SIR WILLIAM JONES AND

ORIENTAL MYSTICISM
Hadi Baghaei-Abchooyeh

Submitted to Swansea University in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of

Doctorate of Philosophy
SWANSEA UNIVERSITY
2021

Copyright: The author, Hadi Baghaei-Abchooyeh, 2021.

Abstract
Oriental mysticism, religion, and science are all intertwined with literature; while proven to be
fantastic for many scholars, this intermixture has made it challenging to extract mystical
concepts from poetry. This difficulty has been one of the earliest sources of conflict between
Oriental literary scholars, religious figures, and mystics. The situation becomes more complex
should one attempt to compare Oriental mysticism with its Occidental counterpart. Arguably,
the first Western scholar who conducted such a rigorous comparison was Sir William Jones
(1746–1794), a linguist, translator, and poet who was also a Supreme Court Judge in Calcutta.
His fascination with Persian mystical poets such as Rumi (1210-1273), Sadi (1210-1292), and
Hafez (1315-1390) drove him towards Sufism. Due to his understanding of Persian mysticism
and culture, Jones became one of the best interpreters of Indo-Persian literature. His works,
founded on his fascination with Persian language and literature, gained him the title of ‘Persian
Jones’ and established his international reputation as an Orientalist. Jones’s publications highly
impacted Romantic scholars, developing sympathetic representations of the Orient in the
period’s literature.
Jones’s works, letters, Persian manuscripts, and the annotations he made on them have
not been examined for his Persian mystical studies before this thesis. Therefore, this PhD
research will investigate his works and library on Sufism and his comparative study of mystical
schools. It intends to analyse Jones’s findings in his comparative mystical studies and elaborate
on his understanding of Sufism. This thesis investigates his essays, letters, and annotations in
various texts; such texts are mainly available in the Royal Asiatic Society archives and the
British Library’s India Office Records and Private Papers. Moreover, in some cases, Jones has
altered his English translations of Persianate Sufi texts; these alterations will be examined and
compared with the original texts to demonstrate Jones’s rationale behind them. This research
will pursue the accuracy of Jones’s interpretation of Sufism and Hinduism. In addition, it
examines his development of the interpretations of Oriental mysticism, which he presented to
eighteenth-century Europe. The findings of this research will contribute to the growing
literature on Orientalism and shed a brighter light on the works of Sir William Jones and Indo-
Persian literature and mysticism.
DECLARATION

This work has not previously been accepted in substance for any degree and is not being concurrently
submitted in candidature for any degree.

Signed: H.Baghaei-Abchooyeh (candidate)

Date: 28/06/2021

This thesis is the result of my own investigations, except where otherwise stated.

Other sources are acknowledged by footnotes giving explicit references. A bibliography is appended.

Signed: H.Baghaei-Abchooyeh (candidate)

Date: 28/06/202

I hereby give consent for my thesis, if accepted, to be available for photocopying and for inter-library
loan, and for the title and summary to be made available to outside organisations.

Signed: H.Baghaei-Abchooyeh (candidate)

Date: 28/06/2021
 Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................... i
List of Illustrations in Each Chapter .....................................................................................ii
Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1
Chapter 1: Sir William Jones’s Collection of Papers, MSS EUR C. 274 .......................... 13
Sir William Jones and Oriental Languages ..................................................................... 21
Persian and A Grammar of Persian Language (1771).................................................. 22
A Grammar of the Persian Language as a Self-teaching Text ..................................... 34
Sir William Jones and India .............................................................................................. 48
Sir William Jones and Sanskrit ..................................................................................... 55
Chapter 2: ‘Sir William Jones’s Collection of Verses’ ....................................................... 68
The Persian Verses and Annotations in Sir William Jones’s Notebook ........................ 73
Chapter 3: On the Pluralistic Traditions of the Oriental Mystical Poetry ..................... 143
The Life and Works of Attar ........................................................................................... 148
Attar’s ‘The Book of Mokhtar’ ................................................................................... 153
Attar’s Book of Khosrow ............................................................................................. 154
Attar’s Book of Mysteries, Rumi’s Masnavi, and Jones’s ‘Song of the Reed’ ........ 155
Attar’s Conference of the Birds and Sufi Poetics ....................................................... 175
A Most Extraordinary Imitation of Attar ...................................................................... 184
The Oriental Sheikh and the Jihadist Society ............................................................... 191
Chapter 4: On the Philosophy of the Asiatics: Sir William Jones, Harmonious
Metaphysics, and Unity ....................................................................................................... 208
The Unity of Being............................................................................................................ 214
Jones’s Annotations on the Market of Unity: ‘Moses and the shepherd’ ............... 225
Jones’s Annotations on the Market of Unity: The Sixth Volume ........................... 228
The Unity of Witnesses .................................................................................................... 250
Sufism and Politics in Medieval India ............................................................................ 251
Pluralism and the Unity of Being in the Mughal Court................................................ 264
Chapter 5: The Majnoon of India: Sir William Jones’s Annotations on Nezami’s
Treasury of Mysteries ........................................................................................................... 293
Appendices ............................................................................................................................ 319
Appendix 1 ........................................................................................................................ 319
Appendix 2 ........................................................................................................................ 323
Bibliography ......................................................................................................................... 358
Acknowledgements

I am heartily grateful to Professor Michael J. Franklin, the pleasant old man, who generously
provided me with inspiration and invaluable supervision during the past seven years as my
Master’s Dissertation and PhD supervisor. His critical counsel and unwavering support
immensely facilitated me to carry out this research. I would also like to thank most sincerely
Professor Caroline Franklin for her learned guidance, stewardship, and patient advice during
this long process; I have learned from both of you more than one can realise. Furthermore, I
would like to express my gratitude to the lecturers of my Master’s degree, Professor Mark
Humphries, Professor Julian Preece, Dr Richard Robinson, and Dr Steven Vine. Their guidance
set me on a course to conduct this research; their presence and influence could be observed in+
parts of this thesis. Moreover, I am grateful to my colleagues in Swansea University’s
Customer Service team, most notably Mrs Amber Arrowsmith, whose continued patience,
support, and encouragement significantly assisted me to conduct this research. Finally, I should
also like to express my appreciation to the British Association for Romantic Studies for
providing me with fundings for my research trips and the staff of the British Library’s Asian
& African Studies Reading Room for assisting me with my research resources.

This thesis is dedicated to my parents, Mehdi and Mahin, to whom I owe everything I
am. Without their love, support, patience, and guidance, I most certainly could not achieve in
my life as much as I have. In addition, my work is dedicated to my partner Parnian for her
constant offering of help and support during the past long four years. Without her, I would not
have made it through my PhD degree and complete this research.

i
List of Illustrations in Each Chapter

Introduction

Illustration 1; Akbar’s gold and silver coins containing Hindu and Persian references.

Chapter 1: Sir William Jones’s Collection of Papers, MSS EUR C. 274

Illustration 1, BL, APAC, MSS Eur C. 274, f. 40-1; Jones’s Persian translations of Psalm 1:
1-6 (KJV),
Illustration 2, BL, APAC, MSS Eur C. 274, f. 47; an extract, showing Jones practising the
different tenses of ‘To Teach’ in Persian.
Illustration 3, BL, APAC, MSS Eur C. 274, f. 45; on top, a distich of Hafez and Jones’s
translation; on the bottom, recitation of the Lord’s Prayer in Persian.
Illustration 4a & 4b, 4c, BL, APAC, MSS Eur C. 274, f. 54-5, & 64; extracts showing Jones
reciting and translating distiches of Hafez.
Illustration 5a & 5b, BL, APAC, MSS Eur C. 274, f.43-4; extracts of recitation and
translation of a distich of Sadi by Jones.
Illustration 6, BL, APAC, MSS Eur C. 274, 51; recitation, transliteration, and translation of
two distiches of Attar.
Illustration 7, BL, APAC, MSS Eur C. 274, ‘’Persian Vocabluary Nov. 1785’, f.3; daily used
phrases in Persian and English translations.
Illustration 8, BL, APAC, MSS Eur C. 274, f.38; daily used phrases in Persian and English
translations.
Illustration 9, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. I; recitation of a quatrain Jones believed to be Amir
Khosrow’s.
Illustration 10, BL, APAC, RSPA 76, f. 34; Jones’s notes on Hindu mythology.
Illustration 11, Jones MSS: 2: 2; a letter from a scribe to Jones.
Illustration 12, Osborn c. 400, f.10; a quatrain in Persian and Sanskrit in Jones’s hand.

Chapter 2: ‘Sir William Jones’s Collection of Verses’

Illustration 1, The Notebook, f. 2; Jones’s translation of a ‘quatrain in the Persian form.’

Illustration 2, The Notebook, f. 16; a quatrain by Badr-odin Jajromi.
Illustration 3, The Notebook, f. 16; a quatrain by Khajeh Shams-odin.
Illustration 4, The Notebook, f. 16; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.
ii
Illustration 5, The Notebook, f. 25; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.
Illustration 6, The Notebook, f. 26; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.
Illustration 7, The Notebook, f. 27; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.
Illustration 8, The Notebook, f. 26; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.
Illustration 9, The Notebook, f. 26; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.
Illustration 10, The Notebook, f. 19; a quatrain by a poet named Jabreal.
Illustration 11, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. I; a quatrain in Jones’s hand which he attributed to
Amir Khosrow.
Illustration 12, The Notebook, f. 24; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.
Illustration 13, The Notebook, f. 18; a quatrain by attributed to Sahabi.
Illustration 14, The Notebook, f. 27; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.
Illustration 15, The Notebook, f. 18; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.
Illustration 16, The Notebook, f. 18; a quatrain attributed to Sahabi.
Illustration 17, The Notebook, f. 22; a quatrain attributed to Sahabi.
Illustration 18, MSS Eur. C 274, f. 48; a quatrain by Khayyam in Jones’s hand.
Illustration 19, MSS Eur. C 274, f. 49; Jones’s word by word translation of a quatrain by
Khayyam.
Illustration 20, Osborn c. 400, f. 28; a Persian quatrain in Jones’s hand.
Illustration 21, Osborn c. 400, f. 28; an extract of a Persian quatrain in Jones’s hand.
Illustration 22, The Notebook, f. 17; a quatrain by Khayyam.
Illustration 23, The Notebook, f. 17; a quatrain by Khayyam.
Illustration 24, The Notebook, f. 17; a quatrain by Khayyam.
Illustration 25, The Notebook, f. 20; a quatrain attributed to Sahabi and Jones’s translation.
Illustration 26, The Notebook, f. 19; a quatrain by Sahabi.
Illustration 27, The Notebook, f. 27-8; three distiches by Amir Khosrow.
Illustration 28, The Notebook, f. 22; a quatrain by Sahabi.
Illustration 29, The Notebook, f. 21; a quatrain by Sahabi.
Illustration 30, The Notebook, f. 21; a quatrain by Sahabi.
Illustration 31, The Notebook, f. 23; a quatrain by Sadi and Jones’s translation.
Illustration 32, The Notebook, f. 24; a quatrain by Sadi.

iii
Illustration 33, The Notebook, f. 20; a quatrain by Amir Khosrow and Jones’s translation.
Illustration 34, The Notebook, f. 20; a quatrain by Amir Khosrow and Jones’s translation.
Illustration 35, The Notebook, f. 22; a quatrain by Amir Khosrow and Jones’s translation.
Illustration 36, The Notebook, f. 23; a quatrain by Amir Khosrow and Jones’s translation.
Illustration 37, The Notebook, f. 28; a quatrain by Amir Khosrow.
Illustration 38, The Notebook, f. 27; a distich by Amir Khosrow.
Illustration 39, The Notebook, f. 28; a quatrain by Amir Khosrow.
Illustration 40, The Notebook, f. 21; a quatrain by Bazel.
Illustration 41, The Notebook, f. 25; a distich and a quatrain by Bidel.
Illustration 42, The Notebook, f. 19; a quatrain by Hazin.
Illustration 43, The Notebook, f. 24; a quatrain by Hazin.
Illustration 44, The Notebook, f. 25; a distich by Arzu.
Illustration 45, The Notebook, f. 23; a quatrain by Sarmad and Jones’s translation.
Illustration 46, Osborn c. 400, f. 35; a Persian quatrain in Jones’s hand.
Illustration 47, The Notebook, f. 29-30; a ghazal by Jami.
Illustration 48, The Notebook, f. 31; a ghazal by Jami.
Illustration 49, The Notebook, f. 32; a Persian quatrain in Jones’s hand.

Chapter 3: On the Pluralistic Traditions of the Oriental Mystical Poetry

Illustration 1, Osborn c. 400, f. 20; Jones’s ‘Order of Persian Reading.’

Illustration 2, BL, APAC, RSPA 35, f. 2; Jones’s handwritten description of Rumi’s Masnavi.
Illustration 3, BL, APAC, RSPA 34, f. 25r; Jones’s recitation of Attar’s and a Persian distich
of Rumi on his copy of Masnavi.
Illustration 4, BL, APAC, RSPA 37, f. 131; Jones’s annotation on Rumi’s Masnavi.
Illustration 5, BL, APAC, RSPA 39; Jones’s annotation on Rumi’s Masnavi.
Illustration 6, BL, APAC, RSPA 57, f. 66; Jones’s annotation on his ‘Commentary on the
Divan of Hafez.’
Illustration 7, the dome of Masjed Jameh of Isfahan.
Illustration 8, Calcutta Gazette, 1784, 1: 5; the ghazal Wilkins gifted to Jones on the first
gathering of the Asiatic Society.

iv
Illustration 9, BL, APAC, RSPA 57, f. 117; Jones’s annotation on his ‘Commentary on the
Divan of Hafez.’
Illustration 10, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. 40; a Persian poem by Jones and in his hand on his
manuscript of Nezami’s Treasury.
Illustration 11, the death of the Christian girl by Ali Asghar Tajvidi.

Chapter 4: On the Philosophy of the Asiatics: Sir William Jones, Harmonious

Metaphysics, and Unity

Illustration 1, BL, APAC, RSPA 35, f. I; Jones reciting and altering a distich of Rumi.
Illustration 2, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 106; Jones’s annotation on Rumi’s Masnavi.
Illustration 3, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 110; Jones translating a distich of Rumi’s Masnavi.
Illustration 4, BL, APAC, RSPA 36, f. 114; Jones’s annotation on Rumi’s tale of ‘Moses and
the shepherd’.
Illustration 5, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. I; Jones’s list of Persian poets annotated on Rumi’s
Masnavi volume six.
Illustration 6, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 18r; an extract showing Jones’s annotation on a distich
in Rumi’s Masnavi.
Illustration 7, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 48; Jones’s annotations on Rumi’s tale of Mohammad
and Aisha.
Illustration 8, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 50; Jones’s annotation on a distich of Rumi’s
Masnavi.
Illustration 9, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 54-5; Jones’s annotation on Rumi’s Masnavi.
Illustration 10, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 87; Jones’s comparative annotation on Rumi’s
‘Freedom of Bilal’.
Illustration 11, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, 91; Jones’s correction on Rumi’s Masnavi.
Illustration 12, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, 92; Jones’s comparative remark on Rumi’s Masnavi.
Illustration 13, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 115; Jones’s annotations on Rumi’s ‘Tale of the
Wretched’.
Illustration 14, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 150; Jones’s annotations on Rumi’s Masnavi.
Illustration 15, Osborn c. 400, f. 96; Jones’s recitation of Rumi’s distich.
Illustration 16, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 155; Jones’s annotation on Rumi’s Masnavi.
Illustration 17, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 156; Jones’s annotations on Rumi’s Masnavi.
Illustration 18, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 180; Jones’s annotation on Rumi’s Masnavi.

v
Illustration 19, Osborn c. 400, f. 55; Jones’s comparative notes on Oriental mysticism.
Illustration 20, Osborn c. 400, f. 58; two extracts, showing Jones’s comparative mystical
studies.
Illustration 21, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. 40; a Persian poem by Jones and in his hand on his
manuscript of Nezami’s Treasury.

Chapter 5: The Majnoon of India: Sir William Jones’s Annotations on Nezami’s

Treasury of Mysteries

Illustration 1, BL, APAC, RSPA 72, f. i; the manuscript of ‘On the Virtues of Love in Sufism
and the Divine Love’.
Illustration 2, BL, APAC, RSPA 35, f. ii; Jones’s description of Rumi’s Masnavi.
Illustration 3, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. i; on top and the bottom of the folio Jones has recited
a quatrain attributed to Amir Khosrow, in the middle, he has written a distich in Persian.
Illustration 4, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. ii; on top and the bottom of the folio Jones has recited
a quatrain by Mahasti Ganjavi, in the middle, he has written a distich in Persian.
Illustration 5, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. i-ii; Jones’s writings on the first two folios of
Nezami’s Treasury.
Illustration 6, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. iii; Jones’s remarks on Nezami’s Treasury.
Illustration 7, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. 1; Jones reciting and translating two distiches from
Caucabi.
Illustration 8, BL, APAC, RSPA, f. 32; Jones’s comparative philological study on Persian
and Hindi alphabet.
Illustration 9, BL, APAC, RSPA 20, f. iii; Jones’s remarks on the Farhang-e Jahāngiri.
Illustration 10, BL, APAC, RSPA 32. f. 2; Jones’s recitation of Nezami’s Treasury.

Appendix 1

Illustration 1, MSS Eur. C 274, f. 12; a letter in verse to Sir William Jones.

Appendix 2

Illustration 1, a miniature depiction of the tale of ‘The Sheikh of Sanaan and the Christan
Girl;’ painting by Ali-Asghar Tajvidi.

vi
Illustration 2, an illustrated Manuscript of Mantegh ol-tayr in the Metropolitan Museum of
Art.

Illustration 3, ‘only that beloved’s formidable Love remained; everything else was purely
gone;’ painting by Ali-Asghar Tajvidi.

Illustration 4, ‘For drinking wine, he lost his heart and control; he was tempted to fold his
arms around her neck;’ painting by Mahmoud Farshchian.

vii
Introduction

Sir William Jones (1746-1794) is arguably the very first Western scholar to conduct
comparative studies between Oriental mysticism and Western schools of thought. In 1770,
before he gained a reputation as an Orientalist, Jones attended the Middle Temple and studied
law; in the meantime, Jones started to learn Arabic and Persian. His acquisition of the Persian
language resulted in the composition of Histoire de Nader Chah (1770), a French translation
of a Persian biography of Nader Shah (1688-1747), and A Grammar of the Persian Language
(1771), the very first English grammar of the language. Due to Jones’s deep understanding of
the Oriental culture and his legal experience, in 1781 Edmund Burke (1729-1797) asked for
his assistance in preparing a bill to protect the Muslims living in the subcontinent against the
East India Company.1 In line with the bill, Jones translated Arabic treatises on the Islamic laws
of succession, published as The Mahomedan Law of Succession to the Property of Intestates
(1782). Although The Mahomedan Law of Succession was relatively short, it immensely
impacted the British legal system operating in India by making the Supreme Court of Judicature
independent from untrustworthy local judges.2 Due to Jones’s knowledge of the Oriental
culture, Burke also consulted him on some other Indo-Persian affairs, such as ‘on the
government, manners, and sciences of the Persians.’3

Jones’s fascination with Persian poets, such as Ferdowsi (940-1020), Nezami (1141-
1209), Rumi (1207-1273), Sadi (1210-1291), and Hafez (1315-1390), drove him towards
Persian mysticism and Sufi metaphysics. His interest in the mystical poetry of Persians can be
observed in his early works such as A Grammar and Poems consisting chiefly of translations
from the Asiatick languages. To which are added two essays, I. On the poetry of the Eastern
nations. II. On the arts, commonly called imitative (1772). Due to the success of his Persian
Grammar, his vast knowledge of the language – which was the language of the Mughal court
of India at the time – and his legal expertise that granted Jones the appointment of puisne
judgeship in the Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort William. On 25 September 1783, Jones

1
Garland Cannon, ‘Sir William Jones and Dr. Johnson's Literary Club’, Modern Philology,
63: 1, (1965), 20-37: 33.
2
For further details on the book see Hadi Baghaei-Abchooyeh, ‘William Jones’, Christian-
Muslim Relations: A Bibliographical History, vol. 12 (Asia, Africa and the Americas 1700-
1800), D. Thomas, & J. Chesworth (eds.), (Leiden: Brill, 2018), 560-73: 562-5.
3
Edmund Burke, Correspondence of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke: between the year
1744 and the period of his decease, in 1797. (London: Francis & John Rivington, 1844), 2:
487.
1
arrived in Calcutta, where he centred his professional career on law and focused on defending
the rights of the Indians.

In India, Jones met Warren Hastings (1732-1818), the first Governor-General of

Bengal (1772-1785). Hastings was familiar with the cultures and languages of the
subcontinent;4 like Jones, he had great respect for the ancient Oriental scripture and believed
in the concept of Hindus and Muslims being governed by their own laws. In 1784, Jones, and
a few other British residents of Calcutta, founded the Asiatic Society of Bengal to investigate
a wide range of Oriental knowledge systematically. Journals such as The New Asiatic
Miscellany: consisting of original essays, translations, and fugitive pieces (1789) and Asiatic
Researches; Or, Transactions of the Society, Instituted in Bengal (1789) were powerful media
for publicizing the results of the Society’s expedition into Oriental knowledge. Hastings and
his circle attempted to govern under the mantle of Akbar Shah (1542-1605),5 replicating his
court, which had been bolstered by philosophical investigations and artistic collaborations
between Muslims and Hindus. Eager to have researches submitted to the Society by both
Muslims and Hindus, Jones suggested an annual award of a medal inscribed in Persian and
Sanskrit to the author of the best paper.6 Jones’s award to the author of the best paper, which
introduced Oriental sciences to the Society, resembles Akbar’s reward to the scholars of his
syncretic court. Please see below the gold and silver coins designed by Akbar:

Illustration 1; Akbar’s gold and silver coins containing Hindu and Persian references.

4
The New Asiatic Miscellany, (Calcutta: William Mackay, 1786), 2: 314.
5
Michael J. Franklin, Romantic Representations of British India, (London: Routledge, 2006),
14.
6
Jones, The Works, 3: 22.
2
On one side, the coins depict the Hindu deities Ram and Sita; on the other side in Persian, it
is inscribed ‫افروردین الهی‬and ‫امرداد الهی‬respectively meaning ‘the Divine Farvardin’7 and ‘the
Divine Mordad.’8 The similarities between Jones’s medal and Akbar’s coins suggest the
influence of Oriental pluralism on Jones’s mind.
Jones’s outstanding scholarship has made him famous to a variety of
scholars depending on their respective fields of studies: linguists consider him as the
father of modern linguistics since he was the first European who developed the
theory of Indo-European languages. In his thesis on the affinity of languages, in
‘Third Discourse’ presented before the Society,9 Jones proposed the affinity of
Sanskrit to other languages by them sharing a common source. His significance to
literary scholars is due to his works on Indo-Persian literature. He became one of
the most remarkable translators and interpreters of Indo-Persian poetry, culture,
philosophy, and mysticism; his publications significantly impacted Romantic poets
such as Coleridge, Keats, Shelley and Byron to develop sympathetic representations
of the Orient in the period’s literature. It was Jones’s literary publications such as
the ‘Essay on the Arts called Imitative’10 which propounded an expressive theory of
poetry that valorised expression over description and imitation:

If the arguments, used in this essay, have any weight, it will appear, that the
finest parts of poetry, musick, and painting, are expressive of the passions
[...] the inferior parts of them are descriptive of natural objects.11

Therefore, Jones anticipated Wordsworth’s founding poetry based on Romantic

subjectivity.12 His career as a puisne judge and the fact that Jones studied twenty-
eight languages stresses his knowledge in the areas of translation, law, Indology,
and Islamic studies. Hence, different scholars of different fields, depending on their
perspective, have analysed Jones’s research and presented his remarkable role in

7
Farvardin is the first month of the Persian calendar, starting from the first day of spring.
8
Mordad is the fifth month of the Persian calendar; beginning in July and ending in August,
Mordad is in the second month of summer.
9
Sir William Jones, Discourses Delivered Before the Asiatic Society: And Miscellaneous
Papers, on the Religion, Poetry, Literature, Etc., of the Nations of India, (London: Charles S.
Arnold, 1824), 28.
10
William Jones, ‘Essay on the Arts called Imitative’, Poems, 201-17.
11
Jones, ‘Essay on the Arts called Imitative’, 216-7.
12
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 86; & Meyer H. Abrams, The Mirror and the Lamp:
Romantic Theory and the Critical Tradition, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1971), 88.
3
their respective field of studies. This echoes two lines in Rumi’s ‘The Song of the
Reed’ which Jones translated and published in his essay ‘On the Mystical Poetry of
the Persians and the Hindus’13 in 1792:

Each in my fond affections claim’d a part

But none discern’d the secret of my heart.14

From one perspective, the scholarship on Jones’s diverse fields of study could be divided into
two major groups: those who centred their work on Jones and those whose primary aim was to
research one of the many fields Jones explored and consequently had to focus on him. Amongst
the first group, two names stand out: Garland Cannon, who recorded most of Jones’s
communications in The Letters of Sir William Jones (1970) and The Life and Mind of Oriental
Jones (1991); the second one is Michael J. Franklin with his publication of Sir William Jones
(1995), Sir William Jones: Selected Poetical and Prose Works (1995) and Orientalist Jones:
Sir William Jones, Poet, Lawyer, and Linguist, 1746-1794 (2011). Other than the books
mentioned, Cannon and Franklin have published articles and scholarly editions which present
an accurate portrayal of Jones and his works; due to the authority of these publications in
understanding Jones’s life and mind, this thesis majorly relies on them. However, since both
scholars had a relative unfamiliarity with the Persian language, they mainly focused on Jones’s
material available in English. Also, as there is more English research available on the
subcontinent’s literary sources, generally, once researchers explore Jones’s Oriental studies,
more emphasis is placed on his inquiries into Indian cultures and traditions. Indeed, Jones’s
research on India’s diverse cultures is remarkable, yet the shortage of research on Persian
sources has kept a significant part of Jones’s works relatively in the dark.
The Persian problem is more apparent amongst the second group of scholars who
researched Jones’s works with a focus on fields such as Indology, Orientalism, and
Romanticism; some of the most notable scholars of this group and their works include
Raymond Schwab’s The Oriental Renaissance: Europe’s Rediscovery of India and the East,
1680-1880 (1958), John Drew’s India and the Romantic Imagination (1987), and James Watt’s
British Orientalism, 1759–1835 (2019). Schwab’s Oriental Renaissance is arguably one of the
earliest works that explored Orientalism and Romanticism's interconnection; arguing that ‘The

13
Jones, The Works, 4: 211-36.
14
Jones, The Works, 4: 230.
4
Orient served as alter ego to the Occident’, he suggested that the two rather complemented than
competed.15 Schwab’s primary focus is the Romantic period which he viewed as ‘an oriental
irruption of the intellect’;16 to him, Romanticism was an Oriental ‘Renaissance’. Asserting that
‘India had worked to reunite the human with a divine that is the Universe’, Schwab sourced
the Romantics’ interest in mysticism in their fascination with the subcontinent;17 also, although
his book establishes Jones’s influence on shaping European philosophers, such as Friedrich
Schlegel,18 it does not deeply engage with Jones’s influence on the English Romantics such as
Blake, Southey, and Shelley. Compared to Schwab’s Oriental Renaissance, Drew’s India and
the Romantic Imagination is more thorough in analysing Jones’s works and his influence on
Romantics such as Coleridge and Shelley. As will be discussed in this thesis, in his works,
Jones creates connections and associations between cultures distant from one another. To this
aim, Drew explores Jones’s utilization of Neo-Platonism, which was a common perspective
during the eighteenth century, to introduce a representation of India to Europe. Drew’s focus
primarily is on Hinduism; in his analysis, India and Hinduism are to some extent
interchangeable; this could be one of the shortcomings of his book as India has been home to
a diverse range of religions – such as Islam, Buddhism, Sikhism, and Jainism – and cultures
such as Persian, Arabian, and Turkish. Like Drew, Franklin is interested in Jones’s syncretic
methodology; yet unlike the former, Franklin examines Jones’s pluralistic tendencies in the
multiracial, multifaith, and multicultural environment of eighteenth-century India.19 Such
examination depicts a more accurate image of Jones and manages not to completely neglect
the role Persians and Arabs played in the diverse subcontinent. This accuracy could be
explained in an example, Jones was after creating links between the Orient and the Occident;
as Drew explains, the Neo-Platonic view – which assisted him in introducing India to Europe
– had Hindu and Vedantic counterparts. However, the Hindu pluralistic mysticism was not the
only source for Jones to associate the East and the West. Neo-Platonism also had a Persian
equivalent called the vahdat-e vojōd, which can be translated to ‘the Unity of Being.’ Drew is

15
Raymond Schwab, The Oriental Renaissance: Europe’s Rediscovery of India and the East,
1680-1880 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1984), 4.
16
Schwab, The Oriental Renaissance, 482.
17
Schwab, The Oriental Renaissance, 483.
18
Schwab, The Oriental Renaissance, 195.
19
Michael J. Franklin, ‘General Introduction and [meta]historical background [re]presenting
“The palanquins of state; or, broken leaves in a Mughal garden”’, Romantic Representations
of British India, Michael J. Franklin (ed.), (New York: Routledge, 2006), 1-44.
5
aware of the Unity of Being, however, it only appears on two occasions in his book. 20 On the
other hand, Franklin does not mention the concept directly, but he refers to one of its
pragmatical aspects: the concept of sulh-i kul, which can be translated to ‘peace with all’,
suggesting ‘universal toleration.’21 The Unity of Being and its deep connection to India and
consequently Jones will be one of the themes of the fourth chapter of this thesis which will be
discussed later.
The more recent scholarly research conducted on Jones is founded on the works of
Franklin, Drew, and Schwab. One which focuses on Jones and examines his influence on the
Romantics is Kurt Andrew Johnson’s PhD thesis ‘Sir William Jones and Representations of
Hinduism in British Poetry, 1784-1812’ (2010). Johnson’s work explores the influence of the
connections Jones created with Hinduism on Romantic poets. As his analysis rather leans
toward Franklin’s syncretic portrayal of Jones,22 Johnson mentions the significance of Jones’s
Persian studies; after emphasizing ‘the importance of the Persian language in Britain’s colonial
relationship’, due to the language being the lingua franca of the Mughal court and consequently
the language of law and commerce, Johnson reiterates Robert Irwin’s point on Jones’s Persian
Grammar being a poet’s grammar.23 Following this trend, Johnson states:

For Jones, the primary reason for Britons to learn Persian was not to make it easier for
them to administer the colony, but rather to gain a better appreciation of ‘Eastern’
poetry. Jones seeks to foster that appreciation by demonstrating how European poetry
resounded with aesthetic echoes from Persian poetry. 24

Strengthening his argument on Franklin’s Sir William Jones: Selected Poetical and Prose
Works (1995), Johnson elaborates that Jones’s works such as ‘Essays on the Poetry of the
Eastern Nations’ (1772) were to demonstrate the ‘very great resemblances between the works
of writers such as the Persian poet Hafez and the epic Persian poet Ferdowsi, and, respectively,

20
Once translated as ‘the doctrine of the unity of all creation’ in John Drew, India and the
Romantic Imagination, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987), 97 and once as ‘unity of
being’ in Drew, India and the Romantic Imagination, 122.
21
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 211; the term is mistranslated as suhl-i kul in Franklin’s book.
22
Kurt Andrew Johnson, ‘Sir William Jones and Representations of Hinduism in British
Poetry 1784-1812’, (Unpublished thesis, University of York, 2010), 3.
23
Robert Irwin, For Lust of Knowing: The Orientalists and their Enemies, (London: Penguin
Books, 2006), 122.
24
Johnson, ‘Sir William Jones and Representations of Hinduism’, 45.
6
Shakespeare and Homer.’25 Johnson’s thesis presents a detailed analysis of Jones’s works on
Hindu literature, including his Hymns to the Hindu deities; in the meantime, he also points out
that those very Hymns were ‘misconceived’ as translations. This was because Jones was
already a well-established and reputable translator of Arabic and Persian poetry, as evinced by
Grammar of the Persian Language (1771) and Poems, consisting chiefly of translations from
the Asiatick languages (1772). The thesis also examines Jones’s influence on Romantics,
including Blake and Shelley; when Johnson begins his analysis of Blake’s Milton and the
symbology of the ‘Mundane Egg’ in the poem,26 he points out that Blake’s ‘adaptation of a
Jonesian syncretism and cultural tolerance’ was due to his ‘engagement with Jones’ work and
his use of Hinduism to emphasize ‘the unity of all human cultures.’27 Johnson’s statement is
true, but not thorough: as it will be explained in this thesis, the unity of all human beings, their
cultures, and religions is served as the cornerstone of almost every single mystical Persian text
which Jones studied to learn the language or used as a source for his writings. James Watt’s
British Orientalism, 1759–1835 is a diverse survey of literature and theory; it uncovers various
genres, political and historical contexts for the period. Debating in a rich context, the work
introduces a wealth of Romantic-period literature revolving around the Orient. The fourth
chapter of the book, entitled ‘“In Love with the Gopia” Sir William Jones and His
Contemporaries’,28 focuses on Jones and some of his Orientalist researches and works,
including his Hindu Hymns, ‘The Palace of Fortune’(1769), and the English translation of
Kalidasa’s Sacontalà (1789). Watt also draws attention to the variable ways in which Jones’s
work was absorbed by Romantic writers and concludes his chapter with a thoughtful reading
of Sydney Owenson’s (1781-1859) novel The Missionary (1811), which often could be seen
as an example of Jones’s perspective of tolerance and intercultural sympathy. An intriguing
point which can be obtained from Watt’s book, and the chapter on Jones within it, is the
complexity of the relationship and the contrast between an individual Orientalist and the overall
image of the British Empire; for example, Watt points out that Jones’s works, such as his ‘A

25
Johnson, ‘Sir William Jones and Representations of Hinduism’, 45-6. Sir William Jones:
Selected Poetical and Prose Works, Michael J. Franklin (ed.), (Cardiff: University of Wales
Press, 1995), 332-4.
26
Johnson, ‘Sir William Jones and Representations of Hinduism’, 124-43.
27
Johnson, ‘Sir William Jones and Representations of Hinduism’, 124-5.
28
. James Watt, British Orientalism, 1759–1835, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2019), 123-56.
7
Hymn to Lacshmi,’29 can ‘be seen as embedded in British abolitionist discourse as well as EIC
Orientalism.’30

The influence of Persian mysticism, i.e. Sufism, or what Johnson calls the
‘Jonesian syncretism and cultural tolerance,’ on the Romantic poets has been
examined in the works of the Iranian scholar Elham Nilchian.31 She explored this
influence on Byron and Shelly from a Lacanian psychoanalytical perspective in her
PhD thesis ‘Sufi-Romantic Self Loss: The Study of the Influence of Persian Sufism
on English Romantic Poetry’ (2011). Nilchian traces the source of the Romantics’
inspiration in Persian poets such as Hafez, Rumi, and Nezami ‘whose works were
translated and adapted by the eighteenth-century scholars such as William Jones and
Isaac D‘Israeli.’32 The second chapter of her thesis, ‘A Persian Song of Jones,’33
examines Jones’s translation of Hafez’s poem which he published in his Grammar
and titled ‘A Persian Song’;34 besides, the chapter accurately explores the Sufi
notions of the Persian poem, its English translation, and the impact it made on later
Romantics. Nilchian is one of the very few literary scholars who know Persian and
has examined some of Jones’s works; however, generally in her works, Jones could
just be perceived as a cultural mediator between Persian muses and the British
poets. Carl Ernst is another scholar familiar with Persian, some of whose works
refer to Jones but centres on other topics. Like Jones, Ernst has researched Arabic,
Persian, and Urdu philosophical and theological texts; his main interest is religious
studies, and his writings focus on critical issues of Islamic studies, premodern and
contemporary Sufism, and Indo-Muslim culture. With these research interests, Ernst
is bound to refer to Jones. For example, in his article ‘Muslim Studies of Hinduism?
A Reconsideration of Arabic and Persian Translations from Indian Languages’
(2013), Ernst explores the long history of interaction between Islam and Hinduism;

29
Watt, British Orientalism, 137-40.
30
Watt, British Orientalism, 138.
31
For example, Elham Nilchian, ‘Gul and Bulbul: Persian Love in Byron’, The Byron
Journal, 40:2, (2012), 155-164. Elham Nilchian, 'Shelley’s Quest for Persian Love', The
Comparatist, 40, (2016), 222-244.
32
Elham Nilchian, ‘Sufi-Romantic Self Loss: The Study of the Influence of Persian Sufism on
English Romantic Poetry’, (Unpublished thesis of the University of Leicester, 2011), iii.
33
Nilchian, ‘Sufi-Romantic Self Loss: The Study of the Influence of Persian Sufism on
English Romantic Poetry’, 73-116.
34
Jones, A Grammar, 133-6.
8
Jones is mentioned briefly in the article, yet Ernst points out that he has examined
some of Jones’s manuscripts and mentions some of Jones’s verse compositions in
Persian.35 This makes Ernst arguably the first scholar who has closely examined
Jones’s Persian compositions; however, as Ernst’s main interest lies in religious
studies, he does not thoroughly focus on Jones and his Persian compositions.

As may be observed from the past few pages, Jones’s ground-breaking

Persian studies remain relatively under-researched, and the majority of it is virtually
unexplored compared to the rest of his works. Therefore, this thesis will explore
Jones’s enquiries into Persian language, literature, and mysticism. Arguing upon the
significance of the language, its philosophy, and its vast socio-political impact on
the Orient, this thesis investigates Jones’s published works and his annotation on his
personal collection of the Persian texts he examined. Overall, this study seeks to
portray Jones through his research on Persian literature and mysticism. Examining
Jones’s understanding and analysis of Persian texts will significantly improve upon
the works of prior researchers who did not profoundly investigate Jones’s Persian
studies; such as Schwab, Cannon, Drew, Franklin, and Johnson. In addition, as the
examination focuses on Jones, it will further elaborate on the Romantics as well as
the eighteenth and nineteenth-century perception of the Orient, its culture, religion,
mysticism, and literature; consequently, the findings of this thesis also complement
the works of researchers such as Nilchian, Ernst, and Watt.

Furthermore, the overall approach of this thesis involves not just published
primary sources, Jones’s published works, but also a detailed examination of the
texts he read and annotated; such an approach has not been taken on Jones’s
annotations by any other researcher to this date. Therefore, other than the novelty
this thesis introduces to the prior studies on Jones’s works, it sheds a brighter light
on Jones’s mind. To this aim, the thesis is divided into five chapters; although each
chapter has its introduction, I briefly mention them in the following few pages so
that the readers can have a comprehensive view of the framework of this thesis.
Moreover, it should be pointed out that the translations and transliterations
presented in this thesis are mine unless stated otherwise. Also, since there are many

35
Carl W. Ernst, 'Muslim Studies of Hinduism? A Reconsideration of Arabic and Persian
Translations from Indian Languages', Iranian Studies, 36:2 (2003), 173-195: 187-8.
9
figures and illustrations – mostly images from Jones’s manuscript folios – each
chapter’s figure numbering starts from one.

The first two chapters focus on his Persian studies whilst he was in Britain, and the
remaining three chapters revolve around the development of his understandings of Oriental
philosophy, culture, and mysticism when he was in India. The first two chapters centre on
Jones’s under-researched collection of papers available in the British Library catalogued as BL,
APAC, MSS Eur. C 274. The collection consists of two different types of material; the first
type, which is examined in the first chapter, entitled ‘Sir William Jones’s Collection of Papers,
MSS EUR C. 274,’ includes some loose folios of his early practising of the Persian language,
some of them are dated 1785. In addition to the loose folios, the MSS Eur. C 274 collection
includes a notebook bearing a contemporary Indian blind-stamped leather-bound book. While
the loose folios centre on Jones’s practice in Persian and Arabic, the Notebook instead revolves
around verses in Persian and Rekhta36 by many prominent Sufi poets. It also contains many
marginal notes by Jones regarding his study and analysis of Oriental literature. The second
chapter, entitled ‘Sir William Jones’s Collection of Verses’, focuses upon Jones’s annotations
on the Persian verses available in his Notebook. The chapter aims to shed light on Jones’s
understanding of Persian and Sufi literature by 1786, when he acquired the Notebook. Other
than discussing the Sufi and literary figures available in the Notebook, the aim is achieved by
examining Jones’s annotations on the poems; the annotations are primarily his translations of
the poems and occasionally marginal notes regarding his analysis of them. While some of the
loose folios in the MSS Eur C. 274 depict Jones during his earliest exposure to Persian language
and culture, the Notebook is the earliest manuscript of Jones, which illustrates the well-
established, Orientalist, ‘Persian Jones’. Overall, the MSS Eur C. 274 collection demonstrates
the transformation of Jones from sometime before he published A Grammar (1771), or even
before the translation of Histoire de Nader Chah (1770), until 1786. Therefore, accordingly,
the first two chapters of this thesis present Jones’s transformation through his Persian
annotations and the evolution of his thoughts demonstrated in the collection. It should also be
noted that the collection, in some cases, contains some personal writings of Jones, which reveal
a far more precise understanding of his life and mind.

36
Rekhta is the language which modern Hindi and Urdu has derived from; it combines the
dynamic vigour of Persian script, diction, and imagery with the sensuous Indian beauty of
Urdu vocabulary.
10
 The remaining three chapters of the thesis mainly focus on Jones’s studies
and works after arriving in India until he died in 1794. To this aim, the research data
of these chapters have been gathered generally from the manuscripts he had whilst
he was in India. Those manuscripts can be found in the British Library, catalogued
as APAC, RSPA, 1-120, the Yale University’s Beinecke Library, catalogued as
Osborn c. 400, and the New York University’s Fales Library, catalogued MSS 301,
Box 1-2. The RSPA 1-120 contains manuscripts that either Jones bought,
commissioned, or was gifted during his life in India; most of these manuscripts are
in Persian, and Jones has extensively annotated twenty of them. The Osborn c. 400
collection is a notebook containing a hundred and fifty folios in Jones’s hand; it
holds notations on various subjects ranging from names of different individuals and
books to lines of poetry. The Fales Library’s MSS 301 are loose folios consisting of
various types of documents related to his studies. Jones had a habit of annotating the
manuscripts he was reading, and his annotations cover a vast range of subjects:
explanatory remarks on the books, parts of the texts he was fascinated with, even
annotations about his comparative studies. As Jones’s various annotations on these
manuscripts have been ignored by almost any scholar who has researched him, they
will serve as a centre point for the final three chapters of this thesis.

Jones’s essay ‘On the Mystical Poetry of the Persians and the Hindus’ (1792) will be
discussed in and examined in the third chapter entitled ‘On the Pluralistic Traditions of the
Oriental Mystical Poetry.’ In addition, Sufism syncretic narratives and allegorical traditions,
which Jones mentioned in the essay, will be analysed. The chapter explores these traditions’
Indian counterparts and concludes with tracing them in Jones’s writings. The fourth chapter of
this thesis, entitled ‘On the Philosophy of the Asiatics: Sir William Jones, Harmonious
Metaphysics, and Unity,’ focuses on the entanglement and complexity of the relationship
between Sufi metaphysics, the Persian language, and their immense influence on the
subcontinent, its politics and consequently how they shaped Jones’s mind and influenced his
writings. The fifth and final chapter of this thesis, entitled ‘The Majnoon of India: Sir William
Jones’s Annotations on Nezami’s Treasury of Mysteries,’ centres on Jones’s annotations on his
personal copy of Nezami’s Treasury of the Mysteries.37 After discussing Jones’s sources of
interest in Nezami and his Treasury, the chapter describes the annotations Jones made on the

37
BL, APAC, RSPA 32.
11
manuscript, analyses them, and concludes with presenting an autograph Persian poem Jones
composed, on the manuscript, with reference to Nezami’s text.

12
Chapter 1: Sir William Jones’s Collection of Papers, MSS EUR C. 274
Introduction

The following chapter depicts Sir William Jones’s early writings and research on
oriental languages and literature. It investigates his learning of the oriental
languages, specifically Persian; in addition, it examines several texts he composed
whilst he was in Britain before arriving in India in 1783.

Jones is often recalled by his dramatic statement of similarities amongst

languages based on their relationship with each other and their derivational
relationship with earlier languages:

The Sanscrit language, whatever be its antiquity, is of a wonderful structure;

more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more
exquisitely refined than either, yet bearing to both of them a stronger affinity,
both in the roots of verbs and the forms of grammar, than could possibly have
been produced by accident; so strong indeed, that no philologer could
examine them all three, without believing them to have sprung from some
common source, which, perhaps, no longer exists; there is a similar reason,
though not quite so forcible, for supposing that both the Gothic and the
Celtic, though blended with a very different idiom, had the same origin with
the Sanscrit; and the old Persian might be added to the same family.1
This statement appeared in Jones’s ‘Third Discourse’, which was presented to the Asiatic
Society at their third annual meeting on 2 February 1786; it proposed that Sanskrit’s affinity to
other languages could be explained by all of them having an early common source. This
brilliant thesis of language families, known today as the Indo-European languages, laid the
groundwork for modern comparative linguistics. Jones is most famous for his philological
research that gave rise to the development of modern attitudes toward language study and
comparative linguistics, which could be called the dawn of modern linguistics. His interests
and achievements, however, ranged far beyond solely the study of languages: his researches
covered a vast area of subjects including astronomy, botany, history, law, literature, music,
physiology, politics, religion, and mysticism. Although the statement mentioned above depicts
the fruits of Jones’s philological researches by 1786, it was his A Grammar of the Persian
Language (1771) that presented the immediate result of his philological researches by being

1
Sir William Jones, Discourses Delivered Before the Asiatic Society: And Miscellaneous
Papers, on the Religion, Poetry, Literature, Etc., of the Nations of India, (London: Charles S.
Arnold, 1824), 28.
one of the earliest and most famous grammars ever of an exotic language. His research on
Oriental languages, particularly Persian, had a significant role in his founding of the Asiatic
Society in 1784, which became the mother of all the other Asiatic Societies worldwide.

The establishment of the Asiatic Society played a significant role in the eighteenth
century from many different aspects, one of which was by tackling the pseudo-Oriental
literature and translations that were quite popular during the period. The pseudo-Oriental genre
could be traced back to a century before the establishment of the Society: as early as Giovanni
Paolo Marana’s (1642–1693) eight-volume collection of fictional letters entitled Letters Writ
by a Turkish Spy (1683), its French translation in 1684, and English translation in 1687,
European writers had begun to impersonate the voice of the Orientals. Similar to Marana, they
falsely claimed that they had translated texts from Turkish, Persian, Arabic, and many other
Oriental languages, producing a pseudo-Oriental translation/literature. As another example, in
the case of the Chinese language, until the nineteenth century, the pseudo-translations
outnumbered genuine ones almost five to one;2 the numbers were to some extent similar for
Arabic and Persian translations. Sir John Eardley Wilmot (1709-1792), during his final year as
the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas (1766–1771), sent some peculiar characters to Jones in
order to find their meaning. Wilmot was under the impression that the characters were Persian.
In a letter dated the third of June 1771, when Jones was busy printing his A Grammar of the
Persian Language, he responded to Wilmot’s enquiry: ‘I am sorry the characters you sent me
are not Persian but Chinese, which I cannot decipher without a book...’ 3 Not being able to
distinguish between Persian and Chinese could provide a demonstrative image of the East's via
the eighteenth-century European perspective.
The East India Company was among the first prominent European institutions which
began mining Oriental knowledge. However, there is evidence available that the Company’s
performance with regards to extracting Oriental knowledge was not very efficient or accurate:
for example, in 1792 Tipu Sultan (1750-1799) sent ambassadors to ignite uprisings against the
Company and the British Government. In a letter to the Sultan, one of the ambassadors advises
him against engaging the British in an open battle. The letter, however, is intercepted, translated
from Persian to English, and is published in the Calcutta Review in 1856: ‘upon the principle

2
James St André, & Xiaoyan Peng, China and Its Others: Knowledge Transfer through
Translation, 1829-2010, (New York, NY: Rodopi, 2012), 35.
3
Memoirs of the Life, Writings and Correspondence of Sir William Jones, John Shore Baron
Teignmouth (ed.), (London: Piccadilly, 1806), 98.
14
recommended by the sage and worthy Khanjeh Hafiz Shirazi, on whom the mercy of the Lord
may forever rest, with friends cordiality, with enemies dissimulation.’4 This extract contains
two errors: first, the title of the poet is Khajeh, not Khanjeh, which could imply the translator’s
difficulty in reading Persian; the second error, which is quite significant, is within the
translation of the quote: the correct translation is ‘with friends cordiality, with enemies
toleration’.5 However, Oriental knowledge was not solely mined by institutions run directly by
the Company or its administration. In 1784, under the patronage of Warren Hastings (1732-
1818), Sir William Jones and a handful of other British residents of Calcutta founded the
Asiatic Society of Bengal. The Society was modelled on the Royal Society of London; it was
located in the newly-built Court House standing at the heart of the imperial city. The Society
became an extremely efficient body for the global diffusion of its intellectual productions on
the Oriental knowledge; in Jones’s ‘Preliminary Discourse’ he stated: ‘If now it be asked, what
are the intended objects of our inquiries within these spacious limits, we answer, MAN and
NATURE; whatever is performed by the one, or produced by the other’.6 In other words, the
society was on a quest to seek out Oriental knowledge ranging from humanities – such as
linguistics, philology and antiquities – to sciences – such as botany, mathematics, astronomy,
geography and economics. Journals such as The New Asiatic Miscellany and The Asiatic
Researches were powerful media for publicizing the results of the Society’s expedition into
Oriental knowledge. The seven hundred copies of the first edition of the Asiatic Researches,
which were shipped from Calcutta to England in 1789 sold out immediately, and of course,
pirated editions were published and brought out within years.7 Jones and other members of the
Asiatic Society focused on languages aiming to gain Oriental knowledge in order to understand
Hindu and Muslim culture and consequently remove the gap between the Orient and the
Occident; this would have resulted in decreasing the friction between the British and the
Indians and consequently, the stabilization of the society. A stable society would lead to an
increase in financial benefits for the British in India, but it would have also improved the lives
of the Indians living under British law. In addition, Hastings’s Orientalist regime had initiated
the concept of Hindus and Muslims being governed by their own laws, facilitating the

4
Anonymous Reviewer, ‘The Odes of Hafiz (1801) and Seven Related Orientalist Works’,
Calcutta Review, 26 (1856), 398-414; 399.
5
The sentence is in fact a frequently used proverb amongst Persian speakers.
6
Jones, The Works, 3: 5.
7
Garland Cannon, ‘Sir William Jones, Persian, Sanskrit and the Asiatic Society’, History
Epistemology Language, 6: 2, (1984), 83-94.
15
stabilization of the relationship between the British and Indian subjects. To this aim, during his
time in India, Jones focused on composing digests of the Hindu and Islamic laws and published
Al-Surajiyyah or the Mohammedan Law of Inheritance (1792) and Institutes of Hindu Law; or,
The Ordinances of Menu (1794).8
In Jones’s researches on the Orient, the readers discover different aspects of Oriental
knowledge and culture: languages, literature, philosophy, religion, mysticism and even
architecture; his researches attempt to portray the Orient for eighteenth-century Europe.
However, the following chapter mainly focuses on Jones’s research into the Persian language
and examines the Oriental knowledge he gained through the language; it centres on his
relatively under-researched collection of papers available in the British Library, catalogued as
BL APAC, MSS Eur. C 274. Jones’s collection of papers consists of two different types of
material; the first type includes some loose folios of his practising the Persian language, some
of which are dated 1785. In addition to the loose folios, the collection includes a red leather-
bound Notebook that has a contemporary Indian blind-stamp. The Notebook contains
transcriptions in Jones's hand of poems by the Sufi poets such as Amir Khosrow of Delhi (1253-
1325), occasionally with English translations; the Notebook is also dated November 1785. I
should also point out here that the loose folios centre on Jones’s practice in the Persian
language, its grammar, and script while the Notebook instead revolves around verses in Persian
and Rekhta by many prominent Sufi poets.
The material available in the MSS Eur. C 274 represents Jones’s process of
learning Oriental culture over the course of at least two decades. While the
Notebook and some loose folios belong to November 1785, about two years after he
arrived in India, most loose folios almost certainly predate 1785. There are three
types of supporting evidence for this hypothesis: firstly, comparing his Persian
handwriting in the notes with his annotations in the Notebook and other
manuscripts, such as his collection of Persian manuscripts available in the British
Library,9 shows that his Persian hand has improved significantly in the latter. In
addition, Jones’s handwriting in one of the manuscripts dated 1783 is similar to
some of the folios of the MSS Eur C. 274; this is proof that the rest of the folios
were annotated before 1783. In writing Persian, it is desirable to reduce the angles

8
The books were part of a bigger project to compose a digest of Hindu and Muslim law
which was left unfinished due to Jones’s death in 1794.
9
British Library, APAC, RSPA 1-119.
16
of the alphabetical letters; furthermore, the spaces left between the words should be
equivalent so that the text becomes easily readable and aesthetically pleasing. By
comparing his hand in illustration 1, two folios, both of which are Persian
translations of verses 1-6 of Psalm 1 in the King James Version (KJV), it can be
observed that the words on the folio on the left have more angles compared to the
ones on the right; in addition, Jones has tried to maintain a similar distance between
the words on the right folio. Therefore, the writings on the folio on the right have
been made sometime after the one on the left.

Illustration 1, BL, APAC, MSS Eur C. 274, f. 40-1; Jones’s Persian translations of Psalm 1: 1-6 (KJV),

Secondly, Jones has made some grammatical mistakes on some of the folios, which
were either corrected in his Grammar (1771) or were not repeated in other folios.
For example, on one of the loose folios he is practising the verb ‫ آمووش‬āmōzesh, ‘to
learn / to teach’, please see illustration 2.

17
Illustration 2, BL, APAC, MSS Eur C. 274, f. 47; an extract, showing Jones practising the different tenses of ‘To
Teach’ in Persian.

In the past tense, the verb is mutated to ‫ آمووشن ن‬āmōkhtan, yet it would seem that
Jones did not know about this at the time and used ‫ آمش ی و‬āmōzidan, which is not
correct. Jones was indeed familiar with word mutations since they appeared in other
languages he knew, for example, Arabic and Welsh. Intriguingly in the Grammar,
Jones has mentioned the verb and its mutation as ‘Irregulars that change ‫ خ‬into ’10 ,
demonstrating that he had learnt this grammatical mutation by 1771; consequently,
the folio belongs to sometime before the publication of the Grammar. Thirdly, some
of the folios themselves suggest that they were composed whilst he was in Britain;
for example, please see illustration 3 on which Jones has written ‫امس و ش ا و در هن وس و‬
‫ نشاهیوو رفوو‬emsāl shomā dar hendōstān khāhid raft, ‘This year, you shall go in
India’.11

10
William Jones, A Grammar of the Persian Language, (London: W. & J. Richardson, 1771),
65.
11
More on this folio will be discussed later.
18
 Illustration 3, BL, APAC, MSS Eur C. 274, f. 45; on top, a distich of Hafez and Jones’s translation; on the
bottom, recitation of the Lord’s Prayer in Persian.

While some loose folios depict Jones during his earliest exposure to the
Persian language and culture, the Notebook illustrates the well-established
Orientalist, ‘Persian Jones’. Overall, MSS Eur C. 274 demonstrates the

19
transformation of Jones from sometime before he published A Grammar (1771), or
even before the translation of Histoire de Nader Chah (1770), until at least two
years after he arrived in India, in 1785. Presenting Jones’s transformation in such a
manner is unique since most scholars working on him have not particularly focused
on his life through his Persian annotations, and the evolution of his thoughts
demonstrated in them. While Garland Cannon has recorded most of Jones’s
Letters12 and Michael J. Franklin has presented an accurate portrayal of Jones in his
works, they have mainly focused on Jones’s English texts; this is due to their
relative unfamiliarity with the Persian language. Other scholars such as Carl Ernst,
who is familiar with Persian and Arabic, have not thoroughly focused on Jones and
his annotations. The bulk of the available material from Jones’s researches on
Persian texts have been virtually unexplored. It should also be noted that the
collection, in some cases, contains some personal writings of Jones, which reveal a
far more precise understanding of his life and mind.

This chapter’s structure will follow that of the collection; it will be divided
into two sections. The first one, entitled ‘Sir William Jones and Oriental
Languages’, presents a summary of Jones’s exposure to Arabic, Persian, and
Sanskrit, in addition to his innovations in A Grammar, and the book’s influences as
a philosophically based work in a colonial situation. This section also presents some
of the annotations and notes he composed in the loose folios as he practised and
improved his Persian over the years. The collection holds eighty loose folios, sixty-
one of them in Persian and nineteen in Arabic. After categorizing the different types
of material available in the loose folios, considering the high number of the
annotated folios and the wide variety of the annotation available on them, I have
chosen some particular ones which represent at least one type of the annotations we
see in the loose folios or shed light on Jones’s character. It should be mentioned that
the translations and transliterations presented here are composed by myself unless
stated otherwise.

12
Sir William Jones, The Letters of Sir William Jones, Garland Cannon (ed.), 2 vols, (Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1970).
20
Sir William Jones and Oriental Languages

Language is commonly defined as a systematic means of communication; it

has been the means to share ideas and knowledge to serve humankind. In Jones’s
day, given that anthropology and archaeology were not fully developed yet, the
study of languages – which would lead to understanding the culture and history of
the people who used the language – was a vital source of past knowledge.
Therefore, he started studying Oriental languages at Oxford by examining Edward
Pococke’s collection of Arabic manuscripts at the Bodleian Library.13 With the help
of a Syrian named Mirza, he translated Antoine Galland’s twelve-volume Les Mille
et Une Nuits, contes arabes traduits en français (Paris, 1704-17), back into
Arabic.14 Jones’s approach to learning was to write down the translation and
Mirza’s pronunciation of the Arabic version of Galland’s book next to its text and
then practise it. With Mirza’s aid, Jones translated Les milles et une nuits and
became able to speak the language to some degree. His innovation, ingenuity, and
practicality become apparent once one considers that languages were commonly
taught by the grammar-translation method when he had employed this method,
which did not enable most learners to speak in the target language. Years later, he
utilized the same method he had practised in his Grammar to enable the British to
converse with Persian speakers in India.

Since Galland’s Les Mille et Une Nuits was initially a French translation of
an Arabic translation of a Persian work,15 this book probably channelled Jones’s
attention towards Persian. Thus, after studying Arabic, Jones started to focus on

13
Pococke’s collection of Arabic manuscripts helped Jones’s career later, by providing him
with the source material for The Mahomedan Law of Succession to the Property of Intestates
(London, 1782).
14
Michael J. Franklin, ‘Welsh History Month: Persian Jones helped to build India's future on
the Immensity and Pluralism of its Past’, Wales Online, (15 Oct 2015),
[https://www.walesonline.co.uk/lifestyle/nostalgia/welsh-history-month-persian-jones-
10260468].
Cannon, ‘Sir William Jones, Persian, Sanskrit and the Asiatic Society’, 86.
15
Ulrich Marzolph, The Arabian Nights in Transnational Perspective, (Detroit, MI: Wayne
State University Press, 2007), 183-5.
Marzolph, Ulrich. ‘Arabian Nights’. Encyclopaedia of Islam, Kate Fleet, Gudrun Krämer,
Denis Matringe, John Nawas, & Everett Rowson (eds), (2007),
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1573-3912].
21
Persian since the two languages employed similar writing characters, shared many
words, and grammatical structures. Furthermore, Persian was the language of the
Mughal court in India which might have led to funding by the European companies,
such as the East India Company (1600-1857), Dutch East India Company (1605-
1825), Danish India (1620–1869), and Établissements français dans l'Inde (1668–
1954), who had any financial interest in India. Enchanted by Persian poetry, Jones
discovered new themes, plots, and metres that would have been helpful to
rejuvenate the neoclassical traditions of Europe. Similar to his new language
learning method, which contrasted the classical grammar-translation method by
emphasizing on communication skills, the novel and exotic Persian literary devices
would have been helpful to shape a new romantic tradition. Therefore, the scholar of
languages gained a larger purpose: to explore, discover, and extract the ideas and
cultural values of the Oriental people from their languages and thus, Jones’s journey
towards becoming a philosophical reformer began.

Persian and A Grammar of Persian Language (1771)

Jones published his Grammar of the Persian Language in April 1771, and Europe was
introduced to a new realm: the ‫ اکرس‬shekarestān, ‘the Land of Sugar’ as the grammar was
titled in Persian. Well stocked with the beauties of ‘the Persian Anacreon Hafez, the very first
translated quatrains of Omar Khayyam and many other Persian poets, ‫ یشنس اوکسفشردی‬Yunus
Oxfordi, the ‘Jonah of Oxford’ began navigating his European readers through the sweet land
of the Orient. Jones’s Persian Grammar aimed not only to train the members of the East India
company in the official language of the Mughal court but also inspired them to read, learn, and
love Persian poetry and Sufi ethics. The book balances the aesthetic and the pragmatical aspects
of language learning by simultaneously being a poet’s grammar, introducing Sufi mystical
thoughts, and being a self-teaching language text. The following few pages will first explore
the Grammar’s literary, philosophical, and aesthetical aspect; later, it focuses on the book as a
self-teaching, pragmatical language learning text.

In the Grammar’s preface, Jones challenged the Eurocentric prejudice of the time:

We all love to excuse, or to conceal, our ignorance, and are seldom willing to allow any
excellence beyond the limits of our own attainments: like the savages, who thought the

22
 sun rose and set for them alone, and could not imagine that the waves, which surrounded
their island, left coral and pearls upon any other shore.16
The reason behind such a statement was that by the time the Grammar was published a
stereotypical image portraying the Oriental other, literature, love, and beauties existed in
Western drawing rooms. Jones’s Grammar aimed to rearrange that image by enabling the
Westerners to create a dialogue with the people of the East and broadening their perspective to
be able to comprehend a different and novel kind of beauty that laid beyond their island and
shores. Other than giving the eighteenth-century Europeans the means of communication, the
poet’s Grammar served that purpose through the examples it used for learning Persian; for
example, in order to demonstrate the ‘pronouns own and self’, after stating their Persian
equivalent ‫ نشد‬khod Jones explains:

... self seems to have been originally a noun, and was, perhaps, a synonymous word for
soul, according to Locke's definition of it; “Self is that conscious thinking thing, which
is sensible or conscious of pleasure and pain, capable of happiness and misery:” if this
observation be just, the Arabs have exactly the same idiom, for their ‫ نفس‬soul answers
precisely to our self... 17

The concepts of self, soul, and their definitions have an enormous significance in any
ideological and philosophical worldview; as it is a vast and significant subject, it will be
discussed in the third and fourth chapter of this thesis. Nevertheless, the intriguing argument
Jones drew here is establishing similitude between the Eastern and Western definitions of the
self and the soul. In order to provide an example for ‫ نشد‬khod, ‘self’ to his readers, Jones used
a beautiful line of the Sufi poet Sadi in which ‘the term self seems to be redundant’:

‫دانی چه گف مرا آ بلبل سحری‬

‫تش نشد چه آدمی کز عشق بیخبری‬

Dost thou know what the early nightingale said to me?

“What sort of man art thou, said he, that canst be
“ignorant of love?” 18

In addition to the example demonstrating the Persian literary aesthetics, since the line’s literal
translation is ‘Do you know what did the nightingale told me in the morning? What kind of

16
Jones, A Grammar, ii.
17
Jones, A Grammar, 30.
18
Jones, A Grammar, 31.
23
human are you if you are unaware of love’, we can see that Jones has adapted his translation to
be more poetic for an English speaker. Jones also points out the Latin and the Greek equivalents
for self, which hints towards the shaping of the idea of the Indo-European languages in his
mind as early as the book's composition.
The poet’s Grammar also introduced the very first English verse translation of Hafez’s
Persian ghazal.19 Jones’s translation aimed to reimagine the role of an Orientalist as a cultural
translator; if we consider the very first stanza, we can begin to appreciate Jones’s subtle mastery
of mediating techniques:

Sweet maid, if thou wouldst charm my sight;

And, bid these arms thy neck infold;
That rosy cheek, that lily hand,
Would give thy poet more delight
Than all Bocara’s vaunted gold,
Than all the gems of Samarcand 20
The literal translation of the ghazal is ‘If that Shirazi Turk gains my heart, I will give
Sarmaghand and Bokhara for her Indian mole’. Jones realized that the traditional Persian trope,
‘Shirazi Turk’, did not mean much for his eighteenth-century readers. Therefore, at first glance,
it can be concluded that in his cultural versed-translation of the ghazal Jones has domesticated
the ghazal of Hafez, erased the Turk/Hindu – white/black – juxtaposition, and has sacrificed
the geographical and cultural connotations of the line. However, it can be argued that Jones
ensured that the imagery he used in his translation was in accord with Hafez’s images; what
differentiates between the ghazal and its translation is due to the fact that one was aimed at,
and based upon, the tastes of the fourteenth-century Persian speakers and the other for
eighteenth-century English speakers. Of course, replacing ‘Shirazi Turk’ with ‘Sweet maid’
could be interpreted as deleting the ‘local and geographic identity of Hafiz’s poem’ and
replacing it with an image ‘that to the eighteenth-century colonialists meant “European;”’ as
Alireza Anushiravani, and Laleh Atashi argue in ‘Cultural Translation: A Critical Analysis of
William Jones's Translation of Hafez’.21 However, by studying the Grammar, one observes
that Jones does mention Shiraz and Shirazi Turk on a couple of occasions: in one of the very
first examples Jones presented in the chapter ‘Of the Persian Syntax’ in the Grammar, we see:

19
Jones, A Grammar, 137-140.
20
Jones, A Grammar, 137.
21
Alireza Anushiravani, & Laleh Atashi ‘Cultural Translation: A Critical Analysis of William
Jones's Translation of Hafez’, Persian Literary Studies Journal, 1: 1 (2012), 41- 58: 45.
24
 If that fair damsel of Shiraz would accept my heart, I would give for the black mole of
her cheek the cities of Samarcand and Bokhara.22
In addition, two pages before his versed translation of the ghazal, Jones concludes his
Grammar ‘with a translation of the ode quoted in the section upon the Persian letters; see p.
12’:

If that lovely maid of Shiraz would accept my heart, I would give for the mole on her
cheek the cities of Samarcand and Bokhara23
While Jones firmly heterosexualizes his translations of the ghazal, the original text is
genderless. It is composed in Persian, a gender-neutral and genderless language; this change is
justifiable should it be observed within the context of eighteenth-century Europe. However, it
should be pointed out that any reader of the book was or is aware of Persian’s gender neutrality
as well as the fact that a Turk is not necessarily a ‘maid’: the gender neutrality of Persian is
amongst the first matters Jones discusses in the book 24 and in the ‘Index’ presented at the end
of the book, he states: ‘a beautiful man or woman; a Turk...’.25 Like Shiraz, Jones’s versed
translation omits the term ‘Indian mole/beauty spot’; yet, the term ‘mole’ is provided in the
literal translation. Jones’s versed translation of the ghazal also contains ‘Bocara’s vaunted gold
…[and] the gems of Samarcand’: the qualities of the two cities, ‘the vaunted gold’ and ‘the
gems’, are inserted and highlighted within the translation by Jones; it would be fair to argue
that Hafez’s intention was rather on the spiritual and artistic wealth of the cities. Therefore,
Anushiravani and Atashi have concluded that by inserting the gold and gems in the translation,
Jones is pointing out ‘the material wealth of the areas [which] reveals the Benthamite endorsing
of utilitarianism, and the consequent mammonistic outlook.’26 However, firstly, we should
keep in mind that the two cities are located on the Silk Road and consequently are known to
the eighteenth-century Western readers mainly through travelling merchants and their accounts
which were more centred on the wealth, rather than purely focusing upon the arts and
spirituality. Secondly, it should not be forgotten that it was wealth that led to patronage and
consequently the flourishing of arts. Thirdly, Jones’s translation states that the poet would find
more delight in the beloved than the wealth of the two cities, which is far from Mammonism.

22
Jones, A Grammar, 101
23
Jones, A Grammar, 135.
24
Jones, A Grammar, 17-8.
25
Jones, A Grammar, 165.
26
Anushiravani, & Atashi ‘Cultural Translation: A Critical Analysis of William Jones's
Translation of Hafez’, 46.
25
In fact, in his essay entitled ‘On the Mystical Poetry of the Persians and the Hindus’27 Jones’s
outlook on the Eastern poets and the Sufis is explicitly clarified: the Sufis, including Hafez,
‘profess eager desire, but with no carnal affection, and circulate the cup, but no material goblet;
since all things are spiritual in their sect’.28

Jones chose a singular measure for his versed translation, abcabc, to skilfully create a
harmony between the Persian and the English cultural and poetical traditions while both display
similitudes and differences. ‘Contrary to the widespread impression that literal translation
means close translation’, Ahmad Karimi Hakkak argues, ‘translators who go beyond lexical
equivalence at times achieve greater proximity with their original texts’. He also argues that
such translators ‘stand a better chance of attracting attention among general readers of
poetry.’29 At this point in Jones’s life, creating such attraction for the English-speaking readers
towards the Persian language and literature played a significant role; it was to that aim that
Jones made the alterations within the translations of the ghazal. Karimi Hakkak concludes that
instead of emphasizing the ‘unbridgeable chasms’ which separates Hafez, and Persian poetry,
from the eighteenth-century reader, Jones attempts to connect the reader to the text with his
‘creative and transformative strategies’.30 The overall reading of Jones’s versed and literal
translations of stanzas ensures that he has conveyed the main imageries of the original text.
Jones’s creative paraphrase of Hafez reveals his techniques of affirmative Orientalism.31

While reading ‘Cultural Translation: A Critical Analysis of William Jones's Translation

of Hafez’ I discovered an intriguing argument,32 in the third stanza of the versed translation of
the ghazal; the stanza reads:

O! When these fair perfidious maids,

Whose eyes our secret haunts infest,

27
The essay will be explored thoroughly in the third chapter of this thesis.
28
Jones, The Works, 4: 211-34: 230.
29
Ahmad Karimi-Hakkak, ‘Beyond Translation: Interactions between English and Persian
Poetry’, Iran and the Surrounding World, N. R. Keddie, & R. P. Matthee (eds.), (London:
University of Washington Press, 2002), 36-60; 36.
30
Karimi-Hakkak, ‘Beyond Translation: Interactions between English and Persian Poetry’,
48.
31
Michael J. Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones': Sir William Jones, Poet, Lawyer, and Linguist,
1746-1794, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 72.
32
Anushiravani, & Atashi ‘Cultural Translation: A Critical Analysis of William Jones's
Translation of Hafez’, 47-9.
26
 Their dear destructive charms display;
Each glance my tender breast invades,
And robs my wounded soul of rest,
As tartars seize their destined prey. 33

By mentioning Inderpal Grewal’s description of the way the East was viewed ‘by the 18th-
century European man’34 as an ‘area of darkness not only because it was unknown and
perceived as mysterious but because it was believed that these lands were ruled by
despotism’,35 Anushiravani and Atashi conclude that Jones:

interprets [the] East as the opaque space which is inevitably infested. The two-word
phrase "secret haunts", connotes an opacity feared by the 18th-century Europeans. Haunt
refers to private moments that are probably beyond the jurisdiction of the panopticon,
and the word "secret" connotes hidden truths, constipations and plots that may endanger
the otherwise transparent society.36

Grewal’s description of the eighteenth–century European man and his understandings of the
East is accurate; an excellent example of Grewal’s eighteenth-century European is James
Beattie (1735-1803), who thought of the Easterners as ‘unfriendly to liberty’.37 However, as
Michael Franklin explains, the actual reason behind Beattie’s strange understanding of the East
was the fact that he had not read much about the East.38 What Anushiravani and Atashi missed
in their train of thoughts is the fact that Jones was indeed no ordinary European man and
consequently most certainly did not view the East like one. Jones was on course to defy any
Westerner who had such views of the East; his illuminating approach, from 1770 to 1773,
towards portraying a real Orient for the Europeans of the eighteenth century will be explored
in the next couple of pages.

33
Jones, A Grammar, 134.
34
Anushiravani, & Atashi ‘Cultural Translation: A Critical Analysis of William Jones's
Translation of Hafez’, 49.
35
Inderpal Grewal, Home and Harem: Nation, Gender, Empire, and the Cultures of Travel,
(London: Duke University Press, 1996), 26.
36
Anushiravani, & Atashi ‘Cultural Translation: A Critical Analysis of William Jones's
Translation of Hafez’, 49.
37
Sir William Forbes, An Account of the Life and Writings of James Beattie LL.D, 2 vols
(Edinburgh, 1806), 1: 235.
38
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 79.
27
 In his Grammar, while Jones explores the indefinite tense of Persian verbs, firstly he
establishes similitude between the Eastern and the European languages: the tense ‘answers to
the potential mood of other languages, and is governed by conjunctions as in Latin and
English’.39 Then, he presents an extract from the life of Nader Shah as an example of the tense:

It is evident to the discerning and intelligent part of mankind, that, whenever the affairs
of the world are thrown into confusion, and fortune favours the desires of the unjust,
the great Disposer of events, in the effusion of his endless mercy, selects some fortunate
hero, whom he supports with his eternal favour; and whom he commands to heal with
the balm of benevolence the wounds of the afflicted, and to sweeten the bitter draught
of their misfortunes with the honey of justice. 40

Perhaps there was a reason for Jones choosing this particular extract from the life of Nader
Shah: as the East India Company, and other similar private trading companies, including the
Dutch East India Company, Danish India, and Établissements Français Dans l'Inde, morphed
into a colonial power, there was a necessity for establishing the link between conquest and
Orientalism. As Nader played a significant role in the power shifts occurring in the Middle East
and India, he proved to be a beneficial character for the Western despots to justify the
hegemony and conquest through the historiography of the Orient. Furthermore, the rise of
Nader to power and his consequent conquest of India weakened both the Mughals and the
Hindu rulers of the subcontinent; this was indeed an advantage to the East India Company.
While it is easy to maintain that Nader was a pivotal part of the global process which assisted
Jones’s Indian adventure, in his Grammar, Jones used this extract from the life of the Oriental
despot to reiterate the value of justice amongst the people of the Orient.
Before presenting another extract of Jones’s Grammar, where the theme of justice and
despotism in the Orient is mentioned, it is fit to briefly mention the themes in the texts he
published before his Grammar. This is the Histoire de Nader Chah (1770),41 and after it,
Poems consisting chiefly of translations from the Asiatick languages. To which are added two
essays, I. On the poetry of the Eastern nations. II. On the arts, commonly called imitative
(1772).42 The Histoire de Nader Chah was Jones’s very first published translation of a Persian
text: a French translation of a Persian biography entitled ‫ ت ریخ جه نگش ی ن دری‬tārikh-e

39
Jones, A Grammar, 50.
40
Jones, A Grammar, 51.
41
William Jones, Histoire de Nader Chah (London: Londres, 1770).
42
William Jones, Poems consisting chiefly of translations from the Asiatick languages. To
which are added two essays, I. On the poetry of the Eastern nations. II. On the arts,
commonly called imitative, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1772).
28
jahāngoshāye nāderi, ‘The History of the World-Conquering Nader’ by Mirza Mehdi Khan
Astarabadi (d.1759). Jones’s translation was commissioned by the absolutist king Christian VII
of Denmark (1749-1808). Jones, however, reluctant to celebrate either the absolutist or the
despot, appended ‘Un traité´ sur la poesie orientale’ to the Histoire de Nader Chah, which
provided prose and verse translations of odes by Oriental poets including his beloved Hafez.
He reluctantly bolstered the fame of the Persian despot in the main translated book; yet, the
appendix, ‘Un traité´ sur la poesie orientale’, and Hafez’s ode narrated another tale:43

Et quoiqu'autour de vous les caressans Although the wine spreads joy here,
Zéphyrs, And although around you the Zephyr
En agitant les Fleurs, invitent aux plaisirs, caresses, inviting pleasures, by waving the
Prenez discrètement la Coupe flowers,
enchanteresse; take this enchanting Cup discreetly;
N'accordez point vos Luths, modérez vos Do not take your Lute for granted; moderate
désirs, your desires,
Car le Censeur punit sévèrement l'Ivresse. Because the censorship [authority] severely
punishes inebriation.
Si la vive couleur de ce Jus délectable If the bright colour of this delectable juice
Brille dans le Cristal, de son éclat jaloux, Shines in the Crystal, with its envious lustre,
Et si vous jouissez du bonheur le plus doux And if you enjoy the sweetest happiness
Dans les bras d'un Objet aussi tendre in the arms of an Object as tender as love;
qu'aimable; keep prudence close by,
Laissez à la Prudence un juste droit sur for in these dire times, the danger is
vous, palpable.
Car le temps est critique, et le péril palpable.
Loin, avec ce flacon, de vous laisser Do not get caught surprised with this bottle
surprendre, Carefully steal its sight from the evil eye;
Dérobez avec soin sa vue à l'œil malin; For, in these sad days, the barbarous fate
Car, en ces tristes jours, un barbare destin exert its fury, [and] nothing can defend you;
Exerce sa fureur rien ne peut vous défendre; Just like you like to pour drops of wine,
Autant que vous versez de gouttes de ce vin, [these cruel times] like to shed human
Autant de sang humain il se plaît à répandre. blood.
N'espérez pas jouir d'une tranquille vie, Do not expect to enjoy a quiet life,
Et craignez la Fortune au Sein de ses And fear the Fortune within its favours:
faveurs: It offers you only deceptive sweets;
Elle n' offre à vos yeux que trompeuses The Cup in his hands, which seems filled to
douceurs; you
Cette Coupe en ses mains, qui vous paroît [of] the most excellent Wines, the richest
remplie Liqueurs,
Des plus excellens Vins, des plus riches Presents to you, [nothing] but a tasteless lie.
Liqueurs,
Ne vous présente, au fond qu'une insipide
Lie.

43
I have translated Jones’s French translation to English.
29
Jones conjugated Hafez’s fourteenth-century image for the eighteenth-century world: although
Shiraz wine spreads joy, Zephyr caresses, and the lute can be heard, yet despotic censorship,
danger, and bloodshed are also palpable. Not in favour of unconstitutional authority, its
deceptive sweets, and tasteless lies, Jones wrote in the preface to his 1773 English translation
of the Histoire de Nader Chah:

Power is always odious always to be suspected, especially when it resides in the hands
of an individual; and a free people will never suffer any single man to be more powerful
than the Laws, which themselves have enacted or confirmed: but no kind of power is
more licentiously insolent than that, which is supported by force of arms.44

Some pages later, in the same preface, Jones confessed ‘that, had I been left to my own choice,
it [The History of the Life of Nader Shah] would have been the last manuscript in the world,
which I should have thought of translating’.45 He continued his statement by tackling the
European prejudice against the Orient, which caused the censure of some of the finest Oriental
literature, by pointing out that:
out of so many Persian books of poetry, ethicks, criticism, science, history, it would
have been easy to have selected one more worthy of the public attention; and the works
of Hafez or Sa’di might have been printed for half the expense, and in half the time.

By this time, in 1773, Jones was aware of the public’s interest in Oriental literature as well as
the expenditure and the efforts such works required for he had composed not only his
Grammar, but also another work Poems (1772).
On a personal level, there is little doubt that Jones was touched by the Middle Eastern
light; other than his publications, his annotations on the manuscripts he read provide evidence
of this claim. However, at the same time, he understood that the tastes of the eighteenth-century
Europeans must be educated with subtlety; translating the Oriental other required tactful
politico-cultural manoeuvres towards the European ‘Self’. One of the reasons behind the
publication of the Poems was to ‘create a public taste for the genuine ethnic commodity’.46 In

44
Mahdī, Khān Astarabadi, & William Jones, The History of the Life of Nader Shah, King of
Persia: Extracted from an Eastern Manuscript, Which Was Translated into French by Order
of His Majesty the King of Denmark. with an Introduction, Containing I.a Description of
Asia, According to the Oriental Geographers. Ii. a Short History of Persia from the Earliest
Times to the Present Century ; and an Appendix, Consisting of an Essay on Aiatick Poetry,
and the History of the Persian Language. to Which Are Added Pieces Relative to the French
Translations, (London: J. Richardson & T. Cadell, 1773), ii.
45
Astarabadi, & Jones, The History of the Life of Nader Shah, King of Persia, xxv.
46
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 92.
30
order to create such a taste in his readers, firstly, Jones presented a more unified, or rather
singular, and universal portrayal of the Orient: the Poems contains titles such as ‘Solima, an
Arabian Eclogue’, ‘The Palace of Fortune, an Indian Tale’, ‘The Seven Fountains, an Eastern
Allegory’, ‘A Persian Song of Hafez’, and ‘An Ode of Petrarch’.

The first translation, ‘Solima’, was ‘not a regular translation from the Arabick language;
but modes of the figures, sentiments, and descriptions in it, were really taken from the poets of
Arabia’.47 The Indian tale of ‘The Palace of Fortune’ was not only translated to English from
a Persian translation of the original Sanskrit text, but also in addition to some alterations, Jones
‘added several descriptions, and episodes from other Eastern writers.’48 Jones stated that
although ‘The Seven Fountains’ is an imitation of Nezami’s ‫ هف پیکر‬haft peykar, ‘The Seven
Beauties’, he has ‘taken a greater liberty with the moral allegory’ by inserting parts of a tale
from A Thousand and One Nights as well as borrowing the general subjects of the poem from
an Arab poet named Ibn Arabshah (1389-1450).49 Following ‘The Seven Fountains’, Jones
added his ‘A Persian Song of Hafiz’ and ‘The Ode of Petrarch’ for the readers to ‘compare the
manner of the Asiatick poets with that of the Italians’ and observe the ‘striking resemblance’
between the two.50 The second manner by which Jones’s Poems attempt to create a public taste
for Oriental literature and educate the readers is through the two essays appended to it. The
first appended essay to Poems, entitled ‘On the Poetry of the Eastern Nations’, could be retitled
‘A Defence of Oriental Poetry’; in the essay, Jones defends the frequently censured style of
Oriental poetry, misjudged by eighteenth-century Europeans such as Beattie as being full of
bombast, excessive ornament, and bad taste, against the European prejudice. While Jones left
it to the readers to compare the composition of Petrarch and Hafez, he compares Hafez’s ghazal
663 with Shakespeare’s Sonnet 99. Jones maintains that the comparison of Shakespeare’s ‘The
forward violet thus I did chide’ and Hafez’s ‘O sweet gale, thou bearest the fragrant scent of
my beloved’ points out that the ‘Eastern imagery is not so different from the Europeans as we
are apt to imagine;’51 however, it should be mentioned that in some sources this ghazal is only
attributed to Hafez.52 The following three photos, illustrations 4a, 4b, and 4c, belong to the

47
Jones, Poems, viii.
48
Jones, Poems, x.
49
Jones, Poems, x-xi.
50
Jones, Poems, xi.
51
Jones, Poems, ‘On the poetry of the Eastern nations’, 173-199: 191-3.
52
One available source of the ghazal attributing it to Hafez is BL, Add MS 7759, f. 129 and
the other is available in Princeton University and accessible via:
[https://libimages.princeton.edu/loris/pudl0032/62g/00000227.jp2/full/,7200/0/default.jpg].
31
loose folios available in the British Library’s collection; they contain the ghazal 663 of Hafez,
in Jones’s hand, as well as his translations of the ghazal into Latin and English:

Illustration 4a, 4b, & 4c, BL, MSS Eur C. 274, f. 54-5, & 64; extracts showing Jones reciting and translating
distiches of Hafez.

As Jones stated, the sonnet and the ghazal do contain similar imagery. After establishing
similarities between the fourteenth-century Persian ‘Tongue of the Unseen’53 with the
sixteenth-century English ‘Bard of Avon’, Jones moves his attention back to the racial and
political stereotyping of the Easterners in Europe; thus, he presented an extract from Sadi’s
Bostan which is entitled ‘The Advice of Anushiravan [the Just] to his son Hormuz’:

53
‫الغیب‬ ‫ لس‬lessān ol-gheyb, ‘The Tongue of the Unseen’ is Hafez’s nickname.
32
 Be a guardian, my son, to the poor and helpless; and be not confined in the chains of thy
own indolence. [ . . . ] Go, my son, protect thy weak and indigent people; since through
them is a king raised to the diadem. The people are the root, and the king is the tree that
grows from it; and the tree, O my son, derives its strength from the root.54

The quotation illustrates the Persian standards in two different periods of history: that of
Anushiravan the Just (501-579 AD) and the thirteenth century when Sadi was living. Jones
follows the quote by asserting: ‘Are these mean sentiments, delivered in pompous language?’
Refuting notions of Asiatic tyranny and Oriental unreason, he encourages his readers to
relocate ‘Oriental’ despotism in the Occident; such poems: ‘a century or two ago [ ...] would
have been suppressed in Europe, for spreading with too strong a glare the light of liberty and
reason’.55 In order to illustrate the affinity between European and Eastern classical traditions,
Jones compares Ferdowsi (940-1020) with Homer:

…there is certainly a very great resemblance between the works of those extraordinary
men: both drew their images from nature herself, without catching them only by
reflection, and painting, in the manner of the modern poets, the likeness of a likeness;
and both possessed, in an eminent degree, that rich and creative invention, which is the
very soul of poetry.56

Jones’s final remarks in the essay ‘On the Poetry of the Eastern Nations’ provides his readers
with a very intriguing proposal:

I cannot but think that our European poetry has subsisted too long on the perpetual
repetition of the same images, and incessant allusions to the same fables: and it has
been my endeavour for several years to inculcate this truth, That, if the principal
writings of the Asiaticks, which are reposited in our publick libraries, were printed with
the usual advantage of notes and illustrations, and if the languages of the Eastern nations
were studied in our places of education, where every other branch of useful knowledge
is taught to perfection, a new and ample field would be opened for speculation; we
should have a more extensive insight into the history of the human mind, we should be
furnished with a new set of images and similitudes, and a number of excellent
compositions would be brought to light, which future scholars might explain, and future
poets might imitate.57

54
Jones, Poems, ‘On the poetry of the Eastern nations’, 173-199: 194.
55
Jones, Poems, ‘On the poetry of the Eastern nations’, 173-199: 194.
56
Jones, Poems, ‘On the poetry of the Eastern nations’, 173-199: 195.
57
Jones, Poems, ‘On the poetry of the Eastern nations’, 173-199: 198-9.
33
It is this proposal that establishes Jones’s essay as a seminal work in the history of criticism:
by sourcing Eastern images, allusions, and fables together ‘with the usual advantage of notes
and illustrations’ to European scholars, Jones aimed to open a new and ample field for
speculations for the European traditions to be rejuvenated. Besides aiming to find similitudes
between the West and the East that aimed to help vanquish racial and political inequalities,
Jones’s proposal for rejuvenating the neoclassical European literature established him as a
significant precursor of the Romantics.

His proposal at the end of ‘On the Poetry of the Eastern Nations’ is followed by his
second essay appended to the poems entitled ‘On the Arts, Commonly Called Imitative’; 58 in
the very beginning of the second essay, Jones states that ‘poetry was originally no more than a
strong and animated expression of the human passions’.59 This statement demonstrates Jones’s
ingenuity should one consider that there are almost three decades between Jones’s statement
and Wordsworth’s famous words: ‘poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings’.60
In the second essay, Jones provided his readers with ‘some Eastern fables, some odes, a
panegyrick, and an elegy’;61 they represent new sources for his readers to be furnished with a
new set of images and similitudes to be able to explore, imitate, and consequently compose
several excellent and new European works. This is how Romantic affirmative Orientalism was
born within a London Welshman’s Persian Grammar and his Oriental Poems;62 Romantic
writers such as Coleridge, Southey, Landor, Byron, Moore, Percy Shelley, Felicia Hemans,
Charlotte Dacre, Sydney Owenson were yet to be born, but they would subsequently discover,
explore, and imitate the Oriental ‘new set of images and similitudes’. All of Jones’s
compositions, including Grammar and Poems, demonstrate his outlook on the East, elaborating
that Jones most certainly did not fit into the portrayal of a common ‘eighteenth-century
European man’.63

A Grammar of the Persian Language as a Self-teaching Text

58
Jones, Poems, ‘On the Arts, Commonly Called Imitative’, 201-217.
59
Jones, Poems, ‘On the Arts, Commonly Called Imitative’, 201-217: 202.
60
William Wordsworth, Lyrical Ballads, With Other Poems, 2 vols, (London: T.N. Longman
& O. Rees, 1800), 1: xiv.
61
Jones, Poems, ‘On the Arts, Commonly Called Imitative’, 201-217: 212.
62
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 73.
63
Anushiravani, & Atashi ‘Cultural Translation: A Critical Analysis of William Jones's
Translation of Hafez’, 49.
34
Jones initially desired to make the knowledge he gained from Oriental languages, including
Persian, useful in the self-teaching of the language; therefore, he started systematically to
collect and analyse Persian linguistic data. His sources were Persian literary works that
contained Sufi thoughts; these Sufi works played a significant role later in Jones’s life and
career and will be addressed later in this thesis. A pedagogical grammar would have been able
to act as a self-teaching text. However, by simultaneously edifying and entertaining with the
data he collected from Persian works, which were the literary and moral examples interwoven
in it, Jones’s Grammar indeed went further than a philological or linguistic text. The book also
shared the knowledge of the past Persian literary and scientific works. In the ‘Preface’ of A
Grammar, Jones emphasized that Persian had a pivotal role in colonial India, the source of
incredible wealth for Europe. The wealth, of course, was not rupees, but knowledge which was
Jones’s ultimate goal as he stated in a letter dated March 17, 1782, to Edmund Burke:

I believe that the greatest part of my savings would be spent in purchasing oriental
books and in rewarding (not as government has rewarded me for Nadir Shah) the
translators and interpreters of them. I should remit part of my fortune in manuscripts
instead of diamonds and my university would ultimately have the benefit of them.64

The language learning approach of Jones’s Grammar was similar to his acquisition of Arabic:
firstly the student learns to read the alphabet and their pronunciation by a native speaker model,
similar to the Syrian Mirza; then, the student moves to the grammar, with supplemental help
from Meninski's Dictionary of the Asiatic languages,65 which acted in a similar role to
Galland’s Les Mille et Une Nuits.66 Evidence found in the MSS Eur. C 274 shows that Jones
himself had learned Persian through the same method. For example, on two of the loose folios
in the collection, please see illustrations 5a and 5b, Jones has practised writing the following
Persian proverbs taken from Sadi’s Golestan:

‫سگ حق ان س به ا آدم ن سپ س‬
‫هرکه سخن نسنج ا جشابش برنج‬

64
Edmund Burke, Correspondence of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke: between the year
1744 and the period of his decease, in 1797. (Francis & John Rivington, 1844), 2: 457.
65
Jones, A Grammar, viii.
66
Franciszek Meninski, Thesaurus linguarum orientalium, Turcicae, Arabicae, Persicae ... et
grammatica Turcica cum adjectis ad singula ejus capita praeceptis grammaticis Arabicae et
Persicae linguae etc, (Vienna, 1680).
35
 A grateful dog is better than an ungrateful man.

He, who weighs not his question will receive an unpleasant answer.

Illustration 5a & 5b, BL, APAC, MSS Eur C. 274, f.43-4; extracts of recitation and translation of a distich of
Sadi by Jones.

In illustration 5a we see Jones’s Persian teacher’s hand, and illustration 5b shows his own
Persian handwriting. The latter folio contains his word for word translation of the proverbs,
while the former contains Jones’s word for word translation and a paraphrased translation. In
another instance, on two other folios, please see illustration 6, Jones has practised a line of
Attar’s Pandnāmeh, which is a book of maxims and morals attributed to Farid od-din Attar
(1145-1221):67

67
Attar’s immense influence on Sufis and his consequent influence on Jones will be
discussed in detail in the third chapter.
One of the copies of the Pandnāmeh which Jones purchased years later in India is available in
the British Library and is catalogued under BL, APAC, RSPA 33.
36
 Illustration 6, BL, APAC, MSS Eur C. 274, f.51; recitation, transliteration, and translation of two distiches of
Attar.

‫گرچه در ظ هر بشد نقش و نگ ر‬ ‫هر دارد در درو دنی چش م ر‬

‫هر م نی اشی دیگر نشاس ه اس‬ ‫اش دنی چش عروس آراس ه اس‬
The world has poison inside like a snake, although it has paintings and ornaments on
the outside.

The world is like an adorned bride, at every instance, she desires another husband.
Jones’s Persian tutor’s handwriting is not available in these two folios; yet, we see Jones
transliterating the Persian text, which was an attempt to practise his Persian-speaking skills.
The folios available in illustration 6 demonstrate the same teaching method he deployed in his
Grammar of the Persian Language. The employees of the East India Company had to study
Persian in order to read letters from Indian princes and potentates concerning important affairs
of war and peace. Therefore, Jones stated the reason for choosing this particular approach was
that: ‘in less than a year [a learner will] be able to translate and to answer any letter from an
Indian prince, and to converse with the natives of India, not only with fluency but with

37
elegance’.68 Jones’s elegant ‘Preface’ to his Persian Grammar also advised the students to work
simultaneously with their munshis (secretaries, language teachers) not only to learn ‘the phrases
of common discourse, and the names of visible objects but also to read aloud Persian literature
[...] to them’.69 Such literary works included Sadi’s Golestan, which is said to explore ‘virtually
every major issue faced by humankind, with both an optimistic and a subtly satirical tone’,70
Attar’s Pandnāmeh, and Ferdowsi’s Shāhnāmeh. These texts were listed by Jones and
presented as ‘A Catalogue of the Most Valuable Books in the Persian Language’.71 The
catalogue contains almost every significant moral, ethical, philosophical, and historical work
in Persian.

The MSS Eur. C 274 also contains evidence of Jones’s seeking of ‘the phrases of
common discourse, and the names of visible objects’ in 1785, two years after arriving in
Calcutta in 1783. The following pages focus on the loose folios and some of Jones’s
compositions since his arrival in India until that date. The first point that should be made clear
considering the loose folios is that the collection contains two different sets: one is ‘Persian
Vocabulary Nov. 1785 autograph of Sir William Jones’, the date confirms that these folios
belong to the time Jones was in India. Consisting of thirteen folios, the set was probably
composed at Jones’s request to further familiarize himself with colloquial Persian spoken at
the time in India. The folios in the set follow a specific pattern: the Persian scribe has written
a Persian phrase, and Jones has composed the English translation and transliteration. The
following folio, please see illustration 7, is a typical example of the folios:

68
Jones, A Grammar, xxi.
69
Jones, A Grammar, xvi.
70
Homa Katouzian, Sadi, The Poet of Life, Love and Compassion, (Oxford : One World,
2006), 31.
71
Jones, A Grammar, 136-45.
38
Illustration 7, BL, APAC, MSS Eur C. 274, ‘’Persian Vocabluary Nov. 1785’, f.3; daily used phrases in Persian
and English translations.

These folios can be distinguished from the rest of the collection through their pattern and the
fact that they do not display any personal annotations or marginal notes from Jones. They
demonstrate selected Persian phrases used in daily life; for example, at the top of the folio seen
above, which is entitled ‘Persian Vocabulary Nov. 1785’, we see the scribe’s handwriting ‫ال س‬

39
‫به‬ ‫ میکنم که یک پ رچه ن‬to its right Jones’s translation appears ‘I pray you give me some bread’
and the English transliteration appears to the left. The scribe follows by replacing ‘some bread’
with ‘some meat’, ‘some butter’, and ‘some tea’. Interestingly, the scribe has made some errors
on his part which Jones corrected. Some of the mistakes could have been caused by the scribe’s
negligence: for example, in the same folio, we see ‘some tea ‫ ق ری چ ه‬kadri chaiu’.72 The scribe
writes ‫ چ ه‬chāh, ‘a well, a pit’ whereas he should have written ‫ چ ی‬chāi, ‘tea’. However, four
lines below the mentioned error, we see another one which suggests that Jones was not
practising his Persian in India with a native speaker, at least before ‘Nov. 1785’. The line is
‘Assist me some money ‫ ق ری فشش به قرض افق کن‬kadri ful be karz shafaghat kon’. There is one
particular folio in this set that proves more interesting than others; please see illustration 8:

72
Marked in red.
40
 Illustration 8, BL, APAC, MSS Eur C. 274, f.38; daily used phrases in Persian and English translations.

