Hafiz and the Religion of Love in Classical Persian Poetry

ḤāfiẓandthePersianSufiTradition 181

and the Najm al-Dīn Rāzī’s (d. 654/1256)Mirṣādal-‘ibād, the latter being the most
important medieval manual of Sufism in Persian. In his chapter on the creation of
man, Rāzī explains as follows how God justified the superiority of Adam’s sin over
theAngels’virtue:

Divine munificence and lordly wisdom whispered into the innermost core of

theangels’hearts:‘Howcanyouevergraspofwhatwehaveintendedfromall

eternity to the end of time with this handful of dust? ... But you have never

hadanythingtodowiththisaffairofLove,soyoucanbeexcused.Youarebut

dry ascetics dwelling in cloisters of holy retirement [zāhidān-iṣūma‘a-nīshīn

ḥaẓā’ir-i quds]. What knowledge can you ever have of the wayfarers who

inhabit the Taverns of Ruin of Love [kharābāt-i ‘ishq]? How can those with

a‘safeandsound’character[salāmatiyān]savourthedelightssensed,everrel-

ish the sweet taste enjoyed by those who incur public blame and censure

[malāmatiyān]?’^136

AsDāryūshĀshūrīexplainsinhisintertextualstudyoftheDīvānandthesetwosem-
inalSuficlassics,^137 Ḥāfiẓinsertedmuchofthesamevocabulary,imageryandideas
from many of Rāzī’s passages directly into his poetry. For example, just as Rāzī
describedGod’srebuketotheangel–asceticsdwellinginParadisefortheirloveless
temperament,soḤāfiẓinsimilartermscriticizestheascetics(zāhidān)ofthisworld:

Youpuritansonthecoldstonefloor,youarenotsafe

FromthetricksofGod’szeal:thedistancebetweenthecloister

AndtheZoroastriantavernisnot,afterall,thatgreat.^138

In the following verse, like Rāzī, Ḥāfiẓ rebukes the dry ‘ascetic’ (zāhid) for residing
in the safety of the ‘cloister’ (ṣūma‘a), identifying himself with Adam destined to
inhabitthetavern(kharābat):

Maqām-iaṣlī-yimāgūsha-yikharābāt-ast

khudāyashkhayrdahādhar-kiīn‘imāratkard

Beforealltime,ourprimordial

Degreewasinthetaverncorner:

Godgracewithgoodnesshe

Whoraisedhighthisedifice.^139

Ḥāfiẓ emulates Rāzī’s imagery and ideas in numerous other verses.^140 Like Rāzī, he
celebrates the sinful, suffering, tavern-haunting Adam who courts reproach
(malāmat), and contrasts him unfavourably to the insensitive ascetic, homologous
ontheearthlyplanetothe‘holy’angelsinheavenendowedwitha‘safeandsound
character’(salāmat).^141 Juxtaposedtothesesmugegotisticalangel–ascetics,Adamis