| Title Page | |
| Introduction | vii |
| THE LAMENT OF BĀBĀ TĀHIR, rendered into English verse by Elizabeth Curtis Brenton | 1 | 17 | -->
| Prose Translation of the foregoing text | 67 |
| The original dialectal text with the Persian equivalents and notes that begins on page 17 is omitted from this website. | |
To write an introduction to the poems, and to endeavour to give information about the life of an author of whom the only thing that can be said with perfect accuracy is that practically nothing is known of him, suggests the brick-making industry as practised by the Jews in Egypt. Though the rubā‘iyāt of Bābā Ṭāhir are chaunted and recited to the present day all over Persia, to the accompaniment of the three-stringed viol or lute, known as the Sih-tār (“Three-strings”), and few collections of poems have been published in that country (or indeed in the Persian language), since the introduction of the lithographic press, that do not contain some specimens of his quatrains, concerning the poet himself few precise details, biographical or otherwise, have yet come to light.
The only published attempt to lift the veil of mystery that shrouds the personality of Bābā Ṭāhir is to be found in the Majma‘u ’l-fuṣaḥā of Riẓā-Qulī Khān (Ṭihrān A.H. 1295, vol. i., p. 326), where, by way of introduction to ten rubā‘iyāt of Bābā Ṭāhir, the compiler expresses himself as follows:—
“Ṭāhir, ‘Uryān, Hamadānī. His name was Bābā
Ṭāhir. He was one of the most eminent mystics of his
era. The opinion expressed by some writers that he
was contemporary with the Seljuq Sultans is erroneous.
He was one of the earliest of the Shaikhs, and lived under
the Daylemite dynasty. He flourished about A.H. 410
(
The same author in a later work, the Riyāẓu’l-‘Ārifīn
(Ṭihrān A.H. 1305, p. 102), states that Bābā Ṭāhir died
in the year A.H. 410 (i.e. A.D. 1019-20:
Mr. E. G. Browne, to whom I am indebted for most valuable assistance in the preparation of this volume, adds the following very important and hitherto unpublished information to the above:—
“I have come across mention of Bābā Ṭāhir in a
unique history of the Seljuqs, of which the one known
MS. is in the Schefer Collection in Paris (vide note,
p. xii.). This history is called ‘Rāḥatu ’ṣ-Ṣudūr wa
Āyatu ’s-Surūr’ (
This passage remains therefore, for the present, the most precise authority at our service for the chronology of the author under consideration.
Neither of the collections of poems lithographed at
Bombay in A.H. 1297 (A.D. 1879-80) and A.H. 1308
(A.D. 1890-91), and at Ṭihrān in A.H. 1274 (A.D. 1857-8),
nor the Munājāt of the Khwāja ‘Abdu ’llāh Anṣārī,
lithographed at Bombay in A.H. 1301 (A.D. 1882-3),
prefix any introduction to the specimens they give of
Bābā Ṭāhir’s quatrains; but in the Ātash Kadah of
Luṭf ‘Alī Beg Āzar [Bombay A.H. 1277 (A.D. 1860-61),
p. 247] twenty-five rubā‘iyāt of Bābā Ṭāhir are introduced
by the following note, under the rubric
“‘Uryān, whose name is Bābā Ṭāhir, is a mad-man
from Hamadān (
The particular two-beyt metre referred to is not the
common rubā‘ī metre, though the Persians themselves
always refer to the quatrains of Bābā Ṭāhir as rubā‘iyāt.
The metre in which these quatrains are written might
properly be described as a simple variety of hazaj
The earliest MS. that I have seen of these quatrains
is one in my own collection, dating only from the end
of the 18th century and containing 27 quatrains, and
the only other to which I have had access is one in the
Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris (which bears the stamp
“Acquisition Schefer No. 9655”),xiia
which is a collection
of 174 rubā‘iyāt written in ordinary modern
Persian, in an ordinary modern nīm-shikasta handwriting,
by one ‘Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib Bakhsh ‘Alī
Qarābāghī, in the year A.H. 1260 (A.D. 1844). This
contains a prose preface of three and a half pages, but
this preface is entirely devoted to praise of the poem
itself, which is, to the writer, “such a book that it is
the very pupil of the eyes of the clear-sighted, and a
fair copy of it is the salt on the table of delicacy of
meanings”—and so on ad infinitum, together with
fulsome and exaggerated compliments to the reigning
Shāh of the Kājār dynasty. The MS. ends abruptly
and is apparently unfinished, but it would appear that
this was intentional, as the compiler ends his preface
with a statement that he has collected all the rubā‘iyāt
of Bābā Ṭāhir that have come to light down to A.H. 1260
(
M. Clément Huart, in his introductory essay to “Les Quatrains de Bābā Ṭāhir ’Uryān en Pehlevi Musulman,”xiiia states that he infers from a passage in the Nuzhatu ’l-Qulūb of Ḥamdu ’llāh Mustawfi, who died in A.H. 750 (A.D. 1349), that this author flourished before that date. The passage referred to is to the effect that the tomb of Bābā Ṭāhir was, ten years prior to that date (i.e. in A.D. 1329), highly honoured at Hamadān. He also tells us, on the authority of Comte de Gobineau’s “Trois ans en Asie” (p. 344), that Bābā Ṭāhir is now regarded in Persia as one of the saints of the Ahl-i-Ḥaqq or Nuṣayrī sect, and that his sister, Bībī Fātimah, is equally venerated by this community.