On the top of the folio, we see ‘Is Sir W in court … ‫’ سر ولیم در دیشانخ نه اس‬which indicates that
the composition date of the folio is after 20 March 1783 when Jones was knighted. In addition,
the folio contains Jones’s Persian handwriting, ‫ ن م این چیس‬or ‫ ن م این ک امس‬meaning ‘what is
its name’, which is significantly improved compared with phrases in many other folios of the
collection. By comparing Jones’s handwriting on the folio with his other Persian annotations
on this set of folios, dated November 1785, it can be confirmed that Jones wrote the two Persian
phrases sometime after that date. His passion for the Persian language and literature was still
present at least about three years after his arrival to the subcontinent and is evident in his
annotation at the bottom of the folio: he has separated a certain phrase ‘I wish I had a waiting-
maid who spoke Persian ‫ف رسی میگف‬ ‫من کنیزی می اا م که ب‬ ‫’ک‬. It should be pointed out here
that there is another set of loose folios in the collection, which belongs to the time Jones was
41
learning Persian language in Britain; the examples mentioned previously, such as illustrations
5a, 5b, and 6 belong to this set. It is evident from his Persian handwriting and some grammatical
errors Jones had made in the set that these folios belonged to when he started learning and
practising Persian. The set is entitled ‘Exercises and Institutes of Persian Grammar’ and
considering its place, in the MSS Eur. C 274, it can be confirmed that these folios are the
earliest ones in the collection; the set predates the ‘Persian Vocabulary Nov. 1785 autograph
of Sir William Jones’ and Jones’s Notebook in which we see his improved Persian hand.
However, the ‘Exercises and Institutes of Persian Grammar’ are far more intriguing than the
‘Persian Vocabulary Nov. 1785 autograph of Sir William Jones’ for several reasons: they are
filled with his annotations not only regarding his Persian studies, but also his personal thoughts;
in one case, a drawing which could be of his future wife, Anna Maria (Shipley) Jones (1748-
1829).73 In addition, while the 1785 set revolves around the Persian phrases Jones needed for
his daily life in the Indian subcontinent and follows a certain system – on every folio, the scribe
writes the Persian phrases and Jones translates or transliterates the phrase – the ‘Exercises and
Institutes of Persian Grammar’ has no scribe nor any systematic approach. It consists of some
folios in which Jones has focused on Persian syntax; however, the majority contains Jones’s
favourite texts – composed by Sufi poets such as Attar, Sadi, or Hafez – and his exercises of
the language and translation through them.

By 1773, the Grammar was translated into German and reprinted twice in that
language; by 1828, it had been reprinted nine times in English. The book’s republication was
due to the commercial need for a practical guide to the Persian language. 74 Jones’s Grammar
reviews and responses support its significance from a literary and linguistics perspective. As
early as 1771, the Grammar influenced Orientalists to explore the languages of the Middle East
and the Indian subcontinent; for example, Captain George Hadley’s Grammatical Remarks on
the Practical and Vulgar Dialect of the Indostan Language: Commonly Called Moors. With a
Vocabulary, English and Moors ... The Whole Calculated for the Common Practice in Bengal
(London, T. Cadell: 1772) and his later work Introductory Grammatical Remarks on the
Persian Language (Bath, R. Cruttwell & G. Hadley: 1776). While Hadley hints towards using

73
See illustration 6.
74
Gernot L. Windfuhr, Persian Grammar: History and State of Its Study, (New York, NY,
Mouton: 1979), 15.
Garland Cannon, Sir William Jones: a Bibliography of Primary and Secondary Sources,
(Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1979), 11-3.
42
Jones as a model,75 Nathaniel Brassey Halhed’s Grammar of the Bengal Language (Bengal:
Hooghly, 1778) praises Jones’s Grammar.76 Halhed, who like Jones had learnt Persian in
Oxford, stated that ‘[B]y an adherence to his [Jones’s] plan this language may be acquired so
far as to open the way to conversation and short correspondence with the natives; after which
the progress of knowledge will ever be proportionate to the affinity of the student.’77 Although
Halhed praised Jones’s Grammar and emphasized the need for the British administrators to
learn Persian, he also complained about the ‘capital impediment’ caused by the fact that the
lingua franca of India is Hindustani – the language in which Hindus conduct their business and
keep their accounts – while the summary of public business in India is kept in Persian.78

This capital impediment was the same reason Jones constantly emphasized learning
Persian and occasionally Arabic rather than Indian languages, for it was those two languages
that the Mughal emperors of India used. In fact, by the end of Akbar’s reign in 1602, Persian
became the language of fashion, diplomacy, and governmental administration.79 Regarding
Jones’s stress on learning Arabic, it should be pointed out that it was that language that enabled
him to help Edmund Burke in 1781-2, to prepare legislation that would have permitted Indians
to be governed by their own laws and customs. It was Jones’s command over Arabic which
showcased his view of the use of language research. He enabled English judges to apply Islamic
laws over Indian Muslims by translating a complex and rhymed legal tract. Intriguingly, in his
The Mahomedan Law of Succession to the Property of Intestates (London, 1782), Jones applied
the same scholarly teaching method as his Grammar: he presented an engraving of the Arabic
text ‘to habituate the student of Eastern languages to the reading of old Arabian manuscripts’80
followed by a Roman transliteration based on the original principle ‘so as to give every full
sound its own specifick symbol’ and then his translation of the text’.81

75
George Hadley, Grammatical Remarks on the Practical and Current Dialect of the Jargon
of Hindostan; with a Vocabulary (etc.), (Cadel, 1784), 42.
George Hadley, Introductory grammatical remarks on the Persian language, 1776 (Menston:
Scolar Press, 1972), 49, & 189.
76
Nathaniel Brassey Halhed, A Grammar of the Bengal Language, (Bengal: Hoogly, 1778),
ix, xix, & xx.
77
Halhed, A Grammar of the Bengal Language, xx.
78
Halhed, A Grammar of the Bengal Language, xiv.
79
David Kopf, British Orientalism and the Bengal Renaissance, (Berkeley, CA: University
of California Press, 1969), 18.
80
Jones, The Works, 8: 165.
81
Jones, The Works, 8: 166.

43
 In the same year of publishing his Mahomedan Law of Succession to the Property of
Intestates (1782), Jones composed an essay entitled ‘The Principles of Government’ (1782).82
The essay, through a dialogue between a Scholar and a Peasant, reminded the people that they
had a legal right to bear arms, resist, and revolt against despotic royal power. In addition, the
essay was printed and distributed by the Society for Constitutional Information: a British
activist group founded in 1780 to promote parliamentary reform. Being campaigners for
parliamentary reform and manhood suffrage, most members of the society were also opposed
to the slave trade, and they promoted works such as Thomas Paine’s Rights of Man and other
radical publications.83 By publishing ‘The Principles of Government’, Jones portrayed his
principles which were in line with the Society for Constitutional Information and anticipated
the works of Thomas Paine and William Godwin: universal manhood suffrage, popular
education, parliamentary reform, and co-operative association. The Society for Constitutional
Information also published another composition of Jones, ‘An Ode in Imitation of Alcæus’
(1781):

WHAT constitutes a State?

….men, high-minded men,
…
Men, who their duties know,
But know their rights, and, knowing, dare maintain,
Prevent the long-aimed blow,
And crush the tyrant while they rend the chain:
These constitute a State,
…

The poem celebrates liberty: high-minded men know their rights, maintain them, and crush the
tyrant while lamenting that Freedom no longer smiles on Britain. This prophetic image of a
democratic state governing the rulers and citizens based on laws reappeared in a letter dated
April 10, 1781, to Dr Samuel Parr, Jones’s Greek classmate at Oxford; as Jones was printing a

For more details on the work, see Hadi Baghaei-Abchooyeh, ‘Sir William Jones’, Christian-
Muslim Relations. A Bibliographical History. Volume 12 Asia, Africa and the Americas
(1700-1800), David Thomas, & John Chesworth (eds.), (Leiden: Brill, 2018), 560-73: 562-5.
82
William Jones, The Principles of Government, (S.L.: The Society for Constitutional
Information, 1782).
83
Rory T. Cornish, ‘Cartwright, John (1740–1824), political reformer.’ Oxford Dictionary of
National Biography, (23 Sep. 2004),
[https://www.oxforddnb.com/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-
9780198614128-e-4817].
44
copy of the poem for Parr, he described the poem as ‘the last sigh of my departed hope for a
renovation of our free Constitution’.84 The poem itself also demonstrates his achievement in
mediating a balance to maintain political ends by aesthetic means. Jones’s ‘An Ode in Imitation
of Alcæus’ and ‘The Principles of Government’ were frequently republished in America; his
future brother-in-law William Shipley, dean of St Asaph, was amongst the people who were
prosecuted for reprinting such ‘seditious, treasonable, and diabolical’ tracts composed by Jones
85
and others similar to him.
On March 17, 1782, since Jones was not able to see Burke, he sent a copy of The
Mahomedan Law of Succession to the Property of Intestates to Burke with a letter.86 After
appreciating Burke for employing his ‘humble pen, in drawing part of the bill for the further
improvement of the English judicature in India’, Jones complained to Burke about the fact that
he had been waiting for a decision on his judgeship appointment in India for the past four years:

I should still remain, like Homer’s '' Man in a Dream," pursuing without approaching
and continue in a state of ruinous suspense, I shall certainly abandon all idea of the
judgeship, and deep as ever plummet sounded, shall drown my Persian books…. my
happiness depends on obtaining the appointment; … [the judgeship of Bengal] has very
nearly been the golden apple which has made me lose the chase in my profession. … I
should prefer that situation [becoming a Puisne judge] on account of the use which I
could make in it, of Arabic and Persian, in explaining the Mahomedan law.

Jones’s state of ruinous suspense was due to his radical compositions and speeches favouring
universal suffrage and the American Revolution; such compositions, ideas, and speeches
branded him as the ‘Republican’ Jones for many establishment figures.87 In another letter dated
January 27, 1783, Jones stated to Attorney General Lloyd Kenyon that his political ideas were
founded on ‘the true spirit of our constitution’; yet, he added: ‘[H]is Lordship may be assured
that I am no more a republican than a Mahometan or a Gentoo’.88 Intriguingly, in a Sufi context,
this statement not only echoes a line from ‘The Song of the Reed’ by Rumi, which Jones
translated and published in his essay ‘On the Mystical Poetry of the Persians and the Hindus’89
in 1792: ‘Each in my fond affections claim’d a part; But none discern’d the secret of my

84
Jones, The Letters, 2: 466.
85
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 2.
86
Correspondence of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke, 2: 455.
87
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 4.
88
Jones, The Letters, 2: 601.
89
Jones, The Works, 4: 211-36; the essay will be examined in detail in the third chapter of
this thesis.
45
heart.’90 But also, it resembles Amir Khosrow’s following quatrain which Jones had written on
his personal copy of Nezami’s The Treasury of Mysteries:91

If I am an infidel, fire or idol worshipper, I am! If I am a rend,92 or a wanderer, I am!

Different tribes have different assumptions of me; only my beloved and I know what I
am! 93

Illustration 9, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. I; recitation of a quatrain Jones believed to be Amir Khosrow’s.

In another instance similar to his letter to Lloyd Kenyon, on 4 September 1787, Jones wrote to
Second Earl Spencer: 'I am no Hindu, but I hold the doctrine of the Hindus concerning a future
state to be incomparably more rational, pious, and more likely to deter men from vice, than the
horrid opinions inculcated by Christians on punishments without end.’94 Some questions arise
by juxtaposing Jones’s letters and his annotations of Amir Khosrow’s quatrain; what Jones

90
Jones, The Works, 4: 230.
91
The work, Jones’s manuscript, and his annotations in the manuscript will be analysed in the
fifth chapter of this thesis, entitled: ‘The Majnun of India: Sir William Jones’s Annotations
on Nezami’s Treasury of Mysteries’.
92
The term in Sufi literature signifies a witty trickster Sufi.
93
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. i:
‫گر ک فر و گبر و ب پرس م هس م‬
‫گر رن نراب تی هس م هس م‬
‫هر ط یفه به من گ نی دارد‬
‫من دانم و دوس هر چه هس م هس م‬
gar kāfar o gabr o bot parastam hastam
gar rend kharābāti hastam hastam
har tāyefe be man gomāni dārad
man dānam v dōst har che hastam hastam
94
Jones, The Letters, 2: 766.
46
truly was and what he believed in? Are we interpreting his English statements as him taking a
page out of his beloved Sufi poets and being a rend?95 Indeed, he was not a Muslim or a Hindu;
he also stated that he was not a Republican; yet, his compositions and deeds significantly
favoured Muslims, Hindus, and the eighteenth-century American republicans.

Jones’s state of long suspense was eventually ended when he became appointed puisne
judge to the Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort William in Calcutta on 4 March 1783. He was
knighted sixteen days after, on 20 March, and in April 1783, he married Anna Maria Shipley.
One of the folios in the collection, please see illustration 3, records Jones’s celebration of the
events. He utilized Hafez to express his love to Anna Maria:

‫مگر دیشانه نشاهم ا‬

‫که در عشق تش اب ت رو‬
‫سخن ب م ه میگشیم‬
‫پری در نشاب میبینم‬
Jones’s recitation of Hafez translates to:

Perhaps I shall be mad, for day and night in thy love

I speak with the moon; I see fairies in sleep [my dreams].

Directly below Hafez’s line, Jones has written an anticipatory remark ‫نشاهی‬ ‫امس ش ا در هن وس‬
‫ رف‬emsāl shomā dar hendōstān khāhid raft, ‘This year, you shall go in India’ which is
followed by ‫ انش هللا تع لی‬enshāllāh ta’ālā, 'Allah Almighty Willing'. It is noteworthy to state that
the seven lines of Persian that appear underneath ‘Allah Almighty Willing’ are Jones’s Persian
translation of the well-known Christian ‘The Lord's Prayer’. The folio signifies Jones’s affinity
with Hafez’s poetry, his fondness for the exotic languages, philosophies, and cultures and his
pluralistic views that intertwined Islam, Christianity, and Hinduism. Furthermore, the folio
demonstrates one of the significant trends of Jones’s annotations: the first line of Hafez’s
original verse is ‘Perhaps I shall be mad, for day and night in this madness...’96 Jones used to

95
The term in Sufi literature signifies a witty Sufi trickster.
96
Hafez, Divan, 365:
‫مگر دیشانه نشاهم ا در این سشدا که اب ت رو‬
magar divāneh khāham shod dar in sodā ke shab tā sobh
47
alter the texts he was working on to make them more fitting for the situation he had; in this
case, the text was changed in order to explain Jones’s intense love for Anna Maria.97

Sir William Jones and India

On his long voyage to Calcutta, Jones recorded his thoughts, feelings, and views of
Asia; travelling on the seas, having ‘India before him, Persia on his left with the breeze from
Arabia below nearly on his stern’, Jones wrote:

It gave me inexpressible pleasure to find myself in the midst of so noble an

amphitheater, almost encircled by the vast regions of Asia, which has ever been
esteemed the nurse of sciences, the inventress of delightful and useful arts, the scene of
glorious actions, fertile in the productions of human genius, abounding in natural
wonders, and infinitely diversified in the forms of religion and government, in the laws,
manners, customs, and languages, as well as in the features and complexions of men.98

Enthusiastic about cultivating Oriental knowledge, Jones was also reflecting on his means of
cultivation: ‘I have ever considered languages as the mere instruments of real learning, and
think them improperly confounded with learning itself: the attainment of them is, however,
indispensably necessary.’99 On December 4, 1783, the influential European Magazine foretold
the fruits of Jones’s efforts in India:

His residence in that country may be considered as fortunate for the advancement of
knowledge. There he will have an opportunity of enquiring, with great advantage, into
the manners, customs, and literature of the Asiatic nations: and the humanity of his
disposition will, in proportion to the sphere of his authority and influence, be a blessing
to the natives of Indostan.100

In a vast geographical expanse such as India which was little known by the scholarly world,
Jones’s singular dynamic attempts of learning knowledge would have proven inadequate; a
comprehensive investigation could have only been implemented through a systematic and well-
coordinated formal research organization. Therefore, in Calcutta, he sought and found several
British scholars who were familiar with the languages of the Indian subcontinent and shared
the mutual interest of having a research body to facilitate their efforts. Amongst the people
Jones had found were Governor-General Warren Hastings, Francis Gladwin, Richard Johnson,

97
Other examples of Jones’s alterations will be discussed throughout this thesis.
98
Jones, The Works, 3: 2.
99
Jones, The Works, 3: 7.
100
European Magazine, (London: Philological Society of London, 4 December 1783), 4: 445.
48
Dr Francis Balfour, Sir Robert Chambers and his brother William, John David Paterson, and
Charles Wilkins. On 15 January 1784, Jones and twenty-nine others formed the Asiatic
Society.101 Jones presented twenty-seven visionary and pragmatical essays, far more than any
other member, to the Society over the next decade; after the publication of the essays in his
Works they were also published separately on Asiatick Researches or transactions of the
Society, instituted in Bengal for inquiring into the history and antiquities, the arts, sciences,
and literature of Asia (1788).102 In the following few pages, I will investigate the first three
Discourses – ‘Discourse I Delivered February 24, 1784’,103 ‘Discourse II Delivered February
24, 1785’,104 and ‘Discourse III Delivered February 2, 1786’105 – as chronologically speaking,
they coincide with some of the material available in the MSS Eur. C 274; particularly with the
Notebook and some of the loose folios dated November 1785.

The first Discourse revolves around the ‘Importance of Asia in the history of mankind
– Advantages to be derived from cultivating its history, antiquities, &c.– for the foundation of
the Society’s objects and future views.’ It was delivered to the Society on February 24, 1784,
about a month after its foundation. Jones began his Discourse by mentioning the time he was
journeying from Britain to India, had his first encounter with an Arab ruler in Mozambique,
and perhaps was nurturing the idea of establishing a body to explore the East systematically.
The pleasing situation of having India before him, Persia to his left whilst a breeze from Arabia
blew nearly on his stern, took place shortly after the newly-wed Joneses had just left their stop
in Anjouan on their passage to India. Positioned on an international trade route between
southern Arabia and Western India, Anjouan was home to Arabs, Africans, Creoles, Malayo-
Indonesians, and Iranians. The island enabled Jones to experience Eastern cultural, religious,
and ethnic diversity. Jones enjoyed conversing with the inhabitants of Anjouan; he visited his
first mosque in the island; the natives were impressed by seeing him taking part in the Islamic
tradition of reciting Arabic prayers as entering the mosque: at the mosque’s door, Jones read
out the Arabic moral sentences engraved on the gateway ‘signifying that the world was given
us for our own edification, not for the purpose of raising sumptuous buildings; life, for the

101
More on the gathering will be discussed in the third chapter of this thesis.
102
Asiatick Researches : or, transactions of the Society, instituted in Bengal, for inquiring
into the history and antiquities, the arts, sciences, and literature, (Calcutta: Asiatick Society,
1788).
103
Jones, The Works, 3: 1-10.
104
Jones, The Works, 3: 11-24.
105
Jones, The Works, 3: 25-47.
49
discharge of moral and religious duties, not for pleasurable indulgences; wealth, to be liberally
bestowed, not avariciously hoarded; and learning, to produce good actions, not empty
disputes’.106 As part of the cultural exchange, Jones presented a Quran to the ruler, Shaikh
Ahmed; in return, the Arab ruler offered him a little African boy. Shocked by the return offer,
Jones presented the Shaikh with an anti-slavery lecture. Although Mohammad was against
slavery,107 the Muslim rulers of Anjouan justified slavery by arguing that‘[I]f we buy them,
they will live: if they become valuable servants, they will live comfortably; but, if they are not
sold, they must die miserably’.108 To this, Jones responded, ‘There may be such cases; but you
fallaciously draw a general conclusion from a few particular instances; and this is the very
fallacy, which, on a thousand other occasions, deludes mankind. It is not to be doubted, that a
constant and gainful traffick in human creatures foments war, in which captives are always
made, and keeps up that perpetual enmity.’109 When Jones’s ship set course to India, the Shaikh
saluted him with a single cannon to which, Jones waved his hat and said Allah Akbar!110

In the first Discourse, Jones points out the core objectives of the Society: to inquire
‘into the History and Antiquities, the Natural Productions, Arts, Sciences, and Literature of
Asia’.111 Therefore, the Society inquired into the history of Asia by investigating whatever is
rare within the fabric of nature and by tracing the various traditions, forms of government, civil
institutions and religions of Asia.112 By inquiring into Asiatic history, the Society sought to
‘correct the geography of Asia’ and depicted a better vision of the continent for the West. Such
a detailed portrayal of Asia would have helped Europe to improve its forms of government and
civil institutions. Regarding the Asiatic sciences, Jones stated that the Society should examine
the improvements and methods of Asia in arithmetic, geometry, trigonometry, mensuration,
mechanics, optics, astronomy, and general physics; furthermore, the Society investigated the
systems of grammar, morality, logic, and rhetoric of the East as well as the Eastern surgery,
medicine, anatomy, and chemistry in addition to agriculture, manufactures, and trade.
Regarding the Society’s inquiry to Asian art, it aimed to investigate music, architecture,

106
Jones, The Works, 4: 274.
107
This will be discussed in the third chapter; whilst exploring Jones’s annotations on Rumi’s
Masnavi.
108
Jones, The Works, 4: 290.
109
Jones, The Works, 4: 290.
110
Jones, The Works, 4: 306.
111
Jones, The Works, 3: 3.
112
Jones, The Works, 3: 6.
50
painting, and poetry in addition to any type of ‘inferior arts by which the comforts, and even
elegancies of social life are supplied or improved.’113

By this time in his life, Jones was aware of the significance of languages in order to be
able to conduct such researches and presenting the Oriental values into European culture;
previously, he had mentioned that the immediatae objective of education is ‘to learn the
languages of celebrated nations both ancient and modern.’114 Yet, it is in this Discourse which
he presents, perhaps the first, modern definition of language as a tool of communication:

I have ever considered languages as the mere instruments of real learning, and think
them improperly confounded with learning itself: the attainment of them is, however,
indispensably necessary.

As he praised God in the manner of Muslims while leaving Anjouan, Jones closed the
Discourse by a Nazr or Islamic offering; he offered the seemingly pleasing or valuable fruits
and flowers of his researches as a ‘humble Nezr to the Society with as much respectful zeal as
to the greatest potentate on earth.’115 The first Discourse and the gathering of the Asiatic
Society will be investigated in detail later in the second chapter of this thesis.

The Oriental knowledge which was to be extracted by the Society was aimed to adjust
Western thought; yet, there was another socio-political dimension to this process. At the end
of his Grammar, Jones compiled ‘A Catalogue of the Most Valuable Books in the Persian
Language’;116 other than sections designated to philosophy and poetry, the catalogue contained
a section on historical books written in Persian. In the history section, Jones stressed the
significance of a text called the Ain-e Akbari (1590); it contained ‘a full account of every
province and city in the dominions of the Mogul [Akbar], of his revenues and expenses, both
in peace and war, and of all the customs and ceremonies in his palace; together with a
description of the natural productions of his empire’.117 Francis Gladwin, a Persian translator
at the time and a future Society member, tells of Jones’s ‘high encomiums’ to Warren Hastings,
who sought to restore the Indian government under ‘the original constitution of the Moghul

113
Jones, The Works, 3: 6-7.
114
Jones, The Works, 1:154:8, 155-6.
115
Jones, The Works, 3: 9.
116
Jones, A Grammar, 137-46.
117
Jones, A Grammar, 138.
51
Empire’.118 Hastings commissioned Gladwin to produce a translation of the text, and the first
volume of Ayeen Akbery, or, The Institutes of the Emperor Akbar (3vols, Calcutta, 1783-6) was
published as Jones arrived in India. Hastings had a novel analysis of the socio-political climate
of eighteenth-century India, which was to some extent facilitated by Jones. In order to
administer the vast subcontinent, Hastings believed Oriental knowledge and information would
be more practical than using military force. Therefore, he introduced Orientalist government
policies that would establish the British sovereignty in India as it was exercised in the manners
of the natives; such policies required all available sources of information and knowledge of
India. Consequently, to increase his understanding of the subcontinent and all its complexities,
Hastings promoted the production of Orientalist knowledge; if he was to inherit the syncretic
mantle of the preceding Mughals, such as Akbar (1556– 1605), it was essential for him to
understand the Hindu and Mughal traditions. Akbar was a fierce warrior and the modernizing
consolidator of the Mughals, yet at the same time, he was also a polymathic talent and a patron
who supported Hindus and Muslims to work side by side, not only in battles but also in his
court and ateliers. The red sandstone buildings, which cluster at the centre of his capital,
Fatehpur Sikri, are standing monuments of Sufi pluralism: Perso-Islamic architecture built by
Bengali and Gujarati architects.119 In many respects, Akbar represented a symbol of syncretic
and enlightened Mughal government with which Hastings sought to identify his British Indian
despotism. Many Indians, both Hindus and Muslims, appreciated their legal and religious
traditions being respected by the British in the tradition of Akbar. Hastings’s Orientalist
government policies, that Indians should be governed by their own laws, encouraged
reconciliation in the subcontinent. The Asiatic Society was Jones’s attempt to institutionalize
Hastings’s view on Oriental knowledge and its significance in the socio-political climate of the
time. In a letter, dated 9 December 1784, Hastings wrote to John Scott (1751-1838), Lord
Chancellor Eldon, that the production of such knowledge would not only free Company
servants from accusations of ‘moral turpitude’ but also ‘free the inhabitants of this country
from the reproach of ignorance and barbarism’ and consequently reconcile Indians with their
imperial masters.120 However, taking the Oriental knowledge from its original sources was a

118
Francis Gladwin, 'Minutes of the Honourable the Governor General on the Intended
Publication of a Translation of Ayeen Akberry by Mr. Francis Gladwin', Ayeen Akbery, or,
The Institutes of the Emperor Akbar, (London: G Auld, 1800), xiii.
119
For more information see Syed Ali Nadeem Rezavi, ‘Iranian Influence on Medieval Indian
Architecture’, The Growth of Civilizations in India and Iran, (London: Anthem Press, 2002),
127-49.
120
BL, Add. MSS. 29, 129, f. 275.
52
significant difference between Jones’s method and earlier British writers on India, such as
Alexander Dow (1735-1779) or Zephaniah Holwell (1771-1798), who had relied on Persian
translations and other secondary sources.121 Jones expected much from ‘learned natives,
whether lawyers, physicians, or private scholars’ and was quite eager to have researches
submitted to the Society; therefore, he suggested an annual award of a medal inscribed in
Persian and Sanskrit to the author of the best paper. Jones advised a notice to be printed in both
Persian and Hindi to state the purposes of the Asiatic Society and encourage the natives ‘to
bring their latent science […] in a style accommodated to their own habits and prejudices’122.
The Society’s research programmes initiated a new scheme of ethical, cultural, and scholarly
standards, which would have compensated for the colonial theft of the previous generation of
the British in India. Just as the Society was to represent Indians to Europeans, it was to represent
Europeans to the natives of the subcontinent.
The second Discourse presented before the Society on February 24, 1785, reflects ‘on
the history, laws, manners, arts, and antiquities of Asia’ and provides a comparative research
‘between the works and actions of the Western and Eastern world.’123 By this time, the Society
was displaying every sign ‘of a healthy and robust constitution’:124 even though some of its
members – including Hastings, Halhed, and Wilkins – had to leave India, the society’s progress
had far exceeded Jones’s expectations; Jones, the Society’s president, on the other hand, was
in poor health and needed frequent recourse to physicians. Jones encouraged his fellow
members to consult Sanskrit books; such researches would promote learning the language and
saving the manuscripts in which the texts were held, despite ‘a want of powerful invitation to
study’ Sanskrit.125 However, despite the rationality of Indian medicine, Jones infamously
declares: ‘[R]eason and taste are the grand prerogatives of European minds, while the Asiaticks
have soared to loftier heights in the sphere of imagination.’126 Yet, Jones’s studies in Oriental
materia medica was soon to make him abandon the simplistic Orient-Occident dualism. In the
second Discourse, Jones stated that ‘we can expect nothing so important from the works of
Hindu or Muselman physicians, as the knowledge, which experience must have given them, of

121
Peter Marshall, The British Discovery of Hinduism in the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1970), 5-6.
122
Jones, The Works, 3: 22.
123
Jones, The Works, 3: 13.
124
Jones, The Works, 3: 10.
125
Jones, The Works, 3: 14.
126
Jones, The Works, 3: 13.
53
simple medicines’; 127
whilst discussing the Notebook, we will see that he was to discover
influential physicians such as Avicenna (980-1037) soon. Jones closed the second Discourse
with a fascinating remark:

Mahomedans have not only the permission, but the positive command of their law
giver, to search for learning even in the remotest parts of the globe. It were superfluous
to suggest, with how much correctness and facility their compositions might be
translated for use, since their languages are now more generally and perfectly
understood than they have been by any nation of Europe. 128

In the first sentence of this extract, Jones does not directly mention who the law-givers of the
Mohamedans are; yet, one of the apparent nominees is Mohammad, who had over forty Hadiths
[traditions relating to Muhammad] encouraging his followers to search for knowledge.
Intriguingly, one of those forty Hadiths is similar to the one Jones has quoted here: ‘If
knowledge was hung on the rich of the Pleiades, it would be reached by some of the
Persians.’129 Initially, Jones’s remark demonstrates his exceptional understanding of Islamic
traditions; yet, should we juxtapose the Hadith and Jones’s remark, it could be asserted that
Jones’s understanding of a ‘Mahomedan’ is to some extent different from, or perhaps more
accurate than, today’s Western understanding of Muslims. In the eighteenth century, Jones
understood that the Orient was ethnically, racially, and culturally diverse; its various religions
also are as diverse as its people. However, after his arrival to India, in most cases, when Jones
mentions a ‘Mahomedan’, he is, in fact, referring to Indo-Iranian Persian speakers who were
followers of Mohammad. This is also due to the fact that he was in India and primarily dealt
with such Muslims. The latter part of the same extract, on one level, points out the efforts of
the European scholars, who, similar to Jones, understood such diversity and tried to educate
the Europeans on the languages of Asia; on another level, it reiterates the significance of the
vast knowledge which could have been gained from Oriental texts.

127
Jones, The Works, 3: 15.
128
Jones, The Works, 3: 22.
129
An Introduction to Ibn Khaldun, Mohammad Parvin Gonabadi (trans), (Tehran: The
Translation and Publication Company, 1949), 2: 1148-52: 1148:
‫لشک العلم معلّق ب لثّریّ ل ن وله قشم من أبن ء ف رس‬
54
Sir William Jones and Sanskrit
Hastings managed to shift the official policy of the English administration to rule Hindus
according to Hindu laws; however, such laws were written in Sanskrit manuscripts.
Consequently, an English digest of the Hindu laws was needed since some of the Sanskrit legal
texts were not translated into Persian, and those which were translated were unreliable.
Preferring to continue to work with Persian, Jones hoped that Wilkins would do the needed
work; in a letter dated April 24, 1784, Jones wrote to Wilkins that he had no intention of
learning Sanskrit, but as he needed assistance with it, Jones would rely on Wilkins; yet, things
were about to change soon, on 7 February 1785 Hastings sailed from Bengal and Wilkins left
India for England in 1786. Consequently, it became Jones’s new task to adjust the metropolitan
perceptions of the Orient and its new Orientalist regime. As Jones became unable to secure
Wilkins’s help in Sanskrit, he began studying the language in 1786. Jones had to persuade
Europe that when the European overlords lived in thatched huts, the Orient had advanced
civilization and sophisticated culture. Jones was not only aware of Iran and India’s syncretic
and vibrant traditions of religious and cultural pluralism;130 but also he had realized that the
Orient had much to teach its latest invaders. However, there were a few problems, most texts
covering the ancient history in the Persian language – for example, Old Persian, which was
used between 730-300 BCE and Middle Persian, which was used between from 224 BCE to
651 AD – had been lost over time. Furthermore, by the eighteenth century, both Old and Middle
Persian were not majorly used by the people for twelve centuries. Nevertheless, Old and Middle
Persian’s ancient sibling, Sanskrit, was accessible in eighteenth-century India and vastly used
to convey Hindu knowledge. Even though Sanskrit was in Jones’s grasp, learning it was not an
easy task as there were only a few Sanskritic scholars in Calcutta before the nineteenth–century
who would be willing to teach the language to the British.131 Jones was not the first foreign
scholar who faced this, about eight centuries before, Abū Reyḥān Birūni (973-1048), the
Persian polymath and arguably the very first Indologist, recorded in his History of India (1017):

They [the Hindu’s] call them [the foreigners] meleccha, i.e. impure, arid forbid having
any connection with them, be it by intermarriage or any other kind of relationship or by

130
Various instances of Jones’s work on such traditions would be discussed in the third and
fourth chapter of this thesis.
131
Kapil Raj, ‘Mapping Knowledge Go-Betweens in Calcutta, 1770–1820’, in The brokered
world: Go-betweens and global intelligence, 1770-1820, Simon Schaffer (ed.), (Sagamore
Beach, MA: Science History Publications, 2009), 105-150: 143.
55
 sitting, eating and drinking with them because, thereby, they think, they would be
polluted.132

It took centuries of pluralistic and syncretic governments, such as Akbar’s, to establish

familiarity and connection between Muslims and Hindus in the subcontinent to facilitate their
cooperation. As mentioned previously, Hastings took such pluralistic and syncretic regimes as
a model to make the natives and the British cooperate. Hence, when Sanskrit scholars such as
Rādhākānta Sarman were presented to the governor-general, Hastings purchased land for them
and yielded a decent annual revenue to them. In the case of Rādhākānta, this patronage resulted
in ‘one of the most significant collaborations between the Sanskritic literati and the British: the
composition in Sanskrit of the Purānārthaprakāsha (a digest of Indian antiquities) and the
supervision of its translation into Persian, which became one of Jones’s primary sources for
Hindu chronology.’133 Jones was inspired to learn Sanskrit as a judge rather than as a lover of
Hindu literature;134 his reasons for learning Sanskrit were pragmatical matters, especially
concerning his mistrust of some court pandits. Other than being able to represent India more
accurately to Europe, learning Sanskrit would facilitate him in working with Indian scholars in
order to compose a digest of Hindu law; such a digest would not only have been beneficial to
Hastings’s vision of Indians being governed by their own laws, but also it would legitimize
British rule in the subcontinent by recovering the native traditions. Furthermore, knowing
Sanskrit would help in the judiciary courts by making him independent of court pandits and
their interpretations of the law; in fact, it was in the quest of the same independence, from
Muslim law interpreters, that he composed The Mahomedan Law of Succession to the
Property of Intestates (1782).135
Ramalocana, similar to other Hindu scholars, was reluctant to teach the ‘language of
the gods’ to a meleccha; hence, Jones had to go under strict purification rules of varna dharma;
their lessons took place in a separate room which was floored with white marble and cleansed
only with the water of the Ganges. Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi (1888–1977) recounts
Jones’s purification: ‘Sir William was to receive instruction on an empty stomach; but

132
Ramesh Chandra Majumdar, Ancient India, (Benares: Motilal Banarsidass Publications,
1977), 499-500.
133
Kapil Raj,‘Mapping Knowledge Go-Betweens in Calcutta, 1770–1820’, 105-150: 143.
134
Franklin, ‘Orientalist Jones’, 34.
135
Muḥammad ibn Ali, ‘The Mahomedan Law of Succession to the Property of
Intestates: In Arabick, engraved on copper plates from an ancient manuscript, with a
verbal translation and explanatory notes’, Jones, The Works, 8:161-99: 165.
56
occasionally when he humbly implored the pandit, he was allowed to take a cup of tea.’136
Jones, on the other hand, referred to his strict teacher as ‘a pleasant old man’;137 it could be
argued that Jones’s description of such a strict teacher was due to his previous lessons from
Persian literature:

A King sent his son to a school with silver tablets on the boy’s lap.
With gold inscribed on the tablets, “The severity of a teacher is better than a father’s
love”.138

Less than a few months after beginning to study the new language, Jones made his famous
announcement:

The Sanskrit language, whatever be its antiquity, is of a wonderful structure; more

perfect than the Greek, more copious [having a large vocabulary] than the Latin, and
more exquisitely refined than either, yet bearing to both of them a stronger affinity,
both in the roots of the verbs and in the forms of the grammar, than could possibly have
been produced by accident; so strong indeed, that no philologer could examine them all
three, without believing them to have sprung from some common source, which,
perhaps, no longer exists; there is a similar reason ... for supposing that both the Gothic
and the Celtic ... had the same origin with the Sanskrit; and the old Persian might be
added to the same family.139
As evident in Jones’s dramatic statement, he analysed data from a vast number of languages
based on derivation, rather than etymology, from one another.140 In addition, similar to his
study of Arabic and Persian, Jones used primary sources for his research on Sanskrit whenever
possible. The statement on the Sanskrit language and his laborious attempt at learning it have
led most researchers of Jones to conclude that his love of the Persian language and literature
faded soon after he visited the Indian subcontinent and started to learn Sanskrit. Garland
Cannon, for example, stated: ‘the colonial situation soon forced Jones to shift his language
focus and ultimately his preference.’141 However, a close examination of the ‘Third Discourse
on the Hindus’, in which the statement on Sanskrit is available, might prove that not only his

136
Abdul Haque Vidyarthi, Mohammad in World Scriptures, (Lahore: Dar-ul-Kutub Islamia,
1940), 11.
137
Bodleian MS Sansk: C .34 Vopade ´va, Mugdhabodha, f. xiii.
138
Mosleh Ibn Abdollah Sadi, The Complete Text of Sadi, Mohammad Ali Foroughi (ed.),
(Tehran: Hermes, 2006), 244.
139
Jones, The Works, 3: 34.
140
Hans Aarsleff, The Study of Language in England, 1780-1860, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press, 1969), 115-161.
141
Garland Cannon, ‘Sir William Jones, Persian, Sanskrit and the Asiatic Society’, 88.
57
preference did not change, but also the influence of Persian literature and philosophy on Indian
literature encouraged Jones to learn the language; just as Sadi encouraged him to bear with the
pleasant old man’s severity.

The ‘Third Discourse’ was presented to the Society on February 2, 1786; as mentioned
previously, many of Jones’s Orientalist colleagues were soon to leave India and consequently,
representing the Orient to Europe was entrusted to him. Therefore, he provided ‘a series of
short dissertations, unconnected in their titles and subjects, but all tending to a common point
of no small importance in the pursuit of interesting truths.’142 In the third Discourse, Jones
outlines a plan for his upcoming discourses to investigate ‘The five principal nations, who have
in different ages divided among themselves, as a kind of inheritance, the vast continent of
Asia’:143 the Indians, the Chinese, the Tartars, the Arabs, and the Persians. In each of these five
essays, Jones not only explores their origins, connections, diversity, and culture, but also, most
importantly, ‘what advantage a more perfect knowledge of them all may bring to our European
world’; the dissertations began with India not because Jones found ‘it the true centre of
population or of knowledge, but because it is the country now inhabit and from which we may
the regions around us’.144 After defining India to the Westerners as a land almost as large as all
Europe, a space in which the ‘religion and languages of the Hindus prevail … and in which the
Nagari letters145 are still used’,146 Jones introduced the fields in which he aimed to investigate
Asia:

[F]our general media of satisfying our curiosity concerning it; namely, first, their
Languages and Letters; secondly, their Philosophy and Religion; thirdly, the actual
remains of their old Sculpture and Architecture; and fourthly, the written memorials of
their Sciences and Arts.147

It is in the first section, on the language of India, which the readers will find the most
remarkable statement of Jones; I should point out here that just as Jones’s Grammar emphasises
the similarity and connections of Persian and European languages, the Sanskrit statement could
be interpreted as him connecting the language of the subcontinent to its Western siblings.

142
Jones, The Works, 3: 24-5.
143
Jones, The Works, 3: 27.
144
Jones, The Works, 3: 27-8.
145
The Nāgarī script, known as the ancestor of the Devanagari script, was the earliest script
used in writing Prakrit and Sanskrit.
146
Jones, The Works, 3: 29.
147
Jones, The Works, 3: 32.
58
However, his most fascinating argument in the essay appears during the parts in which he
introduces the philosophy of the subcontinent to Europe. Jones seeks to find common ground
between the Hindu philosophy and other schools of philosophy; therefore, he asserts that it is
not

possible to read the Vedanta, or the many fine compositions in illustration of it, without
believing that Pythagoras and Plato derived their sublime theories from the same
fountain with the sages of India. The Scythian and Hyperborean doctrines and
mythology may also be traced in every part of these eastern regions Wod, or Oden,
whose religion, as the northern historians admit, was introduced into Scandinavia by a
foreign race, was the same with Buddha, whose rites were probably imported into India
nearly at the same time, though received much later by the Chinese, who soften his
name into FO.148

The argument is further elaborated on with Jones relating Buddha, ‘the ninth great incarnation
of Vishnu’, to Krishna ‘the Indian Apollo’. Then Jones asserts that he ‘cannot but agree that
one great spring and fountain of all idolatry, in the four quarters of the globe, was the veneration
paid by men to the vast body of fire which ‘looks from his sole dominion like the God of this
world.’149 With this assertion, the influence of Persian philosophy and Sufi ideology,
particularly the vahdat-e vojōd or ‘the Unity of Existence/Being’, appears in the third
Discourse. The Unity of Being, its influence on the subcontinent, and its traces in Jones’s
writings will be the central theme of the fourth chapter of this thesis. I should, however,
mention it briefly here, it was this particular belief that interpreted the Hindu idolatry as a
monotheistic practice and consequently promoted harmony and peace between the Hindus and
Muslims. Furthermore, the Mughal rulers whom Hastings and Jones respected, for example,
Akbar, openly promoted the Unity of Being. As we will see in the second chapter, when
discussing Jones’s Notebook, Jones was exposed to this particular perspective on idolatry
through Persian Sufi poetry, including quatrains of Sufi poets such as Amir Khosrow.
There are other instances of Persian mediation available in the third Discourse. For
example, while Jones is mentioning the most beautiful ‘fables of Vishnuserman, whom we
ridiculously call Pilpay’, he points out that they were first translated from the Sanskrit ‘by the
order of Buzerchumihr, the Vezir, of the great Anushirevan’;150 this is the same king and vazir

148
Jones, The Works, 3: 37.
149
Jones, The Works, 3: 40.
150
Jones, The Works, 3: 45.
59
151
Jones refers to in his Grammar and ‘On the Poetry of the Eastern nations’ (1772).152 Pages
later, Jones introduces the Purana to Europe: ‘[t]heir Purana comprise a series of mythological
Histories, in blank verse, from the Creation to the supposed incarnation of Buddha.’153 Jones’s
research source for such description is available in the British Library’s Royal Society Persian
and Arabic manuscripts, catalogued as RSPA; the manuscripts RSPA 73-7 are all, respectively,
Persian translations of Bhagavata Purana, Ramayana, Arjen Gitā, and Shiva Purana. In these
Persian manuscripts, we occasionally see Jones practising his Sanskrit, in Arjen Gitā, we see
his annotations which indicates his research on Hindu mythology; please see illustration
below:154

Illustration 10, BL, APAC, RSPA 76, f. 34; Jones’s notes on Hindu mythology.

Other evidence suggests that Jones searched for sources to investigate the Asiatic antiquity
regardless of their languages. For example, Jones’s knowledge of Middle Persian, also known
as Pahlavi, was not as much as Persian, Arabic, or Sanskrit; however, there is a letter available
in Fales Library addressed to Jones in Persian, which proves he was also looking into Pahlavi,
or Middle Persian, sources. Please see the illustration below:

151
Vazir is a high-ranking political advisor or minister in the Middle East.
152
Jones, Poems, ‘On the poetry of the Eastern nations’, 173-199: 194.
153
Jones, The Works, 3: 44.
154
BL, APAC, RSPA 76, f. 34.
60
 Illustration 11, Jones MSS: 2: 2; a letter from a scribe to Jones.
Dated 30 September 1786, the letter is from an unknown scribe working in Joseph Emin’s
(1726-1809) publishing house in Calcutta; it informs Jones that he does not have enough paper

61
to write the Pahlavi work which Jones commissioned him to write.155 Although the scribe and
the name of the Pahlavi work are not available in the letter, other than pointing out Jones’s
interest in a Pahlavi text, there is another fascinating point in the letter. It is a customary feature
of Persian culture to finish a conversation or a letter by sending regards to the family of one
another; it is pretty common to say or hear ‘say hello to your family from me’. At the end of
the letter, underlined with red in the bottom of the illustration, the scribe states in Persian ‫عرض‬
‫‘ انالص بخ م ص حب واالمرتبه س می رتبه مریم الزم نه ن نم یگ نه لی ی جشنس ص حب رس نن‬please offer my
piety in service, to that high ranked Mary of the Ages, the unique lady Jones.’ Initially, I was
under the impression that the scribe is referring to lady Jones as the ‘Mary of the Ages’ due to
her name, Anna Maria, as well as the fact that Jones and his lady were Christians and Saint
Mary shares a high stature both in Islam and in Christianity. However, there is another layer in
this fine simile: should we consider the Mughal Indian context of the name, the term ‫مریم الزم‬
Maryam-oz-Zamān, ‘Mary of the Age’ refers to the Hindu-Rajput princess (1542 –1623) who
was Akbar’s wife and Jahangir’s (1569-1627) mother. Although the name she was given at
birth is unknown, it is established that her marriage to Akbar was the source of Akbar’s gradual
shift in his religious and social policy; in fact, she exemplifies ‘Akbar's and the Mughal's
tolerance of religious differences and their inclusive policies within an expanding multi-ethnic
and multi-denominational empire.’156 Needless to say, if Anna Maria was referred to with the
title of Akbar’s wife, in the eyes of the scribe, Jones would not have been short of Akbar’s
stature.

In the same year as the Pahlavi-letter, 1786, Jones developed a Jonesian System of
transliteration, expanding his original transliteration scheme to transcribe Persian in Roman
orthography. This was because the existing transliteration schemes could not provide accurate
and consistent transcriptions that were close to the actual pronunciation. In addition, different
systems were providing different spellings of a word that were so varied that a single word
would have been interpreted as two or more different ones. Jones’s ‘A Dissertation on the
Orthography of Asiatick Words in Roman Letters’157 contained Isfahani Persian, spoken in
Iran, as well as Indian Persian. Other than presenting a refined and practical early International
Phonetic Alphabet, the dissertation hints towards Jones’s focus on mainland Iran and his

155
New York, Fales Library, MSS 301, 2: 2 (Box 2 folder 2).
156
Bonnie G. Smith, The Oxford Encyclopedia of Women in World History, (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2008), 1:656.
157
Jones, The Works, 3: 253-318.
62
passion for the language spoken on the land. In addition to Jones’s correspondence and his
works in 1786, the Society Manuscript Proceedings 158 portray him strongly encouraging both
Persian and Sanskrit. With the help of his Persian informant, who accompanied him even on
vacations, Jones translated some of Nezami’s significant works as a reading exercise. The
translations were entitled ‘Tales and fables by Nizami’ and were published in Gladwin’s
Asiatick Miscellany 159 in 1786. Jones’s advertisement of his translation reflects his language-
teaching purposes as well as his love of Persian language, culture, and arts in their native form:

In the translation of following fables, not only every attempt at elegance, but even the
idiom of language and the usual position of our words, have been designedly sacrificed
to scrupulous fidelity: the translator disapproves in general of such literal versions; but
they are certainly useful to beginners. Those, who understand Persian, have need of any
translation: those, who are learning it, will be assisted by a verbal one; however,
inelegant; and those, who neither know nor intend to learn it, are at liberty, indeed, to
say what they please of the images and sentiments, which such a preserves, but have no
right to give an opinion of the original composition.160

Overall, it would be naive to consider Jones, who knew twenty-eight languages,

choosing one language over the other. As it will be established in the fourth chapter,
governmental administrations of the East, even Oriental kings, were required to know specific
languages, including Persian, Arabic, and Turkish; depending on their geographical location,
other languages would have been added to the three mentioned. For example, Mehmed II (1432
–1481), commonly known as Mehmed the Conqueror, knew Latin and Greek, as well as
Persian, Arabic, and Turkish,161 while Akbar knew Sanskrit and Urdu. This was also applicable
to the literary intelligentsia, which contained figures such as Rumi, Amir Khosrow, Hafez,
Sadi, and Jones. When Jones was in the subcontinent, he was dealing with Persian and Sanskrit
daily. Jones was aware that the native speakers of languages descended from Sanskrit could
provide him with better etymology or Sanskrit translations than English or Persian translators.
Learning Sanskrit through Vedic texts was a time-consuming and challenging task, yet the goal

158
Proceedings of the Asiatic Society: 1784-1800, Sibadas Chaudhuri(ed.), (Calcutta: The
Asiatic Society, 1980), vol. 1.
159
The Asiatic Miscellany, (Calcutta: William Mackay, 1786), 2: 191-266.
160
The Asiatick Miscellany, 2: 192.
161
Gülru Necipoğlu, ‘Visual Cosmopolitanism and Creative Translation: Artistic
Conversations with Renaissance Italy in Mehmed II's Constantinople’, Muqarnas Online,
29:1, (2012), 1-81: 5.
63
was to learn the language in which the Hindu laws were preserved. On 27 September 1787, in
a letter to Thomas Caldecott, Jones stated:

Sanscrit and Arabic will enable me to do this country more essential service, than the
introduction of arts (even if I should be able to introduce them) by procuring an accurate
digest of Hindu and Mohammedan laws, which the natives hold sacred, and by which
both justice and policy require that they should be governed.162

In another case, on 19 March 1788, Jones wrote to the first Marquess Cornwallis (1738–1805),
governor-general of India: ‘… a Digest of Hindu and Mohammedan laws would be a work of
national honour and utility, I so cherish both, that I offer the nation my humble labour, as far
as I can dispose of my time consistently with the faithful discharge of my duty as a
magistrate’.163 Thus, he worked tirelessly with a team of Hindu and Muslim legal scholars to
produce an exhaustive digest of Hindu and Muslim law. The results of the collaboration were
two books: Al-Sirajiyyah: or the Mohamedan Law of inheritance; with a commentary (1792)
and Institutes of Hindu Law, Or, The Ordinances of Manu, According to the Gloss of Cullúca,
Comprising the Indian System of Duties, Religious, and Civil (1794).

Just as Jones’s Persian Grammar initiated Romantic Orientalism with illuminating

Persian literature, his translations of Sanskrit literature, particularly Sacontalá,164 reintroduced
the subcontinent to Europe, inspiring philologists, ethnologists, and mythographers throughout
the continent. Johann Gottfried von Herder, introduced it to Friedrich Majer, by whom
Schopenhauer gained familiarity with Sanskrit culture.165 Under the influence of Jones’s
Sacontalá that Friedrich Schlegel stated that ‘In the Orient we must seek the most sublime
Romanticism’.166 In the same year as publishing Sacontalá Jones delivered his sixth Discourse
before the Asiatic Society; on February 19, 1789, the Discourse was ‘On the Persians’167 and
revolved around their ancient languages, Primeval religions and their connection with Persian
philosophy; in addition, the Discourse investigated the architecture, sculpture and sciences of

162
Garland Cannon, ‘Sir William Jones, Persian, Sanskrit and the Asiatic Society’, 89.
163
Jones, The Letters, 2: 799.
164
Kālidāsa, Sacontalá: or, The Fatal Ring, an Indian Drama by Cálidás, Translated from
the Original Sanscrit and Prácrit, Sir William Jones (trans.), (Calcutta: Joseph Copper,
1789).
165
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 259-60.
166
Athenaum, eine Zeitschrift, August Wilhelm Schlegel, & Friedrich Schlegel (eds), (Berlin,
1798–1800), 3: 320.
167
Jones, The Works, 3: 103-37.
64
Persia. As mentioned previously, Jones began his representation of the East to Europe via India
not because he believed India was ‘the true centre of population or of knowledge, but because
it is the country we now inhabit’;168 it is in fact in the sixth Discourse, delivered six years after
he arrived in India and three years after his ‘Discourse on the Hindus’ and learning Sanskrit,
that Jones reveals:

We may therefore hold this proposition firmly established, that Iran, or Persia in its
largest sense, was the true centre of population, of knowledge, of language, and of arts;
which, instead of travelling westward only, as it has been fancifully supposed, or
eastward, as might with equal reason have been asserted, were expanded in all
directions to all regions of the world in which the Hindu race had settled under various
denominations.169

The sixth Discourse does not chronologically belong to the period in which Jones composed
the folios available in the MSS Eur. C 274, which is the central subject of this chapter, I will
not go into the details of it. However, as Michael Franklin points out in his article ‘‘I Burn with
a Desire of Seeing Shiraz': A New Letter from Sir William Jones to Harford Jones’: 170

‘[Sir William] Jones is best known for introducing to Europe the disconcerting
conception of classical India as the fons et origo of world understanding. Persia,
however, had been his first love, and it remained a focal point of his linguistic and
ethnological investigations. Persia's centrality in his research mirrors 'the central
position of Iran, which is bounded by Arabia, by Tartary, and by India... Persia seems
likely to have sent forth its colonies to all the kingdoms of Asia’.171
Franklin’s article also introduces another letter of Jones which is further proof that he stayed
loyal to his first beloved: dated ‘1 Nov. 1791’, the letter is from Sir William Jones to Sir Harford
Jones Brydges (1764-1847). In the letter, Jones states that although he is ‘so busy at this season,
that I can only write on business ... [and what has] the utmost importance to myself. I burn with
a desire of seeing Shiraz’.172 In addition to examining the letter and the sixth Discourse in
detail, Franklin’s article provides various reasons for Jones’s desire to visit ‘Persia, the most
delightful, the most compact, the most desirable country of them all’. Furthermore, as Franklin
points out Jones’s interest in Indo-Persian Sufi poets such as Amir Khosrow has led him to

168
Jones, The Works, 3: 28.
169
Jones, The Works, 3: 135.
170
Michael J. Franklin, “'I Burn with a Desire of Seeing Shiraz': A New Letter from Sir William
Jones to Harford Jones,” The Review of English Studies, 56: 227 (2005), 749-57: 751.
171
Franklin, ‘‘I Burn with a Desire of Seeing Shiraz’’, 749-57: 754.
172
Herefordshire Record Office, Kentchurch Court 8000.
65
translating some of Amir Khosrow’s poetry in the Notebook. These translations will be
discussed later in the second chapter. This demonstrates Jones’s delight in intellectual and
linguistic play and the pluralistic/ vojōdi reconciliation between Hindu and Muslim traditions.
However, evidence suggests that his feelings towards India were changing after his arrival in
the subcontinent; for example, the recently surfaced folios available in the Osborn c. 400
contain Persian quatrains in his hand in which he complains about the subcontinent. The
collection’s date suggests that the folios were composed after 1785, considering the fact that
MSS Eur. C 274 covers until the same year; the Osborn c. 400 could complement the latter
collection. The Osborn c. 400 contains many writings of Jones in both Persian and Sanskrit;
his Persian handwriting is significantly improved in the Osborn c. 400, which, together with
the fact that some of the folios contain his work on Al Sirajiyyah or the Mohammedan Law of
Inheritance: With a Commentary (1792),173 would lead to the assumption that these are among
the last folios he composed before his death in 1794. There are many Persian and Arabic
quatrains available in the collection; Jones has sometimes identified their authors. For example,
an Arabic quatrain from Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Idris al-Shafi'i (767-820) 174 and a
Persian one from Mīr Ali-Shir Navai (1441-1501).175 However, there is one quatrain in both
Sanskrit and Persian for which Jones does not record its poet; please see the illustration below:

Illustration 12, Osborn c. 400, f.10; a quatrain in Persian and Sanskrit in Jones’s hand.

The quatrain translates to English as:

173
Beinecke Library, Osborn c. 400, f.35.
174
Beinecke Library, Osborn c. 400, f.11.
175
Beinecke Library, Osborn c. 400, f. 109.
66
 We have been cast out your eternal heaven to India
why did you create hell if you already had India?
Its people are thieves, with indecent hearts and private parts
[why] this poor wise man has been assigned to burn in such a disaster?176

This particular quatrain is similar to another one found in Jones’s Notebook in the MSS Eur. C
274; it will be examined at the end of the second chapter when discussing the Notebook. Both
are in Jones’s Persian handwriting – although the handwriting in the Osborn c. 400’s folio is
much better –, neither of them follows any Persian rhyming scheme, Jones has not verified who
the authors are, and in both, the poet is complaining about the place he/she is living in as well
as the other people who share that space with him/her. As mentioned, neither of the two
contains a Persian rhyming scheme, and they sound strange to a Persian speaker; furthermore,
the two quatrains cannot be found in any Persian literary sources and/or databases. This could
raise the hypothesis of Jones himself being the poet of the two quatrains. Although with the
current information, the hypothesis cannot be either rejected or accepted, considering the fact
that Jones has written them in his own hand would suggest that he was not content, at least with
parts of eighteenth-century India and its society. Indeed, the vision Jones gained from India
through ancient Sanskrit books or Mughal Persian works was different from the society he
experienced, and this would have led him to discontent; the case would not have been much
different should he have visited Iran and compared it with the vision he had from the land
through the love poetry of Hafez or the heroism of Ferdowsi. However, as he did not have the
chance of visiting Shiraz, Jones burned with the anticipation of Hafez’s city and never forgot
his first love, Shiraz and Persia.

176
Beinecke Library, Osborn c. 400, f.10:
‫در بهش ج وی ا م را بهن ان ان ی‬
‫ه چش هن ی داا ی دو خ چرا می س ن ی‬
‫مردم نش د د و قلب و عشرت نش بی حی‬
‫گ ان ی‬/‫ع قل بیچ ره را در بال گ ن ی‬
Dar beheshte jāvedān mārā behened andākhti
Hamcho hendi dāshti dōzakh cherā misākhti
Mardomānash dozd o ghalb o oratānash bi hayā
āghele bichāreh raa dar balā gomākhti/godākhti
67
Chapter 2: ‘Sir William Jones’s Collection of Verses’

Introduction

The following chapter of this thesis introduces Jones’s early understanding of Sufism by
analysing some of the Sufi literature he read and examined during his early years of studying
the school. The chapter presents a more accurate image of Jones’s understanding of Sufism and
the reasons for his fascination with the school. In addition, the analysis provided in this chapter
will elaborate on the various literary arrays, figures of speech, and symbology utilized in
Persian Sufi literature. The literary features introduced in this chapter and the chapter’s general
analytical method will serve as a foundation for the analysis used in the rest of the thesis.

The British Library’s collection catalogued as MSS Eur. C 274 contains papers and
folios of Jones’s Persian studies over almost two decades, shortly before the composition of
his A Grammar of the Persian Language (1771) until late 1785. Should we consider the subject
matter of the collection, the material available in it could be divided into two major categories:
the first one includes the folios on which he has practised his Persian language and its
acquisition; chronologically speaking, they are the earliest folios in the collection. This
category can be divided into two sets: the first contains folios composed while he was in Britain
and on which he practised the Persian used in eighteenth-century Iran. The second set of the
folios containing Jones’s language acquisition material includes the ones composed whilst he
was in India; this set includes his practice of Persian used in the Indian subcontinent. The
second major category of the contents of the MSS Eur. C 274 comprises a single-volume Indian
blind-stamped leather-bound Notebook that does not contain any marginal notes of Jones’s
language practices. All of his annotations in the Notebook focus on his study and analysis of
Oriental literature. Dated Nov. 1785, the Notebook contains sixty-six folios of verses written
by many famous Sufi poets in Rekhta and Persian. Rekhta is the old name for modern Hindi
and Urdu; it combines the dynamic vigour of Persian script, diction, and imagery with the
sensuous Indian beauty of Urdu vocabulary. Originated from the Persian word ‫ ریخ ه‬rikhteh,
meaning ‘shed, scattered, and besprent’, the language was called Rekhta because it is
essentially Persian with other Indian languages scattered in it. By the mid-eighteenth century,

68
Rekhta was adopted by Indians who had been concentrating on Persian.1 The language excited
writers of the subcontinent as it reflected a syncretic background of combining the best of
Perso-Islamic culture as well as Hindu culture. Its modern version, Urdu, still contains the
‘indigenous base and syncretic qualities’, enabling the language to act as a ‘syncretizing role
in a pluralistic, secular and democratic India’.2 As mentioned in the previous chapter, the
politics of reconciliation had been central to Warren Hastings’s Orientalist government. He
appreciated the Mughal policies, which encouraged the artistic and intellectual collaboration
between the Persian-speaking Muslims and Hindus. Like the Mughals, such as Akbar (1542-
1605), Hastings sought to integrate all cultures in the vast heterogeneous northern India.3
Consequently, due to Rekhta’s syncretic and pluralistic properties, its poetry was being read
and translated by the Calcutta Orientalists and Company servants in the final quarter of the
eighteenth century. Jones’s Notebook contains twenty-seven folios of Rekhta poetry 4
and
sixteen folios of Persian poetry.5 The folios of Rekhta verses bear Jones’s Latin annotations,
and the Persian ones contain his annotations in English and Persian. I should point out here that
there is no evidence suggesting how Jones has procured the Notebook; whether he selected
each poem individually to be written in it, or he commissioned a scribe to select some poems
from Sufi poets he was interested in. Nevertheless, Jones was indeed intrigued by the poets
mentioned in the Notebook and had spent a significant amount of time researching them and
examining their works.

This chapter focuses on the Persian verses available in the Notebook; the verses contain
thirty-six quatrains, three single couplets, parts of a ghazal – love poem – and two complete
ghazals. All of the verses are composed by medieval Persian poets residing in Iran and India.
Other than the first two quatrains, by Badrodin Jajromi (d.1287) and Shams-odin Jovayni,
(d.1285),6 the verses available in the Notebook contain typical Sufi rhetoric and themes. The
three single couplets are composed by Amir Khosrow Dehlavi (1253–1325),7 Bidel Dehlavi

1
Shamsur Rahman Faruqi, ‘A Long History of Urdu Literary Culture, Part 1: Naming and
Placing a Literary Culture’, Literary Cultures in History: Reconstructions from South Asia,
Sheldon Pollock (ed.), (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003), 805–63; 849.
2
Gopi Chand Narang, Urdu Language and Literature, (New Delhi, 1991), vii.
3
Muzaffar Alam, ‘Persian in Precolonial Hindustan’, Literary Cultures in History, 131–98:
171.
4
BL, APAC, MSS Eur. C 274, ‘Notebook’, f. 1-15, & f. 33-45. From this point on, it will be
mentioned as The Notebook.
5
The Notebook, f. 16-32.
6
The Notebook, f. 16.
7
The Notebook, f. 27.
69
(1642–1720),8 and Siraj-ud-Din Ali Khan (1687-1756);9 the uncompleted ghazal also belongs
to Amir Khosrow.10 The two ghazals appearing at the end of the Persian section of the
Notebook were composed by Jami (1414-1492).11 The section is concluded by a Persian
quatrain composed by Sir William Jones in his Persian handwriting.12 In the Persian section of
the Notebook, Jones has annotated three folios:13 the annotations are on seven quatrains: four
by Amir Khosrow, one by Sarmad (1590-1661), one by Sadi (1210-1292) and one by Sahabi
(d. 1609).

In this chapter, each poet whose compositions are available in the Notebook will be
introduced, and the poems will be translated into English by myself unless stated otherwise. In
addition to analysing the poems, their historical, political, and mystical context will be explored
to investigate Jones’s fascination with them. The chapter aims to shed light on Jones’s
understanding of Persian and Sufi literature by 1786, when he acquired the Notebook. Other
than discussing the Sufi and literary figures available in the Notebook, the aim is achieved by
examining Jones’s annotations on the poems; the annotations are primarily his translations of
the poems and occasionally marginal notes regarding his analysis of them. Unlike the
translations available in the rest of the MSS Eur. C 274, which mostly revolve around language
acquisition, Jones presents paraphrased translations of the verses in the Notebook. This
suggests that these translations were aimed at the European readership of the time, and
consequently, Jones might have had desired to publish them in his literary works. However,
although the names of the poets in the Notebook appear in Jones’s works, which will be
explored in this chapter, only one of the quatrains of the Notebook appears in Jones’s work;
which leads to the assumption that his untimely death prevented him from publishing the
English translations. The quatrain appears at the beginning of the Notebook ‘A Quatrain in the
Persian Form’,14 please see below:

8
The Notebook, f. 25.
9
The Notebook, f. 25.
10
The Notebook, f. 28.
11
The Notebook, f. 29-31.
12
The Notebook, f. 32.
13
The Notebook, f. 20, & f. 22-3.
14
The Notebook, f. 2.
70
 Illustration 1, The Notebook, f. 2; Jones’s translation of a ‘quatrain in the Persian form.’

The ‘Persian Form’, Jones refers to here, is originally called a ‫ رب عی‬robāei, often referred to as
a quatrain in English. The form consists of four lines called ‫ مصراع‬mesra; which is the smallest
unit in Persian poetry; two mesras with similar meter are called a ‫ بی‬beyt which is equivalent
to a couplet in English. In his Grammar, Jones translated a ‫ مصراع‬mesra to ‘a hemistich’ and a
‫ بی‬beyt to ‘a distich;’15 I will address the Persian units with Jones’s English equivalents from
this point onwards. Commonly, the poet uses the first hemistich to introduce a subject, the
second and the third hemistich are used to explain and elaborate on it, and the fourth hemistich
acts as the conclusion. The standard rhyming scheme of a Persian quatrain is AABA, or
occasionally AAAA. Jones’s Persian formed quatrain follows the AABA rhyming scheme:

He was a pearl too pure on earth to dwell,

And waste his brightness in this mortal cell:
Man priz’d him not; but his great Maker priz’d,
And mild replac’d him in his native shell. 16

15
William Jones, A Grammar of the Persian Language, (London: W. and J. Richardson,
1771), 127.
16
The Notebook, f. 2.
71
However, the original quatrain itself was not composed in Persian; it is in Arabic. Jones initially
mentions the same quatrain in his early Latin work Poeseos Asiaticae (1774)17 as one of the
fine, vibrant, and delightful compositions of a poet named ‘Shabl o’ddoulah’.18 Although very
little has been written on this poet, the quatrain itself is an epigraph of Nizam al-Mulk-e Tusi
(1018-1092), a Persian scholar and vazir19 of the Seljuk Empire (1037–1194). Jones translated
the quatrain to Latin, one literal translation and one poetic: 20 an English translation of Jones’s
Latin literal translation is:

There was a Vizir Nozámo'l Моlс as valuable as a pearl, the divinity formed him a
noble man, from the divine mind of itself.
[The people of] his age, did not know the price of his purity; therefore, he was gently
placed it into the shell.

Jones’s Latin translation can be translated to English as:

He was a pearl of pure colour with pure shining light;

how amazing was the price of passage? Becoming restored in a shell by the Divine
parent.

Nizam al-Mulk-e Tusi was indeed worthy of such depiction: firstly, it was by his order that a
committee of astronomers, including Omar Khayyam (1048–1131), gathered at the imperial
observatory of Isfahan and created the Jalali calendar;21 with this new calendar, the Pre-Islamic
Persian zodiac system was restored. Secondly, Nizam al-Mulk commissioned scribes to

17
William Jones, Poeseos Asiaticae Commentariorum Libri Sex, Cum Appendice; Subjicitur
Limon, seu Miscellaneorum, (London: T. Cadell, & W. Richardson, 1774).
18
Jones, Poeseos, 312.
19
Vazir is a high-ranking political advisor or minister in the Middle East.
20
The original Arabic and Latin translations are available in Jones, Poeseos, 311-2. Joseph
Dacre Carlyle (1759-1804) also translated the same quatrain in his Specimens of Arabian
Poetry, from the Earliest Time to the Extinction of the Khaliphat,: With Some Account of the
Authors, (Oxford: John Burges, 1796), 131 as:
‘Thy virtues fam'd thro' every land, Thy spotless life, in age and youth, Prove thee a pearl, by
nature's hand, Form'd out of purity and truth. Too long its beams of Orient light, Upon a
thankless world were shed; Allah has now reveng'd the slight, And call'd it to its native bed.’
21
Edward Sell, The Faith of Islám, (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge,
1907), 139.
72
produce thousands of copies of Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh, which facilitated the revival of the
Persian language. Thirdly, the vazir founded the Nezamiyeh schools in many cities, including
Baghdad, Nishapur, Balkh, Herat and Isfahan; the schools were the first organized higher
education institutions globally. Later prominent Persian figures whom Jones was interested in,
such as Ghazali and Sadi, were educated in these schools. While both Nizam al-Mulk and Jones
were fascinated by Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh, the latter also enjoyed the writings of many
scholars who were students of the vazir’s schools; furthermore, the former desired to revive
the Persian culture, and the latter had the same desire for Oriental cultures. Perhaps, it was due
to these similitudes that Lady Jones used the first couplet of this very quatrain of Shabl
o’ddoulah as an epigraph to her editorial preface to The Works of Sir William Jones. In Six
Volumes (1799)22 to describe her late husband.

The Persian Verses and Annotations in Sir William Jones’s Notebook

The first Persian quatrain23 is composed by a poet named Badr-odin Jajromi in praise
of Shams-odin Jovayni, a vazir of the Ilkhanate dynasty (1256–1353). In addition to being a
skilful political and military leader, Jovayni was a poet and a patron of arts and sciences;24
many other poets, including Sadi, praised him.25 Jones was familiar with Jovayni as early as
the time he was publishing his Persian Grammar; in his ‘A Catalogue of the Most Valuable
Books in the Persian Language’, 26
Jones advised his reader, in order to get acquainted with
Persian philosophy, they should study ‘Negaristan, the gallery of pictures, by Jouini. A
miscellaneous work upon moral subjects in prose and verse. There is a beautiful copy of this
book in the Bodleian Library at Oxford Marsh 39’.27 In the Notebook’s quatrain, Jajromi uses
Jovayni’s first name, ‫ ا س ال ین‬shams-odin, ‘the Sun of the Faith’ as an image to praise him;
depicting the vazir as the centre and the rest of the universe circulating him, growing,
developing, and maturing:

22
Sir William Jones, The Works of Sir William Jones. In Six Volumes, Lady Anna Maria Jones
(ed.), (London: Robinson, 1799), 1: i.
23
The Notebook, f. 16.
24
Judith G. Kolbas, The Mongols in Iran: Chingiz Khan to Uljaytu 1220-1309, (Abingdon:
Routledge, 2006), 240, 382-5.
25
Mohammad-Taghi Modares-Razavi, Ahval va Asaare-e Khajeh Nasir-odin-e Toosi,
(Tehran: Bonyad-e Farhang-e Iran, 1975), 146-9.
26
Jones, A Grammar, 141-53.
27
Jones, A Grammar, 149.
73
 Illustration 2, The Notebook, f. 16; a quatrain by Badr-odin Jajromi.

The time is like circumference, and the generosity of the master is its centre;
continuously, the line circulates around the centre.
You mature all, the small and the great, the low and the middle; God does not
mistakenly bestow good fortune and prosperity upon no one. 28

Fascinated by Jajromi’s quatrain, the vazir rewards the poet with three hundred white lambs
from his own personal flock; furthermore, Jovayni composes a quatrain in response to
Jajromi’s. The vazir’s quatrain, available in the Notebook, reads as:

Illustration 3, The Notebook, f. 16; a quatrain by Khajeh Shams-odin.

Khajeh Shams-odin
Three hundred lambs as white as duck’s egg, there is no spot of blackness in them;
From our special flock, not from anywhere else, the shepherd should give to the
holder of this note.29

28
The Notebook, f. 16:
‫پیشس ه به گرد نقطه میگردد نط‬ ‫دورا چش محیط اس و کف نشاجه نقط‬
‫دول ن ه ن ای کس را به غلط‬ ‫پرورده تش که و مه و دو و وسط‬
29
The Notebook, f. 16:
‫ک را سی هی نبشد هیچ نقط‬ ‫سه ص بر ٔه سفی چش بیضهٔ بط‬
‫چشپ ب ه ب س دارن هٔ نط‬ ‫ا گلهٔ ن ص م نه ا ج ی غلط‬
74
These two quatrains convey some significant aspects of Oriental culture; the first is the
significance of poetry amongst the people of Asia. The type of correspondence displayed in
the two quatrains, particularly Jovayni’s response, was quite common in eighteenth-century
India and Iran. Such correspondences commonly start with a person composing a poem,
containing panegyric language and elaborated imagery, asking for a favour or patronage;
sometimes, individuals hired poets to do so for them. In some cases, the poet does not explicitly
mentions what he/she desires, such as Jajromi’s quatrain or the three ghasidehs by Mir Qamar
al-Din Minnat (d.1792/3), which were in praise of Richard Johnson (1753-1807), Sir William
Jones, and Warren Hastings.30 However, sometimes they mention precisely what they need
from the addressee; for example, someone named ‫ صف ر‬Safdar claimed that he had composed
thirty couplets, using extravagant hyperboles and panegyric language, to ask Sir William Jones
for a meeting.31 Jones annotated the folio stating, ‘This letter of verses are compositions of
Mere Hasan Haydar of Lucknow inhabitant’, showing that the poem’s composer was not Safdar
but Mir Hassan Heydar, a poet whom Safdar hired to write on his behalf. The second aspect
of Oriental culture conveyed within these two quatrains is the tradition of gift-giving. Jones
had encountered this strange tradition previously; for example, on his voyage to India, when
he arrived at the beautiful island of Hinzuan or Johanna, now Nzwani or Anjouan,32 a slave
was presented to him as a gift by the local ruler.33 The two quatrains state that Jajromi is gifted
three hundred white lambs for his four lines of praise. Jones and other members of the Asiatic
Society respected and participated in similar gift-giving traditions: for example, as mentioned
in the previous chapter, Persian Jones offered his researches as a ‘humble Nezr to the Society

30
A scholar of Arabic, Persian, and Urdu, Richard Johnson became deputy to the Resident at
the court of the vazir of Oudh in 1780. He commissioned the first printed edition of the Divan
of Ḥafez which was published by Upjohn’s Calcutta press in 1791. In a letter dated 11 August
1786, Jones wrote to him regarding the Divan: ‘I hope some years hence to offer up a copy of
it on the tomb of the divine poet near the crystal stream of Rucnabad.’ See: Sir William Jones,
The Letters of Sir William Jones, Garland Cannon (ed.), (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970), 2:
702. In Calcutta, Johnson helped Jones to study Hindu mythology and Persian literature. They
made connections amongst the India’s Persianate literary scholars such as Abu Taleeb Khan-e
Isfahani, the editor of Hafiz, and Mir Qamar ud-Din Minnat; the latter dedicated his Divan to
Johnson. The ghasidehs in Minnat’s Divan are available in the British library, catalogued as
BL, APAC, Or. 6633, f. 66-9.
31
BL, APAC, MSS Eur. C 274, f. 12. The folio has been translated by myself and is
appended to this thesis; appendix 1.
32
For more details on Jones’s experience in Anjouan see: Sir William Jones, ‘Remarks on the
Island of Hinzuan or Johanna’, Asiatic Researches; Or, Transactions of the Society, Instituted
in Bengal, 2, (1807), 77-107.
33
Jones, The Works, 4: 290.
75
with as much respectful zeal as to the greatest potentate on earth.’34 In return for his researches,
‘Sanskrit Wilkins’, Jones’s fellow member of the Society, presented a ghazal of Hafez to him.35
The tradition, however, was not only amongst the members of the Society, as they had to
interact with Hindus and Muslims of the subcontinent; there were gifts exchanged between the
British administration and the locals. As Michael J. Franklin points out, ‘[R]espect for the
potential authority of this infant meritocracy, couched in a polite image of Mughal gifting,
reveals Jones’s shrewd understanding of how power is mediated by knowledge and knowledge
mediated by power’.36 However, the gift-giving tradition was not without notable downfalls
for the administration: on February 6, 1785, about eight months before the composition of the
Notebook, Hastings set sail for Britain, he was impeached on May 10, 1787, and put to trial
on February 13, 1788, in Westminster Hall with members of the House of Commons seated to
his right, the Lords to his left, and a large audience of spectators, including royalty, in the boxes
and public galleries.37 In the trial, Burke intended upon convicting Hastings primarily on
charges of corruption; according to Burke, Hastings ‘did not only give and receive bribes
accidentally,’38 he also had ‘formed plans and systems of government for the very purpose of
accumulating bribes and presents to himself.’39 Consequently, Burke argued that Hastings had
descended into ‘the muck and filth of peculation and corruption.’40 The impeachment of
Hastings was not successful; yet, should we solely consider the two quatrains of the Notebook
and many other Persian quatrains which refer to the tradition of gift-giving, alongside the fact
that the quatrains date back to the thirteenth century, we might interpret at least some of
Hastings’s actions not as ‘filthy’ bribery but as a participation in Oriental gift-giving.41

34
Jones, The Works, 3: 9.
35
The ghazal will be discussed in the details in the next chapter of this thesis.
36
Michael J. Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones': Sir William Jones, Poet, Lawyer, and Linguist,
1746-1794, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 211.
37
John Garrard, & James L. Newell, Scandals in Past and Contemporary Politics,
(Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2006), 137.
38
Edmund Burke, ‘Speech in Opening the Impeachment (Feb. 18, 1788)’, The Works of the
Right Honorable Edmund Burke, (Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1871), 10: 3.
39
Burke, ‘Speech in Opening the Impeachment (Feb. 18, 1788)’, The Works of the Right
Honorable Edmund Burke, 10:7.
40
Burke, ‘Speech in General Reply (June 14, 1794)’, The Works of the Right Honorable
Edmund Burke 12: 295.
41
For more information on gift giving and its relation to the politics of colonial India see:
Natasha Eaton, ‘Between Mimesis and Alterity: Art Gift and Diplomacy in Colonial India’,
in Romantic Representations of British India, Michael J Franklin (ed.), (Oxon: Routledge,
2006), 84-113.
76
 The next poet whose quatrains are available in the Notebook is Abu-Saeed Abolkhayr
(967-1049).42 Born in Nishapur, Abolkhayr was amongst the most prominent Persian Sufi
poets; most of the information available about his life is obtained from a book named ‘The
Mysteries of Unification’, written by his grandson Muhammad Ibn Monavvar (d.1072/3).43
Abolkhayr’s significance in Sufi literature is due to his being one of the first Sufis who utilized
the ghazal, or ‘love poem’ as a poetic form and medium to express and illustrate mystical
concepts.44 Abolkhayr’s love for poetry can be comprehended through the fact that at his
funeral, instead of the recitation of Quranic verses, which is a common Muslim tradition, he
requested for Sufi poems to be recited. Generally focusing on the liberation of the self from
worldly matters, he extracted the essence of earlier Sufi teachings, such as those of Bayazid
Bastami (d.874) and Mansor Hallaj (858-922), reiterating them in a deeper yet simpler form.
Abolkhayr also believed that taking the Sufi Path does not solely require the Divine Grace; the
guidance of an experienced Sufi, usually referred to as a pir, ‘old-sage’ or morshed in Sufi
literature, is as equally important as the Divine Grace.
Overall, Jones’s Notebook contains eight quatrains composed by Abolkhayr;45 the
subject of the first quatrain revolves around his meetings and correspondence with Avicenna
(980-1037), the Persian physician and philosopher; the rest of the quatrains display
Abolkhayr’s vision of the Sufi path which will be explained and discussed later. Abolkhayr’s
meeting with Avicenna took three days, and the two conversed privately. At the end of this
face-to-face encounter, the mystic informs his followers that the physician knew everything he
could see in his mystical visions. Avicenna, in return, informs his students that the mystic also
observed everything he knew.46 As established in the previous chapter, one of Jones’s goals for
gaining Oriental knowledge was that he thought that such knowledge might have been utilized
to enrich Western culture. In Europe, during the Middle Ages, the development of sciences,
particularly natural philosophy, was founded on Arabic translations of earlier Greek and Latin
compositions. For instance, it was the Arabic translations of the works of Aristotle which

42
The Notebook, f. 16.
43
Zabih-alaah Safa, Tarikh Adabiyat-e Iran, (Tehran: Ibn-e Sina, 1963), 1: 448.
44
Jahangir Mansoor, Rubaeyaat-e Abu Saeed Abolkhayr, Khayyam, and Baba-Taher,
(Tehran: Nahid, 1999), 7-8.
45
One of the quatrains is available on The Notebook, f. 16 and the other seven are on The
Notebook, 24-7.
46
Jan Rypka, History of Iranian Literature, Karl Jahn (ed.), (Dordrecht: Springer, 1968), 244.
77
facilitated the systematic and institutionalized expansion of reason in Europe;47 yet, in the
Middle Ages, European Christendom reason was considered subordinate to revelation.
Although the faculties of natural philosophy and theology were separated in medieval
universities, theological discussions were often not allowed to be undertaken by the faculty of
philosophy.48 In fact, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the Age of
Enlightenment, a series of dramatic revolutions in science, alongside the rise of Protestantism,
challenged the Catholic Church's authority and Christian scriptures. With the advancement of
sciences, literal interpretations of the Bible became ‘increasingly untenable’ and alternative
interpretations, which were in accord with the spirit and authority of the scriptures, were
presented.49 However, as it can be obtained from Thomas Sprat’s (1635-1713) The History of
the Royal Society of London, for the Improving of Natural Knowledge (1667), most of the
founders of the Royal Society in seventeenth-century Britain held conventional and orthodox
religious views; in fact, many of them were prominent Churchmen.50 Therefore, although many
of the Royal Society fellows believed that their scientific researches provided support for
traditional religious beliefs, theological issues with divisive potential were excluded from
formal discussions of the early Royal Society.51 Nevertheless, in the European Age of
Enlightenment, the friction between sciences and religion still existed: Reverend William
Stukeley (1687-1765), an elected fellow of the Royal Society in 1718, wrote about Martin
Folkes (1690-1754), a distinguished mathematician and fellow Society member:

He thinks there is no difference between us & animals; but what is owing to the different
structure of our brain, as between man & man. When I lived at Ormond Street in 1720,
he set up an infidel Club at his house on Sunday evenings, where Will Jones, the
mathematician, & others of the heathen stamp, assembled. [ . . . ] From that time he has
been propagating the Infidel system with great assiduity, & made it even fashionable in

47
Dag Nikolaus Hasse, ‘Influence of Arabic and Islamic Philosophy on the Latin West’, The
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.), (Spring 2020 Edition),
[https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/arabic-islamic-influence].
48
Edward Grant, God and Reason in the Middle Ages (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2001), 193.
49
William Bristow, 'Enlightenment', The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N.
Zalta (ed.), (Fall 2017 Edition),
[https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/enlightenment].
50
See: Peter Harrison, 'Religion, the Royal Society, and the Rise of Science', Theology and
Science, 6:3, (2008), 255–71. The list and names can be found in Thomas Sprat, The History
of the Royal Society of London, for the Improving of Natural Knowledge, (London: Printed
for T.R. by J. Martyn, 1667).
51
Frank Turner, 'The Victorian Conflict between Science and Religion: A Professional
Dimension', Isis, 49, (1978), 356–76.
78
 the Royal Society, so that when any mention is made of Moses, of the deluge, of
religion, Scriptures, &c., it is generally received with a loud laugh.52

The ‘heathen’ mathematician ‘Will Jones’ mentioned here by Reverend Stukeley is, in fact,
Jones’s father; Persian Jones shared ‘Longitude’ Jones’s religious deistic views. Through
scientific methods, the likes of Folkes and Longitude Jones came to the assumption that ‘there
is no difference between us & animals.’ Yet Persian Jones did not need to look further than the
writings of the thirteenth-century Persian mystics: it was Rumi’s Masnavi that states that ‘We
[animals] can hear, see, and think. With you strangers, we are silent!’ 53 and Sadi’s Golestan
that asserted, ‘This is not called humanity, when birds are praying and you are not!’54 As
Franklin points out, ‘two generations of William Joneses endorsed Martin Folkes’s sentiments
as expressed to a Jewish friend: ‘We are all citizens of the world, and see different customs and
tastes without dislike or prejudice, as we do different names and colours.’55 Yet, indeed, the
most well-known Persian proverb by Sadi had influenced the second generation of Joneses:
human beings are members of a whole, in creation of one essence and soul. If one member is
afflicted with pain, other members uneasy will remain.
The first quatrain of the mystic Abolkhayr, which describes his meeting and
intermingling with physician Avicenna in the Notebook, read as follows:

Illustration 4, The Notebook, f. 16; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.

52
William Stukeley, The Family Memoirs of the Rev. William Stukeley, M.D. and the
Antiquarian and Other Correspondence, (Durham: Society, 1882), 1: 100.
53
Rumi, Masnavi, 3:37:
‫ب ا ن محرم م ن مشیم‬ ‫م س یعیم و بصیریم و هشیم‬
54
Said, Golestan, 2: 4:
‫مرغ تسبیحگشی و م ن مش‬ ‫گف م این ارط آدمی نیس‬
55
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 47; also, John Nichols, Literary Anecdotes of the Eighteenth
Century, (London: John Nichols, 1812), 4: 637.
79
 I went to the physician and described my hidden pain; he said, ‘hold your tongue for
anyone but [your] Beloved.’
I asked about food, he said ‘just your liver’s blood;’56 I asked ‘celibacy/avoidance?’,
he said ‘from the world and the hereafter.’ 57

In the quatrain, the mystic states that he has gone to a doctor to seek a remedy for his pain; the
doctor suggests that nothing would soothe the pain but the fulfilment of the Beloved’s desires.
The mystic asks if avoiding something would reduce the pain, to which the doctor responds
‘the world and the hereafter.’ The quatrain contains two allusions: the first one is in the second
hemistich: ‘[the doctor] said hold your tongue for anyone but [your] Beloved’. The hemistich
is an allusion to the life of Mansor Hallaj whose famous statement ‘I am the Truth’ was the
cause of his execution. 58 The last hemistich, ‘I asked “celibacy?”, he said “from the world, and
the hereafter” is an allusion to a quotation of Ali ibn Abi Talib (601-661), the first Shia Imam
and the prophet Mohammad’s son in law. In his ‫ نهجالبالغه‬nahj-ol balāghe, ‘The Peak of
Eloquence’ Ali stated:

‘A group worshipping God out of desire [for heaven] is a merchant’s worship; a group
worshipping God out of fear is a slave’s worship; a group worshipping God for
appreciating his Benevolence [and for God being worthy of worshipping] is a liberal’s
[free thinker’s] worship.’59

Like Ali, the doctor advises Abolkhayr, who in turn advises the reader not to worship God
merely because of fear or rewards in ‘the world and the hereafter’, but simply for the
‘Benevolence’ of the ‘Beloved’. Jones did not miss this allusion as he was indeed interested in
‘the placid and benevolent Ali’60 not only for his researches in Islamic jurisprudence but also
because of Ali’s high stature amongst Sufis who call him ‘the Cupbearer of the Kowsar.’61
Jones was familiar with the significance of the fountain and its cupbearer through the Sufi

56
A bleeding liver is a metaphor for pain and suffering in Persian literature.
57
The Notebook, f. 16:
‫گف که غیر دوس بر بن ب‬ ‫رف م به طبیب و گف م ا درد نه‬
‫گف م پرهیز گف ا هر دو جه‬ ‫گف م که غذا گف ه ین نش جگر‬
58
More details on Hallaj will be presented later in this chapter while examining Jones and his
annotations on Sarmad’s quatrain on The Notebook, f. 23.
59
Ali Ibn Abi-Taleb, Nahj al-Balagha, Wisdom 273:
ْ ّ ‫إ ّ قشم عب وا هللا رغبة ف لک عب دة ال ّج ر وإ ّ قشم عب وا هللا ر ْهبة ف لک عب دة العبی و إ‬
‫قشم عب وا هللا‬
.‫اکرا ف لک عب دة األحرار‬ُ
Arabic to English translation was done by me.
60
Jones, The Works, 8: 208.
61
The Kowsar Fountain is a fountain in heaven. Ali is nicknamed ‫ س قی کشثر‬sāghi ye kowsar
in many Persian Sufi works.
80
poetry he studied. For example, one of the ghazals he translated from Hafez states: ‘Tomorrow
perhaps the stream of Cuther and the girls of paradise will be prepared for us but today also let
us enjoy a damsel bright as the moon and quaff the wine from the full cup’.62 Jones also had a
copy of a collection of poems entitled the Diwan of Ali;63 he described it as ‘the war song and
some of the short pieces were written by the Prince of the Faithful, and, together with his
Homilies, constitute all his works’.64 Intriguingly Jones addresses Ali as the ‫ امیرال شمنین‬amir al-
momenin, ‘Prince of the Faithful’; this nickname is used exclusively by Shias and Sufis to refer
to Ali. In addition, I should point out that Jones also considered Sufi as liberal ‘free thinkers’
similar to Ali, in the quotation mentioned, and Abolkhayr’s quatrain.65
The other three quatrains of Abolkhayr in Jones’s Notebook, which elaborate on his
debate with Avicenna on Divine love, can be seen below:

Illustration 5, The Notebook, f. 25; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.

He asked, ‘who is your beloved?’ I said, ‘that person, why do you ask?’
He sat down and began to cry loudly for me; for how one can live with such a cruel
beloved?’66

62
The ghazal and its translation appears in Jones, The Works, 5:410 & 440. The literal
translation of the distich is: ‘Tomorrow the wine of Kowsar and the Beauties of paradise will
be ours; and today a moon faced cupbearer and a chalice of wine.’
‫و امروز نیز ساقی مه روی و جام می‬ ‫فردا شراب کوثر و حور از برای ماست‬
63
BL, APAC, RSPA 108.
64
BL, APAC, RSPA 108, f. i.
65
Memoirs of the Life, Writings and Correspondence of William Jones, Charles John Shore,
Lord Teignmouth (ed.), (London: J. Hatchard, 1806), 1: 49. The idea of describing Sufis as
liberal free thinkers will be discussed in the third chapter of this thesis.
66
The Notebook, f. 25:
‫گف م که فالنکس اس مقصشد تش چیس‬ ‫پرسی من کسیکه معششق تش کیس‬
‫کز دس چن کسی تش چش نشاهی یس‬ ‫بنشس و به یه ی بر من بگریس‬
81
 Illustration 6, The Notebook, f. 26; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.

He asked, ‘how is your life?’ My heart made my eyes full of tears.

He asked, ‘how can someone live, who deeply desires someone else?’67

Illustration 7, The Notebook, f. 27; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.

He asked about the house of that affection-breaker; I said, ‘my heart is her abode.’
He said, ‘where is your heart?’ I said ‘by her’, he asked ‘where is she?’ I said ‘in my
heart.68

67
The Notebook, f. 26:
‫دش دی ه پر آب کرد و بسی ر گریس‬ ‫پرسی یکی منکه احشاش تش چیس‬
‫کش را ب راد دیگری ب ی یس‬ ‫گف که چگشنه ب ا احشاش کسی‬
There is an alternative version of this quatrain which can be found in most modern sources
Such as: Abu Saeed Abol Khayr, Divan, (Tehran: Iran-e Man), 22:
‫دش دی ه پر آب کرد و بسی ر گریس‬ ‫ب دش گف م که ای دش احشاش تش چیس‬
‫کش را ب راد دیگری ب ی یس‬ ‫گف که چگشنه ب ا احشاش کسی‬
‘I asked my heart ‘how is your life?’ my heart made my eyes full of tears and cried;
then said, how can one’s life be, who must live on someone else’s desire?’
68
The Notebook, f. 27:
‫گف م که دش من اس او را منزش‬ ‫پرسی یکی منزش آ مهر گسل‬
‫گف که او کج س گف م در دش‬ ‫گف که دل کج س گف م بر او‬
82
 The remaining three quatrains of Abolkhayr available in the Notebook demonstrate his
views on the path a Sufi has to take to reach unification with the ultimate beloved, or God. He
interpreted the spiritual path in terms of warrior ethics: a Sufi wages war against his/herself as
a warrior does; such interpretation was relatively novel in the tenth century; in fact, Abolkhayr
was arguably the first Sufi who introduced the warrior ethic to Sufism. Many famous Sufis
living after him have made frequent references to Abolkhayr’s interpretation of the Sufi path;
the most notable is the Persian Sufi poet Farid Al-Din Attar (1145-1221), who mentioned
Abolkhayr as his spiritual guide. Attar also utilized Abolkhayr’s spiritual warrior ethics in
writing his ‫ منطق الطیر‬Mantegh ol-tayr ‘The Conference of Birds’, particularly his tale on ‘The
Sheikh of San’an and the Christian Girl’.69 One of Abolkhayr’s quatrains in the Notebook
sublimely illustrates the intermingling of warrior ethics and the Sufi path of the Divine Love:

Illustration 8, The Notebook, f. 26; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.

A warrior prowls in the path of martyrdom, unaware that a martyr of love is higher
than him.
In Judgment Day, this becomes clear, [as] one has been killed by an enemy and the
other by a friend.70
Emphasizing that one who is annihilated in the path of Love has a higher stature compared to
one who has died in a battlefield, in this quatrain, Abolkhayr is referring to the concept of ‫جه د‬
‫ اکبر‬jahād-e akbar, ‘The Great Jihad’ and compares it to the concept of ‫ جه د اصغر‬jahād-e

69
Jones also mentions Attar’s ‘The Book of Advices’ as ‘a book of moral sentences not
unlike those of Theogonies in Greek’ in A Grammar, 147 and BL, APAC, RSPA, 33.
The works of Attar will be discussed in the third chapter of this thesis.
70
The Notebook, f. 26:
‫غ فل که اهی عشق ب التر ا وس‬ ‫غ ی به ره اه دت ان ر تک و پشس‬
‫کین کش هٔ دا ن اس و آ کش هٔ دوس‬ ‫فردای قی م این ب ا کی م ن‬
83
asghar, ‘The Minor Jihad’. While the former is a battle with one’s self and ego, the latter is a
battle with other people who are against God; it is pivotal to mention that Islamic and Sufi
teachings state that one should not start a war with others unless he/she has overcome his/her
self and ego; hence, the Great Jihad is much more important than the minor one, and Abolkhayr
tries to reiterate this point. Another significant aspect of this quatrain lies within the term
Abolkhayr uses for a warrior: the term ‫ غ ی‬ghāzī in the context of the tenth century referred
to a mercenary and frontier fighter in Khorasan and Transoxiana. Historians explain the
meaning of Ghazi as:

A Ghazi is the instrument of the religion of Allah, a servant of God who purifies the
earth from the filth of polytheism. The Ghazi is the sword of God, he is the protector
and the refuge of the believers. If he becomes a martyr in the ways of God, do not
believe that he has died, he lives in beatitude with Allah, he has eternal life.71
By order of Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni (971-1030), on 28 November 1001, up to twenty
thousand Ghazis initiated the first Islamic campaign of India.72 Yet, it was due to the initiative
of Abolkhayr and later Sufis that the ‘instrument of the religion of Allah’ was morphed to the
tolerance of the Mughals. The Sufis’ efforts to reduce tensions between Muslims and Hindus
in India are the central theme of the fourth chapter of this thesis. However, as mentioned in the
previous chapter, Jones and his fellow Asiatic Society members were interested in Mughal
tolerance and attempted to apply the same transformation for the British in India. 73 Another
one of Abolkhayr’s quatrains in Jones’s Notebook also refers to the polytheism and idolatry
that the Ghazis set to ‘purify’. The quatrain is:

71
Paul Wittek, The Rise of the Ottoman Empire: Studies in the History of Turkey, thirteenth–
fifteenth Centuries Royal Asiatic Society Books, Colin Heywood (ed.), (Abingdon: Routledge,
2013), 44.
72
T.A. Heathcote, The Military in British India: The Development of British Forces in South
Asia:1600-1947, (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1995), 6.
73
Mughal’s toleration policies as well as Jones and the Society’s harmonizing attempts in
India will be discussed in details in the fourth chapter of this thesis.
84
 Illustration 9, The Notebook, f. 26; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.

