Nizamī's Perspective on the Relationship Between Poetry and Truth

Nizamī’s Perspective on the Relationship Between Poetry and Truth

By Seyedehparisa Sajjadi

B.S. in Architecture, January 2007, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran M.A. in Philosophy of Arts, September 2011, Art University Arts, Tehran, Iran

A Thesis Submitted to The Faculty of The Colombian College of Arts and Sciences of the George Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Art

May 15, 2016

Thesis directed by

Muhammad H. Faghfoory Professorial Lecturer in Islamic Studies

Abstract of Thesis

Nizamī’s Perspective on the Relationship Between Poetry and Truth

The dominance of the Seljuk dynasty over Iran had profound consequences on

Persian poetry. From this period on, poetry started to separate from court life and follow an independent path. Accordingly, the joyful and mundane Persian court poetry fell under the influence of Sufism. This transition did not happen at once and there is a middle chain:

‘poetry of religion’. Nizamī of Ganjah was the most distinguished figure during this period.

Nizamī, who thought of poetry as a vehicle for truth, saw the poets as a shadow of the prophets and likewise inspired by Jibra’īl who are responsible for shedding the light of marifah (true knowledge) on his audiences. To summarize, Nizamī primarily sees himself as a jeweler who tries to put words, like gems, into the setting of discourse. Only then can he put himself in a line with the prophets, whose shadow poets seek, and whose inspiration comes from a similar source. Nizamī does not stop here, however. After aligning himself with the prophets, he compares his own poesy with God’s creation. As a divine act, then poesy finds a different meaning. God creates everything based on Truth and Intellect;

Nizamī similarly thinks the poetic words need to be bound up with thought and wisdom.

Keywords: Nizamī, Sufi Poetry, Word, Poetry, Truth

Table of Contents

Abstract of Thesis ...... ii

Chapter 1: Introduction ...... 1

Chapter 2: The Socio-political Context of Nizamī’s Training...... 6

Chapter 3: The ‘Word’ as Defined by Nizamī ...... 14

Chapter 4: Poetry as the Preferred Form for the Word ...... 23

Chapter 5: The Relationship between Poetry and Truth ...... 29

Conclusion ...... 43

Bibliography ...... 44

iii

Chapter 1: Introduction

Persian poetry is one of the most dynamic forms of art in the Persian speaking world. It has experienced many periods of transitions during its long history. Art in general and literature in particular do not emerge or disappear at once, and their cultivation or decadence is a gradual process. Often, transitions within schools follow social and political transformations, especially when the artistic activity is sponsored by ruling institutions, and/or is dependent on a royal court’s financial support.

The establishment of the Seljuk dynasty in Iran signaled an artistic turning point within the Islamic world in general and the Persian speaking world in particular. From this period on, Sufism gradually became the central topic of Persian poetry. Although mystical themes occasionally were used in earlier Persian poetry, Sufi poetry as a style officially began with Hadiqah al Haqiqah of Sanā’ī, of Ghazna (d. 1131 or 1140),1 a man who though raised and trained in the court, nonetheless stood against the shared values of court poets, and started a new path in Persian literature. His attitude influenced other poets after him, and reached a peak in the following centuries, especially in the poems of Hāfiz and Rūmī.

After the reign of the Seljuks, the more Persian poetry moved away from the court, the more a newer terminology, as well as new themes, found their way into verse; this in turn changed the expectations of the medium. ‘Word’ and discourse in the literature of this period emphasized ‘truth’ as the central theme, and through the work of many poets including Fakhruddīn ‘Erāqī (d. 1289), ‘Aṭṭār (d. ca. 1220), Rūmī (d. 1273), and Jāmī (d.

1 Sīrūs Shamīsā, Sabk Shināsī She’r, Tehran: Ferdows, 1381 [2002], p 200 1

1492), truth eventually became the main element of poetry’s content, as well as the cause of the poesy.

The first poet who frankly acknowledged his debt to Sanā’ī as a writer of didactic masnavi was Ilyas ibn Yusuf Nizamī of Ganja, who claimed in his didactical poem,

Makhzan al-asrar (“Treasury of Secrets”)2 that he could surpass his predecessor. Unlike many other Persian poets, Nizamī speaks of himself and his family several times in his romances. From his poems we learn that he was born ca. 535 AH (1140 A.D) in the trans-

Caucasian city of Ganja. He appears to have spent his entire life in the same region, dying there approximately seventy-five years later. He also lived through the time when Iran – or, more accurately, the Islamic world – was enjoying a period of great cultural efflorescence in Seljuk Period.

During Nizamī’s lifetime, a period that saw poetry move from courtly verse towards mystical and otherwise ‘Sufi’ themes, court patronage was still the chief source of support for poets, guaranteeing not only their livelihood but also the reproduction and distribution of their art. In this regard Nizamī stands out as a prominent figure. Although his poems are dedicated to various local princes and contain appeals to his patrons’ generosity, the poet seems to have largely avoided court life.3

The medieval biographers like Dawlatshāh Samarqandī, Aufi, and Jāmī presented

Nizamī as a member in one or more Sufi orders (turuq), but according to Talattof, they

2 J.T.P de Brujin, Persian poetry: an introduction to the mystical use of classical Persian poems, Richmond, Surrey: Cruzon, 1997, p 97 3 Nizamī Ganjavī; Julie Scott Meisamī, Nizamī Ganjavī; Julie Scott Meisamī: A Medieval Persian Romance, Oxford: Oxford University press, 1995, p viii 2 provided no reliable evidence of this. Talattof continues that Nizami’s deep spirituality is always present in his writing, and it would be hard to deny traces of Sufi learnings, as well.4

In his masterpieces, Nizamī defines a new role for poetry. Following in the footsteps of Sanā’ī, Nizamī positions himself against centuries-old customs in Persian literature, and moreover looked to expand the possibilities of the form. Unlike court-based poets, Nizamī used romance as a vehicle for expressing his beliefs.5 In his famous khamsa

(Quintet), the first epic, Makhzan al-asrar (Treasury of Secrets) outlines twenty moral principles, each illustrated by a tale. What follows are three great romantic epics —

Khosrow and Shīrīn, Layla and Majnūn, and Haft Paykar (The Seven Beauties) – the last epic being the Book of Alexander (Iskandarnama), all of which combine didactic, heroic and romantic elements.6

From Nizamī’s perspective, word7 and discourse8 contain rich meaning, and so does poetry, for its main material is the word. He sees a direct relationship between poesy and creation, and considers ‘discourse,’ based on both Islamic and pre-Islamic beliefs, as the first creation of God. In this view, word seems to be identified with Intellect (‘aql), thus making intellect the basis of poetry. This relationship between poetry and Intellect accordingly puts some responsibilities on the shoulders of poetry; indeed, if it is essentially an Intellectual art, it cannot be arbitrary, or in other words cannot be entirely divorced from

4 Kamran Talattof, “preface”, in The Poetry of Nizamī Ganjavi: Knowledge, Love, and Rhetoric, ed. Kamran Talattof, Jerome W. Clinton, New York, Palgrave, 2000, p 7. 5 J.C Burgel, “the Romance”, in Persian Literature, ed. Ehsan Yarshater, Albany, N.Y.: Bibliotheca Persica, 1988, p 167 6 Ibid 7 kalimah 8 sokhan 3 concepts such as truth and falsehood. Perhaps it is because of this connection that Nizamī considers poetry more generally as the vehicle for truth. To have a better understanding of

Nizamī’s views on this matter, this research addresses the following questions in four distinct chapters:

1. Under what socio-political context did Nizamī train? Because social and political environments influence poetry, we must understand how Nizamī came to reflect the themes of early Persian Sufi poetry. Nizamī criticized his peers, and defined the new role of poetry in opposition to contemporary poesy. It is not possible to understand Nizamī’s ideal poetry without knowing the kind of poetry against which he positioned himself.

2. How is the word, as the primary formal element of poetry, understood from

Nizamī’s viewpoint? What Nizamī expected of poetry followed from his understanding of word, and, accordingly, discourse. These views evolved over time, and may have been influenced by religious attitudes and conventions during Nizamī’s lifetime.

3. Why the word should be put in the form of writing, either prose orpoetry? Nizamī stresses that the best form of expression is poetry, and that it is the form through which truth can be revealed. Here, the question is whether or not it made any difference if Nizamī put his words in the form of prose.

4. If the truth is supposed to be made manifest in poetry, then what is the process of this revelation? How Nizamī accessed the source of the ‘truth’ allows us to address this final question. The relationship between poetry, reasoning, and inspiration is also explored in this chapter.

This inquiry will proceed as a literary analysis; In other words, all literature considered herein has been analyzed and sorted out to identify the essential attributes.

Unlike other methodologies that directly deal with the object under study, literary analysis asks us to indirectly access additional information from a variety of sources. An investigation of published materials, both in Persian and English, shows that the research presented here has not previously been conducted. While various scholars have covered some of the aforementioned questions individually, none have synthesized the material to address our two main questions — how and why Nizamī developed his views of poetry as a vehicle for truth, and how these views tell the responsibility of the poet.

In this paper, we therefore draw heavily from khamsa (Quintet) of Nizamī. In each book, Nizamī talks about the causes for the composition of his work. Elsewhere, in

Makhzan al-asrar, and Haft Paykar, he includes chapters in praise of discourse. In addition, a number of scattered distiches address the problem of the word, its definition, and its role, while also explaining arguments for poetry’s superiority over prose. Each book of Khamsa

(Quintet) will be thoroughly investigated to provide as accurate a view as possible regarding the main question of this research.

