196
(^160) Ḥāfiẓ’smostfamousverse(fromaghazalabsentfrommanyscholarlyeditionsoftheDīvān),oftencited
inthiscontext,is:‘InfidelityisunavoidableintheWorkshopofLove.IfAbūLahabdidnotexist,then
whowouldbeburntinHellfire?’Cf.Dārābī,Laṭīfa-yighaybī,p.122;Lāhūrī,Sharḥ-i‘irfānī,I,p.1091.
(^161) Dīvān-iḤāfiẓ,ed.Khānlarī,ghazal36:4.
(^162) Ibid.,ghazal190:5.
(^163) See the analyses of this verse by Isti‘lāmī,Dars-iḤāfiẓ, I, p. 535; Khurramshāhī,Ḥāfiẓ-nāma, I, p. 713;
Lāhūrī,Sharḥ-i‘irfānī-yighazalhā-yi-iḤāfiẓ,II,p.1439.
(^164) Ghazālī,Kīmiyā-yisa‘ādat,II,p.326;citedbyKhurramshāhī,Ḥāfiẓ-nāma,I,pp.713–14.
(^165) On whom, see Heshmat Moayyad and Franklin Lewis,The Colossal Elephant and His Spiritual Feats,
ShaykhAhmad-eJām:TheLifeandLegendofaPopularSufiSaintof12thCenturyIran.
(^166) The reference here to the burning light is taken from the following famous Qur’ānic verse (24:35):
‘God is the light of the heavens and the earth. The similitude of His light is as a niche wherein is a
lamp.Thelampisinaglass.Theglassisasitwereashiningstar.Thislampiskindledfromablessed
tree,anoliveneitheroftheEastnoroftheWest,whoseoilwouldalmostglowforth(ofitself)though
no fire touched it. Light upon light. God guides unto His light whom He will. And God speaks to
mankindinparables,forGodistheKnowerofallthings.’
(^167) See the long footnote with detailed discussion of the provenance of thisḥadīth, given by the text’s
editor‘AlīFāḍil,Rawḍatal-Mudhbibīn,pp.259–61.
(^168) AḥmadJām,Rawḍatal-Mudhbibīnvajannatal-mushtāqīn,chapteron‘WisdomandGuidanceofPeople’,
pp.34–7.
(^169) Kashfal-asrār,VI,p.190.
(^170) IhavedetailedmanyoftheinfluencesofNizārī’santinomianismandimageryonḤāfiẓinapaperon
‘The Influence of Nizārī on Ḥāfiẓ’, delivered at the International Society for Iranian Studies 6th
BiannualConference,London,aspartofapanelon‘ClassicalPersianPoetryandIsmailiThought’(3
August2006).
(^171) Dīvān, ed. Khānlarī,ghazal77: 7. Trans. by Bly and Lewisohn,Angels, p. 66. SeeDīvān-iḤakīmNizārī
Quhistānī,I,pp.920–1,vv.3429–37.BothghazalsarewritteninthesameBaḥr-imujtath-imuthamman-i
makhbūn-imakhzūfmetre. Khwājū Kirmānī (Dīvān-iKhwājūKirmānī, ed. Qāni‘ī, pp. 385–6,ghazal57:
1–10) also later imitated Nizārī’s rhyme and meaning (although Khwājū’s metre is different), attest-
ingtoinfluenceofbothpoetsonḤāfiẓ.Haravī(Sharḥ-ighazalhā-yiḤāfiẓ,I,p.361)pointsoutthatverse
3ofthisghazal(77)isalsomodelledonaquatrainbyKhayyām.
(^172) Dīvān-iḤāfiẓ,ed.Khānlarī,ghazal306:3.
(^173) Ibid.,ghazal179:4.Trans.byBlyandLewisohn,Angels,p.39.Lāhūrīexplainsthatthepoetmeansthat
one cannot recognize the truth of religion until one first perceives the Reality (ḥaqīqat) of faith and
attains inward certainty. As a consequence of that inward certainty, ‘one looks with compassion
andmercyonthefollowersofallotherfaithsandcreeds,anddoesnotdenythemhoweverbenighted
and misguided they may be. This is one of the ideas especially recognized by the Sufis ... As long as
theReality(ḥaqīqat)offaithisnotunveiledtoone,theaspirantwillrelyonhispowersofdeduction
and personal striving (qiyāsvaijtihād), which only generate religious differences (ikhtilāf).’ Lāhūrī,
Sharḥ-i‘irfānī-yighazalhā-yi-iḤāfiẓ,III,pp.1183–4.
(^174) OnḤāfiẓ’simmersioninSufiwritings,seeZarrīnkūb,Azkūcha-irindān,p.168.
(^175) OnḤāfiẓ’sethics,seeKhurramshāhī,‘Ḥāfiẓdarfarhang-imā’,pp.151–2.
(^176) In this respect, I fully endorse Khurramshāhī’s (‘Mayl-i Ḥāfiẓ bih gunāh’, p. 92) conclusion that
‘Ḥāfiẓ’s understanding of the true sense and inner meaning of sin did not lead him “astray” into
“error”, but rather conveyed him from the error of Appearance along the royal road to Reality and
Truth. By understanding the interior truth of sin, he freed himself from the narrow straits of pride
andegotism,toberaisedintothewideopenexpanseofheart-consciousness,whereheexperienced
some of the sublimest degrees the human soul may know. In this fashion, when he partook of the
FruitofKnowledgefromtheTreeofSin,thesecretsofthephilosophyof“inspiredlibertinism”(rindī)
wererevealedtohim.’
(^177) Dīvān-iḤāfiẓ,ed.Khānlarī,ghazal278:6.
ḤāfiẓandtheReligionofLoveinClassicalPersianPoetry