I am occasionally called an idolater in the path of your love; sometimes, I am called a

drunk, rend, and kharābāti.
All these were said to break me down, yet I am happy that I am whatever they say.74
One of the significant points which should be explained in this quatrain is the Sufis’ view on
Idolatry. ‫ ب‬bot and ‫ صنم‬sanam are respectively the most common Persian terms for ‘an idol’;
as Sadi stated, the ‘literal and figurative usage [of an Idol] differs hugely’. 75 To Sufis, an idol
in a literal sense, for example, a statue, is worthless. This interpretation finds its origin in some
of the Quranic verses such as ‘And recall when Abraham said to his father, Azar: 'Do you take
idols for gods? I see you and your people in obvious error’.76 Such Quranic imagery of the idol
is also available in Sufi literature; for example, Daghighi (935-980) stated: ‘[T]hey have made
idols from the mountains, and placed them in place of Azar’s idol’.77 Generally, the act of
Idolatry in a literal sense has always been considered a negative action. An idol in the figurative
sense, on the other hand, contains a completely opposite connotation of its literal sense.
Figuratively, an Idol refers to a being which is the ‘perfection of beauty, glory, and elegance’
yet at the same time, that being ‘is cruel and indifferent towards its lovers’.78 Persian poets

74
The Notebook, f. 26:
‫گه رن و نراب تی و مس م گشین‬ ‫در ره عشق تش گه ب پرس م گشین‬
‫من ا د به اینکه هر چه هس م گشین‬ ‫اینه ه ه ا بهر اکس م گشین‬
75
Sadi, The Complete Text of Sadi, 484-7. Sanaei, Divan of Sanaei, (Tehran: Modares
Razavi: 1988), 485, & 489.
76
The Quran 6:74.
77
Daghighi, Divan of Daghighi Toosi, (Tehran: Mohammad Javad Shariat, 1989), 84.
78
Saeed Nafisi, The Enviroment, Life, and Poetry of Roodaki, (Tehran: Ibn-Sina Library,
1931), 530; Daghighi, Divan of Daghighi Toosi, 96, 103; Ali Ibn Ahmad Asadi, Garshasp
Nameh, (Tehran: Habib Yaghmaei, 1987), 401; Khaghani, Divan of Khaghani Shervani, Ali
Abdolrasooli (ed.), (Tehran: Saadat, 1937), 639; Sadi, The Complete Text of Sadi, 418, 457,

85
have used such figurative interpretation of an idol to depict a beloved, nature, or the world; for
example, to Farrukhi Sistani (980-1037), the world during the springtime is a house of idols,
and its beautiful creatures are the idols.79 Nevertheless, the image of a cruel and indifferent
beloved was later brought to Europe via the Maghreb and the Moorish kingdom of Al Andalus;
the Sufi idol was named Fin’amor and influenced Western literature.
In Sufism, an idol is what the heart desires the most. If this desire is for anything but
the Truth, the idol is considered to be a false one and consequently, worshipping it would be a
negative act. However, should the desire be solely for the Path of Truth and the Beloved,
paradoxically, there is nothing more worthy of worship than that idol.80 An alternative
figurative usage of the term is when one’s self, or ego, becomes the most desired object of
one’s heart; Sufis refer to it as ‘the inner idol’, which is considered as the biggest idol and the
hardest to break.81 According to some Sufis, such as Aziz-odin Nasafi (d.1287), three idols are
keeping human beings occupied: gluttony, lust, and love of one’s kin. 82 However, most Sufis
have used the following verse of the Quran to assert that any form of worship is worshipping
the Truth for anything that exists, including idols, is the absolute manifestation of a
monotheistic God.83 The verse is:

Whether they are the ones who believe (in the Arabian Prophet), or whether they
are Jews, Christians or Sabians [star worshippers] – all who believe in Allah and the
Last Day, and do righteous deeds – their reward is surely secure with their Lord;
they need have no fear, nor shall they grieve. 84

469, 596, 649; Rumi, Masnavi Manavi, Reynold A. Nicholson (ed.), (Tehran: Por Javadi,
1985), 3:313; Rumi, Divan of Shams-e Tabrizi, Badiol-Zaman Forouzan Far (ed.), (Tehran:
Daneshgah, 1957), 620; Hafez, Divan of Hafez, 97, 597, 870.
79
Abol Hasan Ali ibn Jologh Farrukhi Sistani, Divan of Farrokhi Sistaani, Ali Abdolrasooli
(ed.), (Tehran: Saadat, 1937), 64, 307.
80
Yahya Ibn Ahmad Bakherzi, Orad-al Hobab va Fosoos-aladab, (Tehran: Iraj Afshar:
1979), 246; Jafar Sajjadi, The Encyclopedia of Islamic Law, (Tehran: Koomesh, 1987), 381;
Abbas Key Manesh, The Radiance of Mysticsm, (Tehran: Sadi, 1987), 227.
81
Abdolah Ibn Mohamad Ansari, Resale of Khajeh Abdolah Ansari, (Tehran: Vahid
Dastgerdi, 1968 ), 29; Aziz-odin Ibn Mohamad Nasafi, Ensan-e Kamel, (Tehran: Marizhan
Moole, 1971), 54.
Rumi, Masnavi Manavi, 1: 267.
82
Nasafi, Ensan-e Kamel, 53-4.
83
Mohamad Ibn Yahya Lahiji, Mafatih Al-ejaz fi Sharhe Golshane Raaz, (Tehran: Zavvar,
1992), 639, 642; Mahmood Ibn Ali Khajooye Kermani, Divan of Khajooye Kermani,
(Tehran: Ahmad Soheili Khansari, 1990), 403.
84
The Quran 2:62.
86
Persian mystics and Sufis have considered an idol as a point of unification,85 this belief can be
considered as the basis of the Persian phrase ‫ صنم داا ن ب کسی‬sanam dāshtan ba kasi. ‘to have
an idol with someone’ which figuratively means ‘to have similarities with someone’. Such
figurative interpretation of Idolatry has formed the basis of the concept of the ‫ وح ت وجشد‬vahdat-
e vojōd, the ‘Unity of Existence/Being’ which promoted syncretic coexistence amongst
followers of different faiths; the Unity of Being, its effect on India, and traces in Jones’s works
and manuscripts will be the central theme of the fourth chapter of this thesis.
Other than promoting idolatry and drunkenness, ‘In the path of your love, occasionally
I am called an idolater; sometimes I am called a drunk’86 which would imply that the Sufi poet
is not confining himself to strict and extreme Islam, Abolkhayr’s quatrain 87
introduces two
significant terminologies of Sufi literature: being a rend and kharābāti. I will briefly explain
the two: ‫ رن‬rend literally means ‘trickster, slicker, nimble, rogue, mulish, smart, shrewd, and
insouciant’. Interestingly, although these characteristics are considered negative in Persian
culture and literature, being a rend is considered a positive quality solely due to its Sufi
connotation. For example, Sadi, who arguably had the characteristics of a rend more than any
other Sufi, describes himself as ‘Sadi, your name has become a legend of rendness in the
world’.88 In another instance, Sadi states: ‘I am a servant of the rends and the pious; since for
their Love of the Friend, they are enemies of themselves.’89 Sadi’s rendness is portrayed
perfectly in one of his anecdotes: he met someone claiming to be a Darvish, a Sufi wanderer,
debated with him for two days and defeated him with eloquence, logic, and reasoning. Then
‘he [the self-proclaimed darvish] swore, I taunted in return; he tore my shirt’s collar, I pulled
his chin [beard]!’90 Thus, generally, a rend in Persian and Sufi literature is a person whose
inner self and psyche are healthier and cleaner than his or her outward appearance. The idea of
being a rend is demonstrated in another quatrain of Jones’s Notebook attributed to a poet named
Gabriel. I have searched extensively to find who the poet was; yet, because Gabriel, the

85
Ansari, Resale of Khajeh Abdolah Ansari, 29; Lahiji, Mafatih Al-ejaz fi Sharhe Golshane
Raaz, 639; Sadi, The Complete Text of Sadi, 434.
Khajooye Kermani, Divan of Khajooye Kermani, 403.
86
The Notebook, f. 26.
87
The Notebook, f. 26.
88
Sadi, The Complete Text of Sadi, 599:
‫سع ی ن م به رن ی در جه افس نه ا‬
89
Sadi, The Complete Text of Sadi, 664:
‫که ا محب ب دوس دا ن نشیشن‬ ‫غالم ه رن ا و پ کب انم‬
90
Sadi, The Complete Text of Sadi, 267:
.‫ گریب نم دری نخ انش گرف م‬.‫دان مم داد سقطش گف م‬
87
archangel, is such a prominent figure in Islamic, Persian, and Sufi literature, my search has
been fruitless. The quatrain is:

Illustration 10, The Notebook, f. 19; a quatrain by a poet named Jabreal.

Lord, asking you for the kingdom of Jamshid [an Iranian mythological king] and the
glory of the Persian kings
is like asking the Sea for some dampness. It is due to my inferiority that I have asked
so little of your Generosities.91

In the quatrain, although the poet is asking for huge favours, in order to be playful rather than
self-important, he/she also states that all he/she asks is technically nothing, compared to the
might and generosity of God.

The other significant Sufi term in Abolkhayr’s quatrain, and Sufi rhetoric, is
‫ نرابو تی‬kharābāti which means ‘a person who lives or dwells in the kharābāt’. ‫نرابو ت‬
kharābāt literally means ‘ruins’ and figuratively refers to ‘a tavern, a prayer room’.
The term has a divine connotation in Sufism since Sufis believe that the Unity with
the Beloved occurs in kharābāt. To Sufis, kharābāt is where a mystic starts the
Path, goes through the seven valleys of Love and units with the Beloved. Hafez has
used the term kharābāt quite frequently in his poetry; a distich of one of his most
popular ghazals points out the irony that takes place in the kharābāt: God, the
Beloved, can be observed even in a Zoroastrian ruin: ‘In the Magi’s kharābāt, I see

91
The Notebook, f. 19:
‫ور اشک ا ه عجم نشاس ه ام‬ ‫ی رب اگر ا تش ملک جم نشاس ه ام‬
‫ا ه تش هنش کم نشاس ه ام‬ ‫ا دونی نشد بحر نم نشاس ه ام‬
88
God’s Light; it’s a miracle that I see such a Light in such a place.’92 As mentioned
in the previous chapter, in the beginning folio of his copy of Nezami’s Treasury,93
Jones quoted a quatrain attributed to Amir Khosrow which contained the concepts
of rend and kharābāti; please see the illustration below:

Illustration 11, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. I; a quatrain in Jones’s hand which he attributed to Amir Khosrow.

‘If I am an infidel, fire or idol worshipper, I am! If I am a rend, or a kharābāti, I am!

Different tribes have different assumptions of me; only my beloved and I know what I
am!’
The final distich of Amir Khosrow’s quatrain quoted by Jones implies that the poet does not
concern himself with the accusations since only the beloved matters. On the other hand,
Abolkhayr’s final distich of his quatrain states ‘yet I am happy that I am whatever they say’94
which is a sign of contentment even though he feels broken due to the accusations. Intriguingly,
another quatrain of Abolkhayr in Jones’s Notebook explains the source of the Sufi’s
contentment:

92
Hafez, Divan of Hafez, 714:
‫این عجب بین که چه نشری کج میبینم‬ ‫نشرن امیبینم‬ ‫درنراب ت مغ‬
93
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. i:
‫گر رن نراب تی هس م هس م‬ ‫گر ک فر و گبر و ب پرس م هس م‬
‫من دانم و دوس هر چه هس م هس م‬ ‫هر ط یفه به من گ نی دارد‬
94
The Notebook, f. 26:
‫من ا د به اینکه هر چه هس م گشین‬
89
 Illustration 12, The Notebook, f. 24; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.

The beloved came to me and said, ‘keep your heart tired, yet always hopeful.
[For] I have my sight on the brokenhearted, so if you desire me to keep your
heartbroken.95
As it will be explained in the third chapter of this thesis, the final stages of a Sufi’s quest to
unite with the Beloved is ‫ فن‬fanā, ‘annihilation’ which leads to the Sufi’s ‫ بق‬baghā ‘immortality’
or eternal unity with the Beloved. Abolkhayr is content with being ‘broken’ as he has realized
that it leads to the annihilation and consequently eternal unification with the Beloved. Another
quatrain in Jones’s Notebook is attributed to Sahabi, yet its tone and theme are similar to
Abolkhayr’s quatrains. The quatrain is:

Illustration 13, The Notebook, f. 18; a quatrain by attributed to Sahabi.

The friend keeps the door of union closed on us; the friend burdens us with
separation.

95
The Notebook, f. 24:
‫دایم به امی بس ه میدار دل‬ ‫ی ر آم و گف نس ه می ار دل‬
‫م را نشاهی اکس ه می ار دل‬ ‫م را به اکس گ نظره ب ا‬
90
 Me, my ego, disappointment, and the friend’s gate, since the friend likes the broken-
hearted.96

In the last hemistich of the quatrain, ‘since the friend likes the brokenhearted’, the poet uses a
pun: while the first ‫ دوس‬dōst in the hemistich means ‘a friend’, the second one means ‘liking
something’. Jones’s Notebook might be the only manuscript that recognizes Sahabi as the
author of the quatrain. However, it contains signs of being composed by Abolkhayr: other than
the contentment the poet feels due to being broken in the path of union with the beloved, he is
differentiating between one and one’s self, which is another characteristic of Abolkhayr’s
mystical views.
The final quatrain of Abolkhayr in Jones’s Notebook explains the Sufi’s path to the
Divine Love and the burdens a Sufi takes in order to be eternally united with the Beloved:

Illustration 14, The Notebook, f. 27; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.

From the pain [of your separation], tonight I shall sleep in blood, not in the bed of
salvation and bliss.
If you do not believe me, send me a dream vision of yourself to see how I have slept
without you.97
Another Sufi poet whose quatrains are available in the Notebook is Omar Khayyam:98
a Persian philosopher, astronomer, mathematician, and poet who is considered one of the most

96
The Notebook, f. 18:
‫م را به فراق نس ه می ارد دوس‬ ‫بر م در وصل بس ه می ارد دوس‬
‫چش دوس دش اکس ه می ارد دوس‬ ‫من بع من و اکس گی بر در دوس‬
97
The Notebook, f. 27:
‫و بس ر ع فی برو نشاهم نف‬ ‫امشب غ می نش نشاهم نف‬
‫ت در نگری که بیتش چش نشاهم نف‬ ‫ب ور نکنی نی ش نشد را بفرس‬
98
The Notebook, f. 17-8.
91
influential Sufis and scholars of the Middle Ages. In Europe, Khayyam’s significance as a
philosopher and poet has not received the same attention as his scientific writings.99 It is argued
that Edward FitzGerald (1809–83) introduced Khayyam to Europe100 by translating some of
his quatrains and publishing them as Rubáiyát of Omar Khayyam: the astronomer-poet of
Persia: rendered into English verse (1859).101 FitzGerald’s book attributes about a thousand
quatrains to Khayyam; yet, according to some scholars, such as Saeed Nafisi, the number of
his quatrains varies from twelve hundred to over two thousand.102 On the other hand, many
scholars such as Mohammad-Ali Foroughi and Sadegh Hedayat have selected a subset of the
quatrains to be authentic; 103 some such as Hasan Nazarian believed that Khayyam had only
composed a total of twelve quatrains.104 The uncertainty regarding the number of Khayyam’s
quatrains is a result of them not being published during the poet’s era due to the liberal subjects
of the quatrains, the unstable socio-political situation of Iran, and the fanaticism of Khayyam’s
era.105 Hedayat goes as far as stating that ‘if one has lived for a century and has changed his
religion and creed twice a day, he still will not be able to have such a diverse ideology’.106
While publishers’ and scribes’ mistakes can be observed in different manuscripts, Khayyam’s
poetry was also deliberately changed to make it closer to Sufism.107 Furthermore, Hedayat
believes that whoever used to drink wine and compose quatrains has attributed his/her poetry
to Khayyam so that he/she was not excommunicated from the society.108 Another issue that
makes identifying Khayyam’s original quatrains more complex is that through time many poets
followed and imitated his style, and after a while, the imitations became accepted as

99
Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present: Philosophy in the
Land of Prophecy, (Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 2006), 165-83: 165.
100
Jos Biegstraaten, “KHAYYAM, OMAR xiv. Impact On Literature And Society In The
West”, Encyclopædia Iranica, (2008), [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/khayyam-omar-
impact-west].
101
Omar Khayyam, Rubáiyát of Omar Khayyam: the astronomer-poet of Persia: rendered
into English verse., Edward FitzGerald (trans.), (London: Macmillan and Co., 1859).
102
Omar Khayyam, Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, Saeed Nafisi (ed.), (Tehran: Poor-Shaad,
2006).
103
Ali Reza Amir-Moez, ‘A Paper of Omar Khayyám’, Scripta Mathematica 26, (1963), 323-
7.
104
Hasan Nazarian, Nineteen Articles on Omar-e Khayyam, (Mashhad: Art and Culture
Organization of Khorasan Razavi, 2000).
105
Sadegh Hedayat, The Lyrics of Khayyam, 6th ed, (Tehran: Parastoo, 1974), 12.
106
Hedayat, The Lyrics of Khayyam, 9.
107
Hedayat, The Lyrics of Khayyam, 22.
108
Hedayat, The Lyrics of Khayyam, 22.
92
Khayyam’s poetry.109 The oldest manuscript of Khayyam’s quatrain is MS. Ouseley 140,
copied in 1460 in Shiraz, it has 158 quatrains. The most notable contemporary collections of
Khayyam are Sadegh Hedayat’s The Lyrics of Khayyam (1934), consisting of a hundred and
nineteen quatrains, Mohammad Ali Foroughi’s The Quatrains of Omar Khayyam (1941),
consisting of a hundred and seventy-eight quatrains, and Ahmad Shamloo’s The Lyrics (1957),
consisting of a hundred and twenty-five quatrains. The uncertainty over Khayyam’s quatrains
can also be observed in Jones’s manuscripts: for example, the quatrain Jones attributed to Amir
Khosrow and mentioned previously while explaining the term kharābāti,110 is also attributed
to Khayyam. Although most scholars do not agree on the number of Khayyam’s quatrains, they
agree on the themes commonly he has used in his quatrains; other than attacking hypocrisy
which is a commonly used theme amongst Sufi figures, Khayyam’s quatrains – or the quatrains
attributed to him – generally revolve around: the dawn of Eternity, mysteries of the Creation,
passage of time, pain of living, carpe diem, and the transience and futility of human beings, the
world, and life. Although most of these themes can be observed in the four quatrains attributed
to Khayyam in Jones’s Notebook, the general ambiguity over Khayyam’s authorship is evident
in three instances; the first one is in the following quatrain:

Illustration 15, The Notebook, f. 18; a quatrain by Abolkhayr.

In your misery, I cry, and you say it is dissimulation; how can it be dissimulation
since my eyes are weltering in blood?
Do you assume that all hearts are like yours? No, no, my idol, there are differences
amongst hearts. 111

109
Hedayat, The Lyrics of Khayyam, 23.
110
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. i.
111
The Notebook, f. 18:
‫چش رق بشد که دی ه در نش غرق اس‬ ‫گریم به غم تش ار و گشیی رق اس‬
‫نی نی صن می دله فرق اس‬ ‫تش پن اری که هر دلی چش دش تس‬
93
The manuscript has attributed the quatrain to Khayyam, yet contemporary modern scholars
have accounted Abolkhayr as its poet. It might be worth mentioning that the quatrain’s theme
and tone are quite similar to the rest of Abolkhayr’s quatrains in the Notebook; particularly the
pain and sorrow the poet feels due to the separation from the cruel beloved. The poet uses the
image of ‘to cry [shed] blood’ in this poem which signifies the old Persian belief that tears are,
in fact, one’s blood purified and became clear and colourless through the misery of one’s soul.
However, when one is in too much pain, the blood cannot be purified completely, and thus one
cries blood. To put this into scientific terms, when an individual cries so much, the blood
vessels in his or her eyes are damaged, which causes the person to cry blood; such pain is
abundant in Abolkhayr’s quatrains and relatively uncommon in Khayyam’s. Furthermore, as
mentioned previously, the utilization of idolatry imagery is more common in Abolkhayr’s
poetry than in Khayyam’s; consequently, the quatrain is more likely to be Abolkhayr’s. The
other two instances in the Notebook in which the quatrains’ authorship is uncertain occur
between Sahabi and Khayyam.112 The following quatrain is attributed to Sahabi in the
Notebook:

Illustration 16, The Notebook, f. 18; a quatrain attributed to Sahabi.

O heart, suppose that you have everything in the world; suppose that the garden of
your joy is decorated with greenery.
Like dew in that green garden, for only a moment, assume that you are sitting since
you will leave in the morning.113

112
The Notebook, f. 18, & 22.
113
The Notebook, f. 18:
‫ب غ طرب به سبزه پیراس ه گیر‬ ‫ای دش ه ه أسب ب جه نشاس ه گیر‬
‫بنشس ه و ب م اد برن س ه گیر‬ ‫ونگ ه بر آ سبزه ابی چش ابنم‬
94
Most modern sources attribute this quatrain to Khayyam, mainly because of its theme of the
futility of life and the world and its tone; the author of the manuscript, however, considers it as
one of Sahabi’s. The other case is the following quatrain:

Illustration 17, The Notebook, f. 22; a quatrain attributed to Sahabi.

Do not think that if you are vicious to anyone, the firmament will forget that vice and
fate let go of it.
The vices are like taking loans from fate [time], it might be collected on any day that
fate desires.114
There is no conclusive answer about the authorship of this quatrain; some sources
have attributed it to Attar, others to Hakim Shafaei (1587-1627). However, it should
be pointed out that the quatrain also contains themes commonly associated with
Khayyam’s poetry, such as the passage of time, so it might be his.115

Although Edward Fitzgerald has been credited as the first translator of Khayyam’s
quatrains in his Rubáiyát (1859), it was, in fact, Jones who published the very first English
translation of Khayyam in his A Grammar (1771); Europe became accustomed to Khayyam’s
quatrain with the following distich and quatrain:

114
The Notebook, f. 22:
‫گردو فروگذارد و دورا ره کن‬ ‫ب هر ب که میکنی تش مپن ار ک ب ی‬
‫در هر ک ام رو که نشاه ادا کن‬ ‫قرض اس ک ره ی ب اپیش رو گ ر‬
115
There is also another version of the quatrain which is as follows:
‫ایزد فروگذارد و دورا ره کن‬ ‫هر ب که میکنی تش مپن ار ک ب ی‬
‫در هر ک ام رو که ب ا ادا کن‬ ‫قرض اس کرده ه ی تش در نزد رو گ ر‬
‘Do not think that if you commit any vices, God will forget that vice and that fate lets
it go;
your deeds are like taking loans from the fate [time], they might be collected on any
day by fate.’
95
 ‫اوراق وجشد م ه ی گردد طی‬ ‫ا آم به ر و ا رف ن دی‬
By the approach of the spring, and the return of December the leaves of our lives are
continually folded.116
‫هنگام سپیده دم خروس سحری‬
‫دانی ز چه روی هم کند نوحه گری‬
‫یعنی که نمودند در این آینه صبح‬
‫کز عمر شبی گذشت و تو بیخبری‬
At the time that the dawn appears, dost thou know for what reason the bird of the
morning complains? He says, that it is shown in the mirror of the day, that a whole
night of thy life is passed, while thou art lost in indolence.117
Two of the loose folios in the MSS Eur. C 274 collection contain Jones’s works on this
quatrain; the first one, as seen below, is him transcribing the quatrain:

Illustration 18, MSS Eur. C 274, f. 48; a quatrain by Khayyam in Jones’s hand.
The second folio contains the quatrain and Jones’s word for word translation of it; please see
below:

Illustration 19, MSS Eur. C 274, f. 49; Jones’s word by word translation of a quatrain by Khayyam.

The Morning the Cock the Dawn Time

116
Jones, A Grammar, 100.
117
Jones, A Grammar, 138.
96
 complaint he makes cause what for don't thou know
the Morning the Mirror will show, that that is to say
art inattentive thou & has past One Night Life that is

Jones has not directly attributed this quatrain to Khayyam. While Hedayat attributed it to him,
Shamloo and Foroughi attribute this quatrain to Abolkhayr. Years later, when Jones was in
Bengal, he transcribed, transliterated and translated another quatrain, and gave it the title
‘Quatrain on the Vanity of Kingly Grandiosity By Khiyya´m’:

I allow that thy throne, O King, may be formed of beryl & jasper: but he who has a
discerning eye, esteems it a common stone: this royal seat of ermine & sable &
precious fur appears in the sight of those who sit contented upon mats to be merely
Vulgar Wool.118

Initially, reflecting on Jones’s feeling towards arbitrary monarchy, he was attracted to this
quatrain due to its questioning such ‘Grandiosity’. The quatrain’s translation also juxtaposes
‘beryl & jasper’ and ‘ermine & sable & precious fur’ with ‘a common stone’ and ‘Vulgar
Wool’. On one level, as Franklin suggests, ‘the contrast drawn between ermine and wool there
might be an allusion to the fact that Sufi derives from the Arabic word suf (wool), connoting
the pious mystic wool-wearer, a dervish dress of radical renunciation.’119 However, the
juxtaposition also depicts the Sufis’ denunciation of worldly and materialistic possessions and
stature. Jones has mentioned such Sufi denunciations on multiple occasions in his work, and
they will be mentioned in the third chapter of this thesis. However, there is a folio in the Osborn
c. 400 collection which juxtaposes them with Khayyam; please see the illustration below:

118
New York, Fales Library, MSS 301, 1: 19.
119
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 349.
97
 Illustration 20, Osborn c. 400, f. 28; a Persian quatrain in Jones’s hand.

The quatrain can be translated to:

[You with] Venus-liked cheeks and blossomed lips, leave me!

My heart and faith, my heart and faith, my heart and faith!
Why should I concern myself with Khayyam [alternatively Jones has written ‘buy
status’] in India?
There is no remedy for the pain of love in that land!120

120
Beinecke Library, Osborn c. 400, f. 28:
‫دش و دینم دش و دینم دش و دین‬ ‫برو دس م غنچه لب هره جبین‬
‫چ ره نیس ا درد عشق در آ مین‬ ‫من چرا نی م نم در هن وس‬
98
The quatrain is not only in Jones’s hand but also due to several reasons is most likely composed
by him: firstly, there is no trace of this quatrain or any possible variations of it available;
secondly, it does not thoroughly follow any Persian meter. Thirdly, it contains the repetition of
the term ‫‘ دش و دینم‬my heart and faith,’ while such phrasal repetitions are rare in Persian poetry.
As mentioned in the previous chapter, the Osborn c. 400 collection dates back to when Jones
was in India. In the folio, Jones pays tribute to Khayyam not only by mentioning the poet’s
name in his quatrain, but also giving him the title of ‫ ملک الشعرا‬Malek al-shoarā, ‘The King of
Poets’ as he has written below the quatrain: ‘I obtained for him ye Title of Melec al Shoara’.
In addition, Jones’s hand quite literally depicts the Sufis and their denouncement of the worldly
and materialistic by juxtaposing ‫‘ بخرم مقام‬buy status’ and ‫‘ خیام زنم‬concern myself with
Khayyam’; please see below:

Illustration 21, Osborn c. 400, f. 28; an extract of a Persian quatrain in Jones’s hand.

The first quatrain of Khayyam in the Notebook is:

Illustration 22, The Notebook, f. 17; a quatrain by Khayyam.

That palace where Bahram took goblets in, became inhabited by a deer and a fox gave
birth in.

99
 Bahram, who hunted Onagers121 all his life, did you see how a grave hunted him?122

Alternatively, in the first hemistich of modern versions of this quatrain, by Hedayat, Foroughi,
and Shamloo, Jamshid is mentioned instead of Bahram; the alternative version of this hemistich
is translated by Edward Fitzgerald as ‘The Courts where Jamshýd gloried and drank deep.’123
Jamshid was the fourth and greatest king in the Persian mythology; mentioned both in the
Shahnameh as well as Zoroastrian scriptures, it is said that Jamshid had a magical seven-ringed
goblet known as ‫ ج م جم‬jām-e jam, ‘the goblet of Jamshid’ which allowed him to observe the
universe. Furthermore, the place that is known today as the Persepolis in English is known as
‫ج شی‬ ‫ تخ‬takht-e Jamshid, ‘the throne [palace] of Jamshid’ in Persian. Since Khayyam
mentions both a goblet and a palace in this quatrain, it is more likely that the first hemistich is
about Jamshid, not Bahram. However, it is clear that in the second hemistich, Khayyam is
mentioning Bahram V (400-438), known as Bahram-e gōr, who was the fifth Sasanian King
of the Persian Empire. Many Persian poets have mentioned Bahram V in their works; the king
appears in Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh, Sadi’s Golestan, Hafez’s Divan, and Amir Khosrow’s Eight
Heavens. Nezami’s haft peykar, ‘The Seven Beauties’, which inspired Jones to compose ‘The
Seven Fountains, an Eastern Allegory, written in the Year 1767’, 124 is also known as ‫بهرام نامه‬
Bahram nāmeh, ‘The Book of Bahram’. In a letter dated 26 March 1771, Jones describes the
work to James Bate (1703–1775), the English scholar and writer: the book ‘relates the story of
King Bahram VI, whom Greeks with their usual incompetence call Varanes;’125 Jones had
made a mistake in his description of the book as it narrates the story of Bahram V, not Bahram
VI. Khayyam has utilized Bahram’s self-proclaimed title ‫ گشر‬gōr as a pun in his quatrain: the
term gōr means ‘Onager or Zebra’ and Bahram nicknamed himself Bahram-e gōr due to his
skill in the hunting of the animal; the term gōr also means a ‘grave’ in Persian. Bahram’s life
ended with him drowning in a swamp as he was chasing after an Onager; thus, ironically, as
the skilful hunter of the gōr ‘Onager’ was after one, he was hunted by his own gōr, ‘grave’. In

121
Also known as hemione or Asiatic wild ass, the Onager is a species of the family Equidae.
122
The Notebook, f. 17:
‫آهش بچه کرد و روبه آرام گرف‬ ‫آ قصر که بهرام در او ج م گرف‬
‫دی ی که چگشنه گشر بهرام گرف‬ ‫بهرام که گشر میگرف ی ه ه ع ر‬
123
Khayyam, Rubáiyát of Omar Khayyam, 4.
124
William Jones, Poems, consisting chiefly of translations from the Asiatick languages. To
which are added two essays, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1772), 39-69.
125
Jones, The Letters, 1:92.
100
addition to presenting another Persian pun, Khayyam’s following quatrain in the Notebook
portrays the passage of time and the futility of life:

Illustration 23, The Notebook, f. 17; a quatrain by Khayyam.

That palace, which was as glorious as the firmament, many kings were in its
doorways and corridors;
we saw a cuckoo sitting on its ramparts and continually sang Where? Where? Where?
Where?126

In Persian literature, the cuckoo mentioned due to its sound, a repetition of kō; as the term kō
in Persian means ‘where?’ cuckoo has become a cliché in the literature. However, the bird has
another signification that is rarely used: it is known as an unfaithful bird; Sadi states: ‘With the
glory of a peacock and elegant manner of a partridge, your only flaw is that you are more
unkind [unfaithful] than a cuckoo.’127 Hence, by using a cuckoo, Khayyam uses the bird’s
sound and exploits its cultural significance to show that the world is not faithful to anyone. It
might be worth mentioning that Hafez calls the world as ‫ عروس هزار دام د‬arōse hezār dāmād, ‘a
bride with a thousand grooms’, a metaphor which is still used in Persian: ‘Do not expect loyalty
from this ill-founded world, since it is an old bride with a thousand grooms’.128 Both Jones and
Hafez have become familiar with the simile of the world as a bride with a thousand grooms
through the writings of Attar.129
The last quatrain attributed to Khayyam in Jones’s Notebook is as follows:

126
The Notebook, f. 17:
‫بر درگه او اه نه دن ی رو‬ ‫آ قصر که ب چرخ ه یزد پهلش‬
‫بنشس ه ه ی گف که کشکشکشکش‬ ‫دی یم که بر کنگرها ف ن های‬
127
Sadi, The Complete Text of Sadi, 549.
128
Hafez, Divan of Hafez, (Tehran: Parviz Natel-Khanlari, 1983), 90.
129
See ‘Sir William Jones’s Collection of Papers, MSS Eur. C 274’, 34, and Illustration 6
which is Jones practising the following lines of Attar’s Pandnameh:
‘The world has poison inside like a snake, although it has paintings and ornaments on the
outside. The world is like an adorned bride, at every instance she desires another husband.’
101
 Illustration 24, The Notebook, f. 17; a quatrain by Khayyam.

In a thicket, Majnoon with the desire of Leili’s cheeks, was looking for Leili in the
desert.
[the word] Leili was always moving on his tongue; he was saying Leili as long as his
tongue was moving.130

Jones’s Notebook is one of the few sources that attributed this quatrain to Khayyam, but the
quatrain does not offer much more than an alliteration of the sounds sh and ‫ ت‬t and an
allusion to the famous love-story of ‘Leili and Majnoon’ (1192) which is part of The Five
Treasures (1163-1197) by Nezami Ganjavi’s (1141-1209). The Five Treasures consists of ‘The
Treasury of the Mysteries’ (1131), ‘Khosrow and Shirin’ (1177–1180), ‘The Seven Beauties’
(1197), and ‘The Book of Alexander’ (1194/6-1202).131 Jones’s researches and translations of
Nezami will be discussed in detail in the fifth chapter of this thesis.
Another Sufi poet who appears in Jones’s Notebook is Sahabi, who was briefly
mentioned previously since the authorship of some of the quatrains in the Notebook is debated.
Born in Shushtar, Sahabi moved to Najaf and spent the last forty years of his life as a servant
of Ali’s shrine. Some accounts of his life state that he did not leave the shrine for thirty years.132
There are numerous versions of his works; Sahabi quatrains are primarily famous for their Sufi
aspect rather than their literary value and aesthetics.133 Overall, the Notebook contains five

130
The Notebook, f. 17:
‫در دا به جس و جشی لیلی می گش‬ ‫مجنش به هشای روی لیلی در دا‬
‫لیلی می گف ت ب نش می گش‬ ‫می گش ه یشه بر ب نش لیلی‬
131
Charles-Henri De Fouchecour, ‘IRAN: Classical Persian Literature’, Encyclopædia
Iranica, (2012), 8: 414-32. [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/iran-viii2-classical-persian-
literature].
132
Safa Zabih-alaah, Tarikh Adabiyat-e Iran, 4: 317-8.
133
Hasan Poor-Hiva, ‘The Stylistics of Sahabi’s Quatrains’, The Persian Prose and Verse
Stylistics, 4, (2011), 43-56.
102
quatrains which indeed were composed by Sahabi, and Jones has translated one of them to
English; please see the illustration below:

Illustration 25, The Notebook, f. 20; a quatrain attributed to Sahabi and Jones’s translation.

Oh! Thou, from whom proceeds the rose-bud and the thorn, the garden and the desert
From thee proceed roses (of beloved objects) on the head, and thorns on the feet (of
lovers)
The collar of adversity on my neck, since it comes from thee, is sweet:
The collar is from thee, the neck is from thee, and all of us are from thee!134
The quatrain literally translates to:

Oh! The flower-bud, the garden, the thorn, and the desert are yours; the flower on my
head and the thorn in the bottom of my foot are yours;
the collar of Balā on our neck is a blessing from you; the collar is from you, the neck
is from you, and we are from you.

The gist of this Persian quatrain which also appears in Jones’s handwritten English translation
could be summarized in a common Persian proverb: ‫‘ هرچه ا دوس رس نکشس‬Whatever comes
from the friend [beloved] is pleasant’. On a deeper level, in accord with the Unity of Being,
Sahabi points out that whatever one experiences – whether ‘roses (of beloved objects) on the
head’ which in Persian figuratively means the source of one’s pride or the ‘thorns on the feet

134
The Notebook, f. 20:
‫کف پ ا تش‬
ّ ‫گل در سر و ن ر‬ ‫ای غنچه و ب غش ن ر و صحرا ا تش‬
‫طشق ا تش و گرد ا تش و م ا تش‬ ‫در گرد م طشق بال ا تش نشای اس‬
103
(of lovers)’ which figuratively means the source of one’s pain – is originated from a singular
unifying source. For Sufis, both the source of pleasure and the cause of pain are nothing but
the love of the Beloved. Jones’s translation demonstrates his understanding of this concept as
he has distinguished between the two opposing manifestations of Love ‘roses (of beloved
objects) on the head and thorns on the feet (of lovers).’

In the third hemistich, Jones has translated the word ‫ بال‬balā to ‘adversity’; the word
literally means a ‘hardship, trouble, disaster;’ hence, it can be argued that ‘adversity’ would be
a good fit here. However, balā’s meaning in an Islamic and Sufi context is quite different from
adversity: the Quran and the Hadith refer to balā as God’s test for human beings; for example,
Mohammad has used the word as a test: ‘The people who are tested the most severely are the
Prophets, then the righteous, then the next best and the next best.’135 Such Hadiths led Sufis to
interpret balā as the test or labours that the beloved sets for the lover; for example, Hafez stated:
‘The beloved’s locks is a trap on the path and his/her coquetry is an arrow of balā.’136
Furthermore, the word ‫ طشق‬togh, ‘collar’ is another indication that balā here figuratively means
love. In almost every Middle Eastern love story, including Leili and Majnoon as well as Shirin
and Farhad, the lover is portrayed as the beloved’s slave with the beloved’s collar on his/her
neck. Considering all of these, ‘adversity’ would not be the best choice for translating balā
here.

There are four other quatrains of Sahabi in the Notebook; although Jones has not
translated or annotated them, each conveys significant Persian-Sufi concepts. I will briefly
discuss them in the following few pages; the first quatrain can be seen in the below illustration:

135
Fath al-Bari, Sahih al-Bukhari, 7: 70, Hadith 551, [http://hadith.al-
islam.com/Page.aspx?pageid=192&BookID=24&PID=5427].
‫ ث ُ َّم ْاأل َ ْمث َ ُل فَ ْأل َ ْمثَل‬، َ ‫ص ِل ُحش‬ َ َ‫أ‬
َّ ‫ ث ُ َّم ال‬،‫ا ُّ النَّ ِس بَ َالء ْاأل َ ْنبِیَ ُء‬
136
Hafez, Divan of Hafez, 352:
‫لف دلبر دام راه و غ زها تیر بالس‬
104
 Illustration 26, The Notebook, f. 19; a quatrain by Sahabi.

O heart, you have fallen in the lasso of a beloved, trapped by a coquettish idol.
You have not released yourself from the previous one, yet now you have fallen into
the trap of another!137

Other than the idol metaphor discussed earlier, in this quatrain, Sahabi has used
hunting imagery to depict falling in love; such relation is quite common in Persian
literature. The act of hunting signifies the physicality, zest, and high spirit of the
hunter as well as the bravery, skill, and stamina of the hunt; furthermore, it contains
the relentless pursuit of the prey and its final capture, as well as the cruelty,
bloodshed, and death that is accompanied by the hunt.138 Since Persian lyrical,
religious, and mystical poetry uses hunting as a metaphor, the physical aspect is
almost faded, and the entrapment is enhanced. In the metaphor, the beloved
becomes a ‫ چ بووک سووشار‬chābok savār, ‘nimble fierce rider’, who baits the lover in the
trap with a ‫ دانووه‬dāneh, ‘a seed’ which is sometimes the beloved’s beauty spot, and
finally the hunted lover is captured by a snare, or lasso, which is the tresses and
locks of the beloved. Jones’s Notebook contains three distiches of a ghazal of Amir
Khosrow in which these images can be observed:

137
The Notebook, f. 19:
‫در دام ب ی عششه گری اف دی‬ ‫ای دش به ک ن دلبری اف دی‬
‫فیالح ش به دام دیگری اف دی‬ ‫ا قی یکی نالص ن گش ه هنش‬
138
William L. Hanaway, ‘The Concept of the Hunt in Persian Literature’, Boston Museum
Bulletin, 69, (1971), 21-69: 22.
105
 Illustration 27, The Notebook, f. 27-8; three distiches by Amir Khosrow.

Blood is shedding from my eyes, whose anticipation is this for? An arrow is

penetrating my life [soul], whose thorn is this from?
The heart that I took back from the capricious idols has been stolen by someone else
again, find out whose doing is this?
That excited rowdy, has hung the lasso of her tresses, has made the heart exhausted
and bloodstained, who is this nimble fierce rider?139

In these lines, Amir Khosrow has used three of the most common metaphors of
hunting in Persian love poetry: ‫ تیووور‬tir, ‘an arrow’ a common metaphor for a
beloved’s eyelashes, ‫ ک نوو‬kamand, ‘a lasso’ a metaphor for a beloved’s tresses, and
‫ چ بووک سووشار‬chābok-savār, literally meaning ‘nimble rider’ and a common metaphor
for the elegant behaviour of a beloved. In European literature, the usage of hunting
imagery was not uncommon, particularly in medieval times; however, it should be
mentioned that, although some of the Persian images are similar to the European
ones, their meanings differ to some extent. For example, arrows, or sometimes
spears, represent the beloved’s eyelashes in Iran and the Persian culture, while the
image commonly signifies Cupid (Eros) in Europe and Kama – an Indian deity of
love – in India. In addition, while hunting is considered chiefly a masculine act,
irony finds its way to the metaphor, since in Persian literature, the hunter represents

139
The Notebook, f. 27-8:
‫تیری به ج نم میخل در ن ر ن ر کیس این این‬ ‫نشنی چش م میرود ا ان ظ ر کیس این‬
‫ب ر دگر د دی کس بنگر که ک ر کیس این این‬ ‫دش ک ب بشلهشس آورده بشدم ب پس‬
‫دش نس ه و نش ریخ ه چ بک سشار کیس این‬ ‫گلگش ن انگیخ ه گیسش ک ن آویخ ه‬
106
the beloved who is described with feminine imagery. Furthermore, on many
occasions, the lover, the helpless prey in the snare of the beloved’s locks, begs to be
caught. The lover might be fortunate enough to get caught and suffer from love and
separation, yet the result is Union with the Beloved, what Persian mystics believed
to be ‫ فن و‬fanā, ‘annihilation’; the moment when in the lover’s self, there is nothing
left but the beloved. The state of annihilation is further elaborated in the following
quatrain in Jones’s Notebook:

Illustration 28, The Notebook, f. 22; a quatrain by Sahabi.

Until you are not annihilated, you will not be given the path to existence; this status
will not be given to you with a low will [ambition].
Should you not be willing to burn like a candle, the lead to the Light shall not be
given to you.140
The Notebook attributes the quatrain to Sahabi, yet modern sources attribute it to
Sheikh Bahaei (1547-1621),141 a Shia philosopher, architect, mathematician,
astronomer and poet. Sheikh Bahaei lived in Safavid Iran and is considered as one
of the prominent co-founders of the Isfahan School of Islamic Philosophy. Jones
had a copy of his ‫ جوو مع عب سووی‬jāme’ e abbāsi, ‘The Abbasi Treaties’ which is a
popular exposition of the Shia Law.142 Other than pointing out the immense
significance of annihilation in the Sufi path, true Existence requires the annihilation

140
The Notebook, f. 22:
‫این مرتبه ب ه پس ن هن‬ ‫ ره هس ن هن‬،‫ت نیس نگردی‬
‫سر را هٔ روانی به دس ن هن‬ ‫چش ا ع قرار سشن ن گر ن هی‬
141
Sheikh Bahaei, Koliyat-e Sheikh Bahaei, (Tehran: Chekameh, 2010), 65.
142
BL, APAC, RSPA 5.
107
of the lover’s self; in this quatrain, the poet utilizes the standard Sufi image and
metaphor of ‘a candle’. In Sufism, a candle represents the beloved, in the frequently
used phrase of ‫ ا و ع و پروانووه‬sham’-o parvāneh, ‘the butterfly and the candle’. A Sufi’s
path is similar to that of a butterfly that falls in love with an illuminating candle,
moves towards it, and eventually becomes annihilated in the flame of its beloved;
this imagery is often used from the butterfly’s, or lover’s, point of view. In this
particular quatrain, however, Sahabi uses the imagery from the candle’s perspective:
a beloved, who burns her/himself in order to enlighten its lover and surroundings.
The remaining two quatrains of Sahabi in the Notebook revolve around the Sufi
theme of the separation of the lover and the beloved.143 Please see the illustrations
below:

Illustration 29, The Notebook, f. 21; a quatrain by Sahabi.

My soul is a bard for your grievance, for nothing exists in my heart but it.
Do this downhearted one a favour, sometimes, so that I would be alive to grieve over
you.144

143
The theme will be discussed in detail in the next chapter of this thesis, while examining
Rumi’s ‘The Song of the Reed’ and Jones’s translation of it.
144
The Notebook, f. 21:
‫ج در تن من نغ ه سرای غم تش‬ ‫ای هیچ نه در دلم هشای غم تش‬
‫ت ن ه ب نم ا برای غم تش‬ ‫گ هی به من غ زده لطفی میکن‬
108
 Illustration 30, The Notebook, f. 21; a quatrain by Sahabi.

When did I assume that you have forgotten me, like fate, you have forsaken my
desires?
Although I spend every moment with your memory, you will spend a lifetime without
remembering me.145
Jones’s Notebook contains two quatrains of Sadi, who is most famous for his
‫ بشسوو‬Bōstān, ‘The Garden’ and ‫ گلسوو‬Golestān, ‘The Garden of Flowers’. In the
preface to his Grammar, Jones refers to Voltaire (1694-1778) to introduce Persian
poetry and Sadi to the English readers: ‘M de Voltaire […] acknowledges the
beauty of the Persian images and sentiments and has versified a fine passage from
Sadi whom he compares to Petrarch’.146 In the Grammar, in order to familiarize his
English readers with Persian poetry, Jones advises them to study the work of the
Persian Petrarch: ‘the works of Sadi containing ‫ گلس و‬or the bed of roses, ‫ بشس و‬or
the garden, and ‫ ملمعااا‬or the rays of light. They are all upon moral subjects and are
written with all the elegance of the Persian language.’147 Sadi’s Golestan is
evidence for the author’s elegance: the work is a mixture of poetry and rhymed
prose; furthermore, the bed of roses has Arabic and Persian intermingled so
profoundly that a native speaker of either language could not read the book without
the knowledge of the other language. It could be argued that Sadi’s Golestan
encourages Persian and Arabic speakers to learn each others’ language; similar to

145
The Notebook, f. 21:
‫ک ری چش م نه بر مرادم نکنی‬ ‫کی داا م آ گ که ی دم نکنی‬
‫ع ری گذارنی تش که ی دم نکنی‬ ‫ب آنکه به ی دت گذرانم ه ه دم‬
146
Jones, A Grammar, v-vi.
147
Jones, A Grammar, 145.
109
the people who encouraged Sanskrit and Persian speakers to do so with composing
Rekhta poetry. After travelling to India, Jones recognized another significance of
Sadi to Persian speakers. In his ‘The Eleventh Anniversary Discourse, on the
Philosophy of the Asiaticks’, delivered to the Asiatic Society on February 20, 1794,
which explores the morality, ‘ethicks and abstract laws’ of Asia, Jones states:

If conversion, therefore, of the Pandits and Maulavis [Sufi sages] in this

country shall ever be attempted by protestant missionaries they must beware
of affecting, while they teach the gospel of truth, what those Pandits and
Maulavis would know to be false: the former would cite the beautiful Arya
couplet, which was written at least three centuries before our era, and which
pronounces the duty of a good man, even in the moment of his destruction, to
consist not only in forgiving, but even in a desire of benefiting, his destroyer,
as the Sandal-tree, in the instant of its overthrow, sheds perfume on the axe,
which fells it; and the latter would triumph in repeating the verse of Sa’di,
who represents a return of good for good as slight reciprocity but says to the
virtuous man “Confer benefits on him who has injured thee” using an
Arabick sentence and a maxim apparently of the ancient Arabs.148
The passage appears in Jones’s ‘On the Philosophy’ (1794). His intention of the
essay was to point out the similarities between the Eastern and Western schools of
thought, which will be discussed in details in the fourth chapter of this thesis.
However, the passage also signifies that in the Orient ‘the popular teachers of moral
wisdom have immemorially been poets’ such as Sadi and Arya; in addition, it also
implies the immense position of Sadi in the debates which took place from Arabia
to India almost six centuries after his death. Intriguingly, the poet has composed
most of the proverbs used in the Persian language;149 this might be why Hafez
nicknamed him ‘The King of Speech.’ We cannot assert that Jones was aware of the
significance of Sadi’s proverbs and quotations amongst Persian speakers; however,
in his letter dated 26 March 1771, Jones has introduced Anushiravan the Just, one of
the Persian mythological kings, to James Bate as follows:

Anushiravan is continually praised also by other Persian poets of the first

rank, such as Sa’di, Hafiz, Jami, others. One of these poets expresses the idea
well: “For his justice, the name of Anushiravan lives on as a happy one,
although very much time has passed since he himself lived on earth.”150

148
Jones, The Works, 3: 229-53: 243-4.
149
Franklin Lewis, ‘GOLESTĀN-E SAʿDI’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, 9: 79-86,
[https://iranicaonline.org/articles/golestan-e-sadi].
150
Jones, The Letters, 1:91.
110
This poet of the first rank whom Jones quoted was none other than Sadi.

As mentioned previously, Jones’s Notebook has two quatrains of Sadi, and

he has translated one of them; please see below:

Illustration 31, The Notebook, f. 23; a quatrain by Sadi and Jones’s translation.

‘Around thy sugared lips little black ants will find a place;
And the dark violet will make a couch of thy cheeks red as poppies:
From the fire of thy face will arise
a smoke that will blacken a thousand hearts.’ 151

The quatrain’s literal translation is:

‘Ants will find a path around your sugar; the violet will rest its back on the tulip.
From the fire that rises from your cheeks, smoke will rise that blackens a thousand
hearts.’

The quatrain reminds the readers of death; the first image referring to death can be found in the
first hemistich of Sadi’s quatrain: sugar-loving insects are surrounding the beautiful lips. In
addition ‫ بنفشه‬banafsheh, ‘the violet’ is considered as a symbol of a lover’s remembrance of the
beloved in Persian literature and ‫ الله‬lāleh, ‘the tulip’ is believed to grow on graves.152 The two
flowers, one representing the grave of the lover and the other a symbol of the immortality of

151
The Notebook, f. 23:
‫گرد اکرت مشرچه ره نشاه کرد و الله بنفشه تکیه گه نشاه کرد‬
‫دودی که هزار دش سیه نشاه کرد‬ ‫ا آتش رنس ر تش برنشاه ن س‬
152
The connotations of the tulip will be discussed in detail while examining Amir Khosrow’s
quatrains and Jones’s translation of them in the notebook.
111
true love, are often depicted accompanying each other; for example, a quatrain attributed to
Khayyam states: ‘In any field that tulips grow, the lover’s blood [grave] exists. Like the violets,
growing on the ground, they resemble a mole on a beautiful face.’153 The other quatrain of Sadi
in the Notebook also revolves around the lover’s pain, suffering, and eventual death caused by
love; the quatrain also alludes to the tale of Leili and Majnoon:

Illustration 32, The Notebook, f. 24; a quatrain by Sadi.

‘Every moment the blood boils inside me, the outside people are not aware of this.
Only those who have seen the face of Leili knows what a pain Majnoon is in.’154

The Notebook contains five quatrains, two ‫ قطعه‬ghat’e. ‘fragment’,155 and one distich
belonging to Amir Khosrow of Delhi; the number of Amir Khosrow’s poems in Jones’s
Notebook makes the poet the most quoted poet in the Persian section of the Notebook. Amir
Khosrow’s significance to Jones can also be demonstrated by the fact that Jones has translated
four of his quatrains in the Notebook. In the following few pages, Amir Khosrow’s life and
writings will be discussed, and later, his quatrains in the Notebook and Jones’s annotations on
them will be examined.

153
Hedayat, The Lyrics of Khayyam, 49:
‫آ الله نش اهری ری بشدهاس‬ ‫در هر دا ی که الله اری بشده اس‬
‫ن لیس که بر رخ نگ ری بشدهاس‬ ‫چش برگ بنفشه کز مین میروی‬
154
The Notebook, f. 24:
‫و آگ هی نیس مردم بیرو را‬ ‫هر س ع م ان رو بجشا نش را‬
‫دان که چه درد میکش مجنش را؟‬ ‫اال مگر آنکه روی لیلی دی س‬
155
Jones, A Grammar, 128.
112
 Amir Khosrow was a Sufi poet and musician, an iconic figure in the cultural history of
India, he was born to a Turkish father and an Indian mother.156 Although he was fluent in Hindi,
Persian, Sanskrit, Turkish, and Arabic,157 most of his literary output was composed in Persian;
he represents an Indian personage of a multicultural, pluralistic identity.158 Although Amir
Khosrow is considered to be the forerunner of sabk-e hendi, the ‘Indian-style poetry’,159 the
style of his ghazals are imitations of Sadi’s: utilizing eloquent and straightforward language
and tone in order to elaborate on the subjects such as love and mysticism;160 this is the reason
why he is occasionally referred to as the ‘Sadi of India’. In addition, Amir Khosrow emulated
Nezami’s The Five Treasures and composed his own imitation of it. Entitled Khamsah,
‘Pentalogy’ (1298), Amir Khosrow’s prelude to the work states, ‘Nezami is the master of this
profession; in this gathering, he is the illuminating candle. From the ruins of Ganje [Nezami’s
birth place], he became the measuring standard for treasures; he brought the treasures of speech
to five. Whenever Khosrow grappled with the five [Nezami’s The Five Treasures], the arms of
his intellect were harmed.’161 Amir Khosrow was also greatly influenced by Khaghani (1121/2-
1190), with whom Jones was fascinated. Jones describes Khaghani’s Habsiyya, ‘Prison Poem’
as ‘the wildest and strangest poem that was ever written [ . . . ] The fire of Khakani’s genius
blazes through the smoke of his erudition’.162 Amir Khosrow often imitated Khaghani, for
example, Khaghani’s ghasideh entitled ‫‘ مرآة الصف‬The Mirror of Purity’163 begins with ‘My
heart is a sage of knowledge, and I am a child, who knows its language’164 while Amir
Khosrow’s imitation entitled ‫‘ مرآة النظر‬The Mirror of Opinions’ begins with ‘My heart is a
child, and the sage of Love is its language master.’ Amir Khosrow influenced many later
Persian poets, yet his greatest Persian admirer was Jami, who always wished to be as skilful

156
Iraj Bashiri, ‘Amir Khusrau Dihlavi’,
[http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/bashiri/Poets/Dihlavi.html].
157
Mohammad Habib, Hazrat Amir Khusrau of Delhi, (New Delhi: Cosmo Publications,
2005), 4; G. N. Devy, Indian Literary Criticism: Theory and Interpretation, (Telangana:
Orient Blackswan, 2002), 92.
158
Marmaduke William Pickthall, Islamic Culture, Muhammad Asad (ed.), (Hyderabad:
Islamic Culture Board, 1930), 4: 219.
159
Mohammad Moein, ‘Amir Khosro Dehlavi’, Mehr, 1, (1952),12.
160
Hermel Sedarnegani, The Persian Speakers of India and Sind (Tehran: Bonyad Farhang
Iran, 1966), 27.
161
Mohammad Moein, ‘Amir Khosro Dehlavi’, Mehr, 1 (1952), 19.
162
Jones, The Letters, 2: 763.
163
Khaghani, Divan of Khaghani Shervani, 1: 209-15.
164
Khaghani, Divan of Khaghani Shervani, 1: 209.
113
and eloquent as him.165 Jami believed that ‘Khosrow has perfected ghazal, ghasideh, and
masnavi forms: Jami asserts ‘while he has followed Khaghani, Khosrow’s ghazals surpass
Khaghani’s…. No one has composed a Khamse in response to Nezami’s better than
Khosrow….’;166 as there are two ghazals of Jami available in the Notebook, I will discuss him
later in this chapter.

Poetry and the love of early Persian poets were not the only unifying points of Amir
Khosrow’s and Jones’s interest; they both had a taste for philology and were keen on
multicultural and pluralistic world views. Although the origins of Rekhtah and sabk-e hendi
are debated amongst linguistic and literary scholars of precolonial India, 167 the crucial role of
Amir Khosrow in their development is not disputed. Amir Khosrow’s multicultural and
multilingual background led to his writings which ‘anticipated the cultural synthesis between
Hindu and Muslim civilization later to flourish at the court of Akbar’.168 Amir Khosrow’s
defence of Hinduism is evident in most of his poetry, including his quatrains in Jones’s
Notebook; Amir Khosrow’s stress on the essential similarities between Hinduism and Islam
can be found in Jones’s works.169 However, much of the poetry attributed to Khosrow is not
written by him; for example, the quatrains Jones attributed to him in his copy of Nezami’s
Treasury 170 are believed to be Khayyam’s. In Amir Khosrow’s quatrains, Persian and Sanskrit
are mixed; such intermingling symbolizes a cultural embrace, which was only apparent during
the reign of Akbar.171 Like Amir Khosrow and Akbar, Jones celebrated India’s diversity; the
works of the past Persian intellectuals such as Amir Khosrow played a pivotal role in
developing his philological ideas. In 1318, Amir Khosrow composed a book entitled ‫نه سپهر‬
noh sepehr, ‘The Nine Skies’; the book is composed in nine sections. The third section, or ‘the
third sky’, presents a description of fourteenth-century India to non-native Persian speakers.
After describing the geography and climate of India, Amir Khosrow moves to the people of the

165
Saeed Nafisi, ‘Amir Khosrow’, Armaghaan, 8, (1929), 574.
166
Abdol Rahmān Jāmi, Baharestan, Ismael Hakemi (ed.), (Tehran: Etelaat, 1989), 106.
167
Conflicting accounts may be found in Amrit Rai, A House Divided: The Origin and
Development of Hindi-Urdu (New Delhi, 1991) and Shamsur Rahman Faruqi’s, Early Urdu
Literary Culture and History, (New Delhi, 2001).
168
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 352.
169
Aziz Ahmad, Studies in Islamic Culture in the Indian Environment (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1964), 115.
170
BL, APAC, RSPA 35, f. i.
171
Akbar Shah’s reign and its impact on the socio-political climate of the subcontinent will
be discussed in the fourth chapter of this thesis.
114
subcontinent: ‘There are Brahmans whose logic and wisdom tear Aristotle’s works apart;’ 172
Pages later, he states: ‘Firstly, in this land, sciences are abundantly found. However, others
have no clue about the art and sciences of India.’ 173
Intriguingly similar to Jones’s ‘Third
Anniversary Discourse on the Hindus’, after explaining the philosophy, arts, and sciences of
India, Amir Khosrow’s ‘the Third Sky’ focuses on the languages spoken in the fourteenth-
century subcontinent:

Sindhi, Lahori, Kashmiri and Karbi; Dhatki, Sambalpuri, Telugu and Gujarati.
Mobri, Goori, Bengali and Odia; covers Delhi and its surroundings to the fullest.
However, there is another language that is only chosen by all Brahmans.
From ancient times, it is named Sanskrit; the commoners do not know its laws.
The Brahmans know it, and they do not know any other like it.
For in it exists Arabic patterns: in its alignments, syntax, definitions, and literature.174

Amir Khosrow’s depiction of the ancient language of the Brahmans asserts that the élite caste
of Hindu society does not know any other language as pleasant, practical, and valuable as
Sanskrit. This depiction is also implied in Jones’s description of the language in his 1786
‘Third Anniversary Discourse.’175
Jones and Amir Khosrow emphasized the grammatical similarities amongst the Indo-
European languages, and it could be argued that if the Indian poet was familiar with Latin and
Greek, his portrayal of Sanskrit would have been even more similar to Jones’s. There is yet
another aspect of Amir Khosrow’s poetry that captivated Jones; utilizing his knowledge of
languages, Amir Khosrow composed some poetry that could be simultaneously interpreted in
Persian and Hindi.176 This linguistic pluralism appears in the first quatrain of Amir Khosrow
in Jones’s Notebook; please see the illustration below:

172
Amir Khosrow Dehlavi, Noh Sepehr Masnavi, Mohammad Vahid Mirza (ed.), (Lucknow:
Calccuta Press, 1948), 162:
‫دفتر قانون ارسطو بدرد‬ ‫برهمنی هست که در عقل و خرد‬
173
Amir Khosrow Dehlavi, Noh Sepehr Masnavi, 166:
‫علم همه جاست ز اندازه فزون‬ ‫اولش آن شد که درین ملک درون‬
‫ز آنچه در هند علوم است و هنر‬ ‫لیک دگر جا ندارند خبر‬
174
Amir Khosrow Dehlavi, Noh Sepehr Masnavi, 179-80:
‫دهور و سمندری و تلنگی و گجر‬ ‫سندی و الهوری و کشمیری و کبر‬
‫دهلی و پیرامنش اندر همه حد‬ ‫مبری و گوری و بنگل و اود‬
‫آنست گزین نزد همه برهمنان‬ ‫لیک زبانیست دگر کز سخنان‬
‫عامه ندارد خبر از کن مکنش‬ ‫سنسکر نام زعهد کهنش‬
‫نیز نداند حد زانسان سخنی‬ ‫برهمنش داند و هر برهمنی‬
‫از علل و نحو و ز تعریف و ادب‬ ‫زانکه در و هست نمطهای عرب‬
175
Jones, The Works, 2: 268.
176
See Ahmad, Studies in Islamic Culture in the Indian Environment, 116-7.
115
 Illustration 33, The Notebook, f. 20; a quatrain by Amir Khosrow and Jones’s translation.
I went to recreate myself on the bank of a rivulet.
I saw on the brink of the stream a Hindú woman.
I said: “My idol, what is the price of your locks?”
She cried out: “Durdurmúy”: that is, in Hindy, “Keep your distance, sirrah! In
Persian, “a pearl for each hair.” 177

The quatrain could literally be translated as:

‘I went to the bank of a stream for sightseeing, at the brink of the stream, I saw a
Hindu woman;
I said, O idol, what is the price of your hair? She shouted, ‘a pearl for a tress!’’

The quatrain appears in the Persian debate poetry genre; although similar to other
quatrains of the genre, for example, Abolkhayr’s quatrains in the Notebook which
only emphasized on the similarities of mysticism and science, Khosrow’s debate
represents two different ideologies: where land meets water, the Muslim lover meets
the beloved Hindu, love of the other becomes the unifying point, and consequently,
a dialogue is created. The quatrain’s setting, around a stream of water, contains a
more profound significance: a common ground that is crucial to both the Hindu
woman’s and the Muslim man’s survival as well as their respective rituals of

177
The Notebook, f. 20:
‫هن ویی‬ ‫دی م به لبه آب‬ ‫رف م به ت ا ی کن ری جشی‬
‫فری د برآورد که دُر دُر مشیی‬ ‫گف م صن به ی مشی چه بشد‬
116
cleansing. Imagery such as this might have been the source for later Muslims and
Hindus to realize that they need to create a dialogue and coexist to survive.178 Later
Indo-Persian pluralists, such as the scholar prince Dara Shokoh (1615-1659), were
inspired by such literature and attempted to close the gap between Hindus and
Muslims. In the case of Dara Shokoh, perhaps, it was this very quatrain that inspired
him to name his book, which is an effort to bring Hinduism and Islam closer to each
other, The Intermingling of the Seas.179
As it can be observed in Jones’s translation, he was fascinated by the
bilingual pun which took place in Amir Khosrow’s quatrain: “Durdurmúy”: that is,
in Hindi, “Keep your distance, sirrah! In Persian, “a pearl for each hair.” The word
mentioned in this quatrain is ‫ دُر‬dor; which in Persian generally means a ‘gemstone,
jewel’; in Hindi, on the other hand, ‫ دُر‬dor means ‘a string’ of any material.
Through this interpretation, the Hindu woman could have either meant in Persian: ‘a
jewel for each of my hair’ or in Hindi: ‘my hair, string by string’, figuratively
meaning the price is so high that it is measured by each string of her hair. Jones has
interpreted this pun differently: ‘Keep your distance, sirrah!’ This interpretation is
perhaps due to his mistaking ‫ دُر‬dor, a jewel in Persian and a string in Hindi, with
‫ دور‬dūr which both in Persian and Hindi means ‘far away’ and can figuratively
mean ‘Away!’; yet, it is quite evident in the transcribed text that the word is ‫ دُر‬dor,
not ‫ دور‬dūr and thus the only valid interpretation of the poem is the former. In fact,
nowadays, this very quatrain is utilized to demonstrate the difference between a
short vowel and a long vowel in Persian, i.e. ‫ دُر‬dor and‫ دور‬dūr; either way, the
general meaning of the speech would not change: the Hindu woman is out of the
poet’s reach. What makes this quatrain beautiful, and Amir Khosrow deserving of
the title of ‘the Sadi of India’ and ‘Indian parrot’, is that regardless of considering
the word as ‫ دُر‬dor or ‫ دور‬dūr, or even considering it in Persian or Hindi, the line
conveys the meaning, the sublime beloved is out of the lover’s reach. Franklin
explains the linguistic pun of this quatrain beautifully:
This is the semiotics of the syncretic. Its radical importance in terms of
cultural interaction lies in its power to disconcert and re-create imaginative
spaces (mirrored in Jones’s choice of the Augustan-sounding term ‘recreate
myself’) in the re-creation of reading/translating. Khosrow creates new
interrelationships between words, seemingly identical but etymologically

178
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 356.
179
The work will be discussed later in the third and fourth chapter of this thesis.
117
 discrete, within the diverse linguistic family, which—as a result of Jones’s
researches—would be grouped as Indo-European.180

Another quatrain of Amir Khosrow which Jones translated and annotated in the
Notebook is:

Illustration 34, The Notebook, f. 20; a quatrain by Amir Khosrow and Jones’s translation.

Last night, my heart and I, in the street where that faithless maid dwells,
Fixed our abode in the alley of expectation.
When the bird of morning chanted the notes of despair
We were ashamed, I of my heart and my heart of me.181

The Persian quatrain’s literal translation is:

‘Last night, my heart and I settled in the alley of anticipation, in the neighbourhood of
that oath-breaker.
When the morning bird whimpered the sign of disappointment, I was ashamed, me
from my heart and my heart from me.’
While Jones’s Notebook has attributed the quatrain to Amir Khosrow, various sources suggest
that it is composed by Kamal o‐din Hosein Esfahani (d.1565), who used the penname of Zamiri.
The most prominent source that attributes the quatrain to Zamiri is Sheikh Bahaei’s Kashkul
182
(1583-99), a collection of his favourite writings by himself and other Sufi poets.
Intriguingly, Zamiri’s skill in poetry had earned him the nickname of ‘Amir Khosrow the

180
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 356.
181
The Notebook, f. 20:
‫در کشچهٔ ان ظ ر کردیم وطن‬ ‫دی اب من و دش به کشی آ عه اکن‬
‫ارمن ه ا م من دش و دش ا من‬ ‫چش مرغ سحر آیهٔ نشمی ی نشان‬
182
Sheikh Bahaei, Kashkul, (Tehran: Sabok-baran, 1390), 528.
118
second’. The events depicted in this quatrain occur at a conventional Sufi setting: ‘Last night’
and ‘in the alley’ of the beloved. One of the most prominent aspects of the term ‘last night’,
either referred to as ‫ دیشب‬dishab or ‫ دو‬dōsh, to Sufis is that it is the time in which the Sufi
contemplates his/her love and experiences epiphanies which later on he/she shares with the
readers; for example, Hafez stated: ‘Last night, I saw angels knocking on the tavern’s door;
they made some human clay and poured it in a goblet .…The skies were not able to safe-keep
this load [the human clay]; hence, they entrusted me, the insane, with it.’183 The place in which
such events take place is the beloved’s ‫ کشی‬kōy, a ‘neighbourhood’ or an ‘alley’. In Sufi
literature, to have a slight chance of seeing the beloved, the lover would leave his/her abode
and reside in the beloved’s alley. In the tale of ‘The Sheikh of Sanaan and the Christian Girl’,
which will be discussed in the next chapter, Attar states, ‘The Sheikh started living in seclusion
in his beloved’s alley; he became a companion of the stray dogs in her alley’.184 In another
case, Rumi imitates the same image Attar has used: ‘The Lions have lowered their tails, in front
of the dogs of his/her [the beloved’s] alley’.185

At first glance, such imagery combined with the quatrain’s tone conveys the
interpretation that the beloved, to whom the poet refers as ‫ عهو اووکن‬ahd-shekan, ‘oath
breaker’, or ‘faithless’ according to Jones, is cruel and does not care about the lover.
Hence, the lover feels ashamed for letting his heart down. However, Jones has
annotated next to the quatrain ‘‫ هووذا الفووراق بینووی و بیوونکم‬Kor.’ which sheds light on his
interpretation of the quatrain as well as his vast knowledge of Islam, Sufism, and the
way their literature should be interpreted. Jones’s annotation is an Arabic phrase
that means ‘this is the parting between me and you’; the Kor. at the end of the
annotation refers to the Quran. The Arabic phrase is a quotation from the Quran
18:78.186 The verse to which Jones refers to appears in the concluding parts of the
Surah; it narrates Moses’s journey and his meeting with a mystic named ‫نضووور‬

183
Hafez, Divan of Hafez, 374:
‫گل ادم بسرا ن و به پی نه دن‬ ‫دو دی م که مالیک در میخ نه دن‬
‫قرعه ک ر به ن م من دیشانه دن‬ ‫آس ب ر ام ن ن شانس کشی‬
184
Attar, Mantegh-o Teyr of Attar e Neishapouri, (Torbat-e Jaam: Cultural and Social Center
of Torbat-e Jam, 2010), 58:
‫ایخ نلشت س کشی ی ر ا ب سگ کشی او در ک ر ا‬
185
Rumi, Divan of Shams-e Tabrizi, 2812:
‫ایرا ده دم بر مین پیش سگ کشی او‬
186
The eighteenth Surah of the Quran is called ‫ اصح ب کهف‬ashāb-e kahf, ‘The Fellowship of
the Cave’. The story is known in Christian martyrology as ‘The Seven Sleepers’.
119
Khezr. Although considered a prophet in Islam, Khezr has seen as equivalent to the
Zoroastrian Sorūsh and Yazata Haoma,187 Saint Sarkis the Warrior, Saint George,
188
Levant, Samael, and the Hindu Jhulelal.189 In the Quranic tale, Moses follows
Khezr for some time, during which Khezr does several unreasonable deeds and
commits some crimes. Once confronted by Moses, Khezr asks him to be patient and
not to question him as he is not aware of the reasons behind Khezr’s doing so.
Eventually, Moses loses his temper, and Khezr responds:

[Khezr] said: ‘This is the parting (time) between me and you. Now I shall
impart to you the truth of the matters about which you have not been able to
keep patience.190
Once Moses hears Khezr’s reasoning, he realizes that the actions were justified for the greater
good. The moral of the Quranic tale is that one who wants to follow the Path of mysticism
should be patient and what Jones implies in his annotation, ‘‫ هذا الفراق بینی و بینکم‬Kor.’, is a
Quranic and Sufi interpretation of the Persian quatrain: the poet is ashamed of his/her heart,
and the heart is ashamed of the poet not because of the faithless beloved, but due to his
impatience which made him not pure enough to be visited by the Beloved, much like Moses
who was not ready for understanding the truth of Khezr’s actions in the Quranic tale.
Another quatrain of Khosrow in the Notebook is annotated and translated by Jones;
the quatrain and its marginal notes read as follows:

187
Anna Krasnowolska, 'ḴEŻR', Encyclopædia Iranica, (2009),
[https://iranicaonline.org/articles/kezr-prophet].
188
Gürdal Aksoy, Dersim: Alevilik, Ermenilik, Kürtlük, (Ankara: İletişim Yayınları, 2012),
65-80.
189
P. Pratap Kumar, Contemporary Hinduism, (New Delhi: Routledge, 2014), 121.
190
The Quran 18:78:
َّ ‫سأُنَبِّئُكَ بِ َأ ْ ِوی ِل َم لَ ْم ت َ ْس َطِ ع‬
َ ‫علَ ْی ِه‬
‫صبْر‬ َ َ‫قَ َش َٰ َهذَا ف َِراقُ بَ ْینِي َوبَ ْینِك‬
120
 Illustration 35, The Notebook, f. 22; a quatrain by Amir Khosrow and Jones’s translation.

I am desirous of having a conversation with thee. (Bát in Hindi is the same with
hhecāyat in Persian)
The red poppy is the slave of thy cheek; the marygold is under thy feet (páta leaf in
Hindi)
Every Brahmin, O my idol, who sees thy beautiful face,
Tears his Zunnar (or sacred cord) and gives a kick to the face of Lát (An Hindu
idol)’191

The quatrain literally translates to:

‘I wish to tell you a tale: the tulip is your face’s servant, a hundred petals are under
your feet.
Every Brahman who saw your beautiful face, O idol, tore apart his Zunnar and kicked
the Lāt.’
Before focusing on Jones’s annotations, I will briefly discuss the quatrain as Amir
Khosrow has utilized some words that convey specific literary significance in
Persian literature. Apart from ‫ صووونم‬sanam, an ‘idol’ which has already been
discussed, the words ‫ اللووه‬lāleh, a ‘tulip’, ‫ پوور‬parak, a ‘petal’, ‫ّن و ر‬ zonnār, and ‫الت‬
Lát need further explanation. A tulip is one of the most significant flowers in

191
The Notebook, f. 22:
‫یر پ ت‬ ‫الله غالم روی تش ص پر‬ ‫داریم آر و که حک ی کنیم ب ت‬
‫نّ ر را گسس و لگ د بر الت‬ ‫هر بره ن که دی رخ نشب ای صنم‬
121
Persian literature: due to its rich red colour, signifying blood, it resembles a lover’s
heart. The blackness in the middle of the flower is believed to be a burnt mark on
the lover’s heart caused by the separation of the beloved. Alternatively, in Persian
literature, the red colour connotes wine, and since the flower’s shape resembles a
goblet, the tulip is also referred to as a goblet of wine. Yet, the imagery most
associated with a tulip is death or, more specifically, martyrdom whether a martyr
of war or a martyr of love. Jones was familiar with this image as in Ferdowsi’s
Shahnameh, tulips started to grow where the blood of Siavash – a pure, innocent,
and beautiful boy – was spilt. In another case, Hafez alluded to Nezami’s tale of
Shirin and Farhad, stating: ‘I still can see tulips rise from Farhad’s bloody eyes, as
he is still longing Shirin’s lips.’192 A tulip can also resemble the beauty and redness
of a beloved’s face, and the black spot at its centre represents the beauty spot on the
face. The word ‫ پوور‬parak literally means ‘a petal’ or ‘a small feather’, however
figuratively, the word signifies ‘a delicate body’. Considering the connotations of
the tulip as well as the petal’s figurative meaning, the quatrain’s second hemistich
could be read as ‘the redness of the tulip fades in comparison with your cheek, the
lives of a hundred beautiful lovers are beneath your feet.’ The other two concepts,
‫ّنوو ر‬ zonnār and ‫ الت‬Lát, shall be discussed as we examine Jones’s translation and
annotation of the quatrain.

Jones’s first two marginal notes on this quatrain appear on the first two hemistichs of
the quatrain: ‘(Bát in Hindi is the same with hhecāyat in Persian)’ and ‘(páta leaf in Hindi)’.
The word ‫ ب ت‬bāt in the first hemistich is a short and colloquial form of ‫ ب تش‬bā to, meaning
‘with you’ in Persian; Hindi speakers explain bāt as ‘something which is said or written’, it
figuratively can refer to ‘a story’. Jones’s comment asserts that ‘Bát in Hindi is the same with
hhecayat in Persian’. The word he transliterated as ‘hhecayat’ is ‫ حک ی‬hekāyat; Jones probably
transliterated the word with hh in order not to mistake the h as silent, in Persian it means
narration of something or a story. Unlike bāt’s colloquial sense in Hindi, hekāyat has a more
poetic sense in Persian. The other word Jones comments upon, which is in the second
hemistich, is ‫ پ ت‬pāt which is used colloquially in Persian instead of ‫ پ ی تش‬pā-ye to, ‘your foot’.
While pāt has no meaning by itself in Hindi, पत्ता pāti and पत्ती pāta mean ‘leaf’ in Hindi. Hence,

192
Hafez, Divan of Hafez, 210:
‫که الله میدم ا نش دی ه فره د‬ ‫حسرت لب ایرین هنش میبینیم‬
122
considering Jones’s comments, or the word’s meanings in Hindi, in the first distich of the
quatrain, can literally be translated as: ‘I wish to tell a tale, a tale; the tulip is your face’s servant,
with a hundred petals under each leaf.’ The annotations, on one level, signify the multilingual
puns which fascinated Jones and were abundant in Amir Khosrow’s poetry. On another level,
they both imply the similarities between Persian and Hindi. Jones knew that Amir Khosrow
was not only a multilingual poet but was also intrigued by philology. Jones’s marginal notes
on Amir Khosrow’s poetry are aligned with his statement in ‘The Third Anniversary Discourse:
On the Hindus’ (1786), which was presented to the Asiatic Society about three months after he
purchased the Notebook: ‘The Sanscrit language, whatever be its antiquity, is of a wonderful
structure [...] and the old Persian might be added to the same family’.193 In fact, these two notes
could be considered as some of the evidence on which Jones statement was founded on.

The word ‫ ن ر‬zonnār which Jones describes as a ‘sacred cord’ was, in fact, a distinctive
belt or girdle wore by Christians and Jews in Jerusalem in order to be differentiated from
Muslims; it was noted in the Pact of Umar, which was a treaty between the Muslims and the
Christians; the treaty specifies rights and restrictions for non-Muslims living under Islamic
rule. Thus, a sacred cord or even a Brahmanical thread does not thoroughly convey Zunnar’s
meaning. The last word Jones commented on is ‫ الت‬Lát which he mentions as ‘An Hindu idol’.
Lāt is the Persian transliteration of the Arabic word ‫ الالت‬al-lāt, which connoted an Arabian
goddess, one of the three main goddesses of Mecca, who was worshipped in pre-Islamic
Arabia. She was the pre-Islamic consort of ‫ هللا‬allāh, ‘God’ and the equivalent of Elāt the consort
of the Semitic god el. It might be worth mentioning that she is equated with Athena and
Aphrodite in Greece and the Indo-Persian goddess Mithra.194 The idol and its shrine in Taif
were demolished by Mohammad in 630 AD.195
Amir Khosrow’s intention for the second hemistich could be ‘any Brahman that sees
the face of the Beloved, tears his/her Zunnar apart and [becomes as Muslim as Mohammad and
like him] kicks Al-lát to the ground’. It would be quite far-fetched to assume that Jones did not
have any knowledge about Al-lát; therefore, it can only be presumed that since the hemistich’s
literal meaning, a Brahman kicking an Arabic idol, is controversial, Jones decided to somehow

193
Jones, The Works, 3: 34.
194
Egerton Sykes, & Alan Kendall, Who's Who: Non-Classical Mythology, (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1993), 8, 63, 97-98, 130-1.
195
William Muir, The life of Mohammad, (Whitefish, MO: Kessinger Publishing, 1878), 207.
Mosab Hawarey, The Journey of Prophecy; Days of Peace and War, (Selangor: Islamic Book
Trust, 2010).
123
narrow the meaning down. One must consider that in Sufism, turning your back upon your own
religion for the sake of love is widely praised; for example, as will be demonstrated in the next
chapter of this thesis, the Muslim Sheikh of Sanaan tore the Quran apart and wore a Zunnar at
his Christian beloved’s request. Jones interpreted Amir Khosrow’s quatrain as the Brahman
who out of love tore his ‘sacred cord’, broke the false idol, and started worshipping the
Beloved; this interpretation is of course in accord with the Sufi tone of the quatrain.
The last quatrain of Amir Khosrow in the Notebook, which Jones has annotated is:

Illustration 36, The Notebook, f. 23; a quatrain by Amir Khosrow and Jones’s translation.

O silent maid, (with cotton in your mouth) with a blooming face (rúy Hindi for
pemba)
With a dimple in the chin, where is thy abode? (cúyi Hindi for chah)
My mantle is torn (kebí) through love of thy delicate shape,
With eyelashes like needles, in what quarter do you dwell? (suyi Hindi for a
needle).196

Before discussing the quatrain and Jones’s explanatory marginal notes upon it, it is worth
pointing out a correction he has made in the manuscript. As you may see in the illustration, the
first hemistich written as ‫اکف ه رویی‬ ‫پنبه دهن‬, which can be transliterated as panbe dahanān

196
The Notebook, f. 23:
‫چه د د قن ک ام کشیی‬ ‫پنبه دهن اکف ه رویی‬
‫سش پلک ک ام سشی‬ ‫ا ج معه قب اشق ق ت‬
124
shekofte rōee, Jones has changed the ‫ دهن‬dahanān to ‫ دهن‬dahanā by crossing out the . This
change was to correct a mistake, perhaps by the scribe, which would have affected the meter
of the quatrain. The quatrain literally translates as:

‘O, cottonmouth [silent one] with a blooming face; with a dimple on your chin, where
do you live?

My shirt became a cloak due to the delight of your height; O, with needle-like
eyelashes, on which side [where] are you?’

Although it does not contain mystical notions, the quatrain has multiple bilingual puns.
Accordingly, Jones’s annotations revolve around them: ‫ رویی‬rōee means ‘your face is’ in
Persian and in Hindi रूई rōee, means ‘cotton’; ‫ کشیی‬kōee ‘your alley is’ in Persian, in Hindi,

कुं आ kua, means ‘a well’. The word सई sōee, ‘a needle’ in Hindi, means a ‘side’ in Persian.
Therefore, should one consider the Hindi meaning of the words, the English translation of the
quatrain becomes:

‘O, cottonmouth with a blooming cotton; with a dimple on your chin, where is your
dimple?

My shirt became a cloak for the delight of your height; O, with needles like eyelashes,
which needle are you?’

As it can be seen, unlike the previous quatrain by Khosrow, the Hindi substitutions do not fit
well in the Persian quatrain. Regarding Jones’s last comment, on ‫ سش‬sōzan, meaning a
‘needle’ in Persian, the case becomes a bit more complex: Jones has divided the word into two
parts ‫ سش‬sō and zan; then he related the first part to the Hindi word sōee meaning ‘a needle’
without mentioning the second part zan at all. While ‫ سش‬sō itself in Persian means ‘the eye’s
ability to see’, in Turkish, another language Khosrow knew, it means ‘water’. Furthermore, by
replacing the ‫ سش‬sō part of ‫ سش‬sōzan, one would be left with its second part zan which has
a variety of meanings including a ‘woman’ and it is the stem to the verb ‘to hit’; again, unlike
Khosrow’s previous quatrain, none of these meanings fit.

Amir Khosrow’s poetry in Jones’s Notebook is concluded with a quatrain, a distich, and
the beginning distiches of two of his ghazals; Jones has not annotated any of them. The quatrain
is:

125
 Illustration 37, The Notebook, f. 28; a quatrain by Amir Khosrow.

Although from your delicate trait my spirit has been burned, my compassionate heart
pulls me towards you;
You are so beautiful and coquettish that if one’s heart is lost, I would suppose it is you,
although someone else has stolen it.197

The following line is the beginning distich of a ghazal composed by Amir Khosrow:

Illustration 38, The Notebook, f. 27; a distich by Amir Khosrow.

A month has passed and my awakened eyes have not slept; my forgetful beloved has
not recalled the [his/her] friends.198
Moreover, the distich below also belongs to another ghazal of Amir Khosrow:

197
The Notebook, f. 28:
‫سشی تش میکش هنش این دش مهرب من‬ ‫گر چه نشی ن ک سشن ه اس ج من‬
‫گرچه که دیگری برد بر تش بشد گ من‬ ‫بسکه تش اشخ و دلبری گم اشد ار دش کسی‬
198
The Notebook, f. 27:
‫ی دی نکرد ا دوس ی ر فرامشک ر من‬ ‫م هی گذا و نخف این دی ه بی ار من‬
126
 Illustration 39, The Notebook, f. 28; a quatrain by Amir Khosrow.

O heart, should you wish the heaven of soul, look at the face of the beloved; should you
wish to see the sarv-e ravān, look at the Lord of the virtuous.
Last night, when you were walking like the moon, the heart was telling me on the road;
if you have never seen the soul, come here and see it.199
The lines represent typical features of Persian literature; as you can see, Jones has not annotated
them. The concepts Amir Khosrow has mentioned in the lines already have been discussed in
this chapter; the only metaphor that needs a brief description is a ‫ سرو روا‬sarv-e ravān,
‘walking Cypress’. The phrase is a typical Persian metaphor for the beloved, tall and well-
figured as a cypress. In the fragment mentioned above, Amir Khosrow uses his innovation and
creativity to portray his beloved’s movement as a ‘walking Cypress’ and as elegant as the
moon’s movement in the sky.

As mentioned earlier, Amir Khosrow is considered to be the forerunner of the sabk-e

hendi. Jones’s Notebook contains quatrains of three other poets who composed in the same
literary style; in the following few pages, those quatrains will be discussed. The Notebook
contains a quatrain of a poet named Bazel (d.1711), who considered himself one of Khajeh
Shams-o-din Jovayni's grandsons. Bazel’s father moved from Mashhad, in Iran, to India during
the era of Shah-Jahan (1628-1658) and became a member of the Mughal court. Thus, Bazel
was born in Delhi and later became a courtier of Aurangzeb (1658-1707(, Shah-Jahan’s son

199
The Notebook, f. 28:
‫ور ب ی ت سرو روا آ میر نشب را ببین‬ ‫نشاهی دال فردوس ج رنس ر ج ن را ببین‬
‫گرج ن ی ی هیچگ ه اینج بی ج را ببین‬ ‫دیشب که میرف ی چش م ه میگف دش ب من بره‬

127
and Prince Dara Shokoh’s brother; after Aurangzeb’s death, he was removed from the court.200
His most famous work, The Heydari Campaign,201 is a religious epic emulating Ferdowsi’s
Shahnameh, concerning the life of the prophet Mohammad and the three Khalifes after him.
The quatrain reads as follows:

Illustration 40, The Notebook, f. 21; a quatrain by Bazel.

If a brainless person keeps looking at a book, he cannot see the real meaning;
When did the brainless contemplate in words? Diving in the sea is not possible for a
bubble.202
Jones’s Notebook also contains a distich and a quatrain composed by Bidel Dehlavi
(1642–1720), centring on Sufi love, anticipation, and annihilation. Bidel is considered one of
the prominent Persian-speaking poets and Sufis of sabk-e hendi.203 Born in Azimabad, his
native language was Bengali,204 yet as the Mughal court’s language was Persian, Bidel’s poetry
is primarily composed in Persian. Shafiei-Kadkani states that: ‘One must consider Bidel as the
true representative of Indian culture and tradition’.205 As he was brought up in a pluralistic
environment, Bidel was more tolerant than his contemporaries. Preferring free thought over
accepting established beliefs, he usually sided with the ordinary people and rejected his time's

200
Agha Bozorg Tehrani, Al-Dhari'a ila tasanif al-Shi'a, (Ghom: Ismailian and Tehran’s
Islamic Library, 1908), 7: 92-118.
201
Charles Rieu, Catalogue of the Persian Manuscripts in the British Museum, (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1966), 2: 704-5.
202
The Notebook, f. 21:
‫ن شان دی روی معنی در نشاب‬ ‫بی مغز اگر چشم ب و د به ک ب‬
‫غشاصی بهر نیس مح ود حب ب‬ ‫کی غشرکنن در سخن بی غزا‬
203
Gholam Hosein Mojadadi, Bidel-Shenasi, (Herat: Matboe Pohntoon, 1972), 1: 86-7.
204
Moazzam Siddiqi, 'BĪDEL, ʿABD-AL-QĀDER', Encyclopaedia Iranica, (1989), 4: 244-
246, [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/bidel-bedil-mirza-abd-al-qader-b].
205
Mohammad Reza Shafie Kadkani, The Poet of Mirrors: A Survey on Indian Poetry and
Bidel’s Poems, (Tehran: Agaah, 2007), 10.
128
governing system, which he considered corrupt. Bidel’s distich and the quatrain in Jones’s
Notebook can be seen in the below illustration:

Illustration 41, The Notebook, f. 25; a distich and a quatrain by Bidel.

Before coming to existence, I have suffered yearning for you; you shall come to my
grave and I will be dead.206
What happened to the anticipation that dies with the union’s enthusiasm; what
happened to the sigh that caused pain in the firmament?
That heart which yearned the insanity of both worlds [the here and the hereafter],
O God, turned into blood, burned, and depressed, what happened to it? 207
Jones’s Notebook contains two quatrains from a poet name Hazin (1692-1766). Born in
Esfahan to a family originally from Lahijan, Hazin emigrated to India in 1734, where he began
contributing to the Persianization of India’s ruling elites.208 Open-minded and tolerant, he
sought out fellow scholars among other religions and was ‘equally admired and esteemed by
the Muselmān, Hindoo, and English inhabitants of India’.209 Hazin’s poetic lexicon is not as

206
The Notebook, f. 25:
‫تش بر ن کم آیی و من مرده ب ام‬ ‫حسرت چه نش در ع م نشرده ب ام‬
207
The Notebook, f. 25:
‫آهی که الم به چرخ میبرد چه ا‬ ‫اشقی که به ذوق وصل می یرد چه ا‬
‫ی ربّ نش کش سشن فسرد چه ا‬ ‫آ دش که جنش دو جه حسرت داا‬
208
The topic will be discussed in the fourth chapter of this thesis.
209
John R. Perry, ‘ḤAZIN LĀHIJI’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, (2012) 8:1, 97-8
[http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/hazin-lahiji].
129
elaborate as his contemporary poets of sabk-e hendi. Remarkably simple and direct,210 he is
considered one of the last poets who composed his poetry in the genre. Hazin’s first quatrain
in the Notebook is:

Illustration 42, The Notebook, f. 19; a quatrain by Hazin.

I went to the tomb of Farhad the sorrowful, he was still wailing under the ground;
I said, ‘Farhad, who made you bitter?’ He cried out, ‘Shirin Shirin!’211

Hazin’s quatrain narrates a Persian folklore story entitled Shirin and Farhad. Shirin was the
beloved of Khosrow II (570-628); Khosrow orders a palace to be built for her, and Farhad
oversaw the building of its water system. Farhad and Shirin see each other and fall in love but,
although she loved Farhad, Shirin marries Khosrow, and Farhad commits suicide in despair.
The tale and its pre-Islamic origins can be found in the Shahnameh;212 many other Persian poets
romanticized, imitated, and alluded to it, 213 the most famous of which is Nezami’s version in
his The Five Treasures. In the Notebook, Hazin alludes to the tale and adds three literary
figures, which is a common feature of sabk-e hendi; the first appears in the very first hemistich:
the line can also be read as ‘Sorrowfully, I went to Farhad’s tomb;’ the poet also has used his
pen name ‫ حزین‬hazin, which means ‘sorrowful’ in the line. The second pun is regarding the
word ‫ ک م‬kām in the third hemistich: the word means one’s ‘mouth’, ‘taste’, or ‘desire’ in
Persian. Considering the hemistich’s literal translations which is ‘I said “Farhad, who made
your kām bitter?”’ and kām’s meaning, it can be observed that any one of the word’s meanings

210
Mohammad-Taghi Bahaar, Sabk-Shenasi, (Tehran: Sepehr, 1943), 3: 304-5.
211
The Notebook, f. 19:
‫میکرد هنش ن له در یر مین‬ ‫رف م بسرترب فره د حزین‬
‫فری د برآورد که ایرین ایرین‬ ‫گف م فره د تلخ ک م تش که کرد‬
212
P. Chelkowski, ‘Nezami's Iskandarnameh’, Colloquio sul poeta persiano Nizami e la
leggenda iranica di Alessandro magno, (Rome: Editori Vari, 1977),11-55: 17, & 19.
213
Paola Orsatti, ‘ḴOSROW O ŠIRIN’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, (2006),
[http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/kosrow-o-sirin].
130
can be considered the right one in the hemistich’s context. Finally, the word ‫ ایرین‬shirin, which
was the name of Farhad’s beloved, means ‘sweet’ in Persian; therefore, the sweet Shirin was
the cause of Farhad’s bitterness. This type of wordplay appears in the other quatrain of Hazin
in Jones’s Notebook:

Illustration 43, The Notebook, f. 24; a quatrain by Hazin.

Your pain has left a cold sigh in the heart, my clay has gone with the wind, and only
some dust remains.
Bring some Sandal to my gravestone, since from the pain in my head [my labours], still,
some pain remains.214
The phrase ‫ درد سر‬dard-e sar literary meaning ‘pain of head’ or headache, is more commonly
used by its figurative meaning in Persian as ‘trouble’. This wordplay increases the ambiguity
of the source of the poet’s pain.

Hazin engaged in a literary feud over literary schools with Siraj-odin Ali Khan Arzu
(1687-1756);215 Arzu was a poet and linguist in the Mughal Empire.216 Born in Agra to a soldier
and officer of Aurangzeb’s court, he was brought up as a bilingual speaker of Persian and
Arabic. Later in his life, Arzu learned Hindi and Sanskrit217 and, similar to Jones, embarked on
finding the similarities between the languages. Jones knew the philological works of Arzu and

214
The Notebook, f. 24:
‫ن کم ه ه ا به ب د و گردی ب قیس‬ ‫ا درد تش در دش آه سردی ب قیس‬
‫بر لشح مزار من تشا صن ش سشد کز درد سرم هنش دردی ب قیس‬
215
Sarfaraz Khan Khatak, Shaikh Muḥammad ʿAli Ḥazin: His Life, Times & Works, (Lahore:
Muhammad Ashraf, 1944), 36-48.
216
Language in South Asia, Braj B. Kachru, Yamuna Kachru, & S. N. Sridhar (eds.),
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 106.
217
Abida Samiuddin, Encyclopedic Dictionary of Urdu Literature, (New Delhi: Global Vision
Publishing House, 2007), 1:75.
131
had studied his Siraj-ul-Lught, which explains the relationship and similarities between Persian
and Sanskrit. In his copy of the Persian lexicon of Jamalodin Inju Shirazi (d.1625), entitled
Farhang-e jahāngiri, Jones stated ‘Many corrections of this valuable work, and many additions
to it, may be found in the Siraj-ul-Lught by Sirajuddin Arzu, and in the Majman’lloyhah.’218
In addition, Jones’s Notebook attributes the following distich to Arzu:

Illustration 44, The Notebook, f. 25; a distich by Arzu.

The cloth on the figure of the one who killed himself for your eyes is his shroud, grave,
and coffin just like an almond [’s shell].219
The literary feud between Hazin and Arzu can be observed by comparing the former’s quatrains
and the distich of the latter: the quatrains are filled with literary figures and complex imagery,
a common feature of sabk-e hendi. The distich, however, does not contain complex puns and
delivers more straightforward imagery which represents sabk-e hendi’s successor poetry style
called ‫ طر ت ه‬tarz-e tāzeh, ‘A New Mode’.

Jones’s Notebook contains a quatrain composed by Sarmad Kashani (1590-

1661), a Persian poet and mystic. Born in Armenia to a Jewish Persian-speaking
Armenian family of merchants,220 Sarmad renounced his Judaism and adopted
Islam.221 He attended Sufi gatherings such as those held by Mir Fendereski (1562-
1640) and Mulla Sadra (1571/2-1640); his poems, however, do not suggest his
following any particular religion. Sarmad decided to go to India initially to sell
artworks, yet he met a Hindu boy on his journey, gave him all his belongings, and
started teaching the Sufi path.222 Sarmad’s reputation as a poet and mystic caused

218
BL, APAC, RSPA 20, f. i.
219
The Notebook, f. 25:
‫هم کفن هم گشر هم ت بشت چش ب دام بشد‬ ‫کش هٔ چشم ترا رن ی که بر ان ام بشد‬
220
N. Katz, ‘The Identity of a Mystic: The Case of Sa'id Sarmad, a Jewish-Yogi-Sufi Courtier
of the Mughals’, Numen, 42, (2000),142-160, 148.
221
Natalia Prigarina, ‘Sarmad: Life and Death of a Sufi’, 15th European Conference on
Modern South Asian Studies, (Prague, 1998), 314-30: 317.
222
V. N. Datta, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Sarmad, (New Delhi: Rupa Publication India
Pvt. Ltd, 2012).
132
Dara Shokoh to invite him to Shah Jahan’s court. It is speculated that Sarmad’s
Persian translation of the Torah is the source of the chapter on Judaism in Dabestan-
e Mazaheb ‘The School of Creeds’; in addition, it was Sarmad who facilitated Dara
Shokoh in composing or commissioning The Intermingling of the Seas.223 After
Dara Shokoh’s murder by order of his brother, Aurangzeb, Sarmad was arrested,
224
tried for heresy, atheism, and unorthodox religious practice and eventually
beheaded in 1661.225 Please see the quatrain and Jones’s translation below:

Illustration 45, The Notebook, f. 23; a quatrain by Sarmad and Jones’s translation.

