ḤāfiẓintheSocio-historical,LiteraryandMysticalMilieuofMedievalPersia 57(^47) Referring to the Shīrāzi ruler Abū’l-Favāris Jalāl al-Dīn Shāh Shujā‘ (reg. 760/1358–786/1384) to whom
Ḥāfiẓ addressed several panegyrics.
(^48) Dīvān-iKamālKhujandī, ed. Shidfar, vol. 1, p. 451 (ghazal428, in reply to Ḥāfiẓ’sghazal163 [vv. 9–10],
ed. Khānlarī). Ghanī (Baḥth, p. 34) believes the entireghazalfrom which this verse was drawn was
written as a welcoming response (istiqbāl) to Ḥāfiẓ’s original. But Kamāl’s comments about Ḥāfiẓ are
indeed sometimes abusive (cf. Lewisohn, ‘The Life and Times of Kamāl Khujandī’).
(^49) Dawlatabādī, ‘Kamāl Khujandī va Ḥāfiz Shīrāzī’, in idem.,Tuḥfa-yidarvīsh, pp. 529–35.
(^50) Dīvān-iḤāfiẓ, ed. Khānlarī,ghazals 8: 3; 47: 8; 444: 5, in which ‘name and shame’ (nāmunang) are repudiated.
(^51) Dīwān-iKamālKhujandī, ed. Shidfar, no. 233: 1.
(^52) Ibid., no. 282: 5
(^53) For a discussion of this doctrine in classical Islamic love philosophy, see Griffen,TheTheoryofProfane
LoveAmongtheArabs, pp. 118–37.
(^54) Sa‛dī,Kulliyāt-iSa‛dī, ed. Muḥammad ‘Alī Furūghī,ghazal309, p. 524 (maqṭa‘);ghazal251: 7.
(^55) See J.T.P. De Bruijn, ‘‘Emād al-Dīn ‘Alī Faqīh Kermānī’,EIr, VIII, pp. 378–9.
(^56) SeeDīvān-iqaṣā’idvaghazaliyyāt-iKhwāja‘Imādal-Dīn‘AlīFaqīhKirmānī, ed. Rukn al-Dīn Humāyūn-
Farrakh (who discusses the relationship between Ḥāfiẓ and ‘Imād Faqīh), pp. lxv–lxviii. Mu‘īn,Ḥāfiẓ-i
shīrīn-sukhan, I, pp. 322–6, also discounts these legends.
(^57) See the examples given by Mu‘īn,Ḥāfiẓ-ishīrīn-sukhan, I, pp. 324–6.
(^58) Cf. Mu‘īn’s remarks to this effect:ibid., I, p. 324.
(^59) There is a large bulk of scholarship on the relationship (or lack thereof) between the Ḥāfiẓ and Shāh
Ni‘matu’llāh, of which Ḥamid Farzām,Taḥqīqdaraḥwālvanaqd-iāthārvaafkār-iShāhNi‘matu’llāhWalī,
pp. 276–301, provides a learned overview. For discussions about theghazalin question, see Mu‘īn,
Ḥāfiẓ-ishīrīn-sukhan, I, pp. 293–6, and ‘Alī Aṣghar Maẓharī Kirmānī, ‘Shāh Ni‘matu’llāh Walī Kirmānī va
Khvāja Ḥāfiẓ Shīrāzī’, pp. 12–21.
(^60) Kulliyāt-iQāsim-iAnvār, p. 281: 4621.
(^61) Dīvān-iḤāfiẓ, ed. Khānlarī,ghazal418: 7. Parallel adduced by Mu‘īn,Ḥāfiẓ-ishīrīn-sukhan, I, p. 298.
(^62) See Hasan Javadi, trans.‘Obeyd-eZakani:theEthicsofAristocratsandOtherSatiricalWorks.
(^63) See J.T.P. De Bruijn, ‘‘Ubayd-i Zakānī’,EI (^2) , X, p. 764.
(^64) ‘Abbās Iqbāl’s squeamish judgement about his 64 largely pornographic quatrains in his introduction
toKulliyāt-i‘UbaydZākānī, ed. Maḥjūb, p. xli.
(^65) His pornographic works have been fully published in the West in Persian (Kulliyāt-i‘UbaydZākānī) and
a large selection translated in Paul Sprachman’sSuppressedPersian:AnAnthologyofForbiddenLiterature,
pp. 44–75.
(^66) Kulliyāt-i‘UbaydZākānī, ‘A. Iqbāl’s introduction, p. xli.
(^67) Cf. the reference tobad-nāmīinKulliyāt-i‘UbaydZākānī,ghazal78, v. 575, replicated by Ḥāfiẓ’sghazal
(ed. Khānlarī) 177: 5 (composed in the same metre and rhyme).
(^68) Mu‘īn,Ḥāfiẓ-ishīrīn-sukhan, I, pp. 315–16 on this, and also pp. 320ff. for the literary parallels between
the two poets.
(^69) Ḥāfiẓ-ishīrīn-sukhan, I, p. 315.
(^70) Riyāḥī,Gulgasht, p. 59; Zarrīnkūb,Azkūcha-irindān, p. 48.
(^71) Ḥāfiẓ never usedhazlorhajv, as Khurramshāhī (‘Ḥāfiẓ dar farhang-i mā u farhang-i mā dar Ḥāfiẓ’, p.
137) stresses.
(^72) Mu‘īn,Ḥāfiẓ-ishīrīn-sukhan, I, p. 315, n. 28.
(^73) See Dominic Brookshaw, ‘Odes of a poet-princess: theghazals of Jahān-Malik Khātūn’, p. 174, who also
points out that there is a ‘noticeable degree of overlap in the rhyme, meter and content ... between the
ghazals of Ḥāfiẓ and Jahān-Malik’ (p. 188, n. 60), with the implication that they influenced each other.
(^74) See Rastigār-Fasā’ī, ed.,Kulliyāt-i Bushāq Aṭ‘amah, introduction, pp. lxvii–lxxviii; and Mu‘īn,Ḥāfiẓ-i
shīrīn-sukhan, I, pp. 345–9, who provides a shortlist of these parodies of contemporary poets. See also
Ghanī,Baḥth, I, pp. 35–8, for his parodies of Ḥāfiẓ.
(^75) For example, on the influence of Sa‛dī on Ḥāfiẓ, see, e.g.: Adīb Ṭūsī, ‘Muqāyisa bayn-i shi‘r-i Sa‛dī va
Ḥāfiẓ’, pp. 40–60. On Rūmī’s influence on Ḥāfiẓ, see Khurramshāhī, ‘Ḥāfiẓ va ghazaliyyāt-i Shams’, in