calls out for attention that has no destination beyond itself, each seems self-centered, too fragile to
support the gravity of our immense regard’ (OnBeautyandBeingJust, p. 47). This dichotomy between
ordinary human vision and the refined mystically cognizant divine ‘regard’ for beauty is an oft-
broached subject in Sufi erotic poetry. Sa‛dī states: ‘It’s said glancing on the faces of the fair [naẓarbi-
rū-yikhubān] is forbidden. Indeed – and yet, not the regard which I have. I contemplate the mystery
of the ineffable Creator displayed in your countenence, witnessed there as if reflected in a mirror’
(Kulliyāt, p. 427). Elsewhere, Sa‛dī issues the supremefatwāof the manifesto of the Sufi Romantics:
‘Regarding a beautiful face [rukh-izībā] is permissible in the Religion of Love (madhhab-i‘ishq), with
this condition – that it be done constantly! (ibid., p. 502;kiguft). Thus the determination of the mean-
ing of Ḥāfiẓ’s poetic images does not depend so much on the polarity of the sacred or profane, moral
or immoral, but on the ‘authenticity’ of the heart – that is to say, an interior discrimination between
what constitutes sincere or hypocritical conduct, a discernment between the erotic regard that is
unitary, holistic and leads to an imaginal synthesis, and the analytical, ratiocinative perspective that
is always divisive. That is one reason why, in Ḥāfiẓ’s lexicon, images drawn from the repertoire of
profane poetry ultimately have greater sacred import than the same imagery drawn from religious
poetry.(^355) As Ḥāfiẓ states:Dīvān-iḤāfiẓ, ed. Khānlarī,ghazal91: 8.
(^356) My own three decades of study of Ḥāfiẓ’sDīvānconvinces me of the truth of Isti‘lāmī’s judgement that
‘the termshāhidin Ḥāfiẓ’s writings simply has the meaning of a person with a fair face [zībārū’ī] and
a beloved female mistress [ma‘shūq], and if critics have said or written that it refers to pretty-faced
boys, this is wrong’ (Dars-iḤāfiẓI, pp. 326–7). Elsewhere, he writes that ‘there are more than 15 verses
in Ḥāfiẓ’sDīvānwhere this term [shāhid] refers to a person with a fair face [zībārū’ī], and in most of
these instances it cannot be said to refer to the face of a prettyboy’ (ibid., I, p. 98). He adds that: ‘in
most of the instances where Ḥāfiẓ employs the wordshāhid, his regard is for a beautiful woman, or
else it remains ambiguous – whether the reference is to a woman or a pretty boy, although it is far
more reasonable to assume the former’ (ibid., I, p. 292). Isti‘lāmī emphasizes that there is onlyonespe-
cific instance in theDīvān, whereshāhidcan be definitively said to be male (ibid., I, p. 345, referring to
Dīvān,ghazal170:Dars-iḤāfiẓ, I, p. 477 –zāhid-ikhalvat-nīshīn, not in Khānlarī’s ed.). I should also add
that the prevalence of the mainly femaleshāhids in Shīrāz in ‘Ubayd’s poetry (Kulliyāt-i‘UbaydZākānī,
pp. 45:ghazal45, v. 4; 113;ghazal114: v. 1, p. 323, lines 5–6) adds greater weight to Isti‘lamī’s opinion.
This viewpoint of course is contested by some other scholars (cf. Ritter,Ocean, p. 481infra; Sīrūs
Shamīsā,Shāhid-bāzī, pp. 165–70) who largely consider hisshāhidto be exclusively male, andshāhid-
bāzīsimply pederasty.
(^357) Dīvān-iḤāfiẓ, ed. Khānlarī,ghazal484: 10: ‘Thought of self and will of self have no place in the realm of
the libertine: in our creed, self-will and self-conceit are sacrilege.’
(^358) Ibid.,ghazal345: 1. Trans. Bly and Lewisohn,TheAngels, p. 51.
(^359) Schroeder, ‘Verse Translation and Hafiz’, p. 215.
(^360) Dīvān-iḤāfiẓ, ed. Khānlarī,ghazal224: 9. This follows Khwājū’s erotic doctrine of the identity of human
and divine love vis-à-vis divine Reality exactly:‘Ishq-i majāzī dar rah-i ma‘nā ḥaqīqat-ast / ‘ishq
ārchipīsh-iahl-iḥaqīqatmajāznīst(Romantic Love on the Path of Reality is itself True and Divine /
although for the truthful adepts there’s no love at all that is not divine!’Dīwān-iKhwājūKirmānī, p.
214,ghazal76: 8.
(^361) For the major study of this device in his poetry, see Murtaḍawī’sMaktab-iḤāfiẓ, pp. 455–515.
(^362) This is particularly clear in Sa‛dī’sghazals. The following verses from three differentghazals celebrate
his flagrant adoration of the femaleshāhid:(1) ‘Sa‛dī, what a disharmonious creature it is / who claims
he’s got a heart but not a sweetheart.’ (2) ‘If you are a man, do not censure Sa‛dī / for no man did ever
live not inclined to the beautiful fairy-faced nymphs [parī-ruyān].’ (3) ‘Sa‛dī’s name is everywhere
associated withshāhidbāzī/but that is not a flaw; in my creed it is the highest praise / The Muslim
with his ritual prayers, the infidel with his heresy, and me and love: / In secret everyone you see has
their own form of faith.’Kulliyāt-iSa‛dī, ed. Furūghī, pp. 465, 468.
(^363) Dīvān-iḤāfiẓ, ed. Khānlarī,ghazal385: 9. Trans. Bly and Lewisohn,TheAngels, p. 22.
ḤāfiẓintheSocio-historical,LiteraryandMysticalMilieuofMedievalPersia 71