Jones’s translation read as follows:

‘Sermed
Alas, that in your country there is no care for a lover!
She, who has some care for her lover is not in your land.
Should they bear thee like Mansur to the foot of the gibbet (‫ امشب‬See Háfiz)
Keep thy foot resolutely; the world is not permanent.’226

223
Walter Fishel, ‘Jews and Judaism at the Court of the Mugal Emperors in Medieval India’,
Islamic Culture, 25, (1948),105-31. The two works, Dabestan-e Mazaheb and The
Intermingling of the Seas, their socio political significance, and influence on Jones, will be
examined in the third and fourth chapter of this thesis.
224
V. N. Datta, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Sarmad, 49.
225
N. Katz, ‘The Identity of a Mystic: The Case of Sa'id Sarmad, a Jewish-Yogi-Sufi Courtier
of the Mughals’, Numen, 47: 2 (2000), 142-160: 151-3.
226
The Notebook, f. 23:
‫آنرا که درد ی ر نب ا دی ر نیس‬ ‫دردا که در دی ر ا درد ی ر نیس‬
‫مردانه ج دهم که جه پ ی ار نیس‬ ‫منصشر وار گر ببرن م بپ ی دار‬
133
The quatrain does not have any complex literary figures, and Jones has accurately translated it.
The only allusion Sarmad makes here is to the life of Mansor-e Hallaj, who was a Persian Sufi
most famous for dangerously stating ‫ ان الحق‬ana-l-hagh, ‘I am the Truth’. During his time, the
statement was interpreted as a claim to divinity by orthodox Muslims, yet Sufis have taken it
as an instance of Sufi mystical annihilation of the ego that allows God to speak through an
individual. Hallaj was hanged during the Abbasid Caliphate (750-1258) on religious and
political charges.227 Intriguingly, many parallels can be found between Sarmad’s world views
and consequent trial and those of Hallaj. One of Sarmad’s charges was that he used to state:
‘there is no God’ instead of ‘There is no God but Allah;’ Aurangzeb ordered his mullahs
(Muslim clerics) to ask Sarmad the reason to which he responds that ‘I am still absorbed with
the negative part. Why should I tell a lie?’ Thus, he sealed his death sentence’. 228 Sarmad’s
answer and its consequence were tragically similar to those of Hallaj’s. Many Sufi poets have
made various references to Hallaj, including Hafez whom Jones mentioned next to this quatrain
‘Should they bear thee like Mansoor to the foot of the gibbet (‫ امشب‬See Háfiz)’. Jones’s self-
reminding marginal note means ‘Tonight See Hafez’. Hafez mentioned Hallaj in his Divan on
two occasions: the first instance is ‘Like Mansoor, those who have fulfilled their Desire are on
the gibbet; they are asking for Hafez to join [them] and leave this throne [the world].’ 229 The
second one is: ‘On the gibbet, Hallaj showed this point so beautifully; do not ask a Shafi’i 230
about matters of such [Sufi] nature.’231 The latter distich of Hafez not only represents the rivalry
between an Islamic theologian – referred to by Hafez as ‘a Shafi‘i’ – and mystics but also
elaborates on Hafez’s point of view on the Shafi’i school of Islamic law. The rivalry between
different sects of Islam, depicted in Hafez's line and the trials and executions of Hallaj and
Sarmad, provided Jones with pivotal information for his judicial career. For example, in the
case of Hallaj, the trial was basically a clash between the Hanbali creed of Sunnism versus

227
John Arthur Garraty, & Peter Gay, The Columbia History of the World, (New York City,
NY: Harper & Row, 1981), 288.
Jawid Mojaddedi, ‘ḤALLĀJ, ABU’L-MOḠIṮ ḤOSAYN b. Manṣur b. Maḥammā Bayżāwi’,
Encyclopedia Iranica, [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/hallaj-1].
228
Shahzad Z. Najmuddin, Armenia: a Resumé: with Notes on Seth's Armenians in India,
(Bloomington, In.: Trafford Publishing, 2005), The Google books version is unpaginated.
229
Hafez, Divan of Hafez, 194:
‫ب ین درگ ه ح فظ را چش مینشانن میرانن‬ ‫چش منصشر ا مراد آن که بردارن بر دارن‬
230
A follower of the Shafi‘i school of Islamic law in Sunni Islam.
231
Hafez, Divan of Hafez, 307:
‫ا ا فعی نپرسن امث ش این مس ئل‬ ‫حالج بر سر دار این نک ه نش سرای‬
134
Sufism and Shiism. The line of Hafez depicts the clash of Shafi’s, one of the four major creeds
of Sunni Islam, and the Sufis and Shias. As it will be discussed in the fourth chapter of this
thesis, the dispute between Aurangzeb and Dara Shokoh was essentially a clash between two
interpretations of Sufism: the vahdat-e shohōd, ‘’Unity of witnesses’ versus the vahdat-e vojōd
‘Unity of Being’.232 The sources of all these confrontations and rivalries were the different
interpretations of Islamic philosophy and jurisprudence. The pluralistic writings of figures such
as Hafez, Sarmad, and Dara Shokoh provided the Oriental philosophical material that reduced
the friction between the various religious factions of the Orient. Jones had aimed to harmonize
eighteenth-century India through the utilization of these pluralistic literatures. As mentioned
previously, it was to that aim which Jones began compiling a comprehensive digest of Islamic
law for the British to govern the Muslims of the subcontinent. Such poetry, for example Hafez’s
distich which is not in favour of the Shafi’i law, assisted Jones’s search of authoritative and
pluralistic sources for his digest.

The Persian section of Jones’s Notebook is concluded with two ghazals

composed by Jami, a Sufi musician, poet, writer, and prolific scholar. Recognized
for his eloquence as well as his analysis of metaphysics,233 Jami was nicknamed ‫ن و تم‬
‫ الشوووعرا‬khātam-ol shoarā, ‘the Seal to [or the Last of] all poets.’ Apart from
composing tens of books in Arabic and Persian, Jami reviewed and commentated on
the work of other Sufis, philosophers, and theologians.234 His Divan’s structure was
an imitation of Amir Khosrow’s: they are both divided into three sections: ‘The
Beginning of Youth’, ‘The Centre of Life’, and ‘The Conclusion of Life’. In
addition, Jami composed another Divan which is known as ‫ بینقوو ط‬bi noghāt, ‘The
Dot-Less’,235 in which none of the eighteen letters of the Persian alphabet236
containing dots appears. This demonstrated his sophisticated command of the
Persian language. Jami’s The Seven Thrones and The Gift of the Freemen

232
These two world views and the conflict between the followers of them will be discussed in
details in the fourth chapter of this thesis.
233
Sajjad Rizvi, ‘The Existential Breath of al-rahman and the Munificent Grace of al-rahim:
The Tafsir Surat al-Fatiha of Jami and the School of Ibn Arabi’, Journal of Qur'anic Studies,
8: 1 (2006), 58-87: 60.
234
Sajjad Rizvi, ‘The Existential Breath of al-rahman and the Munificent Grace of al-rahim:
The Tafsir Surat al-Fatiha of Jami and the School of Ibn Arabi’, 60.
235
Abdol Rahmani Jami, Divan -e Bi Noghat (Lahoor: Golzar, 1958).
236
The letters that do not appear in the Divan are:
‫ب‬b, ‫ پ‬p, ‫ ت‬t, ‫ ث‬s, ‫ ج‬j, ‫ چ‬ch, ‫ خ‬kh,‫ ذ‬z, z,‫ ژ‬zh, sh, ‫ ض‬z,‫ ظ‬z, ‫ غ‬gh, ‫ ف‬f, ‫ ق‬gh, n,‫ ی‬i.
135
respectively emulated and re-narrated Nezami’s The Treasury of Mysteries and
Khosrow and Shirin. Jami’s intricate knowledge of Persian and Arabic, as well as
his fascination with Nezami and Amir Khosrow, made him the Sufi philologist who
most attracted Jones. Evidence suggests that Jones was familiar with Jami at least
three years before publishing his Persian Grammar: a letter, dated March 7, 1768,
from the Hungarian Orientalist Count Károly Reviczky (1737–1793) to Jones states:

With respect to Jami whose works I do not at present possess I remember

enough of what I read at Constantinople to venture to assert that he is the
most successful of the Persian poets. In the judgment of Sadi, Hafez is
unequal; some of his odes are excellent others very inferior and some very
tame whilst Jami preserves an equality throughout.237

The letter is concluded with Reviczki offering Jones his own prose Latin translation
of the same ghazal of Hafez, which was to be entitled ‘The Persian Song of Hafez’
and published in Jones’s Grammar. In a letter from Jones to Reviczki, dated March
1771, as the Persian Grammar was being published, Jones stated that he had
engraved the ‘poem of Hafiz’ and speculated that ‘if I have enough money I shall
have the same done for all of Jami’s work.’238 Jones further elaborated that ‘One [of
Jami’s work] I especially like is Jami's poem called Yusef va Zulaikha. Each
couplet of the poem, which has about 4,070 of them, has the pure brilliance of a
little star.’239 The little stars of Jami did not reach Jones’s Grammar, yet he included
the works of Jami in ‘A Catalogue of the Most Valuable Books in the Persian
Language’240 including Jami’s most significant work ‫ بهارسااااتان‬bahārestān, ‘the
mansion of the spring’. There is no further reference to Jami’s masterpiece241 in
Jones’s published works; however, Osborn c. 400 contains a quatrain taken from the
book in Jones’s hand, please see the illustration below:

237
Jones, The Works, 1:103.
238
Jones, The Letters, 1: 86.
239
Jones, The Letters, 1:85.
240
Jones, A Grammar, 141-53: 145-6.
241
Jones, Memoirs of the Life, 1: 519.
136
 Illustration 46, Osborn c. 400, f. 35; a Persian quatrain in Jones’s hand.

The quatrain translates to:

Previously, I thought of you as an outsider; I presumed you [to be] the end of
my journey.
Now that I found you, I know that I had left you in the very first step [of my
journey.] 242
The first ghazal of Jami in Jones’s Notebook is as follows:

242
Beinecke Library, Osborn c. 400, f. 35:
‫در غ ی سیر نشد گ داا‬ ‫نشیش پن اا‬ ‫ین پیش برو‬
‫ک ن ر ق م نخس بگذاا‬ ‫اکنش که تش را ی ف م آنی دانم‬
137
 Illustration 47, The Notebook, f. 29-30; a ghazal by Jami.

I am not the only one who desires fair deceivers; there is no one in the city who does not
desire a pretty face.
The harbingers move too slow, O wind of Canaan hurry; bring the good news of Joseph’s
shirt to Jacob.
My heart accepted the cruelty [of the beloved] just as I saw that tall figure; a wise man is
much better to observe the branches of a tree.
You have broken a row of hearts, do not prepare the Rakhsh [a steed in Persian
mythology] of disloyalty; it is not fair to chase a defeated army.
My wet eyes have no sleep without you, although humid people fall asleep easily.243
Yesterday, I eagerly rubbed my eyelashes on her footprint; she said, Jami, you are raising
more dust, sweep slower.
Who is to bring a message from the lovers to the beloved; to remind the forgotten to that
forgetful?
My heart is in pain from the wounds of sorrow and separation, where is it? Where is the
remedy of reunion to remove this pain?

243
The figurative meaning of this distich will be explained in the next page.
138
 Her separation has drawn blood from my eyes; weltering in blood is better for an eye that
does not deserve the honour of seeing the beloved.
Last year that moon told me that she would be more kind to me next year; thus, this year
in my dreams I am seeking the beloved.
I do not wish to choose the title of her dog for myself; how can I be worthy of being her
Excellency’s belongings’ guard dog.
A physician saw Jami in the bed of separation; he said there is no cure but death for this
patient. 244
In the third distich of the ghazal, Jami states ‘a wise man is much better to observe the branches
of a tree’. This figuratively suggests that one should pay close attention to the details and
content of something; this advice is quite common in Persian and Sufi literature: for example,
please see the lines of Vahshi Bafghi’s (1532-1583) Shirin and Farhad, which have become a
proverb amongst Persian speakers:

You see her height and Majnoon sees a parade of affection, you see an eye and he
sees an arrow-shooting sight. You see tresses and Majnoon sees the curls, you see an
eyebrow and he sees the place the eyebrow is pointing at.245
The fourth distich of the poem has battlefield imagery such as ‫ صووف دله و‬saf-e delhā,
‘a row of hearts’ which resembles a row of soldiers; also, it contains an allusion to
Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh and the stories of ‘Rakhsh and Rostam’: Rostam was the

244
The Notebook, f. 29-30:
‫نیس در اهر آنکه م یل نیس روی نشب را‬ ‫من نه تنه نشاهم این نشب اهر آاشب را‬
‫مژده پیراهن یشسف ببر یعقشب را‬ ‫دیر میجنب بشیرای ب د کنع در گذر‬
‫بر درن آ به که بین مرد ع قل چشب را‬ ‫دش نه دم در جف ت دی م آ ق بلن‬
‫ارط نبشد رف ن ا پی لشکر مغلشب را‬ ‫چش صف دله اکس ی ین مکن رنش جف‬
‫گرچه ب ا نشاب اغلب مردم مرطشب را‬ ‫نشاب نبشد چشم تر را بی تش ابه اغلبی‬
‫گف ج می گرد ا آهس ه کن ج روب را‬ ‫دی به ن پ ب ص ذوق میسشدم مژه‬
‫و فرامشا ده ی د آ فرامشک ر را‬ ‫کیس کز عش ق پیغ می رس ن ی ر را‬
‫مره ی وصلی که ا دش چین این آ ار را‬ ‫ا دلم آ رد ٔه نم غم هجرا کج س‬
‫دی ه کش الیق نب ا دول دی ار را‬ ‫نش ا آ گیریم هجرا وگه درنش غرقه به‬
‫ا چن امس ش ک ن ر نشاب جشیم ی ر را‬ ‫پ ر گف آ مه برآیم ب تش نش س ش دگر‬
‫چش پسن م بر اع ر دول ش این ع ر را‬ ‫بهر نشد ن م سگ آ در نخشاهم ع ری‬
‫گف جز مرد عالجی نیس این بی ر را‬ ‫سر بب لین ج ایی دی ج می را طبیب‬
245
Kamalodin Vahshi Bafghi, Shirin and Farhad, (Tehran: Ahmad Ranjbar, 1974), 14:
‫تش چشم و او نگ ه ن و ان ا‬ ‫تش ق بینی و مجنش جلشه ن‬
‫ او اا رته ی ابرو‬،‫تش ابرو‬ ‫تش مش بینی و مجنش پیچش مش‬
Jones was familiar with Vahshi Bafghi’s Shirin and Farhad and uses a lengthy quote from
the work in his eleventh Discourse ‘On the Philosophy of the Asiaticks’, presented before the
Asiatic Society on 20 February 1794, to draw parallels between Neoplatonism, Sufi
metaphysics, and natural sciences; see Jones, The Works, 3: 247. The essay will be discussed
in detail in the fourth chapter of this thesis.
139
strongest hero of the Persian mythology and Rakhsh was his steed famous for his
speed and spirit.
The last point that needs further elaboration in this quatrain is in the fifth
distich; Jami states that although ‘humid people’ sleep often, he is unable to do so
due to his wet eyes; by ‘humid people’ Jami refers to individuals with a humid
temperament: those who have a mixture of sanguine and phlegmatic humour.

The second ghazal of Jami in the Notebook is:

Illustration 48, The Notebook, f. 31; a ghazal by Jami.

For love I have become deplorable; my heart has departed, and my soul is about to
depart.
Should you ask of my chest, it is in pain; should you ask of my eyes, they are in tears.
You killed your promise, but the restlessness is restless in me. [Alternatively, the
hemistich translates to: ‘that broken promise is still kept by me’.]
My tear do not remove the dust from my pale face; it is a memento from that nimble
hunter.

140
 Hundreds of thorns are inside me because of the suffering of the separation; [in this
state] who is in the mood for a promenade in the spring?
Jami, be happy for this pain and sadness since pure pleasures are unpleasant to us.246

Jami’s ghazals conclude the Persian section of the Notebook, yet there is one more
Persian quatrain in the Notebook which is in Jones’s hand. The quatrain appears after Jami’s
ghazals and before the second set of the Rekhta verses in the Notebook begin. Please see it
below:

Illustration 49, The Notebook, f. 32; a Persian quatrain in Jones’s hand.

The quatrain translates to:

Should I tell one about my sad heart, that person’s heart will cry even if it is as hard as
a stone.
Alas, pain and lament from ill-natured people, hypocrites who change their colour for
anything.247

This quatrain is probably composed by Jones himself as there is no record of this quatrain in
the works of any Persian-speaking poet. In addition, the quatrain does not follow any common

246
The Notebook, f. 31:
‫دلم رف اس و ج نزدیک ک ر اس‬ ‫مرا ک ر ا غم عشق تش ار اس‬
‫و گر ا دی ه گشیم ااکب ر اس‬ ‫اگر ا سینه پرسی دردن اس‬
‫مرا آ بیقراری بر قرار اس‬ ‫تش گش ی ا قرار نشیش لیکن‬
‫کزا چ بک سشارم ی دگ ر اس‬ ‫مبر گرد ا رخ رد من ای ااک‬
‫گرا پروایه گلگش به ر اس‬ ‫درو ص ن ر ن ر ا محن هجر‬
‫که ص ف عیش م را ن گشار اس‬ ‫ب رد درد و غم نش ب ای ج می‬
247
The Notebook, f. 32:
‫اشد گری به سخ ی هر دش سنگ‬ ‫اگر فردی بگشیم ا دش تنگ‬
‫که میب ن دغ نقشی به هر رنگ‬ ‫دریغ و درد ا ن جنس مردم‬
141
Persian meter, and the words used in it are strange to a Persian speaker or reader. For example,
the term ‫ بگشیم‬begōyam, ‘I say’ is usually used in Persian prose; in verse, the term is always
shortened to ‫ گشیم‬gōyam. Another instance is the word ‫ دغ‬dagh’ā, ‘ill-natured people/bastards’
which is hardly ever used in the Persian language.

This quatrain, however, dovetails nicely with the other two Persian quatrains Jones
composed in India; for example, Jones’s other Persian quatrain, which was mentioned
previously in this chapter states, ‘Why should I concern myself with Khayyam [alternatively
Jones has written ‘buy status’] in India? There is no remedy for the pain of love in that land!’248
The other Persian quatrain mentioned in the previous chapter stated: ‘We have been cast out
your eternal heaven to India; why did you create hell if you already had India?’249 These three
quatrains, which, to reiterate are not available in any other Persian poet’s works, contain a sense
of dissatisfaction that Jones probably experienced after arriving in India. However, these three
quatrains also demonstrate Jones’s improvement in Persian language and literature as well as
his Persian handwriting. The one in the Notebook, Illustration 49, depicts Jones earliest attempt
of composing Persian quatrains as its meter and lexicon are to some extent strange to native
Persian speakers. Whereas the other two quatrains in the Osborn c. 400 collection, Illustrations
12 and 20, show his improved handwriting and his command over Persian meter and lexicon.

248
Beinecke Library, Osborn c. 400, f. 28.
249
Beinecke Library, Osborn c. 400, f. 10.
142
Chapter 3: On the Pluralistic Traditions of the Oriental Mystical Poetry

Introduction

The following chapter examines arguably the most significant published work of Sir William
Jones on Oriental literary and mystical traditions, ‘On the Mystical Poetry of the Persians and
the Hindus’ (1792). Portraying Jones’s most profound understanding of Oriental literature, the
essay results from his research on a wide range of material similar to those found in the
Notebook. ‘On the Pluralistic Traditions of the Oriental Mystical Poetry’ introduces the
pluralistic philosophical and metaphysical concepts of Sufi literature and serves as a prelude to
the fourth chapter of this thesis.

In his ‘Third Anniversary Discourse’ (1786), Jones had declared it impossible ‘to read
the Vedanta, or the many fine compositions in illustration of it, without believing that
Pythagoras and Plato derived their sublime theories from the same fountain with the sages of
India’.1 Three years later, in the spring of 1789, Jones had learnt Sanskrit and translated the
Gitagovinda,2 or ‘Song of Jayadeva’, and sent a copy of it to his neighbour John Shore (1751-
1834), the future governor-general of Bengal. On 8 December 1791, Jones appended the
English translation of the Gitagovinda to his essay ‘On the Mystical Poetry of the Persians and
Hindus’3 and read both before the Asiatick Society. Composed by Jayadeva (b. 1170 CE), the
Gitagovinda celebrates the pastoral god Krishna and his love for Rādhā, the most radiant Gopi
(milkmaid) and the Goddess of Love, Compassion and Devotion. The narration of such love,
between Krishna and a gopi, has been an ancient tradition in Indian literature, yet the
Gitagovinda slightly differs from the rest of such works. Rādhā contrasts with the rest of the
gopis as she is proud and ambitious; in addition, she is after an exclusive relationship with
Krishna. Jayadeva’s Rādhā appears as ‘the god’s union with Prakriti and symbolizing the
infinite love that is the essence of Krishna.’4 The work elegantly presents the love between the
two, Krishna’s faithlessness to Rādhā, and his subsequent return to her; the work is interpreted

1
Asiatic Researches: Or, Transactions of the Society Instituted in Bengal, for Inquiring into
the History and Antiquities, the Arts, Sciences, and Literature, of Asia, (Calcutta: Asiatic
Society, 1798), 1: 425.
2
Jones, The Works, 4: 236-68.
3
Jones, The Works, 4: 211-34.
4
Michael J. Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones': Sir William Jones, Poet, Lawyer, and Linguist,
1746-1794, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 275.
143
as an allegory of the human soul’s straying from its true allegiance but returning at length to
the God who created it.5 Aware of the work’s religious significance to eighteenth-century
Hindus, Jones introduced his translation by concluding his essay with:

Let us return to the Hindus, among whom we now find the same emblematical theology,
which Pythagoras admired and adopted. The loves of CRISHNA and RADHA, or the
reciprocal attraction between the divine goodness and the human soul, are told at large
in the tenth book of the Bha´gavat, and are the subject of a little pastoral drama, entitled
Gitagovinda: it was the work of JAYADE´VA, who flourished, it is said, before
CALIDAS, and was born, as he tells us himself, in CENDULI, which many believe to
be in Calinga.6

The reason why Jones held on to his translation of the Gitagovinda from the spring of 1789 to
the winter of 1791 might have been to perfect the text. However, in the meantime, Jones also
searched various Oriental sources to strengthen his hypothesis that the European classics drove
‘their sublime theories from the same fountain’ as the sages of the Orient. Some of Jones’s
findings in the quest for the sublime communal fountain are stated in ‘On the Mystical Poetry’.
In the essay, Jones argues upon his thesis on the common identity of the Platonic, Vedantic,
and Sufi traditions. Such similarities between Islam, Hinduism, Judaism, and Christianity were
noted as early as the tenth century by Persian Sufis such as Abolkhayr (967-1049); as discussed
in the second chapter, Jones had studied some of these writings. This speculative syncretism
flourished in the Indian subcontinent during the reign of Akbar’s (1542-1605) liberal religious
toleration. Aiming to convey his fascination with the diversity of the Orient to his readers,
Jones’s philosophy as cultural mediator is simply stated in the essay: ‘if we think it worthwhile
to read their poems, we must think it worthwhile to understand them’. 7‘On the Mystical Poetry’
contains a lengthy quotation from the essay ‘Of the Love of God’ by Isaac Barrow (1630-
1677), whom Jones refers to as the ‘deepest theologian of his age’, and another lengthy
quotation from the philosopher Jacques Necker (1732-1804). After the quotations, Jones
asserts that Western philosophy and Quietism ‘differs only from the mystical theology of the
Sufis and Yogis, as the flowers and fruit of Europe differ in scent and flavour from those of
Asia, or as European differs from Asiatick eloquence; the same strain, in poetical measure,
would rise up to the odes of SPENSER on Divine Love and Beauty, and, in a higher key with

5
‘JAYADÉVA’, Encyclopedia Americana, Alexander Hopkins McDonnald (ed.), (New
York, NY: Americana Corporation, 1951), 15: 747.
6
Jones, The Works, 4: 34-5.
7
Jones, The Works, 4: 230.
144
richer embellishments, to the songs of HAFIZ and JAYADEVA, the raptures of the Masnavi,
and the mysteries of the Bha´gavat.’8

In ‘On the Mystical Poetry’, Jones lists some of his favourite Sufi poets, which includes
‘SAIB, ORFI, MIR KHOSRAU, JAMI, HAZIN, and SABIK, who are next in beauty of
composition to HAFIZ and SADI’, mentioning also ‘MESI´HI, the most elegant of their
Turkish imitators; [ . . . ] a few Hindi poets of our own times, and [ . . . ] IBNUL FA´ RED,
who wrote mystical odes in Arabick.’9 The essay contains a translation of a ghazal by Esmat
Bokhari (d. 1436)10 as well as the very first translation of Rumi’s (1207-1273) ‘The Song of
the Reed’.11 Throughout ‘On the Mystical Poetry’, Jones emphasized the contemporary
relevance of the allegorical tradition within Muslim and Hindu cultures, referring to modern
Sufis and ‘Hindi poets of our own times.’ The essay and the translations Jones included in it
will be discussed in this chapter. The Sufi and ‘Hindi poets’ Jones mentions throughout his ‘On
the Mystical Poetry’ have another common point that Jones does not state in the essay: they all
have been greatly influenced by a poet named Farid-odin Attār (1145-1221).12 For example,
Rumi’s Masnavi Ma’navi, which begins with ‘The Song of the Reed’ was inspired by Attar’s
‫ اسرار ن مه‬asrārnāmeh, ‘The Book of Mysteries;’ the ghazal of Esmat which Jones translated
in the essay is a brief imitation of Attar’s ‘The Sheikh of Sanaan and the Christian Girl,’ a tale
in the poet’s ‫ منطق الطیر‬Mantegh ol-tayr, translated to English as ‘The Conference of Birds.’ As
discussed in the previous chapters, Jones was familiar with the works of Attar as the poet
appears in his A Grammar of Persian Language (1771) and his collection of papers held in the
British Library.13 The Osborn c. 400 collection14 contains further evidence of Jones’s
researches on Attar during his time in India, which will be mentioned later in this chapter.
Attar’s significance in Sufi literature has been under-researched in general, and the poet’s
pivotal role in expanding philosophical ideas which centre on toleration of the Other is even
more neglected by modern researchers. However, as will be discussed in this chapter, the
syncretic narratives and allegorical traditions introduced by Attar to Sufism were culturally
relevant to Hindus and Muslims in India as well as the British in the subcontinent. Attar’s

8
Jones, The Works, 4: 216.
9
Jones, The Works, 4: 232.
10
Jones, The Works, 4: 228-30.
11
Jones, The Works, 4: 230-1.
12
While‫ عط ر‬attār literally means ‘the perfumer’ in Persian, the word generally used to refer
to people practising traditional Iranian medicine and now is being used for people selling herbs.
13
BL, APAC, MSS Eur. C 274 f. 51.
14
Beinecke Library, Osborn c. 400.
145
syncretic tradition was present in the first gathering of the Asiatic Society on 15 January 1784,
in a ghazal of Hafez gifted to Jones by his friend, the Sanskrit scholar, Charles Wilkins (1749-
1836). Another case of Attar’s significance in eighteenth-century India can be found in the
‘Epistle to Sir William Jones’ (1790)15 composed by Captain John Horsford (1751-1817), one
of Bengal’s artillery commanders during the Third Anglo-Mysore War. The poem begins:

Tho’ haughty pow’rs against us turn their rage,

let not the fate of war your mind engage,
Be from your bosom such ideas far,
To vet’ran meadows leave the cares of war:
But ah! To Persian lore devote the hour.
Your Lord in Poesy’s inspiring bow’r:
KHAKANI’s thoughts t’ admiring ears express,
Or your lov’d HAFIZ bring in English dress:
With KHOOSRU sing how gentle pangs t’ assuage,
And trace pure SADI thro’ his moral page;
But if fatigue’d in this too tender field,
Then seek the joys GILLALIDEN can yield,
With ATTAR join in philosophic taste,
Th’ enlighten’d ROCHFOUCALT of half the East:
Their daring works to justly understand,
I’d give thy wealth, O golden Samarcand.16

Horsford was an expert in cannon deployment, yet here he lists Persian poets who were
significantly inspired by Attar’s perception of loving and tolerating the Other. Attar’s
significance to the Oriental thinkers is compared to that of François VI, Duc de La
Rochefoucauld (1613-1680) to the Europeans. Following Hafez’s tradition of exchanging ‘the

15
John Horsford, Collection of Poems, Written in the East Indies. With Miscellaneous
Remarks, in Real Life. By J- H, (Calcutta: Joseph Cooper, 1797), 29–32.
16
Horsford, Collection of Poems, 29.
146
cities of Samarcand and Bokhara’17 for the mole on the cheek of his plundering Shirazi Turk,
Horsford spares the wealth of golden Samarcand to understand the Oriental Other justly. This
enlightenment resulted from centuries of literary traditions that began with the composition of
the tale of ‘The Sheikh of Sanaan and the Christian Girl’ by the ‘Rochefoucauld of half the
East.’ The soldier who ‘inured to blowing Muslims into little pieces… longs for peace and the
“divine sublime” of Sufi poetry as revealed by Jones’.18 Enchanted by Jones’s cultural
mediation philosophy, Horsford thinks Oriental poetry is worthwhile to understand.
Intriguingly, Horsford shared the same fate as the Sheikh of Sanaan: he fell in love with an
Indian woman and this love ‘led him to deplore the discrimination against ‘Eurasians’ or ‘East
Indians’, as persons of mixed ethnicity were called.’19

The extent of Jones’s studies and research on the works of Attar is debatable: the poet
appears in Jones’s published works only on a few occasions, which makes one question if Jones
had conducted any research on Attar. On the other hand, Jones’s manuscripts held in the British
Library and Beinecke Library contain several references to Jones’s research on the works of
Attar; the folios will be presented later in this chapter. The debate also stems from the fact that
Jones’s personal books are held within several libraries in the United Kingdom, United States,
Germany, and India, making accessing all of his Persian manuscripts difficult. In addition, the
information available in the libraries’ catalogues are not accurate and contain some errors. For
example, one manuscript, ‘Presented to the Royal Society By Mr Burjojee Sorabjee Ashburner
May 1865’,20 is catalogued as one of Jones’s manuscripts; in another case, two separate books
have been bound together and catalogued as one work which has led to readers ignoring one
of them.21 The British Library holds a copy of Attar’s Pandnameh, ‘The Book of Advices’,
which belonged to Jones.22 As we have seen, Jones had a habit of annotating the books he read,
but the manuscript’s text contains no annotations. Jones had several copies of the works he
read, for example, at least two copies of the first volume of Rumi’s Masnavi catalogued in the
British library as RSPA 34 and RSPA 35, containing many annotations of Jones. This gives

17
William Jones, A Grammar of the Persian Language, (London: W. and J. Richardson,
1771), 135.
18
Franklin, ‘Orientalist Jones’, 348.
19
‘Sir John Horsford, Anglophone Poetry in Colonial India, 1780–1913: A Critical
Anthology, Mary Ellis Gibson(ed.), (Athens, OH: Ohio University Press, 2011), 46.
20
BL, APAC, RSPA 72, f. i.
21
These issues will be discussed in detail in the fifth chapter of this thesis, ‘The Majnun of
India: Sir William Jones’s Annotations on Nezami’s Treasury of Mysteries.’
22
The manuscript is catalogued as BL, APAC, RSPA 33.
147
rise to the hypothesis that there is at least one more manuscript of Attar’s Pandnameh, which
contains Jones’s annotations. As mentioned earlier, the extent of Jones’s familiarity with Attar
could be debated; however, the impact of the traditions Attar introduced to Persian and Sufi
literature and its consequent influence in Jones’s writings will be examined in this chapter. The
chapter introduces Attar and examines some of his most influential writings; this is due to his
pivotal role in Sufism and the Sufis’ perception of the alien other. In addition, it explores the
continuation, development, and amelioration of Attar’s traditions by later Sufis such as Amir
Khosrow (1253-1325), Rumi, and Esmat Bokharaei. More specifically, it will explore the
influence of Attar on Rumi and analyses Jones’s translation of Rumi’s ‘The Song of the Reed.’
Furthermore, the chapter investigates the significance of Attar’s tale of ‘the Sheikh Sanaan and
the Christian Girl’ in shaping the concept of the Other in the latter Sufis; Jones’s translation of
Esmat’s ode, which is an imitation of Attar’s tale, will be examined. The chapter concludes by
examining such traditions in Jones’s writings as well as the ghazal Wilkins presented to him in
the first gathering of the Asiatic Society. It should be mentioned that the translations presented
in the chapter are mine unless stated otherwise. Moreover, a literal translation of Attar’s ‘the
Sheikh Sanaan and the Christian Girl’ is appended to the thesis.

The Life and Works of Attar

Attar was a Persian mystic poet and hagiographer; he lived in Nishapur, a city northeast of
Iran. He was influenced by poets such as Ferdowsi (940-1020), Sanaaei (1080-1131), and
Nezami (1149-1209); Attar was also influenced by Sufi mystics such as Bayazid Bastami (804-
874),23 Mansoor-e Hallaj (858-922), Abu-Saeed Abolkhayr (967-1049), and Khajeh Abdollah
Ansari (1006-1088). His influence on the Persian and Sufi literature is so immense that many
poets, including Rumi, Hafez (1326-1390), Jami (1414-1492), and Saib-e Tabrizi (1601-1677)
praised, and more importantly, imitated him. Some scholars challenge Attar’s influence on
Persian mysticism and Sufism; for instance, B. Reinert states, ‘It seems that he was not well-
known as a poet in his own lifetime, except at his home town [of Nishapur], and his greatness
as a mystic, a poet, and a master of narrative was not discovered until the 15th century.’24
However, this idea can easily be disputed: firstly, poets such as Rumi, Hafez, and Jami, who
lived before the fifteenth century, alluded on multiple occasions to Attar as a great master Sufi.

23
Known as ‫ سلط الع رفین‬Soltān ol-ārefin, ‘The King of Mystics’, Bayazid Bastami is known
for ‘the boldness of his expression of the mystic’s complete absorption into the Godhead.’ He
introduced and pioneered the concept of ‘drunkenness’ in Sufism.
24
B. Reinert, ‘AṬṬĀR, FARĪD-AL-DĪN’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, 3:1, 20-25: 21,
[http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/attar-farid-al-din-poet].
148
Secondly, the statement can be disputed through Rumi’s biography: by the time that Central
Asia was being invaded by Mongols, sometime between 1215 and 1220, Rumi’s father, Baha-
odin Walad (1149–1232), set out Westwards with his family and some of his disciples in order
to seek sanctuary from the Mongolian invasion. During their journey, they passed through
Nishapur and, according to many accounts, they met Attar. Recognizing Rumi’s spiritual
eminence instantly, Attar gave his ‫ اسرار ن مه‬asrārnāmeh, ‘The Book of Mysteries’, which is
centred on the entanglement of the soul within the material world, to the young Rumi. Later in
his life, Rumi praised the poet on many occasions: ‘Attar was the spirit, Sanaaei his eyes twain,
And in time thereafter, Came we in their train.’25 In another instance, Rumi stated: ‘One, facing
this Path shall become acquainted with Bayazid;26 should either face Sanaaei or analyse Attar’s
works in details’27 and ‘The Luminosity which Sanaaei described, was uniquely personified by
Attar.’28 After Jones introduced Rumi and his the ‘Song of the Reed’ to the West, in his essay
‘On the Mystical Poetry’, he stated ‘A volume might be filled with similar passages from the
Sufi poets; from SAIB, ORFI, MIR KHOSRAU, JA’MI, HAZIN, and SABIK who are next in
beauty of composition to HAFIZ and SADI.’29 Intriguingly, these poets are amongst the
imitators of Attar. For example, Saib-e Tabrizi stated: ‘Saib’s stature might not reach Rumi’s;
just as Rumi’s stature cannot reach Attar’s.’30 Hafez’s poetry and mystical perspective also
reveals the influence of Attar; for instance, in his Divan Hafez states: ‘Come now, the
foundation of the palace of ambition is extremely loose; bring wine, since the foundation of the
life is on the wind [shaky and loose]’31 which is an imitation of Attar’s ‘Come now, since the

25
Arthur J. Arberry, Sufism: An Account of the Mystics of Islam, (Mineola, N.Y: Dover
Publications, 2001), 141.
26
Attar, Muslim Saints and Mystics: Episodes from the Tadhkirat al-Auliya, (Memorial of the
Saints), A. J. Arberry (trans.), (Ames: Omphaloskepsis, 2000), 119.
27
Jalal-odin Mohamad Ibn Mohamad Molavi Rumi, Divan of Shams-e Tabrizi, (Tehran: Badi-
ol Zaman Forozan Far, 1993), 42:
‫ی در سن یی رو کن ی بش ده عط ر را‬ ‫ج نی که رو این سش کن ب ب یزی او نش کن‬
28
Rumi, Divan of Shams-e Tabrizi, 1076:
‫عط ر آ فری‬ ‫ی ف فردی‬ ‫آ سن جش کش سن یی ارح کرد‬
29
Jones, The Works, 4: 232.
30
Saib Tabrizi, Divan, Mohammad Kahreman (ed.), (Tehran: Scientific & Cultural Publication
Company, 1986), 3: 200:
‫گر مشلشی به رتبه عط ر میرس‬ ‫نشاه رسی رتبه ص ئب به مشلشی‬
31
Shams-odin Mohammad Hafez, Divan of Hafez, (Tehran: Parviz Natel-Khanlari, 1983), 90:
‫بی ر ب ده كه بنی د ع ر بر ب د اس‬ ‫بی كه قصر امل سخ سس بنی د اس‬
149
corner of a tavern is our Qibla;32 bring wine, since the lover is not a man of hypocrisy and
pretence.’33

Although there are not many detailed reliable accounts of Attar’s life, we know that his
father was a medical practitioner, and Attar learned about medicine through him and replaced
him after his death. This fact is quite pivotal since, unlike many other poets, particularly Persian
ones, Attar did not need patronage.34 Therefore, although eulogies are quite common amongst
Persian poets, he did not compose even a single eulogy piece or praise poetry in his life.
Another intriguing fact about him is that, unlike other Sufis, Attar did not follow one particular
Sufi teacher; furthermore, in his early life, Attar was neither interested in the theological
studies, schools of the time, nor Sufi monasteries.35 His initiation to Sufism is the subject of
much speculation; many literary scholars believe that he changed his life by encountering a
Sufi wanderer.36 While Attar was busy at his stall, a Darvish arrives and asks him for a donation
in the path of God. Attar initially ignores him, yet the Darvish keeps asking. Eventually, the
Darvish says: ‘O Lord, how do you want to leave the world behind?’ emphasizing Attar’s love
of wealth and worldly materialistic fortune rather than his spirituality. Attar responds: ‘Just as
you do!’ The Darvish, doubting Attar’s claim, asks: ‘Can you really die the way I do?!’ and
Attar says ‘Yes!’ The Darvish lies down, puts his hat under his head and dies while
pronouncing ‘Allah’. This event dramatically impacts Attar; he leaves his shop behind and
travels from Transoxiana to India and from there to Mecca. On his way, Attar begins to learn
from other Sufis. Rumi alludes to this tale in one of his most famous ghazals:

O lovers! O lovers! Should one see the One’s cheeks,

their mind becomes corrupted, their temperament becomes chaotic.
They will seek out the beloved, their stall becomes ruined;

32
‫ قبلة‬gheble, ‘the Qibla’ is the direction in which Muslims face to pray. It is the same direction
as the Kaaba in Mecca.
33
Attar, Divan of Ghasaayed and Ghazaliyaat, (Torbat-e Jam: The Cultural, Social, and
Information Site of Torbat-e Jam, 2008), 2:
‫بی ر ب ده كه ع اق نه مرد ط م ت اس‬ ‫بی كه قبله م گشاه نراب ت اس‬
34
Abdolhossein Zarrinkoob, Sedaye Paaye Simorgh, (Tehran: Sokhan, 2000), 34.
35
Zarrinkoob, Sedaye Paaye Simorgh, 46.
36
Although most of Iranian sources state that the tale is mentioned by Jami, I personally could
not find it in any writings of Jami regarding the matter. The oldest reliable source of the story
is available in: Dolat-Shah Samarghandi, Tazkerat ol-Shoara, Edward G. Browne (ed.),
(Leiden: Brill, 1900), 187-9. Samarghandi’s book was originally written sometime between
1456-1491.
150
 like water in a stream, one’s mind and soul will seek the Beloved.37

While such an event is, to some extent, doubtful, different accounts do mention that Attar, at
some point in his life, leaves his job and starts travelling. The most plausible theory regarding
Attar’s life and his initiation to Sufism is that from an early age, he became interested in Sufism,
probably through his father’s encouragement, and considered Sufi saints as his spiritual
guides.38 In the April of 1221, at the age of 78, Attar met a violent death in the Mongols’
massacre at Nishapur.39 Furthermore, all of his writings, held in his private collection, were
burned by the Mongols. The texts available today, which were sent to other cities or given to
other people before the Mongolian invasion, are considered to be only a fraction of his original
writings. Attar’s writings depict the evolution of one who sets course on a Sufi path as well as
the whole Sufi movement. Starting with the idea of the soul trapped in a body, most of the
times, his writings end with the reunion of the soul and its divine source through purification;40
the soul’s purifying agent always happens to be Love. Utilizing a simple language alongside
allegories and fables, Attar perfected Persian literature’s adoption of the Sufi perceptions,
which Sanaaei started. In his works, Attar approached his predecessor philosophers, mainly of
Aristotelian heritage, with scepticism.41 Intriguingly, unlike any other poet, Sufi, or
philosopher, Attar was neither interested in revealing the Truth nor the mysteries of nature; the
fact becomes particularly remarkable should one consider that he was a medical practitioner.
Attar never shared his knowledge of medicine in the manner customary amongst other Sufis;42
he was more interested in evolving and sharing his spiritual knowledge.

37
Rumi, Divan of Shams-e Tabrizi, 2811:
‫اشری ه گردد عقل او آاف ه گردد نشی او‬ ‫ای ع اق ای ع اق آ کس که بین روی او‬
‫بر رو و سر پشی اشد چش آب ان ر جشی او‬ ‫معششق را جشی اشد دک او ویرا اشد‬
38
Attar, Tazkerat-ol Oliya, Reynold A. Nicholson (ed.), (London: Luzac & Co., 1905), 1, 23,
55.
39
B. Reinert, ‘AṬṬĀR, FARĪD-AL-DĪN’, 24.
Abdolhossein Zarrinkoob, Sedaye Paaye Simorgh, 45.
40
F. Meier, ‘Der Geistmensch bei dem persischen Dichter Attar’, Eranos-Jahrbuch, 13, (1945),
283-353: 286.
41
Attar, Mosibat Nameh, Abdol-Wahaab Noorani-Vesal (ed.), (Tehran: Zavar, 1985), 54.
Attar, Asrar-nameh, Seyed Sadeq Gohareen (ed.), (Tehran: Zavar Publications, 2005), 50.
42
As an example, Rumi, who was not as knowledgeable as Attar in medicine, in one of his
poems describes a princess who has become ill due to the separation from her beloved. Then
he emphasizes the inefficiency of medicine to cure her illness stating: ‘In fact, Sekanjabin
caused her bile to enhance; the almond oil increased the dryness’:
‫روغن ب دام نشکی مین شد‬ ‫ا قض سرکنگبین صفرا فزود‬

151
 The works of Attar which are currently available are his Divan, Mokhtār-nāmeh,
Tazkerat ol-owliā, and Elāhi-nāmeh. Jones mentions Attar in A Grammar (1771):
‫’پن ن مه‬
Pendnāma, a book of moral sentences, not unlike those of Theogonies in Greek, by
‫ فری ال ین عط ر‬Ferideddin Attar, Lond. Oxf.’43

A further instance in which Jones mentions Attar is while introducing another Persian poet
named Catebi (d.1496), a contemporary poet with Jami. While introducing Mohammad Ibn
Abdollah Katebi Tarshizi 44 to his readers, Jones mentions a distich composed by the poet:

‫ن ر صحرای نش پشرم من و عط ر گل‬ ‫نش پشرم ولی‬ ‫ه چش عط ر ا گلس‬

Like Attar* I came from the rose garden of Nishapor; but I am only a thorn of that
garden, and Attar was its most beautiful flower.45

The distich chosen by Jones also points out the significance of Attar to other Persian poets:
Nishapor, the birthplace of both poets, is quite famous for its Turquoise, yet Katebi chooses to
associate the city with its most precious jewel, which was Attar. At the bottom of the same
page, again, Jones associates Attar only with Pandnameh ‘[*] … a Persian poet, author of the
Pendnāma.’ The intriguing fact about Pandnameh is that there are no indications of Attar being
its author.46 Furthermore, the first time that literary scholars mentioned the book and attributed
it to Attar was in the fifteenth century, and there are no other references to the book or Attar,
as its author, before that date. Moreover, Pandnameh’s text does not demonstrate any one of
the characteristics of Attar’s writings since it is ‘a dry moral rule-book in abrupt and
grammatically very simple language with trite wording.’47 However, it should be mentioned

Jones took interest in this line and translated Sekanjabin to ‘Oxymel.’ BL, APAC, RSPA, 36,
f. 6.
43
Jones, A Grammar, 147.
44
In India, Jones had bought a copy of Katebi’s Divan; the manuscript is available in the
British Library, catalogued as BL, APAC, RSPA 45. This particular copy of the Divan -e
Katebi has no annotations of Jones, however, Jones has quoted a quatrain on the poet in the
copy of Nezami’s Treasury of Mysteries, catalogued as BL, APAC, RSPA 35. Jones’s
annotations on Nezami’s Treasury will be discussed in detail in the fifth chapter of this thesis.
45
Jones, The Works, 5: 445.
46
Hellmut Ritter, Philologika: XVI, Farīduddīn ʻAṭṭār. IV. 8. Mutārnāme: 9. Pandnāme,
(Leiden: Brill, 1978), 228.
47
B. Reinert, ‘AṬṬĀR, FARĪD-AL-DĪN’, 24.
152
that Saeed Nafisi, one of the most prominent Persian literary scholars, is amongst the very few
modern critics who attributed the book to Attar and considered it to be an authentic text.48
Despite all these doubts, Pandnameh is quite popular amongst the Turks and has been
translated into Turkish and reprinted in Turkey several times throughout the past five
centuries.49 Perhaps the Turks’ interest in the book and possibly the information Jones gathered
from Turkish sources was the reason for his attribution of the book to Attar and mentioning
him always as the author of Pandnameh rather than any other works of his. However, one of
the folios in Jones’s Osborn c. 400 collection demonstrates the significance of Attar’s
Pandnameh to him. Please see the illustration below, Jones’s ‘Order of Persian Reading’50
beginning with the Pandnameh.

Illustration 1, Osborn c. 400, f. 20; Jones’s ‘Order of Persian Reading.’

Attar’s ‘The Book of Mokhtar’

As I mentioned while analysing Jones’s Notebook, it is quite evident that Jones does
not always mention the books he read explicitly in his works; for example, Abu-Saeed
Abolkhayr and Sahabi (d. 1609) whose quatrains are available in the Notebook are not

48
Saeed Nafisi, Jostetoo dar ahvaal va ash’aar-e Attar, (Tehran: Eghbaal, 1941),108.
49
Hellmut Ritter, Philologika: XVI., 228-38.
50
Beinecke Library, Osborn c. 400, f. 20.
153
mentioned in Jones’s works. In another case, while Jones does not mention Mansoor Hallaj 51
directly in his works, his comments on two of the quatrains in the Notebook52 clearly
demonstrate that he knew about Hallaj’s life; therefore, it could be obtained that Jones was
quite familiar with Attar, particularly with his book entitled Mokhtār-nāmeh, ‘The Book of
Mokhtar’. The book consists of four narrative poems each, nowadays, is considered as a
separate book: Khosrow-nāmeh, Asrār-nāmeh, Mantegh ol-tayr, and Mosibat-nāmeh.

Attar’s Book of Khosrow

The first factor that stimulated Jones’s curiosity about Mokhtār-nāmeh is its first book,
Khosrow-nāmeh, ‘The Book of Khosrow’.53 While Jones was interested in the Oriental
romances, much like any Persian literature scholar, he found two particular stories surpassing
any other Persian romance: the tale of Khosrow and Shirin and the tale of Leili and Majnoon,
which were initially written by Jones’s favourite Persian poet Nezami. Both Sufi romances
have different versions, composed by different poets after Nezami, and we know that Jones
studied some of them. However, Attar’s creativity makes his version of Khosrow and
Shirin, Khosrow-nāmeh, different from others. Firstly, Attar’s version of the tale differs from
the rest of his writings since it is not necessarily mystical but rather a courtly romance in nature.
Secondly, Attar changes Khosrow’s role in the tale, while in other versions, Khosrow54 is one
of the Persian emperors. In Attar’s Khosrow-nāmeh, he becomes an illegitimate son of a Roman
Emperor who was exiled to Ahvaz, Iran and was adopted by the gardener of the city’s court.
This transformation of a familiar figure to the reader, in this case a Persian emperor, to an alien,
the illegitimate son of the Roman emperor, is one of the concepts introduced and commonly
used by Attar in Persian literature. This transformation later was adopted by others, including
Jones’s favourite poet Amir Khosrow Dehlavi.55 Furthermore, Jones himself has applied such
tactics in his translations. For example, while translating a quatrain of Amir Khosrow’s, Jones

51
‫ منصشر حالج‬Mansōr-e Hallāj, Mansor-e Hallaj (858-922) was a Persian Sufi most famous
for stating ‫ ان الحق‬ana-l-hagh, ‘I am the Truth’; this statement was interpreted by as a claim to
divinity, while others took it as an instance of Sufi mystical annihilation of the ego that
allows God to speak through an individual. He was hanged during the Abbasid Caliphate
(750/1517) on religious and political charges.
52
BL, APAC, MSS Eur. C 274, f. 16, & 23.
53
Attar, Khosrow-Nameh, Farshid Eghbaal (ed.), (Tehran: Andishe Gostar, 2003).
54
In Attar’s version, originally his name is Hormoz and later on in the narrative he is renamed
to Kosrow.
55
More details on the self and the other will be provided while discussing about ‘The Sheikh
of Sanaan and the Christian Girl.’
154
introduced Lát, a famous pre-Islamic idol in Arabia known to all Muslims, as ‘An Hindu
idol’.56 In Attar’s narrative, Shirin is also renamed as Gol, the daughter of the king of Ahvaz.
Khosrow and Gol fall in love with each other while neither one is aware of the other’s love,
and this ignorance causes many instances of self-denial and self-discovery for both. It should
be mentioned that many thematic parallels stand out between Attar’s tale and that of Nezami’s:
the lover’s distress at the end of the very flustered courtship, the description of the lovers’
reunion, and the girl’s death due to the separation of her lover on his tomb.

Attar’s Book of Mysteries, Rumi’s Masnavi, and Jones’s ‘Song of the Reed’

Attar’s second book of the Mokhtār-nāmeh is entitled Asrār-nāmeh, ‘The Book of

Mysteries’ which was briefly mentioned while discussing the relationship between Rumi and
Attar. This particular text has received less modern scholarly attention compared with the other
three books in the Mokhtār-nāmeh. It might be due to the fact that the book is a set of twenty-
two essays without any sort of literary frame. However, Asrār-nāmeh contains a certain
conceptual and thematic structure; the book's main theme revolves around the separation of the
soul from its origin and the soul’s longing for a reunion through love. The book is the most
significant piece of literature that influenced Rumi to compose his Masnavi Ma’navi. This gave
rise to the story of Rumi’s meeting Attar and receiving this book from him. It is told that as
Rumi grow older and began conducting teaching sessions on the Sufi path, his disciples asked
him to compose a comprehensive moral guide for them. Rumi reached his turban and brought
out a piece of paper with a Masnavi written on it. After Rumi recited the poem, his disciples
were ecstatic with it, asked for more, and hence, Rumi started to compose his six volumes of
the Masnavi. While introducing the Masnavi, Jones states that it ‘[…] assures us, that they [the
Sufis] profess eager desire, but with no carnal affection, and circulate the cup, but no material
goblet’.57 This description is quite close to a distich of Jones’s beloved Hafez, which states:
‘The courtier, minstrel, and cupbearer is all Him/Her; dreaming of the clay and the drink in the
Path is an excuse.’58 What Jones stated also fits well with not only Rumi’s message of the
Masnavi but also with the general theme of Attar’s Asrār-nāmeh: the separation of the soul

56
BL, APAC, MSS Eur. C 274, The Notebook, f. 22.
57
Jones, The Works, 4: 280.
58
Hafez, Divan, 428:
‫نی ش آب و گل در ره به نه‬ ‫ن یم و مطرب و س قی ه ه اوس‬
155
from its origin and its longing for a reunion. Jones owned at least two copies of the Masnavi,59
in its first volume, he describes the book as illustrated below:

Illustration 2, BL, APAC, RSPA 35, f. 2; Jones’s handwritten description of Rumi’s Masnavi.

So extraordinary a book as the Mesnavi was never, perhaps, composed by man. It

abounds with beauties, and blemishes, equally great; with gross obscenity, and pure
ethicks; with exquisite strains of poetry, and flat puerilities; with wit, and pleasantry,
mixed with dull jests; with ridicule on all established religions, and a vein of sublime
piety: it is like a wild country in a fine climate overspread with rich flowers, and with
the odoure of beasts. I know of no writer, to whom the Maulavi can justly be compared,
except Chaucer or Shakespeare.’60

Jones’s vast knowledge of Sufism, his exposure to Persian and Turkish literature, as well as his
extensive study of Rumi’s Masnavi reaffirms his knowledge of the influence of Attar on Rumi.
In fact, the influence was so immense that Rumi tried to interpret Attar on many different
occasions. One example appears in the Masnavi, where Rumi decided to interpret Attar’s
following distich: ‘Attar: ‘You have an ego, ignorant one! Drink your own blood while on

59
BL, APAC, RSPA 35-41; Jones’s annotations on the Masnavi will be discussed in the
fourth chapter of this thesis.
60
BL, APAC, RSPA 35, f. 2.
156
earth, for if mystics drink poison, it will become an antidote.’61 These influences most certainly
were not ignored by Jones. As you may see, Jones quoted Attar’s line next to Rumi’s
interpretation, in his copy of the Masnavi: 62

Illustration 3, BL, APAC, RSPA 34, f.25r; Jones’s recitation of Attar’s and a Persian distich of Rumi on his
copy of Masnavi.

The Persian distich translates to ‘Ignorant one! You are the holder of the self! Drink wine
amidst this chaos;/ for if the holder of a heart has poison, it turns into honey for him!’
Comparable to none other than Chaucer or Shakespeare, Rumi’s work is considered the
most extraordinary mystical collection ever written;63 it contains an elevated status in the rich
Persian Sufi literature canon to the extent that many scholars have referred to it as the Persian
Quran. Meaning ‘the Spiritual Masnavi’, Masnaviye-Ma’navi was entitled by Rumi himself as
it was a composition on spiritual matters in the Masnavi poetic form. In the form, every
hemistich follows the same metre, and each distich shares its own rhyming scheme:

---------------A ---------------A

---------------B ---------------B

---------------C ---------------C

61
Rumi, The Masnavi, 1: 100:
‫که ص حب دش اگر هری نشرد آ انگبین ب ا‬ ‫تش ص حب نفسی ای غ فل می ن نش می نشر‬
62
BL, APAC, RSPA 34, f. 25r,
63
Jalal al-Din Rumi, The Masnavi, Book One, (Oxford World's Classics), Jawid Mojaddedi
(trans.) (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), xi.
157
This rhyming scheme is one of the key distinguishing factors of masnavi, for it enables the poet
to compose very long poems, each with many verses. For example, Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh,
the world’s longest epic poem written by a single poet, is sixty thousand distiches; another
example is Attar’s The Conference of the Birds which is about forty-five hundred distiches,
and Rumi’s Masnavi is about twenty-six thousand. By Rumi’s era, many Sufis, such as Sanaaei
and Attar, had already utilized the masnavi form for mystical poetry, and the form had proven
to be well suited for composing didactics and narratives.64 Rumi’s disciples asked him to
compose his own mystical masnavi in continuation of the works of Attar and Sanaei.65 The
first volume of the Masnavi covers a diverse range of subject matters, including narratives on
a wide range of characters: from kings, prophets, and shepherds to tramps and beggars, from
humans to animals. Much like Attar, Rumi utilized the Quran, the traditions of Mohammad,
and the works of his predecessor Sufis as a source of inspiration for his poems. For example,
in the third book of the Masnavi, there is a section that narrates a debate between Bohlool
(d.810), a former judge and Sufi figure, and a dervish. The debate begins

Bohlool asked a dervish, ‘What is being a dervish like? Enlighten me.’

The dervish responded: ‘if you truly become one, you will be immortal; the universe
acts on your wishes.’

The dervish argues that whatever happens is created by the Divine love; even ‘the Inferno is a
description to the [separation] from the Beloved.’ The following illustration depicts Jones’s
fascination with the tale with a simple ‘Fine’:

Illustration 4, BL, APAC, RSPA 37, f. 131; Jones’s annotation on Rumi’s Masnavi.

64
Attar, The Conference of the Birds, A. Darbandi, & D. Davis (eds.), (Harmondsworth:
Penguin Books, 1983).
65
Rumi, The Masnavi, Book One, xx.
158
Some of the stories mentioned in the books are humorous, including jokes about sexuality,
which Jones found ‘Strange!’ as well as ethnic and gender stereotypes; for example, please see
the below illustration which describes a male prostitute carrying a knife for self-protection:

Illustration 5, BL, APAC, RSPA 39, f.182; Jones’s annotation on Rumi’s Masnavi.66

Like Sadi, Rumi utilized humour and rendness67 in order to deliver his point to the readers as
memorably as possible. Another point which is shared between Rumi’s Masnavi and the works
of Attar is that Rumi chose the ‫ رمل‬ramal metre for his Masnavi, (- ˘- -/- ˘- -/- ˘-/); Attar also
utilizes the meter in his Conference of the Birds.68
As mentioned previously, the six volumes of Rumi’s Masnavi were composed due to
the captivation caused by a single masnavi which the poet held in his turban; that masnavi is
known as ‫ نی ن مه‬Ney-nāmeh, ‘The Letter of the Reed’. As Dick Davis has pointed out, the poem
is highly innovative and does not follow the established convention of any work written in
Persian or Sufi poetry. While typical Persian or Sufi texts start with an invocation of God and

66
The lines translate to: ‘A thug brought a sodomite to his house/ pinned him down and
pressed it in him./ That damned person saw a dagger with him/ so he asked “why are you
carrying this?”/ The sodomite said “if some has bad intentions with me/ I shall rip him apart
with this dagger.”’ This folio will be discussed in detail in the fourth chapter of this thesis.
67
The word ‫ رن‬rend literally means ‘trickster, slicker, nimble, rogue, mulish, smart, shrewd,
and insouciant’.
68
The work will be discussed later in this chapter.
159
the Prophets, Rumi focuses on the reed-flute and addresses the reader in the second person,
‘Listen!’69 A parallel could be observed here between the Masnavi and the Quran, which no
scholar has mentioned before: based on the mainstream conventional Islamic tradition, the very
first time that the archangel Gabriel appeared before Mohammad was when he was
contemplating in the Cave of Hira, in 600 AD. Gabriel commands Mohammad: ‘Read!’
Mohammad replies: ‘I am unable to read.’ The angel holds and embraces Mohammad three
times and then commands him:70

Read! In the name of your Lord, who Created (1) Created man, out of a clot of
congealed blood (2) Read! And your Lord is the Most Bountiful (3) Who taught by the
pen (4) Taught man what he did not know (5) … In Fact, you shall go back to your
Lord (8)71

Rumi, while writing his ‘Persian Quran’, clearly had the very first verses of the ‘Arabic’ Quran
in his mind: while Gabriel commanded Mohammad to read what is written by the pen,
reminding him of his return to his Lord, Rumi commanded his readers to hear what the reed
narrates, reminding them of their return to their Source. In addition, many scholars believe that
the initial eighteen distiches of ‘the Song of the Reed’ contain the gist of the entire work of the
Masnavi.72 Intriguingly, according to the Islamic belief, the Quran was first descended to
Mohammad when the angel Gabriel recited to him the verses mentioned before,73 and Muslims
believe that those verses contain the gist of the Quran. Another point that should be addressed
here regarding the Masnavi and the Quran is that the latter asks people who doubt its Divinity

69
Dick Davis, ‘Narrative and Doctrine in the First Story of Rumi’s Mathnawi’,in Studies in
Islamic and Middle Eastern Texts and Traditions in Memory of Norman Calder, G. R.
Hawting, & J. A. Mojaddedi, & A. Samely (eds.), (Oxford, 2000), 93–6.
70
Muhammad Mustafa Al-A'zami, The History of The Qur'anic Text: From Revelation to
Compilation: A Comparative Study with the Old and New Testaments, (Leicester: UK Islamic
Academy, 2003), 25, & 47–8.
Edward Sell, The Life of Muhammad, (London: Christian Literature Society for India, 1913),
29.
Daniel W. Brown, A New Introduction to Islam, (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2003), 72-3.
71
The Quran 96:1–8:

َ ‫اال ۡن‬
َ ‫س‬ َ )4( ‫علَّ َم بِ ۡلقَلَ ُِۙم‬
ِ ۡ ‫علَّ َم‬ َ ۡ َ‫) ا ِۡق َر ۡا َو َربُّك‬2( ‫علَق‬
ۡ ‫) الَّذ‬3( ‫اال ۡك َر ُۙ ُم‬
َ ‫ِى‬ َ ‫س َ مِ ۡن‬ ِ ۡ َ‫) َنلَق‬1( َ‫ِى َنلَق‬
َ ‫اال ۡن‬ ۡ ‫ا ِۡق َر ۡا بِ سۡ ِم َربِّكَ الَّذ‬
(8) ‫الر ْج َعى‬ُّ َ‫) … ِإ َّ ِإلَى َر ِبّك‬5(‫َم لَ ۡم َیعۡ لَ ۡم‬
72
For example: E. Turkmen, The Essence of the Masnevi (Konya: Misket Ltd., 1992).
73
The Quran 2:185, 44:3, & 97:1.
160
to compose a similar text.74 Considering this, the very fact that Rumi’s book is entitled ‘the
Persian Quran’ alongside its parallels with the Quran can be interpreted as an act of heresy and
blasphemy. One of the aspects of Persian Sufi literature that fascinated Jones was its infusion
with blasphemy and heresy; for example, the usage of Idolatry imagery in the literature which
equated an Idol with a beloved. The fascination also appears in Jones’s early days of Persian
studies; a letter dated February 24, 1768, from his Hungarian Orientalist friend Károly
Reviczky (1737-1793) expresses the bewilderment one has by reading such poetry, including
Hafez’s:

As to myself, although I am disposed to believe, that when Hafez speaks of love and
wine, he has no recondite meaning, I am equally willing to declare, that his writings are
not disgraced by those obscenities, nor those gross and filthy expressions, which so
frequently occur in Sadi. Nor can I avoid considering him a free thinker: and a hundred
passages might be quoted, in which the poet ridicules the prophet and his Coran;75

The fascination with unorthodox, heretical, or perhaps blasphemous views available in Persian
literature and Sufism helped Jones and his circle to develop a keener relationship with the
Hindu natives of the subcontinent, which will be discussed in the next chapter of this thesis.

Jones was the first English translator of Rumi’s ‘The Letter of the Reed’. He entitled
his English translation of the poem ‘The Song of the Reed’ and published it in his essay ‘On
the Mystical Poetry’.76 After Jones’s translation, the poem has been translated into English
many times. An analysis of Jones’s translation would fit here, yet it is pivotal to understand the
poem itself before that. In ‘the Song of the Reed’, the reed mourns its separation from its source,
the reed-bed, or its ‘native banks’ in Jones’s words. This separation can be interpreted as a
mystic’s self feeling a strong sense of ‘exile from his parent bow’r’, and therefore he/she longs
to return. Love intensifies this longing in the mystic, “‘Tis love, that fills the reed with warmth
divine/ ‘Tis love, that sparkles in the racy wine,” reshaping and enhancing his understanding

74
For example: The Quran 10:38: ‘Or do they say [about the Prophet], “He invented it?” Say,
“Then bring forth a surah like it and call upon [for assistance] whomever you can besides
God, if you should be truthful.” Another instance is The Quran 17:88: ‘Say, “If mankind and
the jinn gathered in order to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like of
it, even if they were to each other assistants.”’
75
Sir William Jones, Memoirs of the life, writings and correspondence of Sir William Jones,
Charles John Shore Teignmouth (ed.), (London: Piccadilly, 1806), 1: 49.
76
Jones, The Works, 4: 211-36, 230-1.
161
of reality from which he/she is veiled. Rumi emphasizes the power of the Divine Love with his
reference to the tale of God appearing to Moses as a burning bush in Mount Sanai: ‘Love warms
this frigid clay with mystick fire, / And dancing mountains leap with young desire’, portraying
the annihilation of the self to reach the Other. The Divine Love cleanses the lover’s self and
only the Beloved, God, remains: ‘All is the Beloved and the lover is veiled; the Beloved is alive
and the lover [without the beloved] is dead.’ Rumi has described human beings and their
relationship with God through the Islamic theological and philosophical perspective; from his
perspective, God is an Absolute Being, while humans are not and therefore ‘With forms
imperfect can perfection dwell?’ For human beings to become cleansed, they must fall in Love,
annihilate their self, and recognize their non-existence so that they would be able to exist
through God truly.

The most significant concept in Rumi’s poem is the idea of the self in Persian-Islamic
Sufism: the human being was created imperfect, without wisdom, only possessing ‘animalistic’
instincts. The mind, wit, or intelligence, sometimes referred to by the Sufis as ‘the awareness’,
was created and bestowed upon man later, after the time that the instincts already captured the
heart. Therefore, there is this constant struggle within one’s self between the wit and the
instincts. Rumi depicts this struggle in one of his quatrains:

If you choose to go on the path of lust and desire, I will inform you, you shall pass
[through life] miserably.
Should you choose to reject this [the path of lust and desire] you will realize why are
you here and where you are heading.77

The lust and desire are represented by ‫ من‬man, the ‘I’ in Sufism, while the wit and intelligence,
‘the architect’ that destroys ignorance, is called ‫ من برتر‬man-e bartar, the ‘better-I’.78 The I is
associated with basic animalistic instincts and effrontery, ignorance, pride, vanity, misery,
violence and brutality; on the other hand, the better-I is associated with knowledge,

77
Rumi, Divan of Shams-e Tabrizi, 4415:
‫ا من نبرت که بینشا نشاهی رف‬ ‫گر بر سر اهشت و هشا نشاهی رف‬
‫کز بهر چه آم ی کج نشاهی رف‬ ‫ور درگذری ا این ببینی بعی‬
By stating ‘where you are heading’, Rumi reminds the reader of the goal: a reunion with the
Beloved.
78
It is important to mention that the same words ‫ من‬man, the ‘I’ and ‫ من برتر‬man-e bartar, the
‘better-I’ have been used in translating Sigmund Freud’s concept of the id and the superego.
However, the function of the Freudian concepts differs from the mystical Persian ones.
162
contentment, courage, compassion, benevolence, kindness, good manners and morals. The Sufi
path aims to battle with the I, annihilate it, and ensure that the better-I rules the heart. This
duality within oneself is one of Sufism’s core concepts; as will be discussed later, the pluralism
and syncretism within Sufism depend on it, as Rumi stated: ‘Division lies within the animalistic
soul; the Unity of self is the soul of humanity.’79

The idea of the self to Sufis is quite similar to the Romantic’s perception of the self: the
self-conscious self and the self within the self.80 One, in order to find the latter, must eliminate
the former through self-annihilation. The self-conscious self, like the better-I, alienates one
from one’s self within the self. To the Romantics, this alienation manifests as a desire to
become one with the Other, generating a longing to return. Geoffrey H. Hartman believes that
the Romantic longing of return to the bliss of Union, through getting rid of the self-conscious
self, is ‘the product of a division in the self‘.81 Similar to the Sufis, the only path for the
Romantics is to abolish alienation; the Sufis’ Separation is through losing their self-conscious
self, their I, with the help of love. This loss leads to the death of the self, I, uniting the self with
the other, or the Beloved. To Sufis, the human being ‘… was of an undifferentiated unity [that
became] interrupted by material creation which resulted in the separation of humanity (as a
lover) from God (as Beloved).’82 This separation and alienation of the human being from God,
the lover from the beloved, creates a longing to return to his/her Origin or beloved;83 Rumi’s
‘The Song of the Reed’ starts with the reed and its separation from the beloved and narrates its
longing to reunite.

For Sufis, the path to the reunion with the Beloved goes through the love of the other.
Rumi portrays the other in one of the most well-known tales of the Masnavi. In the first book

79
Rumi, Masnaviye-Ma’navi, (Torbat-e Jam: The Cultural, Social, and Information Site of
Torbat-e Jam, 2008), 199:
‫تفرقه در روح حیشانی بشد نفس واح روح انس نی بشد‬
80
Geoffrey H. Hartman, ‘Romanticism and Anti-Self-Consciousness’, The Geoffrey Hartman
Reader, Geoffrey H. Hartman, & Daniel T. O‘Hara (eds.), (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University
Press, 2004), 180-90: 184.
81
Hartman, ‘Romanticism and Anti-Self-Consciousness’, 183.
82
Hamid Dabashi, ‘Ayn al-Qudat Hamadani and the Intellectual Climate of his Times’, History
of Islamic Philosophy, Seyyed Hossein Nasr, & Oliver Leaman (eds.), (New York, NY:
Routledge, 1996), 1: 374-419: 381.
83
The following PhD thesis discusses the similarities and differences between the Romantic
self and the Sufi self in more detail: Elham Nilchian, ‘Sufi-Romantic Self Loss: The Study of
the Influence of Persian Sufism on English Romantic Poetry’, unpublished PhD diss.,
University of Leicester, 2011, 41-6.
163
 of the Masnavi, a lover knocks on the door of his beloved’s house. She asks, ‘Who is it?’ and
he responds, ‘It is I!’ consequently, his beloved turns him away. After the lover becomes
‘cooked by the flame of separation’, his experience makes him aware of his mistake and opens
his eyes to reality. The lover returns to the house and knocks again on the door; this time, when
the beloved asks, ‘Who is it?’ he replies, ‘It is you!’ admitting that two selves, Is, cannot
coexist in one. In a subsequent story of the Masnvai, someone is invited to be hosted by Joseph;
the best gift the guest can think of offering Joseph is a mirror, for only a mirror can represent
Joseph’s beauty. A mirror is one of Rumi’s common metaphors for the soul; he finishes his
‘Song of the Reed’ with an image of a mirror incapable of ‘revealing’ the Truth, for it is
blackened by the rust of attachment to phenomenal existence. The rusty mirror can only
become renewed through burnishing and breaking its attachments through Love, and only when
it has become thoroughly clear, it becomes capable of receiving and reflecting the Light of
God. Rumi adopts the image of a mirror being burnished by the love of the Other from Attar,
which I will discuss later in this chapter.

Rumi’s ‘Song of the Reed’ depicts the longing of the Sufi self for a reunion with the
godhead, and Jones portrays this feeling in his translation; please see the poem’s complete
text,84 Jones’s translation of it; and a literal translation of the poem below. The distiches have
also been numbered to make addressing, discussing, and analysing them easier.

Literal Translation Jones’s Translation Persian Text

1. Hear as the reed narrates, of Hear, how yon reed in sadly pleasing ‫بشنش این نی چش اک ی میکن‬
Separation it complains. tales; Departed bliss and present woe
bewails! ‫ا ج اییه حک ی میکن‬

2. Since I have been cut off from With me, from native banks untimely ‫کز نیس ت مرا ببری هان‬
the reed-bed by my outcry, men torn, ‫ن لی هان‬ ‫در نفیرم مرد و‬
and women lamented. Love-warbling youths and soft-ey’d
virgins mourn.
3. I seek a breast, torn by O! Let the heart, by fatal absence rent, ‫سینه نشاهم ارحه ارحه ا فراق‬
Separation; to convey the Feel what I sing, and bleed when I ‫ت بگشیم ارح درد اا ی ق‬
description of the pain of lament;
Aspiration’.

84
The text is obtained from: Rumi, Masnavi Manavi, Reynold A. Nicholson (ed.), (Tehran:
Por Javadi, 1985).
164
4. Whoever is away from their Who roams in exile from his parent ‫هر کسی کش دور م ن ا اصل‬
Source [Origin] shall seek after bow’r, Pants to return, and chides each ‫نشیش‬
the times spent with it. ling’ring hour. ‫ب جشی رو گ ر وصل نشیش‬

5. Lamenting in many gatherings, I My notes, in circles of the grave and gay, ‫من به هر ج عی ی ن ال ا م‬
became acquainted with the Have hail’d the rising, cheer’d the closing ‫جف ب ح ال و نش ح ال ا م‬
vicious and the virtuous. day.

6. Whoever became my companion Each in my fond affections claim’d a ‫هر کسی ا ظن نشد ا ی ر من‬
in his/her mind, the secrets part, ‫ا درو من نجس اسرار من‬
buried in me did not find. But none discern’d the secret of my heart

7. The Secrets do not lie far from What though my strains and sorrows flow ‫سر من ا ن لهٔ من دور نیس‬
my lament; yet, the eyes and the combin’d! ‫لیک چشم و گش را آ نشر نیس‬
ears do not have the Light. Yet ears are slow, and carnal eyes are
blind.
8. The body is not separated from Free through each mortal form the spirits ‫تن مس شر نیس‬ ‫تن ج و ج‬
the Soul; yet, no one is Ordered roll, ‫لیک کس را دی ج دس شر نیس‬
to see the soul.
But sight avails not. Can we see the
soul?’
9. The reed notes are fire, not Such notes breath’d gently from yon ‫آتشس این ب نگ ن ی و نیس ب د‬
simple wind; whoever not vocal frame: ‫هر که این آتش ن ارد نیس ب د‬
having this Fire should not exist.
Breath’d said I? no; ‘t was all enliv’ning
flame.
10. The Fire which has fallen in the Tis love, that fills the reed with warmth ‫آتش عشقس ک ن ر نی ف د‬
reed is of Love; the burning divine; ‫جشاش عشقس ک ن ر می ف د‬
sparkle of the wine is of Love.
‘Tis love, that sparkles in the racy wine.
11. The reed is the compotator and Me, plaintive wand’rer from my peerless ‫نی حریف هرکه ا ی ری بری‬
companion of those separated maid, ‫پردهه یش پردهه ی م دری‬
from their beloved; its melody
tore apart our veils. The reed has fir’d, and all my soul
betray’d.
12. No one has seen anything as He gives the bane, and he with balsam ‫ه چش نی هری و تری قی کی دی‬
poisonous yet soothing as the cures; ‫ه چش نی دمس و مش قی کی دی‬
reed; no one has seen anything
as eager and intimate as the Afflicts, yet sooths; impassions, yet
reed. allures.

13. The reed narrates the tale of a Delightful pangs his am’rous tales ‫میکن‬ ‫نی ح یث راه پر نش‬
Path full of bloodshed; it recalls prolong; ‫قصهه ی عشق مجنش میکن‬
the love story of Majnoon. And Laili’s frantick lover lives in song.

165
14. None is the confidant of this Not he, who reasons best, this wisdom ‫محرم این هش جز بیهش نیس‬
Wisdom but the insane; none but knows; ‫مر ب را مش ری جز گش نیس‬
the ear buys what the Tongue Ears only drink what rapt’rous tongues
sells. disclose.
15. My days have faded in grief; Nor fruitless deem the reed’s heart- ‫در غم م رو ه بیگ ه ا‬
days have become piercing pain: ‫رو ه ب سش ه ه راه ا رو ه‬
accompanied with burns of the See sweetness dropping from the parted
Separation. cane.
16. If the days are passed, fear not! Alternate hope and fear my days divide; ‫نیس‬ ‫رو ه گر رف گش رو ب‬
Let them leave; You, the most I courted Grief, and Anguish was my ‫تش ب ای آنک چش تش پ‬
Unique and Pure, abide. bride.

17. Anyone’s thirst can be satisfied, [Jones has not translated this distich.] ‫هر که جز م هی آبش سیر ا‬
but the fish. It would be a long ‫دیر ا‬ ‫هرکه بی رو یس رو‬
day in misery for one without
their daily bread.
18. The inexperienced cannot [Jones has not translated this distich.] ‫در نی ب ح ش پخ ه هیچ ن م‬
comprehend the state of the ‫پس سخن کشت ه ب ی والسالم بن‬
experienced; therefore, keep
your speech short [for those
unable to understand]; the end!
19. Boy! Tear apart your chains! Be Vig’rous youth! Be free; be nobly bold: ‫بگسل ب آ اد ای پسر‬
free! Shall chains confine you, though they ‫ر‬ ‫چن ب ای بن سیم و بن‬
For how long do you want to be blaze with gold?
enslaved by silver and gold?
20. Suppose that you have exploited Go; to your vase the gather’d main ‫گر بریزی بحر را در کش های‬
the reaches of the seven seas in convey: ‫چن گنج قس یک رو های‬
an urn, how much of it will be What were your stores? The pittance of a
your pittance? day!
21. The urn of the miser’s eye never New plans for wealth your fancies would ‫پر نش‬ ‫کش ٔه چشم حریص‬
has become filled; a invent; Yet shells, to nourish pearls, must
discontented shell has never lie content. ‫ت ص ف ق نع نش پر در نش‬
been filled with a pearl.
22. One, whose garment becomes The man, whose robe love’s purple ‫ا‬ ‫هر که را ج مه عشقی چ‬
torn by love, becomes pure of arrows rend ‫ا‬ ‫او حرص و عیب کلی پ‬
greed and fault. Bids av’rice rest, and toils tumultuous
end.
23. O our exalted love, O our Hail, heav’nly love! True source of ‫سشدای م‬ ‫ا د ب ای عشق نش‬
Healer, be happy! endless gains! ‫ای طبیب ج له عل ه ی م‬
Thy balm restores me, and thy skill
sustains.

166
24. O the remedy of vanity and Oh, more than Galen learn’d, than Plato ‫ای دوای نخشت و ن مشس م‬
pride, you [love] are our Plato wise ‫ای تش افالطش و ج لینشس م‬
and our Galen. My guide, my law, my joy supreme arise!

25. The earthen body is elevated to Love warms this frigid clay with mystick ‫ا‬ ‫جسم ن ا عشق بر افال‬
the heavens, by love; the fire, ‫کشه در رقص آم و چ ال ا‬
mountain began to dance nimbly And dancing mountains leap with young
[for love.] desire.

26. O lover, the love became the [Jones has not translated this distich.] ‫عشق ج طشر آم ع اق‬
soul of Mount Sinai; it became ‫طشر مس و نر مشسی ص عق‬
drunk while Moses fell
unconscious.
27. Since I [the reed] was matched Blest is the soul, that swims in seas of ‫ب لب دمس نشد گر جف ی‬
harmoniously with sympathizing love, ‫ه چش نی من گف نیه گف ی‬
lips, I am able to speak of what And long the life sustain’d by food
the reed speaks of. above.
28. One, separated from the With forms imperfect can perfection ‫هر که او ا هم ب نی ا ج ا‬
companion, although dwell?
harmonious, will become Here pause, my ring; and thou, vain ‫ا گرچه دارد ص نشا‬ ‫بی ب‬
voiceless. world, farewell. 85
29. When the flower is gone, and --- [From this point forward, Jones has ‫چشنکه گل رف و گلس درگذا‬
the garden dies, the nightingale not translated the rest of the poem.] ‫نشنشی ا پس بلبل سر گذا‬
will not chant.

30. All is the Beloved and the lover --- ‫ج له معششقس و ع اق پردها‬
is the veil; the Beloved is alive ‫ن ه معششقس و ع اق مردهای‬
and the lover [without the
beloved] is dead.
31. Should one not be concerned for --- ‫چش نب ا عشق را پروای او‬
it [Love], one becomes like a ‫او چش مرغی م ن بی پر وای او‬
flightless bird separated from it
[unable to fly].
32. How could I have maintained in --- ‫من چگشنه هش دارم پیش و پس‬
my past and will maintain my ‫چش نب ا نشر ی رم پیش و پس‬
future if the Light of my
Beloved did not or will not be
shining upon me?
33. The Love desires for this advice --- ‫عشق نشاه کین سخن بیرو بشد‬
to be heard; otherwise, [even ‫آینه غ نبشد چش بشد‬
something as revealing as] a
mirror cannot reveal the advice.

85
This is the last line in Jones’s translation.
167
34. Do you know why your mirror ‘’ ‫نیس‬ ‫دانی چرا غ‬ ‫آین‬
does not reveal it? For its ‫نیس‬ ‫انکه نگ ر ا رنش م‬
surface is not as reflective as
Love.

Regarding Jones’s translation of the poem, two points should be mentioned: first,
Jones has translated twenty-seven distiches for the poem while it is commonly believed to have
thirty-four distiches. Also, the distich that Jones translated as number twenty-five is commonly
considered the seventeenth distich of the Persian text. It is quite probable that the manuscript
Jones initially used as the primary source of this translation contained twenty-seven distiches.
Furthermore, considering the nature of Persian poetry and its forms, mainly the order of the
distiches does not bear a considerable significance apart from in a few cases,86 and therefore,
usually, the scribes did not pay enough attention to the ordering. By the time Jones was in India,
he had owned at least two copies of the first volume of Rumi’s Masnavi: an illustrated copy
that is now catalogued as RSPA 34 by the British Library and another copy catalogued as RSPA
35. Both the copies contain many annotations by Jones, either analysing the verses or simply
stating his opinion. In both manuscripts, the ‘Song of the Reed’ is scribed as its modern
canonical version: with thirty-four distiches and in the order I translated. However, the
eighteenth distich of the modern version of the poem, which Jones has moved to the end of his
translation – stating ‘therefore keep your speech short; the end!’ – can serve as the finishing
line of the poem. This fact, alongside the fact that the distiches Jones did not translate, serve as
more poetic reiterations of what already has been discussed in the poem is the reason for Jones’s
not publishing a complete translation of the poem. The second matter that should be discussed
is that in his translations, Jones quite often interpolated the poem through omissions and
insertions of phrases. However, he always stayed faithful to the spirit of the poem. The changes
in his translations were generally made to introduce a completely foreign and alien idea or
image, usually from the Orient, to his readers in the Occident. After all, he was ‘a far-seeing
man who seeks to connect the unknown to the known’87 as Goethe described him. In some
cases, Jones’s translational interpolations explicitly state what was implicitly stated in the
source text or to further explain a concept to his readers. In addition, those interpolations

86
For example in the ghazals, the first and the last distich of the poem are quite important for
the first one sets the rhyming scheme of the whole poem and the last one is where the poet
mentions his own pen name.
87
Franklin, ‘Orientalist Jones’, 37.
168
sometimes changed the Oriental imagery of the poem to something more familiar to the
Occidental reader. Most importantly, Jones’s interpolations made his translations more poetic
for the eighteenth-century European taste. His interpolations in Rumi’s ‘Song of the Reed’ will
be examined in the following few pages.

The first instance of explicitly mentioning an implied concept of the poem occurs in the
first distich of the translation; Jones inserted that the reed’s tone is both ‘sadly-pleasing’ and
‘bewailing’; furthermore, Jones uses ‘departed bliss’ for Separation. In the first part of the
second distich, Jones uses ‘native banks’ for ‫ نیس‬neyestān, literally meaning ‘the land of the
reed’, signifying a canebrake or a reed-bed; this change probably has been made to enhance
the poetics of the translation. In the second hemistich of the second distich, Rumi states that
the ‘men and women’, who have heard the song of the reed, have lamented the separation; in
Jones’s translation, he states that ‘Love-warbling youths and soft-ey’d virgins have mourned’
the separation. While Jones’s phraseology enhances the poetics of the translation, it undermines
the universality of the population Rumi is referring to. Since the Sufis believe that Love is the
essence of all beings and for all beings, therefore Rumi uses ‫ مرد و‬mard o zan ‘[every] man
and woman’; however, while Jones sacrifices this aspect for enhancing the poetics, he
associates purity, through the usage of the words youth and virgins, with the audience of the
reed. An intriguing fact is that one of the theories about the etymology of the word Sufi traces
it to the word ‫ صف‬safā, ‘purity’ and therefore Sufi means a ‘pure person’. Although scholars
do not have a firm stance on the meaning and etymology of the word Sufi, the theory relating
the word to ‘purity’ is widely discussed by scholars from an early age; for example, Al-
Qushayri (986-1073) mentions the theory in his writings.88 Jones’s awareness of the theory is
not for certain; he mainly considered Sufis as free thinkers rather than ‘pure individuals’.
Another reason for Jones’s undermining of the population of the listeners of the reed, which is
highly probable, lies within the sixth distich of the poem in which Rumi explicitly states that
not everyone who has become a companion to the reed has comprehended its true message:
‘Whoever became my companion in his/her mind, the secrets buried in me did not find.’ Jones
has translated the distich to ‘Each in my fond affections claim’d a part, But none discern’d the
secret of my heart’.

88
Al-Qushayri, Resaleye Ghoshiriyye, Badiozzaman Forouzanfar (ed.), (Tehran: Elmi-
Farhangi Publications, 1995), 467.
169
 Arguably, one of the most well-known distiches of the poem amongst Persian speakers
is the third one; while it literally means ‘I seek a breast, torn apart by the Separation, to convey
the pain of the Aspiration’, Jones translated it as ‘O! Let the heart, by fatal absence rent, Feel
what I sing, and bleed when I lament’. A very delicate fine point is hidden in the first hemistich
of this distich which does not seem to have been mentioned by anyone before: Rumi states that
the reed asks for a breast which has become ‫ ارحه ارحه‬sharhe sharhe by Separation. ‫ارحه‬
sharhe literally means ‘piece, shred’; the first interpretation of the line, which all scholars agree
on, is that Rumi has utilized visceral physicality to depict the pain a separated lover feels from
the beloved: ‘I seek a breast, shredded by Separation.’ However, there is an alternative
interpretation of the line: in addition to the Quran, Rumi was familiar with different languages,
particularly Arabic. While narrating the story of Moses, the Quran states that he asked God:

[Moses] said, ‘My Lord, expand for me my chest (25) And ease for me my task (26)
And untie the knot from my tongue (27) That they may understand my speech (28)’89
In this passage, Moses asks God to ‫ ا ْا َر ْح‬eshrah, ‘expand’ his chest in order for him to be able
to convey God’s message, and Rumi’s reed uses the exact same words and imagery as Moses.
The fact that Rumi quite often used Moses in his poetry alongside the fact that there are two
other distiches in ‘The Song of the Reed’ which contain allusions to the tale of Moses further
validates the idea that Rumi is alluding to the Quranic passage by using the term ‫ارحه ارحه‬
sharhe sharhe. Considering this alternative meaning, the hemistich can be translated to ‘I seek
a breast, expanded by Separation;’ Although Jones’s copy of the Masnavi, RSPA 35, does not
contain any annotations about this particular pun and allusion, he was interested in puns and
particularly puns that had separate meaning in two different languages. As discussed in the
previous chapter, one of the reasons for Jones’s admiration of poets such as Jami, Sadi, and
Amir Khosrow was their command over language as well as their usage of puns in two different
languages. What Rumi did in this distich is a pun between Arabic and Persian as well as making
an allusion to the Quran. Surely if Jones had noticed this, his fascination with Rumi would have
been further increased. Regarding the second part of the distich, Jones’s translation, ‘Feel what
I sing, and bleed when I lament’, somewhat differs from the Persian text, which literally states,
‘to describe of the pain of the Aspiration’. Jones’s translation could have been inspired by one
of Sadi’s most famous lines: ‘When a member [of a body] is in pain, other members shall not

89
The Quran 20:25-8:
﴾۲۸﴿ ‫) یَ ْفقَ ُهشا قَ ْشلِي‬۲۷( ‫س نِي‬ ُ ‫﴾ َوا ْحلُ ْل‬۲۶﴿ ‫س ِْر لِي أَ ْم ِري‬
َ ‫ع ْق َة مِ ْن ِل‬ َ ‫’قَ َش َربّ ِ ا ْا َرحْ لِي‬
ّ َ‫) َوی‬۲۵( ‫ص ِْري‬
170
be in peace’.90 The concept Sadi and Jones refer to here is called ‫ وح ت وجشد‬vahdat-e vojōd, the
‘Unity of Existence/Being’ which asserts that ‫ ه ه اوس‬hame ōst, ‘All is Him/Her’. Many poets
who believe in the concept have used the metaphor of a body for the universe since everything
is One and Connected. While Rumi mentions the Unity of Being in his poetry, this line does
not bear any sign of it; however, Jones inserts the concept implicitly in his translation.

The fourth distich of Jones’s translation utilizes visceral physicality, ‘Pants to return’,
like Rumi’s third distich, ‘a chest torn apart’. Through this insertion, Jones conveyed the
significance of Rumi’s stylistic usage of the figure of speech. It might be worth mentioning
that Rumi has used the same image, panting out of separation, which Jones inserts; as an
example, Rumi states: ‘Pant, Pant, I have lamented your separation.’91 The other divergence
within Jones’s translation of the fourth distich is his usage of the phrase ‘parent bow’r’ while
Rumi’s text uses the word ‫ اصل‬asl, meaning ‘root, source, origin, principle’ in Persian. Rumi
depicts the longing of the mystic lover for the Beloved, the Ultimate Source of Existence. An
intriguing fact about the word ‫ اصل‬asl is that it refers to ‘predecessor, parent’ in Arabic. As
was discussed in the first chapter, Jones had learned Arabic before Persian and probably had
considered the Arabic meaning of the word while translating the distich. Although familiar
with the word’s meaning in Persian, Rumi’s intention of using it, and its significance in Sufism,
Jones assumes the word’s Arabic meaning through which he portrays an Abrahamic image of
the Garden of Eden for his Western readers. Jones’s depiction fits perfectly with the message
of the line: the separated lover seeks a reunion with the Beloved, the Source of Existence.
Another phrase Jones inserted to his translation of the distich is ‘chides each ling’ring hour’;
the phrase, blaming the passage of time in Separation, is harmonious with the picture both poets
are depicting and can be suggested from the poem; however, it is not available in the Persian
text explicitly. A reason for Jones’s insertion of a blaming sense into this distich could probably
be his misinterpretation of the phrase ‫ ب جشی‬bāz jōyad. The term comes from the stem ‫ب جس ن‬
bāz jostan, which generally and literally means ‘to re-search’; however, sometimes the term
gains a negative connotation signifying an unpleasant search such as frisking or interrogating,
for example, ‫ ب جش‬bāz jō, means ‘an interrogator’.

90
Sadi, Koliyat-e Sadi, Mohammad Ali Foroughi (ed.), (Tehran: Hermes,1961), 31:
‫دگر عضشه را ن ن قرار‬ ‫چش عضشی به درد آورد رو گ ر‬
91
Rumi, Divan of Shams-e Tabrizi, 4108:
‫نفس نفس دهام ن لهه فرق تش‬
171
 In the second part of the seventh distich of Jones’s translation, he stated ‘ears are slow,
and carnal eyes are blind’ rather than Rumi’s text which is ‘the eyes and the ears do not have
the Light [to perceive]’. Through the changes Jones makes here, he tries to elaborate the
implicit connotation of ‫ نشر‬nōr, literally meaning ‘light’ and/or ‘luminance’; it figuratively
signifies the spiritual ability of the perception of the metaphysical, which is a frequent metaphor
in Eastern and Islamic writings. This attempt is made in order to foreshadow the next distich,
number eight, where Rumi states that having the ability to perceive the Divine is not ‘Ordered’;
Jones conveys this by stating, ‘Free through each mortal form the spirits roll, But sight avails
not. Can we see the soul [with carnal eyes]?’

The next Jonesian interpolation occurs in the thirteenth distich: by changing

‫ ح یث‬Hadith, a ‘narration’ to ‘delightful pangs’, Jones creates a parallel with the ‘sadly-
pleasing’ phrase he already inserted in the first distich. Although this change makes Jones’s
translation more poetic, it undermines Rumi’s personification of the reed. In addition, through
this change, Jones introduced a Westernized ‘fin’amour’ oxymoron, where the adjective seems
to be opposed to the noun, to describe the joyous sorrow of being in love. Here, as elsewhere,
he is attempting to find points of contact between West and East. In another case, the fifteenth
distich, Rumi states: ‘Days have faded in our grief; times have become a companion of our
pain’, Jones condenses the whole line into half of his distich ‘Nor fruitless deem the reed’s
heart-piercing pain’. In the second hemistich, Jones added, ‘See sweetness dropping from the
parted cane’ to reiterate the ‘sadly pleasing’ ‘joy of the pain of the Aspiration’ caused by the
Separation. In the thirteenth distich, Jones also changes ‘Majnoon’ to ‘Laili’s frantick lover;’
The reason for this change is due to the fact that if Majnoon had not fallen in love with Laili,
he would not have been immortalized in the Persian and Sufi literature; in other words,
Majnoon would not have been Majnoon if he was not Laili’s frantick lover. Through switching
Majnoon to ‘Laili’s frantick lover’, Jones tries to emphasize that Majnoon, or the lover’s Self,
is nothing without the Love of Laili, the Beloved Other.
The nineteenth distich of Jones’s translation is ‘Go; to your vase the gather’d main
convey: What were your stores? The pittance of a day!’ Rumi’s Persian distich associated with
the translation literally translates to ‘Suppose that you have stored the seven seas in an urn,
how much of it you need to use daily?’ Rumi uses the metaphor of the ‘seven seas’ to
demonstrate the material riches and spoils of the world, notably those achieved through
conquering, exploitation, and possibly colonization. It can be asserted that considering ‘main’
in connection with the mainland, main sea, or the Spanish Main makes the imagery utilized in
172
Jones’s translation and the Persian distich similar. In his translation, Jones has utilized a poetic
periphrasis for the sea, ‘main’, which was common in literature during the Augustan period.
Rumi intends to convey to his readers that no matter what one collects, at the end of the day,
one is not able to use more than his/her needs; in other words, one should have contentment.
Rumi’s distich also reiterates this point by stating that a shell can only produce a precious pearl
when it is content to tolerate the invasion of an irritant grain of sand. This interpretation is in
accord with mystical beliefs, the burdens and irritations of love act as a purifying agent. Jones’s
translation of the nineteenth distich could convey another meaning: you have not gathered more
than the pittance of a day [so, you should probably gather more!]. Although Jones’s translation,
in this case, seems contradictory to Rumi’s poem, in fact, he states the same point as the poet.
For Jones, while introducing his translation, states that the Sufis’ desire is to ‘circulate the cup,
but no material goblet;’ since ‘all things are spiritual in their sect.’92 and therefore, one’s
‘gather’d main convey’ which according to Jones will not suffice ‘the pittance of a day’ is one’s
spiritual gathering, rather than wealth and materialistic goods. In addition, Jones’s translation
of the twentieth distich, ‘New plans for wealth your fancies would invent; Yet shells, to nourish
pearls, must lie content’, explicitly mentions Rumi’s point; moreover, later in the translation,
Jones clarifies that ‘heav’nly love! Is the true source of endless gains.’ Thus, while Rumi
advises his readers to be content in the nineteenth distich, Jones advises them to be content
only in materialistic goods but not in spiritual matters. Intriguingly similar to Jones, Rumi on
many different occasions has prescribed the same:

‘I was making sacks, burning in the greed of gold; I stopped this begging when I saw
the Treasure93 waiting to ambush me!…[then he describes the treasure as:] the
inebriation of life and the universe, the beloved of the eye and the mouth; the destructor
of merchants and markets, the pillager of reverence and religion!’94

92
Jones, The Works, 4: 230.
93
The treasure Rumi speaks of here will be mentioned while discussing the tale of ‘The
Sheikh of Sanaan and the Christian Girl’
94
Rumi, Divan of Shams-e Tabrizi, 2339:
‫تر گ ارویی کنم چش گنج دی م در ک ین‬ ‫من کیسهه می دون م در حرص ر می سشن م‬
…
‫یغ چی تقشا و دین‬ ‫ویرانی کسب و دک‬ ‫معششقه چشم و ده‬ ‫جه‬ ‫سرمس ی ج‬
173
 As mentioned earlier, Rumi’s first reference to Moses is an implied allusion to the
prophet’s Quranic tale in the third distich of the ‘Song of the Reed;’ the subsequent references
to Moses, however, are quite explicit appearing in the twenty-fifth and twenty-sixth distiches:

‘The earthen body is elevated to the heavens, for love; the mountain began to dance
nimbly [for love.]
O lover, the love became the soul of Mount Sinai; yet, while the mountain was drunk,
Moses fell unconscious.’

