic Empire in its
contact with its neighbours — and the contrast pair Turk-Hindu has always
remained popular, be it in the poetry of Sir Muhammad Iqbal, or even in a lullaby
from Shiraz, which Zhukovsky noted down in 1886:
There came two Turks from Turkestan
and carried me to
Hindustan...
Before
summarizing the relevant information provided by Professor Schimmel, we will provide
more examples of the usage of the term, Turk, Rum, Hindu, Habash/Zang.
One of the earliest poets who considered Turks to be the ideal type of beauty is actually the Persian poet Ferdowsi:
که
ترکان به دیدن
پریچهره اند
به
جنگ اندرون
پاک بی بهره
اند
Thus
Ferdowsi says that Turks in the view are as beautiful as fairies.
Even
before Ferdowsi, one of the first Persian poets (Rudaki) states:
ترک
هزاران به پای
پیش صف اندر
هر یک
چو ماه بر دو
هفته درفشان
And
we also noted Qatran Tabrizi, who is one if not the first Persian poet from
Azerbaijan who composed in Eastern Khorasanian Persian:
ای
حور ترک پیکر
و ای ترک
حوروش
هم
زینت بهشتی و
هم زیور خزر
یا
شکفته
لاله در چمن
چو روی ترک ده
ساله
نشسته
در چمن ژاله
چو عکس ماه در
پروین
Instead of listing about thousands of uses of Hindu, Turk, Rum, Zang and Habash amongst in Persian poetry, we take examples from the recent excellent book of Professor Rahim Afifi. The author of each of these couplets is given. We note that many times these imageries come together in the sense that all four (Turk, Hindu, Rum, Zang) can be used in a single verse.
Some examples of the symbolic meaning of Hindu as allusion and imagery:
Hindu=From
India, Slave, Overseer, Watcher, the blackness of the hair of the beloved.
تیغ
تو داند که چیست
رمز و اشارت دین
طرفه
بود هندویی از
عربی ترجمان
(خاقانی)
تا
بر در حکم
توست کامش
شد
هندوی هندوی
تو نامش
این
هندو ِ هندوَش
چه نام است
یعنی
حجر تو را
غلام است
(خاقانی)
حاجی
ما چون ز سفر
باز
کرد
برآن هندوی
خود ترکتاز
(نظامی)
کی
توانم گفت
هندوی توام
هندوی
خاک سگ کوی
توام
هندوی
با داغ را
مفروش تو
حلقهای
کن بنده را در
گوش تو
(عطار)
شد
بر دل من زلفک
هندوی تو چیر
بر
بودش و در زیر
کله رفت دلیر
میگویمت
ای دوست بگو
با کُلَهَت
تا
هندوی دزد را
نگیر در زیر
(کمال
اسماعیل)
We
note Kamal Ismail uses the word Hinduyeh-Dozd or the Hindu Thief. Something
used by other Persian poets including Nizami.
هندویت
رانده برشاه
خاور سپه
لشکر
زنگت آورده بر
چین حَشَر
(خواجو)
Hindu
beh Azar Sookhtan (Burning the Hindu in the fire=symbolically getting rid of
darkness and become day/light):
جون
قرصهء آتش
فشان گردون
گرفت اندر
دهان
بنمود
بیهندوستان
هندو به آذر
سوخته
(مجیر بیلقانی)
هندوبار=کنایه
از دوات
قلم
به یُمن یمنیش
چه گرم رو مرغی
ست
که
خط روم بَرَد
دم به دم ز
هندوبار
(سعدی)
Hinduvash
(Hinu-face=like a slave, servant):
شاها
سخن غلام من
آمد اگر چه
هست
هندووشی
که قیمت نیکو
نیاورد
(مجیر بیلقانی)
Hinduyeh
Atash-neshin (The Hindu sitting in fire=A symbol for the hair of the beloved):
زلف
تو هندو نژاد،
لعل تو کوثر
نهاد
هندوی
آتش نشین کوثر
آتش نشان
(خواجو)
Hinduyeh Aiinehdaar Cheshm (The Hindu holding the mirror for the eye=a symbol for the blackness of the eye):
هندوی
آییینهدار
چشم=کنایه از
مردمک چشمک
رشاشه
از سرشک کند
شانه از مژه
پیش
رخ هندوی آیینهدار
چشم
(کمال
اسماعیل)
هندوی
بدسودا
هندوی
حیلهگر،
کنایه از کافر
و مشرک
Here the unbeneficial Hindu is compared to a trickster and an unbeliever:
هرک
چون هندوی
بدسودایی است
روز
عرضش نوبت
رسوایی است
(مولوی)
Hinduyeh-Basar
(The Hindu of the eye=the blackness of the eye):
هندوی
بصر – کنایه از
مردمک چشم
روی
تو کز ترک
آفتاب دریغ
است
در
نظر هندوی بصر
که پسندد
رویت
ای ترک اگر
نخواهم دید
زحمت
هندوی بصر که
پسندد
(عطار)
Hinduyeh Bakr SalKhurdeh (The old pure Hindu=the black rock of Mecca):
هندوی
بکر سالخورده-
کنایه از
حجرالاسواد
هندوی
تیغ – شمشیر و تیغ
هندی
هندوی
تیغت ز حد شرق
تا اقصای غرب
چون
شه سیارگان در
تحت فرمان
(خواجو)
Hinduyeh Charkh (literally the Hindu Wheel=used as an image for Jupiter)
هندوی
چرخ – کنایه از
ستارهء زخل، کیوان
هندوی
چرخ را ز طالع
شاه
لقب
خاص سعد اکبر
باد
(جمال
عبدالرزاق)
برآویخت
هندوی چرخ از
کمر
به
هارونی شب
جرسهای زر
(نظامی)
Hinduyeh
Choobak zan – (The Hindu with the wooden weapon=symbolically means the head
servant)
هندوی
چوبک زن – کنایه
از مهتر
پاسبان
برفراز
بام قدرت هندوی
چوبک زن است
پاسبانه
قلعۀ هفتم که
خوانندش رحل
(شمس طبسی)
Hinduyeh
Chahaar Paareh Zan-(A symbol of a dancing slave, dancer...)
هندوی
چارپاره زن
کنایه
از بنده و زر
خرید، مطرب،
رقاص(چهارپاره
زنگهای کوچکی
است که رقاصان
هنگام رقص در
انگشتان کنند
و آن را به صدا
در آورند)
شارک
ز تو مطرب چمن
گشت
هندوی
چهارپاره زن
گشت
(خاقانی)
هندوی
زلف
کنایه
از سیاهی زلف
محبوب
دل
را ز بند هندوی
زلفت خلاص ده
چون
رای مدح میر
ملایک خصال
کرد
(شمس طبسی)
کارم
از هندوی زلفش
واژگون
روز
من شب شد، شبم
روز جنون
(شیخ بهائی)
Hinduyeh-Shab
(The Hindu of Night=symbol of the darkness of night)
هندوی
شب – کنایه از
تاریکی شب
خوش
خفتهای
که هندوی شب
پاسبان تست
ای
طفل طبع دزد
چه گیری به
پاسبان
(مجیر بیلقانی)
باز
از هندوی شب
چون ماه زاد
در
سر روزنی نوری
فتاد
(مولوی)
مردم
چشم شبی تا
سحر پاس داشت
گرچه
بر ایوان ماست
هندوی شب
پاسبان
(خواجو)
Hindu-Guy
(Literally one that talks Hindu)
آن
که به هندی
سخن گوید
ز
رومی رخ هندو
گوی او
شه
رومیان گشته
هندوی او
(نظامی)
هندوی
مه پوش
کنایه
از زلف سیاه
شب
از
چه روی هندوی
مه پوش شما در
تاب شد
گر
به مستی دوشم
آمد دوش بر
دوش شما
Hinduyeh-Noh-Chashm
(The Hindu with nine eyes=a black reed music instrument with nine holes)
آلتی
از موسیقی (نی
سیاه) که دارای
نه سوراخ است.
جنبش
ده ترک لرزهدار
ز شادی
هندوی
نُه چشم را به
بانگ در آورد
(خاقانی)
Hinduyeh-Haft-Chashm
(the Hindu with seven eyes=another black reed that has 7 holes)
هندوی
هفت چشم
آلتی
از موسیقی (نی
سیاه) که دارای
هفت سوراخ
است.
همان
زاغ گون هندوی
هفت چشم
برآورد
فریاد بیدرد
و خشم
(اسدی
طوسی)
Hindu
Haftom Pardeh=One of the stars or planets, Jupiter or Saturn
هندوی
هفتم پرده
کنایه
از ستارهء زحل
یا کیوان
ای
به رسم از
آغاز دوران
داشته
طارم
قدرِ تو را
هندوی هفتم
چرخ پاس
(انوری)
هندوی
هفتم سرا
هندوی
هفتم سرا حارس
ایوان توست
ورنه
کجا یافتی
منزلت برتری
(شمس
طبسی)
Hindi
(a symbol of sword, dagger)/Hindish
هندی-کنایه
از شمشیر
سحرنماست
مصریش، مصر
گشاست هندیش
مصری
کلک مُلک ده،
هندی تیغ جان
ستان
(مجیر
بیلقانی)
چو
هندی زنم بر
سر ژنده پیل
زند
پیلبان جامه
در خُم نیل
(نظامی
گنجوی)
Hindi Dragon (symbol of sword, dagger)
هندی
اژدها
کنایه
از شمشیر و تیغ
هندی
آفتاب
مشتری حکم و
سپهر قطب حلم
زیر
دست آورده مصری
مار و هندی
اژدها
Hindi
Parand (Indian Silk=another symbol of sword, dagger)
هندی
پرند
ز
شادروان، به
خاک اندر
فکندش
ز
دستش بستد آن
هندی پرندش
(فخرالدین
اسعد گرگانی)
هندی
کژمژ سخن
گنایه
از غلام و
بندهای
که شکسته و
بسته و نادرست
سخن گوید.
من
ار باشم ارنه
سگ آستانت
ز
هندی کژمژ سخن
در نماند
(خاقانی)
Hindu-Vash
(used as in slave)
شاها
سخن غلام من
آمد اگر چه
هست
هندووشی
که قیمت نیکو
نیاورد
مجیرالدین
بیلقانی
Hinduyeh
Atash Neshin (used for the hair of beloved)
زلف
تو هندو نژاد،
لعل تو کوثر
نهاد
هندوی
آتش نشین کوثر
آتش نشان
خاجو
کرمانی
Some
examples of the symbolic meaning of Turks as allusion and imagery: Tork (symbol
of the beloved, loved one, and the Sun)
نام
و ننگ و صبر و
هوش و عقل و دینم
شد حجاب
ترک
من بازآ که
سلمان ترک هر
شش میکند
(سلمان
ساوجی)
ترک
عاشق کش من
مست برون رفت
امروز
تا
دگر خون که از
دیده روان
خواهد بود
(حافظ)
جانهای
باطن روشنان
شب را به دل
روشن کنان
هندوی
شب نعره زنان
کان تُرک در
خرگاه شد
(مولوی
Torkkaar/Torkaar
(Turkish work-symbol of aggressiveness)
ای
روزی دلها
رسان جان کسان
و ناکسان
ترکاری
و یاغی بسان
هموار و
ناهموار
(مولوی)
Tork-i-Aseman
(The Turk of Sky=symbolically the Sun):
بود
چون ترک آسمان
به جهان
زیر
گلنارگون
پرند نهان
(امیر
خسرو)
Torkan-i Charkh (The Turk of the Wheel = symbol for the moon, sun and the 5 classical planets: mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn)
ترکان
چرخ
کنایه
از سیارات
هفتگانه که
عبارتند از
عطارد،زهره،
ماه، آفتاب،
مشتری، مریخ و
زحل.
شب
که ترکان چرخ
کوچ کنند
کاروان
حیات برحذر
است
(خاقانی)
ترکان
خدیو-پادشاه
ترکستان
چو
ارجاسب بشنید
گفتار دیو
فرود
آمد از گاه
ترکان خدیو
(دقیقی)
ترکان
سخن-کنایه از
سخن آبدار و
نغز
زان
عرضه کند به
عرضۀ فکر
ترکان
سخن ز خرگه
فکر
این
ترکانند خانهزادش
خاقانی
از لقب فتادش
(خاقانی)
Torkan-i-Falak
(The Turks of heaven=reference to the classical seven rotating bodies)
ترکان
فلک-کنایه از
ستارگان
هفتگانه
همه
ترکان فلک را
پس از این
خلق
تتماجی ایشان
شمرند
(خاقانی)
Tork
Ahu Cheshm (The Turk with the eye like that of Gazzelle- symbol of the beloved)
ترک
آهو چشم-کنایه
از محبوب
من
سگت، ای ترک
آهو چشم، برقع
بازکن
کز
برای دیدن روی
تو چشمم چار
شد
(هلالی)
Tork-e-Aflak
(The Turk of Heaven=a symbol of Mars)
ترک
افلاک – کنایه
از ستارهء مریخ
یا بهرام
در
جهان از نیابت
قهرت
ترک
افلاک قهرمان
باشد
(سلمان
ساوجی)
ترک
پریچهره –کنایه
از محبوب زیبا
روی
(آن
ترک پریچهره
که مانند
فرشتهست
یارب
گل پاکش ز چه
ترکیب سرشتست)
(اوحدی)
آن
ترک پریچهره
که دوش از
برما رفت
آیا
چه خطا دید که
از راه خطا
رفت
(حافظ)
Torktaaz
(Attacker, someone that attacks like Turks)
ترکتاز
– حمله کننده
به
دستش اندر شمشیر
ترکتاز ببین
ندیدی
ار تو به یک جای
همبر آتش و آب
(معزی)
ای
طبع روسیاه سوی
هند باز رو
وی
عشق ترکتاز
سفر سوی جند
کن
(مولوی)
عافیت
وقتی ارچه
قاعده بود
ترکتاز
غم تو آن
برداشت
(مجیر بیلقانی)
Torktaaz
Kardan, Torktaazi Kardan (To attack in a Turkish manner=literally pillage and
plunder)
ترکتاز
کردن، ترکتازی
کردن
کنایه
از تاراج کردن
هجوم
بردن به
ناگاه، تاخت و
تاز کردن
باز
فکر تو چشم
باز کند
موکب
روح ترکتاز کند
(اوحدی)
گر
از بهر آن کردی
این ترکتاز
که
چون بندگان پیشت
آرم نماز
(نظامی)
ترکتازی
کنم و بوسه پیاپی
زنمت
تا
که گوید که
مزن وز تو که
دارد بازم
(جمال
عبدالرزاق)
طرف
کُله شکستهای
آشوب خلق شو
دامان
فتنه بر زدهای
ترکتاز کن
(سلیم)
ترکتازی
– کنایه از
تاخت آوردن با
شتاب و ناگاه.
ماه
با این ترکتازی
چیست؟ جز هندوی
او
خاصه
کو چون قیرگون
از قیروان آمد
پدید
(مجیر
بیلقانی)
ترک
ترلکپوش
– کنایه از
محبوب (ترلک،
جامهی
آستین کوتاه و
پیش باز باشد)
ترک
خنجر کش لشکر
شکن ترلکپوش
بت
خورشید
بناگوش و مه
دزدی نوش
(خواجو)
ترک
تندخو – کنایه
از محبوب
فکر
کفن کنید آن
ترک تندخو
تیغی
چنان رساند که
از استخوان
گذشت
(بابافغانی)
ترکجوش-
گوشت نیم پخته
و کنایه از
ناتمام
این
ترک جوش آمد
ولی ترجیع سیوم
میرسد
ای
جان پاکی که ز
تو جان میپذیرد
دهر جسم
ترک
جوشش شرح کردم
نیم خام
از
حکیم غزنوی
بشنو تمام
(مولوی)
Tork-Chihreh
(Turkish face=symbol of the beloved)
ترکچهره-کنایه
از زیبا و زلف
طفلان
طبع من به صفت
ترک چهرهاند
وین
طرفه تر که
ارمنیی بودم
مادرم
(مجیر
بیلقانی)
ترک
چینی نگار-
کنایه از
محبوب
مکن
ترکی ای ترک چینی
نگار
بیا
ساعتی چین در
ابرو میار
(نظامی)
ترکِ
حصاری-کنایه
از خورشید
جو
ترک حصاری ز
کار اوفتاد
عروس
جهان در حصار
افتاد
(نظامی)
Tork
Del Siyah (The Turk with the black heart=symbolically means the eye of the
beloved)
ترک
دل سیه-
کنایه
از چشم معشوق
دلم
ز نرگس ساقی امان
نخواست به جان
چرا
که شیوۀ آن
ترک سیهدل
دانست
(حافظ)
ترک
رزم آرای
گردون-کنایه
از مریخ یا
بهرام
ترک
رزم آرای
گردون گردد اریابد
مجال
کمترین
هندوت را چاکر
ز بهر اختیار
(ابن یمین)
Tork-e-Zard-rooy
(The Turk with the yellow face=Symbol for the Sun)
ترک زرد
روی-کنایه از
آفتاب
عزم
سبک عنان تو
هر دم به مهر
گوید
کای
ترک زردروی روی
چرا تیزتر
نرانی
(شمس
طبسی)
ترک
سپهر-کنایه از
آفتاب
تا
به نوروزی شود
در خرگه تُرک
سپهر
قرص
گرم از جرم
خور بر گوشۀ
خوان یافته
(خواجو)
ترک
سلطان شکوه
(کنایه از
آفتاب)
دگر
روز کاین ترک
سلطان شکوه
ز دریای
چین کوه بر زد
کوه
(نظامی)
ترک
شکار افکن(کنایه
از محبوب)
ای
ترک شکار
افکن، شمشیر
مکش برمن
یا
آنکه پس از
کشتن بربند به
فتراکم
(هلالی)
ترک
شکر ریز(کنایه
از محبوب)
شهید
و تشنۀ آن ترک
شکرریزم
که
نقل مجلسش نقل
سیاه خویشتن
بودی
(بابافغانی)
Tork-e-Sobh
(The morning Tork=the Sun)
ترک
صبح
(کنایه
از خورشید)
در
پای اسب شام
کند اطلس شفق
در جیب
ترک صبح نهد
عنبر صبا
(عطار)
Tork-e-Sahraayeh Aval (The first Tork of the Sahara-a symbol of the moon)
ترک
صحرای اول –
کنایه از ماه
ترک
این صحر ای اول
با جلاجلهای
نور
گرد
ملکت به طریق
پاسبانی آمدهست
(سنائی)
Tork
Tab’(Turkish natured=symbol of cruelty and harshness)
ترک
طبع- کنایه از
ستمگر،جورپیشه
با
عدل تو دست
ترک طبعان
خوشرویی
بوستان گرفته
(مجیر بیلقانی)
ترک
طناز-کنایه از
محبوب
به
گاه شرح چشم ترک
طناز
همی
کن فتنۀ دور
قمر باز
بدید
آن نقشها را
ترک طناز
ز
تخت شاه چین
تا دیر ابخاز
(عارف
اردبیلی)
ترک
عقیقل گیسو-
کنایه از
محبوب.
خانه
روشن شد از آن
ماه سجنجل سینه
حجره
گلش شد از آن
ترک عقیقل گیسوی
(اوحدی)
Tork-e-Falak
(The Tork of heaven=symbolizing the planet Mars or the Sun)
ترک
فلک-کنایه از
ستارۀ مریخ با
بهرام و نیز
آفتاب
گفته
با چشمان تو
ترک فلک
بندۀ
خونریز هندوی
شماست
(ابن یمین)
اگر
نه ترک فلک پیش
او کمر بندد
فلک
به جای کُله
بر سرش نهد
بنطاق
(سلمان
ساوجی)
ترک
فلک را ببین
داغ حبش بر جبین
طرۀ
شب را نگر نافۀ
چین در شکن
(خواجو)
غلام
است ترک فلکه
مر تورا
چو
بدخواه تو در
عرب راه نیست
(طالب
آملی)
چون
علم افراخت به
پنجم رباط
ترک
فلک رُفت به
سبلت بساط
(امیر
خسرو)
Tork-e-Kafar
Kish (The Kaffar (unbeliever) Turk-symbol of the beloved)
ترک
کافرکیش-کنایه
از محبوب
چیست
قصد خونِ من
آن ترک کافر کیش
را
ای
مسلمانان نمیدانم
گناه خویش را
(وحشی)
ترک
کج کلاه-کنایه
از محبوب
گر
آن بودی که
پختم نیکخواه
خویشتن بودی
سر
در پای ترک کج
کلاه خویشتن
است
(بابا
فغانی)
ترک
کمانکش – کنایه
از محبوب
ترک
کمان کشم به
کمین میکشد
ولی
ترک
هوای عشق
گرفتن نمیتوان
(حلاج)
ترک
گردون-کنایه
از ستارۀ مریخ
یا بهرام
ترک
گردون که میخرامد
کج
مستِ
ته جرعۀ سفال
من است
(فیضی)
ترک
وار – همچون
ترک حملهکنان
خیز
تا ترک وار در
تازیم
هندوان
را در آتش تازیم
(نظامی)
ترک
و تاز – کنایه
از تاراج و غارت
و جولان
غافلم
از ترک و تاز
چراغ صائب از
غرور
پیش
پای سیل بیزنهار
در خوابیم ما
(صائب)
ترکوش-مانند
ترک و کنایه
از زیبا و و
دوست داشتنی
ای
جوان ترکوش
میر کدامین
لشکری
ای
خوشا آن کشوری
کانجا تو صاحب
کشوری
(وحشی)
ترکی
آوردن-کنایه
از سخت
گرفتن-سنگدلی
کردن.
اگر
تتار غمت خشم
و ترکیی آرد
به
عشق و صبر کمر
بسته چو
خرگاهم
(مولوی)
ترکی
تاز کردن – کنایه
از با شتاب
تاختن.
طوطی
مرده چنان
پرواز کرد
کتآفتاب
شرق ترکی تاز
کرد (مولوی)
ترکی
صفتی- کنایه
از بیوفایی
و عهدشکنی
ترکی
صفتی وفای ما
نیست
ترکانه
سخن سزای ما نیست
(نظامی)
تُرکی
کردن-کنایه از
جور و ستم
کردن، سخت دلی
کردن، کینه
ورزی کردن.
مینبینید
آن سفیهانی که
ترکی کردهاند
همچو
چشم تنگ ترکان
گور ایشان تنگ
و تار
(سنائی)
خون
خوری ترکانه
کاین از دوستی
است
خون
مخور، ترکی
مکن، تازان
مشو
(خاقانی)
مکن
ترکی ای میل
من سوی تو
که
ترُک توام
بلکه هندوی تو
(نظامی)
Some
examples of the symbolic usage of Rum(Greek) in Persian allusion and imagery:
Rum o Zang (Greek and Black=Day
and Night)
روم
و زنگ-کنایه
از شب و روز،
روشنی و تاریکی،
سوم
روز کاین طاق
بازیچه رنگ
برآورد
بازیچۀ روم و
زنگ
(نظامی
گنجوی)
هر
زمانی همی رسد
مددش
دو
سپه روز و شب ز
روم و زنگ
(مسعود سعد)
Rumi
(Greek=Sun, brightness)
رومی-کنایه
از روشنایی،
آفتاب
نماید
گهی رومی از بیم
پشت
گریزان
و آن زرد خنجر
به مشت
(اسدی طوسی)
رومی
پنهان گشت چو
دوران حبش رسید
امروز
در این لشکر
جرار برآمد
(مولوی)
Rumiyaaneh
Roo Daashtan (Having the face of a Greek=bright face, light face, beautiful
face)
رومیانه
رو داشتن-کنایه
از سفید چهره،
زیبا روی بودن.
رومیانه
روی دارد، زنگیانه
زلف و خال
چون
کمان چاچیان
ابروی دارد پر
عتیب
(سعدی)
رومی
ابیض-کنایه از
روز روشن
از
روی تو و موی
تو دارند نشانی
این
رومی ابیض دگر
آن شامی اسود
(ابن
حسام)
Rumi
Bachegan (Greek Kids=tear drops of the eye)
خون
گریم وز دو
هندوی چشم
رومی
بچگان دوان ببینم
(خاقانی)
Rumiyeh
Talkh (The bitter Greek=a bitter wine)
رومی
تلخ –کنایه از
شراب تلخ.
حدیث
جامی و شیرین
شدن به رومی
تلخ
کرامتی
است که از پیر
جام میگوید
(جامی)
رومی
خوی-کنایه از
دو رنگ و
متلون المزاج.
هوا
چون خاک پای و
آز خوک پایگاهت
شد
خراج
از دهر ذمی روی
رومی خوی
بستانی
(خاقانی)
رومی
رخ- کنایه از زیبا
روی.
رومی
رخی و باد چو
بر زلف تو جهد
از
مشک ساده شکل
چلیپا همی
کند.
(ادیب
صابر)
رومی
ِ روم بودن-
کنایه از یکرو
و یکرنگ و یکدل
و باصفا بودن.
دلت
از یاد حق چیزی
ندانست
همه
میل ِ دلت با چینه
دان است
اگر
رومی ِ رومی
در حقیقت
چرا
میل ِ دلت با
زنگیان است؟
(قاسم
انوار)
رومیزاد،
رومیزاده-کنایه
از روشن و
درخشان
شاه
رومی زادۀ
خورشید را گوی
برمکش
تیغ از میان
آفرینش
تیره
کرده آسمان به
دودۀ شب
چهرۀ
اختران رومی
زاد
(شمس
طبسی)
رومی
زن رعنا – کنایه
از آفتاب
گرچه
زان آیند
خاتون عرب را
نگرند
در
پس آینه رومی
زن رعنا بینند
(خاقانی)
رومی
سلب – جامۀ رومی
آزاده
دلی است بندگی
کوش
صوفی
صفتی است ششتری
پوش
رومی
سلبی است لیک
محروم
زنگی
طربی است لیک
با غم
(خاقانی)
رومی
و زنگی – کنایه
از روزگار، شب
و روز سپید و سیاهی.
مگر
با من این بیمحابا
پلنگ
چو
رومی و زنگی
نباشد دو رنگ
(نظامی)
بدین
دو رومی و زنگی
گر اعتبار کنی
ز
روم تا در
زنگبار بگشاید
(ظهیر
فاریابی)
دو
قرن رومی و
زنگی عنان در
پار دُم بسته
به گیرد
قبۀ ازرق همی یابند
از جولان
(اثیر
اخسیتکی)
الا
تا روز با شب
دو رنگی است
زمانه
گاه رومی گاه زنگی
است
(امیر
خسرو)
رومی
و زنگی نمودن
جهان-کنایه از
روشنی و تیرگی
شب و روز.
جهان
را نیست کاری
جز دو رنگی
گهی
رومی نماید گهی
زنگی
(نظامی)
رومیوش
– مانند رومی و
کنایه از صاف
و روشن.
بیا
ساقی آن می که
رومیوش
است
به
من ده که طبعم
چون زنگی خش
است
(نظامی)
Some
examples of the symbolic usage of Zang/Habash
(Blacks/Ethiopians) in Persian poetic allusions and imageries: Habashi
(Abyssenian/Black=symbol of blackness, symbol of darkness of the beloved’s
hair)
حبشی
کنایه
از سیاه رنگ- سیاه
چهر-سیاه زلف
یکانیکان
حبشی چهره و یمانی
اصل
همه
بلال معانی
همه اویس هنر
(خاقانی)
حبشزلف
یمانی رخ زنگیخال
که
چو ترکانش تتق
رومی خضرا بینند
(خاقانی)
Zangi
(Black/ symbol of the darkness and darkness of night)
زنگی
– کنایه از سیاهی
و تاریکی شب
گهی
آید آن زنگی
تاخته
ز سیمین
سپر نیمی
انداخته
(اسدی
طوسی)
در
عزیمت و هزیمت
هر زمان زنگی
و روم
این
گران کردی
رکاب و آن سبک
کردی عنان
(سید
حسن غزنوی)
زنگیانه-همچو
زنگیان – کنایه
از سیاه
رومیانه
روی دارد زنگیانه
زلف و خال
چو
کمان چاچیان
ابروی دارد
پرعتیب
(سعدی)
خاقانی
است هندوی آن هندوانه
زلف
و آن
زنگیانه خال سیاه
مدورش
(خاقانی)
زنگی
بچگان-کنایه
از خال سیاه
محبوب
در
گلشن بوستان
رویش
زنگی
بچگان ز ماده
زاده
(سعدی)
زنگی
بچگان تاک-کنایه
از خوشههای
انگور سیاه.