All that we can safely state is that he was a “crazy
saint,” a dervish, or religiously inspired beggar, from
his popular name ‘Uryān (
To the above information may usefully be added the following, which is a translation of an account gathered for me from a native scholar by Captain Charles Kemball, His Majesty’s Resident at Bushire. It is headed, “Account concerning Ṭāhir, known under the name of ‘Uryān, as handed down by tradition,” and is as follows:—
“It is stated that Ṭāhir-i-‘Uryān was an illiterate person and was a wood-cutter. During the day he was wont to go to the Madrasa (academy) and listen whilst the students would read their lessons, but the students used to make fun of him. One day he remarked to one of the inmates of the institution, ‘I wonder what these students do in order that they may understand the instructions of the Professors.’ The student replied jokingly, ‘At midnight they get into this pond and plunge their heads under the water forty times; after undergoing this process, they understand the instructions.’ Ṭāhir believed this account and did the same himself, though the weather was intensely cold. Just then a flash of light appeared and entered his mouth (?). Next day he came to the Madrasa and commenced a philosophical discussion with the students to which they were unable to respond. When they asked him the reason of this sudden change, he related his story to them, saying, ‘I passed the night as a Kurd and opened with the morning as an Arab.’ This immensely astonished his hearers. It is stated that there seemed to be extraordinary heat in his body, so much so that no one could sit near him. He used to pass his time continually in the jungles and mountains.” Such is the modern tradition concerning our poet-philosopher.
This is the sum total of what we have been able to discover concerning the author of these rubā‘iyāt, and in the absence of any early text that might throw further light on the subject it seems all that we are ever likely to obtain. M. Blochet in Paris, Dr. Ross in London, Mr. Browne in Cambridge, and Mr. Ellis at the British Museum, have, with the utmost kindness and patience, ransacked the stores of biographical lore of which they have command in the endeavour to obtain for me some more explicit information concerning this mysterious personage, and with their combined failure to elicit any details other than those recorded above, I must reluctantly abandon the search for the present.
The other point to be considered is the dialect in which the rubā‘iyāt of Bābā Ṭāhir are written. He is often called “Lurī,” and Steingass gives “Lurī Ṭāhir Tātī” as the name of one of the tribes of the Lurs. Accordingly, Cte. de Gobineau states that he wrote in the Luri dialect, whilst Chodzko, in his “Popular Poetry of Persia” (London 1842, p. 434), says that he wrote in Māzandarānī dialect. We may, however, I think, adopt the view expressed in the introduction to the quatrains in the Ātash Kadah, that they are written in the Rājī (or Rey) dialect.xvia This dialect is one of the north Persian group which M. Huart (loc. cit.) proposed to class under the generic term “Pehlevi Musulman”; for a fuller explanation of the term the reader is referred to the article of M. Huart already quoted, in which his contentions in favour of this somewhat dubious expression are ingeniously set forth and its use justified.
A learned Sheikh of Kirmān, writing to Mr. E. G. Browne under date July 30, 1891, concerning these dialects, says: “The dialect about which you wrote for information is the Lūrī patois of Shīrāz and Isfahān, which is the Pahlavī dialect. Many poets, such as Sa‘dī, Abū Is-ḥāq, Ḥāfiẓ, and Khwājū (of Kirmān), have composed verses in it.”xviia
It is not expedient, in the introduction of a book primarily intended to present to the occidental reader the sentiment and beauty of a comparatively unknown collection of oriental quatrains, to go into the features of the dialect itself. The student who is interested in this branch of the subject is referred to the text which forms part of this volume. In the notes elucidating that text the dialectal forms are picked out and restored to ordinary Persian; it may be said, however, in this place, that these quatrains having been transmitted through perhaps nine hundred years by recitation and oral tradition, have suffered the usual vicissitudes which affect such folk-songs when reduced to writing. Successive scribes, ignorant perhaps of the dialect they were transcribing, and careless perhaps of the historic value of a scrupulous exactitude, have produced a number of extremely variant texts, the variations, however, being fortunately confined within certain limits. The MS. of Mirzā Ḥabīb Isfahānī, from which M. Huart largely took his text, is apparently for the most part in pure dialect, whilst that of ‘Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib, in Paris, appears to be frankly translated into pure Persian. It is for this reason that I have, wherever possible, given the text of M. Huart “in chief,” noting the variants to be found in the other texts that I have used in compiling that which appears in this volume, and in arriving at its meaning.