Jones has translated the following as:

‘Love warms this frigid clay with mystick fire,

And dancing mountains leap with young desire.’

Jones’s translation of the distich is shorter than Rumi’s original, yet by using ‘clay’, the
translation maintains a specific biblical connotation to ‘Then the Lord God formed the man of
dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a
living creature.’95 Therefore, although the translation is much shorter than the original text,
Jones has not only managed to convey the religious connotations of the original, but also he
established a connection between the Sufi’s elevating divine love, which is the source of life
and the Biblical Lord’s ‘breath of life.’ The second distich of Rumi’s poem, which Jones has
encapsulated in the lines mentioned above, contains another allusion to the Quranic tale of
Moses and a quotation from the Quran:

When Moses came to the appointment, his Lord started speaking to him; Moses asked:
Lord, show yourself to me so that I can look at you. [God] said: you can never see me;
however, look at the mountain, if it could stay still you will be able to see me soon.
Then, his God manifested himself to the mountain and it was demolished, and Moses
had fallen unconscious.96

The Arabic Qur’anic phrase ‫صعِق‬

َ ‫سى‬
َ ‫ ن ََّر ُمش‬kharra Mōsā sāeghā, ‘Moses had fallen unconscious’
is quoted by Rumi in the Persian distich; it also serves as the rhyme of the distich. Furthermore,
Moses is one of the prophets who was mentioned quite often by Rumi, and as will be explained
in the next chapter, Jones was interested in Rumi’s conceptions of the life of Moses. Yet,

95
Genesis 2:7.
96
The Quran 7: 143:
ُ‫ظ ْر ِإلَى ْال َج َب ِل فَإِ ِ ا ْس َقَ َّر َم َك نَه‬ ُ ‫سى ِل ِ یقَ تِنَ َو َكلَّ َ هُ َربُّهُ قَ َش َربّ ِ أ َ ِرنِي أ َ ْن‬
ُ ‫ظ ْر ِإلَیْكَ قَ َش لَ ْن ت ََرانِي َولَك ِِن ا ْن‬ َ ‫’ َولَ َّ َج َء ُمش‬
‘… ‫صعِق‬ َ ‫سى‬ ًّ َ ْ َّ َ
َ ‫ف ت ََرانِي فَل َّ ت َ َجلى َربُّهُ لِل َجبَ ِل َجعَلهُ دَك َون ََّر ُمش‬ َ ‫س ْش‬َ َ‫ف‬
174
although Jones has removed the allusions, his translation conveys the whole point of Rumi’s
distiches which is the lover’s inability to perceive the Ultimate Beloved in all its glory. To do
so, Jones has added ‘With forms imperfect can perfection dwell?’ in addition to using the same
imagery as Rumi: the leaping and ‘dancing mountains’. Jones was quite familiar with the life
of Moses and its Quranic narration; as I mentioned in the analysis of Jones’s Notebook, he
quotes a phrase of Moses’s story from the Quran.97 The reason behind Jones’s omission of the
references to Moses could be sourced from the fact that his translations were aimed at European
readers in the second half of the eighteenth century: an era of secularization and deistic views.
Jones’s deistic views and emphasis upon reason could be observed while he was studying
Sanskrit. He fostered one of his most outstanding achievements, the idea of a common source
for all Indo-European languages, in his philologer passage in the ‘Third Anniversary
Discourse.’98 One of the many impacts of Jones’s linguistic theory, all Indo-European
‘languages sprung from some common source’, was replacing the religious and mythological
approaches to linguistics for a more scientific one; a similar approach can be observed in his
translation of ‘The Song of the Reed’. Apart from removing the religious/mythological image
of Moses while still conveying the moral of the poem, he also removes other references to God
and makes the entity as well as the poem more earthly. For example, in the eighth distich, Rumi
literally states that: ‘yet no one is Ordered to see the soul.’ Jones has removed the ‘Order’ from
his translation: ‘But sight avails not. Can we see the soul?’

Attar’s Conference of the Birds and Sufi Poetics

The third book in Attar’s Mokhtār-nāmeh, The Conference of the Birds, is arguably its
most famous narrative; the work presents a more detailed picture of the journey of the
Sufi/Romantic self. The narrative is a fable about birds, led by the hoopoe, which set forth on
a quest to search for the King of the birds, Simorgh. The Conference of the Birds intermingles
two significant themes: the first is the assembly of the birds to choose the worthiest as their
leader; through this, Attar introduces a set of standards for an individual worthy of being a
spiritual leader. The second theme is the birds’ journey, or the path a Sufi has to take, to the

97
On BL, APAC, MSS Eur. C 274, f. 15, Jones annotates ‫ هذا الفراق بینی و بینکم‬hāz-alfarāgh beini
va beinekom, ‘this is the separation between me and you’. It is a quotation from Quran 18:78,
which is about Moses’s journey and meeting a mystic named ‫ نضر‬Khezr..
98
Jones, The Works, 3: 34.
175
distant seat of the bird-king, or the Beloved. The quest takes the birds through seven valleys
with hundreds of difficulties; undergoing many trials, the birds try to free themselves of what
is precious to them and empty their hearts from anything but the Beloved, some even lose their
lives in the journey. Eventually, thirty birds survive the labours and reach their destination.
However, they become aware of Simorgh’s Unreachability; at this point, Attar brings an
affirmation of his beliefs to the epic narrative: one shall reach the Sought-Supreme-Being only
and only within one’s self; he expressed this idea through a simple yet ingenious pun: the ‫سی‬
‫ مرغ‬si morgh, ‘the thirty birds’ realize that ‫ سی رغ‬Simorgh, ‘the bird-king’ is none other than
themselves. It is pivotal to consider that this very concept that human beings united manifest
God is one of the main reasons extreme religious zealots and ascetics consider the Shias and
the Sufis as heretics and have oppressed them throughout history. As I was analysing the ‘Song
of the Reed’, its thirty-first distich caught my eye in which Rumi has used the same method of
punning which Attar used. Furthermore, like Attar, Rumi utilized the image of a bird in the
distich: ‘Should one not be concerned for it [Love], one becomes like a featherless bird
separated from it [unable to fly].’ The pun lies within the phrase ‫ بی پروای او‬bi parvāye ō,
‘concerned for it’ and ‫ بی پر وای او‬bi-par vāye ō, ‘featherless separated from it’. In many
different cases, Rumi has used the ideas of Attar’s Conference of the Birds; as an example,
Rumi identifies himself with the hoopoe: ‘In the Solomonic Love, I am the mate [sympathizing
leader] of the birds.’99

Scholars such as Forouzanfar have traced the themes of Attar’s The Conference of the
Birds to other Persian Sufis such as the Resālat ol-ṭayr, ‘The Treatises of the Birds’ of
Avicenna (980-1037) and the writings of Ghazali (1058-1111).100 However, contrasting
Ghazali’s version, in Attar’s The Conference of the Birds the leader of the birds, or their sage
in Sufi terms, is a hoopoe which can be interpreted as an allusion to the Quranic tale of Solomon
and his messenger, the hoopoe.101 The other contrasting factor between Attar’s version of the
narrative and that of others, which is quite essential, is that Attar states that the birds are not of

99
Rumi, Divan of Shams-e Tabrizi, 1927:
‫در عشق سلی نی من ه م مرغ نم‬
100
Badiozzaman Forouzanfar, Biography, Criticism, and Analysis of the Works of Attar,
(Tehran: Dehkhoda Book Store, 1961), 336-45.
101
The Quran 27: 22:
‫س َبإ ِبنَ َبإ َیقِین‬ ْ ِ‫غی َْر َبعِی فَقَ َش أ َ َحط ُ ِب َ لَ ْم تُح‬
َ ‫ط ِب ِه َو ِجئْ ُكَ مِ ن‬ َ ‫فَ َ ك‬
َ ‫َث‬

‘But the hoopoe stayed not long and said, ‘I have obtained what you [Solomon] have
not, and I have come to you from Sheba with certain news’.
176
the same feather or an anonymous flock, but instead they are portrayed as individuals with
different characteristics, vices, and virtues who are concerned with problems of the journey
from their own perspective. In the Conference of the Birds, Attar has utilized numerous
anecdotes and tales into the main plot of the narrative to explain more about the Sufi path and
develop the various themes of the narrative. One of the anecdotes is about a King who was so
beautiful that no one could bear looking at him; therefore, people have to look at him through
a mirror. Perhaps Rumi was influenced by this tale to use the same image in the final two
distiches of his ‘Song of the Reed’. Another narrative of The Conference of the Birds is ‘The
Tale of the Sheikh of Sanaan and the Christian Girl’; in the following few pages, this tale will
be analysed, and its immense significance for Sufis will be examined.

The Sheikh of Sanaan was an eminent ascetic living in Mecca for fifty years with four
hundred disciples, practising abstinence and penance; he had never transgressed any of the
traditional Islamic moral codes and laws. One night he dreams of himself in Rome bowing
down to an idol. Therefore, with his disciples, the Sheikh embarks on a journey to Rome in
order to find the interpretation of his dream. In Rome, he sees a Christian girl and the very
moment that the girl removes the veil from her face, every layer of the Sheikh’s body and soul
burns with love and desire. His disciples try to convince him not to pursue this love; yet, when
love enters one’s heart, there would seem to be no place left for logic and reason, and as a
result, the Sheikh’s disciples desert him. The girl eventually notices him and proposes a set of
labours for him: he has to renounce Islam by burning his cloak, wearing a Zunnar,102 herding
swine, converting to Christianity, burning the Quran, and drinking wine. In order to reach his
beloved other, the Sheikh transgresses all of the cultural, moral, and religious boundaries of
Islam. These labours strip him of his social, cultural, and religious status, making him ready to
be remoulded. Through them, much like the birds in the main plot of the book, the Sheikh loses
what is precious to him: the vanity and pride of his social and religious status; by this loss, the
Sheikh’s self is eliminated. Eventually, owing to the prayers of one of his most loyal disciples,
who did not accompany him on this particular journey, since he was on a journey of his own,

102
A distinctive belt or girdle wore by non-Muslims in order to differentiate themselves from
Muslims which was noted in the Pact of Umar. The pact contains a list of rights and
restrictions on non-Muslim whom through abiding it were granted security of their lives and
possessions. For more details see: Christian-Muslim Relations: A Bibliographical History
(600-900), David Richard Thomas, & Barbara Roggema (eds.), (Leiden: Brill, 2009), 359-61.
177
the prophet Mohammad intercedes103 and removes the rust from the Sheikh’s soul.104 The
Sheikh regains his senses, converts back to Islam, and returns to Mecca. At this point of the
story, he is remoulded into a true believer: he is not a Muslim hermit anymore: he has
experienced the love of the other, transgressed from his rigid beliefs, and consequently has
reached a perception which unifies all religions and faiths. After the Sheikh sets course back
to Mecca, the same fate happens to the Christian girl. She dreams that the Sun commands her
to follow her beloved. Having fallen in love with the Sheikh, the girl frantically follows him
and injures herself on her path towards her lover. In the meantime, the Sheikh hears a divine
voice, telling him to go back to his beloved. She finally meets him in a desert, somewhere
between Mecca and Rome, reunites with him, converts to Islam, and dies immediately.

The importance of this particular tale is firstly due to the part it plays in the general
theme of the Conference of the Birds: narrated by the hoopoe, it is the very last tale that
convinces the birds to pursue their journey to find their King. Secondly, consisting of four
hundred distiches, it is the most protracted tale of the book. Thirdly, it has been not only alluded
to but also reused by many Persian-speaking Sufis. To mention some examples of the allusions
to the tale, one can mention Hafez, whose poetry was described by Jones as ‘a higher key with
richer embellishments’ than ‘odes of SPENSER on Divine Love and Beauty’,105 stated: ‘Do
not think of infamy, if you are a traveller on the Path of Love; the Sheikh of Sanaan pawned
his clock to the tavern.’106 In India, Jones had purchased a copy of a commentary on the Divan
of Hafez; the manuscript is available in the British Library, catalogued as RSPA 57. Please see
the illustration below, which shows Jones marking the distich in which Hafez has alluded to
the tale of the Sheikh of Sanaan:

103
The idea of intercession is one of the major causes of tension between current Muslim
Sunnis, who believe that no one but God can help a person and asking anyone but Him/ Her is
blasphemy, and Shias and Sufis, who believe in intercession of the prophets and the saints.
104
This event could be another source of inspiration for Rumi’s image of a rusty mirror in the
‘Song of the Reed’.
105
Jones, The Works, 4: 216.
106
Hafez, Divan of Hafez, 174:
‫گر مری راه عشقی فکر ب ن می مکن ایخ صنع نرقه رهن ن نه ن ر داا‬
178
 Illustration 6, BL, APAC, RSPA 57, f. 66; Jones’s annotation on his ‘Commentary on the Divan of
Hafez.’

Vahshi Bafghi (1532 – 1583), whose tale of Shirin and Farhad reminded Jones of himself and
his wife,107 stated: ‘The Sheikh of Sanaan, whose heart was stolen by the Christian Idol, will
not exchange the ecstasy of the house of idols with hundreds Hajs.’108 Saib Tabrizi, whom
Jones mentioned in his essay ‘On the Mystical Poetry’ 109
and whose Divan was in Jones’s
library,110 stated: ‘My religious struggle is no less than the Sheikh of Sanaan; [hence,] I shall
not rest until I find an Infidel.’111 In addition, Shaikh Abu al-Faiz ibn Mubarak (1547-1595),
the King of Poets in Akbar’s (1542-1605) Mughal court, recounts the emperor’s offer to the
court and his eagerness in a ghazal as: ‘The desire remains in my twiddling imagination; just
like the locks of the Christian girl in the heart of the sage of Sanaan.’112 After Attar, Sufi poets
immortalized the tale of ‘The Sheikh of Sanaan and the Christian Girl’ to the extent that poets
contemporary with Jones still mentioned the tale.113 For example, Forooghi Bastāmi (1798 -
1857) stated: ‘The sage of Canaan [Jacob] has been told of the virtues of Josef; the Sheikh of
Sanaan has become ecstatic by the Christian love.’114

107
Franklin, ‘Orientalist Jones’, 325.
108
Vahshi Bafghi, Divan, Saeed Nafisi (ed.), (Tehran: Saales, 2013), 78:
‫ایخ صنع که دلش را ب ترس ببرد‬ ‫ن ه طشف صن خ نه به س حج قبشش‬
109
Jones, The Works, 4: 211-236, 232.
110
Jones, The Works, 13: 418.
111
Saib Tabrizi, Divan, 3: 400:
‫به که ننشینم پ ت ک فری پی ا کنم‬ ‫هیچ کم ا ایخ صنع نیس درد دین من‬
112
Abu al-Faiz ibn Mubarak Faizi, The Koliyate Faizi, E.D Arshad, & Vazir-al Hasan Abedi
(eds.), (Lahore: Punjab University, 1967), 80:
‫چش در لف ترس دش پیر صنع‬ ‫هشس م ن ه در پیچ و ت ب نی لم‬
‫بی مع کف اش به درگ ه سلط‬ ‫گرت این ت نّ ی واالس در سر‬
113
It might be worth mentioning that the tale is still being used in contemporary Iranian media.
114
Forooghi Bastāmi, Divan, Hosein Nakhaei (ed.), (Tehran: Amirkabir, 1957), 103:
‫ایخ صنع راطرب ا عشق ترس کردهان‬ ‫پیرکنع راقرارا حسن یشسف دادهان‬
179
 In order to thoroughly understand the impact of the tale on Persian culture and Sufism,
a detailed analysis of it would prove helpful. The most significant matter that should be
mentioned is that based on the tale, to an Oriental reader, the Sheikh represents the familiar
Self: a male Muslim ascetic who resides in Mecca and is highly respected due to his social and
cultural stature. The first exciting matter that comes to mind considering Attar’s portrayal of
the self is that although the Sheikh is a Muslim, some Abrahamic images are utilized to describe
him. For instance, he was able to heal the sick; Attar has used the term Messianic exhalation,
which is attributed to Jesus amongst Muslims, for him: ‘Whoever was ill or weak, would have
regained full health from his breath.’115 The distich is also an allusion to the story of Jesus
breathing life into statues mentioned in the Quran116 and the New Testament.117 On the other
hand, the Christian girl represents the alien Other: a female Christian residing in Rome who is
naturally beautiful and adored by society. Similar to the description of the Sheikh, although the
girl is a Christian, Zoroastrian and pagan imagery is used for her. For instance, terms such as
Magi and the act of going to a temple, which is generally considered non-Abrahamic, are
attributed to her.

The narrative speaks of medieval Muslim society and its understanding of religious
transgression as well as the power of love. Through the transgression and crossing of barriers,
the Sheikh will be provided with the opportunity for an alternative identity and spirituality.
Therefore, he is provided with the possibility of accepting the other and the reconstruction of
the Self. Since the reason for the Sheikh’s aberration is love, Attar welcomes the Sheikh’s

115
Attar, Mantegh ol-tayr, Garcin de Tassy (ed.), (Paris: Publié en Persan, 1857), 46:
‫هرکه بی ری و سس ی ی ف ی ا دم او تن درس ی ی ف ی‬
116
The Quran 5:110:
ْ‫س فِي ْال َ ْه ِ َو َك ْهال َو ِإذ‬ َ َّ‫وح ْالقُ ُِس ت ُ َك ِلّ ُم الن‬
ِ ‫علَ َٰى َوا ِل َتِكَ ِإذْ أَیَّ تُّكَ ِب ُر‬ َ ‫سى ابْنَ َم ْر َی َم اذْ ُك ْر ِن ْع َ ِي‬
َ ‫علَیْكَ َو‬ َ ‫َّللاُ َی عِی‬ َّ ‫اذْ قَ َش‬
ْ
‫طیْرا بِإِذنِي‬ ْ َّ
َ ُ ‫ین َك َه ْیئ َ ِة الطی ِْر بِإِذنِي فَ َنفُ ُخ فِی َه فَ َ ُكش‬ ّ ُ
ِ ‫نجی َل َوإِذ ت َْخلقُ مِ نَ ال ِط‬ْ ِ ‫اْل‬ ْ ْ
ِ ‫ب َوالحِ ْك َ ةَ َوال َّ ْش َراة َ َو‬ ْ
َ َ ‫علَّ ْ ُكَ ال ِك‬ َ
َ‫ت فَقَ َش الَّذِین‬ِ َ‫عنكَ ِإذْ ِجئْ َ ُهم ِب ْل َب ِیّن‬ َ ‫ل‬
َ ‫ِی‬ ‫ئ‬‫ا‬ ‫ْر‬ ‫س‬
َ ِ َ‫إ‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ن‬‫ب‬ ُ ْ
‫ف‬ َ ‫ف‬‫ك‬َ ْ ‫ذ‬ ‫إ‬
َِ‫و‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ن‬ْ ‫ذ‬ ‫إ‬ ‫ب‬ ‫َى‬ ‫ت‬‫ش‬ ْ
‫ال‬
ِ ِ َٰ ْ َ ُ ِ ‫ج‬‫ر‬ ْ
‫خ‬ ُ ‫ت‬ ْ ‫ذ‬ ‫إ‬
َِ‫و‬ ‫ِي‬ ‫ن‬ْ ‫ذ‬ ‫إ‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ص‬
ِِ َ َ ‫ْر‬ ‫ب‬َ ‫األ‬ْ ‫و‬ ‫ه‬
َ َ َ ْ
‫ك‬ َ ْ
‫األ‬ ‫ئ‬
ُ ‫ْر‬ ُ
ِ ‫َو‬
‫ب‬ ‫ت‬
َّ َٰ
‫َكف َُروا مِ ْن ُه ْم إِ ْ َهذَا إِال ِس ْح ٌر ُّمبِی ٌن‬
‘Then Allah said: “O Jesus, the son of Mary! Recall My favour to you and to your
mother. Behold! I strengthened you with the Holy Spirit, so that could speak to the
people in cradle as in maturity. Behold! I taught you the Book and Wisdom, the Torah
and the Bible. Behold! You made the figure of a bird out of clay and by My leave you
exhaled into it and it became a bird by My leave; you healed those who were born blind,
and the lepers, by My leave. And behold! you brought forth the dead by My leave. And
behold! I did restrain the Children of Israel from [violence to] you when you showed
them the clear Signs, and the unbelievers among them said: “This is nothing but evident
magic.”’
117
Christ’s raising of Jairus's daughter, see Matthew (5: 22–24; 35–43) and Luke (8: 41–42;
49–56) and for the youth of Nain, see Luke (7: 11–16).
180
subversion. His acceptance of the Sheikh’s transgression is because of Attar’s Sufi beliefs. Any
type of true love, even earthly and ordinary love, can be a gateway to Divine Love. Many
scholars of Sufism, including Leonard Lewisohn, believe that the love that occurs in the tale
transgresses both erotically and religiously; therefore, the hierarchy of the faithful believer and
the unfaithful infidel becomes subverted.118 This subversion enables the Self, the Sheikh, to
face the Other, the Christian girl, and through transgressing the boundaries established by the
religion, culture, and society transforms an ascetic Self into a true Sufi, a mystic of love. It
transforms asceticism to mysticism and the earthly love to the Divine Love and consequently
unites the Oriental Self with the Occidental Other. The question that comes to mind is whether
Jones had any other goal but to ‘profess eager desire, but with no carnal affection, and circulate
the cup, but no material goblet’; to reunite the Occidental Self with the Oriental Other.

Although there has been no explicit evidence of Jones’s familiarity with the tale in the
Conference of the Birds, Jones was familiar with its influences and effects on other poets as
well as on Oriental society. As the Persian language spread throughout India, the literature
gained its place in the Indian courts, and as a result, the Indians became familiar with the story
of ‘The Sheikh of Sanaan and the Christian Girl’ or the stories which imitated it. Jones was an
avid reader of Amir Khosrow Dehlavi (1253-1325), known as ‘the Sadi of India’ and ‘the
Indian Parrot’; many aspects of Amir Khosrow’s life attracted Jones. On many different
occasions, Amir Khosrow alludes to the tale in his poetry; for example: ‘Last night, our
preacher took the path to the house of the idols and the religion of wanderers again; the heart
which was bound to a rosary, became tied to a Zunnar; the head which was in a Mihrab (Muslim
altar), was brought to a cross.’119 Amir Khosrow’s ingenuity was founded on his syncretic
background: the different languages he knew and the various cultures he experienced while
growing up. This ingenuity enabled him to juxtapose different Selves and others to convey his
points, similar to what Attar did in his Khosrow-nāmeh. Jones also did the same in his poetic
translations to convey Oriental morals and concepts to his Occidental readers. A prime example
of this can be found in Jones’s Notebook, where Amir Khosrow introduces the self as a

118
Leonard Lewisohn, ‘Sufi Symbolism in the Persian Hermeneutic Tradition: Reconstructing
the Pagoda of ‘Attar’s Esoteric Poetics’, Attar and the Persian Sufi Tradition: The Art of
Spiritual Flight, Leonard Lewisohn, & Christopher Shackle (eds.), (London: I. B. Tauris,
2006), 255-308: 292.
119
Amir Khosrow Dehlavi, Divan, 799:
‫ ن نه یغ نه د‬، ‫دین قلن ر گرف‬ ‫اه م دو ب در ره ب پ نه د‬
‫سر که به محراب بشد پیش چلیپ نه د‬ ‫دش که به تسبیح داا در نم ن ر بس‬
181
Brahman, who has fallen in love with a Muslim Other, and therefore, much like Mohammad,
kicks down an idol.120 Attar’s pluralistic perception not only influenced poets and mystics but
also through poetry and mystical writings impacted upon Indo-Persian emperors such as Akbar
Shah, who used its message to promote the Sufi perception of the Self and the Other and the
idea of tolerance in their era. The verses of Hafez, advocating human sympathy and liberal
outlooks, influenced Akbar’s policy of tolerance in religious matters. Furthermore, his
childhood tutors, two Iranian Shias, made a significant contribution to his inclination towards
religious tolerance.121 Prince Dara Shokoh (1615-1659), Akbar Shah’s great-grandson, became
a scholar of mystical religious speculation and a poetic diviner of syncretic cultural interaction
among people of all faiths. Influenced by his Sufi tutors’ perception of the Other, Dara Shokoh
sought common mystical ground between Islam and Hinduism. With the assistance of Brahman
pandits in the holy city of Banaras, he translated fifty Upanishads (1657), and in the
introduction, he hypothesized that what is referred to as the ‫ ک ب ال کنش‬Ketāb al-maknōn, ‘The
Hidden Book’ in the Quran is none other than the Hindu sacred treatises, the Upanishads. Jones
was attracted to this work as he aimed to reconfigure the binaries of imperialism by
emphasising pluralism, cultural synthesis, and syncretism. Following Dara Shokoh, in order to
elaborate on the compatibility of Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism, Jones introduced his own
translation of the Isavasyam or Isa-Upanishad from Sanskrit. However, Jones reviews Dara
Shokoh’s Persian version of the Upanishad in the following terms:

[T]hough sublime, and majestick features of the original were discernible, in parts,
through folds of the Persian drapery; yet the Sanscrit names were so barbarously
written, and the additions of the translator has made the work so deformed, that I
resolved to postpone a regular perusal of it till I could compare it with the Sanscrit
original. 122
Franklin argues that although ‘such comments have been viewed as reflecting hostile
condescension towards Persian and Indo-Persian scholarship, … [t]hey simply reveal the
linguist’s enthusiastic desire to study the original’.123 There is, however, another point behind
Jones’s statement, which we will discuss later. Dara Shokoh’s most famous work, ‫مج ع البحرین‬
Majmaʿ ol-baḥrayn, ‘The Intermingling of the Two Seas’ was also devoted to a revelation of
the Sufi mystical and pluralistic affinities between Islam and Hinduism. Dara Shokoh’s Majmaʿ

120
BL, APAC, MSS Eur. C 274, f. 15. The quatrain was analysed in the second chapter of
this thesis.
121
Irfan Habib, Akbar and His India, (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1997), 81-5.
122
Jones, The Works, 13: 366.
123
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 346.
182
ol-baḥrayn argues that the fundamental tenets of Hinduism are identical with those of Islam,
and consequently, Hinduism is essentially monotheistic. Another book which Dara Shokoh
probably commissioned is entitled ‫مذاهب‬ ‫ دبس‬Dabestān-e mazāheb, ‘The School of the
Creeds.’ It should be mentioned that Jones and his contemporary scholars believed that the
Dabestan was composed by an author named Mohsen Fani, yet this hypothesis has been
rejected.124 Jones’s fascination with the Dabestan can be observed in a letter he wrote to John
Shore, on 24 June 1787, from Garden Reach near Calcutta:

[T]he Dabistan also I have read through twice with great attention; and both copies are
ready to be returned, as you shall direct. Mr. R. Johnson thinks he has a young friend
who will translate the Dabistan, and the greatest part of it would be very interesting to
a curious reader, but some of it cannot be translated. It contains more recondite learning,
more entertaining history, and more beautiful specimens of poetry, more ingenuity and
wit, more indecency and blasphemy, than I ever saw collected in a single volume; […]
On the whole, it is the most amusing and instructive book I ever read in Persian.125

About two years after this letter, in delivering the ‘Sixth Anniversary Discourse: On the
Persians’ to the Asiatic Society, on 19 February 1789, Jones acknowledges both his reliance
upon, and excitement with, the Dabestan: ‘A fortunate discovery, […] has at once dissipated
the cloud, and cast a gleam of light on the primaeval history of Iran and of the human race, of
which I had long despaired, and which could hardly have dawned from any other quarter.’126
Shortly after Jones’s statement, Francis Gladwin (d. 1813) translated and published parts of the
Dabestan in his periodical, The New Asiatic Miscellany.127 The intriguing fact about such
literary works, which includes Dara Shokoh’s Upanishads, The Intermingling of the Two Seas,
and the Dabestan is that while they discuss different religions and creeds, the idea of the
familiar and the alien concepts, the Self or the Other, are slightly changed or adapted in order
to synchronize better with each other. These small changes and adaptations, as mentioned
earlier, were introduced to Persian literature by Attar with the portrayal of the Muslim Sheikh
and the Christian girl. Due to these minor deformities, Jones preferred the Sanskrit Upanishads
to Dara Shokoh’s Persian translation; yet, at the same time, it was the Persian ‘drapery’ that
facilitated the intermingling and coexistence of Hinduism and Islam. The idea of different

124
Walter Fishel, ‘Jews and Judaism at the Court of the Mugal Emperors in Medieval India’,
Islamic Culture, 25, (1948),105-31.
125
Sir William Jones, The Letters of Sir William Jones, Garland Hampton Cannon (ed.),
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1970), 2: 739.
126
Jones, The Works, 3: 110.
127
The New Asiatic Miscellany, (Calcutta: Joseph Cooper 1789), 1: 86–136.
183
religions and schools of thought intermingling like the seas was held close to Jones’s heart,
helping to shift the emphasis from the Occidental Self to the Oriental Other and promoting
cultural toleration, syncretism, and pluralism. Jones’s admiration for Dara Shokoh was due to
his study of Ghulam Husain Khan Tabatabai’s (1727-1793) Sëir Mutaqharin, 128 which testified
to the Muslim prince’s ‘approbation, and even preference, to some tenets of the Gentoo law’.129
While Tabatabaei is describing Dara Shokoh’s execution, in the book, he is referred to as ‘the
unfortunate prince;’130 intriguingly, Jones uses the exact phrase in his ‘On the Mystical Poetry’
when he is elaborating on his sources of Sufism: ‘detail of their metaphysicks and theology to
the Dabistan of MOHSANI FANI, and the pleasing essay, called the Junction of two Seas, by
that amiable and unfortunate Prince, DA´RA´ SHECU´H’.131 Indian pluralist works and
Jones’s research and writing on them will be discussed in the fourth chapter of this thesis in
detail.

A Most Extraordinary Imitation of Attar

In ‘On the Mystical Poetry’, Jones presents a literal translation of another Sufi poet: ‘I
cannot refrain from producing a most extraordinary ode by a Sufi of Bokhara, who assumed
the poetical name of Esmat: a more modern poet’.132 Jones’s translation of a ghazal by Esmat
Bokhari may shed a brighter light on Jones’s understanding of Sufism and its influence from
Attar’s ‘Sheikh of Sanaan’. On the right column, you can see the canonical text of the poem in
Persian; Jones’s translation is printed in the middle column, and on the left column, you can
see a more literal translation of the same poem, translated by myself. The distiches have also
been numbered to address, discuss, and analyse easier for the readers.

128
Jones’s copy of the work is available in the British library and catalogued as BL, APAC,
RSPA 13. The manuscript ends with ‘This Book is the Property of Sir William Jones & was
lent to Francis Gladwin Esq. 8 March 1788.’ and contains Gladwin’s letter sent to Jones with
returning the book.
129
Ghulam Husain Khan Tabatabai, A Translation of the Seir Mutaqharin; or, View of
Modern Times, being an History of India, from the Year 1118 to the Year 1195 (this year
answers to the Christian year 1781–82), 3 vols. (Calcutta,1789/90), 3: 348.
130
Tabatabai, A Translation of the Seir Mutaqharin, 3: 349.
131
Jones, The Works, 4: 211-236: 232.
132
Jones, The Works, 2: 228.
184
 Literal Translation Jones’s Translation Persian Text
1. Last night, joyfully, I passed by ‘Yesterday, half inebriated, I ‫سرنش ا كشينراب ت گذر كردم دو‬
the alley of the tavern; looking passed by the quarter, where the ‫به طلبك ري ترس بچة ب ده فرو‬
for a Christian born who sold vintners dwell, to seek the
wine. daughter of an infidel who sells
wine.
2. A fairy-faced [one] came to me, At the end of the street, there ‫پیشم آم بسر كشچه پري رنس ري‬
in the alley. An infidel, a advanced before me a damsel ‫ لف چش نّ ر ب و‬،‫ عششهگري‬،‫ك فري‬
coquette whose tresses were like with a fairy’s cheeks, who, in the
a Zunnar on her shoulders. manner of a pagan, wore her
tresses dishevelled over her
shoulder like the sacerdotal
thread
3. I said “What alley is this? I said: O thou, to the arch of ‫گف م این كشي چه كشیس و ترا ن نه‬
Where is your house? The moon whose eyebrow the new moon is ‫كج س‬
is enslaved by the curve of your a slave, what quarter is this and ‫اي مه نش نم ابروي ترا حلقه بگش‬
eyebrow.” where is thy mansion?
4. She said “Throw away your She answered: Cast thy rosary ‫گف تسبیح بخ ك افكن و نّ ر ببن‬
Tasbih133 and wear a Zunnar; on the ground; bind on thy ‫سنگ در ایشة تقشي وپی نه بنش‬
throw a stone at the glass of shoulder the thread of paganism;
piety and drink wine. throw stones at the glass of
piety; and quaff wine from a full
goblet;
5. After that, come towards me and After that come before me, that I ‫ ت ب ش گشیم سخني‬،‫بع ا آ پیش من آ‬
I shall tell you something; this is may whisper a word in thine ear: ‫راه اینس اگر بر سخنم داري گش‬
my word, if you listen to my thou wilt accomplish thy
word.” journey, if thou listen to my
discourse.
6. With a lost heart, drunk and Abandoning my heart and rapt in ‫دش كف داده و م هش دوی م در پیش‬
insane, I ran; I reached a place ecstasy, I ran after her, till I ‫ت رسی مبه مق مي كه نه دین م ن و نه هش‬
where neither the faith nor the came to a place, in which
wit remained. religion and reason forsook me.
7. At a distance, I saw some At a distance I beheld a ‫دی م ا دور گروهي ه ه دیشانه و مس‬
people, all drunk and out of their company, all insane and ‫و تف ب دة عشق آم ه در جش ونرو‬
mind; by the heat of the wine of inebriated, who came boiling
love they were in a state of and roaring with ardour from the
commotion. wine of love;

133
A Muslim rosary or set of praying beads.
185
8. Without a Daf (a Sufi drum), a Without cymbals, or lutes, or ‫بي دف و س قي و مطرب ه ه در رقص و‬
cupbearer, or a musician, they viols, yet all full of mirth and ‫س ع‬
all were dancing and chanting; melody; without wine, or goblet, ‫بي مي و ج م و صراحي ه ه در نشا نش‬
all were drinking, without wine, or flask, yet all incessantly
cups, or pitchers! drinking.
9. Since I lost the restraint of When the cord of restraint ‫چش سر را ة ن مشس برف ا دس م‬
virtue, reputation, and honour; I slipped from my hand, I desired ‫گف ن ش‬،‫نشاس م ت سخني پرسم ا و‬
decided to ask her a question, to ask her one question, but she
yet she said “silence! said: Silence!
10. This is no Kaaba134 to walk This is no square temple, to the ‫این نه كعبه اس كه بيپ وسرآیي به طشاف‬
around it without feet and gate of which thou canst arrive ‫وین نه مسج كهدرو بيادب آیي به نرو‬
head135; this is no mosque to precipitately: this is no mosque
roar in it without awareness! to which thou canst come with
tumult, but without knowledge.
11. This is the ruins of the Magi’s! This is the banquet-house of ‫این نراب ت مغ نس و درو مس نن‬
Drunks are in it; unconscious, infidels, and within it all are ‫ا دم صبح ا ش ت به قی م م هش‬
ecstatic, from the dawn of intoxicated; all, from the dawn
eternity to the day of of eternity to the day of
resurrection!” resurrection, lost in
astonishment.
12. --- Depart then from the cloister, [The distich is not available in any
and take the way to the tavern; of the available Persian sources of
cast off the cloak of a dervise, the ghazal.]
and wear the robe of a libertine.
13. If you are honest and faithful in I obeyed; and, if thou desirest ‫گر ترا هس درین ایشه سر یك رنگي دین‬
this Path; similar to Esmat, sell the same strain and colour with ‫و دنی به یكي جرعه چش عص بفرو‬
the faith and knowledge for a Esmat, imitate him, and sell this
drop of wine.’ world and the next for one drop
of pure wine.’ 136

It is safe to assert that Esmat’s ode is no more than a compressed paraphrase of Attar’s
‘Sheikh of Sanaan.’ Apart from the Sufi message that the two poems share, Esmat has literally
used the same imagery and lexicon which Attar used; for example: ‘the new moon has your
eyebrow’s ringlet on its ear’ literally appears in both poems.137 While Jones’s translation does

134
The Kaaba, where Muslims pray towards or go for pilgrimage and circulate around it seven
times.
135
Figuratively meaning ‘to roam around it without both body and mind present.’
136
Jones, The Works, 2: 228-30.
137
Attar states:
‫مردمی بر ط ق او بنشس ه بشد‬ ‫ابرویش بر م ه ط قی بس ه بشد‬

186
not particularly follow these images, it stays quite faithful to the moral of the poem. The
changes Jones made in his translation do not simply serve a poetical purpose: for example, ‫ترس‬
‫ بچه‬tarsā bacheh, the ‘Christian child/born’ is changed to ‘the daughter of an infidel’. Jones
was very well aware of the meaning of tarsā, ‘Christian’ since the word is mentioned in the
Dabestan, a book he had ‘read twice with great attention’.138 Since Jones’s translation was
composed for a Christian audience – the Other to the poem’s narrator’s Self – he changed
‘Christian’ to ‘infidel.’ This changed occurred because to his eighteenth-century English
readers, being Christian identified with the Self and an ‘infidel’ with the Other. Furthermore,
Jones changed ‫ بچه‬bacheh, meaning a ‘child or young person’ to ‘daughter’, probably because
the love of two men or a man and a younger person might not have been appealing to his
readers. This change is quite remarkable as it brings Esmat’s image of the Other, a Christian
young person, closer to Attar’s ‘daughter of an infidel’.

Jones also changed the word Zunnar, a belt signifying non-Muslim status, to a
‘sacerdotal thread.’ While a Zunnar could have been worn by any non-Muslim, by changing it
to a ‘sacerdotal thread’, which also embraces the Yajñopavīta, i.e., the sacred thread worn by
high-caste Hindus, Jones has increased the pluralism of this poem. In the translation, the female
other ‘wore her tresses dishevelled over her shoulder like the sacerdotal thread’ and instructs
the aspiring lover to ‘bind on thy shoulder the thread of paganism;’ yet, in Esmat’s poem, the
other simply asks the narrator to ‘wear a Zunnar.’ Therefore, Jones’s depiction of the other
becomes closer to Attar’s other: the religious virtues of both are demonstrated through their
natural beauty. The interpolations found in Jones’s translation of this distich are another
demonstration of the Sufi beliefs portrayed in Attar’s tale: there is no difference between a true
Muslim, Christian, or pagan, and therefore those terms are interchangeable.

Jones’s translation departs from Esmat’s poem at the point when the poet asks the
‘damsel ‘where is thy mansion?’ While the word used in Esmat’s poem is ‫ ن نه‬khāneh, ‘home
or house’, Jones selected the ‘mansion’ out of his other options; intriguingly, the same image,
a mansion rather than a house, is portrayed in Attar’s ‘Sheikh Sanaan.’ Another fascinating
alteration that Jones introduces to his translation is ‘This is no square temple’ instead of ‘This
is no Kaaba’, which could be perceived as another attempt to shift what might be alien to the

‘Her eyebrow was the arch to the moon [her face], with lots of people living beneath
that arch.’
138
Jones, The Letters, 2: 739.
187
translation’s readers to something relatively familiar to them, alongside the interchangeability
I mentioned before. The switch brings up a famous line by the renowned Sufi Sheikh Bahaei
(1547-1627) 139
to mind: ‘You are the [my] Intention, the Kaaba and the house of idols [a
temple] are just excuses.’ 140

A fascinating feature of Jones’s translation appears in its tenth stanza:

‘Depart then from the cloister, and take the way to the tavern; cast off the cloak of a
dervise, and wear the robe of a libertine.’
It is of significant importance to note that several sources141 of this particular ghazal have been
checked to find the Persian distich, which was Jones’s source for these lines. However, these
lines are not available in any one of the sources. Furthermore, the ghazal’s Persian text does
not contain any morals or images, remotely pointing towards the subject of the distich cited
above. In addition, the tone in which this line is written is too straightforward and frank
compared to most of the Persian poetics; particularly, to the followers of sabk-e hendi, who are
renowned for their excessive usage of literary figures. Moreover, the act of casting off the cloak
of a dervish is considered to be unSufi; given the fact that dervishes were Sufi wanderers,
stating something against them did not fit for the moral of the ghazal. In order to analyse the
stanza more accurately, it would be better to divide it into two parts. In the first part, ‘Depart
then from the cloister, and take the way to the tavern;’ Jones portrays a prevalent theme in
Sufism: distance yourself from asceticism and move towards mysticism. Like the stanza,
Attar’s tale of ‘Sheikh of Sanaan’ is arguably the first narrative to deliver the same idea. The
juxtaposition of mysticism and asceticism is echoed throughout Attar’s tale, starting from the
very first distich. We see that the Sheikh, who has practised mortification for more than fifty
years and has reached an ascetic’s perfection, to the extent that he can heal the sick, has never
experienced earthly love. The love towards the Christian girl is sent to the Sheikh by the Truth
to test his spiritual Path. Both the Sheikh and the Christian girl are repellent to each other, for
he is a Muslim ascetic, and she is a female Christian. The opposition of mysticism and

139
Jones’s familiarity with Sheikh Bahaei was addressed in the previous chapter.
140
Sheikh Bahaei, Kashkul, (Tehran: Sabok-baran, 1390), 7:
‫مقصشد تشیی کعبه و ب خ نه به نه‬
141
The manuscripts of his Divan available in the Library, Museum and Document Centre of
Iran’s Parliament: 2656/4, 2329/14, and 1/7 ‫معیري‬.
Esmat Bokhari, The Divan of Esmat Bokharaei, Ahmad Karami (ed.), (Tehran: Ma, 1986), 56.
The ghazal can also be found in Ali Akbar Moshir Salimi, The Eloquent Women of the Past
Millennium, (Tehran: Elmi Publishers, 1956), 327. However, this one also does not contain the
distich.
188
asceticism is depicted wonderfully in a conversation between the Sheikh and his disciples. The
disciples who are mere ascetics themselves can be viewed as the former selves of the Sheikh;
an extract of the tale would fit here to portray the contrast between mystics and ascetics:

A disciple said: ‘Don’t you have regret and shame? Don’t you care for the Muslim
faith?’ The Sheikh replied: No one can be more regretful than I am; regretful of not
being in love before today!’ […] Another one said: ‘Compromise with your friends; let
us return together to the Kaaba tonight.’ He said: ‘If the Kaaba is not here, there is a
convent; I'm the vigilant of the Kaaba yet the drunk of a convent.’[…] Another one told
him: ‘The inferno is at the end of this path! A knowledgeable person will not become a
being of hell!’ He said: ‘If the inferno is at the end of my path, my sigh [of separation]
shall burn seven levels of it!’142 One said: ‘Hope for heaven; return and repent of this
wrong deed.’ He replied: ‘There is a heavenly-born beloved here; should there be a
heaven, it is her mansion!’ Another one told him: ‘Be shameful of the Truth! The Lord
almighty only deserves such sayings!’ He said: ‘The Truth has bestowed this fire upon
me! Therefore, I cannot reject this responsibility.’143

The Christian girl is the Sheikh’s divine means to ponder the Divine Presence on earth, and he
owes his transformation, from an ascetic to a mystic, to his Christian Other and her subversive
love. Many modern Persian scholars, such as Jalal Sattari and Claudia Yaghoobi, believe that
asceticism without love is nothing but mere vanity, which creates nothing but an illusion of a
union with the divine.144 To Sufis, as I mentioned while discussing Jones’s Notebook, the vanity
and egoism created by asceticism is the worst type of idolatry and the only agent capable of
annihilating the idol of the Self, guiding one towards Perfection, is love. Therefore, being truly
in love with the Beloved, or even a mortal beloved, causes a lover to free his/her self from
everything, self-conceit, egoism, social, and material concerns, but the Beloved. In other words,
the first part of Jones’s addition to Esmat’s poem – ‘Depart then from the cloister, and take the
way to the tavern’ – reiterates Attar’s moral of ‘Sheikh of Sanaan’ and Rumi’s ‘Song of the
Reed’: ‘[…] Tis love, that fills the reed with warmth divine; 'Tis love, that sparkles in the racy
wine. […] Not he, who reasons best, this wisdom knows: Ears only drink what rapt'rous
tongues disclose.’145 ‘On the Mystical Poetry’ was published in 1792, but Jones’s perception

142
The distich means that since the Sheikh’s state is worse than being in hell, his sigh burns
more than the fires of hell; figuratively, he has no fears of hell since he has experienced worse
by being separated from his earthly beloved.
143
Attar, Mantegh ol-tayr, 55-6.
144
Jalal Sattari, A Study of the Story of Shaykh of San'an and the Christian Girl, (Tehran:
Markaz Publications, 1999), 75-7.
Claudia Yaghoobi, ‘Subjectivity in 'Attār's Shaykh of San'ān Story in The Conference of the
Birds.’, Comparative Literature and Culture, 16:1 (2014), [http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1481-
4374.2425].
145
Jones, The Works, 4: 211-236, 231.
189
of Sufism and the idea of love annihilating the ego and ignorance and therefore uniting the Self
and the Other can be traced in his writings two decades before the date. In his Grammar (1771),
he had addressed his fellow Europeans, asking them to annihilate their ignorance and
experience the love of the Oriental Other:

Some men never heard of the Asiatick writings, and others will not be convinced that
there is anything valuable in them; some pretend to be busy, and others are really
idle; some detest the Persians, because they believe in Mahommed, and others despise
their language, because they do not understand it; we all love to excuse, or to conceal,
our ignorance, and are seldom willing to allow any excellence beyond the limits of our
own attainments: like the savages, who thought that the sun rose and set for them alone,
and could not imagine that the waves, which surrounded their island, left coral and
pearls upon any other shore.146
The extract points out that to Jones, the Europeans who never saw any other land beyond their
island resembled the orthodox hermit Sheikh of Sanaan who had not travelled to the Roman
shores to see the pagan coral and the Christian pearls.

Returning to the stanza that Jones added to his translation of Esmat’s poem, its second
part, which is left to analyse is ‘cast off the cloak of a dervish, and wear the robe of a libertine.’
Jones lived during Iran’s Afsharid dynasty (1736-1796), and his position in India required him
to know the socio-political status of Iran. Sufism was intermixed with politics during the
Afsharid dynasty and their predecessors, the Safavid dynasty (1501-1736). Consequently, it
transformed from a marginal point of view to a dominant political and religious ideology of
the time. However, this shift occurred at the price of the very factor which distinguishes Sufism
from many other schools of thought: its syncretism and pluralism. At the time, in Turkey, fierce
military factions were associating themselves with Sufism; in Iran, there were dervishes and
servants with Sufi views who would cannibalize or decapitate anyone who did not follow or
openly praise their view of Sufism.147 Aware of these facts, due to his profession in India, it is
feasible that Jones added this stanza to the poem in order to reiterate the true essence of Sufism,
syncretism and pluralism, to the European readers. When the dervishes were not the

146
Jones, A Grammar, ii.
147
Karim Najafi Barzegar, Mughal-Iranian Relations: During Sixteenth Century, (New Delhi:
Indian Bibliographies Bureau, 2000), 211.
Stewart R. Sutherland, The World's Religions, (Boston, MA: G.K. Hall, 1998), 362.
Rula Jurdi Abisaab, Converting Persia: Religion and Power in the Safavid Empire, (London:
I.B.Tauris, 2004), 91.
190
freethinkers they used to be, Jones reminded his readers that the very concepts distinguishing
a true Sufi and dervish from others is freethinking.

The Oriental Sheikh and the Jihadist Society

Another point connecting Attar’s tale and philosophy with Jones and his circle lies in
the fact that scholars of Persian literature consider the tale of ‘the Sheikh of Sanaan’ as a Sufi
epic; the efforts of Jones and his circle can be explained through defining certain aspects of
Sufi thought which are represented in Attar’s epic. The importance of the perception of the Self
in mystical Islam, Shi’ism, and Sufism becomes particularly pivotal when one considers the
path a mystic has to take to reunite with the beloved Other. The most important feature of this
path is the annihilation of the Self, particularly the I or what is called ‫ نفس ام ره‬nafs-e amāreh,
‘The self-inciting self’.148 This struggle between one and his/her self-inciting Self is mentioned
on different occasions in various Islamic and Sufi texts; for example, the Quran states: ‘And
those struggling in Our Path, will definitely be Led in their own ways. [...]’149 The intriguing
fact about the latter verse is that the Quran uses the term ‫ ج ه‬jāhed, ‘one who struggles or
Jihads’. Perhaps a Hadith from Jafar al-Sadegh (702-765), the sixth Shia Imam and one of the
most significant ones in the faith, might shed a brighter light on the situation:

The prophet sent an army [to somewhere], upon the armies’ return he said: “I welcome
those who had done the minor Jihad [, however] the greater Jihad still remains.”
[Someone] asked, “The messenger of God, what is the greater Jihad?” He responded,
“The Jihad with the self.”150
Jones was very well aware of Jafar-Sadegh, his status amongst the Shias and Sufis, as well as
his writings. Persian Jones had studied at least one of Jafar-Sadegh’s books, given to him
probably by the pioneering Sanskrit scholar Charles Wilkins (1749-1836). Wilkins’s gift to
Jones, which contains the Hadith, is entitled ‫رس له مفضل ا ام م جعفر ص دق‬, ‘The Mofazal Treatises
from Imam Jafar Sadegh;’ it is translated from Arabic to Persian by Allameh Majlesi (1616-

148
The different types of self, including the ‘self-inciting self’ will be mentioned in the next
chapter of this thesis.
149
The Quran 29:69:
‘ …. ‫سبُلَن‬ ُ ‫’ َو الَّذینَ ج َه ُوا فین لَنَ ْه ِ یَنَّ ُه ْم‬
150
Allameh Majlesi, Bihar al-Anwar, (Noroohi, Qom: 2009), 328-93: 336.
Mohammad Mohammadi Reyshahri, Mizan-ol Hikmah, (Darl-ol Hadith, Qom: 2010), 2: 332:
ُ‫ِي ال ِجه د‬
َ ‫صغ ََر و َبق‬
ْ ‫الجه دَ األ‬ َ َ‫ َم ْر َحب بقَشم ق‬:َ‫ فلَ ّ َر َجعشا ق ش‬،‫س ِریّة‬
ِ ‫ض ُشا‬ َ ‫ي صلى هللا علیه و آله َب‬
َ ‫عث ب‬ َّ ‫إ َّ النّب‬
ْ ْ
‫ ِجه دُ النَّفس‬:َ‫الجه دُ األكبَ ُر ؟ ق ش‬
ِ ‫ و م‬،‫َّللا‬ ّ ‫ قی َل ی رسش َش‬.‫األ ْكبَ ُر‬
191
1698) and catalogued as RSPA 6 in the British Library. It might be worth mentioning that the
authenticity of the Hadith mentioned above is questioned by many Sunni scholars, including
Ibn Taymiyyah (1263-1328), one of the highly influential figures of Wahhabism, an orthodox
and puritanical interpretation of Islam to restore pure monotheistic worship by devotees. While
Sunni hardliners do not provide any reasons for rejecting such Hadiths, the concept of waging
a jihad against the Self’s desires existed from the earliest ages of Islam. Ali (601-661), the first
Shia Imam and Sufi sage whom Jones called ‘the placid and benevolent’,151 stated: ‘The highest
of jihads is the jihad against the desires of the self and the worldly pleasures.’152 The Sufis and
Shias highly respect figures such as Ali and Jafar-Sadegh; the Sufis notably utilized the concept
of the greater Jihad in their literature. In a Sufi path, the traveller faces his/her own demons and
desires to annihilate their self-inciting self; furthermore, the concepts of a Sufi’s journey
through such battles and as a warrior are quite common in Persian literature. Jones was familiar
with this comparison as it appears in the thirty-third Persian quatrain of his Notebook by Abu-
Saeed Abol Khayr. The quatrain makes this comparison and concludes that a Sufi or one who
annihilates his/her Self in the path of Love, commits the great Jihad, is far more appreciated
and respected in the eyes of God rather than one who commits the minor Jihad and is a martyr
of a war.153 The battles and struggles a Sufi undertakes to annihilate the self with love require
specific codes similar to the warrior ethic. One of the fundamental concepts in Sufi warrior
ethics is the utilization of the intellect and knowledge to overcome the battles with the self-
inciting Self; as Ali stated: ‘Using knowledge in the jihad with the self is the first step to
[epigraph of] the path of Wisdom.’154 Intriguingly, the significance of knowledge that leads to
the annihilation of ignorance is evident in the seventh distich of Jones’s translation of ‘the Song
of the Reed’: ‘What though my strains and sorrows flow combin'd! Yet ears are slow, and
carnal eyes are blind.’ In other words, to Sufis, the enlightenment, or the ability of one’s ears
not to be slow, and eyes not to be blind, eliminates the ignorance of the self, leading to its
annihilation and, consequently, makes the Sufi ready to be remoulded and united with the other.

151
Sir William Jones, Al Sirajiyyah, or The Mohammedan Law of Inheritance, with a
Commentary, (Calcutta: Joseph Cooper, 1839), XI.
152
Reyshahri, Mizan-ol Hikmah, 2: 332:
ِ ‫عن لَذّا‬
. ‫ت ال ُّنی‬ ِ ‫الجه ِد ِجه دُ النَّ ْف ِس‬
َ ‫ و فِط ُمه‬، ‫عن ال َهشى‬ ِ ‫ض ُل‬ َ ‫أ ْف‬
153
BL, APAC, MSS Eur. C 274, f. 17; the quatrain’s literal translation is: ‘A warrior prowls
in the path of martyrdom, unaware that a martyr of love is higher than him;/ in the Judgment
Day this becomes clear, one has been killed by an enemy and the other by a friend.’ The
quatrain has been analysed previously in the second chapter.
154
Reyshahri, Mizan-ol Hikmah, 2: 332:
‫نفس ب لعلم عنشا العقل‬ ِ َّ‫جه د ال‬
192
The concept of knowledge that Ali mentions played a significant role in Warren Hastings’s
(1732-1818) system of government in India, who, sharing the same views on knowledge as
Ali, believed ‘that every application of knowledge attracts and conciliates distant affections.’155
For a short time, during the last quarter of the eighteenth century, some of the East India
Company’s administrators realized that it was crucial to learn about India’s various religious,
social, and legal customs in order to govern it. Hastings, an Englishman familiar with Indian
culture, Urdu, and Persian,156 became the first Governor-General of Bengal (1772-1785). His
Orientalist government attempted to govern under the mantle of Akbar Shah,157 replicating his
court, which had been bolstered by philosophical investigations and artistic collaborations
between Muslims and Hindus. The replication of Akbar’s court fitted well with Jones, for he
was profoundly interested in Persian Sufi poets such as Hafez and Sadi. Furthermore, Jones
demonstrated in his theories of linguistics as well as his translations, what might be termed a
deistic emphasis upon reason, wit, and knowledge. Much like the court of Akbar, seeking
similitude and harmony between the Self and the Other, the Orient and the Occident, was part
of a project aiming to construct a dome under which various faiths and beliefs could have
gathered. Perhaps a dome or a house, resembling the north dome of the Jameh Mosque of
Isfahan where one can see crosses, stars of David, Swastikas, verses of the Quran, gathering
under a pentagram:

155
The Asiatic Miscellany, 1786, 2: 314.
156
Patrick Turnbull, Warren Hastings, (London: New English Library Ltd, 1975), 19-21.
157
Michael J. Franklin, Romantic Representations of British India, (London: Routledge,
2006), 14.
193
 Illustration 7, the dome of Masjed Jameh of Isfahan.

In 1785, Hastings emphasized his Oriental political rationale in his letter to Nathaniel
Smith (1730-1794), a naval officer, director of the East India Company, and a member in the
House of Commons; the letter later was fittingly prefixed to Charles Wilkins’s translation of
The Bhagavad Gita (1785):

The curious and useful information it contains, must stamp its value in any literary
compilation, and its reasoning on Asiatic composition, gives it a peculiar estimation in
this—whilst the liberal sentiments it breathes, the handsome compliment it pays to the
Company's servants in Bengal, and the pleasing contrast it shows between the
Mahommedan and Christian conquerors of India, claim universal approbation, and
cannot be too generally diffused.158

158
The Asiatic Miscellany, 1786, 2: 306.
194
Replicating the northern dome of Isfahan’s Masjed Jameh was no easy task; the Supreme
Council in Calcutta and the Court of Directors in England were concerned with ‘the pittance
of a day’, in Rumi’s words, rather than the main convoy. However, Hastings managed to
delineate an Orientalist regime based on enlightenment and cultural empathy. In the same letter,
he stated:

[Every application of knowledge] attracts and conciliates distant affections; it lessens

the weight of the chain by which the natives are held in subjection; and it imprints on
the hearts of our own countrymen the sense and obligation of benevolence. Even in
England, this effect of it is greatly wanting. It is not very long since the people of India
were considered by many, as creatures scarce elevated above degree of savage life; nor,
I fear, is that prejudice yet wholly eradicated, though surely abated. Every instance
which brings their real character home to observation will impress us with a more
generous sense of feeling for their natural rights, and teach us to estimate them by the
measure of our own. But such instances can only be obtained in their writings: and these
will survive when the dominion in India shall have long ceased to exist, and when the
sources which once yielded of wealth and power are lost to remembrance.159

Hasting and his circle utilized the knowledge, honouring Hindu and Muslim texts; they admired
the potential these texts possessed to override differences of birth, culture, and religion, and to
eclipse anything that makes one an Other. However, it should be mentioned that an imperialist
ideological side existed in the efforts of Hastings; the syncretic pluralism aligned the regime’s
need to appear both neo-Brahmanical and neo-Islamic. Through this appearance and the
translations of Hindu and Islamic texts, the regime's authority was bolstered, and socio-political
stability was almost achieved. Jones emphasized and capitalized on Hastings’s view on
knowledge and its political applications. Like Hastings, Jones was never satisfied ‘if, in
traversing the sea of knowledge, [he] had fallen in with a ship of your rate and station, without
striking my flag.’160 This echoed Rumi’s ‘What were your stores [main convey]? The pittance
of a day!’
Hastings’s Jihad with the self illustrated the cultural empathy of the Orientalist
governance; therefore, the rights of the conquest of the Occidental self became balanced by the
natural rights of the Oriental Other. In 1784, the Shias’ and the Sufis’ jihadist ideology
alongside Hastings’s and Jones’s colonial perception of knowledge led to the establishment of
an institution similar to the northern dome of Isfahan’s Jameh mosque: a jihadi-colonial body

159
The Asiatic Miscellany, 1786, 2: 314.
160
Jones, The Letters, 2: 629.
195
called the Asiatic Society and under which various faiths and creeds gathered. On 24 February
1784, Jones addressed the Asiatic Society, emphasizing the society’s goal and the nobility of
its purpose:‘I may confidently foretell, that an institution so likely to afford entertainment, and
convey knowledge to mankind, will advance to maturity by slow, yet certain, degrees.’161 Later
in the same speech, Jones stated: ‘One thing only, as essential to your dignity, I recommend
with earnestness, on no account to admit a new member, who has not expressed a voluntary
desire to become so; and in that case, you will not require, I suppose, any other qualification
than a love of knowledge, and a zeal for the promotion of it.’162
The long-term results of the efforts of Hastings and Jones, alongside other Asiatic
Society Orientalists such as Francis Gladwin and Sir Charles Wilkins, involved the collection
and translation of the most prominent Oriental texts. Wilkins translated the Bhagavad Gita,
one of the critical texts of the Vedanta, one of the mainstream schools of Hinduism, into English
in 1785.163 The Sufi perception was intertwined within the Asiatic Society; in the preface of
his Bhagavad Gita, Wilkins argued that it was written to encourage a monotheistic
Unitarianism to move Hinduism away from polytheism. This argument resembles Dara
Shokoh’s arguments in his translation of the Upanishads. In line with his career as a judge,
Jones composed the Al Sirajiyyah: Or the Mahommedan Law of Inheritance (1792) and The
Institutes of Hindu Law, or the Ordinances of Manu (1796).164 Furthermore, as discussed
earlier, the Majma’al Bahrein and Dabestān-e Mazāheb were translated to English by other
members of the Asiatic Society; the establishment of these texts helped increase the authority
of the colonial regime and encouraged socio-political stability.
Many Orientalists such as Charles Hamilton (1753–1792), the translator of The
Hedaya, Or Guide: A Commentary on the Mussulman Laws (1791), Gladwin, and the
Sanskritist Wilkins were amongst the founder members of the first meeting of the Asiatic
Society.165 In the gathering, Jones offered the ‘fruits’ of his researches as a ‫ نذر‬nazr, an Islamic

161
Asiatic Researches, 1: x.
162
Asiatic Researches, 1: xvi.
163
Charles Wilkinson, Bhagvat-geeta, or Dialogues of Kreeshna and Arjoon (London:
Nourse, 1785).
164
For more details on the works see Hadi Baghaei-Abchooyeh, ‘Sir William Jones’,
Christian-Muslim Relations. A Bibliographical History. Volume 12 Asia, Africa and the
Americas (1700-1800), David Thomas, & John Chesworth (eds.), (Leiden: Brill, 2018), 560-
73: 565-9.
165
See Michael J. Franklin, ‘“The Hastings Circle”: Writers and Writing in Calcutta in the
Last Quarter of the Eighteenth Century’, in Authorship, Commerce and the Public: Scenes of

196
tradition of gift-giving, to the Asiatic Society. In return, Wilkins offered a ghazal of Hafez to
him, representing ‘the Sufi pluralistic and syncretic concept, suggesting universal toleration as
the Society’s keystone as it had been of Akbar’s Fatehpur Sikri.’166 On June 3rd, Gladwin
published a ‘free translation’ of the ghazal in the Calcutta Gazette:

Illustration 8, Calcutta Gazette, 1784, 1:5; the ghazal Wilkins gifted to Jones on the first gathering of the Asiatic
Society.

Please see the ghazal’s Persian text, its English translation published in the paper, and a literal
translation of the poem below.

Writing, 1750–1850, Peter Garside, Caroline Franklin, & Emma Clery (eds.), (Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan, 2002), 186-202.
166
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 211.
197
 Literal translation Published translation Persian text

1. The king of the flower’s The crown of the king of the ‫گل پی ا ا ا طرف چ ن‬ ‫افسر سلط‬
crown has appeared from flowers has appeared from the
‫ب د بر سرو و س ن‬ ‫مق مش ی رب مب ر‬
the line of the lawn; Lord, border of the garden; Oh God! May
may this arrival be its approach be auspicious to the
fortunate to the cypress Cypress, and Jasmine.
and the lawn.

2. This royal gathering was Fortunate was this acceptance of a ‫به ج ی نشیش ن بشد این نشس نسروی‬ ‫نش‬
so pleasant for by it, now, seat of pre-eminence in the
‫ت نشین هر کسی اکنش به ج ی نشیش ن‬
anyone can take to his/her assembly;
proper place [seat]. As every associate may now
occupy his respective place with
honour.
3. Impart the good news of Impart to the ring of Solomon the ‫ن تم جم را بش رت ده به حسن ن ت‬
the happy conclusion to joyful news of a successful
‫ک سم اعظم کرد ا او کشت ه دس اهرمن‬
Jam’s seal; for the conclusion;
Tetragrammaton has As the most powerful name of God
shortened the Ahriman's has restraind from the hands of
hand from it. Demons.

4. May this house be May this house be forever ‫در‬ ‫ت اب مع شر ب د این ن نه کز ن‬

eternally prosperous for inhabited, from earth of whose
‫می و د ب د ی ن‬ ‫هر نفس ب بشی ریح‬
from its threshold; at every threshold; Is continually wafted the
moment, with the scent of breeze of prosperity fraught with
basil, the wind of Yemen the fragrance of the sweet basil
spreads.
5. The glory of the son of The terror of the son of Peshung ‫پشر پشنگ و تیغ ع ل گیر او‬ ‫اشک‬
Pashang and his world- (Afrasiab) and his world-
‫انج ن‬ ‫در ه ه اهن مه ه ا داس‬
conquering sword; has conquering scimitar, furnish every
become the tale of every Epic Poem with a tale for banquets,
assembly in every king’s and emulations for Heroes.
chronicles.
6. Your flowing sword, is the The flowing current of thy ‫جشیب ر ملک را آب روا ا شیر تشس‬
brook of your realm; plant protecting sword is a river for
‫بکن‬ ‫بیخ ب نشاه‬ ‫تش درن ع ش بنش‬
the tree of justice and fertilizing the country;
eradicate the root of ill- Plant thou the tree of Justice, and
wishers. eradicate evil-disposed persons.

198
7. Your graceful polo horse The steed, on which thou gracefully ‫ننگ چشگ نی چرن رام ا در یر ین‬
is tamed under its saddle; proceedest with the ball, is obedient
‫اهسشارا چش به می ا آم ی گشیی بز‬
Your Highness, you are under the saddle;
already in the field, strike Thou hast advanced on the plain
the ball. with the excellence of an
accomplished horseman---strike
then the ball.
8. From now on, no rose If afterwards thy bud shall expand, ‫بع ا این نشکف اگر ب نکه نلق نشا‬
shall bloom without your discloesing the fragrance of thy
‫نیزد ا صحرای آ رخ ن فه مشک ن ن‬
good temper; amiable disposition,
from your cheeks, the The odour of the musk of Tartary
odour of the Hotani musk shall arise from the plain of thy
shall rise in any dessert. cheek.
9. The hermits are in The Hermits are in anxious ‫میکنن‬ ‫گشاه گیرا ان ظ ر جلشه نش‬
exception of a splendid expectation of thy splendid
‫براکن طرف کاله و برقع ا رخ برفکن‬
representation; appearance;
Raise up the edge of your Raise up the border of thy cap, and
hat and remove the veil throw off the veil from thy face.
from your face.
10. I consulted with my wit I consulted with Reason, who said, ‫مششرت ب عقل کردم گف ح فظ می بنش‬
who said ‘Hafez, drink Hafiz, drink wine,
‫س قی می ده به قشش مس ش ر مؤت ن‬
wine’; cupbearer! Give me O Cupbearer, give me wine, upon
wine, for the command of the strength of the words of my
my trusted advisor. adviser, and guardian.

The ghazal was carefully selected for the occasion; even its translation was interpolated to
some extent to be more fitting for the first gathering of the Asiatic Society. For example, while
the first hemistich of the second distich is ‘This royal gathering was so pleasant’, it is translated
to ‘Fortunate was this acceptance of a seat of pre-eminence in the assembly’, as if Hafez has
composed the poem in order to depict the ‘assembly’ of the Asiatic Society. The translation of
the distich’s second hemistich is slightly altered to rise to the occasion: Hafez literally states
‘so that anyone can sit at his/her own place’, which does not necessarily mean a joyful event
for everyone. The phrase ‫ نشس ن ج ی نشد‬neshastan jāye khod, ‘to sit at one’s own place’ quite
often signifies knowing one’s boundaries and not usurping another’s place; as we will see, this
image dovetails nicely with the allusion to the tale of Solomon in the third distich. While Hafez
reiterates the usurping aspect of the phrase in the third distich by using the image of a demon
stealing the belongings of a king, Gladwin, through inserting ‘with honour’, has altered the
image to make it more apt for the gathering of ‘the associates’ of the Society. After all, the
members of Hastings’s circle, who treated the cultures of the Orient with respect, were in

199
charge of the seat rather than people who only cared about commerce and colonizing. Most
certainly, similar to the virtue of Jamshid’s seal and/or Solomon’s ring, the Society through
knowledge was to provide the power to subdue the demons ‘who thought that the sun rose and
set for them [in the Occident] alone’ and only had carnal/colonial affections.

In the third distich of the ghazal, ‫ ن تم جم‬khātam-e jam, ‘The ring of Jamshid’ is changed
to ‘the ring of Solomon’ as well as ‫ اهرمن‬ahreman, ‘Ahriman’ to ‘Demons’. In order to explain
this change, a comparative understanding of Solomon and Jamshid could help: Jamshid was
the fourth Persian mythical king, and he reigned for about three hundred years. During his
reign, knowledge, wit, arts, and sciences flourished to the extent that no one died from any
disease, people lived harmoniously, roads were built, and the knowledge of melting iron was
achieved. Similar to Solomon’s flying carpet, Jamshid’s throne was airborne; in addition, they
both could command demons. Jamshid’s downfall was due to his ego, out of which he declared
himself as the Creator. On the other hand, according to the Old Testament, Solomon's downfall
was initiated by his practice of polytheistic rituals.167 Thus, Jamshid could be interpreted as the
Persianized version of Solomon. Two essential points should be mentioned here: the Solomon
that mystics and Sufis mention is quite different from those mentioned in the Holy Scripture.
To mystics, much like Jamshid before his downfall by his ego, Solomon represents wit and
knowledge. Aziz-odin Nasafi (d.1287) in his book ‫ك مل‬ ‫ انس‬ensāne kāmel, ‘The Perfect
Human’ considers Solomon as ‘the mind and soul which rules the universe and the being upon
whom, Mercy and Compassion is Bestowed.’168 Attar’s hoopoe in the Conference of the Birds
is an allusion to Solomon’s hoopoe; in addition, the story of Solomon and the Queen of Sheba
has similarities to the tale of ‘the Sheikh of Sanaan and Christian Girl’. Sohrevardi (1154-
1191), one of the most eminent Sufi philosophers, in his book ‫ فی الحقیقه العشق‬fel haghighat al-
eshgh, ‘On the Truth of Love’ pardons the polytheism of Solomon, for he was in love while
committing it;169 much like the Sheikh who was pardoned for his transgression, in the eyes of
God, due to his love of the Christian girl. The second significant point is that Sufis generally
preferred to use Solomon rather than Jamshid in their poetry; as Khaghani pointed out: ‘The
tongue of a panegyrist of the throne of Mustapha [Mohammad] is better to be concerned with

167
The Quran’s version of the tale does not validate this.
168
Aziz-odin Nasafi, Ensan-e Kamel, (Tehran: Tahoori, 2015), 67-8.
169
Shahab o-Din Yahya Ibn Habash Sohrawardi, Dar Haghighat-e Eshgh, (Tehran: Mola,
1994), 7.
200
Solomon than the zephyr.’170 Gladwin’s alteration brings another level of meaning to the poem.
In the Persian text of the ghazal, there are three references to Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh: ‘Jam’,
‘Son of Pashang’, and ‘Shahnameh’. However, the assembly in Calcutta was not solely
concerned with Persian and its literature. Therefore, by changing Jamshid to Solomon and
Ahriman to a demon, Gladwin has included an Abrahamic image in the poem. Another reason
for changing Jamshid to Solomon was perhaps the translator’s extensive familiarity with Hafez
and Islamic literature. According to the Quran, Solomon had power over wind, and in his
poetry, Hafez has continuously associated Solomon with the wind; for example, ‘If you do not
lose your heart to anything, you shall command the wind / even in a situation [so dire] that
deposes the throne of Solomon!’171 Perhaps Hafez’s reference to wind, in the fourth distich of
the ghazal, could further justify the shift from Jamshid to Solomon.

Gladwin points out one of the main reasons for Wilkins’s choice of ghazal: ‘We shall
add that as the expressions of Hafiz are supposed to have a prophetick virtue, the house may
ever be inhabited, or that the Society may ever flourish, will be accomplished.’172 He is
referring to the fourth distich of the ghazal, in which another fascinating change has occurred.
Firstly, the modern canonical version of the ghazal is slightly different from the one published
in the Calcutta Gazette; the canonical verison is ‘May this house be eternally prosperous for
from its threshold; at every moment, with a breeze, the scent of Beneficent with the wind of
Yemen spreads.’ Two crucial concepts lie in this distich: the first one is the allusion Hafez has
made to ‫ نفس رح نی‬nafse rahmāni literally meaning ‘the Beneficent Breeze’ and the second one
is ‫ ب د ی نی‬bād-e yamāni which means ‘the wind of Yemen’. Both of these two references have
been removed either purposefully, by Wilkins’s choice of this specific version of the ghazal,
or simply unintentionally. It is possible that Wilkins chose this particular version of the ghazal
because the ideas of the Beneficent Breeze and the wind of Yemen do not fit in well with Jones
and the Society’s emphasis on knowledge and reason. Nevertheless, figures such as Jones,
Wilkins, or Gladwin were familiar with the concepts, notably Jones, who loved Yemen.
Surprisingly enough, in his first Discourse presented to the Asiatic Society, Jones hints towards
the pleasing wind of Yemen: ‘I found one evening, on inspecting the observations of the day,

170
Khaghani, The Divan of Khaghani Shervani, Ali Abdolrasooli (ed.), (Tehran: Sa'aadat,
1937), 6:
‫که ب رگیر سلی نکشتر اس صب‬ ‫ب ثن گر درگ ه مصطفي نشا ر‬
171
Hafez, Divan of Hafez, 208:
‫در معرضى كه تخ سلی رود به ب د‬ ‫ب دت به دس ب ا اگر دش نهى به هیچ‬
172
Calcutta Gazette, 1784, 1: 5.
201
that India lay before us, and Persia on our left, whilst a breeze from Arabia blew nearly on our
stern. A situation so pleasing […]’ 173 The pleasing breeze of Yemen is a familiar image in the
Middle East, and its usage dates back to the time of Mohammad who stated: ‘I have found the
nafs-alrahman [breezing] from the direction of Yemen’s.’174 Scholars estimate that
Mohammad’s reference to nafs-alrahman either meant a delightful wind that blows from
Yemen to Arabia, or a Muslim Yemeni named Ovais al-gharani (594-657). Ovais lived
contemporary to Mohammad, and although the two never met due to his love of the prophet,
Ovais changed his religion to Islam. Some of the Sufis, particularly poets whom Jones was
familiar with, used the relationship of Ovais and Mohammad as a metaphor for Divine Love.175
For example, Abol Khayr stated:

If you are in Yemen [physically], yet your heart is with me, [it is as if] you are with
me; if you are with me [physically], yet your heart is not with me, [it is as if] you are
in Yemen.
I am with you in this manner, O my Yemeni beloved; I wonder if you are me or I am
you?176
In his Tazkerat ol-oliya, Attar described Ovais as ‘The Kabaa of the followers, the Arch-grace,
the hidden sun, the nafs-alrahman, the Yemeni Canopus’.177
There is yet another interpretation for ‘the Beneficent Breeze’: Oriental mystics and
Sufis believe that everything represents a Unifying Truth. To them, the very first representation
of the Unifying Truth is referred to by names such as ‫ نفس رح نی‬nafas-e rahmāni, ‘the
Beneficent Breeze’ ‫ وجشد منبسط‬vojōd-e monbaset, ‘the Expanding Being’, and ‫ تجلی س ری‬tajaliye
sāri, ‘the infectious representation.’ While Persian mystics mostly use these terminologies,
Islamic philosophers equate ‘the Beneficent Breeze’ with ‫ عقل اوش‬aghl-e avval, ‘the first
intelligence.’ The first intelligence is similar to the primal intelligence in Aristotelian
philosophy. What should be pointed out here is that the members of the Asiatic Society were

173
Asiatic Researches, 1: ix. The Discourse and the quotation have been discussed previously
in the first chapter of this thesis.
174
Ali Akbar Dehkhoda, Lughatʹnāmah, (Tehran: Tehran University, 1998), 3: 3979:
‫انی وج ت نفس الرح ن من الی ن‬
175
The Ovaisi/ Uwaisi order of Sufis is also named after Ovais, as it refers to the transmission
of spiritual knowledge between two individuals, Mohammad and Ovais, with no need of
physical interaction between them.
176
Jahangir Mansoor, Rubaeyaat-e Abu Saeed Abolkhayr, Khayyam, and Baba-Taher,
(Tehran: Nahid, 1999), 33:
‫گر پیش منی چش بی منی در ی نی‬ ‫گر در ی نی چش ب منی پیش منی‬
‫نشد در عجبم که من تشام ی تش منی‬ ‫من ب تش چن نم ای نگ ر ی نی‬
177
Attar, Tazkerat-ol Oliya, 81.
202
quite familiar with the concept’s mystical and philosophical terms. For example, in the ode Mir
Qamar al-Din Minnat (d. 1792/3) composed in praise of Hastings, the governor-general has
been given the stature of ‘the First Intelligence’, or ‘the Beneficent Breeze.’178 The distich
literally translates to ‘The difference between your status and the intellects, is similar to the
difference between the animals and the first intellect.’179 The distich’s translation in the
Aristotelian terminology is ‘The difference between your status and the universal intelligence
is similar to the difference between the primal intelligence and the three kingdoms.’ The
intriguing matter is that many Sufis, including Ibn Arabi (1165-1240), the most well-known
Andalusian Sufi and poet, believed that ‘the Beneficent Breeze’ is/acts the same as the
Tetragrammaton (the Seal of Solomon). They used the following verse of the Quran as
evidence to their claim: ‘Call by the name of Allah or call by the name of the Beneficent …’180
Intriguingly, the image of the Tetragrammaton is available in the text of the ghazal and is
translated to ‘the most powerful name of God.’ Given the Asiatic Society’s extensive
knowledge of Islamic and Sufi concepts and narratives, it would not be plausible to assume
that they did not know about ‘the Beneficent Breeze’ and/or Ovais al-Gharani. However, there
is not much evidence to suggest whether this version of the ghazal was deliberately chosen in
order not to mention ‘the Beneficent Breeze’.
In India, Jones procured a copy of a commentary on the Divan-e Hafez, available in the
British Library.181 The manuscript is highly annotated by Jones and contains many marginal
notes written by him; as it can be seen below, the distich in Jones’s Commentary on Divan -e
Hafez has the distich as:
‫در‬ ‫ت اب مع شر ب د این ن نه کز ن‬
182
‫میش د ب د ی ن‬ ‫هر ب بشی رح‬

178
BL, APAC, Or.6633, f. 67r.
179
BL, APAC, Or.6633, f. 67r:
‫عقل اوش‬ ‫که بشد ت به مشالی‬ ‫آنق ر فرق ق ر تش بشد ت به عقشش‬
180
The Quran, 17:110:
َّ ‫قُ ِل ادْعُشا هللا أ َ ِو ادْعُشا‬
... َ‫الر ْح ن‬
181
BL, APAC, RSPA 57.
182
BL, APAC, RSPA 57, f. 117.
203
 Illustration 9, BL, APAC, RSPA 57, f. 117; Jones’s annotation on his ‘Commentary on the Divan of Hafez.’

The distich translates to: ‘May this house be eternally prosperous for from its threshold; at
every moment, the scent of Beneficence, the wind of Yemen spreads;’ as it can be observed in
the translation, Jones has underlined the second hemistich. However, the same hemistich in the
version chosen for the first gathering of the society literally means ‘at every moment, with the
scent of basil, the wind of Yemen spreads.’ Furthermore, it has been translated to ‘continually
wafted the breeze of prosperity fraught with the fragrance of the sweet basil’. The Persian
hemistich could also be interpreted as an allusion to Rumi’s: ‘The Prophet told his avid
companions not to cover their bodies from the spring breeze.’183 In Arabia, during the spring,
a breeze comes from Yemen. It should also be stated that Yemen is well-known for its fragrant
basil, particularly Ocimum spicatum and Ocimum serpyllifolium. Although Yemen is
mentioned explicitly and implicitly, through basil and breeze in the Persian hemistich, it is
wholly omitted in the translation. Another consideration of the translation is the insertion of
the word ‘prosperity’ describing the breeze. On the one hand, in the Persian text of the ghazal
printed next to the translation, there is no reference to the breeze bringing prosperity; on the
other hand, another version of the ghazal contains ‘the Beneficent Breeze’ which to some
extent implies the prosperous aspect of the breeze. While adding ‘prosperity’ to the translation
somewhat validates the idea that ‘the Beneficent Breeze’ is intentionally omitted, the word
prosperity does not thoroughly convey the idea and concept of ‘the Beneficent Breeze’.

The fifth distich of the poem presented to Jones can be translated as ‘The glory of the
son of Pashang and his world-conquering sword; has become the tale of every assembly in
every king’s chronicles’. Gladwin has translated it to ‘The terror of the son of Peshung

183
Rumi, Masnavi, 110:
‫تن مپشا نی ا ب د به ر‬ ‫گف پیغ بر به اصح ب کب ر‬
204
(Afrasiab) and his world-conquering scimitar, furnish every Epic Poem with a tale for banquets,
and emulations for Heroes.’ The first matter that should be discussed here is about the word
‫ اشک‬shokat. The word means ‘glory and grandeur’, yet Gladwin translated it to ‘terror’, which
is a bit problematic. Perhaps knowing the owner of the ‘glory and grandeur’ might shed a
brighter light on the matter: Hafez attributes it to ‘the son of Pashang’. In Persian mythology,
there are three individuals named Pashang: 1) Pashang the first who was the father of
Manuchehr, the very first king in the Persian mythology, 2) Pashang who was the founder of
Turan and the father of Afrasiab, and 3) Pashang who was the son of Afrasiab and had a son
named Shideh, a minor character in the mythology. It is unlikely that Shideh is the person
Hafez refers to, for aside from being a minor character, he neither achieved any glory nor
caused any terror. Afrasiab was a formidable Turani warrior and a skilful general; he was also
an agent of Ahriman, who appears in the ghazal, and Gladwin translated him to ‘the demon’.
In addition, Afrasiab was endowed with magical powers, which are considered demonic in
Persian mythology, to destroy Iranian civilization, and clearly, there is not much ‘glory’ in the
act. Jones was, in fact, aware of the enmity between the Turani Afrasiab and Iranians; in his
essay ‘The History of Persian Language,’184 Jones introduced Ferdowsi as a ‘learned man’ who
found a copy of Persian history and used it to compose Heroic poems. To Jones, ‘the most
ancient part of it [the Shahnameh] and principally the war of Afrasiab and Khosru, or Cyrus,
seemed to afford an excellent subject form on Heroick Poem which he [Ferdowsi] accordingly
began to compose.’185 However, the published English translation of Hafez’s ghazal in the
Calcutta Gazette asserts that the distich refers to Afrasiab by inserting the mythological
character’s name in the text, ‘the son of Peshung (Afrasiab)…’.

The last distich of the ghazal that requires some explanation is number nine:

The hermits are in anxious expectation of thy splendid appearance;

Raise up the border of thy cap, and throw off the veil from thy face.

184
Jones, The Works, 5: 409- 46.
185
Jones, The Works, 5: 424. Later in the same essay, in order to demonstrate the beauty of
the Persian language, Jones translated an extract of Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh; the extract
recounts the romance of Bijan, an Iranian hero captured during the Iran-Turan war. Bijan falls
in love with his own other: Manijeh, the daughter of Afrasiab. Jones recounts Bijan as ‘a
young amorous hero [...]; who had reason to repent for his adventure with the daughter of
Afrasiab, for he was made captive by the Turks, and confined in a dismal prison, till he was
delivered by the valour of Rostam’, Jones, The Works, 5: 429.
205
Gladwin presents an accurate translation for the distich, maintaining a balance between
Oriental imagery and Occidental perception. It is worth mentioning that generally, in Persian
literature, one’s cap signifies the religious, social, and cultural status of that person, similar to
wigs that represented social status in Europe. In Attar’s tale of ‘The Sheikh of Sanaan and the
Christian Girl’, the Sheikh’s love and transformation from an ascetic, or ‘Hermit’, to a mystic,
was started at the very moment the Christian girl unveiled her face. In this respect, scholars
such as Wilkins and Jones might be seen as unveiling Oriental poetry to new Europe-wide
audiences.

This pluralism, which was arguably introduced into Sufism by Attar, demonstrates
itself in a poem written in Persian by Jones:

Illustration 10, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. 40; a Persian poem by Jones and in his hand on
his manuscript of Nezami’s Treasury

The poem can be translated to English as follows:

O Jones! Act justly and virtuously for the love of the creatures and the religion of the
Creator;

so that after your passing in China and India all of the Creations praise you.

Mourning Muslims tear their chest apart, burying you like Christians in a clean coffin.

206
 The Brahmans recite the Vedas at it, and the Sufis scatter wine over it.186

The very fact that Jones underlines the words ‫مسل‬, ‫نص ری‬,‫صشفی‬, and ‫‘ بره ن‬Muslims,
Christians, Sufis, Brahmans’ in his hand-written poem shows that while he was structuring his
poem, he considered the pluralism in Persian Sufism. In other words, he composed the poem
based on his pluralistic ideas, the same ones that were introduced by Attar through the
anonymity of the birds and later on were adopted by various Persian and Indian Sufis. Jones’s
Persian poem and Sufi pluralistic metaphysical tenets will be discussed in the fourth chapter of
this thesis. Yet, it should be pointed out here that Jones depicts a valedictory image of himself
in the poem, his death being mourned by four different faiths in each of their individual
cultures. The image Jones depicts echoes the death of the Christian girl in Attar’s tale. As stated
earlier, each of the Sheikh’s disciples represents a stage of one’s journey to understand the
Truth, which leads to each one having their own interpretation of the Truth. At the end of the
tale, the Christian girl falls in love with the Sheikh and dies amongst the circle of Sheikh and
his disciples, who each in their own way mourn her death.

Illustration 11, the death of the Christian girl by Ali Asghar Tajvidi.

186
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. 40:
‫به مهرنالیق و دین ن ا‬ ‫چن کن به نیکی و داد یشنس‬
‫ه ه نلق برتشکنن آفرین‬ ‫که بع ا وف ت بهن ی بچین‬
‫مسل به اری کن سینه چ‬ ‫نهن ت نص ری به ت بشت پ‬
‘ ‫و صشفی ب و میفش نی کن‬ ‫بره ن بر او بی نشانی کن‬
207
Chapter 4: On the Philosophy of the Asiatics: Sir William Jones, Harmonious
Metaphysics, and Unity

Introduction

As the literary traditions of Sufism and Jones’s study of them were discussed in the previous
chapter of this thesis, the following chapter focuses on the philosophical and metaphysical
aspects of the school. The fourth chapter will discuss Jones’s writings on oriental pluralistic
philosophy; in addition, it examines the annotations he made during his study of Oriental
pluralism. Furthermore, the chapter investigates the entanglement of Oriental pluralism with
Persian literature. Moreover, it explains the impact of Persian Sufi literature and its pluralistic
views on India.

Before landing in India in 1783, Jones had already established himself as an Orientalist
in Europe. His research on Oriental languages, culture, and law are showcased by the works he
composed while he was residing in Britain; mainly through his translation of Histoire de Nader
Chah (1770), which took him two years to complete, A Grammar of the Persian Language
(1771), and Poems consisting chiefly of translations from the Asiatick languages. To which are
added two essays, I. On the poetry of the Eastern nations. II. On the arts, commonly called
imitative (1772). Due to Jones’s deep understanding of Oriental culture and his legal
experience, in 1781 Edmund Burke (1729–1797) asked for his assistance in preparing a bill to
protect the Muslims living in the subcontinent against the East India Company.1 Subsequently,
Jones compiled The Mahomedan Law of Succession (1782)2 and presented a copy of it to
Burke.3 Although the legal treatises Jones provided, The Mahomedan Law of Succession, was
relatively short, it had an immense impact on the branches of the British legal system operating
in India.4 Before the book’s publication, the Supreme Court of Judicature was unacquainted

1
Garland Cannon, ‘Sir William Jones and Dr. Johnson's Literary Club’, Modern Philology,
63: 1 (1965), 20-37: 33.
2
Muhammad ibn Ali, The Mahomedan law of succession to the property of intestates, in
Arabick, engraved on copperplates from an ancient manuscript, with a verbal translation
and explanatory notes by W. Jones. Arab. & Engl, trans. W. Jones, (London, 1782).
3
Correspondence of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke; between the year 1744 and the
period of his decease, in 1797, 4 vols., Charles W. Fitzwilliam, & Sir Richard Bourke (eds.),
(London: F. & J. Rivington, 1844), 2: 454.
4
For further details on the book see Hadi Baghaei-Abchooyeh, ‘William Jones’, Christian-
Muslim Relations: A Bibliographical History, vol. 12 (Asia, Africa and the Americas 1700-
1800), D. Thomas and J. Chesworth eds., (Leiden: Brill, 2018,), 560-73: 562-5.
208
with the Islamic laws of succession and inheritance, making the court reliant on untrustworthy
local judges called Qazis. Jones’s expertise in law, languages, and deep understanding of the
society and culture of the Orient, on one level, made the court more independent and objective;
and, on another level, helped to protect the rights of the natives of the subcontinent. Due to
Jones’s knowledge, Burke consulted him on some other Indo-Persian affairs, such as ‘on the
government, manners, and sciences of the Persians’, while he was still in London.5 After
reaching Calcutta, Jones became acquainted with Warren Hastings (1732–1818) and was
further encouraged to extend his pursuit of Oriental knowledge and institutionalize it through
forming the Asiatic Society of Bengal in 1784.

During his life in Britain and becoming ‘Persian’ Jones, William had become fascinated
by Sufi metaphysics. The metaphysics can be divided into two major branches, the first one is
the ‫ وح ت وجشد‬vahdat-e vojōd, ‘the Unity of Being’ or the ‘Unity of Existence’ and the second
branch is the ‫ وح ت اهشد‬vahdat-e shohōd, ‘the Unity of Witnesses’. The former, the Unity of
Being, was already well established in the Orient by the eighteenth century; yet the latter was
a response to the former, designed mainly by Indian critics during the sixteenth century.6
Considering the depth of Jones’s Persian studies, it is virtually impossible for him not to have
become familiar with the Unity of Being, as the doctrine was one of the significant dominant
philosophical trends in the Orient by his time. In addition, the Sufi poets, authors, and saints
Jones studied or mentioned in his writings are the same figures who facilitated the school’s
transformation from being a marginal aspect of Islamic mysticism to its becoming a central
tenet of Sufi metaphysics. Many other poets and philosophical writers whom Jones admired –
such as Attar (1145-1221), Amir Khosrow (1253-1325), Rumi (1207-1273), Sadi (1210-1292),
Hafez (1326-1390), Jami (1414-1492), Sarmad (1590-1661), and Dara Shokoh (1615-1659) –
were all heavily influenced by the doctrine. The campaign of such Sufi figures to promote the
doctrine was so successful that it can safely be asserted that in Iran, or canonical Persian
literature, the term ‫ ع رف‬āref, ‘a mystic’ has become synonymous with Sufi and a Sufi is
synonymous with one profoundly believing in the Unity of Being, otherwise called vojōdi.
Other than the immense influence the doctrine had on the writers Jones admired, he would have
been attracted towards it for another reason: the Islamic doctrine not only had Oriental
pluralism and perennialism embedded in it, but also it was the driving source behind the efforts

5
Correspondence of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke, 2: 487.
6
Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present, (New York, NY:
State University of New York Press, 2006), 76.
209
of Oriental scholars who sought a harmonious Orient. Therefore, it was only natural for Jones
or others like him who were on a quest to stabilize India, to be attracted to a doctrine that
promoted pluralism and had roots amongst the natives of the land they were trying to govern.
Shortly after the arrival of Islam in the land of the Hindus, about ten centuries before the British
landed, the Muslim rulers had faced a discordant socio-political climate similar to the one the
British were dealing with in the eighteenth century. A character like Jones was quite familiar
with the history of the Orient, the subcontinent, and the interactions between the two faiths.
Consequently, he was indeed aware of the historical fact that after a significant power struggle,
the Muslims residing in India decided to see the natives of the subcontinent through a vojōdi
perspective; this will be discussed in this chapter. This shift of perspective was welcomed by
the natives and consequently reduced the tensions between the Muslims and Hindus of the
subcontinent. Furthermore, through his study of Persian literature, Jones knew that India was
not the first place which became more peaceful through the utilization of the Unity of Being;
for the doctrine was the result of the interaction between Islam and the various faiths it came
in contact with after the Arab conquest of Iran.

Jones was remarkably familiar with the history, mysticism, religion, literature, and
philosophical thoughts of the Orient; also, he was aware of the immense influence of those
elements in the region's political climate. In addition, it would be quite superficial to think that
with such knowledge, he was blind to the means which would bring him his goal of a more
stable subcontinent. Furthermore, all his works could be perceived, defined, and justified from
the perspective of his being a Sufi who followed his predecessor sages and saints to gather
different faiths and races under the umbrella of coexistence. However, an intriguing fact still
remains: he did not directly mention the Unity of Being or any one of its parallel terms used in
eighteenth-century India. At first glance, this could be because the open promotion of the
doctrine could have caused friction between different factions of Muslims and Hindus. During
his time, Jones already introduced many novel treasures of the Orient to Europe; considering
the nature of the Unity of Being, if he were to address it directly, he might have received
criticism from ultra-orthodox religious groups both in Europe and in the subcontinent. Due to
the nature of the doctrine, it is quite easy to accuse its followers of apostasy, heresy, blasphemy,
and similar defamations. After all, as will be discussed, throughout history, many vojōdis, such
as the unfortunate Prince Dara Shokoh or Hallaj (858-922), suffered persecution and death due
to such accusations; Jones was indeed aware of this. During Jones’s time in India, openly
supporting the Unity of Being might have caused significant socio-political consequences.
210
Since Dara Shokoh’s era, the dominant Indian theological view shifted towards the Unity of
Witnesses, and the vojōdis became highly marginalized.7 Therefore, directly addressing and
openly promoting either of the doctrines would have either resulted in further marginalization
of a pluralistic view or opposing the status quo of the natives. Neither of these two scenarios
would have been helpful to further stabilize India.