انداخته
هندوی کدیور
زنگی
بچگانِ تاک را
سر
سرهای
تهی ز طرۀ کاخ
آویخته
هم به طرۀ شاخ
(نظامی)
زنگی
بچگان زر-کنایه
از دانههای
انگور سیاه
خونِ
زنگی بچگان رز
میخور
پیوست
گر
همی خواهی که
شاخ بقا برگیرد
(شمس
طبسی)
زنگی
پر زنگله-کنایه
از تاریکی شب
در
روز چو ایمن
شدی زین رومی
با عربده
شب
هم مکن اندیشهای
زین زنگی پر
زنگله
(مولوی)
زنگی
پیر- کنایه از
تاریکی شب
گردش
انجم از ورای
اثیر
خیل
رومی به گردِ
زنگی پیر
(سنائی)
زنگی
تار-کنایه از
تاریکی شب
از
آن گریان شدم
کاین زنگی تار
چو
زنگی خود نمیخندد
یکی بار
(نظامی)
جنگی
جبین-سیاه روی،
پیشیانی سیاه
راویۀ
ما اشتر ما
هست این
پس
کجا شد بندۀ
زنگی جبین
(مولوی)
زنگی
چارپاره
زن-کنایه از
نوازنده و
مطرب
سار
مسکین که نیست
چون بلبل
رومی
ارغنون زنِ
گلزار
لاجرم
شاید ار برستۀ
بید
زنگی
ِ چارپاره زن
شد سار
(خاقانی)
زنگی
خفته-کنایه از
تاریکی شب.
از
باد یک دو
عطسه که زد
صبح بر دماغ
زنگی
ِ خفته تا به
کمر گه نشست
باز
(اثیر
اخسیکتی)
Zangi
Del/Zangi Deli (Zangi heart, Zangi heartedness, =merciless, black hearted)
زنگیدل
– کنایه از آن
که بیرحم
و سیاهدل
است
زنگیدلی
– کنایه از کینهتوزی
و شقاوت، سختدلی.
ز
غوغای زنگی
دلان عرب
گریزان
ندانی که چون
آمدیم
(خاقانی)
چو
او زنگیان
فارغ دل آمد
بسی
زنگی دلی زو
حاصل امد
(عطار)
زنگی
زشت – کنایه از
تاریکی شب
چون
ز سرمای صبح
زنگی زشت
دم
دمید اندر آتش
و انگشت
صبحدم
برون همی زد خیل
گفتیی
جان همی بود
بواللیل
(سنائی)
زنگی
سرگشته-کنایه
از موی سیاه
معشوق
ای
آن که ز مه گرد
شب انگیختهای
ب سر
و روان زنگ گل
آمیختهای
آن
زنگی سرگشته
راه که زدهست
کز
کنگرۀ مهش در
آویختهای
(شمس
طبسی)
زنگی
شب- کنایه از
تاریکی شب.
رومی
روز آب کارت
برد و تو در
کار آب
زنگی
شب رخت عمرت
برد و تو در
پنج و جار
(جمال
عبدالرزاق)
زنگی
مغرب نشین-کنایه
از سیاهی
شبانه، هنگان
غروب
زنگی
مغرب نشین
گردن رومی برید
داد
شفق را به خون
رنگ عقیق مذاب
(ابن
حسام)
زنگین
کردن چیزی-آلوده
به زنگ کردن چیزی.
تو
رنگ رزی تو نیل
پزی
هان
کآینه را زنگین
نکنی
(مولوی)
Thus
as we can see:
“The Hindu in Persian poetry is used a symbol for ugliness,
black, of evil omen, mean servant of Turkish emperors, the nafs, the base soul
which on other occasions is to compared to an unclean black dog. Yet, even the
nafs if successfully educated – can become useful, comparable to the little
Hindu-slave whose perfect loyalty will be recognized by any Shah. Turk is from
Ghaznavid times onwards equivalent with the beloved; the word conveys the idea
of strength, radiance, victory, sometimes cruelty, but always beauty; ..These
stories in which the Turkish warrior-not endowed with too much intelligence-is
slightly ridiculed, are by far outweighed by those allusions (not stories) in
which the Turk is contrasted to the Hindu as the representative of the luminous
world of spirit and love, against the dark world of the body and matter”
(Schimmel,
Triumphal Sun).
Also
as Professor Annmarrie Schimmel alluded to:
“Besides the Turk and the Hindu one finds the juxtaposition of
Rum and Habash-Byzantium and Ethiopia—to allude to white and black”.
Thus
the multitude of examples given from Persian literature from the above books
and articles does not denote ethnicity, especially when comparing and
contrasting.
We note some examples that show multiple of contradiction if we are to take them literary.
Attar:
Attar
is a well known Persian poet and philosopher and has had tremendous influence
on Sufism and mysticism. So much so that Rumi considers himself to be in the niche
of a street while he considered Attar to have travelled through the Seven
Cities of Love.
Attar says:
کی توانم
گفت که هندوی
توام
هندوی
خاک سگ کوی تو
ام
If we are to take this literally, then Attar is actually an Indian (Hindu) and he was not Iranian. And here will quote again from Schimmel who quotes:
The classical locus is perhaps in 371:
بوسه
چو داد ترک من
هندوی
او شدم بجان
«Since my Turk gave me a kiss I became from the bottom of my
heart his Hindu...»
Thus
if we are to take this literally, then Attar was a Turk or had a Turk who gave
him a kiss and his heart became a Hindu.
Here
again:
«not a Hindu-yi badkhu, of bad character, in the service of his
beloved but an Abessinian who bears his mark»
در
بندگیش نه
هندویم بدخو
هستم
حبشی که داغ
او دارم
Thus
now Attar is a Ethiopian (Abessinian).
ترک
فلک چاکر شود
آنرا
که شود هندوی
او
«The
Turk of the Heaven (i.e. Mars) becomes the servant of Him,
who
became His (i.e. the beloved’s) Hindu.»
Now
heaven is a Turk, for who is a servant to those that became his Hindu.
هست ترک و
من بجان هندوی
او
لاجرم با
تیغ در کار
آمدست
هست ترک و
من بجان هندوی
او
لاجرم با
تیغ در کار
آمدست
« He is a Turk and I from the bottom of my heart his Hindu,
necessarily he has come to work with his sword.» (129)
Thus as we can see if we are to take Attar’s imagery and symbolism literally, then there would be arguments between Ethiopians and Indian nationalists about the ethnicity of Attar.
Abu
Esmai’l Abdallah Al-Ansari Al-Heravi (Khwaja Abdullah Ansari of Herat):
He was born in Herat and is considered one of the outstanding Persian writers and mystics. Khwaja Abdullah Ansari was a descendant of the companion of the Prophet of Islam, Abi Ayub Ansari. This companion of the Prophet or one of his early descendants migrated to Herat and eventually the family became Persianized.
The
Pir of Herat, Khwajah Ansari writes:
ای
شب تو کیستی
زنگی سیاهی و
من ختنی زادهی
چون ماهی
ای
شب تو بر
خرابههای
تاریک چون بومی
و من بر تخت
روزگار
اسکندر رومی.
(Dastgerdi, Wahid. “Resa’il Jaami’ ‘Aref Qarn Chaharom Hejri: Khwaja Abdullah Ansari”, Forooghi Publishers, 1349/1970, 2nd edition. p 60)
Translation:
Oh
Night, What are? A black Zangi, and I am of Khotanese descent (look like) a
moon (beautiful).
Oh
Night, you are upon the dark ruins like an owl and I am on the throne of the
age of Eskandar-e-Rumi (Alexander the
Greek).
Thus if we take this literally, then the well known Ansari, a descendant of the
compantion of the Prophet of Islam, would be of Khotanese descent. Of course the contrast between
Dark/African/Zang and Khotanese is a well known contrast used by many Persian
poets. In another poem, he compares love
to the Turk because both of them plunder.
عشق
آمد و دل كرد
غارت
اي
دل تو بجان بر
اين بشارت
تركي
عجب است عشق
داني
كز
ترك عجيب نيست
غارت
Amir
Khusraw:
Amir
Khusraw, according to Annmarrie Schimmel, was born to a Turkish father and an
Indian mother and is one of the most important Persian poets of India. Athough ethnically, he was not Iranian, but rather
Indian/Turkic, nevertheless, culturally he was Iranian.
Schimmel
quotes this verse from Amir Khusraw and then further explains:
“The tongue of my friend is Turkish
And I know no Turkish –
Amir Khusrau’s own father was of Turkish extraction and the
great mystic guru in Delhi Nizamuddin Auliya affectionately called the poet
Turki Allah ‘God’s Turk’. However the word Turk was traditionally used to also
mean a beautiful, fair-complexioned, lively, sometimes also cruel beloved,
compared to which the miserable lover felt himself to be but a lowly, humble,
swarthy Hindu slave. The literary counterpart turk-hindu, which can also
mean ‘black-white’, was in use for centuries in Persian literature, and had has
its counterpart in reality on the subcontinent since the days of Sultan Mahmud
of Ghazna. Mahmud was of Turkic lineage, and he invaded India no fewer than
seventeen times between 999 and 1030. As a result the Turks were established as
a military force, and they also formed the ruling class, under whose auspices
the theologians and lawyers henceforth had to work”
(Schimmel, Annemarie. “The Empire of the Great Mughals: History, Art and Culture; translated by Corinne Atwood ; edited by Burzine K. Waghmar; with a foreword by Francis Robinson. London: Reaktion Books, 2004. Excerpt from pg 233)
Thus if one was to take this verse out of context, Amir Khusraw who knew Turkish (note his praise of India) did not know any Turkish, although he said:
“And there are the numerous languages of India which, when
imported, develop more beautifully than it was possible in their native country
– is not the Persian of India much superior to that of Khurasan and Sistan? Do
not people learn the finest Turkish here?”
(Annemarie Schimmel, Turk and Hindu: A Poetical Image and Its Application to Historical Fact in Speros Vryonis, Jr., ed., Islam and Cultural Change in the Middle Ages (Undena Publications, 1975), posthumously honoring G.E. von Grunebaum)
We should note something here about the cultural identity of person like Amir Khusraw, Blban (one of his patrons) and the Turco-Mongols that settled in India. Schimmel points out:”In fact as much as early rulers felt themselves to be Turks, they conntected their Turkish origin not with Turkish tribal history but rather with the Turan of Shahnameh: in the second generation their children bear the name of Firdosi’s heroes, and their Turkish lineage is ivariably traced back to Afrasiyab—weather we read Barani in the fourteenth century or the Urdu master poet Ghalib in the nineteenth century. The poets, and through them probably most of the educated class, felt themselves to be the last outpost tied to the civilized world by the threat of Iranianism. The imagery of poetry remained exclusively Persian.”( Annemarie Schimmel, Turk and Hindu: A Poetical Image and Its Application to Historical Fact)
As Canfield also notes:”The Mughals, Persianized Turks who had invaded from Central Asiaand claimed descent from both Timur and Genghis strengthened the Persianate culture of Muslim India.”(Robert L. Canfield, Turko-Persia in historical perspective, Cambridge University Press, 1991)
Khaqani:
Afzal a-din Badil Ibrahim who received the penname from the Shirvanshah Khaqan ‘Azam Abul’Mufazzar Khaqan-i Akbar Manuchehr b. Faridun and was also known as Hessan al-Ajam Khaqani (the Persian Hassān) may be regarded as the second most important literary figure of the Islamic Caucasia after Nezami Ganjavi. In actually, when it comes to certain forms like the Qasida, he would be the greatest poet of the area. He was born to a Christian mother(possibly Iranian, Armenian, Georgian) and an Iranian (Iranic) father. He writes about his mother:
نسطوری
و موبدی نژادش
“Nesturi o Mobedi Nejaadesh” (Of Nestorian and Zoroastrian(Mobed being the title of Zoroastrian priets). That is his mother’s family might have been originally Zoroastrians who converted to Nesrotrian Christianity, like many Iranians did in the late Sassanid era.
Here are some verses that Khaqani Shirvani literally claims to be a Hindu (that is if we read it literally):
گر دلم سوز سموم باديه
پس
مفرح کز لب و
خالش کنم
کمترين
هندوي او
خاقاني است
گر
پذيرد نام
مثقالش کنم
(خاقانی)
خاقانی
است هندوی آن
هندوانه زلف
و آن
زنگیانه خال سیاه
مدورش
(خاقانی)
Thus
at least twice Khaqani is claiming to be a Hindu here. But these verses are
obviously not taken literally. Or for example, in his famous “Aivaan
Mada’en”, Khaqani remarks:
اینست
همان درگه
کورا ز شهان
بدی
دیلم
ملک بابل،
هندو شه
ترکستان
(خاقانی)
This is that same kingly court, which had from its great Kings
(relative
to it) a Daylamite was a king of Babylon, A Hindu the King of Turkistan
Nizami:
We also discuss some imagery by the Persian poet Nezami who also had an influence on Rumi (although not as much as Attar and Sanai).
As Schimmel has already noted:
By
the end of the 12th century, the symbol Hindu for black is used commonly by Nizami:
— The Indian princess — described with the famous contrast-pair as
«gazelle
with Turkish (i.e. killing) eyes,
from
Hindu origin»
آهوی
ترک چشم هندو
زاد
is
that of Saturday which is ruled by Saturn which is poetically called
the هندوی باریک
بین or هندوی
سپهر and has, according to astrological tradition, black colour.
But Nizami has also compared the crow to the Indian:
زاغ جز
هندوی نسب
نباشد
دزدی از
هندوان عجب
نباشد
«
The crow is surely of Hindu origin,
and to steal is not
astonishing in Hindus » (HP 112)
ترکی از
نسل رومیان
نسبش
قرة العین
هندوان لقبش
«
A Turk from Byzantine origin,
whose
surname is «the object of pleasure to the Hindus»
Here are some other examples.
In praise of one of the rulers:
همه
ترکان چین
بادند هندوش
مباد
از چینیان چینی
بر ابروش
Translation:
May
all the Turks of China be his Hindu (slave),
May
no frown come upon his brows from the Chinese
We note that Chin in Persian poetry (Shahnameh and Panj Ganj) is actually Western China and parts of Central Asia that were ruled by Khaqan. That is why the Khaqan of Gok Turks in the Shahnameh is called the Khaqan of Chin.
Here
is another example from Nizami:
سیاهان
حبش ترکان چینی
چو
شب با ماه
کرده همنشینی
Author’s translation:
Siyaahaan Habash (The blacks of Ethiopia), Torkaan
Chini (the Turks of China),
Cho
Shab (like the night) baa maah (with the moon) kardeh hamneshi (have gathered
together): The blacks of Ethiopia, the Turks of China, like the night with the
moon have gathered together.
Note here that the Siyaahaan Habash (blacks of Ehtiopia) are the color of the night while the Torkan Chini are the moon (and the stars).
Another
example: Here is one where the Kurd’s daughter is of Hindu Mole, Indian
nature/created and Turkish eye and face.
کرد
را بود دختری
با جمال
لعبتی
ترک چشم و
هندوخال
مهی
ترک رخساره
هندو سرشت
ز
هندوستان
داده شه را
بهشت
The
Kurd had a daughter with beautiful face
A lovely beauty with Turkish
eyes and Indian mole
A bride of Hindu components
and Turkish face
From Hindustan has given the
king a paradise
When the King of India offers his daughter to
Alexander the Great, Nezami Ganjavi writes this description of her in his
Eskandarnama:
مهی
ترک رخساره
هندو سرشت
ز
هندوستان
داده شه را
بهشت
نه
هندو که ترک
خطائی به نام
به
دزدیدن دل چون
هندو تمام
ز
رومی رخ هندوی
گوی او
شه
رومیان گشته
هندوی او
A geat beauty of Hindu origin with Turkish face
It has made Hindustan (India) a Paradise for
the King
Not a Hindu, but a Khatai Turk in name
But when it comes to stealing hearts, as adept
as a Hindu
From her Roman face and Hindu (sweet) talks
The King of Rome (Alexander) has became her
Hindu (Slave)
Another
example: A verse from Shirin in Khusraw o Shirin:
و گر
چشمم ز ترکی
تنگیای کرد
به
عذر آمد چو
هندوی
جوانمرد
Author’s translation:
If
my eye because of Turkishness has narrowed,
Came
apologizing the chivalrous Hindu
(Here in my opinion Nizami is
describing the blackness of the eye beautifully)
Here
the whiteness of the eye is the Turk and the blackness of the eye is the Hindu,
furthermore, Turks in Persian poetry are known for Tang-Cheshmi (narrow
eyedness) due to the fact that the Turks described in Persian poetry are the
original Asiatic Turks and not the linguistically Turkified people of later
Azerbaijan, Caucasia and Anatolia. We shall
discuss this in the next section.
We now quote some verses from the translation of Haft Paykar with regards to Persian imagery. Original Persian of some of these verses is brought here:
“The
Slav king’s daughter, Nasrin-Nush
A
Chinese Turk in Grecian Dress”
(Julia
Meysami, Haft Paykar, pg 51-52)
Thus
we can see that if we take the verse literally, Slavic king had a daughter who
was a Chinese Turk in Grecian Dress. But the verse makes perfect sense given
the brief overview that was given on Persian poetic symbols, imagery and
allusion.
“A
fair Turk from Greek stock it seemed
The
Joy of Hindus was its name”
(Julia
Meysami, Haft Pakyar, pg 99)
Thus we can see the symbols Rum, Hindu and Turk all at play in a two verses.
We note that when the Persian Sassanid King Bahram enters the black dome which is identified with the kingdom of India:
“When
Bahram please sought, he set
His
eyes on those seven portraits
On
Saturday from Shammasi temple went
In
Abbassid black to pitch his tent;
Entered
the musk-hued dome and gave
His
greetings to the Indian maid”
(Julia
Meysami, Haft Pakyar, pg 105)
“See
what a Turkish raid heaven made,
What
game with such a prince it played
It
banished me from Iram’s green
Made
my black lot a legend seem”
(Julia
Meysami, Haft Paykar, pg 108)
“A
queen came forth from her palace dome
Greek
troops before Ethiops behind
Her
Greeks and Blacks, like two-hued dawn,
Set
Ethiops troops against those of Rum (in reality Greece=Rum)”
(Julia
Meysami, Haft Paykar, pg 108)
While still in the black dome (associated with the kingdom of India) he meets a lady by the name Turk-taz (Turkish attack, Turkish raid). This is reminiscent of this verse of Khwaja Abdullah Ansari of Herat:
عشق آمد و
دل بکرد غارت
ای دل تو
به جان بر این
بشارت
ترکی عجب
است عشق، دانی
کز ترک عجیب نیست غارت
Here is another use of this in the Haft Paykar:
“My
love”, said I, “What will you? Fame
You
surely have; what is your name?”
She
said: “A lissome Turk I am,
Turktaz
the beautiful my name
In
harmony and accord, I said
Our
names are to each other wed
How
strange that Turktaz your name
For
mine-Turktaazi-is the same
Rise;
let us make a Turkish raid
Cast
Hindus aloes on the flame;
Take
life from the Magian cup
With
it, on lovers sweetmeas sup”
(Julia
Meysami, Haft Paykar, 119-120)
“I’ll
favor you, at life’s own cost
If
You’re a Turk, I am your black”
(Julia
Meysami, Haft Paykar, pg 128)
(Here Hindu or Ehtiop was probably translated as Black)
“Without
the light’s radiance, like a shade,
A
Turk, far from that Turkish raid”
(Julia
Meysami, Haft Paykar, pg 131)
“The
Chinese-adorned bride of Rum
Said
‘Lord of Rum, Taraz, Chin”
(Julia
Meysami, Haft Paykar, pg 133)
In the tale of the Greek’s daughter in the Yellow dome we read:
“Each
newly purchased maid she’d hail
As
‘Rumi’queen and Turkish belle”
(Julia
Meysami, Haft Paykar, pg 134)
“Although
her Turkish wiles enflamed,
He
kept his passion tightly reined”
(Julia
Meysami, Haft Paykar, pg 137)
In the Turquoise Dome
“In
Egypt dwelt a man, Maahaan
More
beautiful than the full moon,
Like
Egypt’s Joseph, fair of face;
A
thousand Turks his Hindu Slave”
(Julia
Meysami, Haft Paykar, pg 175)
“Till
the nights Ethiop rushed day’s Turks,
The
king ceased not his joyful Sport”
(Julia
Meysami, Haft Paykar, pg 216)
Chinese King apologizing to Bahram:
“I’m
still his humble slave; of Chin
At
home, but Ehtiop to him”
(Julia Meysami, Haft Paykar, pg 257)
Rumi:
Since
we already brought some examples from Rumi (see the introduction of this
section), we bring few more examples
here.
According
to Annemarrie Schimmel: “Rumi’s mother tongue was
Persian, but he had learned, during his stay in Konya, enough Turkish and Greek
to use it, now and then in his verses.”
Here
are two contradicting verses from Rumi:
اي
تُرک ِ ماهچهره،
چه گردد که
صبح، تو
آيي
به حجرهي ِ
من و گويي که:
گـُل برو!
تو
ماه ِ ترکي و من
اگر ترک نيستم،
دانم
من اين قَدَر
که به ترکي
است، آب سُو
آب ِ
حيات ِ تو گر
از اين بنده
تيره شد،
تُرکي
مکن به
کُشتَنَمام
اي تُرک ِ
تُرکخو!
Translation:
“You
are a Turkish moon and I, although I am not a Turk,
I
know this little that in Turkish the word for water is su”
گه
تركم و گه
هندو گه رومی
و گه زنگی
از
نقش تو است ای
جان اقرارم و
انكارم
Translation:
“I
am sometimes Turk, sometimes Hindu, sometimes Rumi and sometimes Negro,
O
Soul, from your image is my approval and denial”
“Everyone
in whose heart is the love for Tabriz, becomes – even though he be a Hindu – he
becomes a rose cheeked inhabitant of Taraz (i.e. Turk)”(Schimmel, Triumphal
Sun)
Note Taraz is a city in central Asia known for its beauties. All these contradictory verses have symbolic meaning and should not be taken out of their context.
Here are some more:
زان سو که
ترک شادی و
هندوی غم رسید
When
the Turk of Happiness and the Hindu of Sadness arrived
در عشق
بدل شود همه چیز
ترکی
سازند ارمنی
را
In
love everything changes
From
an Armenian they make a Turk (that is something impossible can happen)
صد هزاران
روح رومی روی
را
در میان
زنگیان
افکنده ای
Hundreds
of thousands of Roman-Faced Spirits
He
has thrown in the midst of the Zangis (Blacks)
سوفسطاییم
کرد سحرت
ای ترک
نموده هندوی
را
Your
magic bewildered me
O
who has made a Turk appear as a Hindu
آن ترک که
آن سال به یغماش
بدیدی
آنست که
امسال عرب وار
برآمد
That
Turk that you saw plundering the year before
Has
now come this year like an Arab
Here are more examples which we do not provide translation:
بوی خمش
خلق را در
کوزه فقاع کرد
شد هزاران
ترک و رومی
بنده و هندوی
خم
..
غلامان
دارد او رومی
غلامان دارد
او زنگی
به نوبت
روی بنماید به
هندو و به
ترکاری
..
پیش آن
چشم های
ترکانه
بنده ای و
کمینه هندویی
آن چه روی
است که ترکان
همه هندوی ویند
ترک تاز
غم سودای وی
از چند گذشت
هندوی ساقی
دل خویشم که
بزم ساخت
تا ترک غم
نتازد کامروز
طوی نیست
…
روزیست
اندر شب نهان
ترکی میان
هندوان
شب ترک
تازی ها بکن
کان ترک در
خرگاه شد
..
جان های
باطن روشنان
شب را به دل
روشن کنان
هندوی شب
نعره زنان کان
ترک در خرگاه
شد
ز ترکستان
آن دنیا بنه
ترکان زیبارو
به
هندستان آب و
گل به امر شهریار
آمد
…
هندوان
خرگاه تن را
روفتند
ترک خلوت
دید و در
خرگاه شد
..
زان سو که
ترک شادی و
هندوی غم رسید
آمد شدیست
دایم و راهیست
ناپدید
…
رومی
پنهان گشت چو
دوران حبش دید
امروز در
این لشکر جرار
برآمد
..
یا رب
سپاه شاه حبش
تا کجا گریخت
ناگه سپاه
قیصر روم از
کجا رسید
..
شب شرق تا
به غرب گرفته
سپاه زنگ
رومی
روزشان به یکی
بار می کشد
گر سیه روی
بود زنگی و
هندوی توست
چه غمست
از سیهی چونک
از آن تو بود
..
ما شب گریزان
و دوان و اندر
پی ما زنگیان
زیرا که
ما بردیم زر
تا پاسبان
آگاه شد
..
شیخ هندو
به خانقاه آمد
نی تو ترکی
درافکن از
بامش
..
بی صورت
با هزار صورت
صورت ده
ترک و رومی و
زنگ
…
ترکی همه
ترکی کند تاجیک
تاجیکی کند
من ساعتی
ترکی شوم یک
لحظه تاجیکی
شوم
..
بوی خمش
خلق را در
کوزه فقاع کرد
شد هزاران
ترک و رومی
بنده و هندوی
خم
..
چون مست
ازل گشتی شمشیر
ابد بستان
هندویک
هستی را
ترکانه تو یغما
کن
رومیانش
جامه دزد و
زنگیانش جامه
دوز
شاد باش ای
جامه دزد و
آفرین ای جامه
کن
..
هاشمی
الوجه ترکی
القفا
دیلمی
الشعر رومی
الذقن
...
همه شیران
بده در حمله
او چون سگ لنگ
همه ترکان
شده زیبایی او
را هندو
...
گهی سودای
فاسد بین زمانی
فاسد سودا
گهی گم شو
از این هر دو
اگر همخرقه مایی
به ترک
ترک اولیتر سیه
رویان هندو را
که ترکان
راست جانبازی
و هندو راست
لالایی
منم باری
بحمدالله
غلام ترک
همچون مه
که مه رویان
گردونی از او
دارند زیبایی
دهان عشق
می خندد که
نامش ترک گفتم
من
خود این
او می دمد در
ما که ما ناییم
و او نایی
...
رومی رخان
ماه وش زاییده
از خاک حبش
چون تو
مسلمانان خوش
بیرون شده از
کافری
..
قیصر رومی
کنون زنگیکان
را شکست
تا به ابد
چیره باد دولت
خندان تو
We note all these symbolic allusions and imagery are part of Persian poetry and have been used by many Persian poets including Hafez, Sa’adi, Sanai, Attar, Khaqani and Nizami Ganjavi. Nezami Ganjavi, Attar, Rumi, Hafez, Khaqani, Sanai and several other Persian poets used them extensively. Unfortunately due to lack of knowledge of Persian language and literature, some people have tried to read these in ethnic-literal sense through the prism of modern nationalism and thus when faced with the literally contradictory readings, have tried to play around with Rumi’s Persian heritage. If taken literally, then Rumi was a Roman, Black, Hindu, Turk, Tajik or anything as he has made comparisons to these. Virtually in all these verses, Hindu and Turk, or Rumi and Black have come together showing the clear symbolism and contrast. In the above examples we have shown how Turk, Hindu, Zangi/Habash, Rum is used for description and symbols of slavery, rulership, slave (Hindu), ruler (Turk),Soldier/Warrior (Turk), cruelty, moon faced, beauty, ugliness, trees, birds, flowers, stars, climes, complexions, colors (yellow, white, black), animals (the eye, face), planets, day (Rum, Turk) and night (Hindu, Habash/Zang), languages, tears, hair, face, various moods and feelings without taking any ethnic meaning. An interesting example was given by Khwajah Abdullah Ansari who compares “love” and “turk” due to both being plunderers (note Rumi also mentions this in an anectode in Aflaki).
عشق
آمد و دل كرد
غارت
اي
دل تو بجان بر
اين بشارت
تركي
عجب است عشق
داني
كز
ترك عجيب نيست
غارت
Today there are two groups of Turkic speakers in term of physical characteristics (phenotypes) and the genotype also show a greater variety. The Turcophones of Anatolia, Azerbaijan and the Caucasia as opposed to the Turks of Central Asia, China and Siberia are overwhelmingly Caucasian looking. It is easily shown that Persian poets (Attar, Hafez, Sanai, Rumi, Khaqani, Nezami, Salman Saveji...) use the term Turk metaphorically and non-methaporically, the term is rooted in the the Mongloid types of Central Asia and not the Caucasoid type of the Caucasia, Azerbaijan and Turkey. This is important since the association of Turks in classical Persian poetry at least up to the time of Hafez has to do with the Central Asian types. Of course, the Caucasoid types (who are mainly linguistically Turkified due to the elite dominance of Turks) are not physically different than Persians, Kurds, Armenians, Greeks, Arabs and etc (of Caucasian Mediterranean) where-as the Mongoloid types are radically different. It is clear that the primary heritage left by the Turkic nomads and invaders of the region was that of language (heavily influenced by Persian and Persianized Arabic) rather than culture. Thus it was their distinctive facial and physical features which made the Turks of Central Asia as the ideal type of beauty in Persian literature.
We quote Professor Peter Golden who has written one of the most comprehensive book on Turkic people in English up to this time:
“The original Turkish physical type, if we can really posit
such, for it should be borne in mind that this mobile population was
intermixing with its neighbors at a very stage, was probably of the Mongloid
type (in all likelihood in its South Siberian variant). With may deduce this
from the fact that populations in previously Europoid areas of Iranian speech
begin to show Mongloid influences coincidental with the appearances of Turkic
people.”
We have also quoted Prof. Schimmel who has said:
“Soon the Turkish type of beauty became prominent both in
pictures and in poetical descriptions: a round face with narrow eyes and a
minute mouth.”