However, because interpretive gaps remain in Nizamī’s work, other texts contemporary to the Khamsa (Quintet), are also examined. In addition, secondary sources dealing mainly with the explanation and articulation of Nizamī’s ideas will be also be included. Chief among these are two commentaries written on Nizamī’s Makhzan al-Asrar

— considered to be his most difficult master piece — by Mahdi Mahūzi, and Behrouz

Saravtiayn, which allow us to infer additional meaning from the aforementioned distiches.

Chapter 2: The Socio-political Context of Nizamī’s Training

The origin of Persian poetry has long been cloaked in obscurity.9 Regarding the first Persian poet in the Islamic period,10 historians have noted discrepancies in both history books and the tazkirahs (biographical works of poets), though most agree that Persian poetry began in the eastern region of the Iran, called the Great Khurāsān. Here, Tarikh-i

Sīstān (the History of Sīstān) is considered one of the most important narrations, the very first lines of versified word in the Persian language during the Islamic period. According to this text, the very first lines of Persian poetry were composed by the direct command of

Ya’qub Layth (d. 879), the founder of Saffarid dynasty; for many, this is the starting point for Persian court poetry after the raise of Islam,11 what Yarshater calls ‘literary resurrection’ in Iran.12

Ya’qub, rebelled against the caliph of Baghdad, with the aim of controlling the whole territory of pre-Islamic Persia. No longer willing to listen to Arabic poetry, from which he could understand nothing, Ya’qub wanted his court poet, Muhammad ibn Vasīf

9 Jerome W. Clinton, “Court Poetry at the beginning of the Classical Period,” in Persian Literature, ed. Ehsan Yarshater, Albany, N.Y.: Bibliotheca Persica, 1988, p 78 10 According to Awfi (1361: 70), Bahram V, one of the Sāsānīd rulers (399- 420 A.D) was the First Poet. In Tarikh e Sistan (209-210), the first verse in Persian was composed in the time of Ya’qub-e- layth (840- 879 A.D), founder of Safārīd dynasty, in the third century. And, according to Dowlat-shah Samarqandi, it was Hanzalah Badghisi, who lived in the time of Tāhirīds (820-872 A.D). 11 This theory, that scribes the beginning of Persian poetry into the Safardi period, does not seem to be eligible. For, there is some verses remained from Tahirids, like those of Hanzaleh badqiysi; however, Yaqub was the founder of a tradition, regarding court poetry that was expanded by Samanid, who were the real leader of literary resurrection in Iran. [refer to Yarshater next citation] 12 Ehsan Yarshater, “Rastakhiz-I Iran va Zohour-e zaban va Adabiat-e Melli”, tr. Into Persian: Fereydoun Vahman, Iranshenasi, 1380 [2001], vol. 50, p 281. 6

Sagzī, to compose in the language that he knew, i.e. Persian.13 It seems that political independence of the Saffarid dynasty resulted in literary independence.14 More than two centuries after the advent of Islam, the Persian language started to regain its position in the government administration.

From the late ninth century until the rise of Sufi literature in the twelfth century, virtually every major poet was either a fixture at the court of a ruling prince or had acquired initial training in his craft at a court. During the forth/tenth and fifth/eleventh centuries,

Persian poetry flourished—at the courts of Samanid and Ghaznavids, of Bukhara and

Samarkand, and of their successors, Ghaznavids, centered in eastern Iran and Afghanistan.

“The identification of Rudaki, with Samanids, Farrokhi and Manuchehri with the

Ghaznavids and Anvari and Mo’ezzi with the Great Seljuks,” Yarshater observes, “…is so complete that mention of one automatically brings thought to the other.”15

M. Taghi Bahar, the first to categorize Persian classic poetry in different schools, distinguished three main styles.16 To name each style, he used the name of the place in which schools were born and flourished. Thus, the first style was called the Khurāsānī; and up to the end of eleventh century, this style dominated. When the center of literary activities

13 Anonymous, Tārīkh- i Sīstān, ed. Mohammad Taghi Bahar, Tehran: Chapkhane Fardin va baradaran, 1314 [1935], pp 201-202 14 Badi’ u-zamān Foruzanfr, Tārīkh-i Adabīāt- i Iran (ba’d az Islam tā Pāyān- i Teymūrīān, Tehran: Vezarat- i farhang va Irshad- i Islami, 1383 [2004], p 71 15 Clinton, 75 16 They are Khurasani, Iraqi, Hindi, and finally a return to Khurasani style again. 7 moved to the western Iran, following the shift in centrality of power, the next that appeared style was named, ‘Eraqi’ according to Bahar.17

Up to the end of eleventh century, Persian literary activities found a center in different courts in eastern part of Caliphate, where “Persian poetry gained footing as a vehicle of higher culture.”18 Poetry of this period had an epical tone, and thematically it was joyful and far away from despair, pessimism, or even acetic life. While the praise of life was a typical theme in this poetry, science, like astrology and medicine, had no place

(in contrast to subsequent styles). Although some poets, like Nāsir Khosraw, were engaged in composing poems based on religious beliefs, in general “the use of Qur’anic verses and hadith were not widespread in Persian poetry.”19

By the time of Ghaznavids, Persian poetry acquired more layers of meaning and became more complex. Court poetry was privileged at this time, especially during the reign of the Sultan Mahmoud (971-1030). This period, considered the zenith for Persian court poetry, featured a competition among the poets, judged according to contemporary criteria.

The fabulous wealth gathered by ‘Unsurī serves as evidence of the prestige poets held as a direct result of the relationship with courts.

De Brujin provides four main reasons for the importance of court poetry. He believes that first of all, court poetry, which derives from actual panegyric or madiheh patterns, had some ritual functions. For example, royal status was often praised through

17 Mohammad Taghi Bahar, Sabk Shīnasī Yā Tārīkh- i Tatavvor- i Shi’r- i Farsī, Tehran: Amir Kabir, 1337 [1958] 18 Brujin, 29 19 Shamisa, 1381: 39 8 panegyric descriptions—lengthy enumeration of patron’s quality.20 Secondly, De Bruijne highlights the role poetry played in the boosting to the patron’s prestige.21 In this regard,

Nizamī Arudhi declared that to keep his name and dignity throughout history, a king can never be needless of poets and their compositions:

So, a king cannot dispense with a good poet, who shall conduce to the immortality of his name and shall record his fame in divans and books.22 Thirdly, according to De Bruijin, the poet also entertained the court by supplying text performed by minstrels and musicians. The final reason for the influence of court poetry is its didactical role, appreciated not only for entertainment but also because of its moral instruction.23 As a matter of fact, it has been regarded as one of the fundamental tasks of literature, in both prose and verse, to convey khirad and hikmah, or as Brujin proposed, secular wisdom.

Starting in 1040, after defeating the Ghanznavids, the Seljuk Turks slowly extended their power westward into Arabophone Iraq. Persian literary activity similarly spread westwards to Seljuk courts.24 In fact, political upheavals and the rise of Seljuk dynasty in the eleventh century had both positive and negative consequences for Persian Literature.

The new dynasty signaled a transition in the poetry, which became less mundane and more ascetic, distinct in terms of form and content from the former style. To better understand the new literary school, we must first understand its political and social context.

20 Brujin, 29 21 Ibid, 30 22 Nidhami Arudi Samarqandi, Four Discourses, tr. Edward G. Brown, Hertford: Austin & Sons, 1899, p 45 23 Brujin, 30 24 Nizamī Ganjavī; Julie Scott Meisamī: vii 9

First and foremost is the influence of geography. The expanded boundaries of the

Seljuk government served the cause of Iranian culture by carrying Persian into many new traditions and creating new centers for its cultivation.25 How the literature was influenced by these political changes is the subject of much research, in both Persian and other languages. Below, Sīrūs Shamīsā summarizes the most important changes influenced the literature. These transformations can be put into seven main categories26:

1- Following the establishment of the new capital in Isfahān in central part of Iran, the

center of power moved from the East (the Great Khurāsān) into the central land. In

this way, diverse languages in the East and the West were synthesized. As a result,

Persian dari distributed to all different parts of Iran.

2- From this period on, Persian once again became the official language of the Empire.

As litterateurs and secretaries started to use Persian again, the hard words of Persian

dari were put aside in favor of simpler alternatives.

3- Sufi orders were instrumental in helping the Seljuk overthrow the Ghaznavids. As

a reward, and for first time after the murder of Hallaj, they had the chance to openly

promote their ideas. Mysticism thus entered into Persian literature and became a

distinguishing feature during the time of ‘Eraqi style became popular.

4- In this period, different schools were established, teaching Arabic books and

branches of sciences. Poets absorbed this education and imported it into poetry.

However, the religious background brought up some contradictions with Greek

25 Heshmat Moayyadi, “Lyric Poetry,” in Persian Literature, ed. Ehsan Yarshater, Albany, N.Y.: Bibliotheca Persica, 1988, p, 135 26 Shamisa, 91-106 10

philosophy. Additionally, inattention to rational science that began in the

Ghaznavid period heightened in this period and reached its peak. The mystics also

used their power to contradict reasoning and they called the reason, ‘aql as the

‘major veil’ or hijab-i akbar.

5- In the early years of the dynasty, and unlike the Ghaznavids, the Seljuk kings did

not have much interest in cultivating Persian poetry. As a result, qasida, the vehicle

for panegyric odes, was gradually put aside in favor of lyrics, or ghzal, which

offered a means for emotional expression. From the mid-Seljuk time, once more

panegyric odes became popular, but never reached the popularity of the Ghaznavid

and Samananids periods.