The following chapter focuses on the entanglement and complexity of the relationship
between Sufi metaphysics, the Persian language, their immense influence on the subcontinent,
its politics, and consequently, how they shaped Jones’s ideas and influenced his writings. The
Sufi doctrine of the Unity of Being, alongside its Hindu counterparts, played a significant role
in constructing a more stable and pluralistic India. This chapter introduces the doctrine and
examines its evolution through its journey from Mesopotamia and Iran to the subcontinent and
India. Jones believed that the most effective way of gaining knowledge was to obtain it from
its source. In his ‘On the Philosophy of the Asiaticks’, delivered before the Asiatic Society on
20 February 1794, he asserted his belief that ‘all nations in the world had poets before they had
mere philosophers’.8 ‘On the Philosophy’ further elaborates on the significance of poets in Asia
and the role they played in Oriental philosophy, ethics, and moral standards by stating:

The moralists of the east have in general chosen to deliver their precepts in short
sententious maxims, to illustrate them by sprightly comparisons, or to inculcate them
in the very ancient form of agreeable apologues: there are, indeed, both
in Arabick and Persian, philosophical tracts on ethicks written with sound ratiocination
and elegant perspicuity: but in every part of this eastern world,
from Pekin to Damascus, the popular teachers of moral wisdom have immemorially
been poets, and there would be no end of enumerating their works, which are still extant
in the five principal languages of Asia.9

Therefore, in order to convey the tenets of Sufism and the Unity of Being, I have utilized verses
and anecdotes from Sufi vojōdi poets. The quotations utilized throughout the analysis are all
from the poets Jones had studied, mentioned, or was familiar with. In addition, while
examining the doctrine, the Sufis, and Jones’s familiarity with them, the annotations on the
manuscripts Jones has made on the vojōdi works will be analysed. The annotations are mostly
retrieved from Jones’s personal manuscript collection, currently held in the British Library as

7
This will be discussed fully later in the chapter.
8
Jones, The Works, 1: 229.
9
Jones, The Works, 1: 242.
211
the Royal Society Persian and Arabic manuscripts, RSPA 1-120. In the collection, the poet who
has composed the highest number of texts is Rumi.10 As the six volumes of Rumi’s Masnavi
Ma’navi in the collection are all annotated by Jones, Rumi is the poet whom Jones has most
annotated in the collection. The lengthy description found at the beginning of the first volume
of Rumi’s Masnavi concludes with Jones stating: ‘I know of no writer, to whom the Maulavi
can justly be compared, except Chaucer or Shakespeare’.11 Jones’s affinity with Rumi becomes
more significant by an example, one of the distiches the poet has used to explain the Sufi desire
of reunion states, ‘While travelling if you see Rome or China; the love of homeland shall not
depart from your heart.’12 There are many distiches in Rumi’s works that advise the reader to
travel to East and West; however, this particular one is amongst the very few distiches that
state that your homeland's love stays with you. Rumi resided in the Middle East and thus
wanted to visit East and West, yet Jones was born in the West: hence he slightly changed the
distich to better dovetail with his circumstances; please see the illustration below:

Illustration 1, BL, APAC, RSPA 35, f. I; Jones reciting and altering a distich of Rumi.

Jones has partially erased the word ‫ روم‬rom, ‘Rome’ and has written ‫ هن‬hend, ‘India’ in its
place. In addition, he has juxtaposed ‫ م‬and ‫‘ من‬I’ instead of ‫ ی‬and ‫‘ تش‬You’ which alters the
distich to ‘While travelling, if I see India or China; the love of homeland shall not depart my
heart.’

10
BL, APAC, RSPA 34-41. It should also be mentioned that BL, APAC, RSPA 56 is a
commentary on Rumi’s Masnavi Ma’navi by someone named Obeidollah Khoishki Hendi
(Unknown).
11
BL, APAC, RSPA 35, f. ii.
12
Rumi, Masnavi, 2: 64:
‫ا دش تش کی رود حب الشطن‬ ‫در سفر گر هن بینی ور ن ن‬
212
 Given that the Persian language is considered the most poetical language of the Middle
East, it is natural that the poet in Jones would have been interested in it. However, the poetical
power of the language solely, I suppose, was not enough to encourage the philologist, polyglot,
lawyer of Oxford – who sought to gain the knowledge conveyed by languages – to become
Persian Jones. The language had a significant role to play in Jones's life and in nurturing the
Unity of Being from its early stages as well as the politics of the subcontinent; Persian was the
earliest and most major medium of the doctrine. It is safe to assert that Jones was fascinated
with the language and its companion: pluralistic literature and mysticism. After introducing the
Unity of Being and Jones’s annotations on Rumi’s Masnavi, this chapter will focus on the
Persian language, its role in the politics of the subcontinent, its provision of a platform for both
Muslims and non-Muslims to intermingle, and its path to become the language of the Mughal
court. In discussing the Mughal period, the chapter will focus on the vojōdi attempts of Akbar
(1542-1605) and his court, which lead to the writings of authors such as Sarmad and Prince
Dara Shokoh.

According to Hafez’s famous saying ‘a conversation should be placed at its own time
and place;’13 Jones was highly practical and pragmatical, therefore it is quite sensible for him
to leave philosophical and mystical matters out of his legal treatises or botanical research.
However, it can be argued that his three legal publications – The Mahomedan Law of
Succession (1782), Al Sirajiyyah or the Mohammedan Law of Inheritance: With a Commentary
(1792), and The Institutes of Hindu Law, Or, The Ordinances of Manu (1794) – were the result
of the pluralism he discovered in Oriental literature. Nevertheless, the appropriate place to find
vojōdi influences in Jones’s published works is in the texts he composed on mysticism and
literature. Therefore, this chapter will focus on finding the signs in his published works on
literature, religion, philosophy, and mysticism. Overall, the chapter will focus on the doctrine
of the Unity of Being, its language, political aspect, and its relationship to Jones’s mind. The
chapter starts with introducing and examining the doctrine, revolving around the vojōdi Sufis
with whom Jones was fascinated; it analyses the annotations Jones made on the works of such
Sufis. Then, it investigates the influence of Unity of Being on the politics of the subcontinent
and is concluded by researching Jones’s writings which contain signs of the doctrine.

13
Hafez, Divan, 125:
‫هر سخن وق ی و هر نک ه مک نی دارد‬
213
The Unity of Being
Arguably the most influential doctrine of Islamic mysticism is the Unity of Being; it revolves
around the idea that nothing exists but God. The concept implies that every entity that exists
represents and is God. More precisely, the essence of existence is of a unique singular entity
exemplified as the Truth; whatever exists apart from the unique singular existence itself is
nothing but its appearance, manifestation, and emanation. In other words, when God – the
unique singular entity – bestows its essence to something, it becomes manifested in the universe
just as colours manifest themselves when light shines; thus, given the fact that objects in this
universe do not have any existence other than what we perceive of them, according to the
doctrine whatever we perceive is nothing but the essence of God.14 Perhaps the best way of
further elaborating the concept is through using a rainbow as a metaphor: the existence of
different colours is not in contrast with the existence of a singular light beam, the existence of
the colours indeed depends on it; in addition, the differences between yellow, blue, or red are
just different manifestations, emanations, or appearances of the light beam. We might consider
the very famous quote of the Quran, ‘God is the Light of the skies and earth’,15 Sufis state that
the Creator is the Existence and the Truth of the cosmos. Based on the quotation, there is no
abstract being in the universe, but God and It is the source of whatever exists. It should be
added that to many Sufis, the Unity of Being is not simply a philosophical concept, but it is
rather the fundamental Truth; to them, the cosmos is not a separate entity from God or the
Truth. This is because a philosophical view is derived through wisdom and the mind;
furthermore, a philosophical view is changeable. On the other hand, the Unity of Being is
derived through love and the heart; furthermore, it is an immutable fact.16 Jones presents a view
similar to the Unity of Being when he is describing ‘the divine spirit’ in his ‘On the
Philosophy’:

The very nature and essence of the divine spirit, ... [is] that all spirit is homogeneous,
that the spirit of GOD is in kind the same with that of man, though differing from it
infinitely in degree, and that, as material substance is mere illusion, there exists in this
universe only one generick spiritual substance, the sole primary cause, efficient,

14
William C. Chittick, ‘The Spiritual Path of Love in Ibn al-'Arabi and Rumi’, Mystics
Quarterly, 19: 1 (1993), 4-16, 4-5.
15
The Quran 24: 35:
‫ض‬ِ ‫ت َو ْاأل َ ْر‬
ِ ‫س َ َوا‬ ُ ُ‫َّللاُ ن‬
َّ ‫شر ال‬ َّ
16
Javad Nurbakhsh, Forty Words and Thirty Messages, (Tehran: Yalda Publication, 2002),
11.
214
 substantial and formal of all secondary causes and of all appearances whatever, but
endued in its highest degree, with a sublime providential wisdom and proceeding by
ways incomprehensible to the spirits which emane from it;17

Jones had gathered his description of the divine spirit from a range of different sources
‘admitted by Hindus, Arabs, and Tartars, by Persians, and by Chinese.’ 18 He explained in the
essay that the ‘splendid enumerations of his attributes, or more beautiful descriptions of his
visible works’ could be obtained from Sanskrit works, particularly the ‘four Vedas and many
parts of the numerous Puranas,’ Arabic works, ‘especially in the Koran,’ as well as the poems
of Persian poets including Sadi, Nezami, and Ferdowsi.

It is widely considered that it was Ibn-Arabi (1165-1240) who first introduced the
doctrine to Islam and Islamic mysticism, yet this can be challenged by the fact that Ibn-Arabi
never used the term in his writings; in addition, the idea of the Unity of Being is available in
the works of many Muslims and Sufis who lived before him. For example, Ahmad Ghazali
(1061-1123/26) stated: ‘There is no existence but God … [and] existence only belongs to
God;’19 in Ghazali’s words, the fruit of a Sufi’s spiritual path is for him/her to be able to ‘testify
that there is no existence’.20 The first Sufi who used the term the ‘Unity of Being’ was Saeed
od-din Forghani (d.1300).21 Regardless of the debate on who introduced or used the term first,
the concept of the Unity of Being spread through the writings and teachings of many Sufis in
different parts of the Orient. Kamal Khujandi (d.1400) in Khujand, Tajikistan, Jami in
Khorasan, Iran,22 and Sadr al-Din al-Qunawi (1165-1240) in Konya, Turkey are among the
many who preached the doctrine. With the expansion of Islam through time, the Unity of Being
travelled to different continents and Sufis such as Muhammad al-Hashimi al-Tilimsani (1881-
1961) in Tlemcen, Algeria further expanded its influence on the Islamic and non-Islamic
world.23

17
Jones, The Works, 3: 251; this extract will be discussed in detail later in this chapter.
18
Jones, The Works, 3: 250.
19
Nasrollah Pourjavady, The Sultan of Tariqa: The Life and Works of Ahmad Ghazaali,
(Tehran: Agaah Publication, 1979), 104.
20
William C. Chittick, ‘Rumi and Wahdat al-Wujud’, Poetry and Mysticism in Islam: The
Heritage of Rumi, Amin Banani, Richard G. Hovannisian, & Georges Sabagh (eds),
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 70-121: 71.
21
William C. Chittick, Ibn 'Arabi: Heir to the Prophets, (Oxford: Oneworld, 2005), 105.
22
For Jones’s studies on Jami see the second chapter of this thesis, ‘Sir William Jones’s
Collection of Verses’ on BL, APAC, MSS Eur. C 274, Notebook, f. 20.
23
Nasr, Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present, 76.
215
 As Islam reached India, the Indians proved that they were not an exception in embracing
the concept: Muhammad Ashraf Semnani – the son of Ashraf Jahangir Semnani (1287-1386),
the founder of Ashrafi Sufis in Kashmir – preached the doctrine widely.24 Semnani wrote many
discourses on the doctrine, yet his most influential dedication to Sufism, mainly to Indian Sufis,
was the universalization of the term ‫ ه ه اوس‬hame ōst, ‘All is Him/Her/It’. Before Semnani,
many Persian Sufis – such as Rumi, Attar, and Sanaei – used the word ‫ او‬ō, which in Persian is
the third person singular pronoun, in their ghazals to signify the Beloved; for example, one of
Rumi’s quatrains states:

Inside and outside of my heart, hame ōst; in my body, life, vein and blood hame ōst.
How can faith and blasphemy be contained here? For other than this, my existence
hame ōst.25
However, Semnani’s phrase ‘All is Him/Her/It’ concentrated upon the religious aspect of the
Beloved: an idol, a star, or a tree was the Beloved, for nothing but It exists. The famous
theologian Moheb-ollah Allah-Abadi (1587-1648) heavily supported it in the subcontinent;26
even during the eighteenth century, many significant poets of the subcontinent, such as Sachal
Sarmast (1739-1827) and Bulleh Shah (1680-1757), were avid adherents of the Unity of Being.
The reasons why it was widely accepted amongst the Indian Sufis will be discussed later in this
chapter.

The most common criticisms of the Unity of Being – by many orthodox Muslims whom
Sufis generally refer to as ‫ اه‬zāhed, ‘preacher’ – is that the Sufis who believe in the concept,
maintain that every being which exists in the universe is God. They forget – perhaps
misunderstand or misinterpret – that the Unity of Being states that existence is intrinsically
limited to God and, therefore, whatever exists is solely a representation of God. In order to
avoid misinterpreting that the Unity of Being means every being which exists in the universe
is God, the Sufis of Iran and the subcontinent further clarify the doctrine by using another
metaphor: the waves belong to the sea, and the sea consists of many waves, and therefore the
sea is the waves. However, it should be mentioned that these sorts of misinterpretations are not
farfetched from the writings of the Sufis; for instance, in his ‘The Bezels of Wisdom’ Ibn-Arabi

24
For more information, see Mohammad Riyaz, ‘Seyed Muhammad Ashraf Semnani and his
Services to the Subcontinent’, The Journal of Islamic Education, 26, (1976), 59-68.
25
Rumi, Divan of Shams-e Tabrizi, Badiol-Zaman Forouzan Far (ed.), (Tehran: Daneshgah,
1957), 172.
26
Hadi Nabi, Dictionary of Indo-Persian Literature, (Delhi: Abhinav Publications, 1995),
427.
216
states that: ‘The perfect gnostic is one who regards every object of worship as a manifestation
of God in which He is worshipped. They call it a god, although its proper name might be stone,
wood, animal, man, star, or angel’.27 Due to the figurative nature of Oriental poetry, the Unity
of Being would be more prone to misinterpretation if the form is utilized to convey the concept.
Particularly, the misinterpretation becomes amplified should the poet utilize the Persian
language as a medium for the verse in which the Unity of Being is being conveyed. This
happens due to two aspects of Persian: one related to the language’s semantics and syntax and
the other related to its cultural aspect and connotation in the Middle East. Regarding the former,
in the previous chapters, it has been mentioned that Persian is generally quite prone to
ambiguity; on one level, this is caused by the language’s gender neutrality which results in the
fact that a poem is open to describe God – the divine Beloved – or an earthly beloved, whether
male or female. On another level, Persian poets and Sufis – people who intended to convey the
Unity of Being – are known to exploit this aspect of the language.28 This aspect of Persian
language attracts poets, Sufis, and literary scholars such as Amir Khosrow, Rumi, and Jones;
on the other hand, by providing grounds for misinterpretations, the ambiguity of Persian gives
further excuse and justification to the zealot preachers to discriminate against the language and
the Sufis. Let us not forget that Jones’s beloved Hafez, allegedly, had to run away from an
angry crowd who could have killed him for composing a mere distich of such nature.29 Another
instance indicating Jones’s awareness about this conflict can be found in Sarmad’s quatrain in
his Notebook and the annotations on it.30 As discussed in the second chapter, the quatrain and
Jones’s annotation refer to Hallaj and his persecution on the accounts of heresy and apostasy
by Orthodox Muslims. Jones was indeed aware of this conflict which most of the time was due
to misinterpretation and misunderstanding. He dedicated his essay ‘On the Mystical Poetry of
the Persians and the Hindus’ (1792) to explain this ‘figurative mode of expressing the fervour
of devotion, or the ardent love of created spirits towards their beneficent Creator’ which had
prevailed ‘among the Persian theists, both ancient Húshangis [an ancient Iranian religion] and
modern Súfis.’ 31 Jones’s efforts, including the composition of his essay, will be discussed later
in the chapter. The other aspect of Persian which further enhances the issue is the language’s

27
Ibn al-ʻArabī, The Bezels of Wisdom, R. W. J. Austin (trans.), (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press,
1980), 247.
28
Some examples of this will be mentioned in the following pages.
29
Ahmad Shamlou, 'Introduction of Hafez Shirazi', The Divan of Hafez Shirazi, Ahmad
Shomlou (ed.), (Tehran: Morvardi, 1975), 6-8.
30
BL, APAC, MSS Eur. C 274, Notebook, f. 23.
31
Jones, The Works, 4: 211.
217
cultural connotation in the Middle East: while Arabic is Islam’s language, Persians were called
‫ العجم‬al-ajam and their language ‫ العج ی‬al-ajami. Ajam literally means ‘illiterate, silent, or
mute’, and over time, the term became a racial pejorative used by Arabs for others, particularly
Persians.32 Another cultural aspect of Persian, which was challenging to the orthodox Arabic –
speaking Muslims is due to the fact that people using the language – in Iran, Tajikistan,
Afghanistan, India, and other places – were those who were initially non-Muslims and were
conquered and submitted to Islam. In other words, Persian speakers were the pagan others who
did not have any desire to maintain Islam, let alone the mainstream Arabian reading of it.
Regardless of all these issues, Persian speakers nurtured the Unity of Being from its earliest
stage: Sadr al-Din Qunawi, Ibn Arabi’s pupil and adopted son, 33 who elaborated much on the
doctrine, was not only of Persian descent but also generally used the language.34 Qunawi also
became very close to Rumi and participated in Rumi’s spiritual circles; they influenced each
other profoundly. Qunawi’s pupil, Fakhr al-Din Iraqi (1213-1289), was another Persian Sufi
poet and writer who played an influential role in introducing Ibn Arabi into Persian.35 After the
expansion of Islam to India, the Unity of Being travelled through the same language to the
subcontinent. Even today, Hindi – or Urdu – speaking Sufis of the subcontinent use the phrase
‫ ه ه اوس‬hame ōst, ‘All is He/She/It’, which is a Persian phrase, signifying the Unity of Being.
More on this subject will be discussed later in this chapter while investigating the influences
of Persian and the Unity of Being on the politics of India.

Observing different religions from the Unity of Being’s perspective results in a

syncretic and pluralistic perspective: all religions, regardless of their difference – within their
names, rituals, or any other religious matters – worship only one God. However, it should be

32
Abd Al-Husain Zarrinkoob, ‘The Arab Conquest of Iran’, The Cambridge History of Iran,
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975), 4: 46. However, it should be clarified here
that Mohammad himself was against such discrimination of others; in his Farewell Sermon –
also known as Muhammad's Final Sermon – he explicitly stated:
‫ال فرق بین عربي و ال أعج ي و ال أبیض وال أسشد إال ب ل قشى‬
‘There is no difference between Arab and Ajam, white or black except [each
individual’s] piety’.
33
William C. Chittik, ‘Sadr al-Din Muhammad b. Ishak b. Muhammad b. Yunus al-Kunawi’,
Encyclopaedia of Islam, P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel, &W.P.
Heinrichs (eds.), (Brill: Brill Online, 2007).
34
F. E. Peters, The Monotheists: Jews, Christians, and Muslims in Conflict and Competition,
(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005), xvii, & 330.
35
Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Three Muslim Sages: Avicenna, Suhrawardi, Ibn 'Arabi,
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1964), 118-9.
218
mentioned that the idea of different religions worshipping one singular entity was not a novel
concept in Islam and its mystical aspect; for the Quran states:

Those who believe (in Islam), or Jews, Christians or Sabians [Star worshipers], all who
believe in God, the Judgment day, and do righteous deeds, their reward is surely secure
with their Lord; they need have no fear, nor shall they grieve.36

There are two other occasions in which verses with a similar narrative are available in the
Quran. 37 Jones has openly recommended reading the book, particularly the verses from which
Islamic laws can be obtained. For example, in The Mahomedan Law of Succession (1782), he
urged the British lawyers and judges dealing with Islamic law to read the Quran should they
need any further clarification of Islamic laws and manners. Since the arithmetic of Muslims
was similar to the Christians, Jones recommended the British lawyers dealing with inheritance
to read the book, stating: ‘The fourth chapter of the Alcoran may throw light, if any be wanted,
the doctrine of the fourth or portions; and, as to the arithmetical part, seems of little
consequence, as our rules of three, and those for of fractions, are common and familiar to all.’38
Therefore, if Jones were to write treatises on the similarities of the different faiths, he would
have instructed the readers to read the Quran; since, on three different occasions, the book
openly states that there are no differences between different faiths. However, what is intriguing
is that most of the orthodox Muslims, the preachers, seemed to have forgotten about these
verses and the syncretic and pluralistic aspects of Islam.

Jones’s prescription for the Occidental lawyers dealing with Islamic law, to read and
understand the Oriental texts, is quite similar to what the Sufis and vojōdis believed in:
understand the beliefs of other faiths and emphasize the similarities between them. The vojōdis
developed this belief since they either belonged to the marginalized groups of various faiths or
lived in multireligious societies; consequently, it was in their favour to reiterate the idea of a
Sabian (star worshipper) being ‘rewarded’ by the Islamic God. The wave of new Muslims
relied heavily on the Unity of Being and, depending on their heritage or living environments,

36
The Quran, 2: 62:
َ ‫ص لِحو فَلَ ُه ۡم ا َجۡ ُره ُۡم ع ِۡن‬
َ ‫ع ِ َل‬ َٰ ۡ ‫ّٰلل َو ۡال َی ۡش ِم‬
َ ‫االنِ ِر َو‬ ِ ّٰ ‫ص ِبوئ ِۡوینَ َم ۡن َٰا َمنَ ِب‬
ّٰ ‫اِ َّ الَّذ ِۡینَ َٰا َمنُ ۡشا َوالَّذ ِۡینَ َه د ُۡوا َوالنَّصَٰ َٰرى َوال‬
َ ‫علَ ۡی ِه ۡم َو َال ه ُۡم یَ ۡحزَ نُ ۡش‬ ٌ ‫َربِّ ِهم َو َال ن َۡش‬
َ ‫ف‬
37
The Quran 5:69, & 22:17.
38
Jones, The Works, 8: 165.
219
were more religiously tolerant of other marginalized religions of the region. The diverse
environment the Sufis lived in played a pivotal role in nurturing their pluralistic views rooted
in the Unity of Being. For example, Mahmoud Shabestari (1288–1340), born in a small town
in the northwest of Iran, was more exposed to Christianity and or paganism which existed
during the time in Armenia. When he was asked if ‘Idols, girdles, and Christianity... [a]re all
infidelity’ in a vojōdi discourse, Shabestari responded:

Here [the] idol is the theatre of love and unity; Girdle [the Zunnar] is the binding of the
bond of service.
Since infidelity and faith are both based on being, true union is essentially idol worship.
Since things are the manifestation facets of being, what is now the one will become the
other.39

It should be noted that the translation mentioned above was done by Edward Henry Whinfield
(1836-1922), a barrister-at-law. Following a path similar to Jones’s, Whinfield composed the
first translations of the works of Hafez and Rumi, which contained a detailed commentary, as
well as five hundred quatrains of Khayyam. Winfield’s comment on Shabestari’s distiches,
True union is essentially idol worship, is particularly intriguing for it signifies his shared
interest with Jones: not only in comparative studies of Oriental literature but also in revealing
the subject of the Unity of Being:

Compare Hafiz (Brockhaus), Ode, 79. Between the love of the cloister and that of the
tavern there is no difference, for wherever love Is, there is the light of the face of the
beloved. Wherever the pious works of the cloister display their beauty, there are the
bells of the monastery and the name of the Cross. Where is there a lover whose state
the beloved regarded not? O master, there is no pain for which there is no physician.40

Hafez’s vojōdi ode, to which Whinfield refers, reads as follows:

39
Maḥmūd ibn ʻAbd al-Karīm Shabistarī, The Gulshan Ráz, Edward Henry Whinfield
(trans.), (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1876), 104.
40
Shabistari, The Gulshan ráz, 104.
220
 Love is a church where all religions meet;
Islam, or Christ, or Tavern, it is one;
Thy face of every system is the sun
O Sun that shines in the Beloved's street.
Where Love is there’s no need of convent bell,
And holy living needs no holy frocks;
Time ticks not to your monastery clocks;
Where goodness is there God must be as well.41

Whinfield’s books, whether on law or Persian literature, were published in both Calcutta and
London less than a century after Jones’s death. In the preface to Shabestari’s The Gulshan ráz,
perhaps following Jones’s footsteps, he asserted that:

This view they [Sufis] developed with the aid of the Greek and especially the
Neoplatonic metaphysics, which had been popularised by […] Farabi, Ghazzali, Ibn
Roshd and Ibn Sina. Under these influences they identified the Allah of the Koran with
the Neoplatonic Being, the One, the Necessary Being, the only Reality, The Truth, the
Infinite, which includes all actual being, good and evil, the First Cause, source of all
action, good and evil alike.42

The statement simply refers to the connection of the tenets of the Oriental pluralistic views,
such as the Unity of Being, and Neoplatonism, the same connection that Jones had emphasized
upon at the beginning of his ‘On the Mystical Poetry’ and ‘On the Philosophy.’ Whinfield
argues that the Sufis developed their views with the aid of Greek Neoplatonic metaphysics;
however, in his essay, Orientalist Jones asserted that such syncretic views had not been sourced
from ‘Italy nor in Egypt ... but in Persia or India:’

A figurative mode of expressing the fervour of devotion or the ardent love of created
spirits towards their beneficent Creator has prevailed from time immemorial in Asia

41
Hafiz, Odes from the Divan of Hafiz : freely rendered from literal translations, Richard Le
Gallienne (trans.), (London: Duckworth, 1905), 50.
42
Shabistari, Gulchan i raz: The mystic rose garden. The Pers. text, with tr. and notes, chiefly
from the comm. of Muhammad bin Yahya Lahiji, E.H. Whinfield (ed.), (Oxford: Oxford
University, 1880), vii.
221
 particularly among the Persian theists both ancient Húshangis and modern Súfis who
seem to have borrowed it from the Indian philosophers of the Védánta school and their
doctrines are also believed to be the source of that sublime but poetical theology which
glows and sparkles in the writings of the old Academicks. ‘PLATO travelled into Italy
and Egypt’ says CLAUDE FLEURY to learn the Theology of the Pagans at its fountain
head,’ its true fountain however was neither in Italy nor in Egypt though considerable
streams of it had been conducted thither by PYTHAGORAS and by the family of Misra
but in Persia or India which the founder of the Italick sect had visited with a similar
design. 43

In his ‘On the Philosophy,’ Jones reiterated his hypothesis concerning the chief fountains of
such views. Although some ‘branches of science in Persian and Arabick, [are] partly copied
from the Greeks,’ the Sufis’ doctrine ‘anciently prevailed, and still prevail in great measure
over this Oriental world, and which the Greeks themselves condescended to borrow from
Eastern sages.’44

Regarding the relationship of the Unity of Being and the Sufis’ living environment, it
should be noted that, for example, in Attar’s case, who was more in contact with Christianity,
the Unity of Being meant the unity of Islam and Christianity, which is portrayed in ‘The Sheikh
of Sanaan and the Christian Girl’. To Indian figures such as Amir Khosrow Dehlavi or Dara
Shokoh, due to their exposure to Hinduism, the Unity of Being came to mean that Islam and
Hinduism are the same. Although the case of Indian Sufis will be discussed in detail later in
this chapter, I should point out that a European living in the Orient, who was influenced by the
Sufi–vojōdi tenets, would most certainly seek the similarities between the European and
Oriental philosophy and culture; which Jones was eager to research. It should also be
mentioned that the doctrine and its religious or racial application can be observed, with varying
degrees, through the life and writings of almost every Sufi mystic. Even those who had lived
before Ibn-Arabi, who allegedly founded the perception, or Forghani, who first used the term.
For example, the quotations of Mohammad, mentioned previously, stating that all humans are
one – regardless of their religions, gender, or race – implies their belief in the concept,
signifying racial and religious toleration; yet, as time passed, the idea of tolerating the other
faded to some extent. The Sufis, however, used various tactics in order to convey the doctrine
to future generations. An example of the Unity of Being shrouded within Sufi literature is the
famous distich by Sadi: ‘The children of Adam are limbs of each other; Having been created

43
Jones, The Works, 4: 211-2.
44
Jones, The Works, 1: 235.
222
of one essence.’45 Another example would be found in Rumi’s Masnavi Ma’navi; the book is
entitled as the ‘market of Unity’ by the author: ‘Our Masnavi is a market of Unity; but the One,
whatever you see [perceive], is an [false] idol.’46 This distich of Rumi’s re-entitling caught
Jones’s eye as it can be seen in the following image;47 Jones, in his own way, marked the
hemistich stating ‘but the One, whatever you see [perceive], is an [false] idol’:

Illustration 2, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 106; Jones’s annotation on Rumi’s Masnavi.

Many annotations of Jones can be found in his personal manuscripts of Rumi’s Market of Unity.
On one of the folios, which served as a prelude to the re-entitling of the Masnavi as the Market
of Unity, Rumi presents some examples, demonstrating his vojōdi views, to convey the true
meaning of the unity he had in mind. One of the distiches was designed to signify the unity of
Christians and Muslims, which was more intriguing for Jones and thus, he translated it to:

Hail, O table of the Messiah without deficiency!

Hail, O fruit of Mary, without a cultured garden!

45
Sadi, Koliyat-e Sadi, Mohammad Ali Foroughi (ed.), (Tehran: Hermes,1961), 31:
‫بنی آدم اعض ی یک یگرن که در آفرینش یک گشهرن‬
46
Rumi, Masnavi, 6: 160: BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f.106:
‫غیر واح هرچه بینی آ ب اس‬ ‫مثنشی م دک وح تس‬
47
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 92:
‫حبذا بی ب غ میشه مری ی‬ ‫حبذا نشا مسیح بی ک ی‬
223
 Illustration 3, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 92; Jones translating a distich of Rumi’s Masnavi.

This distich is also fascinating from a poetical point of view, but let us not forget the role poetry
and verse have played and still play in the legal and political discourses of the Orient. Since a
versed form aids the reader in memorising the texts, many Oriental scientific, philosophical, or
legal texts were composed in the form. Aware of this, Jones emphasized the significance of the
form in Muslim culture; in his Mahomedan Law of Succession (1782), Jones reiterated that ‘the
Alcoran itself, the great source of Mahomedan law, is composed in sentences not only
modulated with art, but often exactly rhymed.’48 Therefore, Rumi’s distich, in the Persian
Quran, could have been utilized by anyone to provide a firm ground for arguing against
Christian-Muslim conflict. Jones was aware of the significance of poetry in Oriental law and
politics; he knew that many Eastern or Muslim scholars had utilized the form to convey
knowledge and science. Pluralistic Sufi distiches were widely utilized in eighteenth-century
India in order to avoid conflict. For example, in one case, Tipu Sultan’s vazir49 , who advised
the sultan not to wage war against the British, utilized the following distich of Hafez to
strengthen further his argument: ‘The tranquillity of this world and the hereafter is in these two
points: kindness with friends, toleration with foes.’50

48
Jones, The Works, 8: 164.
49
A Vazir is a high-ranking political advisor or minister in the Middle East.
50
‘Anonymous review of ‘The Odes of Hafiz (1801) and seven related Orientalist works’,
Calcutta Review, 26 (1856), 398-414: 399:
‫ب دوس مروت ب دا ن م ارا‬ ‫آس یش دو گی ی تفسیر این دو حرف اس‬
224
Jones’s Annotations on the Market of Unity: ‘Moses and the shepherd’
One of the most well-known anecdotes of Rumi’s Masnavi is the tale of Moses meeting a
shepherd who was addressing God in a worldly and, to some extent, blasphemous manner:

Where are you so that I can become your servant? I shall repair your shoes and brush
your hair.
I shall wash your clothes and kill its lice; I will bring you some milk.
I shall kiss your hand and massage your feet; nighttime comes, I shall make your bed
to sleep.51
Hearing this, Moses becomes angry and urges the shepherd to stop, stating that ‘The stench of
your blasphemy has rotted the universe!’ Later in the poem, we see: ‘A vision came to Moses
from God [saying] you have separated my servant from me! You have been sent to Connect,
not to disconnect!’52 To the disciples of the path of the Unity of Being, the virtuous were here
to end the separation of the disconnected and connect them to the Source. This brings to mind
Goethe’s description of Jones as a man who desired to connect the known to the unknown.53
Jones was not only familiar with the tale of Moses and the shepherd, but also he did some
comparative research on it. While his second volume of Rumi’s Masnavi 54
contains many
annotations, the remark he made on this particular poem stands out: ‘See the Tale of the
Stonecutter and Moses’.55 The annotation is written directly by the Persian title ‘The Denial of
Moses, peace be upon him, on Shepherd’s Psalm’ as seen in the image below.

51
BL, APAC, RSPA 36, f. 114:
‫چ رق دو م کنم ا نه سرت‬ ‫تش کج یی ت اشم من چ کرت‬
‫ایر پیش آورم ای مح شم‬ ‫ج مهات اشیم اپشه ات کشم‬
‫وق نشاب آی بروبم ج یک‬ ‫دس ک بشسم ب لم پ یک‬
52
BL, APAC, RSPA 36, f. 115:
‫بن هٔ م را م کردی ج ا‬ ‫وحی آم سشی مشسی ا ن ا‬
‫نی برای فصل کرد آم ی‬ ‫تش برای وصل کرد آم ی‬
53
Michael J. Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones': Sir William Jones, Poet, Lawyer, and Linguist,
1746-1794, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 37.
54
BL, APAC, RSPA 36.
55
BL, APAC, RSPA 36, f. 114.
225
 Illustration 4, BL, APAC, RSPA 36, f. 114; Jones’s annotation on Rumi’s tale of ‘Moses and the shepherd’.

The story Jones refers to here is a poem by an unknown author which was taught in Persian-
speaking schools, commonly known as ‫ مک ب‬maktab, similar to the madreseh. ‘The Tale of the
Stone-Cutter and Moses’ is heavily inspired by Rumi’s tale of ‘Moses and the Shepherd’, with
their difference being that the stone-cutter is even more blasphemous, or one might say vojōdi,
than the shepherd. The tale speaks of a stonemason who built a stone-house up in Mount Sinai
for God to reside in, perhaps similar to the one Abraham built in Mecca. While building the
house, the mason states:

I’ll make you fire if you are cold or fan you if it’s too warm.
I’ll make you a pillow to lean on; I’ll get you a reed and a harp.
Should you need a beautiful woman, again, I’ll bring you one without question.56

After this, the mason goes to a shepherd to buy a sheep to sacrifice and make kebab for God.
It is easy to observe that the mason, much like the shepherd, shares a servant-master
relationship with God, but the intriguing fact is that in both cases, the relationship, unlike most
servant-master relationships, is not out of fear but is grounded in Love. The driving source of

56
Unknown Author, ‘Moses and the Stonecutter’, The Eight Books and the Tale of the
Shepherd and Moses, Hosein Ketabforoosh (ed.), (Tehran: Sangi, 1960), 3-4:
‫ هر م ب دت نم‬، ‫گرم ب ا‬ ‫ بهر تش آتش کنم‬، ‫سرد ب ا‬
‫چنگ و نی نشاهی ه ه پیش آرم‬ ‫ب لشی س م بهر تکیه ات‬
‫ه چن آرم بهرت بی سئشاش‬ ‫ص حب ج ش‬ ‫گر تش می نشاهی‬
226
this relationship is in accord with a saying of Ali ibn Abi Talib (601- 661), whom the Sufis call
‘the Cupbearer of Paradise’:

Some people worship Allah to gain His Favours, this is the worship of traders; while
some worship Him to keep themselves free from His Wrath, this is the worship of
slaves; a few who obey Him out of their sense of gratitude and obligations, this is the
worship of free [thinkers] and noblemen.’57

Perhaps Jones’s awareness of the true tenets of Islam and its mysticism compelled him to warn
the European readers not to mistake the Oriental mystical poetry of the free thinkers with
simply carnal and erotic literature. Alternatively, perhaps it was the idea of worshipping and
serving out of love, which was already embedded amongst the Muslims and Hindus of the
subcontinent, that suited him to weather the Indian storms and encourage liberal thinking.

The tale continues with a man going to Moses and telling him about the Stonemason's
blasphemy; Moses goes to the house the mason has built and destroys the furniture he has put
there for God to use during his residence. When the mason arrives and confronts Moses, the
same events of ‘Moses and the Shepherd’ occur, resulting in the mason quoting the shepherd:
‘[He] said, Moses, you have sewn up my mouth; and burnt my life with regret.’ The rest of the
tale contains God appearing as a vision to Moses, telling him that he is here to Connect the
separated, and he should pursue the stonemason. However, there are two differences between
Rumi’s tale and this one which would have been intriguing for Jones and his comparative
studies. The first one is that in the case of the mason, who was more of a libertine than the
shepherd, God makes Moses convey a message to him:

You will send him Our Greetings and tell him Our Message.
Tell him that the Truth will become your guest and will follow as you command!
Give him the good news that he will be reunited, the Truth shall be his Guest at
dawn.58

57
Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥusayn Sharīf al-Raḍī, Peak of eloquence = Nahjul Balagha: sermons,
letters, and sayings of Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib, Mohammad Askari Jafery (trans.), (Accra,
N.Y: Islamic Seminary Publications, 1984), 28.
58
‘Moses and the Stonecutter’, The Eight Books, 10:
‫می دهی او را نزد م پی م‬ ‫می رس نی می دهی ا م سالم‬
‫هر چه نشاهی تش به فرم آم ه‬ ‫ب گشیش حق به مه آم ه‬
‫حق به مه آی ت وق سحر‬ ‫مژده وصلش ب ه تش سر بسر‬
227
This happens, and God appears as a light in the house the mason has built. The other difference
between the two tales is that the mason, similar to the Christian girl in Attar’s tale, will be
annihilated and consequently united with God after hosting Him / Her in the house.

Jones’s annotation referring to ‘the tale of the Stonecutter and Moses’ unveils some
underlying facts. Firstly, the tale contains a highly figurative language even for an Oriental
taste; this could have been why Jones does not mention it directly while trying to point out the
abundance of figurative speech in Oriental literature to the European readership of the time.
Secondly, the exaggerated figurative language of this particular tale would have served Jones
far better, compared to the Sufi routine ‘blasphemy’, for the portrayed picture of God is more
physical and/or humanistic. While God’s desire for a beautiful woman is quite rare in the
Persians’ mystical poetry, many instances of it could be found in the literature of the ancient
Greeks, Romans, and the Hindus; this rare similarity was quite helpful in further connecting
cultures between the Orient and the Occident. Thirdly, one of the significant aspects of the tales
lies within the fact that it is considered to be a ‫ مک بی‬maktabi text; such texts were an equivalent
of today’s standard school syllabus. In other words, any person who was literate at the time
knew this tale. Therefore, the tale would have proved extremely helpful for anyone who desired
to de-escalate a situation between a Muslim and a non-Muslim.

Jones’s Annotations on the Market of Unity: The Sixth Volume

Jones’s manuscript of Rumi’s sixth volume of Masnavi sheds a brighter light on understanding
the Unity of Being, the probability of Jones’s interactions with the concept, and his general
views on Persian Sufi literature. The manuscript is available in the British Library and is
catalogued as RSPA 40; on its very first folio, Jones mentions some of the most prominent
figures of Persian literature:

228
 Illustration 5, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. I; Jones’s list of Persian poets annotated on Rumi’s Masnavi
volume six.

It can be argued that while writing this, Jones had an ordering in mind: Ferdowsi (935-1020),
the only poet in the circle who was not a Sufi, was the person who revived the Persian language
and its poetical traditions. Anwari (1126 – 1189) was amongst the very first poets, if not the
very first, who blended Arabian poetics, traditions, and philosophy with Persian verse. In
between, Jones placed Nezami (1141–1209) and Hafez on one side and Rumi, ‘Maulavi’, and
Sadi on the other. This positioning could have been due to the character and style of the poets:
Sadi and Rumi could easily be considered as libertines and rends compared to Nezami and
Hafez, who presented a contrastingly conservative portrayal of themselves. Rumi’s sixth
volume of Masnavi contains one hundred and forty chapters, and references to the Unity of
Being can be found from the very beginning of the book. In the fourth chapter, Rumi elaborates
‘On Free Will’, stating: ‘You have bestowed upon me the very first tide; otherwise, O Glorious

229
One, my sea would have been stagnant.’59 Rumi’s argument in the chapter is that there is no
free will since all is God’s Will; he further discusses his argument and later, echoing Attar’s
‘Sheikh Sanaan and the Christian Girl’, states:

There is no path to the Great Divine Court for one who has not been Annihilated.
The Divine ascension is nothing but this; lovers have no religion and creed.60

As it can be seen below, the line ‘lovers have no religion and creed’ was highlighted by Jones:

Illustration 6, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 18r; an extract showing Jones’s annotation on a distich in
Rumi’s Masnavi.

By the book’s twentieth chapter, the Sufi’s blasphemous vojōdi intentions, Jones’s enthusiasm,
and the unrivalled Persian qualities of the verse all become evident. The chapter features a
conversation between Mohammad and his wife, Aisha:

As a test, the Prophet said, ‘He can’t see you, stop hiding!’
Aisha responded, ‘I see Him even if He doesn’t see me!’
Wisdom protects the virtue of the soul; these lines are full of metaphors and similes!
Considering the concealability of the soul, why the mind is being envious of the soul?
O jealous one, who are you hiding from? From the one who has concealed its face
with the Light?
This Sun is moving without any cover; its illuminating light acts as its veil!61

59
Rumi, Masnavi, 6: 4:
‫ورنه س کن بشد این بحر ای مجی‬ ‫اولم این جزر و م ا تش رسی‬
60
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 17l, 18r:
‫نیس ره در ب رگ ه کبری‬ ‫هیچ کس را ت نگردد او فن‬
‫ع اق را مذهب و دین نیس ی‬ ‫چیس معراج فلک این نیس ی‬
61
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 48:
‫او ن یبین ترا کم اش نه‬ ‫گف پیغ بر برای ام ح‬
‫او نبین من ه یبینم ورا‬ ‫کرد اا رت ع یشه ب دس ه‬
‫پر تشبیه ت و ت ثیل این نصشح‬ ‫غیرت عقل اس بر نشبی روح‬

230
As it can be seen below, in Illustration 7, Jones has marked the first two distiches of the poem,
‘As a test, the Prophet ... full of metaphors and similes.’ In addition, Jones has labelled the last
two distiches, ‘O jealous one, who are you hiding from? ... its illuminating light acts as its veil!’
as ‘Fine’:

Illustration 7, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 48; Jones’s annotations on Rumi’s tale of Mohammad and Aisha.

In the last two distiches, Rumi is alluding to Attar’s tale of ‘the Beautiful King’, whom no one
could look directly at, in his Conference of the Birds. However, the point Rumi is trying to
prove through the metaphors and similes is that although the beloved sometimes hides
him/herself from the lover, the lover’s soul is aware of the beauty and existence of the beloved
through its manifestation and emanation, which at the same time act as the beloved’s veil. Later
in the same poem, Rumi addresses the reader, the lover, or the Sufi who tries to describe the
Beloved to others:

O nightingale, do not sing of the flower to engage the people’s attention to its scent.
Engage their ears to yourself, so that the beauty of the flower does not astonish
[annihilate] them!

‫عقل بر وی این چنین راکین چراس‬ ‫ب چنین پنه نیی کین روح راس‬
‫آنک پشای س نشر روی او‬ ‫ا که پنه میکنی ای راکنش‬
‫فرط نشر اوس رویش را نق ب‬ ‫میرود بیرویپش این آف ب‬
231
As it can be seen in the illustration below, 62 Jones found these lines ‘Sweet!’ for in a sense he
was acting as the nightingale who was singing of the Orient, its philosophy, mysticism, and his
Beloved:

Illustration 8, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 50; Jones’s annotation on a distich of Rumi’s Masnavi.

By the fifty-fourth and fifty-fifth folios of the manuscript, Rumi’s intention of

composing the sixth volume of the Masnavi becomes more apparent. Some of the earliest
examples of utilizing a dialogue-formed verse to criticize orthodoxy can be observed in these
folios. With more challenging topics, Jones reveals his enthusiasm for Rumi’s critical poetry:

A mystic asked a sage-priest ‘Sir, which one is older? You or your beard?’
[He] said, I was born before it; I have seen quite a lot of this world without the beard.’
[The mystic] said ‘Your beard has become white [pure and clean], yet your Self is still
quite ugly [and dark]!
What came out of you has grown and progressed; yet you are still dry, desiring only a
piece of bread!’63

The illustration below shows Jones’s annotations on these folios:

62
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 50:
‫ت کنی مشغشلش ا بشی گل‬ ‫در روی گل‬ ‫بلبال نه نعره‬
‫سشی روی گل نپرد هشاش‬ ‫ت به قل مشغشش گردد گشاش‬
63
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 54-5:
‫که تشی نشاجه مسنتر ی که ریش‬ ‫ع رفی پرسی ا پیر کشیش‬
‫بی ریشی بس جه را دی هام‬ ‫گف نه من پیش ا و ایی هام‬
‫نشی ا تش نگردی س وا‬ ‫گف ریش ا سپی ا ح ش گش‬
‫تش چنین نشکی سشدای ثری‬ ‫وا پس تش اد و ا تش بگذری‬
232
 Illustration 9, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 54-5; Jones’s annotation on Rumi’s Masnavi.

As it may be observed from the folio, to Jones, a ‫ پیر کشیش‬pir-e keshish, ‘old/sage priest’ is not
much different from a simple ‘monk’; yet what initially intrigued him was the progress which
the Sufis seek: to purify the dark Self. It should be mentioned that Rumi points out the growing
of a ‘beard’ since in many Middle Eastern cultures having a beard primarily signifies having
high religious affinities or social rank. Jones was aware of such cultural significances, on
November 1, 1791, when he was planning his journey back to Britain through Persia, he
consulted Sir Harford Jones Brydges (1764-1847), the East India Company’s envoy
extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to the court of Persia:

Now my good Sir, you are the only man in the world, who can instruct me what sort of
presents I should carry for the Khan of Shiraz and his Vazir: they should be such as a
man of letters should present to personages of their rank, and I should presume, that the
best English watches would be most acceptable. In this and other circumstances, have
the goodness to be my instructor; that I must let my whiskers grow and wear a Persian

233
 dress will, I conclude, be necessary, and in that dress, I hope to have the pleasure, in
the spring of 1794 of assuring you in person how truly and thankful I am.64

Brydges advised: ‘You may begin to suffer your Beard to grow on the Passage from Bombay.
Nobody in Persia thinks of bereaving the face of what they are pleased to term its greatest
Ornament.’65 However, what Rumi refers to in this poem is different: the priest’s beard
signifies high religious affinity, which leads to religious extremism and narrowmindedness;
this is referred to in the poem by being ‘dry.’ While Jones found Rumi’s satirical metaphor
‘good’, to a modern reader, Jones’s annotation ‘sliced bread’ on ‘What came out of you has
grown and progressed; yet you are still dry, desiring only a piece of bread’ could demonstrate
the particular enthusiasm he had for the witty Sufi rend.

Jones’s Annotations on the Market of Unity: The Sixth Volume, ‘The Freedom of Bilal’

Another part of the book which caught Jones’s detailed attention is where Rumi relates the tale
of Mohammad buying a black slave from a Jew. During Mohammad’s time, Ethiopians were
enslaved by the natives of Arabia, and slavery was one of the many issues Mohammad tackled
as soon as he became a prophet. One way Mohammad stood against slavery before establishing
a governing body in Medina (624 AD), which resulted in anti-slavery laws, was to buy slaves
from the merchants or owners and grant them freedom. Before moving to Rumi’s tale, it is
relevant to point out that Jones, in his ‘Charge to the Grand Jury’ in Calcutta on June 10, 1785,
stated:

I have slaves, whom I rescued from death or misery, but consider them as other servants,
and shall certainly tell them so, when they are old enough to comprehend the difference
of the terms. Slaves, then, if so we must call them, ought not to be treated more severely
than servants by the year or by the month; and the correction of them should ever be
proportioned to their offence: that it should never be wanton or unjust, all must agree.66

Jones made ‘no scruple to declare’ his ‘opinion’67 that echoed Mohammad’s tradition as well
as some of the events occurring in Rumi’s tale. The tale recounts Bilal's (580-640 AD) story,
who came to be one of the prophet's most trusted and loyal companions and the first reciter of

64
Michael J. Franklin, “'I Burn with a Desire of Seeing Shiraz': A New Letter from Sir William
Jones to Harford Jones,” The Review of English Studies, 56: 227 (2005), 749-57: 751.
65
Franklin, “'I Burn with a Desire of Seeing Shiraz'”, 751.
66
Jones, The Works, 7: 15.
67
Jones, The Works, 7: 14.
234
the Islamic ‘call to prayer’. The tale starts with Bilal’s conversion to Islam, which his Jewish
master was not happy with. Since Muslims were prosecuted when Bilal converted to Islam, he
was being tortured for his unruly conversion and the fact that he was a black slave. 68 The
torture images echo Christ’s passion and the last living days of Hallaj, perhaps the earliest
vojōdi Sufi who was prosecuted for blasphemy. In response to the torture, Bilal was shouting
‫ اح اح‬ahad ahad, ‘One! One!’. The news reaches Mohammad, and he instructs one of his
companions, Abu Bakr (573-634 AD), to go there, buy Bilal, and release him from slavery.
Rumi restates Mohammad’s instructions to release the slave at any cost; if the asking price is
too much, they will share it! When Abu Bakr arrives at the master’s place, he asks to buy Bilal,
and the master responds that due to the torture, Bilal’s bones are broken, and he will not be a
good slave ever again. To which, reiterating what Mohammad said to him, Abu Bakr responds:

The bones and the wind [physical aspects] are just a cover.
In this world and the hereafter, there is none but God.69

Illustration 10, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 87; Jones’s comparative annotation on Rumi’s ‘Freedom of Bilal’.

Jones wrote the marginal comment ‘Vedanta’ by Abu Bakr’s vojōdi response. This comparative
annotation is entirely accurate since, according to the Vedanta philosophy, mainly Advaita
Vedanta and Shuddhadvaita, there is nothing but Brahma. Jones referred to this aspect of
Vedanta in his ‘On the Philosophy:’

The fundamental tenet of the Vedanti school […] consisted, not in denying the
existence of matter, that is, of solidity, impenetrability, and extended figure (to deny
which would be lunacy), but, in correcting the popular notion of it, and in contending,
that it has no essence independent of mental perception, that existence and perceptibility
are convertible terms, that external appearances and sensations are illusory, and would

68
Sir William Muir, The Life of Mohammad From Original Sources, (Edinburgh: J. Grant,
1923), 59.
Muhammad Abdul-Rauf, Bilāl Ibn Rabāh: A Leading Companion of The Prophet
Muhammad (SAW), (Indianapolis, IN: American Trust Publications, 1977), 5.
69
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 87:
‫اس خشا و ب د روپش اس و بس در دو ع لم غیر یزدا نیس کس‬
235
 vanish into nothing, if the divine energy, which alone sustains them, were suspended
but for a moment;70

In the essay, Jones further elaborates that such a relationship between the existence and the
Divine, which has been demonstrated in Rumi’s distich, has been adopted from Vedantic
schools by Epicharmus (d. 448 BC) and Plato. Jones follows his statement by pointing out that
such views, whether called Neoplatonism, Vedantism, or the Unity of Being, have ‘been
maintained in the present century with great elegance but with little publick applause.’ This is
where he reiterates that such syncretic views have partly ‘been misunderstood’ and/or have
been ‘misapplied by the false reasoning of some unpopular writers, who are said to have
disbelieved in the moral attributes of GOD, whose omnipresence, wisdom, and goodness are
the basis of the Indian philosophy’.71 It is these misunderstandings that led to prosecutions of
the vojōdi Sufis such as Hallaj. Later in this chapter, the application of such syncretic views
and the misunderstanding they caused in Mughal India will be discussed.

In Rumi’s tale, after Abu Bakr buys Bilal, the Jewish master laughs at him for he has
paid too much for a ‘broken black slave’. Abu Bakr responds by saying that what he has
purchased is beyond material goods and worldly possessions. Rumi’s Abu Bakr concludes his
argument by saying: ‘This is yours and that is mine, [therefore] we have both gained profit./ O
Jew! For you is your religion, and for me is my religion.’72 The distich’s second line, ‘For you
is your religion, and for me is my religion’, is Rumi quoting from the Quran’s hundred and
ninth sūrah [chapter] entitled ‘On the Infidels.’73 The Surah itself has many significances:
firstly, it is one of the four sūrahs which starts with Allah commanding Mohammad to ‘Say …’
something. There are three other Surahs in which God commands the readers to ‘Say’
something; two of them are recommended by Mohammad’s tradition to be recited in the

70
Jones, The Works, 1: 239.
71
Jones, The Works, 1: 239.
72
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, 91:
‫هین لکم دین ولی دین ای جهشد‬ ‫این تش را و آ مرا بردیم سشد‬
73
The Quran 109:1-6:
‫﴾ َوال أَ ْن ُ ْم‬٤﴿ ‫عبَ ْت ُ ْم‬ َ ‫﴾ َوال أ َ ْن ُ ْم‬۲﴿ َ ‫﴾ ال أ َ ْعبُ ُ َم ت َ ْعبُ ُو‬١﴿ َ ‫قُ ْل یَ أَیُّ َه ْال َک ف ُِرو‬
َ َ‫﴾ َوال أَن‬٣﴿ ُ ُ‫ع بِ ُو َ َم أ َ ْعب‬
َ ‫ع بِ ٌ َم‬
﴾٦﴿ ‫ِین‬
ِ ‫ِی د‬ َ ‫﴾ لَ ُک ْم دِینُ ُک ْم َول‬٥﴿ ُ ُ‫ع بِ ُو َ َم أ َ ْعب‬
َ
‘Say, "O Infidels, (1) I do not worship what you worship. (2) And you are not
worshippers of what I worship. (3) And I will not be a worshipper of what you
worship. (4) And you will not be worshippers of what I worship. (5) For you is your
religion, and for me is my religion. (6)”’
236
Muslim daily prayer, known as Salah, while the third one is a mandatory part of the Muslim
prayer. Another significance of this particular Surah is that it is the only one in the Quran
which does not start with ‘In the name of Allah’. This is due to the fact that this Surah, as its
name suggests, is addressed to the ‫ ک فرو‬kāferōn, ‘infidels’, people who are against Allah. This
could be interpreted as Allah’s trying to convey a message to people who are against him/her
in the Surah; the message is: people against Allah should follow their path, and the followers
of Allah should follow their own. In order not to cause any further dispute between the two,
the Surah does not start with ‘In the name of Allah;’ since the ‘infidels’ disagree with the
phrase. It also should be pointed out that considering the Surah’s content, a Muslim should not
seek retribution against the ‘infidels’ who only follow their own religion or path. Jones gave
particular attention to Rumi reciting this Quranic verse,74 even when the scribe who composed
the manuscript has forgotten to put the vowels of the Arabic text. As it can be seen below,
Jones adds the vowels to the text himself:

Illustration 11, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, 91; Jones’s correction on Rumi’s Masnavi.

Jones’s handwriting over the Quranic text points out a few key facts about this line; firstly, I
must mention that Muslims consider it highly disrespectful or even a sin to write on the Quran
or alter its text in any manner. Jones was indeed aware of this, and consequently, even though
he had a habit of annotating the texts he read, he did not write a single annotation on his
personal manuscript of the Quran.75 Jones’s annotations on this hemistich, correcting a
forgetful Persian-speaking scribe and recreating what Rumi had intended, is yet another
evidence of his respect for the faith and its beliefs. Another vital point that might have caught
Jones’s attention is the circumstances in which Rumi has used his Quranic quotation.
According to Islam, there is much difference between a ‫ ک فر‬kāfer, ‘infidel’ and the ‫اهل الك ب‬
ahl al-ketāb, ‘People of the Book’: Jews, Christians, Sabians, and sometimes other religions
such as Zoroastrians.76 However, in this case, the terminology in which an infidel has to be

74
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 91.
75
BL, APAC, RSPA 82.
76
‘Ahl al-Kitab’, The Oxford Dictionary of Islam, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003),
10.
237
addressed is used for a Jew; the rationale behind this is mentioned implicitly in Mohammad’s
instruction to Abu Bakr, the instruction was: the Jewish slaver is unable to comprehend the true
worth of Bilal, all he cares for is money, and thus if he asks for an unreasonable amount we,
Mohammad and Abu Bakr, should share it. The implied point surfaces when Abu Bakr is
negotiating over Bilal; at first, the slave master says that this particular black slave is not worth
anything, to which Abu Bakr responds: ‘If you truly believe in your religion, how could you
torture one who speaks of the Truth? / [So] you are only Jewish in a material way [on the
surface]; hence, you are torturing a faithful prince!’ In this extract, firstly, Rumi emphasizes
one of the fundamental similarities of Judaism and Islam: they are both monotheistic; however,
as the Jew is torturing a fellow monotheist, Rumi questions his belief in the tenets of Judaism.
Consequently, Rumi concludes that the Jew is not, in fact, a proper Jew, as he does not care for
others who share Jewish/monotheistic beliefs, and therefore he is an infidel.

In the tale's conclusion, Bilal is bought from the slaver and released; however, the slaver
who only had a passion for money noticed that Abu Bakr had his eyes only on Bilal and
therefore sold him to Abu Bakr for a high price. Abu Bakr pays all the money by himself,
which was not in accord with Mohammad’s instructions of sharing the price. Thus, the finale
of the tale contains the reunion of Bilal with Mohammad as well as the prophet enquiring about
the reason behind Abu Bakr’s unwillingness to share the price of the slave’s freedom:

[the prophet] said: ‘my friend, I told you to share this great virtuous deed with me.’
[Abu Bakr] said: ‘both of us [Bilal and himself] have become the slaves of your
mansion; just for thy beautiful cheek, I released him.
I will not ask for freedom, as long as you keep me your slave and companion.
Your service is my freedom; without you, all is burden and unjust for me.’77

It should be pointed out that in this tale, the Jewish slave-master represents ‫ نفس ع ّ ره‬nafs-e
amāreh, ‘the self-inciting self’, Bilal is represented as ‫ نفس ُمل َه ه‬nafs-e molhameh, ‘the self-
inspiring self’ who eventually is released from the inciting self, and Abu Bakr represents ‫نفس‬
‫ لَ ّشامه‬nafs-e lavāmeh, ‘the self-accusing self’ who takes orders from ‫ نفس ُمط َ ئنّه‬nafs-e
motmaeneh, ‘the content self’, which has been reunited with God and thus it is God; Rumi

77
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 91-2:
‫که مرا انب کن در مکرم‬ ‫گف ای ص یق آنر گف‬
‫کردمش آ اد من بر روی تش‬ ‫گف م دو بن گ کشی تش‬
‫هیچ آ ادی نخشاهم ینه ر‬ ‫تش مرا میدار بن ه و ی ر غ ر‬
‫بی تش بر من محن و بی ادی اس‬ ‫که مرا ا بن گی آ ادی اس‬
238
represented the content self as Mohammad. While establishing whether Jones was thoroughly
aware of the depth of the symbols of slavery in this story or not, it can be strongly asserted that
he knew some of these terminologies as well as how Sufis used symbolism and philosophical
tenets in their poetry; for example, symbolism with similar nature was used in Minnat’s
panegyric verses dedicated to Jones and Hastings.78 Another example which could signify his
proper understanding of the verse could be found in his annotation on the line in which the self-
accusing self, Abu Bakr, addresses the content self, or Mohammad: ‘Your service is my
freedom; without you, all is a burden and unjust for me.’79

Illustration 12, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, 92; Jones’s comparative remark on Rumi’s Masnavi.

By writing ‘whose service is perfect freedom’, Jones draws a parallel between Rumi’s line, in
the Market of Unity, and the Book of Common Prayer of the Anglican church:

O God, who art the author of peace and lover of concord, in knowledge of whom
standeth our eternal life, whose service is perfect freedom; Defend us thy humble
servants in all assaults of our enemies.80
While Rumi’s distich to an ordinary reader is simply Abu Bakr addressing Mohammad, to one
with some knowledge of Sufism, or enough imagination, it could be interpreted as a lover
addressing a beloved. At first glance, one might think that the prayer has nothing in common
with the line, for one is addressed to God and the other to Mohammad, who is not God.
However, should one consider the complete image portrayed in the verse Jones has referred to,

78
For example, in BL, APAC, Or. 6633, f. 67r:
‫آنق ر فرق ق ر تش بشد ت به عقشش که بشد ت به مشالی عقل اوش‬
The distich literally translates to ‘The difference between your status and the intellects, is
similar to the difference between the animals and the first intellect.’ Its translation in
Aristotelian terms is: ‘The difference between your status and the universal intelligence is
similar to the difference between the primal intelligence and the three kingdoms.’
79
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 92:
‫بی تش بر من محن و بی ادی اس‬ ‫که مرا ا بن گی آ ادی اس‬
80
The Oxford Guide to The Book of Common Prayer: A Worldwide Survey, C. Hefling, & C.
Shattuck (eds.), (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 143.
239
specifically ‘O God, … Defend us thy humble servants in all assaults of our enemies’, the
pieces dovetail: Jones indeed was aware of Rumi’s utilization of Mohammad as ‘the content
self’, for it is the self which has become one with God. Consequently, to Jones, the assaulting
enemies, much like the torturing slave master, was nothing but the self-inciting self; while he
acted as the servant self-accusing self, or Abu Bakr, to save the enslaved self-inspiring self, or
Bilal.

Jones’s Annotations on the Market of Unity: The Sixth Volume, ‘The Tale of the
Wretched’

Another extract of Rumi’s Masnavi which caught Jones’s attention is found in the ‘Tale of the
Wretched’: a person becomes quite sick, and in a wretched state, a doctor instructs him that in
order to be healed, he should not suppress any of his desires. As the wretched one comes out
of the doctor’s surgery, he sees a Sufi sitting by a river. Suddenly, seeing the back of the Sufi’s
neck, the wretched man feels the strongest urge to slap it! At first, he decides to suppress the
urge, yet he recalls the doctor’s prescription! He proceeds and slaps the Sufi on the back of the
neck; the Sufi turns around to see who was responsible and possibly to return the blow.
However, as soon as he sees the poor state of the wretched, he debates whether or not he should
hit him back. During the Sufi’s debate with himself, he realizes that he should forget about
immediate revenge and take the wretched to court since the other person is not healthy. The
following extract is where he realizes that in life, people should be patient and not look for an
immediate outcome:

Observe. A wise person will spend days and nights seeking nothing.
[Similar to] a beggar who does not expect [immediate] generosity; [or] a shopkeeper
who is not after immediate profit.
There is no one expecting immediate greenery in a [new] garden, there is no place for
a [fully grown] palm tree in farms.
There is no one in the Madrasas seeking instant knowledge, no one in the convents
seeks after wisdom.
They have put what exists behind them; serving and seeking what does not exist.
I have already disclosed the mystery to you: see both [what exists and what does not]
as one, do not count them as two. 81

81
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 115:
‫رو و اب در جس جشی نیس هس‬ ‫این ببین ب ری که هر کش عقل هس‬
‫بر دک نه ط لب سشدی که نیس‬ ‫در گ ایی ط لب جشدی که نیس‬
‫در مغ رس ط لب نخلی که نیس‬ ‫در مزارع ط لب دنلی که نیس‬

240
Most of the lines in the passage are quite straightforward to comprehend; as it can be seen
below, Jones took notice of the whole passage:

Illustration 13, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 115; Jones’s annotations on Rumi’s ‘Tale of the Wretched’.

However, he put specific emphasis on the fourth distich, ‘There is no one in the Madrasas
seeking knowledge, no one in the convents seeks after wisdom.’ The distich is open to be
interpreted as a criticism on the orthodoxy of mainstream Islam and Christianity, as well as the
last line which is one of the fundamental tenets of the Unity of Being: ‘I have already disclosed
the mystery to you: see both as one, do not count them as two.’ It might seem rather strange
for the tale’s Sufi, or Rumi for that matter, to utilize a poem revolving around the theme of
patience in order to convey pluralistic messages. However, as it can be observed, of all the lines
in the passage, Jones was keener on two which had vojōdi and pluralistic significance.

Jones’s Annotations on the Market of Unity: The Sixth Volume, ‘The Tale of the Three
Travellers’

The following tale of the book which aroused Jones’s attention is entitled ‘The Tale of the
Three Travellers’. Rumi starts the tale with:

‫در صشامع ط لب حل ی که نیس‬ ‫در م ارس ط لب عل ی که نیس‬

‫این و آ را تش یکی بین دو مبین‬ ‫پیش ا ین رمزی بگف م ا ین‬
241
 Observe that Jew and Christian, who in a journey, became companions of a Faithful
one [Muslim].
Two Infidels82 became companions of a Faithful, just like the Self and the Self-
Inciting Self [who accompany] Wisdom.
People of the East, the West, and the Beyond settled in a Caravanserai to spend the
night.83
After describing the setting of the story, a Caravanserai secluded from the rest of the world,
and stating the obvious differences between the travellers, Rumi emphasizes their similarities:
‘Observe your own body: see where [and how] the different parts gathered in it: / water, earth,
air, and fire; divine, carnal, black and white.’84 Quite similar yet very different, the three
travellers faced a challenge: during their journey and their settlement in the caravanserai, they
had limited food resources. While the Jew and the Christian did not want to have the food right
away, the Muslim who had been fasting all day was hungry. This challenge causes a debate
between them, resulting in them agreeing on not having the food immediately. They decide to
sleep first, and whoever has had the most intriguing dream will have the food. After waking
up, the Jew recalls that in his dream, he saw Moses on Mount Sinai while conversing with God
through the burning bush; the Jew joins the conversation and consequently becomes aware of
God’s messages to Moses. The Christian, attempting to present a superior challenge, says that
he has dreamed that Jesus took him to heaven and many divine matters were revealed to him.
Unbeknown to the Jew and the Christian, the hungry Muslim had woken up earlier than either
of them and eaten all the food. However, following the other two, the Muslim shares his dream
using a sarcastic tone to point out that the two have lied. Mohammad appears to him in his
dream, saying that one of your companions has travelled to Mount Sinai and is busy talking to
Moses and God; the other is spending his time with Jesus and learning all of the divine secrets.
In order for you not to fall behind, you must wake up and eat the food! Eventually, the Jew and
the Christian agree that one must obey the direct order of a prophet. Jones has made various
annotations on the tale, and it is quite fascinating that all of them are on the lines that are either

82
The word Rumi uses here is ‫ گ راه‬gomrāh, ‘astray.’
83
Rumi, Masnavi, 6: 80; also, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f.162:
‫ه رهی کردن ب هم در سفر‬ ‫آ جهشد و مؤمن و ترس نگر‬
‫چش نرد ب نفس و ب آهرمنی‬ ‫ب دو گ ره ه ره آم مؤمنی‬
...
‫اهل ارق و اهل غرب و م ورا‬ ‫کرده منزش اب به یک ک روانسرا‬
84
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 163:
‫ا کج ه گرد آم در ب‬ ‫در تن نشد بنگر این اجزای تن‬
‫عرای و فرای و رومی و گشی‬ ‫آبی و ن کی و ب دی و آتشی‬
Jones took interest in this distich and has translated ‫ گشی‬gashi, which figuratively means
‘black.’
242
pluralistic and vojōdi, or they can be interpreted as such. One of the earliest annotations is on
a line in which Rumi is talking about the morning after; he states that the travellers in the
Caravanserai woke up, washed, and started to pray, each in their own colour:

‘Jews, pagans, Christians, and the Magis became homochromatic by the Great One.’85

Illustration 14, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 150; Jones’s annotations on Rumi’s Masnavi.

As can be seen in the photograph above, Jones uses the device of a pointed finger to direct
attention to Rumi’s line, stating that although different religions appear in different colours,
they are all of one source. Looking for resources in a very colourful subcontinent, Jones was
indeed seeking a homochromatic unifying light. It is not hard to grasp that Jones indeed had
realized that he could find the Great One’s illuminating and unifying light in the Sufis’ poetry
and Vedantic philosophy.

In the Bhagavad Gita, the Goddess of the Vedic Mantra, the poetic metre and form of
Hindu hymns, is named Gáyatrí; according to Jones and the Vedic texts, Gáyatrí is also ‘the
holiest hymn in the Veda’.86 In his notes for the Discourse, ‘Extract of a Dissertation on the
Primitive Religion of the Hindus’87 which he was unable to finish due to his tragic death in
1794, Jones provided a translation of Gáyatrí as the ‘holiest hymn’:

Let us adore the supremacy of that divine sun, the godhead who illuminates all, who
recreates all, from whom all proceed, to whom all must return, whom we invoke to
direct our understandings aright in our progress toward his holy seat. What the sun and
light are to this visible world, that are the Supreme good and truth to the intellectual
and invisible universe; and, as our corporeal eyes have a distinct perception of objects
enlightened by the sun, thus our souls acquire certain knowledge, by meditating on the
light of truth, which emanates from the Being of beings; that is the light by which alone
our minds can be directed in the path to beatitude. 88

85
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 150:
‫ج لگی یکرنگ ا ا الپ الغ‬ ‫و ترس و مغ‬ ‫ا جهشد و مشر‬
86
Jones, The Works, 13: 365.
87
Jones, The Works, 13: 365-84.
88
Jones, The Works, 8: 365.
243
In his The Institutes of Hindu Law (1796), Jones further explains that Gáyatrí is not the worship
of the ‘visible material sun,’ yet it is that of the ‘divine and incomparably greater light…which
illuminates all…and which alone can irradiate (not our visual organs merely, but our souls and)
our intellects.’89 Intriguingly, Jones’s Institutes of Hindu Law (1796) also elaborates that by
‘the sole repetition of Gáyatrí, a priest may indubitably attain beatitude, let him perform, or not
perform, any other religious act’; since by such repetition, one becomes ‘united to the Great
One’.90 The Osborne c. 400 collection contains Jones’s repetition of Rumi’s Gáyatrí in his own
Persian handwriting: ‘The faithful, Christian, Jew, Geber, and the Magi; all head toward that
Great King.’91 Please see the illustration below:

Illustration 15, Osborn c. 400, f. 96; Jones’s recitation of Rumi’s distich.

Jones both invokes and enunciates Gáyatrí in his ‘Hymn to Súrya’ (1787), a fitting invocation
to the Hindu illuminating Sun-god:

FOUNTAIN of living light

That o er all nature streams,
Of this vast microcosm both nerve and soul;
Whose swift and subtil beams, Eluding mortal sight,
Pervade attract sustain th’ effulgent whole,
Unite, impel, dilate, calcine, 92

89
Sir William Jones, Institutes of Hindu law, or, The Ordinances of Menu, according to the
gloss of Cullúca: comprising the Indian system of Duties, religious and civil: verbally
translated from the original Sanscrit: with a preface, by Sir William Jones, (Calcutta: East
India Company Press, 1796), xvi.
90
Jones, Institutes of Hindu law, 125-6.
91
Beinecke Library, Osborn c. 400, f. 96:
‫ج له را رو سشی آ سلط الغ‬ ‫مشمن و ترس جهشد و گبر و مغ‬
92
Jones, The Works, 4: 281.
244
In this poem, Jones uses the hymn as a translational form to allow Hindu religious tradition
and theology to find a ‘consonant mode of expression’ in English; also, the holiest religious
act of Hinduism one can perform.93

The Great One’s illuminating and unifying light is evident in another part of Rumi’s
vojōdi poetry and philosophy; where the Jew recalls his dream, he states that: ‘Moses, the
Mount Sanai, and I have all became lost [annihilated] in that luminating light! Eventually, from
Mostafa [Mohammad]’s illuminating light, hundreds of thousands of dark places became
illuminated.’94 Further anticipating the moral and rationale behind the ‘Tale of the Three
Travellers’, Jones came across the following part, at the end of the Jew’s dream, in which Rumi
states:

All prophets were assembled, [therefore] I comprehended the unity of all prophets.
That Jew continued this trail, a Jewish trail that was leading to Mohammad.
Do not humiliate infidels; perhaps there is the hope of his/her dying a Muslim.
What news do you have of the end of their life? [How can you] at once, turn your face
from them?
Below, you can see the folio of Jones’s manuscript, which contains the part of the poem I
mentioned above:95

93
For further analysis of the Hymn, see: Kurt Andrew Johnson, ‘Sir William Jones and
Representations of Hinduism in British Poetry 1784-1812’, (September 2010), 59-62
[https://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/1236/1/Final_Thesis.pdf].
94
Rumi, Masnavi, 6: 64:
‫هر سه گم گش یم ا ااراق نشر‬ ‫هم من و هم مشسی و هم کشه طشر‬
…
‫ص هزارا نشع ظل ا ضی‬ ‫آنچن کز صقل نشر مصطفی‬
95
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 155:
‫اتح د انبی ام فهم ا‬ ‫انبی بشدن ایش اهل ود‬
...
‫بس جهشدی کآنر مح شد بشد‬ ‫ین نسق میگف آ اخص جهشد‬
‫که مسل مردنش ب ا امی‬ ‫هیچ ک فر را به نشاری منگری‬
‫ت بگردانی ا و یکب ره رو‬ ‫چه نبر داری ن م ع ر او‬
245
 Illustration 16, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 155; Jones’s annotation on Rumi’s Masnavi.

Although this folio does not have as many annotations as some of the other folios in the
manuscript, it can indeed be asserted that it contains the most remarkable annotation of the
manuscript, if not the whole Royal Society Persian and Arabic collection. The first annotation
of Jones is apparent on the top of the folio, where Rumi states: ‘All prophets were assembled,
[therefore] I comprehended the unity of all prophets.’ Jones has written ‘mihi’, the Latin
translation of the Persian ‫ ام‬am, ‘I/me’. At first glance, what naturally comes to mind is that
either Jones simply translated the Persian pronoun or, considering his views on the languages,
he intended to point out the phonetical similarity of the term in both languages. Both
interpretations are plausible and valid; however, a question may arise: in his collection of
personal papers MSS Eur. C 274, which contains many Persian verses alongside Jones’s notes
of practising Persian and in one hundred and nineteen volumes of the Royal Society Persian
and Arabic manuscripts, the term ‫ ام‬am, ‘I/me’ appears numerous times. The question is,
considering the fact that he obtained the manuscript, RSPA 40, while he was in India, why
246
should he choose to write mihi only once and only over a vojōdi line which states that ‘I
comprehended the union of the prophets’? Could this ‘mihi’ suggest Jones’s own mind and its
reflection upon the pluralistic text as well as Rumi’s significant influence on Jones? This is
similar to his treatment of another verse of Rumi, which was mentioned earlier: ‘While
travelling, if I see India or China;/ the love of homeland shall not depart my heart.’96 Another
aspect of the exceptional nature of this folio is apparent in Jones’s annotations on the bottom
of it. Jones quite regularly used brackets to highlight the text; he would often use underlining
as well as drawing a pointing finger, similar to writing ‘NB’, close to the parts of the text he
was interested in. However, usually, Jones did not write any explanations about why that
specific line was highlighted. Sometimes he has written hints, such as ‘See Chaucer’ or ‘See
Ferdowsi’, but he never wrote why the highlighted line was significant to him apart from this
folio. On the bottom of the folio, where Rumi states: ‘Do not humiliate an infidel; perhaps there
is the hope of his/her dying Muslim./What news do you have of the end of their life? [How can
you] at once, turn your face from them?’ Jones writes ‘Toleration’, which could be viewed as
evidence of his altruism and significant interest in Sufi vojōdi and pluralistic conceptions.

Rumi concludes the tale in the next folio; he asserts that not only different religions,
but also different beings that exist, even inanimate objects in the universe such as stones, soil,
mountains, and water, have an interaction with God:

The faithful, Christian, Jew, Virtue and Vice, all are heading toward the One.
The faithful, Christian, Jew, Geber and Magus, all are heading toward the Great One.
Even stones, soil, mountains, and water have some hidden interaction with God.97

This part of the text, which is also similar to Vedanta, as mentioned previously, did not escape
Jones’s keen sight; please see below:

96
BL, APAC, RSPA 35, f. i.
97
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 156:
‫ج لگوو را هووس رو سووشي احوو‬ ‫ جهوشد و نیوك و بو‬، ‫موشمن و ترسو‬
‫ج له را رو سشی آنسلط الغ‬ ‫ جهوشد و گبر و مغ‬، ‫موشمن و ترسو‬
‫هس واگش نه نی ب ن ا‬ ‫بلک سنگ و ن و کشه و آب را‬
247
 Illustration 17, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 156; Jones’s annotations on Rumi’s Masnavi.

It can be observed that Jones was familiar with Sufi philosophy and metaphysics in addition to
knowing that the utilization of such points of view alongside their Hindu equivalents would
promote ‘Toleration’ and consequently make the subcontinent more harmonious. Although his
efforts, for example, translating Islamic and Hindu legal texts, were in accord with such
pluralistic views, the question of why he did not directly address or mention the ‘Unity of
Being’ remains. One must consider some points if he/she seeks an answer to that question.
Firstly, it should be considered that many of Jones’s letters and manuscripts are still under-
researched; for example, the Royal Society’s manuscripts or the three letters of Jones, which
were ‘discovered’ quite recently.98 Secondly, due to the nature of the ‘Unity of Being’ and the
fact that most of its followers were and are being prosecuted, it was likely that addressing it
directly at the time of Jones in India would have been more tumultuous than harmonizing; in
Jones’s words such acts would meet ‘with little publick applause’.99 Thirdly, the vojōdi masters
had advised against challenging the orthodoxy of the masses. For example, in one of the
concluding parts of the sixth volume of the Masnavi, Rumi advises the reader not to try to
convince an ignorant person, no matter how righteous the reader is. In order to further validate
his argument, Rumi utilizes a debate between Abraham and Nimrod; after that, Rumi states
that even if the reader travels to China, signifying a foreign land, he/she should not argue with
or try to change the beliefs of the natives, no matter what those beliefs are:

Do not seek scandal [audacity] in China, use your wit, do not exclude it!
The Plato of times’ advice is to leave such challenges and [pretend] to be on the same
path as them!
In China, everyone strongly claims that ‘the King has not been born [like any other

98
Joshua Ehrlich, ‘Empire and Enlightenment in Three Letters from Sir William Jones to
Governor-General John Macpherson’, The Historical Journal, 62:2, (2019), 541-51.
99
Jones, The Works, 1:239; This will be addressed later in this chapter.
248
 human being’].
Our King did not have any children either, for he did not consort with any woman!’
Whoever states anything other than this about the King, a blade will become consort
to their neck!
The King will say ‘now that you have such claims, you have to prove that I have a
wife!
Should you be able to prove such a girl exists, I will grant you safety.
Otherwise, without any doubts, I will cut off your throat! I will take away, your
worthless Sufi life!’100
Given the fact that Jones paid extra attention to the poem, as seen in the folio below,101 he
might have taken Rumi’s advice in order not to cause scandal, audacity, and turmoil in a foreign
land.

Illustration 18, BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 180; Jones’s annotation on Rumi’s Masnavi.

100
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 180:
‫ع قلی جش نشیش ا وی در مچین‬ ‫نشیش ن رسشا مکن در اهر چین‬
‫هین هشا بگذار و رو بر وفق آ‬ ‫آ چه گشی آ فالطش م‬
‫بهر ا ه نشیش ن که لم یل‬ ‫ج له میگشین ان ر چین به ج‬
‫را ره ن اد‬ ‫بلک سشی نشیش‬ ‫ا ه م نشد هیچ فر ن ی نزاد‬
‫گردنش ب تیغ برا کرد جف‬ ‫هر که ا ا ه ا ین نشعش بگف‬
‫ی بکن ث ب که دارم من عی ش‬ ‫ا ه گشی چشنک گف ی این مق ش‬
‫ی ف ی ا تیغ تیزم آمنی‬ ‫مر مرا دن ر اگر ث ب کنی‬
‫برکشم ا صشفی ج دلق تش‬ ‫ورنه بیاک من ببرم حلق تش‬
101
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 180.
249
The third and fourth distiches of the extract represent an allusion to the Quran; as mentioned
previously, there are four Surahs which start with ‘Say...’, Rumi quotes parts of one of the
fourth Surahs at the end of the third line and translates the other parts of it in the fourth line.102
Rumi’s verse, which is addressed to Sufis, could be interpreted as a criticism of the ignorance
which was presented in Islamic orthodoxy: should one realize that in Persian, the terms ‫ا ه‬
shāh, ‘king’ and ‫ ن ا‬khodā, ‘God’ were interchangeable until two or three centuries ago. Hence,
the ignorant masses of the far-away land were literally repeating what the Muslims say about
Allah. It is quite likely that Rumi has utilized the lexical interchangeability and only changed
the settings of such orthodox beliefs while stating some of the fundamental Islamic, or
Abrahamic, views. The circumstances that Rumi describes in the poem are quite similar to
Jones’s situation in India, as discussed later.

The Unity of Witnesses

Before moving to the next part of the chapter, it is fitting to briefly mention another doctrine
of Islamic mysticism which played a massive role in India: ‫ وح ت اووهشد‬vahdat-e shohōd, ‘the
unity of witnesses’103 which in some respects opposes the former doctrine. The Unity of Being
has had many critics from the beginning of its existence, some of whom were amongst the
Sufis. The Sufi critics of the Unity of Being substituted the role of subject for the object in the
Unity of Being, and the new doctrine was called ‘The Unity of Witnesses’. According to the
new doctrine, any type of Unification between the Creator and the creation does not have any
manifestation, emanation, or appearance in the material world. Furthermore, the Union is
purely subjective and depends on the mind of the individual. One of the major results of this
particular point of view is that the Creator and the creation are not identical but entirely separate
from each other; the creation is more of a shadow or reflection, not a manifestation and
portrayal, of the Divine’s Attributes. A tale from Rumi’s Masnavi is quite helpful in
understanding the doctrine of the Unity of Witnesses: an elephant was in a dark room, different
people went inside and tried to describe the elephant. One, touching the elephant’s trunk,
described the elephant as an animal like a downpipe; another one, touching its ear, described it

102
The Quran, 112: 1-4.
﴾٤﴿ ٌ ‫﴾ َولَ ْم یَ ُک ْن لَهُ ُکفُشا أ َ َح‬٣﴿ ْ َ‫﴾ لَ ْم یَ ِل ْ َولَ ْم یُشل‬۲﴿ ُ َ ‫ص‬ َّ ﴾١﴿ ٌ ‫َّللاُ أَ َح‬
َّ ‫َّللاُ ال‬ َّ ‫قُ ْل ه َُش‬

‘Say, “He is God, the One. God, the Absolute. He begets not, nor was He begotten.
And there is none comparable to Him.”’
103
The term’s Arabic transliteration is Wahdat al-Shuhud.
250
as a flag-like animal. So on and so forth, people described the elephant as pillars – its feet – or
even a bed – its back.104 In this tale, the witnesses described a singular unity, and although their
description was true, it was according to their subjective perception of the object. The
difference between the two doctrines arises from the point that the Unity of Being states that
the people have similarities – and are one – with the elephant, while the unity of witnesses
states that there are no similarities between the people and the elephant. Many scholars have
stated that the difference between the two doctrines is merely semantics due to the ambiguity
of their metaphors and language. Others believe the Unity of Witnesses acts as an introduction
to the Unity of Being. However, the debate on the subject of the relationship between the
Creator and creation is still ongoing. In fact, this relationship – between the Creator and the
creation – causes the turmoil between different sects of Islam and its mystical schools, i.e.
Sufism; the debate, depending on what one believes, could result in accusations of blasphemy
and/or heresy by another. The leading Sufi who founded the doctrine of the Unity of Witnesses
was Ala o-dole Simnani (1261-1336), an eminent saint of the Chishti Order, who had moved
to India from Iran. Simnani wrote many critical texts and marginal notes on Ibn-Arabi‘s The
Bezels of Wisdom. The annotations attracted a huge number of followers, particularly in the
sub-continent; among those followers were Ahmed Sirhindi (1564-1624)105 and Aurangzeb
(1615-1704), also known as ‘the world conqueror’, who will be mentioned later in this chapter
while discussing the role which the Unity of Being played in Akbar’s court.

Sufism and Politics in Medieval India

The earliest centres of Sufism in the subcontinent were built in the eleventh and twelfth
centuries, during the Ghaznavid dynasty’s rule over Punjab. At the beginning of the thirteenth
century, through the establishment of the Sultanate at Delhi, Sufi orders expanded their power
and domain in the subcontinent. This expansion was well-received mainly by the Hindus since

104
Rumi, Masnavi, 3: 49.
The tale is traceable to a Buddhist text entitled Udana, composed sometime during the first
millennium BCE, however it could have been originated from older Buddhist text; see John
D. Ireland, Udana and the Itivuttaka: Two Classics from the Pali Canon, (Kandy: Buddhist
Publication Society, 2007), 9, & 81–84. Other than Buddhism, the tale is shared by many
different religions such as Hinduism, Jainism, Islam, and Christianity.
105
Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present, (New York, NY:
State University of New York Press, 2006), 76.
251
the Sufis’ Unity of Being promoted multicultural society's different and diverse beliefs and
encouraged harmonious coexistence. The Sufis had a perceptive attitude towards Hindu cults
and creeds; they even admired the Hindus. In the words of early Sufis – which again were in
accord with the Unity of Being – faith, infidelity, heresy, and orthodoxy were all only
expressions, signifying a Unifying Entity. During the period, many Sufis conversed and
conducted ideological discussions with yogis and bhakta – Indian mystics – in order to expand
the foundation on the mutual perception of an ‘Ultimate Existence’; the early result of these
discourses was the translation of many significant Hindu texts – such as the Amrita Kunda
which is on Hatha Yoga principles – into Persian and Arabic in the thirteenth century.106 The
translations of such texts demonstrate the mediation of Sufism in the society and social orders
as well as the politics of the time. The sultans of Delhi sought legitimacy from the Sufis, who
demonstrated that the truth of one’s religion was not bounded to the pages of any book, whether
Islamic or Hindu. With Hastings’s circle in India, Orientalists such as Jones, Gladwin, and
Wilkins used the same method to stabilize British India.

The Muslim sultans supposedly attempted in establishing links with Sufis; developing
such connections ended up in the composition of somewhat exaggerated anecdotes about the
Sultans and Sufi saints. For example, Shams ud-Din Iltutmish (d.1236) – the consolidator of
the sultanate in the Indian subcontinent – recounted many incidents and mentioned them to the
public, which concluded that a Sufi predicted or even prophesized the acquiring of his
kingdom.107 In this manner, Iltutmish began to build a significant capital for a new Persian Sufi
Islam in India. On one level, this was in favour of Sufis because their beliefs were expanding;
this was also why the Sufis supported Iltutmish explicitly. For example, Nizam o-din Auliya
(1238-1325) – an eminent saint of the Chishti Sufi order – utilized Iltutmish’s first name, ‫ا س‬
‫ ال ین‬Shams o-din, ‘The Sun of Religion’, as a pun stating: ‘The light of his power was illumined
with the light of Divine Support.’108 On another level, the foundation of the Sultanate in Delhi
further challenged the Arabian theoretical Islam through expanding the usage of the Persian

106
Saiyid Athar Abbas Rizvi, History of Sufism in India, (Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal,
1978), 1: 335.
107
For these stories see Khaliq Ahmad Nizami, Studies in Medieval Indian History and
Culture, (Allahabad: Kitab Mahal, 1966), 8-15.
Minhaj-i-Siraj, Tabaqat-i-Nasiri, (Calcutta: Bibliotheca indica, 1863), 167.
108
Amir H. Dihlavi, Fawâ'id al-Fu'âd: spiritual and literary discourses of Shaikh
Nizâmmudin Awliyâ, Ziya-Ul-Hasan Faruqi (ed.), (Delhi: DK Printworld, 1996), 121.
252
language as well as establishing a more stable place for all Ajams, whether Persian, Hindu, or
Turk.

In order to reduce the hostility between Hindus and Muslims, the Sultans of Delhi
affirmed that their conflict would only be with those challenging their authority, not with the
rest of the natives. As a result, Delhi became a sanctuary for Muslim immigrants with a tolerant
and flexible view of the various social and religious practices, particularly Hindus. This is
evident from a reported comment from Jalal o-din Khalji (d. 1296), the founder and first Sultan
of the Khalji dynasty (1290-1320):

Every day the Hindus [...] pass below my palace, beating cymbals and blowing conch
shells to perform idol worship [...] while my name is being read in the khutbah [Islamic
sermons] as the defender of Islam [...] They beat their drums and other musical
instruments and perpetuate their practices.109

Many Sufis – similar to Orthodox Muslim theologians – were also interested in expanding and
consolidating Islamic power; yet, unlike Orthodox Muslim theologians, the Sufis worked
towards this dissemination via persuasion, interaction, and establishing a dialogue between
Muslims and non-Muslims. Consequently, Sufi traditions in India merged with Hindu features.
Therefore, like many other heterodox groups in non-Arabic countries,110 the Hindu-influenced
Sufis were much less interested in mainstream Islamic rituals, traditions, and prayers, practised
by orthodox Muslims. However, it should be mentioned that transgressing the Islamic norms
and demonstrating prominent anti-Islamic features were frowned upon.111 Nonetheless, there
emerged amongst the Sufis a great interest in writing Hindu-themed poetry, which later helped

109
Ziya al-Din Barani, Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi, Sayyid Ahmad Khan (ed.), (Calcutta: W.N. Lees
& Maulavi Kabir al-Din, 1862), 217. The translation here is taken from Muzaffar Alam, The
Languages of Political Islam, 88.
110
For a detailed discussion on the intermingling of the Sufis with other religions in different
parts of the Orient see: Ahmet T. Karamustafa, Gods Unruly Friends: Dervish Groups in the
Islamic Later Middle Period, 1200-1550, (London: Oneworld Publications, 2006).
111
Details and examples can be found in the followings: Simon Digby, ‘Qalandars and
Related Groups: Elements of Social Deviance in the Religious Life of the Delhi Sultanate of
the 13th and 14th Centuries’, Islam in Asia: Volume 1: South Asia, Yohanan Friedmann (ed.),
(New York, NY: Avalon Publishing, 1984), 60-108. Katherine Ewing, ‘Malangs of the
Punjab: Intoxication or Adab as the Path to God’, in Moral Conduct and Authority: The Place
of Adab in South Asian Islam, Barbara Daly Metcalf (ed.), (Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1984), 357-71.
253
to popularize Sufism in India. The Madhumalati, ‘Night-Flowering Jasmine’ (1545) of Mir
Sayyid Manjhan Shattari Rajgiri (unknown dates), the Padmavat (1540) of Malek Muhammad
Jayasi (1477-1542), and the Mrigavati (1503) of Kutban Suhrawardi (unknown dates) are some
of the most well-known Sufi-composed Hindu-themed texts.112 Such works internalized Sufi
themes of separation, longing, the transformation of the lover, and the union of the lover and
the beloved into subcontinental literature. For example, the Madhumalati is a mystical romance
between prince Manohar and the beautiful princess Madhumalati. The two meet, become
separated, endure the sufferings of separation, long for each other, and eventually transform
into new selves to be reunited and experience true happiness. The Padmavat is much more
fascinating as it contains further Sufi connotations: the love story of Padmavati, the beautiful
princess of the Singhal kingdom, the modern Rajasthan, and Ratansen the ruler of Chittor,
nowadays known as Sri Lanka, echoes Attar’s ‘Sheikh Sanaan and the Christian girl.’ Ratansen
falls in love with Padmavati without seeing her, travels to her abode, tries to win her hand by
various acts, including performing austerities. Eventually, the intervention of the Hindu deities
Shiva and Parvati leads to the union of the two. The major differing point between Attar and
Jayasi’s tale is that Mohammad intervened on behalf of the Sheikh in the former, whereas
Hindu deities performed the act in the latter. Indeed, there are other minor differences between
the two which is simply due to Indian flair: for example, the Sheikh travelled to Rome with
four hundred disciples while Ratansen ‘crossed the seven seas’ to Rajasthan with ‘sixteen
thousand vassals and princes;’ in addition, unlike Attar’s work, Jayasi’s does not end with the
union of the two lovers. A banished Brahmin of Ratansen's court goes to Alaud-Din Khalji
(1267-1316) and tells him of Padmavati’s beauty. Lusting over Padmavati, Alaud-Din attacks
Chittor, which results in the death of Padmavati and Ratansen. The tale ends with Alaud-Din
reflecting on his Pyrrhic victory over Chittor and realizing that he has lost Padmavati.113 In his
1944 English translation of the tale, A.G. Shirreff describes Jayasi as follows:

His broad tolerance and understanding made him, above all, a prophet of unity. If we
could meet him now in the Elysian fields, and could ask him whether he had approached

112
For some comments on these Sufi poets of Hindavi, see: Rashid, Society and Culture in
Medieval India, 216-60.
113
For further details on the tale see: Thomas de Bruijn, Ruby in the Dust: Poetry and History
in Padmâvat by the South Asian Sufi Poet Muhammad Jâyasî, (Leiden: Leiden University
Press, 2012).
254
 his theme from the Muslim or the Hindu standpoint, he would, I imagine, answer with
a smile that he did not know, and that he had never seen any difference between them.114

The prophet of unity’s Padmavati also portrays the misunderstandings of vojōdi works,
resulting in the long-lasting conflict between pluralistic Sufi views and Orthodox religious
groups. Such conflict remains relevant today in the East: in 2017, it was announced that a film
adaptation of the work would be made in India. Ironically, although the original work and its
film adaptation aimed to unite the Muslims, Hindus, and Sikhs in the subcontinent, they became
divisive tools. In response to the film’s production news, several Rajput caste organisations,
for example, Shri Rajput Karni Sena, claimed that the work depicts a Rajput queen in a bad
light. Consequently, protests against the making of the film began, which resulted in the
director being assaulted and the film set being vandalized on several occasions.115 On the other
hand, several Muslim leaders protested against the representations of Alaud-Din Khalji.116
Consequently, before the film’s release, there were violent riots in several parts of India, 117 as
orthodox Muslims, Sikhs, and Hindus were all offended by the visualization of a work that
initially intended to unite them.

