indeed,itsopening(andpointedlyeschatological)banquet-imagery,atfirstglance,
isasclosetofamiliarandbanalasonewilleverfindinthispoet.^8 AndḤāfiẓclearly
intends for that confusion to arise, since he leaves it quite ambiguous whether we
are to read line 7 simply as a continuation of the very personal and intimate voice
oflines5–6,orasareturntothemoreinclusive,objective,wiservoicethathisread-
ers often expect from his conclusion – the kind of all-knowing, reproaching wis-
dom-voiceweclearlydofindinthelastlinehere.Thetransforminganswertothat
dilemma, as we might expect, comes in the second half of line 7, where we are
remindedthatLifeitself(‘aysh,whichisfarmorethanjustenjoyment)isimpossible
without the Friend. So this time, what is pointedly absent from this scene is the
openingpretenceofthelostandlonelyego.Sincewehavebeenremindedthatthat
Friendis‘withyouallwhereveryoumaybe’(57:4),therecanbenoquestionnowof
whoisasking,andwhoisreallybeingasked.
The concluding line 8 of thisghazalis a particularly striking illustration of the
essential double function and meaning of Ḥāfiẓ’s pen-name: both asvocative–
addressed toeveryhuman being and to all the far-reaching responsibilities of our
cosmicroleandpotentialasḥāfiẓ;andinthiscasealsoasimperative,demanding(in
theintensivethirdArabicverbalform)thatweactively,assiduously,constantly‘be
mindful,watchout,observe,upholdandbeheedful’.Andbothfunctions,ofcourse,
areunavoidablyinthenecessarilyindividualsingularform.
Beyondthattellingformofaddress,therestofthefirsthalf-linehereappearsat
first as a beautiful poetic reworking of the famousḥadīth: ‘Don’t curseal-dahr[the
apparentcyclicaleternity,sufferingandfatalityofthematerialworld’sorder,often
blamed in pre-Islamic poetry], because it is among God’s Names!’^9 But Ḥāfiẓ’s con-
cluding, typically ironic formulation here – together with the rest of thisghazal–
goesmuchdeeperinofferingadeeplyinsightfulexplanationofthereasonsunder-
lyingthatPropheticprohibition.Forastheprecedinglineshavemadeclear,itisin
factonlythroughthetransforminghumanWorkofourownnecessarilyuniqueand
individual experience of suffering, loss, distance and separation – through con-
stantly discovering the cyclical polarities and oppositions inherent in all those
divineNamesthataremirroredinthefullyhumanbeing(insān)–thatwecanever
begin to discover, appreciate, know and love that Friend whose apparent painful,
arbitrary‘absence’(andconstantguidingPresence)makesthewholedramaofloss
andredemptionpossible.
VoiceandPerspectiveShiftsinGhazal13:SurrenderorSeparation?This short, apparently simpleghazal^10 well illustrates the particular challenges of
interpretationthatsooftenarisewhenḤāfiẓleavesoutsomeofthefamiliargram-
maticalandsyntacticalmarkersthatnormallysignalimportantshiftsinperspective
and tone or voice. In the face of such intentional indeterminacy, each reader’s
particular understanding of the shifts in question, both in voice and perspective,
tends to be built – as we shall see below – on the basis of apparent allusions to
Ḥāfiẓ’sRomanticImageryandLanguageofLove 239