6- Following the overthrow of Sultan Mas’oud (998- 1040), and the domination of

Afghans over Iran, a new generation of court poet secretaries and litterateurs came

to the scene, many of whom had a positive attitude towards poesy.

7- Civil wars among local rulers made anarchy a common theme among poets, who

often discussed chaos and not knowing the value of grace or virtue.

The changes listed above transformed Persian literature from the Khurāsānī style to the ‘Eraqi. Although the Seljuk laid the groundwork for the shift, it was the Mongol invasion that signal the complete transformation. Following the Mongol invasion, as local courts were overthrown one after another, the great province of Khurāsān disappeared entirely. For almost fifty years, literary activities regressed as a result of political suppression. After that, Persian Sufi poetry reached its zenith. Bahar said, “Persian poetry

11 went to the heaven by the compositions of Hafiz and never came back again.”27 The invasion of Tīmūr did not bring an end to the widespread use of ‘Eraqi style and some continued the style for a number of years.

The ‘Eraqi style is best understood through its key features: in terms of forms, ghazal or lyrics became the popular form, while the long ode was not totally put aside. For the first time in history, ghazal became the dominant form of poetry, since, among the different forms of Persian poetry, ghazal was considered to best express the sentiments. In terms of content, the ‘Eraqi style also sees the widespread use of mystical themes.

Some have suggested that the popularity of the ghazal (and the ‘Eraqi style in general) derives from the hardship brought by the Mogul invasion. It is possible that a wave of depression in Iranian society, and a belief in fate, prompted Iranians to search for sedative words. The increasing interest in afterlife made mysticism more popular than any other time. The high interest in the Asha̒ rits school might be seen as the result of such air.28However, it should be noted that during the Khurāsānī style, mystical ideas did appear to a lesser extent. In this regard, Sanā’ī of Ghazna is considered by many as the official founder of Persian Sufi poetry, “the first poet who gave Sufism some stylistic character.”29

After him, the panegyric poetry was not totally put aside, but it moved to the peripheries and Sufism became the dominant theme of poetry.

Although the Seljuk period is considered to be the starting point of Persian Sufi poetry, a further subdivision can be made. The period between the late 11th century and the

27 Shamisa, p 28 Shamisa, p: 200 29 Forouzanfar, 12 early 12th century might be considered a transition period from panegyric court poetry into mystical poetry of the ‘Eraqi style. We see this reflected in the work of poets like Sanaei,

Nizamī and Khaqani, who follow thematically from religious poets, and do not include the mature form of mysticism seen later on in the composition of Hāfiz and Rūmī.30 Although the expression of “ascetic poetry” or “she’r-i zohd” appeared previously in the poems of

Nasir- Khosrow, who criticized anyone engaging in panegyric poesy, he nonetheless admired the Fatimid Caliphate and devoted a great portion of his verses to the appraisal of this Caliphate; in this respect, panegyric odes were still his main concern.

The important point about the poets of this transition period is that court patronage still comprised the chief source of support, providing a poet’s livelihood and ensuring his work’s copy and diffusion. Sanā’ī, as the beginner of this path, composed Hadiqah al

Haqiqah, setting in place a model many poets who followed him.

In this regard Nizamī stands out as an astonishing figure. Although Nizamī’s poems are dedicated to various local princes and contain appeals to his patrons’ generosity, the poet seems to have avoided court life.31 He blames all those who compose their verses in hope of being rewarded and uses the expression ‘source of wisdom’ to describe poesy (and eloquence)32 , and believed any commercial exchange made poetry worthless, even for “a piece of bread.” Nizemi’s logic here—why the word cannot be exchanged with anything— goes back to the value of the word per se, and is the subject of the next chapter.

30 Ibid, 362 31 Nizamī Ganjavī; Julie Scott Meisamī: viii 32 Nizamī Ganjavī, Makhzan al- Asrar, ed. Vahidi Dastgerdi, Tehran: Armaghan, 1320 [1941], p 42 13

Chapter 3: The ‘Word’ as Defined by Nizamī

Word, according to Nizamī, occupies the highest level of creation, and its existence is bound up with the very first moment of creation. This idea may have its own roots in both Islamic and pre-Islamic Persian beliefs, according to which creation of the “word”

(and discourse) goes back before the creation of the world. However, it seems that the influence of pre-Islamic tradition pales in comparison to the enormous impact of the

Islamic tradition.

From the Persian point of view, referring to the 19th Yasna,33 a dialogue between

Zoroaster and Ahura-Mazda34 proves instructive here. When asked about the words that he had been taught before the creation of heaven, water, animals, plants, fire, men, demons and the others, Ahura-Mazda replies: “ahunvar”. This discourse, i.e. ahunvar, is

Ahuramazda’s weapon against Ahriman35 in the battle that took place totally before creation, good and evil was fighting in pre-eternity. It seems that the creation of words preceded the creation of human beings. The ‘word” is considered to be firstly used by the gods, in a pre-eternal period.

In this regard, in Islamic ontology, the quiddity of the ‘word’ is bound up with the

“tablet, “pen” and the positon they hold in the hierarchy of creation. In Qur’an, the word

“Tablet”, is mentioned once in the last verse of chapter, Burūj, to describe Qur’an itself:

33 Yasnā, tr. To Persian Ibrahīm Pūrdavūd, Published in WWW.TARIKHFA.COM, p:118 34 The sole lord or creator of the universe according to Zoroastrians. 35 In the Avestan-language name of Zoroastrianism's hypostasis of the "destructive spirit" 14

Nay, but it is a glorious Qur’an, in a guarded tablet.36

In addition, we see to references to qalam. The very first verses revealed to Prophet

Mohammad, which start with reading, remind the Prophet that God to teach the men whatever he did not know by the pen.37 Elsewhere, in Qur’an, God swears to ‘pen’ and says:

“By the Pen, and what they inscribe,”38

According to Qur’an, tablet is the second creature after the pen, meaning that it contains anything of created until resurrection. 39 When God created the pen, He looked at it; the pen split, and asked: on what do I cross? God said: on whatever that would endure till the resurrection. Then, the pen crossed on tablet, as God willed.40

In addition to Qur’anic references, the Prophet himself explicitly states that the pen’ was the first creature of God: “Indeed, the first thing created by God was the ‘pen’ and He commands it to write whatever He wants.”41 But how do the words God writes come to be? In the Qur’an, some verses indicate that when God wills something into creation, He says: “be”, and in a moment, that something exists:

36 Qur’an, 85: 21-22 بَ ْل ُه َو قُ ْرآ ٌن َّم ِجيد ٌ * فِي َل ْوحٍ َّم ْحفُو ٍظ 37 Qur’an, 96: 3-5 ْ ِا ْق َرأ َو َربُّ َك ا ْْلَ ْك َر ُم ا َّل ِذي َع َّل َم ب ِا ْل َق َل ِم َع َّل َم ا ْ ِْلن َسا َن َما َل ْم يَ ْع َل ْم 38 Qur’an, 68: 1, نون والقلم و ما يسطرون 39 Mohammad J Yahaghi, farhang-I Asatir va Dastanvare ha dar Adabiat-e Farsi, Tehran: Farhang-e Mo’aser, 1388 [2009], p 377 40 Ibid, 342 ِا َّن اَ َّو َل ما َخ َل َق هللاُ ال َق َل ُم، َفاَ َم َرهُ اَ ْن يَ ْكتُ َب ما يُريد ُ 41 15

His command, when He desires a thing, is to say to it ‘Be,’ and it

is.42

To actualize everything, God just says a word, ‘Be’, and then it is. The expression, “kun fayakūn”, meaning “Be, and then it is”, is used in Qur’an several times and it means that

God’s words are the same as an object’s being. Here, word is considered to be the first actual creature of God. Ontologically, during the emanation process, Intellect is the first creature of God,43 so, these two can be considered the same. Word is the same as Intellect, and the same as being.

Before Nizamī, there was great emphasis on the word and discourse. To provide a summary, one can say that, when Aristotle defined “man [as] a speaker (rational) soul,” that quality was viewed as a symbol of wisdom, the difference between human-being and animal.44 In Islamic context, an utterance is the treasury of Divine Secrets45, a unique feature for man’s adornment,46 and the best (creation) of God.47 This causes the discourse to be valuable per se, but it should be noted that utterance doesn’t mean only speaking;

42 Qur’an, 36: 82 إِ َّن َما أَ ْم ُرهُ إِذَا أَ َرادَ َش ْيئًا أَ ْن يَقُو َل َلهُ ُك ْن َف َي ُكو ُن 43 Mehdi Zamani, “Jaygah- i Lawh va Qalam dar Jahan-Shinasi ‘Irfani ibn Arabi va ‘Attar Neishaburi”, Pazhuhesh- i Zaban va Adab- i Farsi, No. 25, [1391/2012], p 119 44 Nasir-e-Khosraw, Diwan- i Ash’ar, ed. Mojtaba Minovi; Mehdi Mohaqeq, Tehran: Intesharat- i Daneshgah- i Tehran, 1368 [1989], p 208; Mohammad Aufi, Lubāb al-albab, ed. Mohammad Qazvini, Saeid Nafisi, Tehran: Fakhr –e Razi, 1361 [1982], p 61 45Muhammad Ibn Alli ibn Sulayman Ravandi, Rāhat –us-svdur wa Āyat-vs-survr, ed. Mohammad Eghbal. London, 1921, p 47 46 Ayouqi, Varqeh va Golshah, ed. Zabih ollah Safa, Tehran: Nashr- i Iran va Islam, 1362, [1983], p 44 47 Ravandi, 47 16 rather it is a discourse associated with wisdom.48 It seems that the narration regarding the creation of the pen indicates that ‘pen’ is something more like a totem, connecting the human being with the origin of creation.49

Nizamī takes up this same idea when he talks about the word. Nizamī, like his predecessors, draws from Persian -Islamic teachings in believing that ‘discourse,’ sokhan, is the first creation of God, even before the existence of Adam and Eve. The 13th section of Makhzan al-asrar is devoted to “word” and its explanation. But there are many other verses scattered in Nizamī’s compositions that can help us understand his meaning of word.