114
Malek Muhammad Jayasi, Padmavati of Malik Muhammad Jaisi, A.G. Shirreff (trans.),
(Calcutta: Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1944), ix.
115
Times of India Reporter, ‘Sanjay Leela Bhansali assault: 'Padmavati' actors Deepika
Padukone, Ranveer Singh and Shahid Kapoor break their silence’, The Times of India, (29
January 2017).
[https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/sanjay-leela-
bhansali-assault-padmavati-deepika-padukone-breaks-her-
silence/articleshow/56832864.cms].
Ray Saptarshi, ‘Bounty placed on Bollywood actress' head after Hindu-Muslim film outrage.’
The Telegraph, (17 November 2017), [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/17/bounty-
placed-bollywood-actress-head-hindu-muslim-film-outrage].
116
Jaipur, ‘More trouble for Padmavati: Ajmer Dargah Deewan urges PM to ban release’,
Business Standard, (16 November 2017), [https://www.business-
standard.com/article/current-affairs/more-trouble-for-padmavati-ajmer-dargah-deewan-urges-
pm-to-ban-release-117111600673_1.html].
117
Ray Saptarshi, ‘Violent protests spread across India as controversial Padmaavat film
finally released’, The Telegraph, (25 January 2018),
[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/25/violent-protests-spread-across-india-
controversial-padmaavat].
Agence France-Presse, ‘Bollywood epic about Hindu queen provokes mobs rioting in
streets’, South China Morning Post, (24 January 2018),
[https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/south-asia/article/2130408/bollywood-epic-padmavati-
about-14th-century-hindu-queen-has].
255
 The Unity of Being played a pivotal role in facilitating Sufi-Hindu texts; it already had
provided the basis to reach religious pluralism and synthesis as well as cultural intermingling
across the conquered realms of Islam. In India, the doctrine initially did not face many obstacles
sheltering the different versions and interpretations of life presented by the Indian philosophers,
yogis, and bhakta.118 The Unity of Being synchronized harmoniously with Nirguna Bhakti
which believes in devoting to and worshipping the Divine as a formless entity. An example of
this synchronization could be observed in the fifteenth-century poet Kabir (1398-1518), whom
Jayasi imitated.119 Kabir sought similarities even in the terminologies used in Islam and
Hinduism. He believed that Rama and Ram are the same as ‫ رح‬rahmān and ‫ رحیم‬rahim –
other names of Allah – or Hari is ‫ حضرت‬hazrat and Krishna is the incarnation of ‫ کرام‬kerāmat,
‘the Munificent’. To Kabir, Mohammad was Mahadeva which is another name of Ŝiva.120
Kabir’s poetry intriguingly distinguishes the yogis as a different identity from Hindus and
Muslims: ‘The Yogī cries: “Gorakh, Gorakh!” The Hindu invokes the name of Rām. / The
Musalmān cries: “Khudā is One!” But the Lord of Kabīr pervades all.’121 The verse asserts
that Kabir’s perception, i.e. the Unity of Being, pervades Yogis, Muslims, and Hindus. Here
are four more quatrains composed by Kabir which illustrates the same perception:

The Hindu meditates in the temple, the Muslim in the Mosque

The Yogī meditates on the supreme goal, where there is neither temple nor a
mosque.122
Neither the Vedas nor the [Muslim] books, neither the khānīs nor the bānīs. All these
appear as a cover. The [true] word is manifest in the mountain peak in the sky. There,
one perceives knowledge of the Ineffable.
Neither the Vedas nor the Shastras, neither the books nor the Koran, [the goal] is not
read about in books. / Only the exceptional Yogī knows that goal. All others are
absorbed in their daily tasks.123
The Hindu calls on Rām, the Muslim on Khudā, the Yogī calls on the Invisible One,
in whom there is neither Rām nor Khudā.124

118
Rizvi, History of Sufism in India, 1: 322-96.
119
Rizvi, History of Sufism in India, 1: 1:413.
120
The full text of Kabir’s poem with such assertions can be found in: David N. Lorenzen,
‘Who Invented Hinduism?’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 41: 4, (1999), 630–659:
650-1.
121
Charlotte Vaudeville, Kabīr: Volume I, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1974), 88.
122
David N. Lorenzen, ‘Religious Identity in Gorakhnath and Kabir: Hindus, Muslims, Yogis
and Sants’, Yogi Heroes and Poets: History and Legends of the Nāths, David N. Lorenzen, &
Adrian Munoz (eds.), (New York: SUNY Press, 2011), 19-50: 22.
123
Lorenzen, ‘Religious Identity in Gorakhnath and Kabir’, 23.
124
Gorakh bānī, Pitambardatta Dutt Bharthwal (ed.), (Prayag: Hindi Sahitya Sammelan
1994), 25.
256
Kabir’s compositions echo those of the vojōdi Sufis Jones was fascinated with, for example,
the distich of Sheikh Bahaei (1547-1627): ‘You are the Intention, the Kaaba and the house of
idols [a temple] are just excuses’125 dovetails well with the first one. The other three are in line
with Jones’s recitation of Amir Khosrow’s quatrain in the first page of his copy of Nezami’s
Treasury as follows: ‘If I am an infidel, fire or idol worshipper, I am! If I am a rend,126 or a
wanderer, I am! / Different tribes have different assumptions of me; only my beloved and I
know, what I am!’127 Jones was very much aware of Kabir’s poetry and his philosophical vojōdi
perceptions: Kabir’s Rekhta verses are available in Jones’s Notebook;128 in addition, two of the
folios contain Jones’s Latin annotations on Kabir’s verses.129 However, Kabir’s name is not
mentioned in Jones’s published works and/or letters, much like other Sufi vojōdis such as
Abolkhayr. Peter Gaeffke (1927-2005), the linguist and Indologist, describes Jones’s encounter
with Kabir’s ‘heretical’ verses as: ‘When it was shown to William Jones, he read it but
suppressed it because of the many heretical statements in it. In the time of Jones, it was not
advisable to discuss Kabir in Muslim circles.’130 Gaeffke’s hypothesis is indeed valid since, as
of the mid-sixteenth century, after the death of Dara Shokoh, Sufis with vojōdi perceptions
began to be persecuted in the subcontinent. In addition, as stated previously, we should bear in
mind that Rumi had advised his readers not to challenge the ignorant beliefs of the masses in a
foreign land. 131

In the sixteenth century, the influence of the Unity of Being became stronger in north
India. For instance, Shaikh Abdol Ghudus Gangohi (1456-1537) composed his ‫ را ن مه‬Roshd
Nāmeh, ‘The Book of Flourishment’ which was on monotheism. It contained verses in Persian
and Hindavi which were composed by himself and other Sufis, including Attar. Founded on
the Unity of Being, Gangohi’s book describes and analyses Sufi beliefs through the practices
and philosophy of Śaivite Gorakhnath. Abd al-Wahid Bilgrami (1510-1608) exemplified this
sympathetic approach to Hinduism in the mid-sixteenth century. His book, ‫حق یق هن ی‬
Haghāyegh-e Hendi, ‘The Indian Truths’ heavily contained Vaishnava symbols, terminology,

125
Sheikh Bahaei, Kashkul, (Tehran: Sabok-baran, 1390), 7:
‫مقصشد تشیی کعبه و ب خ نه به نهس‬
126
The term in Sufi literature signifies a witty trickster.
127
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. i. The quatrain will be examined in the next chapter of this thesis.
128
The Notebook, f. 8-13.
129
The Notebook, f. 8-9.
130
Peter Gaeffke, ‘Kabir in Literature by and for Muslims’, Images of Kabir, Monika
Horstmann (ed.), (Delhi: Manohar, 2002), 158.
131
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 180.
257
 132
and perceptions used in religious Hindu songs with orthodox Islamic beliefs. Bilgrami
asserted that the names used in the songs, including Krishna, were symbols signifying
Mohammad, or even the notion of the Singular Unity of the Divine Essence known as ‫اح ی‬
ahadiyat to Muslims, Gopis, the cow herding maidens devoted to Krishna, become angels, and
so on and so forth.133

During the sixteenth century, the Gorkani dynasty – known to the West as Mughals –
succeeded the Afghan sultans of north India. The Mughals showed exceptional interest in
promoting Persian literary culture. Babur (1483-1530) introduced Persian gardens to India;
Aram Bagh in Agra is among the first examples of this cultural/architectural intermingling,
while the Taj Mahal is the most famous one. By the time of Humayun (1508-1556), the Persian
language had established itself in north India as the language of the Mughal elite.134 In
Humayun’s era, the distich of Jones’s beloved Hafez had come into reality in north India: ‘The
Indian parrots have become eloquent / due to the Persian sugar which has gone to Bengal’.135
Although the Persian language and culture were influential before the Mughal period, the
dynasty escalated extraordinarily due to different converging elements. Perhaps the most
pivotal element, which further paved the way for the Persian language and culture to strengthen
its position in India, was Iran’s political and military support of the Mughals; for example,
when Afghans defeated Humayun in 1540, he took refuge in Iran with his wife Bega Begum,
her maid, and no more than forty men. Shah Tahmasp (1514-1576), the Safavid king of the
time, offered Humayun substantial support in return for his conversion from Sunnism to
Shi’ism.136 Therefore, in 1555, large numbers of Iranians escorted Humayun back to India and
assisted him in regaining his position in Hindustan. Humayun knew he could have relied on
the Persians because they were the ones who helped his father, Babur, during his campaign

132
For more information on the work and Bilgrami’s arguments in the Haghāyegh-e Hendi,
see: Francesca Orsini, ‘Krishna is the Truth of Man Mir ‘Abdul Wahid Bilgrami's Haqā’iq-i
Hindī (Indian Truths) and the circulation of dhrupad and bishnupad’, in Culture and
Circulation, Thomas de Bruijn, & Allison Busch (eds.), (Leiden: Brill, 2010).
133
Mir ‘Abd al-Wahid Bilgrami, Haqā’iq-i Hindi, S.A.A. Rizvi (trans.), (Varanasi: Nagari
pracarini Sabha, 1957).
See also Saiyid Athar Abbas Rizvi, Muslim Revivalist Movements in Northern India in the
Sixteenth and the Seventeenth Centuries, (Agra: Agra University, 1966), 60-2.
134
Muzaffar Alam, The Languages of Political Islam, 13.
135
Hafez, Divan, 225:
‫ین قن پ رسی که به بنگ له میرود‬ ‫اکراکن اشن ه ه طشطی هن‬
136
John F. Richards, The Mughal Empire. The New Cambridge History of India, Gordon
Johnson (ed.), (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 1, 5, & 11.
258
against the Uzbeks in 1511.137 Another example of Iranian support of the Mughals occurred
during the 1560s when Akbar joined forces with Iranians to overcome the Chaghatay nobles.
The Iranian political and military support to the Mughals contributed to the further expansion
of the Persian language in Mughal India.

The Mughals sought stability in India at a time which there was a widening gap for
more opposition and conflict; consequently, they employed the policy of ‫ صلح کل‬sulh-i kul, ‘the
universal peace’. Being able to be perceived as one of the political implications of the Unity of
Being, the sulh-i kul, could be compared to the ecumenism of the Christian churches; they both
seek to develop better understandings and closer relationship with different traditions,
religions, and sects in order to achieve a visible organic unity between them. Amongst all of
the Mughal kings, Akbar had the most interest in promoting pluralism by expanding cultural,
intellectual, and social connections with Iran.138 Akbar’s accomplishments in establishing such
connections and promoting pluralism were, in fact, quite significant and pragmatical, and due
to this fact, Jones and Hastings designed their ruling system based on his. During the time of
Akbar, many Persian writers and poets came to India; some, such as Sarmad Kashani, whose
quatrains are available in Jones’s Notebook, moved to India in search of better fortune. Many
other Iranian figures fled the religious and political persecution which was occurring in Iran by
the Safavids.139 Jones was aware that most Sufis shifted their views from the Unity of Being to
the Unity of Witnesses and started persecuting people of different faiths whom their
predecessors, such as Rumi, Attar, and Abolkhayr, had adored. Jones, echoing his beloved
Sufis, criticised this through the insertion of the following lines in his translation of Ismat’s
poem: ‘Depart then from the cloister, and take the way to the tavern; / cast off the cloak of a
dervise, and wear the robe of a libertine.’140

Unlike Safavid Iran, Akbar’s India was described as ‘the place of safety [sanctuary]
and the country of the wise.’141 Migrating to this sanctuary resulted in high social positions and
riches for the wise, elite, but persecuted Iranians; therefore, increasing numbers of Iranian

137
Richards, The Mughal Empire, 1, 5, 11, & 19.
138
Riazul Islam, A Calendar of Documents on lndo-Persian Relations, 1500-1750, (Karachi:
Iranian Culture Foundation 1979), 2: 106-7, & 117-20.
139
For further details see: Aziz Ahmad, 'Safavid Poets and India', Iran, 14 (1976), 117-32 &
Hadi Hasan, Mughal Poetry: Its Culture and Historical Value, (Madras: Aakar Books, 1952).
140
Jones, The Works, 4: 229.
141
Abdol-nabi Ghazvini, ‘Molana Hayati Gilani’, Tazkereye- Meykhaaneh, Ahmad Golchin
Ma'aani (ed.), (Tehran: Eghbal, 1961), 809-17: 809.
259
nonconformists and dissidents took refuge in India.142 Akbar was competing against the Iranian
Shah and intended to nullify the Shah’s hold over the Mughal household, which was gained by
helping Babur and Humayun. So, the migration was favourable to Akbar, and he took further
advantage of the situation to expand his authority over the Safavid domain. The Mughal king
was eager to bring ‘the exalted [Persian] community close to him spiritually and materially’.143
Hence, Persian talents started to further flourish in Mughal India than in Safavid Iran. As an
example of the exalted Persian community who moved from Iran to India, one could mention
Mir Jamāl-al-Din Ḥosein Enjū Shirāzi (d.1626). Born in Shiraz, Inju moved to Akbar’s India
and composed his Farhang-e Jahangiri there. The book is the very first digest of the Persian
lexicon and one of the most authoritative dictionaries of the language up to date. Jones had
studied the book, and his personal copy can be found in the British Library.144 In this text, Inju
argued at length that Persian and Arabic are the languages of Islam; he gives accounts of many
different sources of Mohammad’s life that ‘the Prophet’ knew and spoke Persian as well as
Arabic. This does make sense for firstly, Mohammad, at some point in his life, was a merchant
and had to travel to Persian-speaking areas; secondly, one of his most prominent followers,
Salman the Persian (d. 656), was a Persian speaker. According to Inju, Mohammad had high
respect for the merits of the Persians.145 Inju was one of the many immigrants who went to
Mughal India, through whom India drew further away from Iran politically, yet closer to it
culturally, which led to Persian becoming the first language of the Mughal court.146

Akbar did not receive any formal education; therefore, he had people reading important
books aloud; although his library contained hundreds of Arabic, Persian, Hindi, and even Greek
books in prose and verse, the emperor was keen to hear the ones in Persian repeatedly. Some

142
Riazul Islam, Calendar, 1: 101-2.
See also: Riazul Islam, ‘Akbar's Intellectual Contacts with Iran’, Islamic Culture and Society:
Essays in Honour of Aziz Ahmad, Milton Israel, & N.K. Wagle (eds.), (Delhi: Manohar,
1983), 351-73.
143
Riazul Islam, ‘Akbar's Intellectual Contacts with Iran’, 356.
144
BL, APAC, RSPA 20-1. Jones has translated the books’ chapter headings which suggests
that he has read the books. The first volume of the book, BL, APAC, RSPA 20, contains a
section entitled ‘Appendix.’ Jones has extensively annotated the section and pointed out the
similarities between Sanskrit and Persian words.
145
Mir Jamal al-Din Husain Inju Shirazi, Farhang-e Jahaangiri, Rahim Afifi (ed.),
(Mashhad: Ferdowsi University, 1972), 1: 14-22.
146
Riazul Islam, ‘Akbar's Intellectual Contacts with Iran’, 356.
260
accounts also mention that he composed poems in Persian as well.147 One of the fascinating
quatrains of Akbar echoing the long tradition of Sufis, such as Attar, Hafez, and Ismat, is:

Last night in the alley of the wine sellers, I gave gold and bought wine.
Now, I wander and hungover, I gave gold and bought burdens.148
Another quatrain of Akbar resembles the quatrains of Khayyam and Amir Khosrow, quoted by
Jones in his copy of Nezami’s Treasury of Mysteries.149 It reads as follows:

The weight of sin has bent my back, what should I do? With no path to the mosque or
the temple, what should I do?
I have no place in the queue of infidels nor Muslims; I don’t deserve hell or heaven,
what should I do? 150
Whilst Akbar was stabilizing India and consolidating his authority, many literary texts were
translated from other languages to Persian, such as the Babur Nameh by his court. He also
instructed the scribes and the royal historians to compile the Mughal achievements and the new
court’s history in Persian. In north India, Akbar became the first Indo-Islamic king to declare
Persian as the primary language of his administration,151 while naturally, most of the
administrators were from the indigenous Hindavi-speaking communities. Therefore, Akbar
assigned ‫ منشی‬monshis, ‘[Iranian] clerks or secretaries’ to teach Persian to those communities.
Years later, Akbar’s policy inspired Francis Gladwin to write The Persian Moonshee (1795)152
for every civil servant in order to ‘be ascertained that he is sufficiently acquainted with the
Laws and Regulations enacted by the Governor-General in Council, and the Several
Languages, the knowledge of which is requisite for the due discharge of the respective

147
Abul Fazl, Akbar-Nameh, Maulawi ‘Abd-ur-Rahim (ed.), (Calcutta: Asiatic Society of
Bengal, 1873), 1: 271.
148
Zabih-olaah Safa, The History of Literature in Iran, (Tehran: Authors and Translators of
Iran Co., 1985), 5: 444:
‫پی نه می به ر نری م‬ ‫دواینه به کشی میفروا‬
‫ر دادم و دردسر نری م ی ا‬ ‫ن ر سرگرانم‬ ‫اکنش‬
149
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. i.
150
Safa, The History of Literature in Iran, 445 :5:
‫نی راه به مسج نه کنش م چه کنم‬ ‫ب ر گنه ن ی ه پش م چه کنم‬
‫نی آلیق دو خ نه بهش م چه کنم‬ ‫نی در صف ک فر نه مسل ج یم‬
151
Ghulam Husain Khan Tabatabai, A Translation of the Seir Mutaqharin; or, View of
Modern Times, being an History of India, from the Year 1118 to the Year 1195 (this year
answers to the Christian year 1781–82), (Calcutta,1789/90), 1: 200.
152
Francis Gladwin, The Persian Moonshee, (Calcutta: Chronicle Press, 1795).
261
functions of such Offices’.153 Akbar’s Persian reform in India contained a more profound level:
through his enlightenments, a new secular theme was introduced in the syllabi of the schools
of the time known as ‫م رسه‬, madreseh which ‘stimulated a wide application to Persian
studies.’154 Before Akbar’s time, as mentioned previously, the natives of the subcontinent were
learning Persian mostly to be able to learn and perceive various concepts, practices, and rituals
of Islam and/or Sufism; yet, through the emperor’s reforms, new waves of students joined the
schools to gain excellence in the Persian language and literature in order to achieve a position
in the royal court. Therefore, in Akbar’s era, the madreseh students became more familiar with
Persian classics such as Ferdowsi, Sadi, and Hafez; the religious scriptures were also translated
into and delivered in Persian by various Hindu translators in order not to be forgotten.

Akbar also introduced another tradition of the Iranian courts to the subcontinent by
giving the title of ‫ ملکالشعرا‬Malek ol-Shoara, ‘The King of Poets’ to the best poet of his time.
As discussed in the second chapter, Jones followed this tradition by giving the title to
Khayyam.155 In 1588, the title of Malek ol-Shoara was given to Shaikh Abu al-Faiz ibn
Mubarak (1547-1595), commonly known by his pen name, Faizi.156 The poet recounts Akbar’s
offer to the court and his eagerness in a ghazal:

The desire remains twiddling in my imagination; just like the locks of the Christian girl
in the heart of the sage of Sanaan.
[Akbar said to me] ‘if you fancy sublimity, come and reside in the Sultan’s court.’157

Perhaps it was due to Faizi’s familiarity with vojōdi Persian literary works, such as Attar’s
‘Sheikh Sanaan and the Christian Girl,’ that Akbar appointed him to tutor his sons. Such was

153
Francis Gladwin, The Persian Moonshee, William Chambers (ed.), (Calcutta: Chronicle
Press, 1801), xi.
154
Muzaffar Alam, ‘Persian in Precolonial Hindustan’, Literary Cultures in History:
Reconstructions from South Asia, Sheldon Pollock, & Arvind Raghunathan (eds.),
(University of California Press, 2003), 131-69: 163.
155
Beinecke Library, Osborn c. 400, f. 28.
156
Abu'l-Fazl Allami, The Ain-I Akbari, H. Blochmann, (trans.), (Calcutta: The Asiatic
Society, 1927), 1: 548–50.
157
Abu al-Faiz ibn Mubarak Faizi, The Koliyate Faizi, E.D Arshad, & Vazir-al Hasan Abedi
(eds.), (Lahore: Punjab University, 1967), 80:
‫چش در لف ترس دش پیر صنع‬ ‫هشس م ن ه در پیچ و ت ب نی لم‬
‫بی مع کف اش به درگ ه سلط‬ ‫گرت این ت نّ ی واالس در سر‬
262
the situation that resulted in Akbar’s successor son, Jahangir (1569-1627), not to be
accomplished in Turkish or Arabic but to write his memoirs in elegant Persian prose.
Furthermore, like his father, Jahangir composed some verses and ghazals in Persian and
became a noteworthy critic of the poetry.158 By this time, Persian became so infused with the
administration that even ordinary literate soldiers were expected to read in it. The Indians
helped Persian as well; they compiled many comprehensive lexicons and digests on the idioms
of the language such as ‫ به ر عجم‬Bahār-e Ajam, ‘The Ajam Spring’ of Tek Chand Bahar
(d.1766) and ‫ مرات االصطالح‬Merāt al-Estelāh, ‘The Mirror of Proverbs’ of Anand Ram Mukhlis
(1699-1750). Much like Jones’s Persian Grammar (1771), these books are poets’ grammars
demonstrating their authors’ admirable research, interest, and engagement in developing
Persian in India. Whilst I was researching what these authors thought of the Persian language,
I came across a passage from Tek Chandra Bhar addressing his son about the language:

Although the science of Persian is vast, and almost beyond human grasp, in order to
open the gates of language one should read the Gulistān, Bostān, and the letters of Mulla
Jami, to start with. When one has advanced somewhat, one should read key books on
norms and ethics, as well as history books such as the […] Tārīk͟h-i Tabarī, Zafar-nāma,
Akbar-nāma, and some books like these that are absolutely necessary. The benefits of
these will be to render your language elegant, also to provide you knowledge of the
world and its inhabitants. These will be of use when you are in the assemblies of the
learned. Of the master-poets, here are some whose collections I read in my youth, and
the names of which I am writing down.[...] They are Hakim Sana‘i, Mulla Rumi,
Shams-i Tabriz, Shaikh Farid al-Din ‘Attar, Shaikh Sa‘di, Khwaja Hafiz, […] Mulla
Jami, and Unsuri, Firdausi, […] Anwari, Amir Khusrau, […] Nizami.159

Chandra Bhar’s passage is very similar to the listing of essential poets Jones inserted in his ‘On
the Mystical Poetry’: ‘A Volume might be filled with similar passages from the Sufi poets;
from Sa'ib, Orfi', Mi'r Khosrau, Ja'mi, Hazi'n, and Sa'bik, who are next in, beauty of
composition to Ha'fiz and Sadi’.160 However, it can easily be recognized that the originally
Welsh Persian Jones had understood the Oriental self and culture, which was not much different

158
For some examples of the poetry, see: Jahangir, Tarikh-e Jahangiri, Sayyid Ahmad Khan
Aligrah (ed.), (Calcutta: Asiatic Society, 1864), 103, 245, 303, 316, & 341.
159
The translation is taken from Muzaffar Alam, & Sanjay Subrahmanyam, 'The Making of a
Munshī', Forms of Knowledge’, Early Modern Asia: Explorations in the Intellectual History
of India and Tibet, 1500–1800, Sheldon Pollock (ed.), (Duke University Press, 2011), 185-
210: 188-9.
160
Jones, The Works, 4: 371-2.
263
from the Oriental literary figure. After mentioning the literary figures, Jones referred to his
audience ‘… for a particular detail of their metaphysicks and theology to the Dabistan of
Mohseni Fani, and the pleasing essay, called the Junction of two Seas, by that amiable and
unfortunate prince, Da'ra' Shecu'h’; these texts will be discussed later in this chapter.

Pluralism and the Unity of Being in the Mughal Court

In any place that the Persian language travelled to and further flourished in, its mystical views,
particularly the Unity of Being, followed it; Akbar’s court was no exception. For example,
Abolfazl Allami (1551–1602) – the court’s Grand vazir, most noted scholar, and the author of
the Akbar-nameh – openly demonstrated aspects of the doctrine.161 The influence of the Unity
of Being can also be observed in many of the measures taken by Akbar or his son Jahangir.
Displaying keen attentiveness to the local traditions, cultures, and various mystical perceptions,
Akbar not only invited yogis and Hindu scholars to his court, seeking knowledge of their
philosophical, religious, and mystical views, but also he dedicated an independent quarter to
them in Agra called Jogipura.162 Some accounts state that Akbar took his admiration of the
Hindu religion even further to the extent of reporting that he and his close companion used to
go to the yogis in Jogipura to practise Hindu meditation and rituals. In addition, Akbar had
regulated his personal lifestyle following the Yogi perceptions: he had the centre of his head
shaved and stopped eating meat.

The support of the Unity of Being and similar or associated doctrines promoted cultural
and religious pluralism was pursued through the seventeenth century by Jahangir, Akbar’s son,
through maintaining the connections his father established with yogis and Hindu scholars; in
fact, Jahangir respected the sentiment of the non-Muslims to the extent that he appointed Sri
Kant Kashmiri (dates unknown), a scholar reputed for his knowledge of Hinduism, as a judge
specifically to deal with the disputes amongst Hindus according to their own religion. 163 The
author of the Dabestan describes Sri Kant as a well-reputed scholar in Indian sciences, law,

161
For further details, see: Saiyid Athar Abbas Rizvi, Religious and Intellectual History· of
the Muslims in Akbar's Reign, (New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, 1975), 339-
73.
162
Badāoni, Abd al-Qadir, The Muntakhabu-’rūkh, W. H. Lowe (trans.), (Calcutta: Baptist
Mission Press, 1884), 2: 334-6.
163
M Athar Ali, Mughal India: studies in polity, ideas, society, and culture, (New Delhi:
Oxford University Press, 2014), 193.
264
poetry, dialectics, medicine, and astrology: ‘His Majesty Nuruddin Muhammad Jahangir
appointed Sri Kant to the office of Qazi (judge) of the Hindus so that they might be at ease and
be in no need to seek favour from a Muslim.’164 The Dabestan also explains that Sri Kant’s
appointment was in accordance with Akbar’s Law which stated that all people, regardless of
their faith, were to be extended royal favour and protected in their mode of worship and
conduct. In another instance in 1621, on his way to Jammu and Kangra, Jahangir stopped at
Haridwar, located on the banks of Ganga Ma. Then, he described it as ‘one of the most famous
places of worship of the Hindus’ and, out of charity, he gave money and goods to the Brahmans
worshipping there.165 Every year on the anniversary of the death of their relatives, the Hindus
prepared food and incense, inviting others to commemorate the dead. Similar to the Hindu
tradition, Jahangir performed the ceremony on Akbar’s anniversary; yet, on the same occasion,
166
he also gave 10,000 rupees to be distributed amongst the needy, similar to a Muslim Nazr.
One last example, testifying to Jahangir’s promotion of pluralism and the Unity of Being worth
mentioning here: he often held discussions on religious and/or spiritual matters with
Vaishnavites at Ujjain and Mathura. These discussions resulted in Jahangir’s belief that Islamic
mysticism and Vedantic philosophy were identical and compatible.167 Many of the Mughal
elite and nobles followed Jahangir’s footsteps, going to the yogis in Jogipura, seeking their
views on various matters. For example, some accounts mention that Abdul Rahim Khan-e-
Khanan (1556–1627) – poet, minister, and astrologist who served both Akbar and Jahangir and
translated the Babur Nameh to Persian for Akbar – prostrated before the yogis, which of course
was an act of heresy and blasphemy to the zealous Muslims yet an act of respect among the
Hindus!

Hastings’s circle attempted to replicate the tolerant conditions found by Akbar and his
descendants in India; amongst them, Jones was particularly interested in Prince Dara Shokoh.
Distinguished and enlightened, Dara Shokoh is the touchstone of syncretism, pluralism, and
harmonious coexistence of various traditions of the natives of the subcontinent. His tendencies
towards Sufism and the Unity of Being led him to analyse and explore Hindu mysticism and

164
Dabistān- i Maẕāhib, Ibrahim b. Nur Muhammad, (ed.), (Bombay: Dar al-Ḥukūmat,
1875), 153-4.
165
Jahangir, The Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri; or, Memoirs of Jahangir, Alexander Rogers (tarns.),
Henry Beveridge (ed.), (Delhi: Low Price Publications, 2006), 1: 218.
166
Jahangir, The Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri; or, Memoirs of Jahangir, 2: 246-7.
167
Sri Ram Sharma, The Religious Policy of The Moghal Emperors, (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1940), 83.
265
religion deeply; in addition, he not only translated Hindu texts such as The Upanishads but also
gave patronage to scholars in order to translate various other texts – including the
Bhagavadgita, the Yoga Vasistha, and the Prabodha Chandrodaya – into Persian.168 Dara
Shokoh devoted most of his endeavours to seeking a universal theme and language between
Hinduism and Islam. Therefore, after translating fifty of the Upanishads from Sanskrit to
Persian, he named it ‫ سر اکبر‬Ser-e Akbar ‘The Great Secret’ and in its introduction, he strongly
asserted that what the Quran refers to as ‫ ک ب ال کنش‬Ketāb al-Maknōn, ‘The Hidden [Sacred]
Book’169 is nothing but the Hindu Upanishads. For him, both the Quran and the Upanishads
contained the essence of the secrets which led to unity.170 Jones followed Dara Shokoh’s
footsteps in studying the Vedas and the Upanishads; in a letter dated April 24, 1784, Jones
wrote to Sanskritist Wilkins:

A version of the Jōg Bashest [another name for the Yoga Vasistha] was brought to me
the other day, in which I discovered much of the Platonick metaphysicks and morality;
nor can I help believing, that Plato drew many of his notions (through Egypt, where he
resided for some time) from the sages of Hindustan.171
In addition, Jones introduced the first English translations of the Upanishads from Sanskrit,
entitled the ‘Isa vasyam. or an Upanishad from the Yajur Veda’.172 One of the major themes of
the Yajur Veda is the doctrine that one’s soul makes a repeated return to the body until it finds
ultimate release; the same theme that most Sufi literature, such as Rumi’s the ‘Song of the
Reed’, circulates around. John Drew points out that ‘the doctrine of metempsychosis remains
peripheral to Greek thought and is unknown in Egypt, in India it is not only known before the
time of Pythagoras, arising out of a world-view which is developed in the Yajur Veda and in
the Brahmanas.’ In addition, Drew points out that Yajur Veda’s ‘central importance’ is ‘the fact
that it is virtually the only Vedic doctrine which Buddha did not question.’173 The Veda
predating Greek philosophy and its authority in the Orient could be Jones’s reasons for

168
Members of the Asiatic Society translated these works; for example, John Shore (1751-
1834), Jones’s biographer and the Society’s president after Jones, translated the Yoga
Vasistha. See Michael J Franklin, ‘“Harmonious” Jones and “Honest John” Shore:
Contrasting Responses of Garden Reach Neighbors to the Experience of India’, European
Romantic Review, 27:2, (2016), 119-142: 130-4.
169
The Quran, 56:78.
170
Gyani Brahma Singh Brahma, ‘Dara Shukoh - The Prince who turned Sufi’, The Sikh
Review, 44:511, (1996), 24-7:26.
171
Jones, Letters, 2: 646.
172
Jones, The Works, 13: 374-8.
173
John Drew, India and the Romantic Imagination, (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1987), 122.
266
choosing this Upanishad to translate. Jones described Dara Shokoh’s Persian Ser-e Akbar as
sublime, discernibly majestic ‘in parts, through folds of the Persian drapery; yet the Sanscrit
names were so barbarously written, and the additions of the translator has made the work so
deformed’. 174
Dara Shokoh’s drapery leads to the deformity of his translation because his
major aim for the translation was to equate Hinduism with Islam. It was to that aim that Dara
Shokoh altered his translation. Jones refers to these deliberate alterations on another occasion:
‘a man, who knows the Hindus only from Persian books, does not know the Hindus.’175 This
was because the depiction of Hindus, available in Persian books, was different from actual
Hindus; for in the Persian works, Hindu religious practices, traditions, and culture were altered
to suggest that Hinduism and Islam are identical and stem from a singular source.

Dara Shokoh’s Majma al-Bahrein revolves around the Vedantic mystical and religious
concepts and terminologies, aiming to justify them through Islamic perception. In his ‘On the
Mystical Poetry,’ Jones presents a lengthy extract of the ‘pleasing’ work of Dara Shokoh,
which describes the Hindus as follows:

They disregard life through affection for its giver; they abandon the world through
remembrance of its maker; they are inebriated with the melody of amorous complaints;
they remember their beloved, and resign to him both this life and the next. Through
remembrance of God, they shun all mankind: they are so enamoured of the cup-bearer,
that they spill the wine from the cup. No panacea can heal them, for no mortal can be
apprized of their malady; so loudly has rung in their ears, from eternity without
beginning, the divine word alest, with belì, the tumultuous exclamation of all spirits.
They are a sect fully employed, but sitting in retirement; their feet are of earth, but their
breath is a flame: with a single yell they could rend a mountain from its base; with a
single cry they could throw a city into confusion: like wind, they are concealed and
move nimbly; like stone, they are silent, yet repeat God's praises. At early dawn their
tears flow so copiously as to wash from their eyes the black powder of sleep: though
the courser of their fancy ran so swiftly all night, yet the morning finds them left behind
in disorder: night and day are they plunged in an ocean of ardent desire, till they are
unable, through astonishment, to distinguish night from day. So enraptured are they
with the beauty of Him, who decorated the human form, that with the beauty of the
form itself, they have no concern; and, if ever they behold a beautiful shape, they see
in it the mystery of God's work.
The wise take not the husk in exchange for the kernel; and he, who makes that choice,
has no understanding. He only has drunk the pure wine of unity, who has forgotten, by
remembering God, all things else in both worlds.176

174
Jones, The Works, 13: 366. These two comments of Jones have been discussed in detail in
the first chapter of this thesis.
175
Jones, The Works, 4: 181.
176
Jones, The Works, 4: 372-4.
267
Jones, drunk by the pure wine of unity and sympathizing with Dara Shokoh’s aim of the text,
juxtaposes it masterfully with his translation of Rumi’s ‘The Song of the Reed.’ Thus, for
example, Dara Shokoh’s statement about the Hindus ‘they are inebriated with the melody of
amorous complaints; they remember their beloved, and resign to him both this life and the next’
echoes Rumi’s:

Hear how yon reed in sadly-pleasing tales

Departed bliss, and present wo bewails!
With me from native banks untimely torn,
Love-warbling youths and soft-ey'd virgins mourn.177
Another intriguing part of the passage is where Dara Shokoh, the Muslim Prince with vojōdi
views, attempts to convince other Muslims of his time that the Hindu’s idolatry is, in fact
worshipping the One God:

So enraptured are they with the beauty of Him, who decorated the human form, that,
with the beauty of the form itself, they have no concern; and if ever they behold a
beautiful shape, they see in it the mystery of God's work.
In the first part of the quotation, Dara Shokoh reiterated the Sufi tenets of the Unity of Being;
while, through the second part, he referred to the famous ‘So God created man in his own
image, in the image of God he created him ...’178 The second part further served Jones to
demonstrate the common grounds of Islam, Hinduism, and Christianity. One reading the
Majma al-Bahrein and not familiar with the Vedantic texts might conclude that Vedantism is
a monotheistic view quite similar to Islam. This is due to the fact that Dara Shokoh’s works
and translations contain certain interpolations to emphasize the compatibility between the two
religions. These interpolations are another common feature between the two cultural
interpreters; needless to say, for both of them, Islam’s true and most pure form was Sufism.

The Unity of Being, the most syncretic mystical aspect of Sufism, was inherently
valuable to Hastings’s Orientalist regime for its goal was to bring Muslims and Hindus closer
together; just as the intercultural tradition of Dara Shokoh’s Majma al-Bahrein aimed to
facilitate the intermingling of the two seas of Hinduism and Islam. In the same path as Dara
Shokoh, Jones set a course to establish a connection between Sufi politics, the politics of
Advaita Vedanta, the most mystical aspect of Hinduism, and Western philosophies. Jones’s ‘A

177
Jones, The Works, 4: 370.
178
Genesis 1: 27.
268
Hymn to Narayena’ (1785), ‘the most powerful poem he ever wrote’179 according to Franklin,
explores ‘the metaphysical relationship between the variegated veil of nature and the Supreme
Mind that continuously creates it’.180 ‘A complete introduction’ to the Hymn, Jones stated,
‘would be no less than a full comment on the VAYDS and PURANS of the Hindus, the remains
of Egyptian and Persian Theology and the tenets of the Ionick and Italick Schools.’181
Connecting Platonic and Vedantic views, Jones continued his pluralistic transcultural synthesis
in his prefatory argument to ‘A Hymn to Narayena’:
[T]he whole Creation was rather an energy than a work, by which the Infinite Being,
who is present at all times in all places, exhibits to the minds of his creatures a set of
perceptions, like a wonderful picture or piece of musick, always varied, yet always
uniform; so that all bodies and their qualities exist, indeed, to every wise and useful
purpose, but exist only as far they are perceived; a theory no less pious than sublime,
and as different from any principle of Atheism, as the brightest sunshine differs from
the blackest midnight. This illusive operation of the Deity the Hindu philosophers call
Maya or Deception;182
This Hymn to the Hindu deity is composed in English with Miltonic resonances and long
Pindaric stanzas; simultaneously, it has eighteen lines that symbolise the number of the Puranas
and the number of Hymns Jones intended to compose. For example, in the second stanza, Jones
states:

Before Heav’n was, Thou art:

Ere spheres beneath us roll’d or spheres above,
Ere earth in firmamental ether hung,
Thou satst alone; till, through thy mystick Love,
Things unexisting to existence sprung,
And grateful descant sung. 183
While ‘Before Heav’n was, Thou art’ is ‘a revisioning of the opening of the Lord’s Prayer,’ 184
Jones is also depicting the creation of the universe according to the Bhagavata Purana.185 In
the Purana, Brahma is depicted as the one who rises from the ‘Ocean of Causes.’ Emerging at
the moment in which time and universe are born, Brahma combines nature and matter, called
Prakriti, with spirits and souls, called Purusha, to bring a dazzling variety of unexisting entities
into existence. The creation of Maya is attributed to Brahma in the Bhagavata Purana, as he

179
Franklin, ‘Orientalist Jones’, 229.
180
Franklin, ‘Orientalist Jones’, 231.
181
Jones, The Works, 4: 302.
182
Jones, The Works, 4: 302.
183
Jones, The Works, 4: 305.
184
Franklin, ‘Orientalist Jones’, 230.
185
BL, APAC, RSPA 73-4.
269
alone creates the creation ‘imbuing everything with both the good and the evil, the material
and the spiritual.’ 186
Jones’s Hymn affirms that before anything existed, the creator ‘satst
alone; till, through thy mystick Love, Things unexisting to existence sprung.’ It is fascinating
that Dara Shokoh’s Majma al-Bahrein also asserts that the creation occurred through Love:
‘The first thing to come out of chid akas [annihilation/unexistence] was Love (or ‘Ishk), which
is called Maya in the language of the Indian monotheists.’ 187 Instead of revisioning the Lord’s
Prayer, Dara Shokoh states the following Hadith (a divine Islamic narration) to ‘proof’ his
statement: ‘I was a hidden treasure, then I desired to be known; so, I brought the creation into
existence.’188 To Sufis, the Hadith explains God’s reason for creating the universe: the Love
and recognition of its manifestation.189 The hypothesis Dara Shokoh introduced in his Majma
al-Bahrein, the Sufis’ eternal Love is the Hindu’s Maya, is available in Jones’s handwritten
notes in the Osborn c. 400 collection; please see the illustration:

Illustration 19, Osborn c. 400, f. 55; Jones’s comparative notes on Oriental mysticism.

The first line in the image is ‘Maya ‫ م ی‬Commonly ‫[ عشق ا لی‬the eternal love] by the Muslems.’
Below the '‫'عشق ا لی‬, ‘the eternal love’, next to ‘ By Pundit,’ Jones has written ‘ ‫ارادت ن ا ا پی ا‬
‫ن شد دنی‬/ ‫ ’کرد‬which is a quotation of Dara Shokoh's Majma al-Bahrein: ‘the will of God for
creating the world.’

186
Richard Anderson, ‘Hindu Myths in Mallarmé: Un Coup de Dés’, Comparative
Literature, 19: 1, (1967), 28-35: 31-3.
187
Prince Muhammad Dara Shikoh, MAJMA' UL BAHARAIN or The Mingling of Two
Oceans, M. Mahfuz-ul-Haq (trans. & ed.), (Calcutta: The Asiatic Society, 1929), 39.
188
Mohammad Bagher Majlesi, The Oceans of Lights: A Compendium of the Pearls of the
Narrations of the Pure Imāms, (Beirut: Muʾassasat al-Wafāʾ, 1983), 84:199:
‫کن کنزا مخفی فأحبب أ أعرف فخلق الخلق لکی أعرف‬
189
Peter Koslowski, The Concept of God, the Origin of the World, and the Image of the
Human in the World Religions, (New York: NY, Springer, 2001), 99.
270
 One year after the composition of the ‘Hymn to Narayena’, in his ‘Third Anniversary
Discourse’ (1786), Jones declared that it is impossible ‘to read the Vedanta, or the many fine
compositions in illustration of it, without believing that Pythagoras and Plato derived their
sublime theories from the same fountain with the sages of India.’190 It was almost six years
later that in his ‘On the Mystical Poetry’ (1792), Jones presented his understanding of the
common identity of the Platonic, Vedantic, and Sufi traditions utilizing Dara Shokoh’s vojōdi
Majma al-Bahrein. Another folio of the Osborn c. 400 collection demonstrates Jones’s reliance
on the book to connect Sufism and Vedanta:

Illustration 20, Osborn c. 400, f. 58; two extracts showing Jones’s comparative mystical studies.

On the top of the folio, Jones noted to himself to ‘See ‫[ مج ع البحرین‬the Majma al-Bahrein] by
‫[ دارااکشه‬Dara Shokoh]' on ‘One of the Vaids.’ In the bottom of the same folio, he has written
‘Vedanty's and Neays [Naya is one of the doctrines of Jainism]’; on the top of Vedanti Jones
has written ‫ بی انی‬bidāniyat which is his Persian transliteration of the word and next to it he has
written ‫ تصشف‬tasavof, ‘Sufism.’

Dara Shokoh’s views and attempts of uniting Hinduism and Islam resulted from the
influence of two figures he admired: the first one was a Persian mystic named Sarmad Kashani,
191
an Armenian Jewish poet and merchant who converted to Islam and had deep pluralistic
convictions. Jones was familiar with Sarmad; firstly, the familiarity could have been obtained
through Jones’s studies of the Dabestan. Thus, Jones probably would have known that the
author’s chapter on Judaism was probably composed by Sarmad. Secondly, Jones’s Notebook
192
contains a quatrain composed by Sarmad; the quatrain alludes to the life of the vojōdi Sufi

190
Jones, The Works, 13: 269.
191
N. Katz, 'The Identity of a Mystic: The Case of Sa'id Sarmad, a Jewish-Yogi-Sufi Courtier
of the Mughals’, Numen, 47, (2000), 142–160.
192
The Notebook, f. 23.
271
Hallaj, and Jones’s translation of it contains ‘‫[ امشب‬tonight] See Háfiz.’ The quatrain and
Jones’s translation of it have been discussed in the second chapter of this thesis; however, it is
noteworthy to reiterate that Jones’s comment, relating Sarmad to Hafez, suggests that Jones
was indeed conducting a comparative analysis between the writings of the vojōdi Sufis, Sarmad
and Hafez, as well as the life of Hallaj.

The second person who influenced Dara Shokoh was a Sufi saint of the Qadiri order
named Hazrat Mian Mir (1550-1635).193 Mian Mir was quite influential in Dara Shokoh’s life
– particularly regarding his relationship with the Sikhs and Hindus – and consequently, Mian
Mir would have been an exciting figure for Jones to study. Immensely respected amongst
communities of different faiths, like Sarmad, Mian Mir had significant pluralistic tendencies;
the Sikhs, for example, invited Mian Mir to lay the foundation of their Golden Temple in
Amritsar. Through Mian Mir, Dara Shokoh established a close relationship with Guru Har Rai
(1630-1661), the seventh Sikh guru, who supported him in the conflicts which occurred in the
years to come. Although the conflicts were over the Mughal throne – between the prince and
his brother Aurangzeb (1618-1707) – it would be superficial to consider Aurangzeb’s hunger
for the throne as the only source of the conflict. Dara Shokoh’s interactions with the other
faiths, his quest on finding a unifying source for all religions, patronage of fine arts, dancing
and music were not desirable traits to his younger brother. These acts portrayed Dara Shokoh
as a blasphemer and heretic in the eyes of Aurangzeb – the orthodox Sunni Muslim – and many
of the Mughal elites who either had an eye for the throne or simply gained more benefit from
overthrowing the prince. The conflict of the brothers had a deeper - yet much simpler – level:
Dara Shokoh, associating himself with figures such as Sarmad and Mian Mir, was following
the Unity of Being, while Aurangzeb decided to follow the likes of Ahmed Sirhindi and Khawja
Baqi Billah (1563-1603), and thus tended more towards the unity of witnesses. Sirhindi and
Baqi Billah were amongst the most prominent Sufis of the Naqshbandi order. Putting forward
the unity of witnesses before Aurangzeb’s initiation into the order and supporting it openly,
they were initially against the liberal Sufis and the policies of Akbar and other Mughal
emperors.194

193
The empire of the great Mughals: history, art and culture, Burzine K. Waghmar (ed.),
(London: Reaktion Books, 2004), 135.
194
Roshen Dalal, The Religions of India: A Concise Guide to Nine Major Faiths, (New
Delhi: Penguin Books India, 2010), 261.
272
 After assassinating Dara Shokoh in 1659, Aurangzeb did everything possible to erase
the unfortunate prince’s pluralistic achievements. Dara’s collection of fine arts, demonstrating
his syncretic views, which he dedicated to his wife Nadira Banu (1618-1659) in the early 1640s,
was deliberately vandalized.195 Aurangzeb’s enmity did not stop at mutilating Dara Shokoh’s
body,196 or art collection, his ignorant and fossilized interpretations affected others who
followed the vojōdi views. Although Aurangzeb and his company did everything in their power
to eradicate every trace of the Mughal’s rich pluralistic and syncretic history, their attempts
failed. This was caused by the variety of the literature, promoting the Unity of Being, produced
from Akbar’s era to Dara Shokoh’s, emphasizing the similarities between Islam and Hinduism.
The consistent promotion of such literature, up until the time of Dara Shokoh, in the
seventeenth century, created an environment in which various Hindu Vedantists began to call
most of the views found in Rumi’s Masnavi as well as Sufism, in general, their own. The
celebrated seventeenth-century Hindu poet Chandra Bhan 'Brahman' (d.1662-63) compiled the
Mokālamāt-e Dārā-Shokoh va Bābā Lāl, ‘The Dialogues of Dara Shokoh and Baba Laal’
which was a mystical discourse between the Prince and a Brahman; needless to say, it asserted
that the Muslim Prince has the same beliefs as the Hindu ascetic. Like the Hindus, Muslim
theologians – such as Shaikh Muhibullah and Shaikh 'Abd al-Rahman Chishti (d. 1683) – began
to believe that the Hindus were not idol worshippers but monotheists with deep pantheistic
beliefs. Shaikh Muhammadi, one of Muhibullah’s most eminent disciples, openly started
training in yoga from Brahmans.197

So far, many books and literary-theological figures have been mentioned who aimed to
bring harmony to India before the British rule, all of whom have influenced Jones in shaping
his pluralistic views – whether directly or indirectly – and consequently the picture he had in
mind for a harmonious India. I decided to leave one of the most critical texts Jones had read,
examined, and was influenced by, to the last as there is uncertainty surrounding the book’s
authorship. The book is called ‫مذاهب‬ ‫ دبس‬Dabestān-e Mazāheb, ‘The School of

195
Jeremiah P. Losty, ‘Ascetics and Yogis in Indian Painting: The Mughal and Deccani
Tradition’, (July 2016), 14.
[https://www.academia.edu/27189427/ASCETICS_AND_YOGIS_IN_INDIAN_PAINTING
_THE_MUGHAL_AND_DECCANI_TRADITION].
196
Niccolao Manucci, Storia do Mogor; or, Mogul India 1653-1708, William Irvine (trans.),
(London: John Murray and Albemarle Street, 1907), 1: 340-1.
197
Saiyid Athar Abbas Rizvi, & Mohammad Habib, Muslim revivalist movements in northern
India in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, (New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1995),
340.
273
Religions/Creeds’ which is a digest of the religions and sects existing in South Asia during the
mid-seventeenth century. The Dabestan is written in Persian by an anonymous writer who calls
him/herself as ‫ ن مه نگ ر‬nāmeh-negār, ‘the [letter] writer’ or ‫ کردار گذار‬kerdār-gozār, ‘the servant
[of the acts]’. Based on the autobiographical references in the book, apparently, the author was
born in Patna around 1617 and moved to Agra around the age of seven in 1624. The book was
probably composed during the reign of Shah Jahan, sometime between the years 1645 and
1658. In his essay, ‘On the Mystical Poetry’, Jones suggested a Mohsen Fani (d. 1670-1), an
Indo-Persian scholar and poet, 198 to be the author of the Dabestan,199 while modern scholars
reject his hypothesis.

Containing twelve chapters, dedicated to a faith and the faith’s sects and creeds, each
chapter of the Dabestan raises more debates about the book’s authorship. For example, the
fourth chapter, which is on Judaism, is ‘learned from the Sufi Sarmad, who was born a Jew’;
which makes one doubt if the book was genuinely written during the time of Akbar and/or
Jahangir. In some manuscripts of the Dabestan, its author is identified as ‫ مشب ا ه‬Mowbad-shāh
(1617-70), a Zoroastrian-cleric who was born in a Persian Shia family and started to follow the
Azar-Kayvani – a Zoroastrian sect – at a very young age.200 Nevertheless, the Dabestan’s
description of Zoroastrianism cannot be taken as thoroughly reliable either. The chapter on
Zoroastrianism consists of fifteen subchapters: the first three solely describe sects close to Azar
Kayvani.201 The primary source that the author uses for these subchapters is a book entitled
‫ دس تیر آس نی‬Dasatir-e Asemani, which has been proven to be fabricated during the time of
Akbar in order to synchronize Persian Shia philosophers such as Avicenna and Sohrevardi
(1154-1191) with Zoroastrian philosophers. Modern research has proven that the Dabestan and
the Dasatir to be the compositions of the Azar Kayvanis, who were a heterodox Zoroastrian
sect amongst the Persians who lived in Patna during the Seventeenth century; both works
sought to legitimatize the Azar Kayvani views as well as other heterodox religious traditions

198
For more details on Mohsen Fani see: Sharif Husain Qasemi, 'FANĪ KAŠMĪRĪ',
Encyclopedia Iranica, (4), 2: 207. [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/fani].
199
Jones, The Works, 4: 372.
200
Charles Rieu, Catalogue of the Persian manuscripts in the British Museum, (London:
Piccadilly, 1879-83), 1: 142.
201
Azar Kayvan (1530 – 1618) was a Persian Zoroastrian high clergy who went to India and
founded a Zoroastrian-Illuminationistic school. For more information on Azar Keyvan see:
H. Corbin, ‘ĀẔAR KAYVĀN’, Encyclopedia Iranica, (3) 2: 183-187, 183.
[http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/azar-kayvan-priest].
274
of India. Therefore, they invented the primordial prehistory that aroused Jones's enthusiasm;202
thus, it definitely can be asserted that Akbar’s mission for finding an ‘ecumenical religion [had]
encouraged religious invention’.203 Furthermore, the description of Azar Kayvani’s teachings
in the Dabestan has led some scholars to state that the ‘author’s proselytizing attitude is
especially apparent in the section on Islam, which is filled with distortions, fabrications,
unwarranted interpretations, and even outright lies.’204 However, from another perspective, the
invented religion or the fabrications and unwarranted interpretations can be observed as an
extreme mode of the other’s domestication, which prior Persian vojōdi Sufis used. As discussed
in the previous chapter, the Christianity of Attar’s Christian girl contained a high level of
Judaism, Paganism, and Zoroastrianism; in other words, it was a fabricated view on
Christianity with many unwarranted interpretations. Such inventions were later expanded by
the Indian vojōdis, such as Dara Shokoh, in his Majma al-Bahrein. The Dabestan’s next ten
subchapters explore and focus purely on the Zoroastrian beliefs which are close to the ancient
Greeks and Hindu philosophers who fascinated Jones. However, only the last two subchapters
on the Zoroastrians deal with common Zoroastrianism: the two are derived from a twelfth-
century text called ‫ ملل و نحل‬melal va nehal, ‘The Book of Sects and Creeds’205 written by an
Iranian Muslim named Muhammad Shahrastani (d. 1153).

Despite all the uncertainty and criticism revolving around the authorship and its
authenticity, the Dabestan contains historical merit and holds valuable information about
seventeenth-century India and its intellectual and social climate. For example, its tenth chapter
which is an accurate description of a syncretic creed, introduced by Akbar, called ‫ اللهیه‬elāhiyeh,
also known as ‫ دین اللهی‬din olāhi, ‘the God’s religion’. The other feature of the Dabestan which
makes it outstanding – and perhaps was another reason for drawing Jones’s attention to it – is
that each of its chapters is derived from the original literature of the examined religion. For
example, the interpretation of the Prophet Mohammad’s ascension at the end of the eleventh

202
Bruce Lincoln, ‘Isaac Newton and Oriental Jones on Myth, Ancient History, and the
Relative Prestige’, History of Religions, 42:1 (2002), 1-18: 13.
203
Fath-Allah Mojtaba'i, ‘DABESTĀN-E MAḎĀHEB’, Encyclopedia Iranica, (3) 5: 532-4,
533. [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/dabestan-e-madaheb].
204
Mojtaba'i, ‘DABESTĀN-E MAḎĀHEB’, 533.
205
A book quite similar to the Dabestan; melal va nehal is a digest for various religions
present the Middle East. For more information on the book, see: David Thomas, 'Kitāb al-
milal wa-l-niḥal', Christian-Muslim Relations 600 - 1500, David Thomas (ed.),
[http://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/christian-muslim-relations-i/kitab-al-milal-wa-
l-nihal-COM_24627].
275
chapter was extracted from the Merāj-nāmeh attributed to Avicenna.206 This was in accord
with Jones’s view that anyone examining a culture or religion should start with its original
texts. Furthermore, in some cases, traditions, folklore stories, and anecdotes of each religion or
culture are mentioned, such as the fifth chapter on Christianity. These anecdotes and traditions
had travelled from other cultures to seventeenth-century India; on the one hand, they are highly
syncretic and pluralistic, while on the other hand, they paved the way for anyone, like Jones,
who aimed to conduct a comparative study on such matters.
Francis Gladwin was the first person who translated parts of the Dabestan into English
and published it in 1789.207 In 1843, the whole book was translated to English and published
in Calcutta;208 the Dabestan has been reprinted many times ever since in Iran and India. Based
on the various references Jones made to the book, it is apparent that he was heavily influenced
by it. Other than mentioning the Dabestan in his ‘On the Mystical Poetry’, which juxtaposes
the book with Dara Shokoh’s Majma al-Bahrein, Jones refers to the book in his fifth and sixth
Discourses presented to the Asiatic Society. In the fifth Discourse, ‘On the Tartars’ delivered
on February 21, 1788,209 Jones has used the book as a source to understand the Tartars living
under the rule of Genghis Khan (1158-1227): ‘We are assured, however, by the learned author
of the Dabestan that the Tartars under Chengiz and his descendants were lovers of truth and
would not even preserve their lives by a violation of it.’210 Jones’s sixth Discourse, ‘On the
Persians’ delivered on February 19, 1789,211 further demonstrates his reliance on the Dabestan.
Described as a ‘rare and interesting tract on twelve different religions,’ Jones uses the work to
signify the heterodox background of Oriental pluralism as well as the conflict between the
pluralistic views and orthodox Islam:
the wonderfully curious chapter on the religion of Hushang which was long anterior to
that of Zeratusht but had continued to be secretly possessed by many learned Persians
even to the author’s time and several of the most eminent of them dissenting in many
points from the Gabrs [fire worshippers] and persecuted by the ruling powers of their

206
For more information and an English translation of the book see: Peter Heath, ‘Part III:
The Mi'râj Nâma’, Allegory and philosophy in Avicenna (Ibn Sînâ): with a translation of the
Book of the Prophet Muḥammad's ascent to heaven, (Philadelphia, PA: University of
Pennsylvania Press, 1992), 107-45.
207
‘The Dabistan or School of Manners’, The New Asiatic Miscellany, Francis Gladwin
(trans.), (Calcutta: Joseph Cooper, 1789), 1: 86-137.
208
Muḥsin Fānī, The Dabistán, or School of manners: translated from the original Persian,
with notes and illustrations, David Shea, & Anthony Troyer (trans), (Paris: Oriental
Translation Fund of Great Britain and Ireland, 1843), 3 vols.
209
Jones, The Works, 3: 71-103.
210
Jones, The Works, 3: 92.
211
Jones, The Works, 3: 103-37.
276
 country had retired to India where they compiled a number of books now extremely
scarce. 212
Hushang was the discoverer of fire in Persian mythology; his discovery led to mankind’s
uncovering of iron and ironworking principles, which consequently led to the development of
agriculture.213 Other than some references to its name in the Shahnameh, there is not much
known about Hushang’s religion in Persian literature. All we know for sure was that his
discoveries were aimed to comfort humanity, and he argued upon principles such as reason,
wisdom, and justice. Later in the Discourse, Jones relied ‘on the authorities adduced by
Mohsani Fani’ on the primaeval religion of Iran: ‘we learn from the Dabistan that the popular
worship of the Iranians under Hushang was purely Sabian [worshipping stars].’ The author of
the Dabestan’s aim for the hypothesis was to enable people such as gabrs, ‘fire worshipers’ or
those who worshipped anything else to argue that their religion is like the Sabian’s and
consequently, using verses of the Quran,214 justify their practices against orthodox Muslims.
As the Discourse was aimed at an eighteenth-century European audience, Jones intermingled
information from the Dabestan with Isaac Newton’s (1643-1727) understanding of the ancient
Persian religion as ‘the oldest and noblest of all religions’:

A firm belief that One Supreme God made the world by his power and continually
governed it by his providence, a pious fear love and adoration of him, a due reverence
for parents and aged persons, a fraternal affection for the whole human species, and a
compassionate tenderness even for the brute creation.215
The author of the Dabestan and Newton have both used broad and positive terminologies to
describe the other; the devil is in the details. Such descriptions have been common amongst
Oriental pluralistic mystics to minimize the differences between diverse Oriental cultures; to
facilitate the connection between the known and the unknown by emphasising the similarities
between the two. Following Newton’s description of ancient Persian religions, Jones explains
that ‘the modern philosophers’ of Hushangi persuasion are called Sufis:

their fundamental tenets are, that nothing exists absolutely but God: that the human soul
is an emanation from his essence, and, though, divided for a time from its heavenly
source, will be finally re-united with it; that the highest possible happiness will arise
from its reunion, and that the chief good of mankind in this transitory world, consists

212
Jones, The Works, 3: 110.
213
Donna Rosenberg, Folklore, Myths, and Legends: A World Perspective, (Lincolnwood:
NTC Publishing Group, 1997), 116-8.
214
For example, Quran’s 2:62 which was mentioned earlier in this chapter.
215
Jones, The Works, 3: 125.
277
 in as perfect a union with the Eternal Spirit as the incumbrances of a mortal frame will
allow; 216
This short extract is arguably one of the very first, if not the first, accurate description of the
Sufis and their metaphysics: ‘Such in part (for I omit the minuter and more subtle metaphysics
of the Sufis which are mentioned in the Dabistan)’. Jones elaborates that Sufism is ‘the wild
and enthusiastick religion of the modern Persian poets, especially of the sweet Hafiz and the
great Maulavi [Rumi]’. Emphasizing the Indo-Persian connection in his sixth anniversary
Discourse entitled ‘On the Persians,’ Jones clarifies the affinity between Sufi mystics and ‘the
Vedanti philosophers and best lyrick poets of India; as it was a system of the highest antiquity
in both nations, it may be added to the many other proofs of an immemorial affinity between
them’.217 Jones’s connecting link between the philosophy of the two Oriental nations and
modern Europe can be found in the theory of Emanationism, all are derived from the first reality
or perfect God, by the Neoplatonic philosopher Plotinus (205-270). In his Enneads, Plotinus
described all things phenomenal and otherwise are an emanation from the One. He also argued
that emanation is a diffusion from the One, of which there are three primary hypostases, the
One, the Intellect, and the Soul.218 Plotinus’s supreme One ‘is before all existents,’219
transcendent, and contains no division, multiplicity, or distinction; without the supreme One,
nothing could exist.220 The emanationist metaphysics asserts the absolute transcendence of the
One as the source of all beings.221 The understanding of the Neoplatonic scholar dovetails
nicely with the vojōdi Sufis’ and the Vedanti philosophers: whatever exists is part of a unique
singular existence or an appearance, manifestation, or emanation of it. Jones’s ‘On the
Philosophy’ addresses this connection at length:

but supplication and praise would not satisfy the boundless imagination of the Vedántì
and Sufi theologists, who blending uncertain metaphysics with undoubted principles of
religion, have presumed to reason confidently on the very nature and essence of the
divine spirit, and asserted in a very remote age, what multitudes of Hindus and
Muselmans assert at this hour that all spirit is homogeneous, that the spirit of God is in
kind the same with that of man, though differing from it infinitely in degree, and that,
as material substance is mere illusion, there exists in this universe only one generic

216
Jones, The Works, 3: 130.
217
Jones, The Works, 3: 130.
218
Plotinus, The Essential Plotinus: Representative Treatises From The Enneads, S. J. Elmer
O’Brien (trans.), (Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing, 1964), 90-136: 90-2.
219
Plotinus, The Enneads, Stephen MacKenna (trans.), B. S. Page (ed.), (Harmondsworth,
Penguin Books: 1991), 487.
220
Plotinus, The Enneads, 617-20.
221
Plotinus, The Enneads, 92-3, & 98-9.
278
 spiritual substance, the sole primary cause, efficient, substantial, and formal of all
secondary causes and of all appearances whatever, but endued in its highest degree,
with a sublime providential wisdom, and proceeding by ways incomprehensible to the
spirits which emane from it.222

Earlier, in his sixth Discourse ‘On the Persians,’ Jones elaborated on the mystical views of
the Sufis:

that, like a reed torn from its native bank, like wax separated from its delicious honey,
the soul of man bewails its disunion with melancholy musick, and sheds burning tears,
like the lighted taper, waiting passionately for the moment of its extinction, as a
disengagement from earthly trammels, and the means of returning to its Only
Beloved.223
Jones suggested his fellow Asiatic Society members should ‘borrow such expressions as
approach the nearest to our ideas, and speak of Beauty and Love in a transcendent and mystical
sense’. Three years after ‘On the Persians’, in his ‘On the Mystical Poetry’ (1792), Jones
recounted the sadly pleasing notes of ‘reed torn from its native bank.’ In the eleventh Discourse
‘On the Philosophy’ (1794), Jones revised the opinions he stated in the previous Discourses:

I can venture to affirm, without meaning to pluck a leaf from the never-fading laurels
of our immortal Newton,—that the whole of his theology and part of his philosophy
may be found in the Vedas and even in the works of the Sufis: that most subtle spirit,
which he suspected to pervade natural bodies, and, lying concealed in them, to cause
attraction and repulsion, the emission, reflection, and refraction of light, electricity,
calefaction, sensation, and muscular motion, is described by the Hindus as a fifth
element endued with those very powers;224

Jones elaborated that the Vedantic ‘fifth element’, the ‘force universally attractive’, is mainly
ascribed to the Sun and is called ‘Aditya, or the Attractor a name designed by the mythologists
to mean the child of the Goddess Aditi.’ In Neoplatonic terms, the One is compared to light,
the Divine Intellect – first will towards Good – to the Sun, and the Soul – whose light is merely
a derivative conglomeration of light from the 'Sun' – to the Moon.225 Therefore, Jones’s
statement compares the Vedantic Aditya to the Divine Intellect and the Neoplatonic One to
Aditi. Regarding the Moon, Jones utilized ‘the most wonderful passage on the theory of

222
Jones, The Works, 3: 250-1.
223
Jones, The Works, 3: 130.
224
Jones, The Works, 3: 246.
225
Plotinus, The Enneads, 417.
279
attraction’ from Nezami’s Shirin and Farhad, which he re-entitled ‘the Divine Spirit and a
human Soul.’ Later in the Discourse, he summed up the fruits of his syncretic research:

[T]he general corollary, admitted by Hindus, Arabs, and Tartars, by Persians, and by
Chinese is the supremacy of an all creating and all preserving spirit, infinitely wise,
good, and powerful, but infinitely removed from the comprehension of his most exalted
creatures. nor are there in any language [...] more pious and sublime addresses to the
being of beings, [...] than in Arabic, Persian, and Sanscrit, especially in the Koran, the
introductions to the poems of Sadi, NIZAMI, and FIRDAUSI, the four Vedas, and
many parts of the numerous Puranas.226
In other words, he asserted that Oriental perception of God, for example, Rumi’s Great One, is
no different from the Occidental, Neoplatonic Supreme One. Jones, who knew twenty-eight
languages, also added that he could not find ‘more pious and sublime addresses to the being of
beings’ than in Oriental languages. This addition to his understanding of the East-West
philosophy brings his view on the differences of the East-West mystical poetry to mind; they
differ ‘as the flowers and fruit of Europe differ in scent and flavour from those of Asia:’

the same strain, in poetical measure, would rise up to the odes of SPENSER on Divine
Love and Beauty, and, in a higher key with richer embellishments, to the songs of
HAFIZ and JAYADEVA, the raptures of the Masnavi, and the mysteries of the
Bha´gavat.227

In the meantime, as Jones was conducting his comparative research in India, he also worked
on composing a short verse which, in line with many vojōdi Sufis, promoted toleration. The
verse depicts Jones’s moment of extinction, his passionate ‘disengagement from earthly
trammels,’ and reunion with the ‘Only Beloved’, the supreme ‘all preserving spirit, infinitely
wise, good, and powerful’ creator. The verses are in Persian, one of the languages of the Orient
in which ‘more pious and sublime addresses to the being of beings’ is abundant. It is in the
meter of Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh (U-U-UU--U-U-UU-) and available in Jones’s personal copy
of Nezami’s Treasury: 228

226
Jones, The Works, 3: 250.
227
Jones, The Works, 4: 216.
228
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. 40.
280
 Illustration 21, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. 40; a Persian poem by Jones and in his hand on his manuscript of
Nezami’s Treasury.

The verses translate as follows:

Jones! Act justly and virtuously for the love of the creatures and the religion of God.
So that after your passing, every being in China and India praises you.
Mourning Muslims tear their chest apart, burying you like Christians in a clean coffin.
The Brahmans recite the Vedas at it, and the Sufis scatter wine over it.229
In the first distich, Jones has omitted the subtle details of the qualities of a life worthy of the
reunion with the Beloved; he has encapsulated them in justice, virtuous acts, and love of the
other beings, as well as not forgetting the Beloved. The second distich asserts that by
maintaining such standards in life, one would be praised by all creations; in Rumi’s words, one

229
See the original Persian text and transliteration of the verse below:
‫به مهر نالیق و دین ن ا‬ ‫چن کن به نیکی و داد یشنس‬
‫ه ه نلق بر تش کنن آفرین‬ ‫که بع ا وف ت بهن ی بچین‬
‫مسل به اری کن سینه چ‬ ‫نهن ت نص ری به ت بشت پ‬
‫و صشفی ب و میفش نی کن‬ ‫بره ن بر او بی نشانی کن‬
Chenān kon be niki o dād younesā be mehr-e khalāyegh o dine khodā
Ke ba’d az vafātat be hend v be chin hame khalgh bar to konand āfarin
Nehandat nasāri be tabōte pāk mosalmān be zāri konad sine chāk
Berahman bar ō bid khāni konad va sōfi bed ō mey feshāni konad
281
should not seek scandal, audacity, and turmoil in the foreign lands of China and/or India.230
The remaining two distiches gather every major religion of the subcontinent, which Jones
believed to share his view of the Beloved and the path to it. The intriguing fact is that the
followers of these four religions – Muslims, Christians, Brahmans, and Sufis – each are
mourning Jones’s separation from them and celebrating his union with the Beloved in their
own culture and customs; just as the travellers in Rumi’s tale worshipped the Great One in their
own manners.231 As it can be seen in the illustration, Jones has underlined the words: ‫نص ری‬,
‫مسل‬, ‫بره ن‬, ‫بی نشانی‬, and ‫ صشفی‬which respectively mean ‘Christian,’ ‘Muslim,’ ‘reciting the
Vedas,’ and ‘Sufi;’ the underlinings point out the significance of the four religions and the
Vedas to Jones. In addition, below the underlined word ‫‘ صشفی‬Sufi,’ Jones has coined a Persian
word: ‫ به ین‬beh-din, ‘better/best-religion’, which demonstrates his respect for its pluralistic,
tolerant, all-pervading views.

Before moving to the final chapter of this thesis, it is fit to mention an essay written by
Lieutenant James William Graham, the linguist of the first battalion in the sixth regiment of
Bombay Native Infantry. Entitled ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, the essay
was initially composed ‘in a cursory manner at the desire of Brigadier-General Sir John
Malcolm in 1811 […] to throw a light upon this mysterious system.’232 Jones’s influence is
apparent on both Graham, the military’s linguist, and Malcolm, the intellectually curious
Brigadier-General. To briefly mention Malcolm’s achievements, it should be stated that he
travelled to Iran several times and composed the History of Iran (1815); his book was the very
first English book on the history of Iran which was derived directly from Persian sources.
Another intriguing instance which points out Malcolm’s understanding of Iranians occurred
when Haji Khalil Khan Malek ol-tojjar (d. 1802), the Extraordinary Iranian Envoy and
Plenipotentiary Minister to the East India Company, was killed in Bombay. Malcolm was left
in charge of dealing with the situation and his understanding of the Iranian culture, which was
obtained from the works of Jones and other Asiatic Society members, as well as his diplomatic
skills, led to the defusing of the situation. Iranian historical sources report ‘years later [after the
situation], in Shiraz, people said ‘if the British are this generous, they can kill ten of our

230
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 180.
231
Beinecke Library, Osborn c. 400, f. 96; BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 150.
232
Lieutenant James William Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’,
Transactions of the Literary Society of Bombay, Literary Society of Bombay, (London:
Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, and Brown, Paternoster Row; and John Murray, 1819), 1: 89-
120.
282
envoys!’233 In the next few pages, Graham’s ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’
will be critically examined for the first time since its publication.

Graham, like Jones, was after ‘the real knowledge; the beauty, as it always is, is in the
original.’234 Therefore, in the essay, he presented translations of Sufi texts which were
discovered through his ‘colloquial intercourse with natives [...] accepted by the orthodox
Mussulmans (Sunnis) and also by the Shiahs.’235 The essay complements Jones’s ‘On the
Mystical Poetry’ and ‘On the Philosophy;’ as after Jones’s death, there existed

an ample field for further discussion on this curious and important head, more
especially as the illustrious President has written professedly on their poetry only; and
though his discourse explains a number of their tenets, yet it does not fully convey the
notions of this peculiar sect, which could not have been done without much digression,
nor was primarily intended.236

Graham’s Neoplatonic view is evident in the ‘Treatise on Sufism:’

So many passages from the Holy Scriptures seem to speak in the language of Sufism
[…] ‘God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him’; and
of the mystical union; ‘But he that is joined into the Lord is one spirit.’237

Graham provides an etymological definition of the term Sufi; stating the word could have been
‘derived from suf, wool,’238 he traces it back to earlier scholars, such as Al-Qushayri (986-
1073) and Sohrevardi (1154-1191), who hypothesized that the word was generated from the
term ‫ صف‬safā, ‘purity.’239 Also, he points out that amongst Muslims, Sufism and its tenets is
equivalent to ‘mysticism or quietism’ amongst Christians. Graham’s image of Sufi becomes
more similar to Jones’s while he is discussing ‘the different States and Stages’ a Sufi passes
through in his path ‘approaching Divinity’:

In fine, the present free-thinker or modern philosopher of Europe would be esteemed a

sort of Sufi in the world, and not the one retired therefrom. This has occasioned another.

233
Dehkhoda, Lughatʹnāmah, 13: 18986.
234
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 108.
235
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 89.
236
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 89.
237
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 100.
238
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 90.
239
Al-Qushayri, Resaleye Ghoshiriyye, Badiozzaman Forouzanfar (ed.), (Tehran: Elmi-
Farhangi Publications, 1995), 467.
283
 hudees nebooi, or tradition of the Prophet, As Sufi lu yemuzhiboo, ‘The Sufi has no
religion’.240

Although no evidence can be found to suggest Jones knew the Hadith, verses of Rumi and
Amir Khosrow, which Jones annotated, certainly portrayed a Sufi as someone with no
particular religion. In addition, as it was discussed earlier, Jones’s Hungarian Orientalist friend
Károly Reviczky (1737-1793) had a similar conception of Hafez:

As to myself, although I am disposed to believe, that when Hafez speaks of love and
wine, he has no recondite meaning, I am equally willing to declare, that his writings are
not disgraced by those obscenities […] Nor can I avoid considering him a free thinker:
and a hundred passages might be quoted, in which the poet ridicules the prophet and
his Coran.241

Jones’s beacon is also apparent in another part of Graham’s Treatise; when the essay explains
the Sufi’s views on ‘the Inefficacy of Practical Worship,’ the reader is presented with some
examples. One is a distich in Rekhta or ‘Hindoostany’, which according to Graham states:

A jogue [Yogi] has elapsed in turning over the rosary, and the mind (or chaplet of beads)
has turned likewise—Put by the wooden rosary, and turn over the beads of the mind.242

The Hindoostany couplet is, in essence, the same as the distich in Ismat’s poem, which Jones
translated to: ‘She answered: Cast thy rosary on the ground; bind on thy shoulder the thread of
paganism; throw stones at the glass of piety; and quaff wine from a full goblet.’243 The
difference between the two distiches lies in the fact that one is about a yogi and the other is
about a Muslim or Monotheist. The same message could also be found in the distich Jones
added to his translation of Ismat’s ghazal: ‘Depart then from the cloister, and take the way to
the tavern; cast off the cloak of a dervise, and wear the robe of a libertine.’244 After mentioning
some other Indian specimens from Kabir, Graham moves to some Persian distiches which were
‘never hitherto printed; I received them orally with some explanations.’ One of the distiches is:

If that lovely youth of Turkistan would yield his intoxicated heart to me,
I would give for the black mole on his cheek the country of Hindoostan as a tribute.245

240
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 96.
241
Sir William Jones, Memoirs of the life, writings and correspondence of Sir William Jones,
Charles John Shore Teignmouth (ed.), (London: Piccadilly, 1806), 1: 49.
242
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 103.
243
Jones, The Works, 2: 228.
244
Jones, The Works, 2: 228.
245
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 106.
284
As it can be observed, the distich is an imitation of the same ghazal of Hafez which Jones
translated in 1771: ‘If that lovely maid of Shiraz would accept my heart, I would give for the
mole on her cheek the cities of Samarghand and Bokhara.246 The difference between the
original Persian and the Indian imitation only consists in the Sufi’s offering to the Beloved: the
Shirazi Hafez gave away Samarghand and Bokhora, while the Indian poet offered the whole of
Hindoostan. It should be mentioned here that Jones’s Grammar also delivered a more poetical
translation of ‘A Persian Song’:247

Sweet maid, if thou wouldst charm my sight;

And, bid these arms thy neck infold;
That rosy cheek, that lily hand,
Would give thy poet more delight
Than all Bocara’s vaunted gold,
Than all the gems of Samarcand. 248
Although Graham fails to acknowledge Jones’s translation, he notes the significance of Jones’s
‘On the Mystical Poetry’ in interpreting Sufi rhetoric:

The meaning of these odes [...] will be clearly understood when I refer the reader to the
Discourse already mentioned on the mystical poetry of the Persians and Hindus.
(Asiatic Researches, vol. iii.) Suffice it for the present to observe, that they are not to
be taken in the bacchanalian or libertine sense, but, like Solomon's Song, in the mystical
one; but this lies with the opinions of those who read such works as Hafiz, &c. All do
not possess the same disposition or way of thinking. 249

The ‘Treatise’ reiterates the significance of Jones’s ‘On the Mystical Poetry;’ in addition, like
Jones’s ‘On the Philosophy,’ it explores the compatibility of the Oriental and Occidental
philosophy; however, the ‘Treatise’ does not mention Jones’s ‘On the Philosophy’ which could
have been due to the fact that Graham’s focus was mainly upon Sufis rather than Oriental
philosophy in general. Since this chapter mainly revolved around Jones’s understanding of
Sufism and its relationship with other faiths, the following few pages discuss those sections of
Graham’s ‘Treatise on Sufism’, which deal with the same subject.

Graham divided his ‘Treatise’ into eleven sections: in the first ten sections, he
introduces and defines an aspect of Sufism, then presents the reader with a high number of

246
Jones, A Grammar, 135.
247
Jones, A Grammar, 137-140.
248
Jones, A Grammar, 137.
249
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 107.
285
biblical verses to reiterate that ‘So many passages from the Holy Scriptures seem to speak in
the language of Sufism […] ‘God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and
God in him’; and of the mystical union; ‘But he that is joined into the Lord is one spirit’.250 For
example, when the reader is being introduced to the religion or doctrine of Sufism,251 Graham
juxtaposes the Sufis’ rejection of worldly matters with Job saying, ‘Naked came I out of my
mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither; the Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away:
blessed be the name of the Lord.’ (Job 1: 21.) Graham explains that the Sufi’s rejection of the
world is sourced from the Quranic quote ‘Be, and it is’;252 he also points out the Neoplatonic,
and most certainly vojōdi, connection:

The Sufi conceives himself and all nature to be an emanation from the Deity; the soul
to be a portion or ray of his own blessed divine essence; animation to be the effect
thereof, and matter to be produced from the Almighty.253

This chain of Islamic, Sufi and Biblical quotations is dovetailed with ‘the words of a great poet’
Alexander Pope: ‘Slave to no sect, who takes no private road, / But looks through Nature up to
Nature's God.’ The chain is prolonged with other links of references to ‘the fathers or saints of
the third and fourth centuries, such as St. Jerome, St. Chrysostom, St. Anthony’ to assert that
‘God is in all and that “ye are the temples of the living God”’. In addition, Graham states that
Greek philosophers such as Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, and Plotinus were ‘not ignorant of this
in the very height of idolatry.’254 Eventually, Graham’s chain is concluded with verses of the
Quran: ‘O thou soul which art at rest, return into thy Lord, well pleased with thy reward, and
well pleasing unto God: enter among my servants and enter my paradise.’255 The verse echoes
Rumi’s reed, which in Jones’s words, ‘roams in exile from his parent bow'r, / Pants to return,
and chides each ling'ring hour.256 By establishing these connections, Graham achieves a key
goal: firstly, in line with Jones’s ‘On the Mystical Poetry’ and ‘On the Philosophy’, this chain
signifies the similarities between Oriental philosophy and the allegorical traditions with the
Occidental ones. Secondly, Graham lays the groundwork for his assertions in the next section

250
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 100.
251
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 90-4.
252
The Quran, 2: 117, 3: 47, 3: 59, 6: 73, 16: 40, 19: 35, 36: 82, & 40: 68.
253
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 92.
254
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 93.
255
The Quran, 89: 27-30.
256
Jones, The Works, 4: 230.
286
of the essay entitled ‘Elucidation of the foregoing or on the different States and Stages towards
Perfection attainable by Man as approaching Divinity:’257

It may not be unworthy of remark, especially in this place, that we are, generally
speaking, at least in this country, looked upon as a species or one kind of Sufi, from our
non-observance here of any rites or forms, conceiving a worship of the Deity in mind,
and adherence to morality, sufficient. In fine the present free thinker or modern
philosopher of Europe would be esteemed a sort of Sûfi in the world and not the one
retired therefrom. 258

The ultimate goal of the chain, which of course is in accord with the essay as well as Jones’s
works, is that it closes the supposed cultural gap between the West and the East.

Graham’s ‘Treatise’ becomes particularly remarkable in its fifth section ‘On the
different kinds of Sufis.’259 His categorization is not found in the works of Jones or prior
Europeans; dividing Sufis into three types: ‫ س لک‬sālek, ‘traveller’, ‫ مجذوب‬majzōb, ‘fascinated
or attracted’, and ‫ مجذوب س لک‬majzōb-e sālek, ‘fascinated by the traveller.’ Graham’s
categorisation is in accord with many Sufi writers, including Ghazali, Sohrevardi, and Jami;260
however, Graham does not fully explore this categorization. This could have been because,
firstly, the categorization was relatively novel in eighteenth-century European texts. Secondly,
he provided enough proof for his point – that Sufism is compatible with and similar to Christian
mysticism and many other European philosophical schools – by only mentioning these three
‘types of Sufis’. The remarkability of ‘On the different kinds of Sufis’ resides in the fact that it
facilitates the overall point of the essay by defining each type of Sufi with verses of the
Christian scripture and quotations from Western philosophers. For example, Graham defines
the ‫ س لک‬sālek as ‘the traveller, or one in the right road and path of purity;’ then he identifies
the sālek to the Christians with ‘Unto the pure, all things are pure (vide St. Paul's Epist. to
Titus, chap, i., ver. 15)’ and concludes the familiarization with Plato’s:

Such a man, taking all these things into his consideration, living in quietness and
tranquillity (like one who takes shelter when the storm is raging), occupied wholly in

257
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 94-7.
258
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 95-6.
259
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 98-100.
260
For further reading see: Shihab al-Din 'Umar al-Suhrawardi, The Awarif ul Maarif,
(Beirut: Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1983), 1:87; Nasrolah Poorjavadi, Soltan-e
Tarighat: The Life and Works of Ahmad Ghazali, (Tehran, Agaah, 1980), 208-9; Mahmoon
ibn Ali Ezodin Kashani, Mesbahol Hedaya va Meftahol Kefaya, (Tehran: Homaei, 1986),
108; & Abdol Rahman Jami, Nafahat al-Uns, (Tehran: Abedi, 1992), 517.
287
 his own concerns, and seeing the world around him filled with all manner of iniquity,
is contented to pass the time of his sojourning here in peace, himself free from all
unrighteousness and works of unholiness, and with calm confidence expects his
dismission and departure in all fulness of hope.261

When Graham explains the majzōb, he points out that this type of Sufi ‘signifies attracted,
drawn or carried away, abstracted, allured.’ Then Graham presents descriptions of such a
person with references to St. Paul and verses of the Quran. Also, he points out that:

those who are said in Scripture to be carried in the spirit or thrown into a trance, as
Enoch, Elisha, and Elijah were in the former instance [sāleks], and Ezekiel in the
latter [majzōbs] —or again, those who are called the violent, and said to take the
kingdom of heaven by force (vide St. Matt., chap, xi., ver. 12, also St. Luke, chap,
xvi., ver. 16).262

Later, in the sixth section of the ‘Treatise’, ‘On those who are accounted Sufis, and the double
distinction of Salik and Mejezoob’263 Graham provides a list of sāleks and majzōbs. The list of
sāleks includes figures such as Amir Khosrow and Sadi; the majzōbs’ include Shams Tabrizi
(1185-1248),264 Hallaj, and Hafez.265 These lists and Graham’s identification of the distant
Oriental Sufis – Amir Khosrow and Sadi with Enoch, Elisha, and Elijah as well as Shams,
Hallaj, and Hafez with Ezekiel – is a further step in portraying the mystics of the land far away
similar to Christian saints. An intriguing point that should not be forgotten here is that
Graham’s juxtaposition of Sufi and Christian saints, or rather Oriental and Occidental figures,
echoes the great connections Jones made – both in his published works as well as his
annotations in the manuscripts – between the East and West.

The same pattern of argument is found in the eighth section of the ‘Treatise’,
‘Comparison of the Holy Trinity with the Sufis’ three Hypostases.’266 Graham provides
Biblical verses to suggest:

In Scriptural language Christ is called the beloved, and beloved son: vide St. Luke, ch.
iii. ver. 22. Now in the first light and splendour (that of God the Father) for the sake of
the king of the beloved and elect (the Son), the Love (the Holy Ghost) which was

261
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 99.
262
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 100.
263
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 101-2.
264
Shams was Rumi’s the spiritual instructor; he is referenced with great reverence in Rumi's
poetic collection. Rumi’s final work, the Divan-e Shams-e Tabrizi, which contains his
ghazals was composed and named in the honour of Shams.
265
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 102.
266
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 108-11.
288
 overcome (and lay dormant in the Father) rose up and became victorious between the
beloved (the Son) and him who loves all (the Father).267

This statement is followed with a Hadith, which he translated to ‘This treasure (the universe
and all created things) lay in secret and concealed (in the nature of God); afterwards, Love
arose, that I (the Lord) should be known.’ As it was discussed earlier, this is the same Hadith
which Dara Shokoh used in his Majma al-Bahrein to establish that ‘The first thing to come out
of chid akas [annihilation/unexistence] was Love (or ‘Ishk), which is called Maya in the
language of the Indian monotheists.’268 Graham’s chain of Scriptural and Islamic quotations is
prolonged with ‘a tetrastich stanza in Persian’ by an unknown poet:

This jot of unity arose from out of him at once;

Then the beloved, Love itself, and he who loves all, became manifest.
The light and glory descended and became visible in the nature of man,
That treasure which was latent became enlightened by that glory.269

The Persian verses are printed in the essay, however, as they cannot be found in any Persian
literary source, the poet's identity cannot be verified. Yet, the message and figures of speech
used in these distiches can be found in the works of many Sufi poets such as Rumi, Sohrevardi,
and Shabestari. Graham juxtaposes the third and fourth distich with ‘Saint John in his Gospel,
ch. i. ver. 14, and third verse of the same chapter’ and concludes that ‘The beloved, Mahboob,
is the Son; Love itself, Mohbut, is the Holy Ghost; and he who loves all, Mohib, is evidently
the Father.’ Also, continuing Jones’s hypothesis of the similarity and compatibility of
Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism, Graham pays tribute to Dara Shokoh’s Majma al-Bahrein,
stating that this trend reminds him of ‘the doctrines of the Veidant philosophy on the creation
of the world.’270

The ninth section of the ‘Treatise’, ‘Anecdotes or Narrations promised in the

Introduction’,271 includes three narrations from Mansoor Hallaj, Shams-e Tabrizi, and an
unknown Sufi. Graham’s aim of this section is to distinguish and depict the conflict between
those whom he calls ‘Observers of the Law’ and Sufis. He explains the differences between
the two in the tenth section, yet there is a subtle point in the narrations chosen that should be

267
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 109.
268
Dara Shikoh, Majma' ul Bahrain, 39.
269
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 109.
270
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 110.
271
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 111-6.
289
discussed here to elaborate upon Graham’s understanding of a Sufi: all three narrations
presented revolve around vojōdi Sufis. Moreover, the quotations he chose for these narrations
also belong to vojōdis. For example, after presenting the reader with the account of Hallaj’s
life and execution, Graham states:

There is a distich or two made upon this occasion by one Shibli a poet and Sûfi of the
same order that is Mějězoob; he is down in the small list of Mějězoob Sheikh
Aboobeker Shibli;—he is represented asking the Almighty why Munsoor suffered; and
the reply is annexed thus:

Question Shibli put this question to the palace of the gracious lord
–Why did the prince put Munsoor on the impaling stake?
Answer. Munsoor was acquainted with everything but was a friend who
discovered secrets and mysteries:
Whoever makes public mysteries and hidden things this is his punishment.272

Leonard Lewishon introduced Abu Bakr al-Shibli (d. 945) as follows:

Since he was of Persian derivation (aslish Irani bud) and spent some time in Iran as an
official holding a post with the government of his day, he became acquainted with the
philosophy and the ethics of the Persians (ba falsafa va akhlaq-i Irani), which consists of
the unity of being (wahdat-i wujud), love of God and divine Reality ('ishq bi-Haqq va
haqiqat), chivalry and kindness to all living beings.273

Consequently, it can be seen from the narrations and quotations Graham presents that to him,
Sufis and vojōdis are interchangeable. Graham’s view provides proof that in Persian literature,
a mystic is synonymous with a Sufi and a Sufi is synonymous with a vojōdi. This
interchangeability is also apparent in the tenth section of the ‘Treatise’ entitled ‘An Inference
drawn on a Difference between the Sufis and Observers of the Law, from a peculiar saying of
each.’274 Graham describes the difference between the Sufis and the orthodox Muslims as: ‘the
Sufis say, Aun hemeh o est, “That all is He;” and the observers of the law, Hemeh azōest, “All
is from him.” He further elaborates on the difference between these two phrases by:

1st, The observers of the law say that ‘All is from Him’, without being in the least
connected with, either by nature or essence, but wholly and solely dependent on him,
and produced by his almighty fiat. […] 2nd. Now the Sufis, on the other hand, say that

272
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 113.
273
Leonard Lewishon, ‘Persian Sufism in the contemporary West: reflections on the Ni
‘matu’llahi diaspora’, in Sufism in the West, Jamal Malik, & John Hinnells (eds.), (London
Routledge: 2006), 49-70: 67. Lewishon has translated the extract from: Javad Nurbakhsh,
Shibli Mast-i haq va majdhub-i haqiqat, (Tehran: Yalda, 1997), 3.
274
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 116-7.
290
 the power, energy, or latent spirit of the Deity is in all matter, substance, and form,
without which that matter could not perform its functions or exist.275

As described at length in this chapter, what Graham refers to as a Sufi is identical with a vojōdi;
alternatively, his description of the Law observers exactly corresponds with the shohōdis.
However, although Graham’s ‘Treatise’ delves into Sufism, just like Jones’s works, there is no
mention of the Unity of Being.

The ‘Treatise’ is concluded with ‘the Analogy drawn between Sufism and Christian
Spiritualism.’276 The conclusion contains references to the second chapter of the First Epistle
of St. Paul, the Quran, as well as quotations from the British poet Edward Young (1683-1765)
and the French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1720-1778). Graham points out that to him

[T]he Mussulman Shiryât in its feature very much resembles the Jewish dispensation
from which together with some parts of the Christian faith it was evidently borrowed
through both greatly interpolated and misinterpreted.277

He reiterates that the grand and mutual factor between Christianity and Sufism ‘is to know
one's self;’ the understanding of the self occurs with contemplation. When a Sufi contemplates
‘the image of his Maker’, he finds in ‘every object around him; he conceives himself united
with him, and changed into his essence.’ Graham states that this contemplation, which leads to
the Divine union, is not only apparent in Sufi works such as Nezami’s ‘Leila and Mijnoon (the
Romeo and Juliet of the East)’ but also in St. Paul’s tradition: “But we all, with open face,
beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to
glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.” He also asserts that God is indifferent towards the
various religions and contentions; although Jones found this view in Rumi’s homochromatizing
Masnavi, Graham uses the following ‘Persian distich and beautiful simile:’

He who is maddened to the heart with the arrow of love knows not the infidel or
believer; What does the precious signet know of the engraving thereon, whether it is
reversed or not? 278

275
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 116.
276
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 117-9.
277
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 118.
278
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 119.
291
 In some respect, Graham and his ‘Treatise’ represent another example of a Briton who
has gone native in the subcontinent; under Jones’s spell, and intriguingly similar to him,
Graham aimed to reduce the gap between the Occident and the Orient by emphasizing the
similarities between the two:

we are, generally speaking, at least in this country, looked upon as a species or one kind
of Sufi […] In fine the present free thinker or modern philosopher of Europe would be
esteemed a sort of Sûfi in the world and not the one retired therefrom.279

Graham’s ‘Treatise’ showcases the result of enlightenment Jones and his Asiatic Society
introduced to eighteenth and nineteenth-century Britain. Franklin has traced Jones’s
enlightenment to June 22, 1784, 280 when in a letter he announced to Richard Johnson that he
is ‘in love with the Gopia, charmed with Crishen, an enthusiastick admirer of Ram, and a
devout adorer of Brimha-bishen-mehais [Brahma, Vishnu, Siva: the trimurti].’281 However,
Jones’s Persian verses in which he instructed himself to ‘act justly and virtuously for the love
of the creatures and the religion of God’ to be praised by all beings282 echoes Lewisohn’s
description of Abu Bakr al-Shibli, the tenth-century Sufi whom Graham mentioned in his
‘Treatise’:283

Since he […] spent some time in Iran as an official holding a post with the government of
his day, he became acquainted with the philosophy and the ethics of the Persians, which
consists of the unity of being, love of God and divine Reality, chivalry and kindness to all
living beings.284

The manuscript of Nezami’s Treasury, which contains Jones’s Persian verses, was purchased
on November 4, 1783, 285 less than forty days after he arrived in India and will be examined in
the next and final chapter of this thesis.

279
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 95-6.
280
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 19.
281
Jones, The Letters, 2: 652.
282
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. 40.
283
Graham, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, 113.
284
Leonard Lewisohn, ‘Persian Sufism in the contemporary West: reflections on the Ni
‘matu’llahi diaspora’, 67.
285
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. iii.
292
Chapter 5: The Majnoon of India: Sir William Jones’s Annotations on Nezami’s
Treasury of Mysteries

The thesis’s fifth and final chapter centres on Sir William Jones’s marginalia and annotations
on his copy of Nezami Ganjavi’s (1141–1209) The Treasury of Mysteries. The Treasury is one
of the few Sufi-themed works of Nezami which presents different tales revolving around
spiritual and practical matters. Expanding upon the previous chapters' findings, ‘The Majoon
of India’ presents a summative image of Jones’s research on Sufi mysticism. In line with the
previous chapters, this chapter examines Jones’s annotating habits, cultural translation method,
and comparative studies of the manuscript. Jones’s copy of Nezami’s Treasury is available in
the ‘Royal Society Persian and Arabic manuscripts’ collection of the British Library,
catalogued as RSPA 32. This chapter begins with providing a vision of the RSPA collection
and assesses the previous research which was conducted on it before this thesis. Then, focusing
on the RSPA 32, it discusses Jones’s sources of interest in Nezami and his Treasury and
describes and analyses Jones's annotations on the manuscript. The chapter, and the thesis,
concludes with presenting an autograph Persian poem Jones has composed on the manuscript.
It should also be mentioned that Jones’s Persian annotations are translated by myself, while a
verse translation of the Treasury of Mysteries 1 is used for Nezami’s text.

The RSPA collection, alongside many other Oriental manuscripts of Jones, was
entrusted to Sir Joseph Banks (1743-1820); in a letter accompanying the manuscripts, dated 29
January 1792, Jones advised Banks ‘should I die, you will deposit them in the Royal Society,
so that they may be lent out, without difficulty, to any studious man who may apply for them.’2
After his premature death in late April 1794, the manuscripts were presented to the Royal
Asiatic Society by Jones’s wife, Anna Maria, and by 28 June 1798, Sir Charles Wilkins (1749-
1836) composed the very first catalogue of the manuscripts; 3 years later, the collection was
transferred to the British Library, in 1826. About seventy-six years after the collection’s arrival
4
to the library, it was catalogued by Edward D. Ross (1871-1940) and Edward G. Browne

1
Nezami Ganjawi, Treasury of Mysteries, translation of Makhzanol Asrar, trans. Gholam
Hossein Darab (trans.), (London: Arthur Probsthain, 1945).
2
Jones, The Works, 13: 399.
3
Jones, The Works, 13: 401-26: 416-22.
4
Edward D. Ross, & Edward G. Browne, Catalogue of two collections of Persian and Arabic
manuscripts preserved in the India office library, (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1902).
293
(1862-1926); they were partially catalogued again in 2020 by Jonathan Lawrence. 5 As it was
established in the previous chapters, Jones had a habit of annotating the manuscripts he was
reading, and his annotations cover a vast range of subjects: explanatory remarks on the books,
parts of the texts he was fascinated with, even annotations about his comparative studies. In
addition, given that by the time Jones died in India, he could speak English, Latin, Arabic,
Sanskrit, Turkish, and Persian, the collection contains annotations in all those languages.
Although the Ross-Browne catalogue mentions a few of Jones’s annotations, it is mainly
centred around the Oriental manuscripts themselves; even the few annotations printed in the
catalogue are Jones’s explanatory remarks regarding what the manuscript is, and how he
obtained and read it. For instance, in the case of RSPA 23, which is a copy of Ferdowsi’s
Shahnameh, the only mention of Jones in the catalogue is ‘Sir William Jones says in a note at
the beginning: “I finished the reading of this book a second time, 3 Nov, 1787. Calcutta’.6
However, the manuscript contains various marginal notes and annotations by Jones, ranging
from his translations or explanations of the text to simply highlighting sentences in it. Another
case is RSPA 32, Jones’s copy of Nezami’s Makhzan al-Asrār, which translates to ‘The
Treasury of the Mysteries’. The manuscript is filled with Jones’s reiteration of Persian poetical
compositions in his own hand; yet, there is no mention of the compositions and annotations in
the catalogue.7 As the main objectives of a catalogue are ‘to enable a person to find a book,
show what the library has, and assist in the choice of a book’,8 it can be argued that a catalogue
should not necessarily mention the annotations of the manuscripts. However, as I spent some
time researching the collection, another issue was noticed: RSPA 72 is catalogued as the
Tarjuma-i-Pārjātk, the ‘Translation of a Sanskrit work on Indian Music’.9 Although the
manuscript is not dated, Jones’s English handwriting is available on it: he has translated the
title of each chapter from Persian to English; furthermore, Jones has translated two short
extracts of the work: one on the Hindu rituals and ceremonies before opening an amphitheatre;
Jones annotated the manuscript with: ‘The theatre is one of a circular form and wd. be furnished
with benches for the accommodation of the Spectators so that all may be seated according to

5
Jonathan Lawrence, ‘Building a Library: The Arabic and Persian Manuscript Collection of
Sir William Jones’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 31:1, (2021), 1-70.
6
Catalogue of two collections, 20.
7
Catalogue of two collections, 28.
8
These objectives are cited by Charles Ammi Cutter, Public Libraries in the United States of
America then History, Condition, and Management, (Washington: Government Printing
Office, 1876), 10.
9
Catalogue of two collections, 57.
294
their degree and be able conveniently to view ye Performance.’10 The other annotation of Jones
is on the ‘Nat’11 , which is his transliteration of the Natya, a Sanskrit word for drama that
encompasses dramatic narrative, virtuosic dance, and music.12 In addition to that particular
text, another text bound into RSPA 72 has not been recorded in the catalogue. The text is
entitled ‫ الهی عشق و تصشف درعلم عشق حسن‬Hosen-e Eshgh dar Elm-e Tasavof va Eshghe Elāhi,
which can be translated to ‘On the Virtues of Love in Sufism and the Divine Love’. The book
is by an unidentified author and explains the significance of love in natural sciences,
metaphysics, philosophy, and Sufism. Please see the following illustration:

10
BL, APAC, RSPA 72, f. 44. I would like to thank Professor Franklin for helping me with
reading this annotation.
11
BL, APAC, RSPA 72, 47.
12
E.J. Westlake, World Theatre: The Basics, (London: Routledge, 2017), 7.
Kamlesh Kapur, History of Ancient India (portraits of a Nation), (New Delhi: Sterling
Publishers Pvt. Ltd, 2010), 483.
295
 Illustration 1, BL, APAC, RSPA 72, f. I; the manuscript of ‘On the Virtues of Love in Sufism and the Divine
Love’.