Iraj Anvar, the translator of forty eight ghazals from Rumi also mentions this:
“It indicates people from the North, with high cheek bones
and almond shaped eyes, considered to be the most beautiful people”.
(Anvar, Iraj. “Divan Shams Tabrizi, Fourthy Eight Ghazals, Translated by Iraj Anvar”, Semar Publishers Srl, 2002. Pg 131)
We now quote many Persian poets including Rumi, as well as Muslim historians account. One attribute of Turks identified in Persian poetry is Tang-Cheshm (literally: narrow-eyes) which is part of the Mongloid features.
Nizami Ganjavi mentions this fact at least four times with respect to Turks:
ز بس که
آورده ام در
چشمها نور
ز ترکان تنگ چشمي کرده ام دور
“I brought so much
light into this world, that I cast away narrow-eyedness from Turks”
Nizami Ganjavi describing the anger of Alexander at the Khaqan:
به
نِفرين
تُرکان زَبان
بَرگُشاد
که بي
فِتنِه تُرکي
زِ مادَر
نَزاد
زِ
چيني بِجُز
چينِ اَبروُ
مَخواه
ندارند پِيمان
مردم نِگاه
سُخن
راست گُفتند
پيشينيان
که عَهد
و وَفا نيست در
چينيان
همه
تَنگ چِشمي
پَسنديده اند
فَراخي
به چَشمِ
کَسان ديده اند
خبر ني
که مهر شما
کين بُوَد
دل
تُرکِ چين پُر
خَمُ و چين
بُوَد
اگر
تُرکِ چيني
وَفا داشتي
جهان
زيرِ چين قَبا
داشتي
And
in another description:
سرآينده
ترك با چشم
تنگ
فروهشته
گيسو به گيسوي چنگ
An
allusion to the beauty of the eyes:
وگر
چشمم ز ترکی
تنگی کرد
به
عذر آمد چو
هندوی
جوانمرد
According to Ibn Athir, When the Mongols reached the Alans (Iranian tribe) and Qipchaq (Turkic Tribe) tribes, the Mongols told the Qipchaq:
“We and you are of the same race, but the Alans are not from
you, so that you should help us. Your religion is also not like theirs.”Thus
the Qipchaq turned away from the Alans, but later on the Mongols attacked the
Qipchaq).
(Al-Kamil
Ibn Athir).
In
Persian literature, when Turks are described, they are described with the
physical feature of the Turks of Central Asia and Yakuts. For example this
statue of an ancient Turkish King of the Gok-Turks Kul Tegin exemplifies this http://www.ulkuocaklari.org.tr/kulturedebiyat/grafik/kultigin.jpg
Rumi also describes this physical
characteristics of Turks at least four times:
مولوی:
ترک
خندیدن گرفت
از داستان
چشم
تنگش گشت بسته
آن زمان
Translation:
The
Turk started laughing from the story
His
narrow eyed became closed at the time
مولوی:
دو
چشم ترک خطا
را چه ننگ از
تنگی
چه
عار دارد سياح
جهان از اين
عوری
The
two eye of the Turk of Khita, what shame from narrowness?
Why
should the world traveler complain about this nakedeness?
مولوی:
گفت
كای تنگ چشم
تاتاری
صيد
ما را به چشم مینآری؟
He
said o narrow-eyed Tatar
Are
youn not hunting us with your eyes?
مولوی:
قاصرات
الطرف فی حجب
الخيام
حال
ترکان است گویی
والسلام
............
..........
.........
تنگ
چشمانند ليكن دوربين
خوبرويانند
ليكن خويش كام
The Turks, they are narrow-eyed but
can see far
They are good looking but follow
their own desires
And other examples from Hafez, Sanai,
and Naj al-Din Daya.
حافظ:
به
تنگ چشمی آن
ترک لشکری
نازم
كه
حمله بر من
درویش یک قبا
آورد
نظامی:
سرآیندهء
ترک با چشم
تنگ
فروهشته
گيسو به گيسوی
چنگ
سنایی
غزنوی:
مینبیند
آن سفیهانی که
ترکی کرده اند
همچو
چشم تنگ ترکان گور
ايشان تنگ و
تار
سنایی
غزنوی:
باش
تا چون چشم
ترکان تنگ
گردد گور تو
گر
چه خود را کور
سازی در مسافت
صد کری
خاطرات
نجم الدين
رازي معروف به
دايه
وي
يکي از رهبران
مهم صوفيه و
نثر نويس پخته
اين روزگار است
که تا سال 653
زنده بوده
است. او شاگرد
نجم الدين
کبري است که
در حمله
مغولان به
خوارزم در
ميدان جنگ
کشته شده است. مهم ترين
اثر وي، کتاب
تصوف مرصاد
العباد است که
سلوک عرفاني
را به زبان
پارسي دري شرح داده
است. دربخشي
از اي متن به
حمله ترک و مغول
و گريز خود
اشاره کرده
است. با هم
اين بخش را مي
خوانيم:
«در
تاريخ شهور سنۀ
سبع و عشر و
ستمائه (617) لشکر مخذول
ِ کفار تتار
استيلا يافت
بر آن ديار ، و آن
فتنه و فساد و
قتل و اسر و
هدم و حرق
که از آن
ملاعين ظاهر
گشت، در هيچ
عصر و ديار
کفر و اسلام
کس نشان نداده
است و در
هيچ تاريخ
نيامده الا
انچه
خواجه(پيغمبر)
عليه الصلوة و
السلام از
فتنه هاي آخر الزمان
خبر باز داده
است و فرموده:
لا تَقومُ السٌاعة
حتي تُقاتِلوا
التُرک صغارَ الاعين
حُمرَ الوجوه
ذلف الانوف
کان وجوههم المجان
المطرقة ، صفت
اين کفار
ملاعين کرده است و
فرموده که ،
قيامت
برنخيزد تا
آنگاه که شما
با ترکان قتال
نکنيد، قومي که
چشم هاي ايشان
خرد باشد و
بيني هايشان
پهن بود و روي
هاي ايشان سرخ
بود و فراخ همچون
سپر پوست در
کشيده. و بعد
از آن فرموده
است: و يکثر
الهرج، قيل:
يا رسول الله!
ما الهرج؟
قال: القتل ،
القتل. فرمود
که قتل بسيار
شود. به
حقيقت، اين
واقعه آن است
که خواجه عليه
الصلوة و
السلام به نور
نبوت پيش از
ششصد و اند
سال باز ديده بود.
قتل ازين
بيشتر چگونه
بود که از يک
شهر ري که
مولد و منشـأ
اين ضعيف است
و ولايت
آن قياس کرده
اند ، کما بيش
پانصد هزار آدمي
به قتل آمده و
اسير گشته. و
فتنه و
فساد آن
ملاعين بر
جملگي اسام و
اساميان از آن
زيادت است که
در حٌيز عبارت گنجد...
عاقبت چون بلا
به غايت رسيد
و محنت به نهايت
و کار به جان
رسيد و کارد
به استخوان...اين
ضعيت از سهر
همدان که مسکن
بود به شب
بيرون آمد با
جمعي از
درويشان و عزيزان
در معرض خطري
هرچ تمام تر ،
در شهور سنۀ
ثمان عشر و
ستمائه به راه
اربيل و بر عقب
اين فقير خبر
چنان رسيد كه
كفار ملاعين..به
شهر همدان
آمدند و حصار
دادند و اهل
شهر به قدر و
وسع بكوشيدند
و چون طاقت
مقاومت نماند
- كفار دست
يافتند و شهر بستند
و خلق بسيار
كشند و بسي
اطفال را و
عورات را اسير
بردند و خرابي
تمام كردند و اقرباي
اين ضعيف را
كه به شهر
بودند٬ بيشتر
شهيد كردند.
باريد
به باغ ما تگرگي
وز
گلبن ما نماند
برگي»
Note this part:
«قومي
که چشم هاي ايشان
خرد باشد و
بيني هايشان
پهن بود و روي
هاي ايشان سرخ
بود و فراخ
همچون سپر پوست
در کشيده»
The Mathanwi as opposed to the Diwan-i Shams does not contain the metaphors of Turk, Hindu, Abbysian and Rumi and is a didactic text.
But the stories about Turks usually show a person that is cruel and/or lacks intelligence. The story of the Turkish amir who gets easily cheated by a tricky tailor, the drunk Turk who disliked music played by mystical singers, the story of the Turk in Balaghasun who lost one of his two bows, or the story of the Oghuz tribesmens who come to village and plunder, and etc.
According to E.H.
Whinfield: “The Turk, who
typifies the careless pleasure-seeker, was so intent on listening to the jokes
and amusing stories of the tailor, typifying the seductive world, that he
allowed himself to be robbed of the silk which was to furnish him with a
vesture for eternity.”
The story of the Turk and the Tailor is a one of those which is very humorous.
قصهي
ترک و درزی
تو
بنشنيدي که آن
پر قند لب
غدر خياطان
همي گفتي به
شب؟
خلق را
در دزدي آن
طايفه
مينمود
افسانههاي
سالفه
قصهي
پارهربايي
در برين
مي حکايت کرد
او با آن و اين
در سمر
ميخواند
دزدينامهاي
گرد او جمع
آمده هنگامهاي
چونک
دزديهاي بيرحمانه
گفت
که کنند آن
درزيان اندر
نهفت
اندر
آن هنگامه
ترکي از خطا
سخت طيره شد ز
کشف آن غطا
بس که
غدر درزيان را
ذکر کرد
حيف آمد ترک
را و خشم و درد
گفت اي
قصاص در شهر
شما
کيست استاتر
در اين مکر و
دغا؟
دعوي
کردن ترک و
گرو بستن او
که درزي از من
چيزي نتواند
بردن
گفت
خياطيست نامش
پورشش
اندرين چستي و
دزدي خلقکش
گفت من
ضامن که با صد
اضطراب
او نيارد برد
پيشم رشتهتاب
پس
بگفتندش که از
تو چستتر
مات او گشتند
در دعوي مپر
رو به
عقل خود چنين
غره مباش
که شوي ياوه
تو در
تزويرهاش
گرمتر
شد ترک و بست
آنجا گرو
که نيارد برد
ني کهنه ني نو
مطمعانش
گرمتر کردند
زود
او گرو بست و
رهان را بر
گشود
که گرو
اين مرکب تازي
من
بدهم ار دزدد
قماشم او به
فن
ور
نتواند برد
اسپي از شما
واستانم بهر
رهن مبتدا
ترک را
آن شب نبرد از
غصه خواب
با خيال دزد
ميکرد او
حراب
بامدادان
اطلسي زد در
بغل
شد به بازار و
دکان آن دغل
پس
سلامش کرد گرم
و اوستاد
جست از جا لب
به ترحيبش
گشاد
گرم
پرسيدش ز حد
ترک بيش
تا فکند اندر
دل او مهر
خويش
چون
بديد از وي
نواي بلبلي
پيشش افکند
اطلس استنبلي
که ببر
اين را قباي
روز جنگ
زير نافم واسع
و بالاش تنگ
تنگ
بالا بهر جسمآراي
را
زير واسع تا
نگيرد پاي را
گفت صد
خدمت کنم اي
ذو وداد
در قبولش دست
بر ديده نهاد
پس
بپيمود و بديد
او روي کار
بعد از آن
بگشاد لب را
در فشار
از
حکايتهاي
ميران دگر
وز کرمها و
عطاء آن نفر
وز
بخيلان و ز
تحشيراتشان
از براي خنده
هم داد او
نشان
همچو
آتش کرد
مقراضي برون
ميبريد و لب
پر افسانه و
فسون
مضاحک
گفتن درزي و
ترک را از قوت
خنده بسته شدن
دو چشم تنگ او
و فرصت يافتن
درزي
ترک
خنديدن گرفت
از داستان
چشم تنگش گشت
بسته آن زمان
پارهاي
دزديد و کردش
زير ران
از
جز حق از همه
احيا نهان
ترک را
از لذت افسانهاش
رفت از دل
دعوي پيشانهاش
اطلس
چه؟ دعوي چه؟
رهن چی؟
ترک
سرمستست در
لاغ اچي
لابه
کردش ترک کز
بهر خدا
لاغ ميگو که
مرا شد مغتذا
گفت
لاغي خندميني
آن دغا
که
فتاد از قهقهه
او بر قفا
پارهاي
اطلس سبک بر
نيفه زد
ترک غافل خوش
مضاحک ميمزد
همچنين
بار سوم ترک
خطا
گفت لاغي گوي
از بهر خدا
گفت
لاغي خندمينتر
زان دو بار
کرد او اين
ترک را کلي
شکار
چشم
بسته عقل جسته
مولهه
مست ترک مدعي
از قهقهه
پس سوم
بار از قبا
دزديد شاخ
که
ز خندهش يافت
ميدان فراخ
چون
چهارم بار آن
ترک خطا
لاغ از آن
استا هميکرد
اقتضا
رحم
آمد بر وي آن
استاد را
کرد در باقي
فن و بيداد را
گفت
مولع گشت اين
مفتون درين
بيخبر کين چه
خسارست و غبين
بوسهافشان
کرد بر استاد
او
که بمن بهر
خدا افسانه گو
گفتن
درزي ترک را
هي خاموش کي
اگر مضاحک دگر
گويم قبات تنگ
آيد
گفت
درزي اي طواشي
بر گذر
واي بر تو گر
کنم لاغي دگر!
پس
قبايت تنگ آيد
باز پس
اين کند با
خويشتن خود
هيچ کس؟!
خندهي
چه؟ رمزي ار
دانستيي
تو
به جاي خنده
خون بگرستيي
اي
فسانه گشته و
محو از وجود
چند افسانه
بخواهي آزمود
خندمينتر
از تو هيچ
افسانه نيست
بر لب گور
خراب خويش
ايست
اي فرو
رفته به گور
جهل و شک
چند جويي لاغ و
دستان فلک
تا بکي
نوشي تو عشوهي
اين جهان
که
نه عقلت ماند
بر قانون نه
جان
لاغ
اين چرخ نديم
کرد و مرد
آب روي صد
هزاران چون تو
برد
ميدرد
ميدوزد اين
درزي عام
جامهي
صدسالگان طفل
خام
لاغ او
گر باغها را
داد داد
چون دي آمد
داده را بر
باد داد
پيرهطفلان
شسته پيشش بهر
کد
تا به سعد و
نحس او لاغي
کند
بيان
آنک بيکاران
و افسانهجويان
مثل آن ترکاند
و عالم غرار
غدار همچو آن
درزي و شهوات
مضاحک گفتن
اين دنياست و
عمر همچون آن
اطلس پيش اين
درزي
اطلس
عمرت به مقراض
شهور
برد پارهپاره
خياط غرور
تو
تمنا ميبري
که اختر مدام
لاغ کردي سعد
بودي بر دوام
...
Overall, there developed a literature based on Persian writers view of Turks in Ottoman times were the term Turk to some extent became identified with lack of intelligence.
Another story is about the cruetly of Oghuz tribes and starts with:
|
آن
غزان ترک خونریز
آمدند |
|
بهر یغما
بر دهی ناگه
زدند |
|
دو کس
از اعیان آن
ده یافتند |
|
در
هلاک آن یکی
بشتافتند |
|
دست
بستندش که
قربانش کنند |
|
گفت ای
شاهان و
ارکان بلند |
|
در چه
مرگم چرا میافکنید |
|
از چه
آخر تشنهی
خون منید |
|
چیست
حکمت چه غرض
در کشتنم |
|
چون
چنین درویشم
و عریانتنم |
|
گفت
تا هیبت برین یارت
زند |
|
تا
بترسد او و زر
پیدا کند |
|
گفت
آخر او ز من
مسکینترست |
|
گفت
قاصد کرده
است او را
زرست |
|
گفت
چون وهمست ما
هر دو یکیم |
|
در
مقام احتمال
و در شکیم |
|
خود
ورا بکشید
اول ای شهان |
|
تا
بترسم من دهم
زر را نشان |
|
پس
کرمهای الهی
بین که ما |
|
آمدیم
آخر زمان در
انتها |
|
آخرین
قرنها پیش از
قرون |
|
در حدیثست
آخرون
السابقون |
|
تا
هلاک قوم نوح
و قوم هود |
|
عارض
رحمت بجان ما
نمود |
|
کشت ایشان
را که ما ترسیم
ازو |
|
ور
خود این بر
عکس کردی وای تو |
The first verse starts with:
“Those blood-spilling Oghuz Turks came
And set to immediately plunder a town”
The adjective blood-spilling for Oghuz Turks is firmly negative here.
There is a major difference in the Mathnawi were the term Turk is not an allusion or metaphor and the Diwan-I Shams were Hindu vs Turk, or Zang/Abbysian vs Rum/Turk, or Tajik (softness, settled) vs Turk (warrior, soldier, rapid, movement, migratory, plunderer (which metaphorically means of the heart as well)..etc.) are used as metaphors. The Diwan-i Shams metaphors required a more detailed treatment and that detailed treatment was provided in the previous section.
Professor Speros Vryonis Jr has done a detailed and recent study on the division and distinguishing of ethnic groups in the text of Aflaki.
Source:
(Speros Vryonis, Jr., "The Economic and Social Worlds of Anatolia in the Writings of the Mawlawi (Mevlevi) Dervish Eflaki" in "Jaye L. Warner (2001), "Cultural Horizons A Festschrift in Honor of Talat S. Halman", Syracuse Universty Press, pp 188-197.)
Before we provide more details with regards to Aflaki, it is worth reading what Professor Speros Vryonis Jr. has to state:
Closely related to the religious
groups are the divisions according to ethnic groups. Interestingly, Eflaki is
often more sensitive to ethnic and linguistic differentiations than to shades
of religious difference. Eflaki and his social world were attuned to
linguistic differences since Persians, Turks, Arabs, Greeks, Armenians, Jews,
and Mongols lived juxtaposed in many Anatolian cities. Baha al-Din Walad, Rumi,
Sultan Walad, and Amir Arif were all Persian speakers by birth and Arabophone
by education and training. For this circle, at least, Persian was both the spoken
and written language. It was certainly
the language of cultural prestige and of much of the administrative
bureaucracy. In the text of the Menakib, Rumi is made to quote Arabic
within his Persian discourse, and having studied in Syria he often spoke to
Arabic visitors in their language. He almost certainly spoke and understood
Turkish and some Greek, as is certainly the case of Sultan Walad who, alongside
his Persian writings, has left mystical poetry in the dialect of spoken Turkish
and demotic Greek.
A few examples of this sensitivity to
and familiarity with the polyglot environment of Konya and Seljuk-Beylik
Anatolia are recorded in our author. In one episode a Turk appeared in the
Konya bazaar holding a fox skin and selling it at auction, calling out in
Turkish "delki, delki" {tilki) or, "fox, fox". Rumi,
who happened to be in the bazaar heard the Turk, and the regularity of the
cadenced cry sent him into his ceremonial dance, crying out at the same time,
"Where is the heart, where is the heart." Obviously Rumi understood Turkish and took the
opportunity to pun in the two languages. In the celebrated incident or anecdote of the hostile water spirit that lurked in
the river near Ab-i Garm, Eflaki refers
to him in Persian as Lord of the Water. Eflaki then adds, "the Turks call
him Su Isa (Lord of the Water)." Once more Eflaki is aware of both Persian and
Turkish nomenclature and language. Finally, for our last example, Eflaki records the Greek sobriquet of certain
members of Rumi's family. The author
informs us that Meleke Hatun, the daughter of Rumi, was better known as
Efendopoulo (daughter of the
master); Amir Arif’s daughter, also Meleke Hatun, was known as Despina. In both cases, these daughters were better known by their Greek sobriquets than by
their Islamic names.
The most
prominent of the Anatolian ethnic groups, in Eflaki, was the Persians. This is
so not because they were the most numerous;
certainly they were not. For at that time the most numerous groups were the Turks, Greeks, and Armenians. The Persians appear as the most prominent in
Eflaki because they dominated much of
the Seljuk administration as well as the literary domain, and because Eflaki
himself was Persian. There was a steady immigration of Persian administrators,
merchants, craftsmen, and religious men into Anatolia where their talents found
ready employment and where there also must
have been a Persian ethnic network. The most capable of these Iranian
administrators, and the most
powerful local politician is the famous pervane, Mu'in al-Din
Sulayman. Persian statesmen administered and managed the finances, the
foreign relations, and the internal conflicts of the declining Seljuk state. Even court chronicles were
written in Persian. But the most brilliant contribution to this hybrid culture of Seljuk Anatolia was the
mystical poetry, in Persian, of Rumi and his son Sultan Walad; the work
of Eflaki is itself another monument.
Although the
Turkish element (both sedentary and nomadic) was very large, for it represented
the military and governing classes as well as large numbers of nomads, this
group nowhere receives the same
attention in Eflaki as does the Persian. Indeed if Eflaki were taken as the
sole source, one' would derive a very incomplete picture of this new ethnic
group which, in the end, would predominate in the period of the rise and history of the Beyliks.
The mere fact
that Eflaki differentiates ethnically by employing the epithet "Turk"
indicates that to him religious lines were
not the only marks of sociocultural distinction. Ethnic demarcations were also important to him, and this further implies
that Eflaki was writing in a social, cultural, and literary milieu where
ethnic differences were important and had some resonance.
I have already
referred to the individual, whom Eflaki describes as a Turk, who was auctioning
off a fox skin in the Konya bazaar. We must
assume that the people of the marketplace understood his advertisement in the Turkish language. In addition, our author
refers to an individual who occupies a privileged
place within Islamic legal ana religious institutions: a kadi (judge)
who challenged Rumi as to whether
the rebab and the setar were permissible in Islam. Although the kadi
remains nameless, Eflaki
nevertheless qualifies him ethnically as a Turk. In other words, to Eflaki, the ethnic
affiliation of the kadi was
more important than his name. In the upheavals between the Seljuk
administration of Konya and the Turcoman Karamanid dynasty, the latter
are said to have placed a garrison of one hundred Turkish horsemen on the
city's citadel. Finally, it should be
noted that the epithet appears occasionally as part of the extended name of
prominent Akhis.
In Eflaki's work there is another use
of ethnic nomenclature to denote values of a different kind. In one particular
verse, Rumi (in Eflaki) states that he has men (followers) "who have a
Greek face and a Turkish soul." The
contrast made here in terms of ethnic moral attributions, is that between
corporeal and spiritual-emotional-mystical. In the previously discussed
examples the differentiating ethnic epithets are morally neutral as applied to
the kadis-, soldiers, and petty merchants. In the case of Rumi's verse
quoted above, the epithet Turk, applied to the soul, is very strongly positive
in regard to the mystical and emotional virtues of the Turks; this concurs with
the analysis by Annemarie Schimmel of the contrast between Hindu and Turk in
the writings of Rumi. Another example of the ethnic epithets preserved in
Eflaki as denoting ethical virtues or their lack is: "I went to bed a Kurd
and awakened an Arab".
At the same time, and paradoxically,
the image of the Turks in Eflaki, in contrast to the works of Rumi, is often a
negative one, and coincides with the remarks of the Persian Seljuk chronicler
Karim al-Din Aksarayi. The following paraphrased anecdote from Eflaki, is an
example:
A Turk came to town [Konya] and upon
catching sight of the madrasa of Rumi entered its portals. Therein he
saw that the grounds were swept and watered, and the jurists were seated about,
with their great turbans and sumptuous clothing, receiving the daily ration of
bread and meat as the porter distributed
them. This sight was a great revelation for the Turk, opening as it did a
bright new world, and he contemplated it with great pleasure. He
departed, clothed himself appropriately and reentered the madrasa. The mudarris
quickly perceived, by the Turk's demeanor, that he was not a member of the ulama [ ulama, doctors of
Islamic theology] and that his goals were other than spiritual. Then he pointedly explained to the visitor
that hard work and long years were the necessary prerequisites for the
enjoyment of the status, privileges, and benefits of a member of the ulama.
The contrast in this case is obviously
between a person of nomadic ("Turk") background and an urban dweller.
The story of the Germiyanid amir is
even more pointed. Amir Arif went to visit the son of Alishir, prince of
Germiyan, who was resident in the city of Ladik. The amir had encamped,
together with his large army, in the plains of Alam al-Din Bazari and there he
formally received the Mawlawi "caliph" and his retinue. When the
customary prayers and recitations commenced, Alishir became restless and was
generally bored. He thus began to preoccupy himself with his ghulams (gulam,
page), for, says Eflaki, "he was a Turk without manners and ignorant
of the nature of the saints." Here
the author has broached the negative aspect of the ethnic epithet, which along
with the more positive ones became attached to the ethnicon in Persian
literary and cultural circles.
In the same negative vein is the
famous story of Salah al-Din Zarkub who hired Turkish laborers to build the
wall around his garden. On visiting Zarkub, Rumi addressed the following
remarks to him:
Efendi, or
Khodaband, Salah al-Din, for this construction one must hire Greek workmen and
at the time of destruction Turkish workers are
necessary. For the construction of the world is special to the Greeks and the destruction of this same world is reserved for
the Turks.
Of other Muslim ethnic groups resident
in Asia Minor, the Kurds, who must have been numerous in southeastern Anatolia,
are mentioned only in the Arabic proverb quoted above, "He went to bed a
Kurd and awoke an Arab " This is, as pointed out, an ethical application
of the ethnicon.
Of the dhimmis in Seljuk
society, those most frequendy mentioned in our text are the Greeks. It should
be noted that the dhimmis are always, and without exception, at least in
Eflaki, distinguished by their ethnic affiliation. The word kafir (unbeliever)
is also in use. The Greek is referred to as Rum or Rumi, the
Armenian as Ermeni, and the Jew as Yahudi. The matter of the
ethnic appellation of the Greek speaker as Rumi or Rumiyan has
been obscured in much of the scholarly literature by the fact that the
geographical term used to denote Anatolia is also Rum, as in bilad
ar-Rum. Thus a person who comes from or resides in Anatolia would also be
called a Rumi,as in the case of Djalal al-Din Rumi. In Eflaki, however,
almost the only example of the use of the epithet Rumi in the
geographical sense is for Djalal al-Din Rumi himself. In most other cases the
context makes it clear that Eflaki has employed the term in an ethnic sense
denoting Christians who are at the same time Greek. It is important to investigate
the term Rumi, as the specific determination of its use and meaning has a
direct and essential bearing on the appearance, or not, of a Greek ethnic group
in Eflaki's social world.
The specific examples of the term Rumi
or Rumiyan break down into several categories. The first deals with
individuals or groups that use this identifying epithet and are converted to
Islam. At the funeral ceremony of the famous flutist Hamza, Djalal al-Din Rumi
is said to have converted one hundred infidel Greeks. In regard to the obstinate and narrow-minded
Safi al-Din Hind, Rumi declared that "it is easier to convert to Islam
seventy infidel Greeks than to lead Safi al-Din to the right path." A Greek architect who constructed a
chimney in Rumi's house was eventually converted to Islam. Now
if the epithet Rumi/Rumiyan were to denote only geographical provenance,
the above texts would make little sense, for all inhabitants of Asia Minor,
Muslim and Christian alike, would have been Rumi/ Rumiyan and so the
distinction would have had no meaning.
This is confirmed by the conversion of
the famous Thyrianos Ala al-Din. Before his conversion, Eflaki says he was a kafir
and a Rumi. What is decisive in this instance is that his pre-Muslim
name, Thyrianos, which is Greek, has been preserved. In another episode Eflaki speaks of two
painters who moved about in the circle of
Rumi. Eflaki says of them: "Both painters were Rumis [i.e., Greeks]
" They are described as having been proficient,
indeed incomparable, in their art of the icon. Their arti-sanal status alone
strongly suggests that they were Greeks, since Anatolian Arabs, Turks, and
Persians did not command this skill.
Once again Eflaki preserves the names of the two painters: Kaloyan and Ayn al-Dawlat. The first name is obviously Greek
and means Good John. The second painter was converted to Islam by Rumi and
only his Muslim name is given. It is clear that Rumi as used here by
Eflaki means Greek, not Anatolian.
A second domain in which the use of Rumi
would tend to suggest an ethnic rather than a geographical use is the
domestic or household realm. Eflaki relates that one Baha al-Din Bahri had a servant-cook in his home who was a Rumi and
who hustled up some fried rice from the day's leftovers to feed Djalal al-Din Rumi during his visit to
Baha al-Din. More specific is the case of Khwadje Majd al-Din of Maraga, who in his house in Konya had a
large number of female slaves, all of whom, much to his amazement, had mystical visions. One of them, a certain Siddiqa,
saw frequent visions of colors, angels, and prophets. Eflaki states that she
was of Greek race. Her name
is Muslim and undoubtedly indicates her conversion, whereas her slave status
probably precludes that she was Muslim, Turkish, or Persian in origin. Obviously, in speaking of a
slave of Greek origin, Eflaki means exactly what he says.