For example, Nizamī refers to ‘word’ during the process of creation. To create, God is using words, so, word precedes every other thing in the world. With the first movement of

“the Pen,” the very first word came to the existence:

As the pen began the first movement, It produced the first word and speech. When they raised the curtain of non-existence, The first manifestation of existence was word and speech 50

Saravtiayn, in explanation of this verses, says: “when the veil of solitude went by, the first manifestation of God’s transcend is the word; in other words, “the word” is the messenger of God’s parade.” 51 In a way, this points to the creation story, when God says ‘Be’ and

48 Nasir-e- khosrow, 91 49 Yahaghi, 654 50 Nizamī, 1320: 39 جنبش اول که قلم برگرفت حرف نخستين ز سخن در گرفت پردهی اول که برانداختند جلوه اول به سخن ساختند 51 Behrouz Saravtiayn, sharh- i Makhzan ul-Asrar Nizamī, Tehran: Sabzan, 1383 [2004], pp 270-271 17 then something ‘is’. Before the word came to be, there is just the solitude of God. It seems that the world of existence and existence itself is bound up with ‘word’.

To emphasize the creation of word before the existence of Adam, Nizamī composed: “’Taught Adam’ is its quality“52. This is a direct reference to the chapter Cow, verses 30-31, which says:

And when thy Lord said to the angels, 'I am setting in the earth a viceroy.' They said, 'What, wilt Thou set therein one who will do corruption there, and shed blood, while we proclaim Thy praise and call Thee Holy?' He said, 'Assuredly I know that you know not.' And He taught Adam the names, all of them; then He presented them unto the angels and said, 'Now tell Me the names of these, if you speak truly.’53 Additionally, word is not only the first creature of God, and a means of creating other things, but also it considered the best creature. In Haft Paykar, Nizamī composed:

That which at once is new and old Is discourse; let its tale be told. The mother ‘Be’ hath never born, That discourse, and better son54 Word is the vehicle of thought and knowledge; whatever else exist in the material world is less precious. Nizamī, compares the word with gold and finds the former more valuable:

That who had my words and his gold, Took them both to a Sage

52 Nizmai, 1320: 71 َوإِ ْذ َقا َل َربُّ َك ِل ْل َمالَئِ َك ِة إِ منِي َجا ِع ٌل فِي اْلَ ْر ِض َخ ِلي َفةً َقالُو ْا أَتَ ْجعَ ُل فِي َها َمن يُ ْف ِسدُ فِي َها َوي َ ْس ِف ُك ال ِدم َما َونَ ْح ُن نُ َسبمِ ُ بِ َح ْم ِد ََ َونُ َق ِدم ُُ َل َك َقا َل إِ منِي أَ ْع َل ُم َما اَ 53 َو َع َّل َم آدَ َم اْلَ ْس َما ُك َّل َها ثُ َّم َع َر َض ُه ْم َع َلى ا ْل َمالَئِ َك ِة َف َقا َل أَنبِئُونِي بِأَ ْس َما َهـ ُؤا إِن ُكنتُ ْم َصا ِدقِي َن *ت َ ْع َل ُمو َن 54 Nizamī Ganjavī; Julie Scott Meisamī, 22 آنچه او هم نوست و هم کهن است سخن است و در اين سخن سخن است ز آفرينش نزاد مادر کن هيچ فرزند خوبتر ز سخن

From the new discourse and old gold, He asked which is better? Replied discourse is better, discourse.55 In other words, discourse dominates the realms of heart and reasoning, occupying the highest position in the creation world. Being the best creature of God, then, discourse holds the best heritage:

Look round: of all that God has made, what else, save discourse, does not fade? The sole memorial of mankind is discourse; all the rest id wind.56 One of the main fears of men on the earth is death. Continuity is a central concern of the human being. In Persian literature, these themes appear in the work of many poets and thinkers, who consider leaving word after death as one of the best ways to preserve your name through history: as it says in the preface for Shahmname of Abi Manusr:

When man understood that nothing would remain of him, he tried to keep his name alive through the history, by construction of buildings and a places and bravery, and bringing up wisdom, like the innovations of the King of Hindus who commanded the composition of the Kalilah and Dimnah, and Ram and Ramin.57

55 Nizamī, 1320: 41 کان سخن ما و زر خويش داشت هر دو به صراف عرض پيش داشت از سخن تازه و زر کهن گفت چه به؟ گفت سخن به سخن 56 Nizamī Ganjavī; Julie Scott Meisamī, 23 بنگر از هرچه آفريد خدای تا ازو جز سخن چه ماند به جای يادگاری کز آدميزاد است سخن است آن دگر همه باد است 57 Anonymous, “Muqadame Shahnameh abu Mansouri”, in Bist Maqaleh Qazvini, Tehran: Ibn SIna, 1333 [1954], pp 30-32 19

The written word is thus a means by which poet makes himself immortal. Not excluded from this rule, one of the Nizamī’s major interests is the desire for immortality.

He sees his poetry as a vessel for longevity:

Know! That Whoever likes to see me, to see the pith of my soul in this skin. …. While you are reading this epopee, find Nizami’s presence outright. How the manifestor could be hidden from you, while in every distich telling you a secret. After hundreds of years if you say where is he, Every distich calls up that here he is.58

As mentioned earlier in this chapter, from perspective of mystical ontology, the first thing God created was the Intellect, that is, the 'Supernal Pen' (al-qalam). This means that the Pen, Intellect, light and word are contemporaneous, born at the same time. For

Nizamī, thought is a form of word, and when it flows into the tongue, into the form of discourse, it changes its format while retaining its quiddity:

The beginning of thought, and the last counted! Is the discourse, keep this words here 59

58 Nizami, Khosrow and Shīrīn, ed. Behruz Sarvatian, Tehran: Amir Kabir, p: بدان تا هر که دارد ديدنم دوست ببيند مغز جانم را در اين پوست … نظامی نيز کاين منظومه خوانی حضورش در سخن يابی عيانی نهان کی باشد از تو جلوهسازی که در هر بيت گويد با تو رازی پس از صد سال اگر گوئی کجا او زهر بيتی ندا خيزد کهها او 59 Nizamī, 1320: 40 اول انديشه پسين شمار، اين سخن است، اين سخن اينجا بدار

Here, Nizamī declares that thought itself is a form of word, merely changing its form when articulated. Thus, in addition to the thinker, others will be able to access those words, and maybe think of them.60

The word is eternity and newness, meaning that the word always starts in the form of thinking, and it is the last thing that can be counted on. Moreover, if ordinary words are like objects and their meanings are like the souls, then the souls and the spirits of creatures are like the meanings of the words God has put into human beings.61 So, from this reading, the word comprises not only the beginning of everything, but also the end.

In this way, ‘word’ is related to the soul. Nizamī believes that as long as a word does not exist, the soul has rejected to enter the body:

Until the word gave voice to the heart, The soul did not submit its free bod to clay 62 According to him, the soul was not willing to be captured, however, the word of heart convinced the soul to enter the body, and into this world. Because of the heart, Nizamī implies, the free soul bound itself to the earthen body, and is housing the heart.63 From a mystical point of view, man’s perfection also is located in his heart, and what gives the heart this perfection could be considered the words or discourse of heart.

As is seen in the Khamsah, Nizamī did his best to heighten the importance of ‘word’ and its role for humans as the vehicle for thought. To summarize his idea, one can deduce

60 Saravtiayn, 373 61 Zamani, 119 62 Talattof, 2000: 8 تا سخن آوازهی دل درنداد جان تن آزاده به گل در نداد 63 Saravtiayn, 272 21 three basic roles for word: 1) Word is the first creature of God, and is the same as creation,

2) Word is considered the best creature of the God; and 3) Word is considered the vehicle of thought. 4) Word existed before everything else, and will remain after everything. It starts with thought, and will be ended by the judgment.

But what was said about the word belongs to a transcendent world, i.e. God’d realm, and is beyond the world of creation. Discourse is preferred by gods, either Ahuramazad or

Allah, and forges a link between God and His creation. In terrestrial life, however, we might wonder how on earth the meaning of the word could change? In the coming pages, we will explore how Nizamī makes a connection to the word in its transcendental existence and poetry, and especially his compositions.

Chapter 4: Poetry as the Preferred Form for the Word

If speech is the divine gift to humanity, that which distinguishes humans from beasts, poetry is the highest form of speech. The word and discourse, can be found in two different formats, depending on relationships to rhythm. Almost every litterateur, talking about the different forms of words, has the same idea. As an example, in Lubab-ul-al-bāb,

Aufi writes:

“Word” is a source of sincerity which shines from darkness of ink and gives permanent life to poetry and prose.”64

According to Aufi, the difference between prose and poetry is rhythmic tone. The poem is related to rhythm but in prose no such relation is found. Rhyma and rhythm makes the poetry to seems ordered. This order makes the word to be in harmony with the world of creation, since everything in this world seems to have an internal order.65 Besides, some authors like Monshi believed that human being is naturally attached to the poetry more than prose.66 For such reasons, the forms do not attain the same level among Persian thinkers, and the vast majority of Persian litterateurs viewed poetry as superior to prose.