When we come to the discussion of our translation, which purports to place before our readers the sentiments of Bābā Ṭāhir, we get on to exceedingly delicate ground. I must say at once that I alone am responsible for the actual translation of the quatrains, and that Mrs. Brenton has rhymed my literal interpretations with a fidelity and exactitude which is often but little short of amazing. Whatever errors of interpretation are to be found in this volume (and I am exceedingly conscious that they are many), are entirely due to my lack of a just comprehension of the original. It is for this reason that, after very serious consideration, I have at last, and somewhat reluctantly, decided, on the advice, and at the request, of several students of the language, to append after the text my own measured prose rendering of the quatrains.
The initial difficulty with which one is confronted when attempting to translate a Persian dialect is the absence of any text-book dealing with the subject in anything like a complete form. An invaluable “Table of Phonetic Equivalents” forms part of Mr. Browne’s article above referred to, and M. Huart’s already quoted article discusses these variants at some length. Besides these sources of information, we have the important work of Berésine, “Recherches sur les Dialectes Persans,” printed at Kazan (Casan) in 1853, which gives us elaborate vocabularies of the dialects of Gīlak and Māzandarān, Gabrī, Kurdish, Tālish, and Tātī. Some observations of Mr. Browne upon these difficulties will not be out of place. They are as follows:—“Not only does the Arabic character, especially when unpointed, afford a very imperfect means of representing graphically the finer shades of pronunciation, but every scribe, when he has to do with dialects not used for literary purposes, where he has no fixed rule to guide him, employs his own system, and is usually not consistent even in that. It is bad enough when the scribe is thoroughly familiar with the dialect which he wishes to express in writing, and far worse when (as is generally the case) we have to deal with copies more or less remote from the original draft, made by persons ignorant of the dialect before them, into which all sorts of clerical errors are almost sure to have crept” (loc. cit., p. 782). “I have learned by experience that the publication of even a very faulty and imperfect account of a matter which is interesting in itself, often suffices to elicit from other workers in the same field valuable communications and criticisms which might otherwise never be made … The English rendering which I give must, in some cases, be regarded as rather of a tentative character, though I believe that they fairly represent the general sense of the poems” (loc. cit., p. 783).
With these preliminary observations by way of introduction, we must leave our “Lament of Bābā Ṭāhir” in the hands of the amateur of verse, and the student of the Persian language. My own interpretations of the quatrains have been versified with conspicuous success (I speak of course from the philological point of view, and not in any way presuming to encroach upon the domain of the literary critic), by Mrs. Elizabeth Curtis Brenton, whose paraphrase of the accepted renderings of the “Rubā‘iyāt of ‘Omar Khayyām” (by “Elizabeth Alden Curtis”) attracted so much attention when issued by “The Brothers of the Book” at Gouverneur (New York, U.S.A.) in 1899. My own translation has been added at the last moment under circumstances already alluded to. I had not intended that it should form part of this volume, but having been commanded to make a draft of it for the pleasure of a friend, it fell into the kind of measured prose in which it now stands. The result having been (as a fulfilment) a failure, it was cast aside, but was rescued from destruction, and, in a revised form, included herein for the assistance of students who may care to have a guide through the intricacies of the text. The quatrains being in the nature of independent aphorisms have no proper order of their own. Mrs. Brenton has arranged them as they fell into place during the process of constructing her poem; my prose version follows the order of the text, which I have arranged to some extent so as to bring together such sets of quatrains as appear to deal with certain attitudes of mind, e.g. Addresses to God, to himself, to his Beloved, and so on.
It may be observed, in conclusion, that it is often very difficult to determine whether an earthly or a heavenly object of adoration is the object addressed in any particular rubā‘ī, but this is a difficulty which is incidental to all oriental poetry in which a mystic or Sufistic tendency is observable.
It only remains for me to record in this place my great indebtedness and sincere gratitude to Mr. E. G. Browne for his invaluable assistance in the compilation of this work.
EDWARD HERON-ALLEN.
VENICE,
April, 1901.