There are three anecdotes in which the
apposition of Rumi with one or more other ethnic groups shows clearly
that Eflaki more often employs Rumi as an ethnic rather than a
geographical designation. The first of these episodes has to do with the
spectacular funeral ceremony and procession for Rumi in 1273. The procession was heavily attended and included people
from every religious community and ethnic group in Konya-. The text
reads:
And all the
nations with the religious leaders and the leaders of the state were present,
Christians and Jews, Rumiyan [Greeks]
and Arabs and Turks and others.
Here the
juxtaposition of Rumiyan, Arab, and Atrak, that is, Greeks, Arabs, and
Turks, allows us only one interpretation: Rumiyan
is clearly used as an ethnic epithet denoting Greeks.
In the second
story Salah al-Din Zarkub, as we saw above, is given Rumi's explanation of the
difference between Rumiyan workers and Turkish workers. The
understanding and explanation of the opposition
of Rumiyan and Turkish clearly shows that we are dealing with
Greeks. In a third and last episode we
have once more the appearance of builders. Sultan Walad hired Greek workers to
plaster the terrace of Rumi's madrasa, after which he paid them in cash
and prepared a meal for them.
In summation, Rumi
or Rumiyan in all these specific examples refers to the ethnic Greek
and not to Anatolians. Thus the Greeks in Eflaki's social world appear as a
fairly frequent presence. They emerge as converts, builders, plasterers, painters, monks,
priests, and domestic slaves. There are frequent mentions of conversions of Greeks to Islam
within the circle of Rumi and the Mawlawis; they are to be seen en masse at the funeral of Rumi; and Amir Arif is a frequent
visitor to the neighboring Greek monastery
of Aflatun where he came for the company of the monks and their fine wine
cellar.
The remaining two ethnic groups, the
Armenians and the Jews, are mentioned less often than the Greeks and again only where their activities touch
upon Rumi and the Mawlawis. After a grand sema sponsored by the Seljuk official Alam al-Din
Qaisar and attended by the amirs, the grandees of Konya, the ulama, and the poor, Rumi exited onto
the streets of Konya. The strains of the rebab issuing from a nearby wine tavern fell upon his ears and once
more he was inspired to dance. He danced until dawn and all the runud came
out of the tavern and fell at the feet of Rumi. It turns out that these runud,
who on the following day came again to Rumi and converted to Islam, were
Armenians.
In a second incident, which I have
examined elsewhere, the runud of Erzurum and Erzincan acknowledged as their mystical superior an
Armenian-speaking dervish. This indicates that here also, in cities with very significant Armenian
populations, the local Armenian Christians, as in Konya, were important
constituent elements of the runud commanded by the Akhis. The sole
Armenian mentioned by name, Tenil, is also
a member of Seljuk urban society. He was, by vocation, a butcher.
As for the Jews, they too are present
but even more vaguely. We learn that when Shams al-Din Tabrizi requested wine from Rumi, the latter went to the Jewish quarter
of Konya to secure it. The Jews and their rabbis appear at Rumi's funeral and
there is also an incident of the conversion of a rabbi to
Islam.(192-197)
As Speros Vryonis states: “The mere fact that Eflaki differentiates
ethnically by employing the epithet "Turk" indicates that to him religious lines were not the only marks of sociocultural distinction.
Ethnic demarcations were also important to
him, and this further implies that Eflaki was writing in a social, cultural,
and literary milieu where ethnic differences were important and had some
resonance.”
Obviously, Rumi was not a Turk because if he was,
Rumi, Sultan Waland and Aflaki would not constantly distinguish Turks as
unusual and foreign in the Manaqib and constantly identify the ethnicity of
Turks, Rumis, Armenians and etc. We do
not see this with regards to Persians since Rumi, Sultan Walad, Aflaki and etc.
were all Persians.
For example, we look at some of these
anecdotes. All of these were taken from
the recent translation:
Shams
al-Din Aflaki, "The feats of the knowers of God: Manāqeb al-ʻārefīn",
translated by John O'Kane, Brill, 2002.
[257] Report: It is transmitted that Amir
Mohammad-e Sokurji, who was the intimate disciple of Soltan Valad, related the
following: “When the imperial self (Shahzada) of the world Keyghatu
Khan, arrived in Aqsara after the death of Mowlana, he sent a reputable
ambassador to invite the commanders and the Turks of
Konya to declare their obedience and come forth to welcome him. It happened that some of the rogues (ronud)
out of impudence and quarrelsomeness put his ambassador to death. When news of this reached the king’s ear, he
was greatly angered and a yarligh was issued, to the effect that all the
soldiers go to Konya and, having laid siege to the city, kill the inhabitants
and engage in plundering and looting. On
this occasion none of the officers and commanders was able to ward off his
wrath. All the people of Konya were very
upset because of this news. They saw no
other remedy for their salvation than to seek refuge at the sanctified
sepulchral shine [of Mowlana].
Absolutely everyone went to the tomb and wept and uttered supplications.
When Keyghatu arrive in the vicinity with a huge army, one night in a
dream he beheld Mowlana come forth from his cupola with frightening
appearance. Undoing his blessed turban,
Mowlana made a circle with it around the city’s battlements. After that in extreme anger he came to
Keyghatu’s room, placed his fingers on the ruler’s throat and began to strangle
him. Keyghatu cried out asking for
quarter. Mowlana said: “Oh ignorant
Turk! Give up (tark) this idea and
undertaking. Take back your Turks
(torkan) to your lady (tarkan) as quickly as possible. Otherwise, you will not escape with your
life.” Keyghatu immediately woke up and
called his commanders and courtiers.
When we went before him, we found him extremely frightened and shaking
and weeping. Without our asking, he told
what he had seen in the dream. All the noyans
and the courtiers with one accord lowered their head and said: “We were worried
about this matter. This city and this
clime belong to Mowlana, and whoever sets out to attack this region (Diyar), no
member (deyyar) of his lineage remains and he is destroyed. But out of fear of the king it was impossible
to speak.” Again a yarligh was issued,
to the effect that the army retreat.
When it was morning, Keyghatu in
person, along with all the commanders honored himself by visiting the
sanctified sepulchral shrine. I myself
had also not yet seen the sepulchral shrine.
Summoning Soltan Valad, the king became his disciple. He performed sacrifices and gave out alms to
those living by the sepulchral shrine and to the leaders of religion. Having forgiven the sin of the city’s
inhabitants, he departed with a happy heart.
The inhabitants of the city were overcome with joy and they sent the
king an honorific present made of sumptuous preparations of every kind.
For my part, my old former affection and love increased a thousand fold,
and I became a disciple of Soltan Valad.
As a thanks offering for this mercy, I had the vaulted arch of the
sepulchral shrine renovated’. (pg
229-231)
[221] (Sultan) Valad also said: “One
day two jurists who were Turks came to visit my father. They brought a small amount of lentils as a
gift and felt ashamed because of the paltriness of it. Mowlana recounted: “One day God Most High
sent a divine inspiration to Mostafa – peace be upon him – to the fact
that: ‘Let those endowed with intelligence donate wealth and goods to
me.’. Mostafa instructed everyone to
bring wealth according to his ability and the extent of his capacity. Some brought half their wealth, others
brought a third, and our Abu Bakr brought all his wealth – so that a limitless
amount of wealth results. Some brought
camels, others gold, and other weapons of war.” (pg 210)
[331] Report: It is also transmitted
that one day Mowlana had grown passionate uttering higher meanings, and a crowd
of every kind of group was present. He
recounted a story: “It happened that a Turk came to the city. Suddenly he arrived before the door of a madrasa.
He saw that the madrasa has been
swept and sprinkled with water, and the jurists were seated wearing big turbans
and precious clothes. After a while he
saw the doorkeeper of the madrasa come and bring for each of them items
like bread, meat and other things which were their rations, and give each
person his share. The Turk liked this
situation very much. The next day the
unfortunate Turk left his family and his village, made himself a turban and
robe (jobba), and entered the madrasa. After greeting the teacher with “salaam”, he
sat down alongside him.
It happened that the jurist teacher was a man of poverty (faqir) (note:
Faqir means spiritualist in the popular sense of the word). He knew through clairvoyance (feraasat) that
the Turk was not a religious scholar and that he come because of some other
motive. The teacher said: “Oh dear
friend, by means of external adornment and a robe and a turban a person does
not become a religious scholar and a jurist.
And without ascetic struggle a person does not attain direct
witnessing. For years one must drink the
liver’s blood and repeat the experience over and over again. And one must become soiled with the smoke of
the lamp. Then perhaps, through success
from God and His favor, a nobody may become somebody (kas-i) and from his
existence somebodies and nobodies may be able to learn what it is to be
somebody (kasi)”
Now the group who are worshippers of appearance and have remained with the
beauty of appearance and find external education sufficient and have donned the
faraji for appearance’s sake and are never knows of meaning, seers of
meaning and extractors of meaning—they are like that Turk who has been
mentioned. It is necessary to undergo
hardship for years so that an ephemeral (yak-dama) human being may
perhaps become someone of “that momen” (an-dami). And he recited:
‘It takes years of sitting
in the sun
For the ruby to acquire
color, brilliance and glow.
For dung to turn into musk,
oh disciple,
It must graze within that
garden for years
Heart and soul became like
a thread in witnessing
So that the tip of the
string appeared to me
In asceticism the body
becomes like a specter (khiyal-i),
To chase away fantasies
(khiyalat) from the interior. (pg
274-275)
[315] ..Majd al-Din related the
following: ‘Early on I had brought with me from Qishahr to Konya a Turkish boy
who was pursuing religious learning. He
waited upon me in Mowlana’s Madrasa. It
happened that one night at midnight Mowlana was walking in the madrasa’s courtyard
like the moon on the night of the full moon. All the disciples were asleep. The Turkish student of religious learning was
quietly repeating his lesson and was observing Khodavandgar’s (Rumi’s) states. I had also succumbed to sleep. The Turkish jurist saw that Mowlana mounted
the green light and little by little began to ascent to the wind [in the
roof]. As soon as he reached the window,
the jurist woke me.
When I perceived what was happening, I was unable to bear the burden and
to keep control over myself. Like
someone utterly bewildered, I let out a shout and lost consciousness. The companions who had been asleep all woke
up together. When I regained my senses,
Mowlana said: “Majd al-Din, why did you let out a shout and release your quarry
from your gullet? A Turk who is a recent
disciple is able to bear the burden, but you divulge the matter. Many things like this occur to abdals
to God. Acquire the state of close
intimacy (Mahrammiyat) so you do not become deprived (mahrum).
After all: ‘Whoever conceals his secret is a master over his affair’ is
a saying of the manly men, isn’t it?”
If man were a keeper of
secrets,
Good and bad would not be
revealed
Whatever belonged to the
unseen realm
Would all become visible
for him (pg 266)
[347] There is also a true report that
one day Mowlana said: “They will rebuild our tomb seven times. The final time a rich Turk will come forth
and build my tomb with alternating bricks of gold and pure silver, and around my
tomb a very big city will grow up and our tomb will remain in the middle of the
city. At that time, our Mathnavi
will take on the role of a shaykh. (pg 281)
[22]
Report: Likewise, the most
perfect of the disciples, Mowlana Salah al-Din-e Adib (the Man of Letters)---God
have mercy on him---related the following: ‘Accompanying Chalabi ‘Aref, I
went to the province of the son of Mantesha’ Mas’ud-Beg , and he was from among
the supporters [Mowlana’s] family. One
night he arranged a gathering, brought together the religious scholars and
shaykhs of this province, and held a sama’-session for Chalabi. Moreover, they had their own shaykh ---a man
who was a Turk but of enlightened heart and pure simplicity. Indeed many times things he said would
actually take place, and the Tarkan of the Turks (Tarkan-e Torkan)
believed in him deeply. He was also
called to the gathering. The moment he
entered through the door, he passed by Chalabi with complete indifference,
without greeting him with “salaam” or paying him any attention, and sat down in
the seat of honor while mumbling and muttering something under his breath. After Chalabi began performing the sama’,
he dragged the shaykh by his collar, brought him into the midst of the dance,
and recited this quatrain:
“When lovers set foot on
the road of non-being,
They escape all existence other than the
beloved
They died unto this
deceptive, impermanent life
They take flight the way lovers flee from
it”
And then he let go of him and the
shaykh immediately fell down and began to foam at the mouth. After the second day the Turkish (Tork)
shaykh quit (tark) the world and died.
At that a great tumult broke out among the commanders, and Mas’ud-Beg
was very afraid. Meanwhile the people of
this province, in droves, became disciples and rendered many services. The next morning, Mas’ud Beg rose and going
to Chalabi in complete supplication, presented his apologies. He bestowed on him five male and female
slaves, ten handsome horses, ten fine cloaks of saqerlat cloth and
twenty sufe-e morabba’. And he
sent him sums of feluris [gold coins: florins] and silver in cash, and he
became Chalabi’s disciple. Having been
distinguished by divine favor, he made his lovely son, Shoja’ al-Din Orkhan, a
disciple—God Most High have mercy on them! (pg 595)
[36] Report:
The religious scholars among the companions related that one day Sultan
Valad said: ‘The king of those have lost their wits, our Faqih Ahmad – God
have mercy on him—was engaged in studying jurisprudence with Baha-e
Valad. He was a Turk, a simple-hearted
man, and he was also his disciple. Due
to one glance (nazar) from my grandfather he became incomparable (bi-nazar)
in the world and such a state came over him that he threw the book from his
hand. He became filled with passion and
set out on the road to the mountains.
Engulfed in the ocean of bewilderment and divine omnipotence, he
wandered about for many years in the mountains practicing ascetic austerities. In the end the secret of Oveys-e Qarani—God
be pleased with him—was manifested to the famous jurist, and he became
completely drawn to God (majdhub) and deprived of reason. A group of people asked Baha-e Valad about
the man’s state and his madness. Baha-e
Valad replied: “From those brimming cups of ours which Sayyed-e Serr-e-Dan
[Borhan al-Din] quaffed, a single drop reached this man.”
Likewise, my father also said one day:
“The intoxication of Faqih Ahmad is but a single whiff from the ocean of
intoxication of Mowlana Shams al-Din-e Tabrizi, and no more.”
You’re drunk on wine,
while I’m drunk on a whiff.
At Keyqobad’s banquet, the whiff as well is
no trifle. (pg 30-31)
[71] Likewise in the of Qaramanids the city of
Konya was in Qaramanid hands. Because Chalabi
favored the army of the Mongols, this party was annoyed and would frequently
raise objections, saying: ‘You do not want us who ar your neighbors and
supporters (mohebban) but you definitely favor the foreign
Mongols.’ Chalabi replied: ‘We are dervishes. Our glance is turned toward the will of
God. Whomever God wishes and whomever He
entrusts with his Sovereignty, we are on that person’s side and we want him.’
When the bondsman is
content with God’s predestination
He becomes a willing bondsman under Command
‘This being the case, God Most High does
not want you but He favors the army of the Mongols. He has taken sovereignty away from the
Saljuqs and given it to the family of Chengiz Khan, in accordance with: God
gives His kingship to whom He will (2/248).
We want the same as God wants.’
Thus the sons of Qaraman, despite being devoted supporters and
disciples, were angry and were on guard against Chalabi. Meanwhile, they had entrusted the citadel of
Konya to a person by the name of One Eyed Qelechi Bahador, and his gallows’
thief (dozd-e daar), having been made commander of the fortress (dezdar), was
guarding the citadel with one hundred Turks devoid of shame.
It so happened that one day Chalabi, along
with a group of disciples, entered the citadel through the Sultan Gate. Bahador descendent from a cur, arrived and
ordered them to beat the companions, and they even struck the rump of Chalabi’s
horse with a whip. He returned to the
blessed madrasa and became so upset and morose that it is impossible to
describe. After a while, Bahador was
afflicted with colic of the navel. He
rolled upon the ground and let out screams. As much electuary and opium as they
gave him, the pain would not subside.
After the third day of his being in the heat and burning, a tumor
appeared in his infidel interior and his whole impure, shameless body began to
swell up. Crying and shouting out
profusely, he sought the assistance and clemency from Chalabi. But it was of no avail. Thus they placed this
lowly, worn-out brute on a wagon and were carrying him to Laranda. Half-way along the route he let out a sigh
and burst. He consigned his infidel soul
to Hell, and no one from that company remained. (pg 647-648)
[23]
Likewise, it is a well-known story that one day Shaykh Salah al-Din
happened to hire Turkish laborers to do building work in his garden. Mowlana said: ‘Effendi’— that is to say
lord—‘Salah al-Din, when it is time for building, one must engage Greek
laborers and when it is time for destroying something, Turkish hirelings. Indeed, the building of the world is assigned
to the Greeks, whereas the world’s destruction is reserved for the Turks. When God—He is sublime and exalted—ordered
the creation of the world of sovereignty (‘alam-e molk’), first He created
unaware-infidels, and He conferred on them long life and great strength so they
would strive like hired laborers in building the terrestrial world. And they built up many cities and fortresses
on mountain peaks and places on top of a hill such that after generations had
passed these constructions were a model for those who came later. Then divine predestination saw to it that
little by little these constructions would become completely destroyed and
desolate, and be eradicated. God created
the group of Turks so that they would destroy every building they saw,
mercilessly and ruthlessly, and cause it to be demolished. And they are still doing so, and day by day
until the Resurrection they will continue to destroy in this manner. In the end, the destruction of the city of
Konya will also be at the hands of wicked Turks devoid of mercy.’ And this being the case, it turned out just
as Mowlana said. (pg 503)
From the above samples, it is clear that Rumi in Aflaki had an Iranian identity and not a Turkish one and Turks are clearly distinguished as separate from the order itself. Obviously, someone who says:
“Oh ignorant Turk! Give up (tark) this idea and
undertaking. Take back your Turks
(torkan) to your lady (tarkan) as quickly as possible. Otherwise, you will not escape with your
life.”
“Majd al-Din, why did you let out a
shout and release your quarry from your gullet?
A Turk who is a recent disciple is able to bear the burden, but you
divulge the matter. Many things like
this occur to abdals to God.”
“
Indeed, the building of the world is assigned to the Greeks, whereas the
world’s destruction is reserved for the Turks.
“
“when it is time for building, one must engage Greek laborers and
when it is time for destroying something, Turkish hirelings.”
“God
created the group of Turks so that they would destroy every building they saw,
mercilessly and ruthlessly, and cause it to be demolished.”
Furthermore all the conversations of Rumi in Aflaki are recorded in Persian (despite Persians being a minority in the area) and sometimes in Arabic. For example, usually when someone curses, they do so in their native language.
According to Franklin: “Rumi
also swore, as we learn in the Discourse (Fih 88) and Aflaki (Af 151-2), saying
gharr khwahar, roughly “slut of a sister,” a curse which would, addressed to a male,
impugn his honor. Sana’i had also used
this curse, as did Shams (Maq 83).”(pg 317)
Thus the complete picture provided by Aflaki shows ethnicity was not only distinguished by language/background and even having the same religion did not mean ethnicity was not distinguished back then. From Afkali’s anecdotes, it is clear that neither Rumi or Sultan Walad were Turks and had any sort of Turkish identity, the comments above again shows that Rumi’s native language was Persian and naturally, even when swearing, it was again in his native language. The conclusion of this Section will be part of the overall conclusion of the article.
Sultan
Walad was Rumi’s son and thus knew Rumi personally. He had spent his life with Rumi, had daily
interactions with him and probably knew the physical Rumi better than anyone
else. He was given the name of
his grandfather Sultan al-Ulama Baha al-Din Walad. Mawlana Jalal al-Din Rumi sent Sultan Walad
and his brother Ala al-Din Muhammad to Aleppo and Damascus for the study of
religious sciences. Sultan Walad was
deeply trusted by Rumi, and it was him that Rumi sent to seek Shams Tabrizi
after the disappearance of Shams.
Sultana Walad married the Daughter of Salah al-Din Zarkub, Fatima
Khatun. He had two daughters by her and
one son (Jalal Ali-Din Arif). Sultan Walad at the insistence
of his entourage, took up the succession which, at his father's death, he had
declined in favor of Husam Al-Din.
Sultan Walad’s work has been surveyed by
Lewis (237-240) and statistically speaking, more 99% of the Work is in Persian,
with the rest being in Arabic, Turkish and Greek. Based on the direct information provided by the
books, and its overview by the Encyclopedia of Islam and Franklin Lewis, we
will give a brief overview here(with some direct quotes from these two
sources).
1)
The Diwan
The Diwan of Sultan Walad, in Persian
contains 925 Ghazals and Qasida, and 455 quatrains. Approximately there are 12500 lines.
Sultan Walad used twenty-nine different meters and composed nine poems
in Arabic, fifteen in Turkish, 22 verses in Greek and the rest in Persian. That is overall 12300+ lines of Persian
poetry, 129 in Turkish, 22 in Greek and 70 lines in Arabic. The Greek verses occur in four different
Ghazals and we have included them as an attachment.:
2)
Ibtidāʾ-nāma, also
called Walad-nāma or Mat̲h̲nawī-yi
Waladī.
This Persian poetic verse book of Sultan
Walad, in the style Mathnawi (a type of Persian verse) is the Ibtidā-nāma
(The book of the beginning), also called Walad-nāma (The
book of Walad) or Mat̲h̲nawī-yi
Waladī. Composed around 1291,
it is written in the meter of the Hadiqa of Sanai. It constitutes an important source for the
biographies of Baha al-din (Rumi’s father) and Mawlana (Rumi) as well as for
the early history of the order. It
chronicles the history of the Mawlawwiya order, as well focusing primarily on
Rumi. It also describes the predecessors
and successors of Rumi. One of the
students of Rumi, Salah al-Din Zarkub who had a close spiritual relationship
with Sultan Walad is also mentioned.
This work provides a firsthand account by Rumi’s son who was very close
to the many of the events described in the book. Overall, it is a hagiographical book, and
promotes an image of Rumi as a miracle-working saint. It also provides a firsthand account of the
Mawlawwiya order and the major personages associated with its history,
including Baha al-Din, Borhan al-Din, Shams, Rumi, Salah al-Din Zarkub, Hosam
al-din and finally Sultan Walad. The
work contains over 9000 lines of poetry in Persian and 76 lines of Turkish.
3)
Rabāb-nāma, a
Persian Mathnawi, composed, at the behest of a notable, within five months of
the year 700/1301 in the meter ramal of his father's Mathnawi. It
contains 7745 lines in Persian, 35 in Arabic, 22 in Greek and 157 in Turkish. A critical edition was prepared by Ali
Soltani Gordfaramazi in 1980 and published in Montreal as a collaborative
effort between McGill University’s Institute of Islamic Studies and the
University of Tehran under the title: ‘’Rabāb-nāma az Sultan
Walad, Farzand-e Mowlana Jalal al-Din Mowlavi’’. Sultan Walad composed the Rabāb-nāma
between April and August of 1301 at the request of certain saint whom
Sultan Walad repeatedly praises in the text.
This “man of God” approached Sultan Walad with the suggestion that since
had already produced a Mathnawi in the meter of Sanai’s Hadiqa, he should now
set to work on a mathnawi in the same meter as the Mathnawi of his father,
Rumi.
Sultan Walad begins this work in an
imitation the song of the reed flute (Persian: Nay) at the beginning of the
Mathnawi, but instead has the Rabāb start the opening tale:
“Hear in the cry and wail of the Rabāb
A hundred chapters on the depth
of love”
At one point Sultan Walads references his
father’s work as being “sent-down”, suggesting he regarded Rumi’s writing as
quasi-divinely inspired.
4)
The Intihā-nāma is another
Persian Mathnawi. It was composed for
the purposes, and is a kind of summary of the first two Mathnawi (Ibtida
Nama and Rabab Nama). It contains about
8300 lines of Persian poetry(Lewis).
5)
The Ma’arif Waladi also called al-Asrār
al-d̲j̲alāliyya. It is
a prose work in a style approaching the spoken language and containing accounts
of Sultan Walad's
thoughts and words. The title is an evocation of his grandfather's work by the
same title. An uncritical edition appeared as an appendix to an undated Tehran
print of Mawlānā's Fīhi mā fīh; a scholarly
edition was prepared by Najib-Mayil-I Hirawi,Maʿārif , Tehran
1367/1988. This work is in Persian and
contains 56 of the sermons and lectures from the pulpit by Sultan Walad and recorded
by others. It also again shows that the
everyday language of preaching and guidance of Sultan Walad was in Persian and
is replete with quotes from Rumi, Attar and Sana’i.
Indeed like Rumi, Sultan Walad ‘’speaks
of Sana’i and Attar as the eyes of the heart and the spirit respectively, which
he set before himself as an example”.
Overall we possess close to 50 verses in
Greek and 370 in Turkish by Sultan Walad.
By all means, this is negligible relative to the 37000+ lines of verses
in Persian and the 56+ sermons in Persian. Thus the Greek and Turkish output of
Sultan Walad are less than 1% of his total output where-as the Persian output
is about 99% of his literary output.
This makes one wonder why such is the
case. If some want to argue that Persian
was the literary language, they have no argument again because the Ma’arif
Waladi is recorded lecture notes and sermons of Sultan Walad in everyday colloquial
Persian by the followers of the order.
So had he just used Persian for literary purpose, then one would expect
that the sermons from the pulpit where he is guiding his everyday followers
should be in Arabic or Turkish or Greek or in another language. However, it was in Persian which shows that
the everyday language of the order was Persian and it was also the native
language of Sultan Walad.
Despite the approximately 50 verses in
Greek and 370 in Turkish, Sultan Walad admits his knowledge of Greek and
Turkish is rudimentary. That is while he
knew these languages, he did not feel complete mastery over them.
According to Franklin:
“Sultan
Valad elsewhere admits that he has little knowledge of Turkish”(pg 239)
“Sultan Valad did not feel confident about his
command of Turkish”(pg 240)
Sultan Walad actually admits the fact that
his knowledge of Turkish and Greek is rudimentary four times.
1)
In the Ibtedanama, Sultan Walad states:
بگذر
از گفت ترکی و
رومی
که
از این اصطلاح
محرومی
گوی
از پارسی و از
تازی
که
در این هر
دوخوش همیتازی
Translation:
Abandon the speech of Turkish
and Greek
Since you are deprived of these
expressions
Instead speak Persian and
Arabic
Because you are well versed in
these two
Sultan Walad, Masnaviyeh
Waladi, Ensha’ Baha al-Din b. Mowlana Jalal al-Din Mohammad b. Hosayn-e Balkhi, Mashur beh Mowalana, ed. Jalal al-Din Homa’I (Tehran:Eqbal,
1316) (pp 393-4)
2)
In another poem in the Rababnama, he
states:
Türkche bilseyd
üm
ben eyed üm
size (If I had known Turkish, I would
have told you)
Sirlarin
kim tanridan de ğdi (The secrets
that God has imparted on me)
Bild
üreyd üm s özile bildüğümi (I would have informed you in words of what
I know)
Bulduraydum ben size bulduğumi (And let
you find what I have found)
Dilerem kim g öreler kamu am (I wish that all could
see that (truth) )
Cümle yoksullar ola benden gani (And that all
the poor would be rich because of me;)
Bildürem dükeline bildüğumi (That I would inform all of what I know)
Bulalar ulu kiçi bulduğumi (And let great and small find what I have found)
See:
(Sultan Walad, Rabab Nameh az Sultan
Valad, Farzand-e Mowlana Jalal al-Din Mowlavi. Ali Soltani Gordfaramarzi,
McGill University’s Intitute of Islamic Studies and the University of
Tehran,1980). Pp 451
Also quoted in:
Mehmed Fuad Köprülü, Early Mystics in
Turkish Literature, trans., ed., and with an introduction by Gary Leiser
and Robert Dankoff (London: Routledge, 2006).
Again this is clear example of Sultan Walad
admitting that his Turkish was not on par with his Persian.
3)
In the Turkish lines of Ibtidanama
he also states:
Türk dilin bilürmiseydüm
ben - soz ile bellu gostereydiim ben
If I had known Turkish, I would
have made it clear with words
4) And again in the Diwan he states:
تورکچه
اگر بیلیدیم بی
سوزی بین ایلیه
دیم
تاتچه
اگر دیلر سوز
گویم اسرار
اولی
If I had known Turkish, I would
have made one word into a thousand
But when you listen to Persian,
I tell the secrets much better
Source:
Sultan Walad, Mowlavi-ye Digar:
Shaamel-e Ghazliyaat, Qasaayed, Qet’at, Tarkibat, Ash’are Torki, Ash’ar-e ‘Arabi,
mosammat, roba’iyat (Tehran, Sanai, 1984) Pp 556
One wonders how many times Sultan Walad has to admit that he
does not know Turkish and Greek well. So why did Sultan
Walad make this miniscule contribution to Turkish and Greek which is less than
1% of his total literally output?
Despite his rudimentary knowledge of these languages (and he could have
sought the help of a Greek or a Turk for understanding some of these
words). According to Mehmed Foud
Kopurulu: “The fact
that he occasionally resorted to Turkish derives from his fear that a large
majority, who did not understand Persian, would be deprived of these teachings”(Mehmed Fuad Köprülü,, 209)
At the same time Mehmed Fuad Köprülü,
states(Mehmed Fuad Köprülü,, 209):
“I will not go into a lengthy description
here of these poems, which were written in a very
crude and primitive language and with a very defective and rudimentary
versification replete with Zihaf {pronouncing a long vowel short} and Imala {pronouncing a short vowel long}.”
