Hafiz and the Religion of Love in Classical Persian Poetry

168

(niyāz) of the rake, the rogue, the sinner, the miscreant and the down-and-out

homeless beggar over the Qur’ān-thumping puritan and sanctimonious fundamen-

talistzāhid:

Somepeoplesaythatgooddeedswillearnthem

Agatedhouseinheaven.Beingrakesandnaturalbeggars,

AroomintheMagiantavernwillbeenoughforus.^60

Thepuritanascetic,whoseexperienceembracesonlyinitialdegreesofthespiritual

path,^61 worships God for the sake of heaven and its delights (heavenly maidens,

fruits and wines all promised in the Qur’ān). However, for those advanced on the

path–thatis,theinspiredlibertine(rind)andthelover(‘āshiq)–thepursuitofpar-

adise purely through the exercise of pious deeds and works of self-mortification is

disdainedanddisparaged.Theloverandenlightenedlibertinehavealreadyentered

the realm of Paradise by virtue of following their highersectaamoris, expressed in

theaboveversebythesymboloftheMagianTavern,^62 whenceḤāfiẓsays:

WhenParadiseisminetodayascashinhand,

WhythenshouldIbetakeninandcountupon

ThePuritan’spledgeoftomorrow’skingdom?^63

The ascetic relies on his own efforts in the material realm to reach what he
imagines to be paradise, whereas the lover and inspired libertine have long ago
abandonedthelongingforaughtbutthedivine,theBeloved.^64
Another problem concerns the differing spiritualattitudesofrindandzāhid.The
difference between the inspired libertine and ascetic is one ofspiritualperspective
withregardtobothactionandcontemplation.Forthelatter,thebaremotionoffor-
malritualsandpiousobservances(prayer,renunciation,etc.)takesprecedence;for
the former, it is the contemplative ‘intention’ (niyyat) of the heart and the fervour
ofspiritualneedinessandpoverty(faqr)whichareofprimaryimportance.^65
This difference of spiritual attitudes betweenrindandzāhidharks back to the
classical definition of ‘ascetic renunciation’ (zuhd) given by Abū’l-Qāsim Junayd
(d. 297/910), cited in the earliest major work on Persian Sufism by Abū Ibrāmīm
Mustamlī Bukhārī (d. 434/1042–3)–his monumental multi-volume commentary
entitledSharḥal-ta‘arrufon al-Kalābadhī’s (d. 380/990)Kitābal-ta‘arrufli-madhhab
ahlal-taṣawwuf.Junayd remarked: ‘Ascetic renunciation [al-zuhd] is to empty one’s
hands of all possessions and divest the heart of pursuit of them.’ Bukhārī then
explains Junayd’s saying with the comment that the first degree (of the hands)
belongs to the common masses of devotees, whereas the second degree (of the
heart)pertainstothespiritualElect.^66 Ḥāfiẓ,referringpreciselytothisdistinction,
evokesinoneversethecontrastinspiritualperspectivesbetweentheconceitedasce-
ticontheonehandandhumblefaqīrontheother:

ḤāfiẓandtheReligionofLoveinClassicalPersianPoetry