There are plenty of interpretations from Persian litterateurs illustrating this preference: Rashīdī, the poet of the fourth century believes that the prose is like single, scattered pearls while poetry is like a roasted pearl67. Ayūqi likens the prose to a bride with

64 Aufi, 61 65 Farīd al-Dīn Aṭṭar Neishāpūri, Elahī Nāmeh, ed. Helmut Rayter, Tehran: Ofset Publication, 1359/ 1980, p 5 66 Nasrullah Monshi, Kalīlah and Dimnah, [Tehran]: Sanā’ī, 1345 [1966] p: 25 67 Ibid, pp61- 62 23 make-up68 while Kai Ka’us Ibn Iskandar considers the prose as a king and the verse as a peasant.69

Here lies my pith; seek me therein: The rest’s a moldering bit of skin70

In the same way, Nizamī uses the pearl as the allegory. Prose writing is considered a rough pearl, while poetry is compared to a bored pearl:

چونکه نسخته سخن سرسری هست بر گوهريان گوهری نکته نگهدار، ببين چون بود نکته که سنجيده و موزون بود71 Besides, in the Haft Paykar he compares himself to a jeweler working with precious gems to create a poetic treasure, that is he calls attention both to the value of his work, and to his own creative skill in selecting, weighting, and shaping his material, and in arranging and ornamenting his poem.72

Besides, the poets have spiritual power and the have the realm of discourse in their hands. Here, like Kay ka’vous, Nizamī uses the word king for the poets, the kings of the world of discourse:

Poetry raises your name into kingship Cos the poets are the kings of discourse73

68 Ayouqi, 45 69 Kai Kāᵓūs Ibn Iskandar, A Mirror of Princes, tr. Reubin Levy, London: Cresset Press, 1951, p 229 70 Nizamī Ganjavī; Julie Scott Meisamī, 13 71 Nizamī, 1320: 43 72 Nizamī Ganjavī; Julie Scott Meisamī, pp viii, iix 73 Ibid: 44 شعر برآرد به اميريت نام کالشعرا امرا الکالم 24

In Makhzan al-asrar Nizamī calls poets “Heaven’s nightingales”74 and not comparable to anyone else:

No one is comparable to the eloquent, They are the heaven nightingales are, 75 Nizamī prefers the poet who has the ability to explain what is inside him, and to talk about their feelings. What the poet puts into words, in accordance with Nizamī’s ideals, is the treasury of two worlds:

Those eloquents who makes compositions, Put the treasury of two worlds in the discourse 76 Nizamī calls poets second in rank only to the prophets and their followers, and poetry as ‘a shadow of the shadow of prophet hood.’ In several places, Nizamī puts poets and prophets in the same category and supposes them inspired by the same source, for example:

The veil of secrets that is eloquence, is the shadow of a prophet’s shadows 77 Here, Saravtiayn thinks that Nizamī’s comparison puts the words of poets in a supernatural world, inspired from somewhere beyond the physical. Again, ‘word’ here does not belong to the material world but originated from some superior realm, the same place where prophet hood is born. Nizamī adds:

74 Ibid, 42 75 Saravtiayn, 283 بلبل عرشند سخنپروران باز چه مانند به اين ديگران 76 Nizamī, 1320: 41 قافيه سنجان که سخن برکشند گنج دو عالم به سخن درکشند 77 Ibid, p 42 پردهی رازی که سخنپروريست سايهای از سايهی پيغمبريست 25

پيش و پسی بست صف کبريا پس شعرا آمد و پيش انبيا اين دو نظر محرم يک دوستند اين دو چو مغز، آن همه چون پوستند78 Note how Nizamī indicates the chapter of “poets” in the Qur’an, in which God blames the followers of the poets, since He knows them misguided. In this chapter, we see a reference to a line of prophets, including Moses, Abraham, Houd, Salih, Lout, and finally

Muhammad, and their challenges with their people.79 In this chapter it comes:

Shall I tell you on whom the Satans come down? They come down on every guilty impostor. They give ear, but most of them are liars. And the poets -- the perverse follow them; hast thou not seen how they wander in every valley and how they say that which they do not?80 However, Nizamī considers it a good thing that the name of the prophets and poets come together, and both should take pride in the comparison. Excluding himself from the kinds of poets mentioned in Qur’an, Nizamī boasts that his own poetry, inspired by religion and the sacred Law, will ‘.

seat thee on the Tree of Paradise [and] make thee ruler of the empire of the spirit81

Later, Nezami compares the poesy to God’s creation. The foundation of human creation appears in discourse and sokhan. What a poet does is comparable with God’s creation and is somehow His imitation. A poet creates a world as he wishes and shapes this

78 Ibid 79 Saravtiayn, 285 80 Qur’an, 26: 221-226 يُ ْلقُو َن ال َّس ْم َع َوأَ ْكث َ ُر ُه ْم َكا ِذبُو َن * َوال ُّشعَ َرا يَتَّ ِبعُ ُه ُم ا ْلغَا ُوو َن * أَ َل ْم تَ َر أَ َّن ُه ْم فِي ُك مِل َوا ٍد يَ ِهي ُمو َن * َوأَ َّن ُه ْم *تَنَ َّز ُل َع َلى ُك مِل أَ َّفا ٍَ أَثِي ٍم يَقُولُو َن َما َا يَ ْفعَلُو َن 81 Nizamī, 1320: 44 شعر تورا سدره نشانی دهد سلطنت ملک معانی دهد 26 world in the form of words. The human being, according to his nature, is always in search of immortality; the poets, in artistic creation, creates an everlasting picture of his words, as well as himself:

Say not the eloquent are dead; Neath waves of speech they’ve disappeared. But should you mention one by name, Fish-like, he’ll raise his head again.82

By saying “as the pen began its first movement,” Dabbashi believes, Nizamī not only refers to God’s creation, but to his own composition as well. The first movement might be first effort of writing, and as long as the pen does not work, there is no word. From the first movement, the words Nizamī had in mind exist.83

Just as God’ creations start with thinking, and accompany wisdom, Nizamī sees similar responsibilities for the poet.

The speech which has not [first] been given form in the head, should neither be written down nor uttered. It is easy to make verses; however, they should be well ordered. Although you may possess many words, be brief, do not transform one [word] into one hundred, but rather one hundred into one.84

82 Nizamī Ganjavī; Julie Scott Meisamī: 22 تا نگوئی سخنوران مردند سر به آب سخن فرو بردند چون بری نام هر کرا خواهی سر برآرد ز آب چون ماهی

83 Hamid Dabbashi , “Harf- i Nakhsotin: Mafhume- i Sokhan nazd- i Hakim Nizamī Ganjavi” Iran-SHinasi, no. 12 [1370/1991], p 730 84 Christine Van Ruymbeke, Science and Poetry in Medieval Persia: The Bitany of Nizamī’s Khamsa, Edinburgh: Cambridge University Press, 2007, p 11 سخن کان از سر انديشه نايد، نوشتن را و گفتن را نشايد 27

There are some causes, put forward by Nizamī, that motivate poetry. To him, one of the most influential functions of poetry is to glorify the poet. His predecessors shared this view—when communicating with audiences, a teller could achieve fame through poetry:

It is profitable to utter speech, at that time, When, from the uttering of it,—reputation becomes lofty.85 The human being, according to his nature is always in search of immortality. Poets, in their artistic talent, create an everlasting picture, of his words, as well as himself, for what poetry brings to its composer is immortality:

Say not the eloquent are dead; Neath waves of speech they’ve disappeared. But should you mention one by name, Fish-like, he’ll raise his head again.86 Not only would the name of the poets remain in history, within a piece of poetry, but also Nizamī believes that poets have the ability to illustrate an image of other people

(here in this verse the crowned or takht-varan) in a way that he intends. In a sense, Nizamī puts the words into them and makes an image in the mind of his audience.87

سخن را سهل باشد نظم داد ببايد ليک بر نظم ايستادن سخن بسيار داری اندکی کن يکی را صد مکن صد را يکی کن

85 NizamīGnjavi, the Sikandar Nāma, e Barā or Book of Alexander the Great, tr. Cpitain Wilberforce Clarke, London: W.H. Allen & Co, 1881, p 64 کز آن گفتن آوازه گردد بلند سخن گفتن آنگه بود سودمند 86 Nizamī Ganjavī; Julie Scott Meisamī: 22 تا نگوئی سخنوران مردند سر به آب سخن فرو بردند چون بری نام هر کرا خواهی سر برآرد ز آب چون ماهی

87 Nizamī, 1320: 41 28

Chapter 5: The Relationship between Poetry and Truth

Nizamī calls poets the Heaven’s nightingale and the prophet’s shadow, and held that the eyes of the world were opened into the world by the word, without which no sound existed.

As the pen began to move, It opened the eyes of the world with the word Without speech the world has no voice, They have said so much but the word has not diminished.88

When he asserts that speech is man’s sole legacy and teaches him the nature of his own design, he asserts his belief in the imaginative role of poetry in leading to self-knowledge.

While these are well-known poetic topoi, their recurrence and continued emphasis suggest that they were meant quite seriously.