Thus Sultan Walad admits that he is not
proficient in Turkish and Greek as he is in Persian. But he did have Greek and Turkish followers
and thus he could have asked their help in understanding some of those words and
trying to make the message of Rumi clear for non-Persians. He prefers Persian to state the secrets and
mystical wisdoms that were imparted to him by his father. At the same time, he wanted to provide
guidance to the non-Persian followers of the order. Given the fact that the Ma’arif Waladi is
also his sermons, and in an everyday colloquial language, this provides a
conclusive proof that the family of Rumi was Persian speaking and Sultan Walad
himself grew up in a native Persian speaking environment. Hence this is another proof that the native
language of Rumi was Persian. Also the
fact that his sermons from the pulpit are in Persian also shows that he was a
native speaker of the Persian language.
During the time of Sultan Walad there was a
intense rivalry between the Turkish Qaramanlu and the Persianized Seljuqs of
Anatolia. At one poin the Qaramanlu
attacked Konya and pillaged the town.
According to the Encyclopedia of Islam: “Following this, they were headed by Giineri Beg,
who seems to have been a member of the
Karamanid dynasty. The defeat of the Mongol army by the Mamluks at Hims in
680/1281, and the death of Abaka following this, led to disturbances in Turkey.
Karaman Oghlu Giineri Beg carried out frequent acts of plunder in the Konya
region,”
And
“As Sultan Masud lived in Kayseri and there
was no competent governor in Konya, the Karamanids were emboldened to carry out
frequent raids and acts of plunder in and around the city. On one occasion,
under the command of Khalil Bahadur, they raided and plundered the city for
three days in succession. Sultan Masud thereupon requested help from Gaykhatu,
who had recently succeeded to the Ilkhanid throne, Gaykhatu came to Anatolia
with a large army, which also included Georgian soldiers. Laranda and Eregli
and the villages around these cities were destroyed with particular savagery.
The number of captives taken from the lands of the Karamanids and Ashraf
Oghullari alone (690/1292) was 7,000.
(F. Sumer,
“Karaman-Oghullari”, Encyclopaedia of Islam. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th.
Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill, 2009. Brill
Online.)
(Note F. Sumer displays a Turkish nationalist viewpoint on
the Karamanids and would support the Karamanids. Anyhow we wanted to demonstrate the conflict
between the Seljuqs and Karamanids)
The disdain for the
Qaramanlou is shown by Aflaki, Sultan Walad, the Maktubat of Mowlana and etc.
and requires its own detail study.
What is interesting is that
during the takeover of Konya, the Qaramanlou made Turkish the official language
of the court and administration.
However, Sultan Masud of the Seljuqs (whom we described as a Persianized
dynasty who had left the Turkic origin) defeats them and retakes Konya. This episode is recalled by Sultan Walad where
he praises Sultan Masud:
ظلم و ستم
نابود شد، عدل
و کرم موجود
شد
هم عاقبت
محمود شد، چون
شاه ما مسعود
شد
شد این
جهان زنده ز
نو، از نیک و
بد بنده ز نو
با بخت و
فرخنده ز نو،
چون شاه ما
مسعود شد
در روم شادی
سر زده،
بنشسته شر و
عربده
گلزار شد
آتشکده، چون
شاه ما مسعود
شد
آمد ندا از
آسمان، اندر
زمین ای راهدان
نعم البدل
بین در جهان،
چون شاه ما
مسعود شد
ترکان عالم
سوز را، از
غار و کوه و بیشه
ها
آورده در
طاعت خدا، چون
شاه ما مسعود
شد
زین پس شود
امن و امان، زین
پس نماند
اندهان
عالم شود شیرین
چون جان، چون
شاه ما مسعود
شد
تلخی کنون
حلوا شود، پستی
یقین بالا شود
کار همه زیبا
شود، چون شاه
ما مسعود شد
بنمود زهره
بی زحل، جارن
را برون کرد
از وحل
شد مشکلات
بسته حل، چون
شاه ما مسعود
شد
صد رو نماید
عشق ما، صد در
گشاید عشق ما
صد جان فزاید
عشق ما، چون
شاه ما مسعود
شد
خم ازل
بگشاده بین،
بزم ابد
بنهاده بین
بیساغری
صد باده بین،
چون شاه ما
مسعود شد
در خواب میدیدم
ارم، در روی
هزاران گون
نعم
تعبیر از
آن شد روشنم،
چون شاه ما
مسعود شد
گر بندهی
شاهی بیا، ور
طالب راهی بیا
گر کو و گر
کاهی بیا، چون
شاه ما مسعود
شد
گوید ولد
جویا منم، در
عاشقی بینا
منم
در خم تن دریا
منم، چون شاه
ما مسعود شد
همچون که عیسی
بر برم، از
چرخ و کیوان
بگذرم
جز راه حق
را نسپرم، چون
شاه ما مسعود
شد
غرقه شوم
اندر احد، در
بحث و مجو بیعدد
شکر شود زین
بس ز بد، چون
شاه ما مسعود
شد
Sultan Walad, Mowlavi-ye Digar:
Shaamel-e Ghazliyaat, Qasaayed, Qet’at, Tarkibat, Ash’are Torki, Ash’ar-e
‘Arabi, mosammat, roba’iyat (Tehran, Sanai, 1984) Pp 536
Here Sultan Walad calls the
Turks as “World-Destroyers” and praises Sultan Masud for bringing them under God’s
control even if they were hiding in the plains, caves and mountain. After the defeat of the Qaramanlou Turks,
Sultan Walad beseeches Sultan Masud to not let a single one of these Turks
alive.
به دولت شاه شاهانی به صولت شیر شیرانی
همه
ترکان ز بیم
جان شده در
غار و کُه
پنهان
چو نبود شیر در بیشه رود از گرگ اندیشه
پلنگ
اکنون بشد موشی،
چو آمد شیر حق
غٌران
چو
ماران رفته در
کُهها در آن
بیشه به اندهها
همه
چون روز میدانند
که خواهی کوفت
سرهاشان
همه
در گریۀ ناله،
بخون در غرق
چون لاله
گهی
بر موت خود گریان،
گهی بر خوف
خان و مان
چو
رنجوران بیدرمان
بشسته
دستها از جان
به
اومیدی طمع
کرده که بوک
از شه رسد
غفران
گذشت
از حداین
زحمت مکن شاها
توشان رحمت
حیات
خلق اگر خواهی
بکم آن جمله
را قربان
لکم
اندر قصاص خلق
حیات و این
شنو از حق
قصاص
چشم چشم آمد
به دندان هم بود
دندان
حیات
اندر قصاص آمد
جهان ازاین
خلاص آمد
نبودی
هیچکس زنده برین
گرد نامدی
فرمان
خوارج
را مهل زنده
اگر میرست اگر
بنده
که
خونی کشتنی
باشد سه شرع آیت
قرآن
ولد
کردست نفرین
ها برون از
چرخ و پروین-ها
که
یارب زین سگان
بد ببر هم جان
و هم ایمان
(cited in Firuz Mansuri, “Mot’aleaati
Darbaareyeh Tarkh, Zaban o Farhang Azarbaijan”, Nashr Hezar, Tehran, 1387
(Solar Hejri Calendar), volume 1. Pp
71).
This is in our opinion one of the more colorful poems of
Sultan Walad and ties the concept of Qisas with political justice. Sultan Walad first praises Sultan Masud for
making “all the Turks” (Hameh Torkaan) flee into the mountains and caves. Then he asks Sultan Masud not leave a single
one of them alive and finally the last line Sultan Walad beseeches God: “O
God, from these evil Dogs, take away both their life and faith”. As noted, in modern Turkish nationalism,
the Karamanids are looked upon in a positive light. This is because of their anti-Persian stance
and attempt at removing Persians and the Persian language from the courts and
administrations. We could already see
some tension as mentioned in the work of Aflaki between the two groups.
According to Dr. Firuz Mansur, “It should be noted that Fereydun Nafidh ‘Ozluk has changed the word “Hameh Torkaan” to Khawarij in his Turkish translation of the Diwan of Sultan Walad”.
This is what Dr. Firuz Mansuri states:
در آن
تاریخ نه تنها
این قصیده،
بلکه مندرجات
سایر منابع
تاریخی و ادبی
همه دلالت بر
این دارند که
شهرنشینان،
به ویژه اهالی
قونیه، از
ترکان کوچ رو
که مُخل آسایش
عمومی و مخالف
نظام اداری
حکومت بودند،
دل خوشی
نداشتند و
نسبت به آنها
اظهار کینه و
نفرت میکردند. فریدون نافذ
اوزلوک مترجم
دیوان سلطان
ولد به ترکی،
در نخستین بیت
منظومهی
فوق، به جالی
کلمهی «همه
ترکان» لغت
خوارج را
گمارده است. ایشان
با این اقدام
بیمورد و تحریف
آشکار، حس کینه
و نفرت سلطان
ولد را نسبت
به ترکان پردهپوشی
کرده و از چشم
خوانندگانی
که فارسی نمیدانند،
پنهان داشته
اشت.
Firuz Mansuri, “Mot’aleaati Darbaareyeh Tarkh, Zaban o Farhang Azarbaijan”, Nashr Hezar, Tehran, 1387 (Solar Hejri Calendar), volume 1. Pages: 71-72.
This poem is reminiscence of the poem of Sanai Ghaznavi who
complains about cruetly of various rulers in his own era and uses the metaphor
“Torki Kardan” as equivalent to cruetly.
|
ای
خداوندان
مال
الاعتبار
الاعتبار |
|
ای
خداخوانان
قال
الاعتذار
الاعتذار |
|
پیش
از آن کاین
جان عذر آور
فرو میرد ز نطق |
|
پیش
از آن کاین
چشم عبرت بین
فرو ماند ز کار |
|
پند
گیرید ای سیاهیتان
گرفته جای
پند |
|
عذر
آرید ای سپیدیتان
دمیده بر
عذار |
|
ای
ضعیفان از سپیدی
مویتان شد
همچو شیر |
|
وی
ظریفان از سیاهی
رویتان شد
همچو
قار |
|
پردهتان
از چشم دل
برداشت صبح
رستخیز |
|
پنبه
تا از گوش بیرون
کرد گشت روزگار |
|
تا کی
از
دارالغروری
ساختن
دارالسرور |
|
تا کی
از
دارالفراری
ساختن دارالقرار |
|
در
فریب آباد گیتی
چند باید
داشت حرص |
|
چشمتان
چون چشم نرگس
دست چون دست چنار |
|
این
نه آن صحراست
کانجا بی جسد
بینند روح |
|
این
نه آن بابست
کنجا بی خبر یابند بار |
|
از
جهان نفس بگریزید
تا در کوی عقل |
|
آنچه
غم بودست گردد
مر شما را غمگسار |
|
در
جهان شاهان
بسی بودند کز
گردون ملک |
|
تیرشان
پروین گسل
بود و سنان
جوزا
فگار |
|
بنگرید
اکنون بناتالنعش
وار از دست
مرگ |
|
نیزههاشان
شاخ شاخ و تیرهاشان پارپار |
|
مینبینید
آن سفیهانی
که ترکی کردهاند |
|
همچو
چشم تنگ
ترکان گور ایشان
تنگ و تار |
|
بنگرید
آن جعدشان از
خاک چون پشت
کشف |
|
بنگرید
آن رویشان از
چین چو پشت سوسمار |
|
سر
به خاک آورد
امروز آنکه
افسر بود دی |
|
تن
به دوزخ برد
امسال آنکه
گردن بود پار |
|
ننگ
ناید مر شما
را زین سگان
پر فساد |
|
دل
نگیرد مر شما
را زین خزان بیفسار |
|
این یکی
گه زین دین و
کفر را زو رنگ
و
بوی |
|
و آن
دگر گه فخر
ملک و ملک را
زو ننگ و عار |
|
این یکی
کافی ولیکن
فاش را ز
اعتقاد |
|
و آن
دگر شافی ولیکن
فاش را ز اضطرار |
|
زین یکی
ناصر
عبادالله
خلفی ترت و مرت |
|
وز
دگر حافظ
بلادالله
جهانی تار و مار |
|
پاسبانان
تو اند این سگ
پرستان همچو
سگ |
|
هست
مرداران ایشان
هم بدیشان
واگذار |
|
زشت
باشد نقش نفس
خوب را از راه
طبع |
|
گریه
کردن پیش مشتی
سگ پرست و موشخوار |
|
اندرین
زندان برین
دندان زنان
سگ صفت |
|
روزکی
چند ای ستمکش
صبر کن دندان فشار |
|
تا
ببینی روی آن
مردمکشان
چون زعفران |
|
تا
ببینی رنگ آن
محنتکشان
چون گل انار |
|
گرچه
آدم سیرتان
سگ صفت مستولیند |
|
هم
کنون بینی که
از میدان دل عیاروار |
|
جوهر
آدم برون
تازد برآرد
ناگهان |
|
زین
سگان آدمی کیمخت
و خر مردم
دمار |
|
گر
مخالف خواهی
ای مهدی در آ
از آسمان |
|
ور
موافق خواهی
ای دجال یک ره
سر
برآر |
|
یک
طپانچه مرگ و
زین
مردارخواران
یک جهان |
|
یک
صدای صور و زین
فرعون طبعان صدهزار |
|
باش
تا از صدمت
صور سرافیلی
شود |
|
صورت
خوبت نهان و سیرت
زشت آشکار |
|
تا
ببینی موری
آن خس را که میدانی
امیر |
|
تا بینی
گرگی آن سگ را
که میخوانی عیار |
|
در
تو حیوانی و
روحانی و شیطانی
درست |
|
در
شمار هر که
باشی آن شوی
روز شمار |
|
باش
تا بر باد بینی
خان رای و رای
خان |
|
باش
تا در خاک بینی
شر شور و شور شار |
|
تا
ببینی یک به یک
را کشته در
شاهین عدل |
|
شیر
سیر و جاه چاه
و شور سوز و
مال
مار |
|
ولله
ار داری به جز
بادی به دست
ارمر ترا |
|
جز
به خاک پای
مشتی
خاکسارست
افتخار |
|
کز
برای خاک پاشی
نازنینی را
خدای |
|
کرددر
پیش ساستگاه
قهرش سنگسار |
|
باش
تا کل بینی
آنها را که
امروزند جزو |
|
باش
تا گل یابی
آنها را که
امروزند خار |
|
آن
عزیزانی که
آنجا گلبنان
دولتند |
|
تا
نداریشان بدینجا
خیره همچون
خار
خوار |
|
گلبنی
کاکنون ترا هیزم
نمود از جور دی |
|
باش
تا در جلوهش
آرد دست
انصاف بهار |
|
ژندهپوشانی
که آنجا
زندگان
حضرتند |
|
تا
نداری
خوارشان از
روی نخوت زینهار |
|
و آن
سیاهی کز پی
ناموس حق
ناقوس زد |
|
در
عرب بواللیل
بود اندر قیامت بونهار |
|
پردهدار
عشق دان اسم
ملامت بر فقیر |
|
پاسبان
در شناس آن
تلخ آب اندر
بحار |
|
ور
بقا خواهی ز
درویشان طلب
زیرا که هست |
|
بود
درویشان
قباهای بقا
را پود و تار |
|
تا
ورای نفس خویشی
خویشتن کودک
شمار |
|
چون
فرود طبع
ماندی خویشتن
غافل
بدار |
|
کی
شود ملک تو
عالم تا تو
باشی ملک او |
|
کی
بود اهل نثار
آنکس که برچیند نثار |
|
هست
دل یکتا مجویش
در دو گیتی
زان که نیست |
|
در
نه و در هشت و
هفت و در شش و
پنج و چهار |
|
نیست
یک رنگی بزیر
هفت چار از
بهر آنک |
|
ار
گلست اینجای
با خارست ور
مل با خمار |
|
بهر
بیشی راست اینجا
کم زدن زیرا
نکرد |
|
زیر
گردون قمر پس
مانده را
هرگز
قمار |
|
در
رجب خود روزهدار
و «قل هوالله»
خوان و پس |
|
در
صفر خوان «تبت»
و در چارشنبه روزهدار |
|
چند
ازین رمز و
اشارت راه باید
رفت راه |
|
چند
ازین رنگ و
عبارت کار باید
کرد
کار |
|
همرهان
با کوههانان
به حج رفتند و
کرد |
|
رسته
از میقات و
حرم و جسته از
سعی و جمار |
|
تو
هنوز از راه
رعنایی ز بهر
لاشهای |
|
گاه
در نقش هویدی
گاه در رنگ
مهار |
|
چون
به حکم اوست
خواهی تاج
خواهی پای
بند |
|
چون
نشان اوست
خواهی طیلسان
خواهی غیار |
|
تا
به جان این
جهانی زنده
چون دیو و
ستور |
|
گر
چه پیری همچو
دنیا
خویشتن
کودک
شمار |
|
حرص
و شهوت در تو بیدارند
خوش خوش تو مخسب |
|
چون
پلنگی بر یمین
داری و موشی
بر
یسار |
|
مال
دادی لیک رویست
و ریا اندر
بنه |
|
کشت
کردی لیک
خوکست و ملخ
در
کشتزار |
|
خشم
را زیر آر در
دنیا که در
چشم صفت |
|
سگ
بود آنجا کسی
کاینجا
نباشد سگ سوار |
|
خشم
و شهوت مار و
طاووسند در
ترکیب تو |
|
نفس
را آن پایمرد
و دیو را این
دست
یار |
|
کی
توانستی
برون آورد
آدم را ز خلد |
|
گر
نبودی راهبر
ابلیس را
طاووس و مار |
|
عور
کرد از کسوت
عار ار ز دودهی
آدمی |
|
زان
که اندر تخم
آدم عاریت
باشد
عوار |
|
حلم
و خرسندی در
آب و گل طلب کت
اصل
ازوست |
|
کی
بود در باد
خرسندی و در
آتش وقار |
|
حلم
خاک و قدر آتش
جوی کب و باد
راست |
|
گرت
رنگ و بوی
بخشد پیلهور
صد
پیلوار |
|
تا
تو اندر زیر
بار حلق و جلقی
چون ستور |
|
پردهداران
کی دهندت بار
بر درگاه یار |
|
گرد
خرسندی و
بخشش گرد زیرا
طمع و طبع |
|
کودکان
را خربزه
گرمست و پیران
را
خیار |
|
راستکاری
پیشه کن
کاندر مصاف
رستخیز |
|
نیستند
از خشم حق جز راستکاران رستگار |
|
تا
به جان لهو و
لغوی زنده
اندر کوی دین |
|
از قیامت
قسم تو نقشست
و از قرآن نگار |
|
حق
همی گوید بده
تا ده
مکافاتت دهم |
|
آن
به حق ندهی و
پس آسان بپاشی
در
شیار |
|
این
نه شرط مومنی
باشد که در ایمان
تو |
|
حق
همی خاین نماید
خاک و سرگین استوار |
|
گرد
دین بهر صلاح
دین به بیدینی
متن |
|
تخم
دنیا در قرار
تن به مکاری
مکار |
|
ای
بسا غبنا کت
اندر حشر
خواهد بود از آنک |
|
هست
ناقد بس بصیر
و نقدها بس کم عیار |
|
سخت
سخت آید همی
بر جان ز راه
اعتقاد |
|
زشت
زشت آید همی
در دین ز راه اعتبار |
|
بر
در ماتم سرای
دین و چندین
نای و نوش |
|
در
ره رعناسرای
دیو و چندان
کار و بار |
|
گرد
خود گردی همی
چون گرد مرکز
دایره |
|
ای پی
اینی بسان
خشک مغزان در
دوار |
|
2از
نگارستان
نقاش طبیعی
برتر آی |
|
تا
رهی از ننگ جبر
و طمطراق اختیار |
|
چون
ز دقیانوس
خود رستند
هست اندر رقیم |
|
به ز
بیداری شما
خواب
جوانمردان
غار |
|
بازدان
تایید دین را
آخر از تلقین
دیو |
|
بازدان
روحالقدس
را آخر از حبر نصار |
|
عقل
اگر خواهی که
ناگه در عقیلهت
نفکند |
|
گوش
گیرش در دبیرستان
«الرحمان» در آر |
|
عقل
بیشرع آن
جهانی نور
ندهد مر ترا |
|
شرع
باید عقل را
همچون معصفر
را
شخار |
|
عقل
جزوی کی
تواند گشت بر
قرآن محیط |
|
عنکبوتی
کی تواند کرد
سیمرغی شکار |
|
گر
چه پیوستست
بس دورست جان
از کالبد |
|
ور
چه نزدیکست
بس دورست گوش
از
گوشوار |
|
پیشگاه
دوست را شایی
چو بر درگاه
عشق |
|
عافیت
را سرنگون
سار اندر آویزی بدار |
|
عاشقان
را خدمت
معشوق تشریفست
و بر |
|
عاقلان
را طاعت
معبود تکلیفست
و
بار |
|
زخم
تیغ حکم را چه
مصطفا چه
بوالحکم |
|
ذوالفقار
عشق را چه مرتضا
چه
ذوالخمار |
|
هر
چه دشوارست
بر تو هم ز باد
و بود تست |
|
ورنه
عمر آسان
گذارد مردم
آسان گذار |
|
از
درون جان
برآمد نخوت و
حقد و حسد |
|
تا
که از سیمرغ
رستم گشت بر اسفندیار |
|
تا
ندانی کوشش
خود بخشش حق
دان از آنک |
|
در
مصاف دین ز
بود خود نگشتی
دلفگار |
|
ورنه
پیش ناوک
اندازان غیرت
کی بود |
|
دست
باف عنکبوتی
زنده پیلی را
حصار |
|
چند
جویی بی حیاتی
صحو و سکر و
انبساط |
|
چند
جویی بی مماتی
محو و شکر و افتقار |
|
جز
به دستوری
«قال الله» یا
«قال الرسول» |
|
ره
مرو فرمان
مده حاجت مگو
حجت میار |
|
چار
گوهر چارپایهی
عرش و شرع
مصطفاست |
|
صدق
و علم و شرم و
مردی کار این
هر چار یار |
|
چار یار
مصطفا را
مقتدا دار و
بدان |
|
ملک
او را هست
نوبت پنج
نوبت زن چهار |
|
پاس
خود خود دار زیرا
در بهار تر
هوا |
|
پاسبانت
را تره کوکست
و میوه
کوکنار |
|
از
زبان جاه جویان
تا نداری طمع
بر |
|
وز
دو دست نخل
بندان تا
نداری چشم بار |
|
کی
توان آمد به
راه حق ز راه
جلق و حلق |
|
درد
باید حلق سوز
و حلق دوز و حق گزار |
|
نی
از آن دردی که
رخ مجروح
دارد چون
ترنج |
|
بل
از آن دردی که
دلها خون کند
در بر چو نار |
|
نه
چنان دردی که
با جانان نگوید
دردمند |
|
بل
از آن دردی که
ناپرسا بگوید
پیش
یار |
|
بر
چنین بالا
مپر گستاخ کز
مقراض لا |
|
جبرئیل
پر بریدست
اندرین ره صد
هزار |
|
هیزم
دیگی که باشد
شهپر روحالقدس |
|
خانه
آرایان شیطانرا
در آن مطبخ چه کار |
|
علم
و دین در دست
مشتی جاه جوی
مال دوست |
|
چون
بدست مست و دیوانهست
دره و ذوالفقار |
|
زان
که مشتی
ناخلف هستند
در خط خلاف |
|
آب
روی و باد ریش
آتش دل و تن خاکسار |
|
کز
برای نام
داند مرد دنیا
علم دین |
|
وز
برای دام
دارد ناک ده
مشک تتار |
|
ای
نبوده جز
گمان هرگز یقینت
را مدد |
|
وی
نبوده جز حسد
هرگز یمینت
را یسار |
|
شاعران
را از شمار
راویان مشمر
که هست |
|
جای
عیسی آسمان و
جای طوطی
شاخسار |
|
باد
رنگینست
شعر و خاک رنگینست
زر |
|
تو ز
عشق این و آن
چون آب و آتش بیقرار |
|
ز
آنچنین بادی
و خاکی چون
سنایی بر سر آی |
|
تا
چنو در شهرها
بیتاج باشی
شهریار |
|
ورنه
چون دیگر خسیسان
زین خران
عشوه خر |
|
خاک
رنگین میستان
و باد رنگین میسپار |
|
نی
که بیمار حسد
را با شره در
قحط سال |
|
گرش
عیسی خوان
نهد بر وی
نباشد خوشگوار |
|
خاطر
کژ را چه شعر
من چه نظم
ابلهی |
|
کور
عینین را چه
نسناس و چه
نقش
قندهار |
|
نکته
و نظم سنایی
نزد نادان
دان چنانک |
|
پیش
کر بر بط سرای
و نزد کور آیینه دار |
Rumi’s son Sultan Walad was born in
Anatolia. In an environment where
Persians were a minority, but culturally they predominated and even ran the
Seljuq administration. The everyday
language of Sultan Walad as demonstrated by his sermons was Persian. Furthermore, despite the fact that he lived
in Anatolia where Greek and Turkish were important languages, he himself claims
at least four times that his knowledge of Greek and Turkish are very
rudimentary. He states also that he does
not preach in Arabic and uses Persian, so that everyone may understand.
فارسی
گو که جمله دریابند
گرچه
زین غافلند و
درخوابند
By everyone, he of course means the
followers of the order and with this, we can ascertain that the majority of the
followers of Rumi at that time were Persians and Persian speaking. Also we brought examples were Sultan Walad
has some of the harshest comments for Turks and specially the Qaramani Turks
who tried to make Turkish the official language. He calls the Turks as “world burners” and
asks the Persianized Seljuqs to not even let one of the Turks alive. At the same time, he had Greek and Turkish
followers, but these were to adopt Persian cultural traditions. So Sultan Walad like his father was a
universal figure, but the above mentioned points clearly demonstrates his
Persian background and culture. We have
more to say on the order’s spiritual lineage based on a poem by Sultan Walad
which is discussed in the end of this article.
According to Halman:
“Turkish scholars have advanced the
argument that the Sema, one of the salient and dramatically effective
aspects of the Melevi ritual, has its origin the ritual dances of the Turkic
shamans in Central Asia. This viewpoint
apparently does not conflict with the theory which B. Carra de Vaux summarizes
in the following words: “The dance of the whirling derwishes, which goes back
to Djalal al-Din, seems to be an attempt to express the Neo-Platonic idea of
perfection and the harmony of the movement of heavenly bodies” (pg 272)
Furthermore Halman or another Turkish scholar claims without any proof or sources (ignoring even Sama’ among Shams Tabrizi and Attar and Sanai and Ghazzali who were all Persians like Rumi and major influences on Rumi ):
“Persian communities of the twelfth
and thirteenth centuries vehemently denounced the use of music and dance in any
religious, including Sufi, observances” (pg 273)
We shall show both of these statements to be utterly false
and are written for nationalistic consumptions.
Indeed Sanai, Attar, Al-Ghazzali and many other famous Persian Sufis
have discussed Sama and music. We will
first bring the relevant scholarly passages to discount the above two claims before
offering more commentary.
According to Franklin:
“Sama is a difficult word to
translate. It has usually been rendered
as “audition,” but this sounds like a musical try-out. “Spiritual concert” has also been tried, but
in the usage of Rumi it is much more than listening. Sama ideally involves the use of poems
and music to focus the listener’s concentration on God and perhaps even induce
a trance-like state of contemplative ecstasy (vajd, hal). When this happens, it often moves the
listener to shake his arms or dance. It
is therefore a kind of motile meditation or deliberative dancing, a mode of
worship and contemplation. According to
Mohammad b. al-Monavvar’s Asrar al-Towhid, the sama’ of Shaykh
Abu Sa’id would include waving the hands (dast afshani) as well as circling about and
stamping the feet. Abu Sa’id had
learned this practice as a child(MAS 218), which had been well known in eastern
Iran for over two centuries before the birth of Rumi. Sama’ was not, therefore, an
incidental or chance hearing of music, but a liturgical and ritual use of
music.
The manuals of Sufism had
thoroughly covered the subject of sama’ by the time of Rumi, giving it a
theoretical justification. In the mid-eleventh century, Hojviri
devotes the last chapter of his Kashf al-mahjub to it, first proving
that the Prophet had encouraged the chanting of the Koran, and then proving
that the Prophet had also listened to poetry.
Hojviri goes on to show that the Prophet did allow singing and the
playing of melodies. Of course,
music can provoke a person’s base passions or it can send him into transports
of spiritual bliss. The act of listening
to music was not, therefore, in itself wrong or evil, but it could become
sinful if the listener responded improperly.
Dancing was not approved by Hojviri, though he did not forbid it,
explaining that the movements of the dervishes in Sama’ are not dancing but
responding to mystical ecstasy. Hojviri
gives rules for proper behavior in Sama’,
and these rule out looking upon beautiful boys (see below, “Rumi’s Sexuality”).