Note.—In the following translation I have endeavoured to offer a certain measure of ordinary English expression. Where the precisely literal signification has suffered eclipse, it has been restored in the notes. The notes appended to the foregoing text must also be referred to when characteristic Oriental images occur in this translation.
* Vide E. G. Browne, “Some Notes on the Poetry of the Persian Dialects,” in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, October, 1895.
↩ * I have retained in this place the term Rājī for the reason that
it transliterates the Persian, but I am indebted to Mr. E. G. Browne
for the following note: “If the reading
* These Schefer MSS. are included in the “Supplèment Persan,” nos. 1303—1578.
↩* Journal Asiatique (Paris), ser. viii., vol. vi., no. 3, November-December, 1885.
↩* See the note on page xi.
↩* E. G. Browne, “Notes on the Poetry of the Persian Dialects,” loc. cit., p. 773.
↩Lit. who see Thee always.
↩Lit. who talk with Thee.
↩Lit. Though I have not strength (a foot) to come and see Thee, I will go and see those who see Thee.
↩Lit. If, without Thee, the heart smiles and opens its lips (in laughter), may it never wash its cheek from heart’s blood.
↩ “Whose (constant) occupation is the reciting of the Ḥamd
and the Ikhlāṣ,” i.e. the Sūratu ’l-Fātiḥa, the first chapter of the
Qur’ān, beginning
Lit. Their market, i.e. the market in which their wares find acceptance.
↩ Perhaps we should read instead of
Lit. In whatsoever faith (or sect) we be, &c.
↩Lit. the Crucible.
↩Lit. let us lament together.
↩Lit. For he whose heart is burnt knows the condition of the Burnt-in-Heart.
↩Lit. Thy passage must be over the Zenith of Heaven.
↩Lit. If it comes from thy hand (i.e. if thou canst), cast off thy skin, so that thy load may thus be a little less.
↩Lit. the heavier will we weigh (i.e. the greater will be our honour).
↩Lit. And though she mourn not.
↩This might also mean “A black-eyed beauty’s arrow,” which is probably correct.
↩Lit. feed (pasture), not on the heights.
↩Lit. feeds (grazes).
↩This is ascribed to Bābā Ṭāhir in my MS., but I think it is an importation. It is neither in his style or language.
↩Lit. ’Tis through the mischief-working of Heaven’s Wheel that…
↩Lit. My groaning body and my tears reach even unto Samak (i.e. the Fish that in the Muḥammadan cosmogony supports the whole world, here meant to symbolize the deepest depths of ocean).
↩Lit. O Lord! so afflicted am I by this heart.
↩Lit. I am in torment through this heart of mine, &c.
↩Lit. for I am weary of it. Vide also the note on p. 32.
↩Lit. A plague is the heart, a plague, a plague.
↩Or, “The eyes see, and the heart is afflicted (with love).
↩Lit. it does not smoke.
↩Lit. anchor (i.e. settled abode).
↩Lit. what (harm) would it be?
↩I.e. an infinite soul in a finite body. Cf. the passage in the Prologue to Book I. of the Mathnawī of Jalālu ’d-dīn Rūmī: “If thou pourest the ocean into a jug, how much will go into it? But one day’s portion”—
Lit. in stature (upright) like an Alif (i.e. the Persian letter “a”).
↩Lit. I am the thrall of my heart.
↩Lit. The image of thy down, thy mole, Love, will not depart.
↩Lit. That (though) blood (i.e. bitter tears) pour forth, thine image may not go forth.
↩Lit. beside myself.
↩Lit. The oriental imagery of this verse is hard to render. It might be translated:
Lit. “O stony-hearted one, thou pitiest me not.”
↩Lit. If I so much as strike my eyelashes together a torrent arises.
↩Lit. comes from the roots (or ‘side’) of thy, &c.
↩Or, “All night I clasped thine image (phantom) to my breast.”
↩Lit. Do not leave me in the affliction of the day of separation.
↩Lit. If thou comest, by thy life I will, &c.
↩Lit. And if thou comest not.
↩Lit. will I melt.
↩I.e. the pains thou canst inflict.
↩Lit. whose tears are of fire. Cf. the verse of Jamāl ’ud-dīn Salmān quoted by Sir Gore Ouseley (“Biographical Notices of Persian Poets,” London, 1846) beginning:
Lit. with my heart’s blood.
↩Observe the note to the text on page 59.
↩Lit. topsy-turvy.
↩Lit. overturned.
↩Lit. By my heart’s doing.
↩Lit. alchemy.
↩Lit. It is (only) our heart whose (sole) remedy is annihilation.
↩
Lit. Is this distance enough?
↩