In the following verse, he claims that he brings poetry closer to mysticism and further from unbelief, and not everyone is worthy enough to compose poetry:

To utter virgin (lustrous) words is to pierce the soul,— Not everyone is fit to utter (virgin) speech 89 Personally, Nizamī believed that an angel, i.e hatef or Surūsh, found him compatible and started singing; upon hearing the hatif’s advice, he went to solitude. In that solitude, the

آنکه ترازوی سخن سخته کرد تخت وران را به سخن سخته کرد 88 Talattof, 2000: 8 چون قلم آمد شدن آغاز کرد چشم جهان بين به سخن باز کرد بی سخن آوازهی عالم نبود اين همه گفتند و سخن کم نبود 89 Nizamī, 1881: 77 سخن گفتن بکر جان سفتن است نه هر کس سزای سخن گفتن است 29 source of divine grace followed — Jibra’īl90 came across him and said, “stand and renovate the garments of poetry.”

نصيحتهای هاتف چون شنيدم چو هاتف روی در خلوت کشيدم91 This assumption — that everyone does not have the capability to be a poet, and that some special people, such as Nizamī, are chosen to be inspired with the poetical word — recall the importance of poetry, and this importance can be interpreted in two ways: first, the influence that poetry has on its audience, and secondly, the content of the poetry itself.

Firstly, Nizamī considered the influence of poetry to be like magic, referring to it as ‘permissible sorcery’ or sihr-i halal .92 Like magic, eloquence and beauty in verse can have a very deep influence on audiences:

نطقم اثر آن چنان نمايد کز جذر اصم زبان گشايد93 Following Persian poets before him, Nizamī imagines the pen as a sword when he writes:

تيغ ز الماُ زبان ساختم هرکه پس آمد سرش انداختم94 To Nizamī, the poet is king of the realm of discourse and has the power to manipulate, moving whenever he wants. from asceticism into banquet.

Of so many eloquent ones (ancient poets)—remember (this my) speech: “I am the remembrancer of (their) speech in the world.” When, by me, speech assumed integrity (lustrousness and correctness), By me, it will display stability till the judgment-day.

90 The divine messenger sent to Prophet Muhammad 91 Nizamī, 1386: 92 Nizamī, 1320: 46 شکل نظامی که خيال منست جانور از سحر حالل منست 93 Nizamī, Leili va Majnun 94 Nizamī, 1320: 38 30

I am—the cypress-pruner (gardener) of the garden of speech; Like the cypress-tree, in attendance, loin-girt (erect). Like the sky—far from the deriding of all; The chief; yet (through humility) the foot-kisser of all (poets); 95 Such verses might derive from common beliefs about the role of pen as a sword, as expressed by other Persian poets and litterateurs. For example, Khayyam pointed to the role of Pen in his Nowrooz nāma, and said:

Persian rulers know that sword can conquer a land and establish the pillars of the government, and pen keeps land and delineates the policy; and the deed performed by the two items is rooted in hand’s arts.96 He believed that while the sword could conquer new territory, it was with the Pen that this territory would be protected. Likewise, in Nasīhat-ul-mūlūk, Alexander is quoted as saying:

The world stands up on two things: sword and pen, but the pen is beyond the sword.97 Abu Hamīd Ghazzali elsewhere offered similar assertions:

Nothing is established in the world without pen and sword, and these two items are the true governors of the world.98 Following this line of thinking, the word dwelled on common themes — religion, piety, sapience, and knowledge, to name a few. These are the major concerns of Persian

95 Nizamī, 1881: 67 ز چندين سخن گو سخن ياد دار سخن را منم در جهان يادگار

سخن چون گرفت استقامت به من قيامت کند تا قيامت به من

منم سرو و پيرای باغ سخن به خدمت ميان بسته چون سرو بن

فلکوار دور از فسوُ همه سر آمد ولی پای بوُ همه 96 Khayyam, Nowrouz-Nameh, ed. Mojtaba Minovi, Tehran: Asatir, 1380 [2001], p 45 97 Abu Hamid Muhammad Ghazali, Nasihat ul-moluk, ed. Jalal al-Din Homaei, Tehran: Homa, 1367 [1988], p189 98 Ghazali, 188 31 literary men, from the early days of history, both before and after the time of Nizamī, and it goes without saying that he is influenced by this attitude. Moreover, to some, the value of the poetry in Iran can be measured by the amount of sapience and knowledge each verse holds; sapience should not be understood as superfluous to poetry, let alone vain or futile.

For instance, Shahid Balkhi, a tenth -century poet, observes:

You claim that you are the best poet of the Time, but there is no sapience, or joy, or meaning in your verses.99

Poets in the Persian speaking world found themselves responsible for raising the awareness of their audience using the pen. Many considered this dynamic a major motivation for composition. ‘Aṭṭar held that he desired to shine on the darkness of ignorance. 100 ‘Eraqi (1213 – 1289) considers his heart filled with world of ideas and regards poetry as a chance to express them.101 To this point, Jami (d.) says that he put the

99 Shahid Balkhi, Gilbert Lazard, Ash’ar- i Parakandeye qadimi-tarin Sho’araye farsi az hanzale Badqeisi ta Daqiqi (bejoz Dudaki), Tehran: Anjoman Iran-shenasi Faranse, 1361 [1982], p 31 دعوی کنی که شاعر دهرم وليک نيست در شعر تو نه حکمت و نه لذت و نه چم 100 Farīd al-Dīn Aṭṭar Neishāpūri, Mantiq al -ṭayr, ed. Mohammad Reza Shafiᶜie Kadkani, Teran: Sokhan, 1388 [2009], p 437: گر کسی را ره نمايد اين کتاب پس براندازد ز پيش او حجاب ... زين سخن گر خفتة عمری دراز يک نفس بيدار گردد به راز بی شکی دانم برآيد کار من منقطع گردد غم و تيمار من بس که خود را چون چراغی سوختم تا جهانی را چو شمع افروختم.

101 Ibrāhīm Ibn Bozorgmehr ‘Erāqī, Kolyāt (Complete works), ed. Saeid Nafisi, Tehran: Sanaei, 1338 [1959], p 332. جان من چون به عالم شد با صفا گشت و حامل شد گشت حاصل ز فيض ربانی در وجودم جنين روحانی چون محبت بشوق تسويه داد قابلة عشق میيافت چون میزاد ديدمش چون ز غيب روی نمود قره العين نيک موزون بود

32 seed of truth in his verses. 102 In the same way, Nizamī believes that he has a treasure of truth, which allowed him to express himself in his poetry. 103 In fact, for Nizamī, words not based on knowledge do not deserve to be mentioned:

سخن كان از سر انديشه نايد نوشتن را و گفتن را نشايد104

So, in their poetry, the expression of knowledge is a central aim, and this position sheds light onto Nizamī’s objections regarding the poetry of his time. He criticizes the tradition of court poetry in part because of the relationship he sees between poetry and wisdom. Like his predecessors, from Shahīd Balkhī to Sanā’ī, Nizamī thought concerning discourse in general and poetry in particular considers sapience essential. In other words, to engage in the material world is to deprive poetry of its value. Poets and the eloquent hold the key to the treasure:

خاصه کليدی که در گنج راست زير زبان مرد سخن سنج راست105 To understand how poetry is bound up with truth, we must return to the origin of the word. The connection of poets to the world of meanings and the source of intuition, suggests they have access beyond the material world.106 According to Nizamī, the source

102 Nūr al –Dīn Abd al-Raḥmān Jami, Bahārestān wa Rasaᵓel –e Jami, ed. Aᶜla Khan Afsah-nezhad et la, Tehran: Miras –e Maktub, 1379, p 928. بران بحر يک مثنوی داشتم که تخم حقايق درو کاشتم همه نکتههای حکيمان دين حکايات ارباب کشف و يقين چو اين گوهرم بود ازان بحر ژرف مکرر نراندم در اين بحر حرف سخن گرچه باشد چو آب زال ز تکرار خيزد غبار مالل

103 Nizamī, 1386: ز من داناتران کاين شعر گفتند ز بازوی ملوک اين لعل سفتند به دولت داشتند انديشه را پاُ نشايد لعل سفتن جز به الماُ سخنهايی ز رفعت تا ثريا به اسباب مهيا شد مهيا 104 Nizamī, 1386: 105 Nizamī, 1320: 41 106 Saravtiayn, 283 33 of poetry is not reasoning but rather intuition. In this regard, Nezami is of course talking about his own personal experience. As Hasan-Nezhad’s research107 shows, from the beginning of his career, Nizamī referred to an external source of intuition, which gradually became internalized – increasingly associated with his heart – as he grew older. In both of these phases, one thing holds constant for Nizamī — that per the inspiration he received, the content of his poetry remained rooted in truth.

This situation is well known in the Persian Islamic context, where most of the time the source of poetic inspiration lies somewhere outside the poet, each using his own name to describe this source of intuition, most of the time referring to the surūsh, or hatīf, who talk to the poet about the secrets of heavens in an esoteric way.108 The source of poetry in

Nizamī’s point of view, by contrast, is not reasoning, but rather intuition.