Sari Saqati had compared the Sama’
to rain on fertile ground. But it was a dangerous thing which needed a
shaykh to guide and control it. As the Owrad
al-Ahbab describes Sama, it is a grace from God that attracts the
hearts of His servants to him…whoever listens with truth will reach the
truth. Whoever listens with passion will
become a heretic (Saf 3/1:200-201). Most
of the Sufi orders practiced Sama’, though not all; the
Naqshbandis of Naqshband’s own circle, for example did not (Saf 3/1:203).
The theologians, however, were divided
about whether or not poems should even be recited in the mosque. Mo’ad b. Jabal, a companion of the Prophet,
had said not, but later jurisprudents tended to be less strict on the matter,
with even the Hanbalis making some allowances.
Ibn al_Jowzi held the recitation of ascetic-oriented verse in the mosque
permissible; however, Ibn Jobayr even heard al-Jowzi recite love poetry (ash’ar
min al-nasib) in 1184 in the caliphal place at Baghdad, where he preaches
twice a week (MAS 226). Abu Hafs ‘Omar Sohravardi,
the caliphal envoy, also moved his hearers with poetry in the mosque once (MAS
227)). Ibn Taymiya allowed preachers to
recite verses of a religious/didactic nature in the mosque, if based upon the
Koran, the Hadith, or exhortations to penance. The Hanafi legal handbooks held all of these
permissible and eventually would add love poems for the Prophet as licit genre
for recitations in mosque (MAS 226). The
Shiites also allowed love poems for the Imams.
However, the Shaf’i Zarkashi (d. 1392) held that reciting anything but
religio-ethical verses in the mosque was forbidden (MAS 227). The preacher of Molla Hosayn Va’ez-e Kashefi
(d. 1505) considered the signing of poems in the mosque impermissible, but he would
allow them to be recited without music (MAS 228).
Abu Najib ‘Abd al-Qaher
Sohravardi (1097-1168) in his “Manners for Disciples” (Adab al-moridin,
written c. 1155) explains that all the authorities agree on the permissibility
of listening to a beautiful and melodious voice reciting the Koran, as long as
the chanting does not obscure the meaning of scripture. Having established that the act of chanting
is not objectionable, he takes up the question of whether or not it is licit to
chant poetry. One can only judge,
Sohravardi says, by the content of the verse in question, even then, poems
which might be inappropriate for one person at a given level of development
would not be objectionable for another person.
Sohravardi explains that some people, as they listen to chanting and
music, may weep out of sorrow, yearning or fear; others might clap or dance out
of a sense of hope, joy or delight. Such
movements and cries arise from the human spirit and are not in and of
themselves, forbidden, though those who have truly attained do not need act in
this manner.
Among Rumi’s contemporaries in
Konya, Akhi Evren was opposed to Sama’, an attitude probably not atypical among
the fottovat orders. But Ahmad-e
Faqih wrote a “whirling” poem, and ‘Eraqi praised the state of ecstasy brought
about by listening to singers (qavval) tell of the beloved.
One account which Aflaki (Af
680-681) attributes to Sultan Valad tells us that it was the grandmother of
Sultan Valad (the mother of Gowhar Khatun) who first encouraged Rumi to
practice Sama. He did so, but at first
simply shook his arm about. Only after
Shams arrived in Konya did Rumi begin to practice the whirling dance.
On the other
hand, Sepahsalar (Sep 64-5) says:
His holiness, our lord – may God
increase the light he shines upon us – from the beginning of his career
followed the practice and procedure of his father – his holiness our lord, Baha al-Din Valad, may paradise be his –
including teaching, preaching, renunciation and ascetic exercises. He [Rumi] followed whatever forms of worship
and renunciation were attributed to his holiness the Messenger - God’s peace and blessing upon him. In his prayers and fasting and exercises of
self-renunciation, he [Rumi] would see epiphanies and spiritual stations to
which no perfect man had ever attained, but he had never performed sama’. When his holiness, our lord and monarch of
the beloved, looked upon our lord Shams of Tabriz, the Sun of Truth and
Religion – God Magnify his mention – with the eye of insight, recognize him as
the beloved and king of the saints who held a rank among the highest stations
of the beloved ones, he fell in love with him and honored whatever he
instructed. Shams then instructed him:
Enter into Sama’, for you
will find increase of that which you seek in it. Sama’ was forbidden to the people because
they are preoccupied with base passions.
When they perform Sama’, their reprehensible and hateful characteristics
increase and they are moved by pride and pleasure. Of course Sama’ is forbidden to such
people. On the other hand, those people
who quest for and love truth, their characteristics intensify in Sama’ and none
but God enter their field of vision at such times. So, Sama’ is permissible to such people
Rumi Obeyed this instruction and
attended Sama’ and observed with his own eyes in the state of Sama’
that which Shams had indicated, and he continued to practice and follow this
custom until the end of life.
Indeed, Rumi became quite
enamored with the ritual of turning and singing verse. Sama’ became Rumi’s flood of divine
love, and he played it on and on.(Franklin, 309-11)
The
Encyclopedia of Islam article on Sama also elaborates:
SAMA’, verbal noun from the root s-m-‘ (like sam’-and
sim’), signifying "hearing"; by extension, it often denotes
"that which is heard", such as music, for example. The same applies
to istimd’- "listening" (Lane, Lexicon, 1427b, 1429b; LCA,
s.v.)
1. In music and mysticism.
The term is not found in the Kuran, but it exists in ancient
Arabic, even in the sense of song or of musical performance (Lane, 1617b, s.v. mushar).
In lexicology and in grammar, it signifies "that which is founded on
authority", as opposed to kiyasi "founded on analogy" (de
Sacy, Grammaire, i, 347, and Lane,1429b). In theology, it is opposed to
‘akl, "reason"(Goldziher, Richtungen, 136-7, 166). But
it presents a specific sense in Sufism, where it generally denote the hearing
of music, the concert, and in its particular sense, the Sufi tradition of
spiritual concert, in a more or less ritualised form. Sama’- is then considered to be the
"nourishment of the soul", in other words, a devotional practice
which, according to Sufi authors, can induce intense emotional transports (tawddjud),
states of grace (ahwal), of trance or of ecstasy (wadj, wudjud) and
even revelations. These manifestations are often accompanied by movements,
physical agitation or dance which are of set form or otherwise, individual or
collective, of which Persian miniatures have left numerous testimonies and of
which certain forms are still in use.
The very sense of the term sama’, which has been widely
discussed, suggests that it is actually listening which is spiritual,
since music or poetry do not necessarily have a sacred nature.
"Hearing", on the other hand, can be applied to any sound, natural,
artificial or artistic, as well as to the "subtle" sounds of the
hidden world or of the cosmos. In its predominant sense, hearing is a synonym
of "understanding", in other words, comprehension, acceptance and
application of the Revelation, and the practice of sama’, beyond ecstasy
or rapture, can be an unveiling of mysteries, a means of attaining higher
knowledge (Ruzbihan, Gisu Deraz).
Sama’- does not seem to appear until the mid-3rd/9th century
among the Sufis of Baghdad, but while the association of music with ecstatic
rites or practices is attested prior to Islam in the Religions of the
Book(Mole), no solution has been found to the question of continuity between
the latter and the Sufi practice of sama’-, in spite of numerous
similarities. It could take the form of an extension of the hearing of the
Kuraan to that of religious ghazals and kasidas, or furthermore,
of sacralisation of the secular concert and a sublimation of tarab, that
new custom which spread very quickly to Isfahan, Shiraz and in Khurasan
(Purdjawadi,18). Sama’ is thus
initially an "oriental" phenomenon, promulgated in particular by the
Persian disciples of Nuri and of Djunayd. By the same token, all of the early
authors dealing with sama’ were Persians, with the exception of Abu
Talib Muhammad al-Makki (d. 386/996 [q.v.]). Subsequently, sama’- spread
to all areas, but found most favour in Persian, Turkish and Indian Islam. The
first writings, composed a century after the inauguration of the custom of sama’,
coincided with the first attacks on the part of traditionalists who sought
to condemn music (such as Ibn Abi '1-Dunya (208-81/823-94 [q.v.]), the
author of the Dhamm al-maldhi, cf. Robson), and constituted a reply to
them. According to Purdjavadi(ibid., 22), these writings may be arranged
in three groups and periods:
(1) 4th/10th century. ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Sulami(d. 412/941
[q.v.]), whose K. al-Sama’ is the first monograph devoted
specifically to sama’; al-Makki; al-Sarradj (d. 378/988 [q.v.]); al-Kalabadhl
(d.380/990 [q.v.])', and Abu Mansur. They base their arguments on hadiths
and on the logia of the ancient mystics (Dhu '1-Nun al-Misri), being
concerned above all to defend sama’- from its detractors.
(2) 5th/11th century: al-Bukhari; Abu '1-Kasim al- Kushayri
(d. 466/1074 [q.v.]); al-Ghazall (d. 505/1111 [q.v.]). In these
authors, too, the defensive aspect is featured, but the Sufis seem to rely on
them more on account of their social and even political status.
(3) 7th-8thl 13th-14th centuries: Nadjm al-Dln Kubra [q.v.],
Ruzbihan Bakli Shirazi (d. 606/1209); Ahmadi Djam; Nadjm al-Di Baghdadi;
‘Abd al-Razzak Kashani; Ahmad Tusi (8th/14th century); etc. They take into
account the social and ritual aspect and argue more rationally. After this
period, sama’ was included in its entirety among the customs of the
mystics and was no longer the object of judicial debates. Writers confined
themselves to extolling its qualities and its symbolic meanings, some going so
far as to consider it an obligation for adepts (Ahmad Tusi, whose Bawarik has
been erroneously attributed to Ahmad al-Ghazali (cf. Mojahed, 1980). After the
9th-10th/15th-16th centuries, the question of sama’ seems to have been
filed away or exhausted, and setting aside the orders which retained its
practice and its theory (Mawlawis, Cishtis), did not give rise to any more
original literature (Gisuh Deraz).
The function of sama’-, as well as its conditions of
performance, have evolved in a sense which al-Hudjwiri was the first to deplore,
and which the aphorisms of the earliest Sufis (al-Halladj, Dhu '1-Nun) had
anticipated in their warnings. It became for some a form of delectation or a
sensual pleasure, all the more so in that the rite now included dancing and was
concluded with a meal. Furthermore, the proletariat indulged in profane sama’,
in other words concerts with a religious pretext (Pouzet), not to mention
rites of trance inherited from paganism and superficially Islamised (berated by
Ibn Taymiyya). In order to restrain the adepts and counter the criticisms of
the jurists, the majority of authors established conditions (al-Ghazali) and
rules of propriety (al-Nasafi), and distinguished between the types of concert (sama’)
in terms of the nature of the hearing: some listen according to their ego (sama’*-
al-nafs, or their nature, tab’), others according to the heart,
others through the spirit. While for the first category,
music (or sama’) is not to be permitted, as for the adepts, not all the shaykhs
were unanimous as to the advantages which could be drawn from sama’. The
contention was that sama’- is dangerous for beginners and useless for the more advanced. Some
maintained that it should be limited to the hearing of Kuranic psalmody (Ibn
‘Arabi), others did not approve of it, but none explicitly discouraged it, with
the exception of Ahmad Sirhindi .
It is remarkable that the conditions of admissibility of sama’
have had practically no effect on the musical form itself, except that
instruments with profane or dubious connotations are proscribed
(al-Ghazali). This is why certain
instruments, such as the tambourine (daff, bendir, mazhar) and the nay
were more widespread, while certain orders were content with song.
Similarly, romantic poems were adopted at a very early stage in Persia, on
condition that they were to be interpreted by the adepts in a metaphorical
sense—sometimes very subtle—relating to a spiritual object or to the person of
the Prophet. Faced with the diversity of
attitudes, sama’- has taken on extremely varied forms, especially in
combining with or associating with collective dhikr, the ritualisation
of an ecstatic technique, which probably appeared a few centuries later. At the
present day, it is most often in the context of a ceremony of dhikr that
sama’ is performed, in the form of chant sometimes accompanied by
instruments, whether in the course of one of the phases of the ritual, or in
association with the metrical shape of the dhikr. Thus the distinction
drawn by anthropologists between sama’ and dhikr., on the basis
of the participation of subjects, "set to music" in one case and
"making music" in the other, is not applicable, all the more so in
that even silent listening is generally accompanied by interior dhikr (khafi),
as among the Mawlawis, often being transformed into audible dhikr
(djahri, djali). In its primary definition, sama’ as hearing without
acoustic participation of the adepts hardly survives except among the Mawlawis,
the Bektashi-Alawis, the Indo- Pakistani Kawwalis, and in the rites of marginal
groups such as the Yazidis, the Ismailis, the maled shamans of
Balucistan (types damali, kalandari). On the other hand, in many rituals
(hadra, hizb, dhikr), it survives as the introductory part (Kadiris of
Kurdistan) or concluding part (Sufi brotherhoods of the Maghrib). In all these
cases, the hymns or the instrumental pieces constitute specific repertoires
generally distinguished from the music of the secular environment by means of
their rhythms, their structures and their texts. Faced with the diversity of
musical techniques put into practice, it is difficult to identify in purely
formal terms a notion of "music of sama’", except at the level
of the force of expression, drawn from the dhikr as a form and as a mode
of concentration. The difficulty in
identifying a global specificity is due perhaps to the paradoxes underlined by
certain shaykhs (al-Suhrawardi), according to which it is not sama- and
dance which induce ecstasy, but ecstasy which arouses the dance, or furthermore,
that sama’ is only a revealing instrument and that it only supplies that
which is brought to it by the hearer.(J. During, “Sama’” , Edited by: P. Bearman , Th.
Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill, 2007. Brill Online.)
Thus as shown in
the above two excerpts on Sama’ that Sama’ was an Iranian-Khorasanian Sufi
phenomenon. Virtually all the names
associated with it including Abu Said Abul Khayr, Hujwiri, Junayd Baghdadi (of
Iranian origin), Abu al Hassan Nuri (Sufi in Baghdad of Iranian origin), Sari
Saqati (Iranian origin), were early promulgators of Sama’. That is why the Encyclopedia of Islam
states: “Sama’ is thus initially an "oriental"
phenomenon, promulgated in particular by the Persian disciples of Nuri and of
Djunayd”
During Rumi’s own time, it was the Iranian Shams Tabrizi who
encouraged Sama’ and we have other Iranian Sufis. Also other Iranian Sufis of that time
including Najm al-Din Kubra, Ruzbihan Baqli Shirazi, Ahmad Djam and etc.
practiced Sama’. Franklin clearly also
sates: “The manuals of Sufism had thoroughly
covered the subject of sama’ by the time of Rumi, giving it a
theoretical justification. “ and virtually all these
manuals were written by Iranians Sufis.
Indeed Fakhr ad-Din ‘Araqi who also visited Konya practiced Sama’ as
well. Ghazzali a prominent Iranian
theologian and Sufi (who emphasized the importance of Shari’ia) has also
stated:
غزالی در کیمیایی
سعادت در مورد
احکام سماع می
نویسد بدانکه
در سماع سه چیز
نگاه باید
داشت :
زمان
مکان و اخوان
زمان مناسب
که هر وقت دل
مشغولی باشد و
یا وقت نماز یا
وقت طعام سماع
بی فایده بود
مکان مناسب که
چون راه گذری
باشد و یا جائی
ناخوش و یا به
خانه ظالمی
حالت سماع
نبود اخوان باید
هر که حاضر
بود اهل سماع
بود و اگر
متکبری از اهل
دنیا حاضر بود
و یا کسی که هر
زمان به تکلف
حال و رقص کند
و یا قومی از
اهل غفلت حاضر
باشند و بهر
جانبی بنگرند
و حرمت نباشد
حجت
الاسلام غزالی
در کتاب احیاء
علوم الدین در
مورد سماع بحث
مفصل کرده و
چار فصل از
کتاب خود را
بدین موضوع
اختصاص داده
اسـت که ترجمۀ
آن بجای خود می
آید. اما اینکه
چرا در این
مبحث وارد
شـده چنین می
نویسـد:
« دل آدمی گنجینۀ
راز ها و معدن
گوهر هاسـت
چنانچه آهن در
سـنگ مضمر
اسـت و آب در
خاک این راز
ها و گوهر ها
را در دل آدمی
پنهان نموده
اند این راز
ها را جز بوسـیلۀ
سـماع نمی
توان آشـکار
کرد و جز از
روزن گوش نمی
توان بخزینۀ
دل راه یافت
آهنگ لذت
بخشـای موزون
آنچه را در دل
نهفته پدید می
آرد ـ و نیک و
بد آنرا روشـن
میگرداند
سـماع محک
صادق و معیار
ناطق قلب
اسـت.»
Finally
an example from the poetry of Attar relating the concept of “bikhodi” (losing
oneself) and Sama’:
عطار:
چون شدی بیخود
ز کاس اصطناع
کرد جان تو
کلام حق سماع
از حجب چون آن
کلام آمد بدر
گشت یک یک ذره
داودی دگر
Thus
unlike what was erroneously claimed, Sama’ was practiced by the Persian poet
Rumi’s contemporaries including Shams, Fakhr al-Din Araqi, Najm al-Din Kobra,
Ruzbihan Baqli and etc. The origin of
Sama’ also dates back to at least the earliest days of Iranian Sufism and the
Encyclopedia of Islam has mentioned that virtually all the prominent names in
relation to the practical and theoretical developments of Sama’ are
Iranians. Thus the nationalistic claims
to locate Sama’ in Turkic shamanistic rituals or try to deny the Iranian-Sufic
origin of this phenomenon has no
scholarly value and is a forgery that has been coined to disclaim Rumi from his
Khorasanian-Persian Sufi heritage.
In this section, we emphasize some aspects
of Rumi’s Persian culture, in particular the spiritual saints mentioned by Rumi
and Sultan Walad.
Thus repeating for emphasis what the Turkish professor Talat
Halman has stated: “Baha ad-din (Rumi’s Father)
and his family eventually settled in Konya, ancient Iconium, in central
Anatolia. They brought with them their
traditional Persian cultural and linguistic background and found in Konya a
firmly entrenched penchant for Persian culture.
In terms of Rumi’s cultural orientation – including language, literary
heritage, mythology, philosophy, and Sufi legacy –the Iranians have indeed a strongly justifiable
claim. All of these are more than
sufficient to characterize Rumi as a prominent figure of Persian cultural
history”(Rapture and Revolution, page 266)
In one Poem in the Diwan Sultan Walad
explains the spiritual lineage of the Mowlavi and the major saints in it. After praising the ancient Prophets, then the
Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and then the four caliphs, he names Bayazid Bistami
(Persian whose grandparents were Zoroastrians) after Ali (AS), and then Junayd
Baghdadi (a Persian from Baghdad), Ma’ruf Karkhi (Another Persian), Abu Sa’id
Abu’l Khair (Another Persian), Shibli Baghdadi (born to a family originally
from Samarkand and likely of Sogdian origin.), Mansur Hallaj (another Persian),
Sanai (Persian poet), Attar (another Persian poet) and then Baha al-Din Walad (and then to Rumi and
important personalities of the order).
Let us quote that section of the
Diwan(Divan Walad, pp 522-523):
چون بایزید
اندر مزید از
شیر شیران مزید
شد در زمان
شاه علا ای
عاشقان ای
عاشقان
چونکه جنید
از جام جان
نوشید یک رطل
گران
شد در طریقت
پیشوا ای
عاشقان ای
عاشقان
کرخی از آن
نرخ نکوشد
مشتری بیگفت
و گو
تایافت دربی
بها ای عاشقان
ای عاشقان
چون بوسعید
از یک وعید از
غیر شد کلی بعید
شد عید و
سورش دایما ای
عاشقان ای
عاشقان
چون گشت
شبلی طالبش میل
خدا شد غالبش
دادش دو صد
کار و کیا ای
عاشقان ای
عاشقان
منصور چون
منصور شد جمله
ظلامش نور شد
دلدار دید
از دا را ای
عاشقان ای
عاشقان
هم شد سنائی
بر سنا چون
خود از آن خمر
بقا
بیگانه بد
گشت آشنا ای
عاشقان ای
عاشقان
عطار از آن
عود و شکر چون
برد بود شد بی
خبر
زد آتش
اندر طبلهها
ای عاشقان ای
عاشقان
سلطان بهاء
الدین ولد چون
گشت سرمست احد
داد او
بخلقان صدعطا
ای عاشقان ای
عاشقان
Thus besides the early Caliphs, all the
Sufi saints that are quoted in the above poem are Persians. Furthermore,
virtually all the Sufi saints quoted in the Mathnawi are Persian and the rest
of them are of Arabic descent (like Buhlul and Dhul Nun Misri). This shows that Khorasanian Sufi order of
Rumi was in reality a Persian-cultural order.
In this regard, two figures clearly stand out
and those are the Persian poets and Sufis Attar and Sanai.
Rumi states:
هفت شهر
عشق را عطار
گشت
ما هنوز
اندر خم یک
کوچه ایم
The seven cities of love were travelled by
Attar
But we are still in the corner of the first
lane
With regards to Sanai, the late Professor
Arberry states:
“Rumi, a far greater thinker and poet, freely acknowledges his indebtness to
Sanai, not only quoting from the Hadiqa in his own Mathnawi, but
also in a direct confession:
Attar was the spirit,
Sanai his twain
And in time thereafter,
Came we in their train”
The original Persian of that
famous couplet is:
عطار روح
بود و سنائی
دو چشم
ما هم از پی
سنائی و عطار
آمدیم
Rumi quotes Attar and
Sanai many times in his everyday sermons as shown in his works the Seven
Sermons and Fihi Ma Fihi. He praises
Sanai numerous times for example:
گفت کسی
خواجه سنایی
بمرد
مرگ چنین
خواجه نه کاریست
خرد
قالب خاکی
به زمین
بازداد
روح طبیعی
به فلک واسپرد
ماه وجودش
ز غباری برست
آب حیاتش
به درآمد ز
درد
پرتو خورشید
جدا شد ز تن
هر چه ز
خورشید جدا شد
فسرد
صافی
انگور به میخانه
رفت
چونک اجل
خوشه تن را
فشرد
شد همگی
جان مثل آفتاب
جان شده
را مرده نباید
شمرد
Besides Attar and Sanai,
Rumi was influenced by the Shahnameh and its characters are recounted in
different poems.
Siyavash:
شب
چیست نقاب روی
مقصود
کای
رحمت و آفرین
بر آن روش
هین
طبلک شب روان
فروکوب
زیرا
که سوار شد سیاووش
…
Key-Qobad:
چو
ز آفتاب زادم
به خدا که کیقبادم
نه
به شب طلوع
سازم نه ز
ماهتاب گویم
…
Key Khusraw:
همه
غایب همه حاضر
همه صیاد و
شکاری
همه
ماهند نه ماهی
همه کیخسرو و شاهی
Jamshid, Fereydun and Keyqubad:
آدم
مگس نزاید، تو
هم مگس مباش
جمشید
باش و خسرو و
سلطان و کیقباد
شدیم
جمله فریدون
چو تاج او دیدیم
شدیم
جمله منجم چو
آن ستاره رسید
And finally the heroes most mentioned by Rumi is Rustam. In two poems, he puts the bravery of Rustam and Esfandyar in the same line as that of the first Shi’i Imam Ali (AS) who was given the title Haydar (lion) due to his bravery and chivalry.
For example in this famous line:
زین
همرهان سست
عناصر دلم
گرفت
شیر
خدا و رستم
دستانم
آرزوست
Here Rumi is stating:
My heart is grieved by
these companions of feeble nature
I seek and wish to have (as companions) the lion of God
(a reference to Ali (AS) ) and Rustam Dastan
This mixture of pre-Islamic and post-Islamic Iranian symbols of bravery speaks directly to the heart of some modern “intellectuals” who are trying to polarize Iran’s heritage.
In another poem, Rumi mentions the Hero Esfandyar with that of Imam Ali(AS):
…
منگر
به هر گدایی،
که تو خاص
ازان مایی
مفروش
خویش ارزان،
که تو پس گران
بهایی
بصف
اندر آی تنها،
که سفندیار
وقتی
در
خیبر است
برکن، که علی
مرتضایی
Let go of the beggars (show offs), thou who are ours are
of special quality
Do not sell yourself short, you are very valuable
Come as a one man army, because you are the Esfandyar of
time
Throw away the gate of Khaybar from its roots, Because
thou are Morteza Ali (AS)
Here is another place Rustam is mentioned:
صیقل
هر آینهام رستم هر میمنهام
قوت
هر گرسنهام
انجم هر
انجمنم
I am the luster of mirrors, I am the Rustam of Battles
I am the power of hungry, I am the star of gatherings
Finally other heroes like Saam, Narimaan and etc. are mentioned:
وسوسه
تن گذشت غلغله
جان رسید
مور
فروشد به گور
چتر سلیمان رسید
این
فلک آتشی چند
کند سرکشی
نوح به
کشتی نشست
جوشش طوفان رسید
چند
مخنث نژاد دعوی
مردی کند
رستم
خنجر کشید سام
و نریمان رسید
جادوکانی
ز فن چند عصا و
رسن
مار
کنند از فریب
موسی و
Thus the Shahnameh provides many of the
symbols Rumi uses in his poetry. In
reality, without Shahnameh, Sanai, Attar, Khorasani Persian Sufism there would
be no Rumi.
Shahab al-Din Suhrawardi has taken a very symbolic and spiritual reading of the Shahnameh in his Alwah-i Imadi. Attar also in his Elahi Nama has taken a spiritual reading of the Shahnameh. The following poem has also been attributed to Rumi and has been retold by several different authors as a poem from Rumi (For example the Atashkadeh of Azar):
کیخسرو
و سیاوش کاوس
کیقباد
گویند
کز فرنگش
افراسیاب زاد
زمی
خوشست گر بینوشی
بیان کنم
احوال
خلق و قدرت
شادی و علم و
داد
ز
ایران جان شیاوش
عقل معاد، روی
از
بهر این نتیجه
به توران تن
نهاد
پیران
مکر پیشه که
عقل معاش بود
آمد
برسم حاجب و پیشش
بایستاد
ابرد
مرو را بر
افراسیاب نفس
بس
سعی کرد و
دختر طبعش بزن
بداد
تا
چندگاه در ختن
کام و آرزو
بیچاره
با فرهنگس
شهود ببود شاد
گرسیوز
حسد ز پی کینه
و فساد
آمد
میان آن دو
شهر نامور
فتاد
تدبیرهای
باطل و اندیشههای
زشت
کردند
تا هلاک سیاوش
ازان بزاد
زیر
سفال سفله
درخشنده
گوهرش
پنهان
نشد که داشت ز
تخم دوشه نژاد
کیخسرو
وجود ز تزویج
عقل و نفس
موجود
گشت و بال
بزرگی همی
گشاد
گیو
طلب بیامد و
شهزاده
برگرفت
از
تو تن ببرد به
ایران جان چو
باد
ز
آنجاش باز برد
به زابلستان
علم
دادش
به زال علم که
او بود اوستاد
سیمرغ
قاف قدرتش از
دست زال علم
بستد
ز لطف و چشم
جهان بینش
برگشاد
Be that it may, Simorgh and Rustam are specially mentioned by Rumi many times and deserve their own study.
During Rumi’s time, we saw that the Seljuqs
were a Persianate dynasty and Persian culture predominated. Even the verses of the Shahnameh were
inscribed into the walls of Konya.
However there were Armenians, Turks, Greeks (Rums) and other people
besides Iranians (Kurdish/ Persian/Zaza speakers) living in their domain. However when it comes to Mowlavi order
itself, we saw that Rumi’s everyday language was Persian and he preached in
Persian (all of his prose works that are recorded by his students) as did
Sultan Walad.
This is specially the case with regards to the Mowlavi order as its founders were Iranians culturally and ethnically. In the Walad-nama (see the section on Sultan Walad), after several verses in Arabic, Rumi’s son, Sultan Walad states:
فارسی
گو که جمله دریابند
گرچه زین
غافلند و
درخوابند
Translation:
Tell the tale in Persian so that all
may understand it,
Even though they lack insight and are
(spiritually) sleep
And Rumi after couple:
And he mentions this again after writing some Arabic in another Ghazal:
اخلایی
اخلایی، زبان
پارسی می گو
که نبود
شرط در حلقه،
شکر خوردن به
تنهایی
And Rumi states the same thing with regards to Persian after some Arabic verses:
مسلمانان
مسلمانان
زبان پارسی گویم
که
نبود شرط در
جمعی شکر
خوردن به تنهایی
Oh Muslims, Oh Muslims, Let me say it in Persian
Because is it not polite to eat all the sweets by myself
in a gathering and not share it
So the cultural environment of the order was also Persian and this leaves no doubt that the order started as predominantly Persian speaking order. That is why the everyday vernacular and informal language of Rumi and Shams are in Persian and Rumi’s informal sermons are in Persian which contrasts with his formal writing in the Maktubat. All of this is not surprising as the founder of the order came from the Persian environment of Khorasan and the Seljuq Sultanate of Rum was dominate by Persian culture and literature. Thus the emphasis on culture, language, mythology and Sufi orientation (Khorasanian-Persian Sufism) is the most important component that makes Rumi and all of these are sufficient to put Rumi in the realm of the Perso-Islamic civilization while not neglecting the fact that through this civilization, he brings out a universal message (the Mathnawi). As per genealogy, we note simply that Rumi’s ancestors (and his sons) were preachers and native Persian speakers. Also a study on the vast influence of Attar and Sanai (as well as Hallaj, Bayazid Bistami, Kherqani, Abul Khair, Junayd Baghdadi) on Rumi is beyond the scope of this article and we hope a separate study is undertaken by scholars on this issue.