Although poetic creation depends on intuition, we must also note the importance of, and responsibility toward, education of the poet, and there is no doubt about Nizamī’s prodigious learning. Poets such as himself were expected to be well-versed in many subjects, but Nizamī seems to have been exceptionally so. A clear polymath, his poems show that he was fully acquainted with Arabic and Persian literatures, as well as with oral, written, popular, and local traditions. He was familiar with diverse scholarly fields such as mathematics, geometry, astronomy and astrology, alchemy, medicine, as well as the religious sciences of Koranic exegesis, Islamic theology along with law, history, ethics,

107 Mahmud Riza Hassan-Nezhad, “Nizamī Ganjavi va Mansha’-I Ilham- i Sukhan”, Matn-Pazhuhi Adabi, no. 57, [1392/2013] 108 Farzad Qa’emi, “Sorūsh: Rab ul-No’-i Sha’iri dar Iran Bastan”, Majaleye Adabaiat- i Daneshgah- i Fedowsi, no. 160, [1387/2008], p 261 34 philosophy, esotericism, music, and the visual arts.109 Concrete evidence of this can be found in his Haft Paykar, which is virtually a summary of medieval knowledge adapted to poetic ends and contains many allusions to contemporary events and issues.110

In this regard, he criticizes the poetry of his time as valueless, overly engaged in the material world:

چشمه حکمت که سخندانی است آب شده زين دو سه يک نانی است It is only the word that knows what takes place in the heart, and it is through the word that one can reach true profundity. Conversely, the word that does not emerge from reasoning does not merit being written or spoken:

خط هر انديشه که پيوستهاند بر پر مرغان سخن بستهاند اول انديشه، پسين شمار هم سخن است اين سخن اينجا بدار111

Although poets during Nizamī’s time had access to new and different sciences, he maintains an emphasis on religious teachings. As previously mentioned, Nizamī’s concern is what is called ‘poetry of religion.’ He believes one cannot start practicing poetry unless first trained by religion. It is with the support of religion that a piece of poetry can reach perfection and become heavenly.

تا نکند شرع تو را نامدار نامزد شعر مشو زينهار شعر تو از شرع بدانجا رسد کز کمرت سايه به جوزا رسد112

109 Nizamī Ganjavī; Julie Scott Meisamī, viii 110 Ibid 111 Nizamī, 1320: 40 112 Ibid, 44 35

So, before anything else, it is the religious teaching that provides a poet with the meaning and the truth they need to be heard. Religion seems to be an essential element, the first step in training a poet to access meaning and knowledge.

True knowledge, or ma’rifah as it understood by the mystics, is the sight of “things identical to the way that God sees them, i.e. things as they are.”113 The creation that God thought of was in His mind an ideal creation, not material but an ideal — haqiqah, literally meaning truth or ‘reality’ of a given thing. Its real meaning is the totality of the vision of the ideal existence. Truth, the relationship of all things in harmony and unity, does not allow conflict to come into existence. This ideal was then actualized in the material world by God, who in His wisdom, conceived of a perfect existence. And this is called the truth.

So, the truth or haqiqah is an ideal form of existence, where there is no conflict between creatures. It is important to note here that ‘truth’ is not intended along the lines of the common usage of ‘truth or falsity,’ although occasionally in his discussions about truth,

Nizamī considers it in both meanings, i.e. as the ultimate reality and a factually correct statement. This is in contrast to the common belief in his period, according which, lie in poetry was acceptable.

It should be mentioned here that during the period of the Khurāsānī style, there were several indications demonstrating that a piece of poetry did not need necessarily to be a true statement; rather, the more lies contained in the poetry, the more it was accepted. Early definitions of poetry presented by Jami reinforce this message — there is little to no factual credence to what is mentioned in poetry. Poets in this period openly claim that untruths

113 Muhammad Asadi-Garmaroudi, “Irtibat I aql va Dil”, ANjoman Ma’arif Islami, vol. 1, No 4, 2005: 78 36 subtend the poetic art; the more fibs, the better.114 Nizamī, however, sees truthfulness as the essential element of poetry when he writes:

Although in utterance that is fountain of youth, Everything possible is permissible, While you can make a true statement, Why do you put a lie [in your word]? اگرچه در سخن كاب حياتست بود جايز هر آنچ از ممكنات است چو بتوان راستي را درج كردن دروغي را چه بايد خرج كردن 115

Although the role of reason in grasping certain kinds of knowledge is not rejected here, from the point of view of the mystics, reason does not have the ability to reach true knowledge; therefore intuition and certitude, all of which belong to the realm of heart.116

To this end, Ibn ‘Arabī mentioned three different stages for true knowledge: the first, ma’rifah, is the knowledge that can be reached through reasoning. The second type of knowledge can be reached by dhauqoq, a direct experiential knowledge to which reason bears little relation. The final type of knowledge exists beyond reasoning, and this knowledge is given by the Holy Spirit to the heart, access to which is limited to the prophets and saints.117

In the same way, ‘Ayn al-Qudhāt distinguished between science and knowledge.

He considered science the result of reasoning, whereas knowledge came through intuition,

114 Aufi, 1361/1982:62 115 Nizamī, 1386: 116 Sarvatian, 283 117 Asadi-Garmaroudi, 2005: 77 37 and intuition through insight, struggle, and discernment.118 In the same way, Najm al-Din

Razi introduced the heart as the main tool to reach the truth and gain knowledge. He thought this the reason for humanity’s superiority over the beasts.119

Nizamī, considering himself among the circle of Sufis, and places himself in a superior positon over other poets when he writes of Jibra’īl:

By Gabriel taught, my reed-pen’s muse My marks on paper thus construes: ‘Go, deck this muse-taught magic fine In garments ne for New Year’s time120

He claims that Jibra’īl guides his pen, not demons and jennies, as the Arabs used to thought about the source of poetic intuition.121 Nizamī puts himself in the same position as an angel. He is aware of how to access to true knowledge, and uses poetry as a means to translate this message.

Not surprisingly, Nizamī believed in a similitude not only between poets and saints, but also between poets and prophets. He called the poet ‘heaven’s nightingale,’ as well as the ‘shadow prophets.’ Poetry from his perspective succeeds the prophets’ discourse, which

.کبريا originates in

هركه علم بر سر اين راه برد گوي ز خورشيد و تك از ماه برد گر نفسش گرم روي هم نكرد يك نفس از گرم روي كم نكرد در تك فكرت كه روش گرم داشت برد فلك را ولي ازرم داشت بارگي از شهپر جبريل ساخت باد زن از بال سرافيل ساخت پس سپر كس مكن اين كشته را باز مده سر بكس اسن رشته را سفرهي انجير شدي صفر وار گر همه مرغي بدي انجيرخوار

118 Ibid:78 119 Ibid 120 Nizamī Ganjavī; Julie Scott Meisamī: 13 121 Asadi-Garmaroudi, p 110 38

منكه درين شيوه مصيب آمدم ديدني ارزم كه غريب آمدم شعر به من صومعه بنيادش شد شاعري از مصطبه آزاد شد زاهد و راهب سوي من تاختند خرقه و زنار در انداختند سرخ گلي غنچه مثالم هنوز منتظر باد شمالم هنوز گر بنمايم سخن تازه را صور قيامت كنم آوازه را هرچه وجودست ز نو تازه كن فتنه شد بر من جادو سخن صنعت من برده ز جادو شكيب سحر من افسون ماليك فريب بابل من گنجهي هاروت سوز زهرهي من خاطر انجم فروز زهرهي اين منطقه ميزانيست اجرمش منطق روحانيست سحر حاللم سحري قوت شد نسخ كم نسخهي هاروت شد شكل نظامي كه خيال منست جانور از سحر حالل منست

The word allows the truth to reach the world of creation, through which the prophets are inspired to truth. Thus the word is rooted in the hidden world, and originates in the depths of the soul and spirit. This means that there are different sources for the word. For being the true witness of the truth and the discoverer of a secret from the treasury of secrets, the first letter can be nothing except for ‘word,’ which is the knower of every secret of truth. ‘Word’ is the path to reaching the truth.122 It seems, then, to be the link between reason, rationality, and reasonability.

When they raised the curtain of non-existence, the first manifestation of existence was word and speech

On the other hand, ‘the curtain of non-existence’ is an indication of God’s eternal solitude, and “even an indication to the Hadith Qodsi: “I was a hidden treasure (and) I wanted to be known, so I created Creation”123 In the moment that the veil of God’s solitude falls, the first sign of existence – i.e. substantiated being or the manifestation of pre-created Being –

122 Dabbashi , 730 123 Ibid کنت کنزا مخفيا فاحببت لکی اعرف نفسی، فخلقت اانسان 39 was the ‘word’. Beyond the solitude of God, the very first moment of being, the first image

عدم of creation, is the ‘word’. It is synonymous with creation, while before the ‘word’ is and absolute annihilation. “Even thinking about that impossible moment of non-existence,”

Dabbashi notes, “is bound up with the possibility of being.”124

Nizamī believes that through the word, one can reach thought and idea, since the word is the first creature of God and has a close relationship with the world of ideas. In exploring the meaning of word in Nizamī’s work, Dabbashi writes:

word is not only the means by which the meaning is implicated, but also it is the way of producing the meaning. The understanding of the world and how being in the world is impossible without ‘word’. ‘word is the source and the origin of the world.125 It is only word who knows what is going on in the heart. It is through the word that one can reach the profundity that underlies everything. Thus, the source of truth is inside the human being:

Nizamī believes that through the word one can reach thought and idea, since the word is the first creature of God and has a direct relationship with the world of ideas.

124 Ibid 125 Ibid, 734 126 Nizamī Ganjavī; Julie Scott Meisamī 23 40

Rooted in the hidden world, the word originates in the depths of the soul and spirit. This means that the word may be introduced by different sources.