As mentioned in the introduction, there has been a rise of ethno-nationalistic historiography through due to the political-ideology of pan-Turkism. This nationalist historiography has not just stepped upon Rumi’s heritage but has claimed a host of Iranian scientists and poets such as Avicenna, Biruni, Nizami Ganjavi, Al-Ghazzali, Suhrawardi, Khwarizmi (the mathematician) and etc.
In this article, we examined the cultural, linguistic, heritage and genealogical background of Rumi and some of his closest companions. We also examine the background of close friends of Rumi, mainly Shams Tabrizi and Hesam al-Din Chelebi. It was shown that at that time, Tabrizian people spoke an Iranian language, followed Shafi’ism and even Rumi has quoted words from this unique Iranian language (i.e. “Buri”). Today Shafi’ism is also the Madhab of the Western Iranian Sunni people such as the Kurds and the Talysh, where-as Sunni Turks of the regions are uniformly Hanafi.
Another issue was discussed was the Seljuq empire. The Seljuqs had ancestors who were Altaic however by the time of Rumi, they were completely Persianized in language and culture.
Stephen P. Blake, "Shahjahanabad: The Sovereign City in Mughal India, 1639-1739". Cambridge University Press, 1991. pg 123:
"For the Seljuks and Il-Khanids in Iran it was the rulers rather than the conquered who were "Persianized and Islamicized".
C.E. Bosworth, "Turkish Expansion towards the west" in UNESCO HISTORY OF HUMANITY, Volume IV, titled "From the Seventh to the Sixteenth Century", UNESCO Publishing / Routledge, 2000. p. 391:
"While the Arabic language retained its primacy in such spheres as law, theology and science, the culture of the Seljuk court and secular literature within the sultanate became largely Persianized; this is seen in the early adoption of Persian epic names by the Seljuk rulers (Qubād, Kay Khusraw and so on) and in the use of Persian as a literary language (Turkish must have been essentially a vehicle for everyday speech at this time). The process of Persianization accelerated in the thirteenth century with the presence in Konya of two of the most distinguished refugees fleeing before the Mongols, Bahā' al-Dīn Walad and his son Mawlānā Jalāl al-Dīn Rūmī, whose Mathnawī, composed in Konya, constitutes one of the crowning glories of classical Persian literature."
In the section “Some Distortions due to Nationalistic Reasons” we discussed was distortions and misrepresentations of primary text. A clear example was given by one author who has inserted the word “Turkish” in the quote of Aflaki below while it does not exist. That author misrepresented the quote of Aflaki :
“Mowlana had a special likeness for his son Sultan Walad and took
him to all gatherings and places of discourse and considered him his
“action”. Aflaki says about Sultan
Walad: “Meanwhile, after his father’s death Valad lived on in tranquility for
many years and he composed three books of mathnaviyyat and one volume of Turkish collected poetry (Divan)”
Where-as Aflaki does not use the highlighted red word
“Turkish” at all in that anecdote and this was added in by the nationalist
Turkish author.
Another distortion was mistranslation by Fereydun Nafidh Ozluk on the poem of Sultan Walad. Another distortion for example was Mehmet Onder who claimed that: “when addressing people and in his sermons, Rumi used Turkish”. Where-as all the sermons, lectures and letters of Rumi are in Persian except a handful which are in Arabic and not a single one of them is in Turkish. Indeed the sermons and lectures are replete with Persian poetry which also invalidates another false claim that “these sermons were originally in Turkish” as if the works of Attar and Sanai were also “originally in Turkish”!
In the section on “Shams Tabrizi and his Background” we looked closely at the culture and language of Tabriz at that time. Direct evidence from Safinayeh Tabrizi leads to the “Zaban-i Tabriz” and the “Zaban-i Tabrizi” leaves absolutely no doubt that Tabriz at that time had a Iranian speaking population and spoke a Persian dialect. Furthermore, the districts of Tabriz mentioned by Shams are also “Sorkhaab” and “Charandaab” with clear Persian names. Also some words like “Buri Buri” (Biyaa Biyaa) were recorded by Rumi from the mouth of Shams demonstrating the western Iranian dialect of Shams Tabrizi and this word exists in Fahlaviyat of Baba Taher, in the Iranic Laki, Harzandi and Karigani (the last two are remnants of a more widespread Iranian language in Azerbaijan at one time) tongues.
We mentioned the importance of the Safinayeh Tabriz for understanding the intellectual and Sufic culture of Tabriz and hence Shams Tabrizi himself. The book Safinayeh Tabriz is thus indispensable for future Rumi and Shams Tabrizi studies. Interestingly enough, the statements and sentences in the Persian dialect of Tabriz (zaban-i Tabrizi) from this book have mystical Sufi orientations. Like this one from Baba Faraj Tabrizi:
انانک
قدهی فرجشون
فعالم آندره
اووارادا
چاشمش نه پیف
قدم کینستا نه
پیف حدوث
Standard Persian (translated by the author of Safina himself):
چندانک
فرج را در
عالم آوردهاند
چشم او نه بر
قدم افتاده
است نه بر
حدوث
And here:
Sadeqi, Ali Ashraf. “Chand She’r beh Zaban-e Karaji, Tabrizi wa Ghayreh”(Some poems in the language of Karaji and Tabrizi and others), Majalla-ye Zabanshenasi, 9, 1379./2000, pp.14-17.
http://www.archive.org/details/LocalPoemsInIranicDialectsOfTabrizHamadanMazandaranQazvinInThe
From the viewpoint of cultural contribution, we have lecture notes taken by the students of Shams in the form of Maqaalaat and this work is in informal everyday Persian. The lectures are in Persian as this was again the everyday language of Shams Tabriz. Furthermore, the conversational style of Shams itself has been considered a masterpiece by Persian scholars and thus it makes an important contribution to the Persian literary heritage.
As Shams notes himself:
زبان
پارسی را چه
شده است؟ بدین
لطیفی و خوبی،
که آن معانی و
لطافت که در
زبان پارسی
آمده است و در
تازی نیامده
است.
In the Section on Baha al-Din Walad (Rumi’s father), we showed that Baha al-Din walad was a native Persian speaker. Indeed traces of Eastern Iranian language are found in the Ma’arif of Baha al-Din Walad. We also mentioned the Zaban-i Balkhi, which was the language of the large area of Balkh (which is now in modern Afghanistan and Tajikistan). As noted by the Dekhoda dictionary:
مردم بلخ
تا زمان مؤلف
ذخیره ٔ
خوارزمشاهی (نیمه
ٔ اول قرن ششم
هجری ) به فارسی تکلم می
کرده اند.
رجوع به ریش
بلخی و پشه گزیدگی
در ذخیره ٔ
خوارزمشاهی
شود.
The Dakhireyeh Khwarizmshahi provides direct evidence of the Balkhi language. From the point of native language, we noted the vernacular form “maami” used by Baha al-Din Walad to address his mother. Obviously, if Baha al-Din Walad was a non-native Persian speaker, he would not use such colloquial terms as seen in the Ma’arif.
We
note some very interesting colloquial Persian terms that are rarely used today
and possibly have Soghdian origin. The most outstanding of these (in our
opinion) from the Ma’ari are bolded below:
پرتوز
– آس کرده – آیان –
انگله – باشش – بلگ
(برگ) – پاشنه
کوفته – پتیله
–ترنجیده –
تسترغیده
(درهم فشرده)-
تنهاگانه-تواره
(دیوار-فاصله
و واسطه)- چراغ
وره (ظرفی که
چراغ در آن
نهند و برند) – خاوند
/خاونده
(خداوند) – خدوک
– در چغزیده (غم
در دل گرفته) – دژماندن
(خشمگین و
آشفته) – دیوک
زده (چیزی که
آفت دیوان
بدان رسد) – روژیدن
(ظاهر شدن) – سراغج
(مجمعه گیسو
پوش زنان) – سکلیدن
(منقطع کردن) – سیبغوله
(سیب ناخام و
نارسیده) –غیژیدن
(خزیدن) – غریژک
(لای و لجن) –
کژپایک
(خرچنگ) – فرخج
(نامناسب) –
ناوچه (کشتی
کوچک) – خنور
(کاسه و ظرف)
Thus from an ethnic point of
view, Baha al-Din Walad was a native Persian speaker.
What do we know about Baha
al-Din and Rumi’s genealogy? The claimed
maternal royal descent (by later followers ) from the Khawrizmshahs for Rumi or
Baha al-Din Walad is dismissed by scholars and as seen as a later fabrication
in order to tie the family to royalty.
Indeed Baha al-Din Walad’s mother is seen as a woman of non-royal
background in his Ma’arif. The
claim of paternal descent from Abu Bakr is also not in his writing or that of
Rumi’s. Even if such a claim was true
(since many sources have stated it after Rumi), we should note that Baha
al-Din’s native language was Persian, his works are in Persian and he was
culturally Persian. However, as
mentioned, modern scholars have dismissed the lineage from Abu Bakr. The claim might have been made according to
one source because Bahal al-Din’s mother was related to a certain Abu Bakr
Sarkhasi (a Hanafi scholar from Sarkhas).
Then there was the paternal claim descent from the Khatibun families of
Isfahan put forward by Fritz . The only
firm knowledge we have of Baha al-Din’s genealogy is that he is a descendant of
a certain Ahmad Khatibi who preached again in Persian speaking towns and lived
in a Persian cultural environment. It
seems that being a Islamic preacher ran through many generations of Rumi’s
family, because Sultan Walad and Rumi themselves gave sermons and lectures to
their followers (we shall say more about these later in the article). From the viewpoint of culture, the
Ma’arif is again an important contribution to Persian literature and its style
of Persian is very pleasant. It also
shows the solid basis of Khorasanian Sufism in the foundation of Masnavi.
In the Section on Rumi, we noted that Rumi has five important works. These are the Mathnawi, Diwan, Fihi Ma Fih, Majalis-i Sabe’ and the Maktubat. Unlike what Turkish nationalist scholars like Mehmet Onder and Fereydun Nafidh Ozluk claimed, Rumi’s everyday language was Persian. The best proof is that the lectures in Fihi Ma Fih and the sermons in Majalis Sabe’ were recorded by his students and these works are in highly informal and vernacular Persian which constrasts with the literarlly and formal style of the Maktubat (which were official letters). The fact that Rumi gave lectures in Persian clearly shows that the Mawlawiya order started as a Persian phenomenon. Either way, the Mathnawi, Diwan-i Shams , the Seven Sermons and Fihi Ma Fih are major contributions to Persian literature with the Mathnawi being Rumi’s most important work.
We also responded to some invalid claims in that section on Rumi. For example Fereydun Nafidh Ozluk has tried to claim (without any proof but mere conjecture) the seven sermons were originally in Turkish! yet we showed that the seven sermon is in a sweet style of Persian and is replete with the poetry of Sanai, Attar and other Persian poets intertwined with the sermons. This invalidates the claim of Fereydun Nafidh Ozluk since these Persian poets also wrote in Persian. Overall the lectures of Rumi noted down by his students (in private settings as well as in public settings like the Friday prayers) leaves no doubt that the everyday spoken language of Rumi was Persian and it was is native language.
We also showed another invalid argument claiming that Rumi uses Turkish word. However the number of Turkish words are very small and these Turkish words much like Arabic and Greek words had entered the Persian language. Another invalid argument was that some of these Turkish words are not found today in the Anatolian Turkish dialect, however as noted, at that time in the 13th century, the Turkish dialects of the region were much varied and many places had not yet lost their Central Asian features. The Seljuqs themselves and many tribesmen had only recently arrived in Anatolia and thus this invalid argument has no basis. There is absolutely not a single verse in the Oghuz dialect from the region of Balkh and the Zaban-i Balkhi as noted was Persians. So one cannot look at 13th century were more archaic forms of Persian was used (with archaic vocabulary from other languages it had borrowed) and then try to juxtaposition it into the 20th century.
Furthermore, another invalid argument has risen because of couple of dozen or so of Turkish couplets (mainly in mixed verses) among the more than 350000 couplets of Persian poetry in the Divan. The proponents of Turkish identity want to claim this as a proof that Rumi was Turkish. However as noted, Rumi also has about a dozen Greek couplets and much more Arabic couplets. Rumi’s mother tongue was Persian as scholars state but he learned some Greek and Turkish in Anatolia. Any migrant to a new place who grows up in that place will pick up the prevalent local languages. So just like Rumi is not a Greek because of the number of miniscule verses in Greek, he is not Turkish because of the number of miniscule verses in Turkish. Together the Greek and Turkish verses make up less than one third of a percent of the Divan of Shams. Also as noted in the section of Sultan Walad, the family was native Persian speaking and Sultan Walad complains four times about his incomplete knowledge of Greek and Turkish. Also as noted many Iranians have also written in Ottoman Turkish, but Rumi basically has left nothing in Greek or Turkish although these languages were more widespread than Persian. His everyday sermons and lecture notes recorded by his students was Persian and it is clear from this that he lived in a Persian environment in the sense that his daily interaction with his followers was also in this language and this was his native language.
We provide an overview of the usage of the term “Turk” in three majors: Diwan Shams Tabrizi (where misinterpretations have taken place), the Mathnawi and finally the Manaqib al-‘Arifin. It was noted that the Mathnawi is a didactic poetical work full of wisdom and advices where-as the Diwan-i Shams is a mystical book of longing and passion. In the Mathnawi, the stories about Turks usually show a person that is cruel and/or lacks intelligence. The story of the not too smart Turkish amir who gets easily cheated by a tricky tailor, the drunk Turk who disliked music played by mystical singers, the story of the Turk in Balaghasun who lost one of his two bows, or the story of the Oghuz tribesmens who come to village and plunder, and etc.
However in the Divan-i Shams, the word Turk, Hindu, Rum and Habash are used in a metaphoric and symbolic sense. The same should be said of the Shahnameh characters. Rumi at various times has called himself a Hindu, Turk, Rumi, Habash, Tajik and etc., while at other times he has disclaimed these.
Note these examples:
تو ماه ِ ترکی و من اگر ترک نيستم،
دانم
من اين قَدَر
که به ترکي
است، آب سُو
“You are a Turkish moon, and I, although I am not a Turk,
know that much,
that much, that in Turkish the word for water is
su”(Schimmel, Triumphal Sun, 196)
“Everyone in whose
heart is the love for Tabriz
Becomes – even though he be a Hindu – a rose-cheeked
inhabitant of Taraz (i.e. a Turk)”
(Schimmel,
Triumphal Sun, 196)
And
گه ترکم و
گه هندو گه
رومی و گه زنگی
از نقش تو
است ای جان
اقرارم و
انکارم
“I am sometimes Turk and sometimes Hindu, sometimes Rumi and
sometimes Negro”
O soul, from your image in my approval and my denial”
(Schimmel, Triumphal Sun, 196)
Overall, we note all these symbolic allusions and imagery are part of Persian poetry and have been used by many Persian poets including Hafez, Sa’adi, Sanai, Attar, Khaqani and Nizami Ganjavi, etc. in their mystical works. Nezami Ganjavi, Attar, Rumi, Hafez, Khaqani, Sanai and many other Persian poets used them extensively. Unfortunately due to lack of knowledge of Persian language and literature, some people have tried to read these in ethnic-literal sense through the prism of modern nationalism and thus when faced with the literally contradictory readings, have tried to play around with Rumi’s Persian heritage. If taken literally, then Rumi was a Roman, Black, Hindu, Turk, Tajik or anything as he has made comparisons to these to himself. Virtually in all these verses, Hindu and Turk, or Rumi and Black have come together showing the clear symbolism and contrast. We have shown how Turk, Hindu, Zangi/Habash, Rum is used for description and symbols of slavery, rulership, slave (Hindu), ruler (Turk),Soldier/Warrior (Turk), cruelty, moon faced, beauty, ugliness, trees, birds, flowers, stars, climes, complexions, colors (yellow, white, black), animals (the eye, face), planets, day (Rum, Turk) and night (Hindu, Habash/Zang), languages, tears, hair, face, various moods and feelings without taking any ethnic meaning. An interesting example was given by Khwajah Abdullah Ansari who compares “love” and “turk” due to both being plunderers (note Rumi also mentions this in an anecdote in Aflaki).
عشق
آمد و دل كرد
غارت
اي
دل تو بجان بر
اين بشارت
تركي
عجب است عشق
داني
كز
ترك عجيب نيست
غارت
In the section on “Which Turks are described in Persian
poetry?” we noted that the Turks that are mentioned are the narrow-eyed and
round-faced ideal type of beauty which resemble the Turkic faces of Kazakhs,
Kyrghiz, Turkomens, Uighyurs, Yakuts and other Turkic people. This is an important note, since it was the
wide difference of look from the Mediterranean Caucasoid looks of Iranians that
made these the ideal type of beauty in Persian poetry.
Finally, in the Section of Rum, we looked at the work of Aflaki. As noted by noted by Professor Speros Vyronis:
“Eflaki and his social world were attuned to linguistic differences since Persians, Turks, Arabs, Greeks, Armenians, Jews, and Mongols lived juxtaposed in many Anatolian cities. Baha al-Din Walad, Rumi, Sultan Walad, and Amir Arif were all Persian speakers by birth and Arabophone by education and training. For this circle, at least, Persian was both the spoken and written language.”
Also noted by Speros Vyronis:
The mere fact
that Eflaki differentiates ethnically by employing the epithet "Turk"
indicates that to him religious lines were
not the only marks of sociocultural distinction. Ethnic demarcations were also important to him, and this further implies
that Eflaki was writing in a social, cultural, and literary milieu where
ethnic differences were important and had some resonance.
We brought some of these anecdotes from Aflaki which clearly shows Rumi and his followers distinguished themselves from Turks.
Obviously,Rumi has everywhere distinguished himself from Turks in these:
“Oh ignorant Turk! Give up (tark) this idea and
undertaking. Take back your Turks
(torkan) to your lady (tarkan) as quickly as possible. Otherwise, you will not escape with your
life.”
“Majd al-Din, why did you let out a
shout and release your quarry from your gullet?
A Turk who is a recent disciple is able to bear the burden, but you
divulge the matter. Many things like
this occur to abdals to God.”
“Likewise, it is a well-known story
that one day Shaykh Salah al-Din happened to hire Turkish laborers to do
building work in his garden. Mowlana
said: ‘Effendi’— that is to say lord—‘Salah al-Din, when it is time for
building, one must engage Greek laborers and when it is time for destroying
something, Turkish hirelings. Indeed,
the building of the world is assigned to the Greeks, whereas the world’s
destruction is reserved for the Turks.
When God—He is sublime and exalted—ordered the creation of the
world of sovereignty (‘alam-e molk’), first He created unaware-infidels, and He
conferred on them long life and great strength so they would strive like hired
laborers in building the terrestrial world.
And they built up many cities and fortresses on mountain peaks and
places on top of a hill such that after generations had passed these
constructions were a model for those who came later. Then divine predestination saw to it that
little by little these constructions would become completely destroyed and
desolate, and be eradicated. God created
the group of Turks so that they would destroy every building they saw,
mercilessly and ruthlessly, and cause it to be demolished. And they are still doing so, and day by day
until the Resurrection they will continue to destroy in this manner. In the end, the destruction of the city of
Konya will also be at the hands of wicked Turks devoid of mercy.’ And this being the case, it turned out just
as Mowlana said. (pg 503)”
In the work of Aflaki it is clear that the Turks are differentiated from Rumi and his inner circles. Even if all these anecdotes were not true, the fact is that Rumi is constantly differentiated from Turks and they are seen as foreigners relative to Rumi. At the same time, it should be noted that Rumi had both Greek and Turkish followers. It is very interesting though that ethnic identifies are used more than religious identifiers in the work of Aflaki and it shows that a perception of ethnic identity was also present. This identity was in both a cultural sense and native language sense.
Overall, from the Section of Rumi, we showed that from the perspective of modern historiography what is the most important is the cultural contribution of Rumi. As noted several times, even Turkish scholars note that:“Baha ad-din (Rumi’s Father) and his family eventually settled in Konya, ancient Iconium, in central Anatolia. They brought with them their traditional Persian cultural and linguistic background and found in Konya a firmly entrenched penchant for Persian culture. In terms of Rumi’s cultural orientation – including language, literary heritage, mythology, philosophy, and Sufi legacy –the Iranians have indeed a strongly justifiable claim. All of these are more than sufficient to characterize Rumi as a prominent figure of Persian cultural history”.
We also overview Rumi ‘s father (Baha al-Din Walad) and Sultan Walad’s (Rumi’s son) literally output. The study shows that Rumi’s everyday language (not just poetic language) was Persian and thus his native language was Persian. His cultural heritage was Persian. His genealogy is also discussed and based on the work of his father, we also show that his father’s native language was Persian and hence Rumi’s genealogy is also Persian.
In the Section on Sultan,
Rumi’s son who was born in Anatolia, we showed once again decisive proof of the
family Iranian culture and background.
The everyday language of Sultan Walad as demonstrated by his sermons was
Persian. Furthermore, despite the fact
that he lived in Anatolia where Greek and Turkish were important languages, he
himself claims at least four times that his knowledge of Greek and Turkish are
very rudimentary. Of course Sultan
Walad spent his whole time in Anatolia, but usually a person is much more
versatile in their everyday language and mother-tongue rather than other
languages. All the prose work of Sultan
Walad are in Persian and 99%+ of his poetic work is also n Persian. His lectures were also in Persian.
For example in the Ibtedanama, Sultan Walad
states:
بگذر
از گفت ترکی و
رومی
که
از این اصطلاح
محرومی
گوی
از پارسی و از
تازی
که
در این هر
دوخوش همیتازی
Translation:
Abandon the speech of Turkish
and Greek
Since you are deprived of these
expressions
Instead speak Persian and
Arabic
Because you are well versed in
these two
He states also that he does not preach in Arabic
(the more significant language for religious preaching) and uses Persian, so
that everyone may understand.
فارسی
گو که جمله دریابند
گرچه
زین غافلند و
درخوابند
By everyone, he of course means the followers
of the order and with this, we can ascertain that the majority of the followers
of Rumi at that time were Persians and Persian speaking. Also we brought examples were Sultan Walad
has some of the harshest comments for Turks and specially the Qaramani Turks
who tried to make Turkish the official language. We can already see some tension between the
two linguistic groups at that time, although the Islamic religion survived as a
great binder.
Sultan Walad calls the Turks as “world
burners” and asks the Persianized Seljuq Sultan Masud to not even let one of
the Turks alive.
ظلم و ستم
نابود شد، عدل
و کرم موجود
شد
هم عاقبت
محمود شد، چون
شاه ما مسعود
شد
...
ترکان عالم
سوز را، از
غار و کوه و بیشه
ها
آورده در
طاعت خدا، چون
شاه ما مسعود
شد
…
به
دولت شاه شاهانی
به صولت شیر شیرانی
همه
ترکان ز بیم
جان شده در
غار و کُه
پنهان
گذشت
از حداین
زحمت مکن شاها
توشان رحمت
حیات
خلق اگر خواهی
بکم آن جمله
را قربان
..
ولد
کردست نفرین
ها برون از
چرخ و پروین-ها
که
یارب زین سگان
بد ببر هم جان
و هم ایمان
At the same time, he had Greek and Turkish
followers, but these were to adopt Persian cultural traditions. So Sultan Walad like his father was a
universal figure, but the above mentioned points clearly demonstrates his
Persian background and culture. He
wanted to spread Rumi’s universal message to the Greek and Turkish followers of
the order and thus despite his rudimentary knowledge of this language, there
are a miniscule number of Greek and Turkish verses in his work (possibly with
the help of his students).
In the Section of the origin of Sama’, we responded to a
Turkish nationalist argument claiming that Sama’ had its origin in the nomadic
(and by the way mongloid) Turkic peoples of Siberia and Central Asia. Indeed as shown, Sama’ was an early
Khorasanian and Baghdadi Persian Sufi phenomenon and has been mentioned very
positively by many important figures
like Sanai, Attar, Shaykh Abu Sai’d, Fakhr al-Din ‘Araqi, Suhrawardi, and
theologians like Ghazali. Thus unlike what was
erroneously claimed, Sama’ was practiced by the Persian poet Rumi’s
contemporaries including Shams, Fakhr al-Din Araqi, Najm al-Din Kobra, Ruzbihan
Baqli and etc. The Encyclopedia of
Islam mentions its origin: “Sama’ is thus initially an "oriental" phenomenon, promulgated
in particular by the Persian disciples of Nuri and of Djunayd. By the same
token, all of the early authors dealing with sama’ were Persians, with
the exception of Abu Talib Muhammad al-Makki (d. 386/996 [q.v.]). Subsequently,
sama’- spread to all areas, but found most favour in Persian, Turkish
and Indian Islam.”
Thus the nationalistic claims to locate Sama’ in Turkic shamanistic rituals or try to deny the Iranian-Sufic origin of this phenomenon has no scholarly value and is a forgery that has been coined to disclaim Rumi from his Khorasanian-Persian Sufi heritage.
In the end, we want to point out cultural contribution and cultural roots.
In one Poem in the Diwan
Sultan Walad explains the spiritual lineage of the Mowlavi order and the major saints
of this order. After praising the
ancient Prophets, then the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and then the four caliphs,
he names Bayazid Bistami (a Persian whose grandparents were Zoroastrians) after
Ali (AS), and then Junayd Baghdadi (a Persian from Baghdad), Ma’ruf Karkhi
(Another Persian), Abu Sa’id Abu’l Khair (Another Persian), Shibli Baghdadi
(born to a family originally from Samarkand and likely of Sogdian origin.),
Mansur Hallaj (another Persian), Sanai (Persian poet), Attar (another Persian
poet) and then Baha al-Din Walad (and then to Rumi and important personalities
of the order during his time).
In this regard, two figures
clearly stand out and those are the Persian poets and Sufis Attar and Sanai.
Rumi states:
هفت شهر
عشق را عطار
گشت
ما هنوز اندر
خم یک کوچه ایم
The seven cities of love were travelled by
Attar
But we are still in the corner of the first
lane
Besides Attar and Sanai,
Rumi was influenced by the Shahnameh and its characters are recounted in
different poems. The hero most mentioned by Rumi
is Rustam. In two poems, he puts the
bravery of Rustam and Esfandyar in the same line as that of the first Shi’i
Imam Ali (AS) who was given the title Haydar (lion) due to his bravery and
chivalry.
For example in this famous line:
زین
همرهان سست عناصر
دلم گرفت
شیر
خدا و رستم
دستانم
آرزوست
Here Rumi is stating:
My heart is grieved by
these companions of feeble nature
I seek and wish to have (as companions) the lion of God
(a reference to Ali (AS) ) and Rustam Dastan
This mixture of pre-Islamic and post-Islamic Iranian symbols of bravery speaks directly to the heart of some modern “intellectuals” who are trying to polarize Iran’s heritage by setting these two epochs against each other.
Thus the teaching of Rumi
were firmly grounded in the Persian Sufism which traces back to Junayd and
Ma’ruf Karkhi, Bayazid Bistami and through them to the Prophet of Islam. The influence from Iranian traditions like
Shahnameh are seen as well as texts that had been absorbed into Iranian
civilization (including the Kalila o Demna which was versified by Rudaki and
possibly Rumi had position of that copy).
Finally, we like to emphasize what we have left today. As Rumi said:
ای
برادر تو همه
اندیشهای
مابقی
خود استخوان و
ریشهای
Oh Brother! You are essentially
nothing but thoughts (Andisheh)
All of the rest of you is bone and Sinew
So it is thoughts through the medium of the Persian language that we have left, and indeed the bones and skins of these people are long gone and departed. What do we have elft?
The outstanding contribution to Persian culture and literature by Baha al-Din Walad (the Ma’arif), Shams al-Din Tabrizi (the Maqaalaat which was recorded by students of Shams while Shams was giving his lectures), Rumi (Masnavi, Diwan, Fihi ma Fih, Maktubat and the Seven Sermons) and Sultan Walad(Diwan, Rabab Nama, Ebetedaa Nama, Entehaa Nama, Ma’arif Waladi) firmly place these great mystics as part of the Perso-Islamic Sufi heritage. They build upon the previous generations of Persian mystics including Attar, Sanai, Hallaj, Suhrawardi, Kherqani, Abu Sa’id Abul Khayr, Aba Yazid Bistami and etc and contributed to the Persian language and culture. These excellent works of inner wisdom are accessible to those who know the Persian language and any translation is at most an interpretation filtered through the spritirual capacity window of the translator. So these are enormous monuments of Persian civilization.