For being the witness of the truth and the discoverer of a secret from the treasury of secrets, the first letter can be nothing except for ‘word’, which is the knower of every secret of truth. ‘Word’ is the reaching path to the truth.

Here, there is external third party inspiring Nizamī ; this time the source of the word is inside him. The source of truth thus exists inside the human being:

He who his own self truly knows, triumphant over his life goes. Who knows not his design must die But who can read it, lives for aye. When once you know yourself alright, Though gone, you shall not pass from sight. 127 The key for spiritual treasures is under the tongue of the poet. Poetry places the treasures of both worlds under its discourse.

خاصه کليدی که در گنج راست زير زبان مرد سخن سنج راست قافيه سنجان که سخن برکشند گنج دو عالم به سخن در کشند By common means, Nizamī reminds us that one can never reach the depth of meaning and truth; tongue and words alone are not enough. Instead, the truth is bound up with discourse itself, which prohibits improper and incorrect words:

زنگ ندارد ز نشانی که هست راست نيايد به زبانی که هست تا سخن آنجا که برآرد علم حرف زيادست و زبان نيز هم گرنه سخن رشتهی جان تافتی جان سر اين رشته کجا يافتی128

127 Ibid 128 Nizamī, 1320: 40 41

The poets are the owners of the treasury of both worlds, and the key to understanding this treasury lies with the critics and eloquence. 129

These ideas connect to the hadith, which says:

the treasures of God are in the Heaven and its key is under the tongue of the poets. 130 An earlybird poet, in his early morning thoughts, is like an angel. During this time, he has he access to both worlds. And through mystical thought, he can have access to a pure discourse.131

در آن مدت که من در بسته بودم سخن با اسمان پيوسته بودم گهی برج کواکب میبريدم گهی ستر ماليک میدريدم

129 Mahouzi, 192 ان هللا کنوزا تحت العرش، مفاتيحه السنه الشعرا 130 131 Mahouzi, 186 42

Conclusion

The dominance of the Seljuk dynasty over Iran had profound consequences on

Persian poetry. From this period on, poetry started to separate from court life and follow an independent path. Accordingly, the joyful and mundane court poetry which began under the Safarids, flourished under the Samanid courts, and peaked during the Ghaznavid period, fell under the influence of Sufism. This transition did not happen at once, and many overlook the middle link in this chain —a ‘poetry of religion’.

Nizamī of Ganjah was the most distinguished figure during this period. Where court poets often composed verse with the hope of reward, Nizamī thought of poetry as a vehicle for truth. In his eyes, the poet – as shadow of the prophets and likewise inspired by Gabriel

– was responsible for shedding the light of marifah on his audiences. In short, a discourse without knowledge, according to Nizamī, was not worthy of being spoken.

To summarize, Nizamī primarily sees himself as a jeweler who tries to put words, like gems, into the setting of discourse. Only then can he put himself in a line with the prophets, whose shadow poets seek, and whose inspiration comes from a similar source.

Nizamī does not stop here, however. After aligning himself with the prophets, he compares his own poesy with God’s creation. As a divine act, then poesy finds a different meaning.

God creates everything based on Truth and Intellect; Nizamī similarly thinks the poetic words need to be bound up with thought and wisdom.

Bibliography

‘Erāqī, Ibrāhīm Ibn Bozorgmehr, Kolyāt (Complete works), ed. Saeid Nafisi, Tehran: Sanaei, 1338 [1959]. Anonymous, “Muqadame Shahnameh abu Mansouri”, in Bist Maqaleh Qazvini, Tehran: Ibn SIna, 1333 [1954]. Anonymous, Tārīkh- i Sīstān, ed. Mohammad Taghi Bahar, Tehran: Chapkhane Fardin va baradaran, 1314 [1935]. Asadi-Garmaroudi Asadi-Garmaroudi, Muhammad, “Irtibat I aql va Dil”, ANjoman Ma’arif Islami, vol. 1, No 4, 2005 Aṭṭar Neishāpūri, Farīd al-Dīn, Mantiq al -ṭayr, ed. Mohammad Reza Shafiᶜie Kadkani, Teran: Sokhan, 1388 [2009]. Ayouqi, Varqeh va Golshah, ed. Zabih ollah Safa, Tehran: Nashr- i Iran va Islam, 1362, [1983]. Bahar, Mohammad Taghi, Sabk Shīnasī Yā Tārīkh- i Tatavvor- i Shi’r- i Farsī, Tehran: Amir Kabir, 1337 [1958] Brujin, J. T.P de, Persian poetry: an introduction to the mystical use of classical Persian poems, Richmond, Surrey: Cruzon, 1997 Burgel, J.C, “the Romance”, in Persian Literature, ed. Ehsan Yarshater, Albany, N.Y.: Bibliotheca Persica, 1988 Christine Van Ruymbeke, Science and Poetry in Medieval Persia: The Bitany of Nizamī’s Khamsa, Edinburgh: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Clinton, Jerome W., “Court Poetry at the beginning of the Classical Period,” in Persian Literature, ed. Ehsan Yarshater, Albany, N.Y.: Bibliotheca Persica, 1988 Dabbashi, Hamid, “Harf- i Nakhsotin: Mafhume- i Sokhan nazd- i Hakim Nizamī Ganjavi” Iran-SHinasi, no. 12 {1370/1991]. Farīd al-Dīn Aṭṭar Neishāpūri, Elahī Nāmeh, ed. Helmut Rayter, Tehran: Ofset Publication, 1359/ 1980. Foruzanfr, Badi’ u-zamān, Tārīkh-i Adabīāt- i Iran (ba’d az Islam tā Pāyān- i Teymūrīān, Tehran: Vezarat- i farhang va Irshad- i Islami, 1383 [2004]

Ghazali, Abu Hamid Muhammad, Nasihat ul-moluk, ed. Jalal al-Din Homaei, Tehran: Homa, 1367 [1988]. Heshmat Moayyadi, “Lyric Poetry,” in Persian Literature, ed. Ehsan Yarshater, Albany, N.Y.: Bibliotheca Persica, 1988. Kai Kāᵓūs ibn Iskandar, A Mirror of Princes, tr. Reubin Levy, London: Cresset Press, 1951. Khayyam, Nowrouz-Nameh, ed. Mojtaba Minovi, Tehran: Asatir, 1380 [2001]. Mahmud Riza Hassan-Nezhad, “Nizamī Ganjavi va Mansha’-I Ilham- i Sukhan”, Matn- Pazhuhi Adabi, no. 57, [1392/2013] Monshi, Nasrullah, Kalīlah and Dimnah, [Tehran]: Sanā’ī, 1345 [1966] Muhammad Ibn Alli ibn Sulayman Ravandi, Rāhat –us-svdur wa Āyat-vs-survr, ed. Mohammad Eghbal. London, 1921. Nasir-e-Khosraw, Diwan- i Ash’ar, ed. Mojtaba Minovi; Mehdi Mohaqeq, Tehran: Intesharat- i Daneshgah- i Tehran, 1368 [1989]. Nidhami Arudi Samarqandi, Four Discourses, tr. Edward G. Brown, Hertford: Austin & Sons, 1899. Nizamī Ganjavī, Makhzan al- Asrar, ed. Vahidi Dastgerdi, Tehran: Armaghan, 1320 [1941]. Nizamī Ganjavī; Julie Scott Meisamī, Nizamī Ganjavī; Julie Scott Meisamī: A Medieval Persian Romance, Oxford: Oxford University press, 1995 Nizami, Khosrow and Shīrīn, ed. Behruz Sarvatian, Tehran: Amir Kabir, 1386 [2007]. NizamīGnjavi, the Sikandar Nāma, e Barā or Book of Alexander the Great, tr. Cpitain Wilberforce Clarke, London: W.H. Allen & Co, 1881. Qa’emi, Farzad, “Sorūsh: Rab ul-No’-i Sha’iri dar Iran Bastan”, Majaleye Adabaiat- i Daneshgah- i Fedowsi, no. 160, [1387/2008]. Saravtiayn, Behrouz, sharh- i Makhzan ul-Asrar Nizamī, Tehran: Sabzan, 1383 [2004] Shahid Balkhi, Gilbert Lazard, Ash’ar- i Parakandeye qadimi-tarin Sho’araye farsi az hanzale Badqeisi ta Daqiqi (bejoz Dudaki), Tehran: Anjoman Iran-shenasi Faranse, 1361 [1982]. Shamīsā, Sīrūs, Sabk Shināsī She’r, Tehran: Ferdows, 1381 [2002] Talattof, Kamran, “preface”, in The Poetry of Nizamī Ganjavi: Knowledge, Love, and Rhetoric, ed. Kamran Talattof, Jerome W. Clinton, New York, Palgrave, 2000 Yahaghi, Mohammad J, farhang-I Asatir va Dastanvare ha dar Adabiat-e Farsi, Tehran: Farhang-e Mo’aser, 1388 [2009]. 45

Yarshater, Ehsan, “Rastakhiz-I Iran va Zohour-e zaban va Adabiat-e Melli”, tr. Into Persian: Fereydoun Vahman, Iranshenasi, 1380 [2001] Yasnā, tr. To Persian Ibrahīm Pūrdavūd, Published in WWW.TARIKHFA.COM Zamani, Mehdi, “Jaygah- i Lawh va Qalam dar Jahan-Shinasi ‘Irfani ibn Arabi va ‘Attar Neishaburi”, Pazhuhesh- i Zaban va Adab- i Farsi, No. 25, [1391/2012].