These are sufficient to show these men came from the Iranian civilization and at the same time, brought a universal message that resonates with human souls from the four corners, seven lands and all generations. Their message is universal because anything that truly has the imprint of the divine will be everlasting. Anything that does not have this imprint will fade away through the passage of time. Thus this article does not attempt to take away anything from the universality of these figures. Rumi was a man of God foremost and above all else. An American with spiritual intuition will speak and understand Rumi thana person of a Muslim background with no such intuition (“Zaban-i bi Zabani”).
He belongs to any Iranian who understands his message as much any other people who can understand his message. In order to demonstrate our commitment to the universal message of Rumi, we have appended a scholarly on the Greek verses of Rumi and Sultan Walad.
They why write such a lengthy article some might ask? I believe it was important to elucidate the Persian culture, native language and Khorasani Sufism (which can be interpreted as a Khorasani and Iraqi Persian reading of the Qur’an and Islam) that gave rise to these universal figures and make sure for the sake of the truth that these are not distorted due to modern nationalistic reasons. These figures do not fall out of thin air and there was an underyling Persiani Sufi civilization that produced Attar, Sanai, Rumi, Shams, Abdullah Ansari, Kherqani, Bayazid, Junayd, Hallaj in such a rapid manner. To downplay this civilization and culture is a distortion of history. To some extent, those who can respond to distortions of history should do so. The amount of distortion on Rumi’s heritage was piling up (due to certain governments) and it was important that for someone that is capable to provide a response to these distortions. If anyone else is more capable, then they should proceed as well.
Another reason was that the article provided mention of some neglected materials in history. It is important to know these underyling basis (for example what gave rise to a Sanai, Attar , Rumi and if it is possible to have such a figures in the modern era? And if they do exist do they assume a much different form?). Thus this article was a response to those who try to reject the underlying basis for nationalistic reasons and deprive important figures of the Persian cultural heritage from the civilization they were attached to at the time. It is important for the modern Iranian (in the wider sense meaning Persian speakers and Iranian peoples) who possess the Persian language and hence are the direct inheritors of these important works to understand these works better.
· Abu Rahyan Biruni, Athar al-Baqqiya 'an al-Qurun al-Xaliyyah(Vestiges of the past : the chronology of ancient nations), Tehran, Miras-e-Maktub, 2001.
· Abdul Ali Karang. “Tati, Harzani, two dialects from the ancient language of Azerbaijan”, Tabriz, 1333. 1952.
·
Abu Tahir Tartusi,
Darab-namah-yi Ṭarsusi :
rivayat-i Abu Ṭahir Muḥammad ibn ʻAlī ibn Mūsá al-Ṭarsusi
/ bi-kushish-i Zabih Allah Ṣafa.,2
v, Tehran : Bungah-i Tarjumah va Nashr-i Kitab, 1344-46 [1965-68]
· Ahmad ibn Abi Yaqubi, Tarikh-i Yaqubi tarjamah-i Muhammad Ibrahim Ayati, Intisharat Bungah-i Tarjomah o Nashr-i Kitab, 1969.
· Ahmad Asharf and Ali Banu Azizi, Fars-nameyeh Nasseri in Encyclopedia Iranica
· Ahmad Taffazolli, Fahlaviyat in Encyclopedia Iranica.
· Al -Mas’udi, Kitab al-Tanbih wa-l-Ishraf, De Goeje, M.J. (ed.), Leiden, Brill, 1894. Original Arabic and Persian translations are also readily available on the internet. For example: www.alwaraq.net
· Al-Moqaddasi, Shams ad-Din Abu Abdallah Muhammad ibn Ahmad, Ahsan al-Taqasi fi Ma’rifa al-Aqalim, Translated by Ali Naqi Vaziri, Volume One, First Edition, Mu’alifan and Mutarjiman Publishers, Iran, 1981, pg 377
· Al-Muqaddasi, ‘The Best Divisions for Knowledge of the Regions’, a translation of his Ahsan al-Taqasim fi Ma’rifat al-Aqalim by B.A. Collins, Centre for Muslim Contribution to Civilization, Garnet Publishing Limited,1994.
· Ali Akbar Dehkhoda, Loghat Nama, http://www.loghatnaameh.com/
· Ali Ashraf Sadeqi. “Chand She’r beh Zaban-e Karaji, Tabrizi wa Ghayreh”(Some poems in the language of Karaji and Tabrizi and others), Majalla-ye Zabanshenasi, 9, 1379./2000, pp.14-17.
http://www.archive.org/details/LocalPoemsInIranicDialectsOfTabrizHamadanMazandaranQazvinInThe
· Ali Ashraf Sadeqi, Ash’ar-e mahalli-e Jame’al-Alhaann,”Majalla-ye zaban-shenasi 9, 1371 (Hejri Solar), pp. 54-64.
http://www.archive.org/details/LocalPoemsInIranicDialectsOfTabrizHamadanMazandaranQazvinInThe
·
Ali Doostzadeh, “Politicization of the background of Nizami Ganjavi:
Attempted de-Iranization of a historical Iranian figure by the USSR", June
2008 (Updated 2009).
http://sites.google.com/site/rakhshesh/articles-related-to-iranian-history or here:
http://www.archive.org/details/PoliticizationOfTheBackgroundOfNizamiGanjaviAttemptedDe-iranizationOf accessed October 2009.
· Annemarie Schimmel. “The Triumphal Sun. A Study of the Works of Jalaloddin Rumi”. Albany: SUNY Press, 1993.
·
Annemarie Schimmel, I Am Wind, You Are Fire, Shambhala
Publications, 1992.
·
Annemarie Schimmel. “Turk and Hindu; a literary symbol”. Acta Iranica, 1, III, 1974, pp.243-248
·
Annemarie Schimmel. “A Two-Colored Brocade: The Imagery of
Persian Poetry”, the imagery of Persian poetry. Chapel Hill: University of
North Carolina Press. (pg 137-144).
·
Annemarie Schimmel. “The
Empire of the Great Mughals: History, Art and Culture; translated by Corinne
Atwood ; edited by Burzine K. Waghmar; with a foreword by Francis Robinson.
London: Reaktion Books, 2004.
·
Annemarie Schimmel, “Turk
and Hindu: A Poetical Image and Its Application to Historical Fact” in
Speros Vryonis, Jr., ed., Islam and Cultural Change in the Middle Ages (Undena
Publications, 1975
· Arthur. J. Arberry, "Sufism: an account of the mystics of Islam",Publisher Courier Dover Publications, 2001 (reprint)
· B.A. Livinsky, "The Hephthalites" in History of Civilizations of Central Asia - Vol. 3. South Asia Books; 1 edition (March 1999)
· Badi’ al-Zaman Foruzanfar, Resale-ye tahqiq dar ahval va zendegi-yi Mowlana Jalal al-Din Mohammad mashhur be Mowlavi, revised 2nd edition (Tehran: Zavvar, 1954).
· Baha al-Din Valad, Ma’aref: majmue-ye mavaez va sokhanan-e Soltan al-olama Baha al-Din Mohammad b. Hosayn Khatibi-ye Balkhi. ed. Badi al-Zaman Foruzanfar, 2 vols. (Tehran: Edare-ye Koll-e Enteba’at-e Vezarat-e Farhang, 1955 and 1959). A 2nd edition was published in Tehran in 1973, but reference has been made to the two volume first edition.
· Bosworth, C.E.; Hillenbrand, R.; Rogers, J.M.; Blois, F.C. de; Bosworth, C.E.; Darley-Doran, R.E., Saldjukids, Encyclopaedia of Islam. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill, 2007. Brill Online.
· Chris Brown, Terry Nardin, Nicholas J. Rengger, International Relations in Political Thought: Texts from the Ancient Greeks to the First World War, Published by Cambridge University Press, 2002.
· C.E. Bosworth, "Turkish Expansion towards the west” in UNESCO HISTORY OF HUMANITY, Volume IV, titled "From the Seventh to the Sixteenth Century", UNESCO Publishing / Routledge, 2000.
· C.E. Bosworth, "The Appearance of the Arabs in Central Asia under the Umayyads and the establishment of Islam", in History of Civilizations of Central Asia, Vol. IV: The Age of Achievement: AD 750 to the End of the Fifteenth Century, Part One: The Historical, Social and Economic Setting, edited by M. S. Asimov and C. E. Bosworth. Multiple History Series. Paris: Motilal Banarsidass Publ, 1999.
· Clifford Edmond Bosworth, “Ibn Balkhi” in Encyclopedia Iranica
· Clifford Edmond Bosworth, "Barbarian Incursions: The Coming of the Turks into the Islamic World." in Islamic Civilization, Edited by D. S. Richards. Oxford, 1973.
· C.E. Bosworth, Central Asia: The Islamic period up to the Mongols in Encyclopedia Iranica
· Daniel Coit Gilman, Harry Thurston Peck, Frank Moore Colby, "The New international encyclopædia, Volume 2",Dodd, Mead and Company, 1902
· D.N. Mackenzie, The Chorasmian Language, Encyclopedia Iranica.
· Ehsan Yarshater, Iran, Encyclopedia Iranica.
· Ehsan Yarshater, Azeri: Iranian language of Azerbaijan in Encyclopedia Iranica
· Elias John Wilkinson Gibb, History of Ottoman Poetry, Volume 1, London, 1900.
· Federal Research Div Staff, Turkey: A Country Study, Kessinger Publishers, 2004.
· Firuz Mansuri, “Mot’aleaati Darbaareyeh Tarkh, Zaban o Farhang Azarbaijan”, Nashr Hezar, Tehran, 1387 (Solar Hejri Calendar), volume 1.
· Franklin D. Lewis, Rumi: Past and Present, East and West – The Life, Teaching and Poetry of Jalal al-Din Rumi, One World Publication Limited, 2008. 2nd edition.
·
Fritz Meier, Baha al-Din Walad, translated from
German to Persian by Maryam Musharraf al-Mulk, Intishaaraat Markaz Nashr-i
Daneshgahi, 1382 (Solar Hejri)
· F. Sumer, “Karaman-Oghullari”, Encyclopaedia of Islam. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill, 2009. Brill Online.
· Gerhard Endress, An Introduction to Islam, translated by Carole Hillenbrand, Columbia University Press, 1998.
· Gholam Reza Ensafpur, “Tarikh o Tabar Zaban-i Azarbaijan”(The history and roots of the language of Azarbaijan), Fekr-I Rooz Publishers, 1998 (1377).
·
G. Lohrasp,” Some remarks on Farabi's background: Iranic (Soghdian/Persian) or
(Altaic)?” http://www.archive.org/download/SomeRemarksOnFarabisBackgroundIranicsoghdianpersianOraltaic/Farabiremarksonbackground.pdf
http://www.archive.org/details/SomeRemarksOnFarabisBackgroundIranicsoghdianpersianOraltaic (2009)
· Gilbert Lazard, “The Rise of the New Persian Language” in Frye, R. N., The Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 4, pp. 595–632, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (1975)
· Gudrun, Schubert, "Sulṭān Walad , Bahāʾ al-Dīn Muḥammad-i Walad." Encyclopaedia of Islam. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill, 2009.
· H. Algar, “BAHĀʾ-AL-DĪN MOḤAMMAD WALAD “ , Encyclopedia Iranica.
· H. Ritter, H.;A. Bausani, "ḎJ̲alāl al- Dīn Rūmī b. Bahāʾ al-Dīn Sulṭān al-ʿulamāʾ Walad b. Ḥusayn b. Aḥmad Ḵh̲aṭībī ." Encyclopaedia of Islam. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill, 2009. Brill Online.
· Hamdallah Mostowafi. Nozhat al-Qolub. Edit by Muhammad Dabir Sayyaqi. Tahuri Publishing, 1957.
· Hossein Karbalai Tabrizi. “Rawdat al-Jinan va Jannat al-Janan”, Bungah-I Tarjumah o Nashr-i Kitab, 1344-49 (1965-1970), 2 volumes.
· Hossein Mohammadzadeh Sadiq,”Torki-Saraayaan Maktab Shams o Mowlavi”, Nedaayeh Shams, 1386 (Solar Calendar) (note book was highlighted due to forged quotes).
· Ibn Khaldun, The Muqaddima, Tehran (reprinted by Sherkat Intishaaraat ‘Elmi o Farhangi), Tehran, 1382 (Solar Hejri).
·
Ibn al-Athir (d. 1233), “Al-Kamil
fi al-ta’rikh”(Beirut: n.p., 1965)
· Ibn Batuttah, Travels, translated by Dr. Ali Muvahid, Tehran, Bongaah Publishers, 1969
· Ibn Nadeem, “Fihrist”, Translated by Reza Tajaddod, Ibn Sina publishers, 1967.
· Iraj Anvar, “Divan Shams Tabrizi, Fourthy Eight Ghazals”, Translated by Iraj Anvar, Semar Publishers Srl, 2002.
· Jalal al-Din Rumi, “Majalis-e Sab’e”, critical edition of Towfiq Sobhani, Tehran, Kayhan , 1986 (1994 reprint).
· Jalal al-Din Rumi, “Divan-e Shams ya Divan-e Kabir”;edited by Badi al-Zaman Foruzanfar. (Amir Kabir, 1977) Also online.
· Jalal al-Din Rumi, “The Mathnawi of Jalal al-Din Rumi” , Tehran, Amirkabir, 1982. Also online.
· J ean During, “Sama’” , Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill, 2007. Brill Online.
·
John Perry, THE HISTORICAL ROLE OF TURKISH IN RELATION TO PERSIAN OF
IRAN in Iran & the Caucasus,
Vol. 5, (2001), pp. 193-200.
· Jonathan Dewald, Europe 1450 to 1789: Encyclopedia of the Early Modern World, Charles Scribner's Sons, 2004.
· Karang, Abdul Ali. “Tati o Harzani, Do lahjeh az zabaan-i baastaan-i Azerbaijan”, Shafaq publishers, 1333(1955).
· L. Massignon, "Al-Biruni et la valuer internationale de la science arabe" in Al-Biruni Commemoration Volume, (Calcutta, 1951).
· M.A. Amir-Moezzi, Shahrbanu, Encyclopaedia Iranica
· M.-A. Adib Tusi, Fahlavyat-e Magrebi Tabrizi, NDA Tabriz 8, 1335 (Solar Hejri)
·
M.- A. Adib Tusi,
“Fahlawiyat-e- Mama Esmat wa Kashfi be-zaban Azari estelaah-e raayi yaa
shahri”, NDA, Tabriz 8/3, 1335/1957, pp 242-57. http://web.archive.org/web/20070927210648/http://www.azargoshnasp.net/languages/Azari/fahlaviyaatmamaesmat.pdf
·
M.A. Shaban, Islamic
History, Cambridge University Press, v.2 1978.
·
Manuchehr Mortazavi,.
Zaban-e-Dirin Azerbaijan (On the Old language of Azerbaijan). Bonyad
Moqufaat Dr. Afshar. (1384 Solar Hejri).
· Mehdi Marashi, Mohammad Ali Jazayery, Persian Studies in North America: Studies in Honor of Mohammad Ali Jazayery, Ibex Publishers, Inc, 1994.
· Mehmed Fuad Koprulu’s , Early Mystics in Turkish Literature, Translated by Gary Leiser and Robert Dankoff , Routledge, 2006.
· Mohammad Amin Riyahi Khoi. “Molehezati darbaareyeh Zabaan-i Kohan Azerbaijan”(Some comments on the ancient language of Azerbaijan), ‘Itilia’at Siyasi Magazine, volume 181-182. Also available at: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.azargoshnasp.net/languages/Azari/26.pdf
· Mohammad Amin Riyahi. “Nozhat al-Majales” in Encyclopedia Iranica
· Mohamed Taher, “Encyclopedic Survey of Islamic Culture”, Anmol Publication PVT, 1998. Turkey
· Rahim Malek Rezazadeh. “The Azari Dialect”(Guyesh-I Azari)”, Anjuman Farhang Iran Bastan publishers, 1352( Solar Hejri)
· Rene Grousset, The Empire of the Steppes, Rutgers University Press, 1991.
·
Reuben
Levy, Social Structure of Islam, Taylor and Francis, 2000. Pg 183
· Robert L. Canfield, Turko-Persia in historical perspective, Cambridge University Press, 1991
· Şefik Can, M. Fethullah Gulen, Zeki Saritoprak, "Fundamental of Rumi's Thought: A Mevlevi Sufi Perspective", Tughra; Second edition edition (December 1, 2005).
· Seyyed Hossein Nasr. The Heart of Islam: Enduring Values for Humanity. HarperColins, 2004. Pg 68
·
Shams al-Din Ahmad
al_Afkali, Manāqeb al-ʻārefīn, ed. Tahsin
Yazici, 2 vols, Tehran, Donyaayeh Ketab, 1983.
English translation: Shams al-Din
Aflaki, "The feats of the knowers of God: Manāqeb al-ʻārefīn", translated by John O'Kane, Brill, 2002.
· Speros Vryonis, Jr., "The Economic and Social Worlds of Anatolia in the Writings of the Mawlawi (Mevlevi) Dervish Eflaki" in "Jaye L. Warner (2001), "Cultural Horizons A Festschrift in Honor of Talat S. Halman", Syracuse Universty Press.
· Stephen P. Blake, Shahjahanabad: The Sovereign City in Mughal India, 1639-1739", Cambridge University Press, 1991
·
Strabo, Geography, The Geography of Strabo: With an
English Translation by Horace Leonard Jones. Based in Part Upon the Unfinished Version
of John Robert Sitlington Sterrett Translated by Horace Leonard Jones Published
by Harvard University Press, 1966
·
Sultan
Walad, Masnaviyeh Waladi, Ensha’ Baha al-Din b. Mowlana Jalal al-Din Mohammad
b. Hosayn-e Balkhi, Mashur beh Mowalana, ed. Jalal
al-Din Homa’I (Tehran:Eqbal, 1316) (pp 393-4)
·
Sultan
Walad, Rabab Nameh az Sultan Valad, Farzand-e Mowlana Jalal al-Din Mowlavi.
Ali Soltani Gordfaramarzi, McGill University’s Intitute of Islamic Studies and
the University of Tehran,1980
·
Sultan
Walad, Mowlavi-ye Digar: Shaamel-e Ghazliyaat, Qasaayed, Qet’at, Tarkibat,
Ash’are Torki, Ash’ar-e ‘Arabi, mosammat, roba’iyat (Tehran, Sana’I, 1984)
·
Tahsin Yazici, Habib Esfahani, Miza in
Encyclopedia Iranica
· Talat. S. Halman, Rapture and Revolution, Syracuse University Press, November, 2007.
· Xavier Tremblay Pour une histore de la Sérinde. Le manichéisme parmi les peoples et religions d’Asie Centrale d’aprés les sources primaire, Vienna, 2001, Appendix D «Notes Sur L'Origine Des Hephtalites”
The following has been taken from: http://www.tlg.uci.edu/~opoudjis/Play/rumiwalad.html
All rights are owned to this section by Nick Nicholas and it is
being used here only for academic purposes.
Accessed 2009
Nick Nicholas: Greek Verses of Rumi & Sultan
Walad
The following are Greek verses in the poetry of
Mawlana Jalal ad-Din Rumi (1207-1273), and his son, Sultan Walad (1226-1312). The works have been difficult to
edit, because of the absence of vowel pointing in most of the verses, and the
confusion of scribes unfamiliar with Greek; different editions of the verses
vary greatly. I give the latest edition of the verses (Dedes'), with
translations; I then compare the various editions of the verses since the
1820s. The editions cited are:
·
Dedes, D. 1993. Ποίηματα
του Μαυλανά
Ρουμή [Poems by Mevlana Rumi]. Ta Istorika 10.18-19:
3-22.
·
Mertzios, C.D. 1958. Quelques vers grecs du XIIIe siècle en
caractères arabes. Byzantinische Zeitschrift 51: 15-16.
·
Burguière, P. & Mantran, R. 1952. Quelques vers grecs du XIIIe
siècle en caractères arabes. Byzantion 22: 63-80.
·
Meyer, G. 1895. Die griechischen Verse in Rabâbnâma. Byzantinische
Zeitschrift 4: 401-411.
·
Salemann, C. 1891. Noch einmal die seldschukischen Verse. Bulletin
de l'Académie Impériale des Sciences de St. Pétersbourg. NS II:
293-365.
·
von Hammer, J. 1829. Wiener Jahrbücher der Literatur. 48:
108-119.
Of the editions, the three first dealt only with
the first poem of Sultan Walad. Burguière & Mantran collated manuscripts of
Rumi and Walad anew in Turkey, so they present a new edition of the Arabic
script poems in question. The journal editor H. Grégoire, and later on C.D.
Mertzios, suggested corrections to their Greek reading. Dedes uses the
Burguière & Mantran Arabic script edition, and did not inspect the
manuscripts himself; but his readings appear more comprehensive, and are treated
here as the base edition (filling in some of the Persian from Burguière &
Mantran). Switches to Persian are indicated in (italics).
As I am not familiar with Sufiism (or Persian),
I ask any readers familiar with Rumi and Walad to help out by (a) providing text
input for the Arabic script; (b) providing the translations that have appeared
in Persian or Turkish editions of the texts; (c) providing explanations and
commentary, or correcting commentary and translations.
General Note: Sultan Walad refers to the body (in constrast with the soul) as σκήνωμα, "tent"—the tent or tabernacle in which the soul temporarily dwells. This sense was used in Christian Greek (starting with 2 Peter 1:13), and Dedes believes it is evidence of Mevlana's discussions with the monks of St Chariton monastery, near Konya. "Slender", λυγερός, is an adjective used to praise women in mediaeval vernacular Greek ballads; this presumably explains why Mertzios seeks to emend one instance of the masculine adjective to a feminine.
|
Με τους
άγιους πώς
δοικάσαι
λάλησε· |
Tell how you govern yourself with the saints. |
[The poet Sultan Walad clearly is addressing his
father Mevlana, who is probably already dead, and invokes him]
How you behave with the saints, tell us.
Don't enjoy the divine by yourself, let us share your divine life experience.
For now your eyes clearly see God
and you are so joyful your clothes cannot contain you.
With divine light you see God face to face
and in a show of piety I touch my forehead at the porch of your door.
Whoever has bowed his head like a slave
will tread on an angel's head.
Like the saints he will always be alive,
and he will not die like other human beings.
Whoever happens to have been reconciled with you here on Earth
and has given and taken with you;
whoever has your love in his soul,
so that he can see whatever your eyes see,
that person says: the soul in the body is like it is buried,
let our soul also mourn for that burial.
[Here dead Mevlana starts to speak of the
relation of the soul to the body, and his experiences in Heaven]
And then you (Mevlana) said: How much are you
saying here on Earth?
What do you want from us the departed, that you are calling?
The body of Man treads on Earth
while his soul walks above in Heaven.
Our human bodies will perish on Earth
while our soul will rejoice with the saints in Heaven.
The soul has grown roots in the joy of God,
but since it has departed there and come to Earth, it is embittered.
Yet people's soul will go back to the place of God
to be glad there always in His desire.
The soul was light there in Heaven, but when it came to Earth it became dark.
Yet here too, with the light of God, it has become bright.
For a little while it was attached to Earth
but it has gone back to Heaven where it was created.
And while it like was a drop here on Earth, a place of Separation of the Mortal
from the Divine,
it has reunited with the Divine and become a sea.
The human soul has gone back there to Heaven and been saved
and it has been filled with what it desired, namely the Divine.
[Walad speaks again of his father Mevlana]
His soul (Mevlana's) speaks there in Heaven like
I do now:
Who might there be in the whole world like me?
[Walad now apparently alludes to the meeting in
Heaven of Mevlana with his friend and teacher Shams Tabrizi, who was secretly
murdered in Konya. Mevlana thought that Tabrizi has permanently left Konya and
kept looking for him, believing he was alive. For that reason he had travelled
to Damascus twice. Walad had hidden the horrifying news from him to shield him.
Mevlana resumes speaking.]
I found whom I was looking for [Tabrizi], and
from him I have learned whatever I say.
I kiss him forever, without lips, there in Heaven
and there are servants of God like me there in the thousands.
The tongue cannot express the beauty of God.
Come burn, slender one, in His desire.
Whoever has given (God) his soul, has lived.
Whoever was crushed here on Earth, has defeated all.
|
Burguière &
Mantran (1952) |
Grégoire (1952), Mertzios (1958) |
Meyer (1895) |
|
Με τους
άγιους πώς
δικαιέσαι
λάλησε, |
Με τους
άγιους πώς δικιέσαι λάλησε, |
με τους
άγιους, πώς
δοκάση, λάλησε, |
|
Burguière &
Mantran (1952) |
Grégoire (1952), Mertzios (1958) |
Meyer (1895) |
|
Speak with the saints as you are entitled to, |
Tell us how you deal with the saints, |
Speak how you wait with the saints, |
|
Meyer (1895) |
Salemann (1891) |
von Hammer (1829) |
|
με τους
άγιους, πώς
δοκάση, λάλησε, |
μη τις
άγιος πώς
δοκάση λαλήση |
με τους
αγιους πως ...
λαληση |
|
Meyer (1895) |
Salemann (1891) |
von Hammer (1829) |
|
Speak how you wait with the saints, |
Unless one who is a saint waits speaking |
with the saints how... to speak, |
|
Να ειπώ
εδώ ρωμαίικα,
ήκουσες καλή
ρόδινη |
I'll speak here in Greek: you've heard, my
fair rosy girl, |
|
Burguière &
Mantran (1952) |
Grégoire (1952), Mertzios (1958) |
|
Ν' είπω
εδώ ρωμαϊκά, ν'
ακούς εσύ, καλή
ραδινή. |
Ν' είπω
εδώ ρωμαϊκά, γι' άκ'σε, καλή
ραδινή. |
|
Burguière &
Mantran (1952) |
Grégoire (1952), Mertzios (1958) |
|
I'll speak here in Greek, so you can listen,
fair and slender (girl). |
I'll speak here in Greek, do listen, fair and slender (girl). |
|
Τα μάτια
τα είδα μετά
σεν τις είδεν; |
The eyes I have seen with you, who has seen
them? |
|
Burguière &
Mantran (1952) |
Grégoire (1952), Mertzios (1958) |
|
Τα μάτια
τα ... μετά μέναν (?)
τις είδεν; |
Τα μάτια
τα είδα, μετά
μέναν (?) τις
είδεν; |
|
Burguière &
Mantran (1952) |
Grégoire (1952), Mertzios (1958) |
|
The eyes... after me (?) who has seen them? |
The eyes I have seen , after me who has seen them? |
|
... |
(If you want me to be full of life) |
|
Burguière &
Mantran (1952) |
Grégoire (1952), Mertzios (1958) |
|
... |
|
|
Burguière &
Mantran (1952) |
Grégoire (1952), Mertzios (1958) |
|
(If you want me to be full of life) |
|
|
Αφέντη,
από καρδιά
πάντα θέλω |
Master, from my heart I always want |
|
Burguière &
Mantran (1952) |
Grégoire (1952), Mertzios (1958) |
|
Αφέντη,
από καρδιά
πάντα θέλω |
|
|
Burguière &
Mantran (1952) |
Grégoire (1952), Mertzios (1958) |
|
Master, with all my heart I constantly want |
|
Rumi:
Museum of Konya ms 67 (+ University of Istanbul ms F 334) ff 45v-46r
Rumi's verses are macaronic with (Persian)
and Arabic (which Rumi calls
"Saracen" in Greek). Dedes says the Arabic verse is in imitation of
the Koran.
|
Πού
είσαι συ,
αφέντη μου (όμοια
ευεργετικέ κι
όμοια
φεγγαροπρόσωπε) |
Where are you, my Master (in the same way
beneficial and moon-faced) |
|
Burguière &
Mantran (1952) |
Grégoire (1952), Mertzios (1958) |
|
πού
είσαι εσύ, αφέντη
μου ... |
|
Burguière &
Mantran (1952) |
|
|
Where are you, my Master? (Who are who does
good and at the same time has a face [beautiful] like the moon.) |
Where are you my master? the dispenser of
benevolence and the moon-faced charmer? |
Rumi:
Museum of Konya ms 67 (+ University of Istanbul ms F 334) ff 273v
|
Αφέντης
μας έν κι
αγαπούμεν τον |
He is our Master and we love him |
|
Burguière &
Mantran (1952) |
Grégoire (1952), Mertzios (1958) |
|
αφέντης
μας είν', και
αγαπώμεν τον, |
|
Burguière &
Mantran (1952) |
Grégoire (1952), Mertzios (1958) |
|
He is our Master and we love him, ... |
Rumi:
Museum of Konya ms 67 (+ University of Istanbul ms F 334) ff 290v
|
Καλή
τύχη απάνω σου,
έη αφέντη
τσελεμπή, |
Good luck be with you, oh Sir and Master |
|
Burguière &
Mantran (1952) |
Grégoire (1952), Mertzios (1958) |
|
καλή
τύχη απάνω σου,
έι, αφέντη
τσελεμπή! |
|
|
Burguière &
Mantran (1952) |
Grégoire (1952), Mertzios (1958) |
|
Good luck be with you, oh Sir and Master! |
|