The note on the bottom of the front page of the manuscript suggests that it was ‘Presented to
the Royal Society By Mr Burjojee Sorabjee Ashburner May 1865’. The note, alongside the fact
that there is no annotation in the manuscript referring to Jones, suggests that the text of ‘On the
Virtues of Love in Sufism and the Divine Love’ was not part of Jones’s collection. Ashburner’s
name also comes up in the Catalogue of Two Collections of Sanskrit Manuscripts Preserved in

296
the India Office Library,13 which also contains Jones’s Sanskrit manuscripts; in both of the
catalogues, he is mentioned as a collector who has presented some of the manuscripts to the
Royal Asiatic Society. However, neither of the catalogues mention the manuscript of ‘On the
Virtues of Love in Sufism and the Divine Love’. Overall, to conclude the assessment of the
catalogues, it is safe to assert that although the catalogue has its own merits, it does not present
a highly accurate description of the collection, especially if one considers Jones and his
annotations on the manuscripts.

Jones is the first person who introduced Nezami to Europe; among his published works,
there is a translation of the twenty stories from the twenty sections of Nezami’s Treasury of
Mysteries. In the prefatory advertisement to his translation, entitled ‘Tales and Fables of
Nezami’,14 Jones introduced Nezami as follows:

NIZAMI holds a distinguished rank among the Persian poets of the first class. Inferiour
to Firdausi, alone in loftiness of thought and heroick majesty, to Maulavi Rumi,
perhaps, in variety and liveliness, and to SADI in elegant simplicity, he surpasses all
others in richness of imagery and beauty of diction. With ANVARI, HAFIZ, and
KHAKANI, he is not to be compared; because he wrote neither odes, elegies, nor
satires; but confined himself to the composition of Mesnavī or verse in couplets; on
which account he is said by the Persian Criticks to have attained supreme excellence in
that species of versification’.15

After a brief introduction to the book which he called ‘The Treasury of Secrets’, Jones remarks
that ‘the warmest admirers of Nezami cannot but allow that the sententious brevity of his
couplets often renders them obscure’. Jones warned those without any knowledge of Persian
not to judge his version of the merits of the original text. As Jones admits in the advertisement,
in his translation and rendering of the Treasury: ‘every attempt at elegance, but even the idiom
of our language and the usual position of our words, have been designedly sacrificed to a
scrupulous fidelity’.16 In other words, the ‘Tales and Fables of Nezami’ were intended to assist
students of Persian language and possibly Jones had intended to include them in his Persian
Grammar. Jones’s ‘Tales and Fables of Nezami’ received a positive reception in eighteenth-
century Europe; it became a source of inspiration for future European poets. For example, the

13
Charles Henry Tawney, & Frederick William Thomas, Catalogue of Two Collections of
Sanskrit Manuscripts Preserved in the India Office Library, (London: Eyre and
Spottiswoode, 1903).
14
Jones, The Works, 4: 385-432.
15
Jones, The Works, 4: 383.
16
Jones, The Works, 4: 384.
297
tenth tale of Nezami which Jones translated to ‘On Candour and Detraction. The
BENEVOLENCE OF JESUS’17 was later rendered into German by Joseph von Hammer-
Purgstall (1774-1856), in his Geschichte der schönen redekünste Persiens: mit einer
blüthenlese aus zweyhundert persischen dichtern (1818). Later, this tale was versified by
William Rounseville Alger (1822-1905), retitled to ‘Charity’s Eye’,18 and published in Alger’s
The Poetry of the Orient (1856). The ‘Tales and Fables of Nezami’ was not the only work of
Jones which Nezami inspired, ‘The Seven Fountains, an Eastern Allegory, written in the Year
1767’19 was a pastiche of Nezami’s ‫پیکر‬ ‫ هف‬haft peykar, ‘The Seven Beauties’. Jones was
fascinated with Nezami and his works for several reason. The first is that Nezami utilized
Persian as the language of his compositions even though he was familiar with Arabic and
Kurdish as well as Turkish and Pahlavi. Nezami was born of a Kurdish-speaking mother who
lived in Ganja, in the Caucasus region, which was a predominantly Pahlavi and Turkish-
speaking area. By the time Jones was in India, Persian was the language of the Mughal courts,
Turkish was the language of the military, while Arabic and Sanskrit were the languages of
religion. In addition, Nezami had a prominent influence on the development of Persian, Arabic,
Turkish, Kurdish and Urdu poetry amongst many other languages in the subcontinent on which
Jones had centred his researches.20 The second reason lies within the style of Nezami’s poetry;
similar to many other poets of the Caucasus, he quite often used colloquial expressions and
daily used lexicon in his poetry.21 The utilization of vernacular expressions would indeed help
Jones or any other learner or teacher of the language in order to improve their comprehension

17
Jones, The Works, 4: 385-432, 408-9.
18
William Rounseville Alger, The Poetry of the Orient, (Boston: Roberts Brothers, 1865),
189.
19
Jones, Poems, Consisting chiefly of translations from the Asiatick languages, 39-69.
20
For more information on Nezami’s influence on other poets see:
Domenico Parrello, ‘ḴAMSA OF NEẒĀMI’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, November 10, 2010,
[Retrieved from http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/kamsa-of-nezami 13-06-2019].
Paola Orsatti, ‘ḴOSROW O ŠIRIN’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, June 27, 2006,
[http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/kosrow-o-sirin 13-06-2019].
Moḥammad Amin Riāḥi, ‘NOZHAT AL-MAJĀLES’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, December 15,
2008, [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/nozhat-al-majales 13-06-2019].
Paola Orsatti, ‘ḴAMSA-ye JAMĀLI’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, April 20, 2012,
[http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/kamsa-ye-jamali 13-06-2019].
Anna Livia Beelaert, ‘ḴĀQĀNI ŠERVĀNI i. Life’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, December 15,
2010, [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/kaqani-servani-poet 13-06-2019].
Moḥammad Amin Riāḥi, ‘Nozhat-al-Majales’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, December 15, 2008,
[www.iranicaonline.org/articles/nozhat-al-majales 13-06-2019].
21
Moḥammad Amin Riāḥi, ‘Nozhat-al-Majales’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, December 15, 2008,
[www.iranicaonline.org/articles/nozhat-al-majales].
298
skills.22 Another source of Jones’s fascination, particularly with Nezami, could be their mutual
interests in pluralistic literature and views on matters such as governance. To shed light on the
similarities between the two, an opinion of a well-established scholar would be helpful. Goethe
(1742-1839) portrays Nezami as a poet who aimed to intertwine intimate love with the epic
genre of Ferdowsi. ‘A sensitive, highly gifted mind, who, as Firdusi had exhausted all the
traditional stories of heroes, chose the most charming exchanges of intimate love as subject
matter for his poems’.23 Goethe further elaborates on Nezami’s subject matter and the heroes
of his works: ‘He presents Mejnun and Laila, Khusrau and Shirin, loving pairs destined for
each other by intuition, skill, nature, habit, inclination, and passion; firmly in each other’s good
graces; but then parted by caprice, obstinacy, contingency, necessity, and force’.24 Jones was
familiar with the works Goethe mentions; he had also studied and analysed them in addition to
advising others to read them’25 In other words, it was Jones who introduced the Oriental works
to European scholars such as Goethe. In addition, Goethe’s portrayal of Jones as ‘a man who
seeks to connect the unknown to the known’26 hints towards the heroes' quests in Nezami’s
narratives to overcome separation and become connected with their beloved. While Nezami’s
Khosrow o Shirin focuses on the conflict of Logic and Love, his tale of Layli o Majnoon is
directly relevant to Jones and his era. Both of the characters in the tale, like Jones, were
dedicated to closing cultural and social gaps in a divided society. In the tale, the young lovers
become separated because of their different castes, Layli was from a wealthy family while
Majnoon was poor. Nezami portrays a divergent and unharmonious society in which the people
are orthodox, violent, and fixated on outdated traditions such as old tribal feuds and caste
systems, the polar opposite of the society he portrays in Khosrow o Shirin.27 This depiction of
the society is quite similar to eighteenth-century India, in which there was turmoil not only due
to the British presence but also because of the rivalries and power struggles amongst the various

22
William Jones, A Grammar of the Persian Language, (London: W. and J. Richardson,
1771), 147.
23
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, West-East Divan: Poems, with "Notes and Essays":
Goethe's Intercultural Dialogues Martin Bidney (trans), (Albany, NY: State University of
New York Press, 2010), 200.
24
Goethe, West-East Divan, 200.
25
Jones, A Grammar of the Persian Language, 137-145.
26
Goethe, West-East Divan, 272.
27
Fazl-alaah Rezai Ardaani, , ‘A Comparative Analisys of Nezami’s “Khosrow and Shirin”
and “Leyli and Majnun”’, Ghanaei Literary Journal, 11, (2008), 80-106: 99.
299
native ethnic and religious factions.28 In the tale, the only character with a humanitarian
approach towards the Other is Majnoon, which is due to his love of Layli. Majnoon defends
the members of Layli’s tribe, the Other, from his own family. On account of his love of India,
Jones translated the Islamic and Hindu laws to bring justice amongst the native populations
and defend their rights against the British in a tumultuous India.
There are also several reasons behind my choosing this manuscript, RSPA 32, with the
most prominent one being the fact that it contains almost every type of annotation Jones used
to make on the manuscripts he read. His annotations, whether in the process of translating the
text, writing his thoughts upon it, indicating his agreement, or highlighting especially relevant
words and imagery, all reflect an engrossed reader. In addition, the text itself is quite a
prominent composition for it is the first and one of the few Sufi-themed works of Nezami: The
Treasury of Mysteries is heavily influenced by Sanai’s (1080-1131) ‫ ح یقه الحق یق‬Ḥadighat al-
Haghāyegh, ‘The Garden of Truth’29 one of the earliest and most remarkable books in which
Sufism was integrated into Persian poetry. Furthermore, although Nezami himself
acknowledges the influence of Sanai, he considers The Treasury to be a more elegant and
fashioned ethico-philosophical book.30 Unlike Layli and Majnoon or Khosrow o Shirin,
Nezami’s The Treasury of Mysteries does not focus on a single narrative. Instead, it presents
differing tales which deal with spiritual and practical matters; particularly divine and kingly
justice; the admonition of vanity and hypocritical piety; the futility of the world; and the
necessity to prepare for the afterlife. During the discourses, Nezami argues that the ideal way
of life can be achieved by ‘remembering the supreme rank of man among God's creatures and
approaching of the end life and the necessity of man becoming aware of his spiritual
destination.’31 Under the influence of this Neo-Platonic/vojōdi argument, Jones has composed
a remarkable poem in Persian, which is available in the manuscript and will be discussed at the
end of this chapter.

Generally, Jones’s first annotations on the manuscripts are some introductory remarks
that usually state the book’s price and the date he bought or finished reading the book. In some

28
The rivalry and power struggles of different religious and ethnic factions of seventeenth-
and eighteenth-century India have been discussed in the fourth chapter of this thesis.
29
J.T.P de Bruijn, Persian Sufi Poetry: an introduction to the mystical use of classical
Persian poems, (Surrey: Curzon, 1997), 97-8.
30
P.J Chelkowski, ‘Nizami Gandjawi’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, (Leiden: Brill, 1995), 8: 76-
81.
31
de Bruijn, Persian Sufi Poetry, 98.
300
rare cases, however, Jones has written an introductory passage regarding the manuscript: for
example, on his personal copy of Rumi’s Masnavi Ma’navi:

Illustration 2, BL, APAC, RSPA 35, f. ii; Jones’s description of Rumi’s Masnavi.

As can be seen in the image, Jones wrote:

So extraordinary a book as the Mesnavi was never, perhaps, composed by man: it

abounds with beauties and blemishes equally great; with gross obscenity and pure
ethicks; with exquisite strains of poetry and flat puerilities; with wit and pleasantry
mixed with dull jests; with ridicule on all established religions, and with a vein of
sublime piety: it is like a wild country in a fine climate, overspread with rich flowers
and with the ordure of beasts. I know of no writer to whom the Maulavi can be
compared except for Chaucer and Shakespeare.32
Other than hinting towards his comparative studies on Eastern and Western texts, the
annotation indicates Jones’s passionate interest in that ‘extraordinary’ book, as well as the
reasons for his interest in Sufi pluralistic rhetoric. However, the title page of Jones’s manuscript
of Nezami’s Treasury begins differently; as it can be seen in the image below, the first
annotation seen on the manuscript is Jones’s quoting a quatrain of Amir Khosrow of Delhi

32
BL, APAC, RSPA 35, f. ii.
301
(1253-1325), one of the Indian-Sufi poets who emulated many works of Nezami,33 and with
whom Jones was fascinated. The quatrain reads as:34

‫گر رن نراب تی هس م هس م‬ ‫گر ک فر و گبر و ب پرس م هس م‬

‫من دانم و دوس هر چه هس م هس م‬ ‫هر ط یفه به من گ نی دارد‬
‘If I am an infidel, fire or idol worshipper, I am! If I am a rend,35 or a wanderer, I am!
Different tribes have different assumptions of me; only my beloved and I know, what I
am!’
Please see the illustration below:

33
T. Moharramov, ‘The Khamsas of Nizami and Amir Khusrau’, Life, Times, & Works of
Amir Khusrau Dehlavi, Z. Ansari (ed.), (New Delhi: National Amīr Khusrau Society,
1975),103-18: 105.
34
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. i.
35
The term in Sufi literature signifies a witty trickster Sufi.
302
 Illustration 3, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. i; on top and the bottom of the folio Jones has recited a quatrain
attributed to Amir Khosrow, in the middle, he has written a distich in Persian.

It can be asserted that Amir Khosrow’s aim in composing the quatrain was to pay tribute to, or
imitate, a quatrain which belonged to another Sufi poet, Khayyam (1048-1131):

‫ هس م‬،‫گر ک فِر و َگبْر و ب پرس م‬ ‫ هس م‬،‫گر من می ُمغ نه مس م‬

36
‫ ُچن که هس م هس م‬،‫من ا ِ نشدم‬ ‫هر ط یفهای به من گ نی دارد‬
‘If I am drunk by a Magi’s wine, I am; if an infidel, fire or idol worshipper, I am.
Different tribes have different assumptions of me; I am, for myself, the way I am.’
Initially, Jones was interested in Amir Khosrow due to his comparative study of the languages;
apart from Sanskrit and Hindi, Amir Khosrow had a good command of Persian, Arabic, and
Turkish in addition similar to Nezami, he utilized the languages through various figures of
speech in his poetry but used Persian as the primary medium for his poetry. Amir Khosrow and
Jones both celebrated India’s astonishing multicultural and multilingual aspects; therefore, it

36
Sadegh Hedayat, The Lyrics of Khayyam, 6th ed. (Tehran: Parastoo, 1974), 80.
303
can be maintained that this annotation was due to the pluralistic views of the Sufis, Amir
Khosrow in this case, which sometimes led to their ridiculing all established religions and
criticizing the vanity of sublime piety. However, although Jones has quoted Amir Khosrow’s
quatrain twice, there are two other lines available in the folio:

‫آری آری پن اری که دنی ا تشس‬

37
‫غ فل غ فل ن انی که دنی بگذرد‬
Yes, yes you think that the world is yours;
fool, fool you do not know that the world shall pass!

The theme of these two lines is the futility of the world, which, although not uncommon in
Persian literature, reflects a central theme in the quatrains of Amir Khosrow, Khayyam, and as
mentioned previously, Nezami’s Treasury. However, the intriguing matter regarding these two
lines is the fact that they do not appear in the works of any other Persian poet; in addition, they
do not contain any specific Persian meter or rhyme. While the two lines could have been
composed by Jones, at this moment, there is insufficient evidence to prove his authorship of
these lines. They indeed indicate Jones’s comparative research and understanding of the themes
of Nezami’s Treasury. The lines also reappear in the following folio of the manuscript; please
see the illustration below: 38

37
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. i.
38
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. iii.
304
 Illustration 4, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. ii; on top and the bottom of the folio Jones has recited a quatrain by
Mahasti Ganjavi, in the middle, he has written a distich in Persian.

However, Jones has replaced Amir Khosrow’s quatrain with that of another poet. The
quatrains, which are placed symmetrically to Amir Khosrow’s in the next folio, contain the
same theme of criticizing the orthodoxy:

‫گه مرد حاللیم وگهی مرد حرام‬ ‫یک دس به مصحفیم و یک دس به ج م‬

305
 39
‫ت م‬ ‫نه ک فر مطلق نه مسل‬ ‫م ییم در این گنب ن پخ ه و ن م‬
‘The Holy text in one hand, a goblet of wine in the other, sometimes we are men of
Halāl and sometimes Harām.40
Beneath this dome,41 we are the inexperienced, neither an absolute infidel nor fully a
Muslim.’
Unlike Amir Khosrow’s quatrain, Jones does not mention the poet of the quatrain cited above.
By some scholars such as Edward Browne, it is believed that the quatrain has been composed
by Mahsati Ganjavi (1089-1159): a female poet of Ganja.42 Browne mentions that Mahasti had
connections to both Nezami and Khayyam. Although Mahasti was an eminent poet of her time,
few details of her life have been accounted for; she was esteemed in the court of Soltan Sanjar
Saljuqi (1086-1157). Most of the available modern sources mention no more than sixty
quatrains of Mahasti, which are based on the account of the Nozhat al-Majales, a thirteenth-
century anthology;43 however, some other scholars speculate that she composed one hundred
and ninety-one quatrains.44

Jones’s version of the quatrain, which does not mention the poet’s name, states that
‘Sometimes we are men of Halāl [‫ ]مرد حاللیم‬and sometimes Harām’ while in all other versions
we see ‘Sometimes we are accompanied by the Halāl [‫ ]نزد حاللیم‬and sometimes Harām’. The
poet’s name is not mentioned on the folio; in addition, Mahasti was a woman. However, the
poet uses the term ‫ مرد‬mard, ‘man’ in the quatrain. Therefore, it cannot be maintained if Jones
knew her or considered her the composer of this quatrain. However, regardless of the questions
over the quatrain’s authorship, Jones’s familiarity with Mahasti, or the authorship of the two
lines between the two quatrains on each folio, there is a thematical consistency and textual
symmetry in the first two folios of the manuscript.

39
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. ii.
40
Meaning ‘forbidden’ in Arabic, the term is the opposite of ‘Halal’.
41
A common metaphor in Persian literature for the universe.
42
Edward Browne, A Literary History of Persia, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
1969), 2: 344-5.
43
Jamal Khalil Shervani, Nozhat al-Majaales, Mohaamad Amin Riahi (ed.), (Tehran:
Mahaarat, 1996), 53-9.
44
Recorded in the book: Robaeiyat-e Mahasti Ganjavi, Rafael Hoseinof, and Mohammad
Agha Soltan Zadeh (eds), (Baku: Yaazchi, 1985).
306
 Illustration 5, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. i-ii; Jones’s writings on the first two folios of Nezami’s Treasury.

As can be seen in the above illustration, the quatrains Jones quoted and the two lines which he
probably has composed are in accord with parts of the message Nezami aimed to convey in the
Treasury: they centre on the admonition of vanity and hypocritical piety as well as the futility
of the world.

As mentioned previously, Jones’s introductory remarks and annotations on Rumi’s

Masnavi 45
and Nezami’s Treasury are not very common in the collection; however, most of
Jones’s manuscripts in the collection start with his noting the date and the origin of the
particular manuscript. In the Treasury’s case, Jones mentions that he procured the manuscript
for eleven Rupees in Calcutta on 4 Nov 1783; please see the illustration below.46 Less than
forty days after he arrived in India, on 25 September 1783, he certainly wasted no time in
visiting the bookstalls of Calcutta.

45
BL, APAC, RSPA 34-40.
46
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. iii.
307
 Illustration 6, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. iii; Jones’s remarks on Nezami’s Treasury.

On the main text of the Treasury, the first annotation that catches the reader’s eye is a
translation and recital of four lines of a poem that Jones believes to be composed by a poet
named ‘Caucabi’.47 Please see the illustration below:

47
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. 1.
308
 Illustration 7, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. 1; Jones reciting and translating two distiches from Caucabi.

Very little is known of this Sufi poet; he was born in Qazvin, 150 km (93 miles) northwest of
Tehran, Caucabi moved to India, resettled in Hyderabad, and died in 1624. Caucabi’s lines,
which are quoted and translated by Jones, are:

Slay me, sweet maid, and bid me rise

Alternate from a living death:
Destroy me with thy locks and eyes
Restore me with thy lips and breath.
‫ین روای که هر م‬ ‫مرا‬ ‫می کش ومی ی‬
309
 ‫لعل تش ب می ه‬ ‫ه ی برد‬ ‫جع تش ج‬
The literal translation of the quatrain is:

Kill me and bring me to life

This is your manner every time.
The curl of your tresses takes the life away
Your ruby brings it back.
As can be observed, Jones’s translation is more appealing to an English speaker than the literal
Persian one. Although Jones stayed remarkably faithful to the meaning of the source material,
he made some changes: inserted ‘sweet maid’, ‘thy locks and eyes’, and omitted the line in
which the poet states that the beloved is used to destroying and resurrecting him in such
manner; in addition, he has replaced the ruby metaphor with ‘lips and breath’. These changes
that are common in Jones’s translations result from his efforts to, in Goethe’s words,
‘smuggle’48 the poem and its translation into the conception of an eighteenth-century English-
speaking reader. Hence, to provide a ‘cultural’ translation of the poem, although Persian is a
genderless and gender-neutral language, the beloved becomes a female, sweet maid. In the
literature, the ruby is a conventional metaphor for a kiss; it becomes ‘lips and breathe’ while
the curl of the tresses become ‘locks and eye’. It should be mentioned that Jones had
successfully tested his smuggling method more than a decade before this annotation; when he
translated Hafez’s Tork-e Shirazi he presented two different translations, a literal one and a
‘cultural’ one which he entitled ‘A Persian Song’.49

Similar to Mahasti, Caucabi is a minor poet unbeknown to most modern scholars; as a

matter of fact, the only trace of Caucabi is a concise biography of him which can be found in
Siraj-ud-Din Ali Khan Arzu’s (1687-1756) Majma al-Nafāes, ‘The Collection of People’.50
Jones was familiar with Arzu, for he was keen on discovering interrelationship between Persian
and Sanskrit.51 For example, in the illustration below, Jones has written the phonemes of

48
Goethe, West-East Divan: Poems, with "Notes and Essays", 223.
49
Jones, A Grammar, the literal translation is available on 131-3 and the cultural translation
is available on 133-6.
50
Siraj-ud-Din Ali Khan Arzu, Tazkereye Majma al-Nafāes, Muhammed Safaraz Zafer, &
Zeinab al-Nesa Ali Khan (eds.), (Iran Pakistan Institute of Persian Studies: Islamabad, 2006),
3: 1359-60. The book’s title can roughly be translated to ‘The Collection of People’; it is a
survey of Persian literature and poets.
51
It should be mentioned that Jones’s philological comparative examination of Persian and
the languages of the subcontinent is available in the Treasury, BL, APAC, RSPA f. 32.
310
Persian, ‘Pers’, and Indian, ‘Hind’, the alphabet in two lines side by side to compare them
together, please see the illustration below:

Illustration 8, BL, APAC, RSPA, f. 32; Jones’s comparative philological study on Persian and Hindi alphabets.

Jones’s introductory note to Farhang-e jahāngiri (1608), a Persian dictionary by Jamal Inju
Shirazi (d.1625) which was gifted to Jones by his fellow Asiatic Society member Charles
Boddam (1762–1811) on 16 Feb. 1788, states:
Many corrections of this valuable work [the Farhang-e jahāngiri], and many additions
to it, may be found in the Siraj-ul-Lught , ‘The Light of Words’ which is a lexicon of
Persian which also discusses the relationship between Persian and Sanskrit, by
Sirajud'din Arzu.52

Please see Jones’s note below:

52
BL, APAC, RSPA 20, f. iii.
The work also appears in Wilkins’s catalogue of the manuscripts of Jones. See Jones, The
Works, 13: 419.
311
 Illustration 9, BL, APAC, RSPA 20, f. iii; Jones’s remarks on the Farhang-e jahāngiri.

In addition to the ‫ سراج الغة‬Siraj-ul-Lught, ‘The Light of the Words’ which is a lexicon exploring
the relationship of Persian and Sanskrit, Jones had studied other works of Arzu53 and therefore,

53
Franklin, 'Orientalist Jones', 354.
312
it is safe to assert that Jones became familiar with Caucabi, another Persian-speaking
intellectual of India, through his researches on Arzu.54
The Treasury’s manuscript, RSPA 32, itself starts in the same way as any other modern
canonical version with Nezami saluting God and Ferdowsi, whom he refers to as ‫ حکیم‬hakim,
‘the wise’: ‘In the Name of God, the Most Merciful and Compassionate” is the key to the door
of the treasury of the wise’.55 The text continues with the praise of God, stating:

Beginning and end of existence and life,56 Creator and Destroyer of creation,
Compared with His Majesty which is greater than both worlds, our time from its
beginning to its end is but an instant.
His eternity has no beginning; neither has it any end.57
RSPA 32 contains one of the most common annotations of Jones on the lines mentioned above:
as it can be seen in the folio’s image, 58 he has used brackets to separate these lines from others.
Other than using brackets, Jones occasionally used to quote parts of Nezami’s text with which
he was fascinated; please see below:

54
Some scholars have questioned the Oriental sources and figures which Jones had
conducted his researches on; for example, Abdul Azim stated ‘Sir William Jones who
postulated a single source for Sanskrit, Persian, and the classical languages of Europe was not
aware of Khan-i Arzu’s discovery.’ The statement appeared in ‘Khan-i Arzu's Observations
on the Relationship of Sanskrit and Persian’, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen
Gesellschaft, 119: 2, (1969), 261-9: 269. Yet, the evidence found in the BL, APAC, RSPA 20
and BL, APAC, RSPA 40 shows Jones’s works on Arzu.
55
Treasury of Mysteries, translation of Makhzanol Asrar, 89:
‫هس کلی در گنج حکیم‬ ‫بسمهللا الرح ن الرحیم‬
56
In Jones’s manuscript, the word ‫ حی ت‬hayāt, ‘life’ is used while in other versions of the
book, including the translated ones, the word ‫ صف ت‬sefāt, ‘attributes’ is used.
57
Treasury of Mysteries, translation of Makhzanol Asrar, 90:
‫هس کن و نیس کن ک ین ت‬ ‫اوش و آنر بشجشد و حی ت‬
‫اوش م آنر م یک مس‬ ‫ب جبروتش که دو ع لم ک س‬
‫آنر آنر بیان ه‬ ‫اوش اوش بی اب ا‬
58
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. 1.
313
Illustration 10, BL, APAC, RSPA 32. f. 2; Jones’s recitation of Nezami’s Treasury.

314
Within the triangular shape above the Persian text quoted by Jones, he has written ‘from page
1.’ The quotation can be translated to:59

The struggle of every living being is to do service to His Godhead.

His Existence alone has permanence; He is sanctified who is not transient.
When by His liberality He created generosity, existence was freed from the bondage
of non-existence.60
Almost every distich Jones has singled out, whether with brackets or through reiteration,
including the ones mentioned above, contains a recurring theme: God is all. The theme and
Jones’s attention to it is apparent and evident in the Treasury, as well as his personal
manuscripts of Rumi’s Masnavi,61 as discussed in details in the previous chapter. The distiches
Jones has mentioned above particularly resonate with his comment ‘whose service is perfect
freedom’ – from The Book of Common Prayer – 62 on Rumi’s ‘Your service is my freedom;
without you, all is a burden and unjust for me.’63 Years after the death of Nezami and Rumi,
their idea of ‘God is all’ was entitled ‫ وح ت وجشد‬vahdat-e vojōd, the ‘Unity of Being’ or the
‘Unity of Existence’ by a Sufi named Saeed od-din Forghani (d.1300).64 Given that India’s
political climate was in turmoil during the eighteenth century, the Unity of Existence had an
immense significance for Jones since it promoted cultural, ethnic, and religious pluralism. The
Mughals of India had already attempted to utilize the idea to reduce the religious tensions
between Muslims and Hindus in India; most prominently, Akbar (1542-1605) who propounded
a universal religion entitled the ‫ دین الهی‬Din-i-Ilahi, ‘the Divine Religion’, which was a syncretic
creed derived mainly from Islam and Hinduism as well as some parts of Zoroastrianism and
Christianity. With the same pluralistic views, influenced by the Unity of Existence, Akbar’s
great-grandson, Prince Dara Shokoh (1615-1659), asserted that what the Quran refers to as
‫ ک ب ال کنش‬Ketāb al-Maknōn, ‘The Hidden [Sacred] Book’65 is nothing but the Hindu

59
BL, APAC, RSPA 32. f. 2:
‫پیش ن اون ی او بن گیس‬ ‫کش کش هر چه در و ن گیس‬
‫بر ک ر کشه و کاله مین‬ ‫من او راس هزار آس ین‬
‫بن وجشد ا ع م آ اد ا‬ ‫چش که به جشد کرم آب د ا‬
60
Treasury of Mysteries, translation of Makhzanol Asrar, 90.
61
BL, APAC, RSPA 35-40.
62
The Oxford Guide to The Book of Common Prayer: A Worldwide Survey, C. Hefling, and
C. Shattuck (eds.), (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 143.
63
BL, APAC, RSPA 40, f. 92:
‫بی تش بر من محن و بی ادی اس‬ ‫که مرا ا بن گی آ ادی اس‬
The comment and Rumi’s tale has been discussed in the fourth chapter of this thesis.
64
William C. Chittick, Ibn 'Arabi: Heir to the Prophets, (Oxford: Oneworld, 2005), 105.
65
The Quran, 56:78.
315
Upanishads. For Dara Shokoh and other followers of the vahdat-e vojōd, Hindu idolatry was
nothing but a pluralistic way of worshipping Allah, for the Idols are different manifestations of
66
Him. Jones had translated and studied the works of Dara Shokoh in detail and shared the
same views as Dara Shokoh and his great-grandfather.

The moral codes of Nezami’s Treasury of Mysteries constitute preparation for the
afterlife, love for other beings, divine justice, and a pluralistic religion. These elements are
reflected in Jones’s concluding annotation on the manuscript. On the very last folio, which is
the back cover of the manuscript,67 Jones composes a Persian poem in his own hand:

Illustration 11, BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. 40; a Persian poem by Jones and in his hand on his manuscript of
Nezami’s Treasury.

Just as Nezami started his work with paying tribute to Ferdowsi ‘the wise’, Jones choses to
compose the poem in the meter and rhyme of Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh, a book which Jones had
read twice.68 The Persian text of the poem is:

‫به مهرنالیق و دین ن ا‬ ‫چن کن به نیکی و داد یشنس‬

‫ه ه نلق برتشکنن آفرین‬ ‫که بع ا وف ت بهن ی بچین‬
‫مسل به اری کن سینه چ‬ ‫نهن ت نص ری به ت بشت پ‬
‫و صشفی ب و میفش نی کن‬ ‫بره ن بر او بی نشانی کن‬

66
Jones, The Works, 4: 211-236, 232-4.
67
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. 40.
68
Catalogue of two collections, 20.
316
It can be translated to:

O Yunus! act justly and virtuously, out of love for the creatures and the religion of the
Creator;
so that after your death, in China and India, all of the Creation praise you.
Mourning Muslims tear their chest apart, bury you in a clean coffin like Christians.
The Brahmans recite the Vedas at it, and the Sufis scatter wine over it.

The Persian poem is so skillfully composed that if Jones’s Persian pen name ‫ یشنس‬Yunus, as he
calls himself in his A Grammar of the Persian Language (1771), and the Arabic words ‫نالیق‬
‫ نلق‬and khalgh and khalāyegh the ‘Creation’ and ‘creatures’, were not present in the poem, it
would have been quite challenging to believe that an English speaker is the poet and not
Ferdowsi himself. The usage of the Arabic terms could be related to the fact that Jones, like
Nezami, had aimed to compose his poem in colloquial Persian, in which Arabic words are used
more frequently. Jones’s concept of virtue in such a manner was shaped as early as the time
when he read his very first Persian Sufi texts, such as Nezami’s Leyli o Majnoon, in order to
learn the language. It can be traced back to when he became confident in the language and
published his very first translation of a Persian work: Histoire de Nader Chah, connu sous le
nom de Thahmas Kuli Khan, empereur de Perse (1770). In his preface to this work, Jones stated
that ‘the nature of true Virtue consists, not in destroying our fellow-creatures, but in protecting
them, not in seizing their property, but in defending their rights and liberties, even at the hazard
of our own safety’.69 This statement was indeed in accord with Majnoon, who protected Leyli’s
tribe and gave up his armour to save a stag’s life from a hunter.
Another matter that should be considered about this poem is that another version of it
is available in a collection held in Berlin.70 The manuscript itself is a Persian translation of the
Laws of Manu, ‘at the request of S' W. Jones’; it is not dated, and Jones describes it as ‘on the
whole accurate, but disfigured by some gross errors’.71 The Berlin version of the poem is also
in Jones’s handwriting and follows the same theme, meter, and rhyme as the version available
in the British Library; however, the intriguing fact is that some of the words differ. Professor
Carl W. Ernst has translated the poem as follows:

Act thus with goodness and justice, Yunus, with compassion for creatures and fear of
God,

69
Jones, The Works, 12: 313-4.
70
Wilhelm Pertsch, Verzeichniss der persischen Handschriften der Königlichen Bibliothek zu
Berlin, (Berlin: A.Asher & Co., 1888), 1029-30.
71
Wilhelm Pertsch, Verzeichniss der persischen Handschriften, 1029.
317
 so that after your death, all humanity, in Indian and China, will bless you.
Your companions will lament over your bier, the Musulman wailing with lacerated
breast,
the Brahman reciting the Veda over it, and the Sufi scattering wine over.72
Although the translator, like Jones in Goethe’s description, smuggles ‘creation’ as ‘humanity’,
it can be seen that in the version of the poem available in the Treasury,73 ‘fear of God’ and
‘companions’ have been replaced with the ‘religion of God’ and ‘like a Christian’. This change
indicates that Jones had been working on this poem for a while and has revised it at least once.
In addition, in the British Library’s version of the poem, we see that Jones has underlined the
words ‫مسل‬, ‫ نص ری‬, ‫ صشفی‬, and ‫ بره ن‬respectively ‘Muslim’, ‘Christian’, ‘Sufi’, and
‘Brahman’. The underlinings indicate the fact that Jones structured his poem in order to contain
every major religion present in India, as well as Jones’s pluralistic views regarding the
subcontinent.

72
Carl W. Ernst, ‘Muslim Studies of Hinduism? A Reconsideration of Arabic and Persian
Translations from Indian Languages’, Iranian Studies, 36:2 (2003), 173-195: 187-8.
73
BL, APAC, RSPA 32, f. 40.
318
Appendices

Appendix 1
Someone named ‫ صف ر‬Safdar claimed that he had composed thirty couplets, using extravagant
hyperboles and panegyric language, to ask Sir William Jones for a meeting. Jones annotated
the folio stating, ‘This letter of verses are compositions of Mere Hasan Haydar of Lucknow
inhabitant’, showing that the poem’s composer was not Safdar but Mir Hassan Heydar, a poet
whom Safdar hired to write on his behalf. Please see below the folio containing the verse:

Illustration 1, MSS Eur. C 274, f. 12; a letter in verse to Sir William Jones.

319
‫‪Jones has inscribed in the bottom of the folio, ‘This letter in verses is the Composition of Hare‬‬
‫‪Hossein Hyder of Lukknow Inhabitant.’ Please see the letter’s Persian text and an English‬‬
‫‪translation below:‬‬

‫ح یث اشق را تحریر کردم‬ ‫به نظم این ن مه را تحریر کردم‬

‫رقم کن ن مه ایرین بی نی‬ ‫بی ای ن مه سر کن داس نی‬
‫نشیس این ن مه روان چش گشهر‬ ‫به سشی ص حبی فرنن ه ان ر‬
‫ت ه می بخش کالمش‬ ‫که ج‬ ‫محیط فیض ویلی م جشنز ن مش‬
‫ع ش او به هر محفل روای‬ ‫علم او به هر کششر حک ی‬
‫تحریر‬ ‫علم او افزو‬ ‫بی‬ ‫تقریر‬ ‫ک ش ع ش او بیرو‬
‫ه ه دا و ه ه نشا و ه ه کشس‬ ‫به تصنیف سخن بسی ر نیکشس‬
‫سپهر علم و فضل و دانش و فر‬ ‫محیط لطف و جشد و کرم یکسر‬
‫به ع لی ن م آ نیک ن می‬ ‫صف ر ‪ ...‬ب دا سالمی‬
‫به وصف ن میش مشصشف ب دا‬ ‫ح یث آر و مکششف ب دا‬
‫دلم ه شاره معروف وف ق اس‬ ‫مرا ا ح فزو تر اا ی ق اس‬
‫ح افزو ک ش س می تش‬ ‫انی م وصف ن م ن می تش‬
‫به ت لیف وبه تصنیف و به تحریر‬ ‫به علم هی ت و فقه و تف سیر‬
‫صنع ه ی هر گشنه که ا ی‬ ‫نظم و نثر وا غزش و قص ی‬
‫هزارا گشهر ایشار سف ی‬ ‫ک الت سخن هر گشنه گف ی‬
‫ا آ گلشن بسی گل چی ه ام من‬ ‫گرامی دی ه ام من‬
‫گش‬ ‫نب ا هیچ کس مثل تش نش‬ ‫ک الت سخن ن م اس بر تش‬
‫کسی اینج نی م‬ ‫انگلس‬ ‫به این تک یل علم و فضل بی ح‬
‫به علم و فضل و تصنیف‬ ‫انگلس‬ ‫ا آ رو ی که آوردی تش تشریف‬
‫مین گردی راگ گلس نی‬ ‫ع ل ا جه نی در ام نی‬
‫هزارا گشنه رونق ی ف ا تش‬ ‫بن ی علم و ع ش وفیض هر سش‬
‫دش ع لم بخ ش ا د کردی‬ ‫جه نی را ع ش آب د کردی‬
‫که در بزم تش آیم روبروی‬ ‫دلم دارد هزارا آر وی‬
‫گل ار ک ل گل بچینم‬ ‫به چشم نشد ک الت تش بینم‬
‫س م‬ ‫ضی بخش ذک و هش‬ ‫س م‬ ‫سخن ه ی گرامی گش‬
‫اشم ف یز دی ار حضشرت‬ ‫اج ت ده که آیم در بصشرت‬
‫که ا راه ادب آیم به پیش‬ ‫بفرم یی اج ت وق فرص‬
‫راه ان ظ ر اس‬ ‫نگ هم فر‬ ‫جشاب ن مه را دش بیقرار اس‬
‫که گردد این دش مش ق نشانشد‬ ‫عن ی کن جشاب ن مه ام ود‬
‫دگر اشق ونی و والسالم اس‬ ‫ن شای به ر اکنش ا کالم اس‬
‫‪320‬‬
I have composed this letter in verse, to express the story of a strong desire.
O pen come and tell the story, write a well-expressed letter.
Write a letter as bright as jewels, to a blessed and auspicious Saheb.
Of source of Beneficence, with the name of William Jones, whose speech reincarnates.
Many tales are told about his knowledge in every country, many narratives are told of his
justice in different gatherings.
His perfect justice is beyond description [indescribable], his knowledge [is so vast] it’s
unprintable.
He is an excellent composer of words, and knows, reads, and questions everything .
The source of kindness, munificence and meekness, the sky of science, excellence,
knowledge, and splendour.
Greetings from Safdar, to whom you have a good reputation.
The tale of my desire becomes revealed and remains discovered, it is related to Your High
repute.
My eagerness is much more than my endurance, my heart desires to reach a consensus.
I have heard the praise of your famous name; your perfection is much more than my
expectation:
your knowledge in astronomy, jurisprudence, and interpretations; in authorship, composition,
and writing;
From verse to prose and from ghazal to ghasideh, from any type of literary style in
existence,
Your status in any style you have touched is perfection, you have pierced thousands of royal
jewels.
I have seen many honourable compositions [of you]; I have picked many flowers from that
garden.
The perfection of lexicon ends with you, there is no one as eloquent as you.
No one so perfect, with unlimited knowledge, and excellence has come here from England.
From the day you arrived from England, with your knowledge, excellence, and composition,
the world has been safe, for your justice, the Garden [of Eden] has become jealous of the
earth.
The foundation of knowledge, justice, and beneficence has prospered in thousands of
different ways because of you.
You exalted the world by your justice; you have made the heart of the world happy.

321
Thousands of times, my heart has wished to be in your banquet in person for once
to see your perfections by my own eyes, to pick a flower from the garden of your perfections,
to listen to your honourable speeches, to brighten my intelligence and sagacity.
Please allow me to come to your palace to regenerate myself by seeing you.
If you let me know when you are free, I will come to you politely.
My heart is restless for your response, impatiently, looking forward to hear [ literally the line
translates to ‘my sight is like a carpet on the road of anticipation to hear from you’].
An early reply would be a favour, which makes this eager heart happy.
Now keeping my silence is much better than talking, the rest is eagerness, desire, and that is
all.

322
Appendix 2
The tale of ‘the Sheikh Sanaan and the Christian Girl’ is the final and most extended narrative
of Attar’s The Conference of the Birds (1177). The text you are about to read is the first literal
translation of the tale by myself.

Illustration 1, a miniature depiction of the tale of ‘The Sheikh of Sanaan and the Christan Girl’ by Ali-Asghar
Tajvidi.

323
 The Story of the Sheikh of Sanaan and the Christian Girl

Taken from Attar’s Mantegh ol-tayr

The Sheikh of Sanaan was the arch-sage of his time; in perfection, he had achieved more than
anyone [could have imagined].

A cleric he was, in a shrine for fifty years; accompanied by four hundred perfected disciples.

In happiness as well as the sorrow of all creations, he was the world’s standard-bearer.

1
‫ سن‬sonnat, Mohammad’s path, manner, and tradition; the way he and his companions lived
their lives.
2
‫ مشاک فی‬mō shekāfi, ‘to split a hair’ is used when something or someone is so precise that
they can split and analyze something as small and tiny as a hair.
3
An allusion to ‫ دم مسیح یی‬dam-e masihāei, ‘the Messiah’s exhale’. The story of Jesus
breathing life into statues is mentioned in the Quran 5:110 as follows:
‘Then Allah said: “O Jesus, the son of Mary! Recall My favour to you and to your mother.
Behold! I strengthened you with the Holy Spirit, so that could speak to the people in cradle as
in maturity. Behold! I taught you the Book and Wisdom, the Torah and the Bible. Behold!
You made the figure of a bird out of clay and by My leave you exhaled into it and it became a
bird by My leave; you healed those who were born blind, and the lepers, by My leave. And
behold! you brought forth the dead by My leave. And behold! I did restrain the Children of
Israel from [violence to] you when you showed them the clear Signs, and the unbelievers
among them said: “This is nothing but evident magic.”’

324
While he considered himself as the leader of his disciples, suddenly, he started to have a
dream for several nights continuously.

In the sky of beauty, she resided in the highest tower of charm; she was the sun, yet without a
decline [dusk].

4
The word used here is ‫ منظر‬manzar, which generally means something that is pleasant to
one’s eyes.
5
The original word here is ‫ معرف‬ma’refat, ‘knowledge, science, understanding’ and
figuratively ‘gnosis’.
325
The sun was so envious of her appearance that [in her presence] the sun was paler than the

Her mouth was like a needle’s eye;13 her long locks were like a Zunnar on her waist.

6
‫ ن ر‬was a distinctive belt or girdle wore by Christians and Jews in Jerusalem in order to be
differentiate from Muslims. It was noted in the Pact of Umar.
7
‫ سر‬sar, ‘head’ normally metaphorically means sanity.
8
The word originally used here is ‫ ف نه‬fet’ne, ‘Fitna’. While the word means ‘tumult and
chaos’, it is romanticized by Persian and Arab poets. Sadi describes his beloved as: ‘Your
eyes are the Original [very first] Sorcery, you are the Fitna of the End of Days’. Sadi, The
Complete Text, 2:592.
9
The original word used in this line is ‫ ط ق‬tāgh, ‘arch’. Metaphorically it means eyebrows;
her eyebrows were unique and beautifully connected to each other.
10
In Persian poetry, the act of falling in love has been similized to being hunted by a hunter
[the beloved]. The distich figuratively means that if the girl showed her eyes to people,
hundreds of people would have fallen in love with her.
11
‫ لعل سیراب‬la’l-e sirāb, literally meaning ‘the ruby needless of water’ is a metaphor for the
beloved’s lips. The lover is in need of them yet the beloved is needless.
12
‫ نرگس مس‬narges-e mast, ‘drunken narcissus’ is a common metaphor for the beloved’s
eyes.
13
Having small lips used to be considered a beautiful feature in Persian literature; thus, her
lips are compared to a needles’ eye in smallness and being well-shaped.
326
She had a silver dimple14 on her chin; her speech resembled that of Jesus.

In vain, they advised and consulted him; yet, since there was nothing achievable, no solution
was achieved.

14
The original word used here is ‫ چ ه‬chāh, well; this would later on be linked to the tale of
Joseph.
15
In the original ‫ بن بن‬band band, which could be translated as ‘string by string’ or, ‘every
string’.
327
Whoever advised him, he did not obey, as his pain received no salve.

Will a distressed lover heed reason? Can a treatment-spoiling pain be treated?16

The day was still far from the night; he kept his eyes on the mansion with an open mouth.17

Like a dark night, in a dark poem, his blasphemy became hidden beneath the sin.

Any light18 that appeared in that night’s sky, originated from the heart of that sorrowful old
man.

His Love was increased a hundred times that night, and inevitably he lost himself.

He cut off his heart both from his self and the world; he mourned and scattered soil on his
head.19

16
Attar has similized the love that distresses lovers to ‫ درد درم سش‬dard-e darmān sōz, ‘a
remedy-burning pain’. One in pain takes remedies for it, yet love is such a painful pain that it
even destroys or ‘burns’ the remedy that is used for it.
17
Out of astonishment, he was unable to close his jaws.
18
The word in the original text is ‫ چراغ‬cherāgh, ‘lamp’; metaphorically meaning a star.
19
‫ ن بر سر‬khāk bar sar, ‘soil on head’ is a phrase commonly used in Persian when someone
is in a really bad situation that makes him rather die; in such situation, one scaters soil on his
head in order to bury himself. The act is also a sign of mourning.
328
 Illustration 2, an Illustrated Manuscript of Mantiq al-Tayr in the Metropolitan Museum of Art.20

Sleepless and restless, he throbbed from Love and whimpered bitterly.

He said,

Obtained from Yumiko Kamada, ‘A Taste for Intricacy: An Illustrated Manuscript of

20

Mantiq al-Tayr in the Metropolitan Museum of Art.’, Orient, 45 (2010), 129–75.

329
 O' Lord, is not there a day after this night? Is not the candle of the sky going to burn

O Lord, many signs I have seen tonight, is the judgment day coming after tonight?

[O Lord] has the candle of the sky died by my sigh? Or has it been veiled by the
bashfulness of my beloved?

21
The night-raids here refers to the spiritual tests an ascetic passes during his/her nights.
22
‫ جگر سش‬jegar-sōz, ‘something that burns liver’ is a metaphor for something that causes pain
in the worst possible manner. ‫ جگر‬jegar, ‘liver’ is a metaphor for the dearest and most
precious possession of someone.
330
 The night is long and dark as her hair; this is why hundreds of people cannot see her
23

The wit, the patience, and the Beloved are all gone; what is this Love, this pain, and
this event?

His disciples rushed to console him for his lament through the night.

One of them said,

O great Sheikh, stand up and perform ablution, get rid of this obsession!

23
Similezing the girl’s face to the moon.
24
The phrase ‫ ن و نش‬khāk-o khōn, ‘soil and blood’ is commonly used to describe the
utmost dire situations. For example, in a war when a city is attacked and all of the residents
are killed it would be said that the city was dragged to khāk-o khōn.
25
‫ دس گیری کرد‬dast-giri kardan, ‘to take one’s hand’ metaphorically means to help
someone. The phrase is used widely in this poem.
331
The Sheikh replied

with my liver’s blood,26 O unaware one! I have performed ablution a hundred times!

Another one said,

27

Another one said,

how long are you going to say such things? Then, stand up, prostrate yourself to
nothing but God!

He replied,

26
‫ نش جگر‬khōn-e jegar, ‘the liver’s blood’ metaphorically means huge sadness and sorrow;
as I mentioned the significance of the liver before, the phrase here signifies the pain and
sorrow caused by seeing something precious in pain.
27
‫ تسبیح‬tasbih, a Muslim praying bead.
28
‫ ن‬namāz is a Persian word used for Islamic prayers. The Arabic word is ‫ صالة‬salāt.
29
‫ نگ ر‬negār the word literally means ‘an image’ or ‘a portray’; its metaphorical meaning is
‘an idol’ and signifies a beautiful beloved.
332
 my idol-face is here; prostrating is only beautiful in front of her!

The other one said,

Don’t you have regret and shame? Don’t you care a moment for the Muslim faith?

He said,

suffering of others!

Another one said,

compromise with your friends; Let us return together to the Kaaba tonight.

30
‫ گ راه‬gomrāh, ‘one who has lost his way, astray’; the word commonly connotes the spiritual
aspect of being lost.
333
He said,

if the Kaaba is not here, there is a convent; I am the vigilant of the Kaaba yet the
drunk of a convent.

One said,

He replied,

there is a heaven-born beloved; should there be a heaven, it is her mansion!

Another one told him,

be shameful of the Truth!32 The Lord almighty only deserves such sayings!

He said,

31
The distich means that since the Sheikh’s state is worse than being in hell, his sigh is more
firey than the fires of hell; figuratively, he has no fears of hell since he has experienced worse
by love on earth.
32
‫ حق‬hagh, literally meaning ‘the truth’ is a consistent entity which one cannot reject. To
Sufis, hagh is an Absolute Entity, boundless of any bound; in other words, to them hagh, the
Truth is the Essence of God.
334
 the Truth has bestowed this fire upon me! Therefore, I cannot reject this
responsibility.

The other one said,

settle yourself down, bring your faith back and stay a devotee to God.

thread of hair.

In her alley, days and nights for about a month, the Sheikh waited to see his sun.35

Eventually, he became ill for the separation from the beloved; yet, he did not remove his sight
from her mansion.

33
This distich has been translated in its thorough literal sense; figuratively, it means that the
night was passed and the day came up.
34
The word used here is ‫ مع کف‬mo’takef, one who does the act of ‫ اع ک ف‬e’tekāf. It is when
one to confines oneself in a certain place, usually mosques, for a certain amount of time to
pray and to leave the worldly activities behind. Thus, mo’takef is a devotee to praying and
letting go the worldly affairs.
35
A metaphor for the girl.
335
The idol’s alley’s soil was his bed, and her mansion was his bedside.

Since he was unable to leave her alley, the girl realised that he loved her.

She made her beautiful self-pretend ignorance;36 [went to the Sheikh and] said,
O Sheikh, why have you become restless?

betterment;

Stop making me restless with your curled tresses for a moment, and make my dream
with your beautiful drunken eyes in the next moment!

36
The word in the original text is ‫اعج ی‬a’ajami, ‘illiterate or ignorant’ in Arabic. It is worth
mentioning that after Iran was conquered by Muslims, Persians were called ajam; the
tradition still lives to some extent.
37
The word used in the original text is ‫ بس‬besāz, literally meaning ‘make it’ and figuratively
meaning ‘to bear with something’.
38
The original word is ‫ من‬manāz, meaning ‘do not be proud’ and ‘do not behave coquettely’.
39
The original phrase is ‫ سر دار آر‬sar dar ār, ‘bring your head out’; the term figuratively
means get closer to me or sympathize with me.
336
 My heart is fire; my eyes are rainy clouds by you! I am kinless, friendless, and restless
by you.

Without you, I sold the universe for my soul. Look, I am lining my own pockets from
your Love.

Although, from anxiety, I have become a shadow; you are the sunshine, I shall
reshape to anything for you.
I will bring the seven skies under my plumage; if you accept this vagrant one!41

40
Figuratively meaning ‘stop disrespecting and undermining me and all I have achieved.’
41
The original phrase is ‫ سرفرود آورد‬sar forōd āvardan, literally ‘to bring one’s head down.’
It figuratively means to bow down, obey, and submit. However, in some situations the term
also means agreeing to or accepting something, which is more acceptable given the situation
depicted in this part of poem.
337
 I will go to soil42 with a burnt soul; the universe has been burnt from the fire of my
soul.
For your Love, my feet are stranded in the clay; longing you, my hand cannot detach
my heart.43

The girl said,

if you are firm in your decision, you have to do four things:

Prostrate to an idol, burn the Quran; drink wine, and shut your sight to your faith.

The Sheikh replied,

42
Figuratively means ‘I will be buried.’
43
Figuratively means my heart beats so fast that I have to use my hand to keep my heart in
my chest.
44
Figuratively meaning, ‘you are old and you need to make you funeral arrangements.’
45
The original phrase is ‫ کفن کرد ترا‬kafan kardan to ra, ‘putting or wrapping you in a
shroud.’
338
 I will choose to drink wine; I have nothing to do with the other three.

I will drink to your beauty and virtue; yet, I will not do the other three.

The girl said,

The fire of Love had taken away his reputation; the Christian’s tresses had stolen his fate.

No wit and intellect were left for him; he [was astonished and] remained in that place
silently.

46
The original phrase used here is ‫ رنگ و بشیی بیش نیس‬rang va bōei bish nist, literally means
‘it is nothing more than a mere colour and scent’; figuratively means it is not genuine.
47
The original phrase used in the poem is ‫ حلقه در گش‬halghe dar gōsh, ‘a ring in/on one’s
ear’. The phrase figuratively means being someone’s slave or servant; it is widely used in the
sense that a lover has his/her beloved’s ring on his/her ear.
48
It was customary to put ringlets in hair in order to give them form and make them look
more beautiful.
49
The original word is ‫ فغ‬feghān, shouting and moaning.
339
He took a drinking goblet from his beloved’s hand; he drank and cut away his heart from his
self.50

Whatever he knew escaped his mind; when the wine came, his wit was gone like a wind.

Whatever his primal purpose was, the wine washed away from his soul and mind;

only that beloved’s formidable Love remained; everything else was purely gone.

50
The phrase used in the original text is ‫ ک ر نشیش‬kār-e khish, literally meaning his/her
occupation; the term could figuratively refer to all one cares about and in this case, his self.
51
Metaphorically: became more chained in her slavery.
340
 Illustration 3, ‘only that beloved’s formidable Love remained; everything else was purely gone.’ Painting by
Ali-Asghar Tajvidi.

When the Sheikh became drunk, his Love became stronger; his soul became like a wild sea of
passion.

He saw that idol drunk with a goblet of wine in her hand; at that moment, the Sheikh lost
himself completely.

For drinking wine, he lost his heart and control; he was tempted to fold his arms around her
neck.

The girl said,

you are not on the right Path yet; you cannot claim a genuine love yet.
If your steps are firm in Love; if you have accepted the faith of my twisted tresses;
341
 Set your steps, as my twisted tresses, to blasphemy; since Love is not something
casual!
Comfort and Love are not harmonious; Love is a result of blasphemy, remember!
Should you follow my blasphemy, you will be able to take me in your arms right
now;
Should you not follow me at this point, stand up and leave; here is your staff and
cloak.

Illustration 4, ‘For drinking wine, he lost his heart and control; he was tempted to fold his arms around her
neck.’ Painting by Mahmoud Farshchian.

The lovelorn Sheikh had fallen so much that; he relied on fate due to his negligence.
When there was no drunkenness in his mind, he never cared about worldly existence for a
moment.
342
But now, since he had become in Love and drunk, he was on his knees and became utterly
lost.

they brought him to a monastery drunkenly; then, they ordered him to wear a Zunnar.

When the Sheikh tied the Zunnar, set his cloak on fire and restarted his life:

freed his heart from his self and his religion,54 he never recalled the Kaaba or being a Sheikh.

52
The original word here is ‫ مصحف‬mas’haf. The word’s general translation is ‘a corrected,
edited, published version of a manuscript;’ commonly refers to the Quran. While many
scholars believe that this distich asserts the Sheikh’s willingness to burn the Quran on his
beloved’s demand, Sufis such as Ain-al Quzat Hamedani (1098–1131) argue that the first
word written on the soul is ‫ محب‬mohebat, ‘kindness and love.’ Through living and
experiencing life, the word could be changed to ‫ محن‬mehnat, ‘plight’. What love does is by
figuratively burning the self, it reveses and corrects the error of ‫ محب‬mohebat to ‫محن‬
mehnat. The process which occurs in making a ‫ مصحف‬mas’haf is exactly the same as love
changing ‫ محب‬to ‫محن‬. That is why it is unlikely that the Sheikh is willing to burn the Quran
and what he refers to is his soul.
53
The word used in the original text is ‫ دیر‬dair, means a Christian or Zoroastrian ‘monastery’.
54
The distich could also be read as ‘freed his heart from his personal religion.’
343
Many years of solid beliefs were washed away with something novel.
He told himself,

forlornness and infirmity has affected this Darvish; the Love of the Christian-born has
done its job;

from now on, whatever she says, I shall obey; what can be worse than what I have

The plank of the Kaaba is a starting point in the Path of Love; one, knowledgeable of
the supernatural, becomes a vagrant while facing Love.

All these have occurred, now tell me simply, when you will be one with me?

55
‘The mother of all vices’ is a term used by Mohammad to refer to wine.
344
 Since the primary purpose was uniting with you, whatever I have done was in the
hope of that union.

I desire unity and familiarity; for how long shall I burn in separation?’

O exalted-natured one I would prefer, to be in hell with you than without you in
heaven.’

Eventually, since the Sheikh had become her man, that moon felt sorry for his pain.
She said,

345
 O’ immature one, instead of paying my jointure, look after my pigs for a whole year;
And after one year, we shall spend our life in happiness and sorrow together.

The Sheikh did not disobey the beloved’s order; whoever has disobeyed the beloved did not
gain a happy life.

The Sheikh replied,

my soul is full of pain; wherever you wish to go, move soon.

Whilst I am alive, the monastery is enough for me; the Christian girl is enough to be

346
 my animator.
You did not perceive [the events thoroughly, thus] you are free yet, since all of you
are being captives here.

If you were feeling my troubles for a moment, you would have commiserated with me

melting.
Their Sheikh had remained alone in Rome; had given up religion on his Path of Christianity.
From shame, they felt astonished; each was hiding in a corner.
Yet, the Sheikh had a witty and nimble friend in the Kaaba, who had washed his hands of all
for his Devotion.

He was such a meticulous observer and great guide that no one was more knowledgeable
about the Sheikh than him.

347
When the Sheikh was leaving the Kaaba for the journey, he was not present there.
When that disciple returned, he found the court empty and his Sheikh absent.
He asked the other disciples about the Sheikh, and they told him all about the Sheikh’s fate;

an infidel!
A friend is recognised at times of frustration and failure; there are hundreds of
thousands of friends at the time of success and happiness!

56
‫ گبر‬gabr, in Persian means ‘a Zoroastrian’; after the Arab conquest, in some places it
became synonymous with ‘an unbeliever’.
348
 When the Sheikh had fallen in the mouth of the beast,57 all of you escaped to keep
your honour and avoid shame?

Love is based on infamy! Therefore, whoever disobeys this mystery [the ignominy

Since you have left your Sheikh alone, what do you expect from the gate of the Truth?

When they heard those words, they understood that they have failed; none could have kept
his head high.

57
The original word used here is ‫ نهنگ‬nahang, ‘whale’ which is an allusion to the story of
Jonah and the beast.
58
The distich could also be read as ‘the gates of the Truth was the only place for you to be.’
349
The man told them,

now, there is no gain in shame; what is done is done, we must rise again immediately.

Consistently, in the presence of the Truth we should be; pleading for justice, we
should scatter soil.59

After spending forty nights that devoted pure disciple was lost in his private quarters;
A musk-scented wind was blown early in the morning, and the hidden universe became
apparent to his heart.

59
The image of scattering soil could figuratively mean to take any desparate masures.
60
‫ پیراهن ک غذی‬pirāhan-e kāghazi, ‘a paper shirt’ is a metaphor for seeking justice. In the past,
someone who was oppressed used to wear a shirt made out of paper. While wearing the shirt
of paper, the person would have been brought to the king in order to seek justice.
61
This is not a physical act of moving. With having an e’tekāf, they focused on Rome and the
Sheikh.
62
In Islamic culture, Green is a colour associated with Mohammad and his bloodline. Here,
‘green wearer’ means that bloodline or simply Holy Beings.
63
The term used here is ‫ کبشد‬kabōd, which is a type of purplish blue. To be precise, the colour
of a bruise.
350
He saw Mustafa 64 walking to him like a moon, with two black plaits over each side of his
shoulders;
The shadow of the Truth was the sunshine of his face; a single hair of him was endowed with
a hundred worlds.

[Mohammad] was walking gracefully and smiling; one seeing him would have lost one’s self
[in wonder].
The disciple was surprised by seeing him; he stood up and said,

of repentance.

When the sea of Beneficence becomes wavy, it will cleanse the guilt of every man
and woman.

64
One of the nicknames of Mohammad.
65
The term ‫ دم نزد‬dam nazadan literally means ‘not to breathe’ and figuratively means ‘not
giving up’. Hence, the disciple’s will did not even wasted time to breath in order to save his
Sheikh.
351
From joy, the man became ecstatic; he roared so loudly that the sky became restless.
He made all of his companions aware of what happened, gave them gifts for this evangel and
decided to leave;

all tearfully started to run; till they reached where the Sheikh was herding the swine.

this miracle].

They said to the Sheikh,

O the discoverer of the secrets, the cloud has stopped blocking your sun;

66
‫ ن قشس مغ‬naghōs-e moghan, literally meaning ‘the bell of the Magis’; however, in some
Persian dictionaries it is mentioned that it is a bell that was used by Christians during mass.
352
 the blasphemy has been removed, and faith is settled down in the Path, the idolater of
Rome has become a God worshiper.

The sea of Acceptance waved suddenly; the Messenger became your intercessor.
At this moment, your gratitude should be as immense as the world; be thankful to the

You were his bandit, be his travelling-mate for a while; stop your ignorance, become
aware and enlightened!

When the Christian girl woke up, her heart was shining like a sun!

67
Hejaz is a region in the west of Arabia. Its largest city is Jeddah, it is better known for the
Islamic holy cities of Mecca and Medina. As the site of Islam's holiest cities, Hejaz has a
prominent significance in the Islamic historical and political landscape.
68
Metaphorically meaning ‘you should be his humble servant.’
353
She felt a surprising pain in her heart; that pain and eagerness made her restless.
A fire had fallen in her joyous inebriated soul, she put her hand on her heart, yet her heart fell
from her hand!69

She had no idea what was implanted in her restless soul!

It was done, yet she had no one to talk to about it; she saw herself in a strange new world!
A world with no signs, roads, and paths; there is no place for a tongue where one becomes
speechless.

Please show mercy for what this poor one has done; I have accepted religion, please
you take my hand [help me]!

69
Figuratively meaning that ‘her heart started to beat so fast and hard that although she tried
to keep it in her chest, it fell out of her chest.’
70
The line is ‫ پ ی داد ا دس بر پی می وی‬pāy az dast dād bar pey midavid which literally means
‘lost her grip over her feet, [hence she] ran on her foundation’. The hemistich tries to depict
the state in which one is unable to do something, perusing love in this case, physically, yet is
not able to give up the act either.
354
 Should I die, no one cares [help me]; my share of honour is nothing but humiliation
and abjectness.

An internal message revealed to the Sheikh that

the girl has left Christianity.

She has gained familiarity with Our Throne; her efforts are in Our Path now.

When that beloved looked at the Sheikh, tears started to fall like a spring cloud,
She observed his faithfulness, his loyalty to his oath; she lay down at his feet and asked for
forgiveness.

She said,

my soul burnt from the shame I brought you; I could not bear to burn more secretly.
I have repented; I want to become enlightened;71 present Islam to me so that I could
have a Path.

71
The original word is ‫ آگ ه‬āgāh, meaning ‘aware.’
355
The Sheikh presented Islam to her; a tumult occurred among all of the disciples.
When that idol face became one of the ahl-e ayān,72 a rain of tears waved amongst them.
Eventually, when that idol found the Path, the joy of faith appeared in her enlightened heart.
Although her heart became restless from the joy of faith, the sorrow [of her past] was still

Whenever the battle between the heart and the self becomes rigorous, one should sing
laments since mourning has become harder.

72
Ahl can generally mean ‘people or companions’, ayān means ‘an obvious fact.’ In Islamic
philosophy, one the paths which lead to knowing God is through ‫ اهشد‬shohōd ‘logic and
sense;’ followers of this path are called ‫ اهل اهشد‬ahl-e shohōd. The other path which is not
through logic, is called ayān. ‫ اهل عی‬ahl-e ayān are those who had persived the Presence of
God through revelation and epiphany.
73
‫ن ن ا پر ص اع‬, khāndān-e por sedā’, ‘the troublous tribe’ as is metaphor for the world.
356
Kamada, Yumiko ‘A Taste for Intricacy: An Illustrated Manuscript of Mantiq al-Tayr in the
Metropolitan Museum of Art.’, Orient, 45 (2010), 129–75.

357
Bibliography

Manuscript Sources

Beinecke Library, New Haven, CT

Osborn c. 400.

British Library, London

Add. MSS. 29, 129, 7759.

Asia, Pacific and Africa Collections (APAC), formerly Oriental and India Office
Collections (OIOC), RSPA 1-119.

APAC, MSS Eur C. 274.

Oriental Manuscript (Or). 6633.

Bodleian Library, Oxford

MS Sansk, C. 34.

Fales Library, New York, NY

Jones MSS 301.

Herefordshire Record Office, Hereford

Kentchurch Court 8000.

Library, Museum and Document Centre of Iran’s Parliament, Tehran

MS 2656/4.

MS 2329/14.

MS ‫[ معیري‬Moayeri] 1/7.

358
 Periodicals

Asiatick Researches

Calcutta Gazette

European Magazine

Journal of the Asiatic Society

Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society

New Asiatick Miscellany

The Asiatick Miscellany

The Calcutta Review

Printed Sources

Aarsleff, Hans, The Study of Language in England, 1780-1860, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press, 1969).

Abdul-Rauf, Muhammad, Bilāl Ibn Rabāh: A Leading Companion of The Prophet

Muhammad (SAW), (Indianapolis, IN: American Trust Publications, 1977).

Abisaab, Rula Jurdi, Converting Persia: Religion and Power in the Safavid Empire, (London:
I.B.Tauris, 2004).

Abrams, Meyer H., The Mirror and the Lamp: Romantic Theory and the Critical Tradition,
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1971).

Ahmad, Aziz, ‘Safavid Poets and India’, Iran, 14, (1976), 117-32.

----- Studies in Islamic Culture in the Indian Environment, (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 1964).

359
Aksoy, Gürdal, Dersim: Alevilik, Ermenilik, Kürtlük, (Ankara: İletişim Yayınları, 2012).

Alam, Muzaffar, & Sanjay Subrahmanyam, 'The Making of a Munshī', Forms of

Knowledge’, Early Modern Asia: Explorations in the Intellectual History of India and Tibet,
1500–1800, Sheldon Pollock (ed.), (Duke University Press, 2011).

----- ‘Persian in Precolonial Hindustan’, Literary Cultures in History: Reconstructions

from South Asia, Sheldon Pollock, & Arvind Raghunathan (eds.), (University of
California Press, 2003), 131-69.

Al-A'zami, Muhammad Mustafa, The History of The Qur'anic Text: From Revelation to
Compilation: A Comparative Study with the Old and New Testaments, (Leicester: UK Islamic
Academy, 2003).

al-Bari, Fath, The Translation of the Meanings of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī: Arabic - English,
Muhammad Muhsin Khan (trans.), (New Delhi : Kitab Bhavan, 1984.), 9 vols.

Ali, M. Athar, Mughal India: studies in polity, ideas, society, and culture, (New Delhi:
Oxford University Press, 2014).

Ali, Muhammad ibn, ‘The Mahomedan law of succession to the property of intestates, in
Arabick, engraved on copperplates from an ancient manuscript, with a verbal translation and
explanatory notes by W. Jones. Arab. & Engl’, The Works of Sir William Jones. With the life
of the author by Lord Teignmouth, (London: J. Stockdale & J. Walker, 1807).

Allami, Abu'l-Fazl, Akbar-Nameh, Maulawi, Abd-ur-Rahim (ed.), (Calcutta: Asiatic Society

of Bengal, 1873), 3 vols.

-----The Ain-I Akbari, H. Blochmann, (trans.), (Calcutta: The Asiatic Society, 1927), 2
vols.

Al-Qushayri, Abd al-Karim, Resaleye Ghoshiriyyeh, Badiozzaman Forouzanfar (ed.),

(Tehran: Elmi-Farhangi Publications, 1995).

Amir-Moez, Ali Reza, ‘A Paper of Omar Khayyám’, Scripta Mathematica 26, (1963), 323-7.

Anderson, Richard, ‘Hindu Myths in Mallarmé: Un Coup de Dés’, Comparative Literature,

19: 1, (1967), 28-35.

360
Anonymous Reviewer, ‘The Odes of Hafiz (1801) and Seven Related Orientalist Works’,
Calcutta Review, 26 (1856), 398-414.

Ansari, Abdolah Ibn Mohamad, Resaleh of Khajeh Abdolah Ansari, (Tehran: Vahid
Dastgerdi, 1968).

Anushiravani, Alireza, & Laleh Atashi, ‘Cultural Translation: A Critical Analysis of William
Jones's Translation of Hafez’, Persian Literary Studies Journal, 1: 1, (2012), 41-58.

Arberry, Arthur. J., Sufism: An Account of the Mystics of Islam, (Mineola, N.Y: Dover
Publications, 2001).

Arzu, Siraj-ud-Din Ali Khan, Tazkereye Majma al-Nafāes, Muhammed Safaraz Zafer &
Zeinab al-Nesa Ali Khan, (Iran Pakistan Institute of Persian Studies: Islamabad, 2006), 3
vols.

Asadi, Ali Ibn Ahmad, Garshasp Nameh, (Tehran: Habib Yaghmaei, 1987).

Astarabadi, Mahdī Khān, & William Jones, The History of the Life of Nader Shah, King of
Persia: Extracted from an Eastern Manuscript, Which Was Translated into French by Order
of His Majesty the King of Denmark. with an Introduction, Containing I.a Description of
Asia, According to the Oriental Geographers. Ii. a Short History of Persia from the Earliest
Times to the Present Century; and an Appendix, Consisting of an Essay on Aiatick Poetry,
and the History of the Persian Language. to Which Are Added Pieces Relative to the French
Translations, (London: J. Richardson & T. Cadell, 1773), ii.

Attar, Asrar-nameh, Seyed Sadeq Gohareen (ed.), (Tehran: Zavar Publications, 2005).

-----Divan of Ghasaayed and Ghazaliyaat, (Torbat-e Jam: The Cultural, Social, and
Information Site of Torbat-e Jam, 2008).

-----Khosrow-Nameh, Farshid Eghbaal (ed.), (Tehran: Andishe Gostar, 2003).

----- Mantegh ol-tayr, Garcin de Tassy (ed), (Paris: Publié en Persan, 1857).

-----Mantegh-o Teyr of Attar e Neishapouri, (Torbat-e Jaam: Cultural and Social

Center of Torbat-e Jam, 2010).

-----Mosibat Nameh, Abdol-Wahaab Noorani-Vesal (ed.), (Tehran: Zavar, 1985).

361
 -----Muslim Saints and Mystics: Episodes from the Tadhkirat al-Auliya, (Memorial of
the Saints), A. J. Arberry (trans.), (Ames: Omphaloskepsis, 2000).

-----Tazkerat-ol Oliya, Reynold A. Nicholson (ed), (London: Luzac & Co., 1905).

-----The Conference of the Birds, A. Darbandi & D. Davis (eds.), (Harmondsworth:

Penguin Books, 1983).
August Wilhelm & Friedrich Schlegel, Athenaum, eine Zeitschrift, Schlegel, (Berlin, 1798–
1800).

Azim, Abdul, ‘Khan-i Arzu’s Observations on the Relationship of Sanskrit and Persian’,
Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 119: 2, (1969), 261-9.

Badāoni, Abd al-Qadir, The Muntakhabu-’rūkh, W. H. Lowe (trans.), (Calcutta: Baptist

Mission Press, 1884).

Baghaei-Abchooyeh, Hadi, ‘Sir William Jones’, Christian-Muslim Relations. A

Bibliographical History. Volume 12 Asia, Africa and the Americas (1700-1800), David
Thomas, & John Chesworth (eds.), (Leiden: Brill, 2018), 560-73.

Bahaar, Mohammad-Taghi, Sabk-Shenasi, (Tehran: Sepehr, 1943), 3 vols.

Bakherzi, Yahya Ibn Ahmad, Orad-al Hobab va Fosoos-aladab, (Tehran: Iraj Afshar: 1979).

Barani, Ziya al-Din, Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi, Sayyid Ahmad Khan (ed.), (Calcutta: W.N. Lees
& Maulavi Kabir al-Din, 1862).

Bastāmi, Forooghi, Divan, Hosein Nakhaei (ed), (Tehran: Amirkabir, 1957).

Bharthwal, Pitambardatta Dutt, Gorakh bānī, (Prayag: Hindi Sahitya Sammelan 1994).

Bilgrami, Mir ‘Abd al-Wahid, Haqā’iq-i Hindi, S.A.A. Rizvi (trans.), (Varanasi: Nagari
pracarini Sabha, 1957).

Bokhari, Esmat, The Divan of Esmat Bokharaei, Ahmad Karami (ed.), (Tehran: Ma, 1986).

Brown, Daniel W., A New Introduction to Islam, (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2003).

Browne, Edward, A Literary History of Persia, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

1969), 3 vols.

362
Burke, Edmund, Correspondence of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke: between the year
1744 and the period of his decease, in 1797, (Francis & John Rivington, 1844), 4 vols.

Cannon, Garland, ‘Sir William Jones and Dr. Johnson's Literary Club’, Modern Philology,
63: 1 (1965), 20-37.

----- ‘Sir William Jones, Persian, Sanskrit and the Asiatic Society’, History
Epistemology Language, 6: 2, (1984), 83-94.

-----Sir William Jones: a Bibliography of Primary and Secondary Sources,

(Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1979).

Carlyle, Joseph Dacre, Specimens of Arabian Poetry, from the Earliest Time to the Extinction
of the Khaliphat: With Some Account of the Authors, (Oxford: John Burges, 1796).

Chaudhuri, Sibadas, Proceedings of the Asiatic Society: 1784-1800, (Calcutta: The Asiatic
Society, 1980).

Chelkowski, P.J, ‘Nizami Gandjawi’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, (Leiden: Brill, 1995), 13 vols.

----- ‘Nezami's Iskandarnameh’, Colloquio sul poeta persiano Nizami e la leggenda

iranica di Alessandro magno, (Rome: Editori Vari, 1977).

Chittick, William C., ‘Rumi and Wahdat al-Wujud’, Poetry and Mysticism in Islam: The
Heritage of Rumi, Amin Banani, Richard G. Hovannisian, & Georges Sabagh (eds),
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994).

----- ‘Sadr al-Din Muhammad b. Ishak b. Muhammad b. Yunus al-Kunawi’,

Encyclopaedia of Islam, P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel,
&W.P. Heinrichs (eds.), (Brill: Brill Online, 2007).

----- ‘The Spiritual Path of Love in Ibn al-'Arabi and Rumi’, Mystics Quarterly, 19: 1
(1993), 4-16.

Ibn 'Arabi: Heir to the Prophets, (Oxford: Oneworld, 2005).

Cutter, Charles Ammi, Public Libraries in the United States of America then History,
Condition, and Management, (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1876).

363
Dabashi, Hamid, ‘Ayn al-Qudat Hamadani and the Intellectual Climate of his Times’, History
of Islamic Philosophy, Seyyed Hossein Nasr, & Oliver Leaman (eds.), (New York, NY:
Routledge, 1996).

Daghighi, Abu Mansur, Divan of Daghighi Toosi, (Tehran: Mohammad Javad Shariat, 1989).

Dalal, Roshen, The Religions of India: A Concise Guide to Nine Major Faiths, (New Delhi:
Penguin Books India, 2010).

Dara Shikoh, Muhammad, MAJMA' UL BAHARAIN or The Mingling of Two Oceans, M.

Mahfuz-ul-Haq (trans. & ed.), (Calcutta: The Asiatic Society, 1929).

Datta, V. N., Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Sarmad, (New Delhi: Rupa Publication India
Pvt. Ltd, 2012).

Davis, Dick. ‘Narrative and Doctrine in the First Story of Rumi’s Mathnawi’, Studies in
Islamic and Middle Eastern Texts and Traditions in Memory of Norman Calder, G. R.
Hawting, & J. A. Mojaddedi, & A. Samely (eds.), (Oxford, 2000),
De Bruijn, J.T.P, Persian Sufi Poetry: an introduction to the mystical use of classical Persian
poems, (Surrey: Curzon, 1997).

-----Ruby in the Dust: Poetry and History in Padmâvat by the South Asian Sufi Poet
Muhammad Jâyasî, (Leiden: Leiden University Press, 2012).

Dehkhoda, Ali Akbar, Lughatʹnāmah, (Tehran: Tehran University, 1998), 16 vols.

Dehlavi, Amir Khosrow, Noh Sepehr Masnavi, Mohammad Vahid Mirza (ed.), (Lucknow:
Calccuta Press, 1948).

Devy, G. N., Indian Literary Criticism: Theory and Interpretation, (Telangana: Orient
Blackswan, 2002).

Digby, Simon, ‘Qalandars and Related Groups: Elements of Social Deviance in the Religious
Life of the Delhi Sultanate of the 13th and 14th Centuries’, Islam in Asia: Volume 1: South
Asia, Yohanan Friedmann (ed.), (New York, NY: Avalon Publishing, 1984).

Dihlavi, Amir H., Fawâ'id al-Fu'âd: spiritual and literary discourses of Shaikh Nizâmmudin
Awliyâ, Ziya-Ul-Hasan Faruqi (ed.), (Delhi: DK Printworld, 1996).

Drew, John, India and the Romantic Imagination, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987).
364
Eaton, Natasha, ‘Between Mimesis and Alterity: Art Gift and Diplomacy in Colonial India’,
Romantic Representations of British India, Michael J. Franklin (ed.), (Oxon: Routledge,
2006).

Ehrlich, Joshua, ‘Empire and Enlightenment in Three Letters from Sir William Jones to
Governor-General John Macpherson’, The Historical Journal, 62:2, (2019), 541-51.

Ernst, Carl W., ‘Muslim Studies of Hinduism? A Reconsideration of Arabic and Persian
Translations from Indian Languages’, Iranian Studies, 36:2 (2003), 173-195.

Esposito, J. L., The Oxford Dictionary of Islam, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003).

Ewing, Katherine, ‘Malangs of the Punjab: Intoxication or Adab as the Path to God’, Moral
Conduct and Authority: The Place of Adab in South Asian Islam, Barbara Daly Metcalf (ed.),
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984).

Ezodin Kashani, Mahmoon ibn Ali, Mesbahol Hedaya va Meftahol Kefaya, (Tehran: Homaei,
1986).

Faizi, Abu al-Faiz ibn Mubarak, The Koliyate Faizi, E.D Arshad, & Vazir-al Hasan Abedi
(eds.), (Lahore: Punjab University, 1967).

Fani, Muḥsin, ‘The Dabistan or School of Manners’, The New Asiatic Miscellany, Francis
Gladwin (trans.), (Calcutta: Joseph Cooper, 1789).

-----The Dabistán, or School of manners: translated from the original Persian, with
notes and illustrations, David Shea, & Anthony Troyer (trans), (Paris: Oriental
Translation Fund of Great Britain and Ireland, 1843). 3 vols.

Farrukhi Sistani, Abol Hasan Ali ibn Jologh, Divan of Farrokhi Sistaani, Ali Abdolrasooli
(ed.), (Tehran: Saadat, 1937).

Faruqi, Shamsur Rahman, ‘A Long History of Urdu Literary Culture, Part 1: Naming and
Placing a Literary Culture’, Literary Cultures in History: Reconstructions from South Asia,
Sheldon Pollock (ed.), (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003).

Faruqi, Shamsur Rahman, Early Urdu Literary Culture and History, (New Delhi, 2001).

Fishel, Walter, ‘Jews and Judaism at the Court of the Mugal Emperors in Medieval India’,
Islamic Culture, 25, (1948), 105-31.
365
Forbes, Sir William, An Account of the Life and Writings of James Beattie LL.D, (Edinburgh,
1806), 2 vols.

Forouzanfar, Badiozzaman, Biography, Criticism, and Analysis of the Works of Attar,

(Tehran: Dehkhoda Book Store, 1961).

Franklin, Michael J., ‘“Harmonious” Jones and “Honest John” Shore: Contrasting Responses
of Garden Reach Neighbors to the Experience of India’, European Romantic Review, 27:2,
(2016), 119-142.

----- “'I Burn with a Desire of Seeing Shiraz': A New Letter from Sir William Jones to
Harford Jones,” The Review of English Studies, 56: 227 (2005), 749-57: 751.

-----'Orientalist Jones': Sir William Jones, Poet, Lawyer, and Linguist, 1746-1794,
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011).

Romantic Representations of British India, (London: Routledge, 2006).

----- ‘“The Hastings Circle”: Writers and Writing in Calcutta in the Last Quarter of
the Eighteenth Century’, Authorship, Commerce and the Public: Scenes of Writing,
1750–1850, Peter Garside, Caroline Franklin, & Emma Clery (eds.), (Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan, 2002).

Gaeffke, Peter, ‘Kabir in Literature by and for Muslims’, Images of Kabir, Monika
Horstmann (ed.), (Delhi: Manohar, 2002).

Garrard, John, & James L. Newell, Scandals in Past and Contemporary Politics,
(Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2006).

Garraty, John Arthur, & Peter Gay, The Columbia History of the World, (New York City,
NY: Harper & Row, 1981).

Ghazvini, Abdol-nabi, ‘Molana Hayati Gilani’, Tazkereye- Meykhaaneh, Ahmad Golchin

Ma'aani (ed.), (Tehran: Eghbal, 1961).

Gibson, Mary Ellis, ‘Sir John Horsford’, Anglophone Poetry in Colonial India, 1780–1913: A
Critical Anthology, Mary Ellis Gibson (ed.), (Athens, OH: Ohio University Press, 2011).

Gladwin, Francis, Ayeen Akbery, or, The Institutes of the Emperor Akbar, (London: G Auld,
1800), 2 vols.
366
 -----The Persian Moonshee, (Calcutta: Chronicle Press, 1795).

-----The Persian Moonshee, William Chambers (ed.), (Calcutta: Chronicle Press,

1801).

Goethe, Johann Wolfgang, West-East Divan: Poems, with "Notes and Essays": Goethe's
Intercultural Dialogues, Martin Bidney (trans), (Albany, NY: State University of New York
Press, 2010).

Gonabadi, Mohammad Parvin, An Introduction to Ibn Khaldun, (Tehran: The Translation and
Publication Company, 1949), 2 vols.

Graham, James William, ‘A Treatise on Sufism or Mahomedan Mysticism’, Transactions of

the Literary Society of Bombay, Literary Society of Bombay, (London: Longman, Hurst,
Rees, Orme, Brown, Paternoster Row; & John Murray, 1819), 1: 89-120.

Grant, Edward, God and Reason in the Middle Ages, (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2001).

Grewal, Inderpal, Home and Harem: Nation, Gender, Empire, and the Cultures of Travel,
(London: Duke University Press, 1996).

Habib, Irfan, Akbar and His India, (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1997).

Habib, Mohammad, Hazrat Amir Khusrau of Delhi, (New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 2005).

Hadley, George, Grammatical Remarks on the Practical and Current Dialect of the Jargon of
Hindostan; with a Vocabulary (etc.), (London: Cadel, 1784).

-----Introductory grammatical remarks on the Persian language, 1776, (Menston:

Scolar Press, 1972).

Hafez, Shams-odin Mohammad, Divan of Hafez, (Tehran: Parviz Natel-Khanlari, 1983).

-----Odes from the Divan of Hafiz: freely rendered from literal translations, Richard
Le Gallienne (trans.), (London: Duckworth, 1905).

Halhed, Nathaniel Brassey, A Grammar of the Bengal Language, (Bengal: Hoogly, 1778).

Hanaway, William L., ‘The Concept of the Hunt in Persian Literature.’, Boston Museum
Bulletin, 69, (1971), 21-69.
367
Harrison, Peter, ‘Religion, the Royal Society, and the Rise of Science’, Theology and
Science, 6:3, (2008), 255–71

Hartman, Geoffrey H., ‘Romanticism and Anti-Self-Consciousness’, The Geoffrey Hartman

Reader, Geoffrey H. Hartman, & Daniel T. O‘Hara (eds.), (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University
Press, 2004).

Hasan, Hadi, Mughal Poetry: Its Culture and Historical Value, (Madras: Aakar Books,
1952).

Hawarey, Mosab, The Journey of Prophecy; Days of Peace and War, (Selangor: Islamic
Book Trust, 2010).

Heath, Peter, ‘Part III: The Mi'râj Nâma’, Allegory and philosophy in Avicenna (Ibn Sînâ):
with a translation of the Book of the Prophet Muḥammad's ascent to heaven, (Philadelphia,
PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1992).

Heathcote, T.A., The Military in British India: The Development of British Forces in South
Asia:1600-1947, (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1995).

Hedayat, Sadegh, The Lyrics of Khayyam, 6th ed, (Tehran: Parastoo, 1974).

Hefling, C., & C. Shattuck, The Oxford Guide to The Book of Common Prayer: A Worldwide
Survey, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006).

Horsford, John, John Horsford, Collection of Poems, Written in the East Indies. With
Miscellaneous Remarks, in Real Life. By J- H, (Calcutta: Joseph Cooper, 1797).

Ibn al-ʻArabī, The Bezels of Wisdom, R. W. J. Austin (trans.), (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press,
1980).

Inju Shirazi, Mir Jamal al-Din Husain, Farhang-e Jahaangiri, Rahim Afifi (ed.), (Mashhad:
Ferdowsi University, 1972), 3 vols

Ireland, John D., Udana and the Itivuttaka: Two Classics from the Pali Canon, (Kandy:
Buddhist Publication Society, 2007).

Islam, Riazul, ‘Akbar's Intellectual Contacts with Iran’, Islamic Culture and Society: Essays
in Honour of Aziz Ahmad, Milton Israel, & N.K. Wagle (eds.), (Delhi: Manohar, 1983).

368
 -----A Calendar of Documents on lndo-Persian Relations, 1500-1750, (Karachi:
Iranian Culture Foundation 1979), 2 vols.

Jahangir, Tarikh-e Jahangiri, Sayyid Ahmad Khan Aligrah (ed.), (Calcutta: Asiatic Society,
1864).

-----The Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri; or, Memoirs of Jahangir, Alexander Rogers (tarns.),

Henry Beveridge (ed.), (Delhi: Low Price Publications, 2006), 2 vols.

Jami, Abdol Rahman, Baharestan, Ismael Hakemi (ed.), (Tehran: Etelaat, 1989).

-----Divan-e Bi Noghat, (Lahoor: Golzar, 1958).

-----Nafahat al-Uns, (Tehran: Abedi, 1992).

Jayasi, Malek Muhammad, Padmavati of Malik Muhammad Jaisi, A.G. Shirreff (trans.),
(Calcutta: Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1944).

Jones, Sir William, Al Sirajiyyah, or The Mohammedan Law of Inheritance, with a

Commentary, (Calcutta: Joseph Cooper, 1839).

-----Discourses Delivered Before the Asiatic Society: And Miscellaneous Papers, on

the Religion, Poetry, Literature, Etc., of the Nations of India, (London: Charles S.
Arnold, 1824).

-----Institutes of Hindu law, or, The ordinances of Menu, according to the gloss of
Cullúca: comprising the Indian system of Duties, religious and civil: verbally
translated from the original Sanscrit: with a preface, by Sir William Jones, (Calcutta:
East India Company Press, 1796).

-----Memoirs of the life, writings and correspondence of Sir William Jones, Charles
John Shore Teignmouth (ed.), (London: Piccadilly, 1806).

-----The Letters of Sir William Jones, Garland Cannon (ed.), 2 vols, (Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1970).

-----The Works of Sir William Jones. In Six Volumes, Lady Anna Maria Jones (ed.),
(London: Robinson, 1799), 6 vols.

-----A Grammar of the Persian Language, (London: W. & J. Richardson, 1771).

369
 -----Histoire de Nader Chah, (London: Londres, 1770).

-----Poems consisting chiefly of translations from the Asiatick languages. To which

are added two essays, I. On the poetry of the Eastern nations. II. On the arts,
commonly called imitative, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1772).

Poeseos Asiaticae Commentariorum Libri Sex, Cum Appendice; Subjicitur Limon, seu
Miscellaneorum, (London: T. Cadell, & W. Richardson, 1774).

-----The Principles of Government, (S.L.: The Society for Constitutional Information,

1782).

Kachru, , Braj B., Yamuna Kachru, & S. N. Sridhar, Language in South Asia, (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2008).

Kālidāsa, Sacontalá: or, The Fatal Ring, an Indian Drama by Cálidás, Translated from the
Original Sanscrit and Prácrit, Sir William Jones (trans.), (Calcutta: Joseph Copper, 1789).

Kamada, Yumiko, ‘A Taste for Intricacy: An Illustrated Manuscript of Mantiq al-Tayr in the
Metropolitan Museum of Art’, Orient, 45 (2010), 129–75.

Kapur, Kamlesh, History of Ancient India (portraits of a Nation), (New Delhi: Sterling
Publishers Pvt. Ltd, 2010).

Karamustafa, Ahmet T., Gods Unruly Friends: Dervish Groups in the Islamic Later Middle
Period, 1200-1550, (London: Oneworld Publications, 2006).

Karimi-Hakkak, Ahmad, ‘Beyond Translation: Interactions between English and Persian

Poetry’, Iran and the Surrounding World, N. R. Keddie, & R. P. Matthee (eds.), (London:
University of Washington Press, 2002).

Katouzian, Homa, Sa’di, The Poet of Life, Love and Compassion, (Oxford : One World,
2006).

Katz, N., ‘The Identity of a Mystic: The Case of Sa'id Sarmad, a Jewish-Yogi-Sufi Courtier
of the Mughals’, Numen, 42, (2000),142-160.

Key Manesh, Abbas, The Radiance of Mysticsm, (Tehran: Sadi, 1987).

Khaghani, The Divan of Khaghani Shervani, Ali Abdolrasooli (ed.), (Tehran: Sa'aadat, 1937).

370
Khajooye Kermani, Mahmood Ibn Ali, Divan of Khajooye Kermani, (Tehran: Ahmad Soheili
Khansari, 1990).

Khalil Shervani, Jamal, Nozhat al-Majaales, Mohaamad Amin Riahi (ed.), (Tehran:
Mahaarat, 1996).

Khatak, Sarfaraz Khan, Shaikh Muḥammad ʿAli Ḥazin: His Life, Times & Works, (Lahore:
Muhammad Ashraf, 1944).

Khayyam, Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, Saeed Nafisi (ed.), (Tehran: Poor-Shaad, 2006).

-----Rubáiyát of Omar Khayyam: the astronomer-poet of Persia: rendered into

English verse., Edward FitzGerald (trans.), (London: Macmillan & Co., 1859).

Kolbas, Judith G., The Mongols in Iran: Chingiz Khan to Uljaytu 1220-1309, (Abingdon:
Routledge, 2006).

Kopf, David, British Orientalism and the Bengal Renaissance, (Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press, 1969).

Koslowski, Peter, The Concept of God, the Origin of the World, and the Image of the Human
in the World Religions, (New York: NY, Springer, 2001).

Kumar, P. Pratap, Contemporary Hinduism, (New Delhi: Routledge, 2014).

Lahiji, Mohamad Ibn Yahya, Mafatih Al-ejaz fi Sharhe Golshane Raaz, (Tehran: Zavvar,
1992).

Lewishon, Leonard, ‘Persian Sufism in the contemporary West: reflections on the Ni

‘matu’llahi diaspora’, Sufism in the West, Jamal Malik, & John Hinnells (eds.), (London
Routledge: 2006), 49-70.

----- ‘Sufi Symbolism in the Persian Hermeneutic Tradition: Reconstructing the

Pagoda of ‘Attar’s Esoteric Poetics’’, Attar and the Persian Sufi Tradition: The Art of
Spiritual Flight, Leonard Lewisohn, & Christopher Shackle (eds.), (London: I. B.
Tauris, 2006).

Lincoln, Bruce, ‘Isaac Newton and Oriental Jones on Myth, Ancient History, and the Relative
Prestige’, History of Religions, 42:1 (2002),1-18.

371
Lorenzen, David N., ‘Religious Identity in Gorakhnath and Kabir: Hindus, Muslims, Yogis
and Sants’, Yogi Heroes and Poets: History and Legends of the Nāths, David N. Lorenzen &
Adrian Munoz (eds.), (New York: SUNY Press, 2011).

----- ‘Who Invented Hinduism?’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 41: 4,
(1999), 630–659.

Mahasti Ganjavi, Robaeiyat-e Mahasti Ganjavi, Rafael Hoseinof, & Mohammad Agha Soltan
Zadeh (eds), (Baku: Yaazchi, 1985).

Majlesi, Mohammad Bagher, Bihar al-Anwar, (Noroohi, Qom: 2009), 110 vols.

-----The Oceans of Lights: A Compendium of the Pearls of the Narrations of the Pure
Imāms, (Beirut: Muʾassasat al-Wafāʾ, 1983), 110 vols.

Majumdar, Ramesh Chandra, Ancient India, (Benares: Motilal Banarsidass Publications,

1977).

Mansoor, Jahangir, Rubaeyaat-e Abu Saeed Abolkhayr, Khayyam, and Baba-Taher, (Tehran:
Nahid, 1999).

Manucci, Niccolao, Storia do Mogor; or, Mogul India 1653-1708, William Irvine (trans.),
(London: John Murray and Albemarle Street, 1907), 3 vols.

Marshall, Peter, The British Discovery of Hinduism in the Eighteenth Century, (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1970).

Marzolph, Ulrich, The Arabian Nights in Transnational Perspective, (Detroit, MI: Wayne State
University Press, 2007).

McDonnald, Alexander Hopkins, Encyclopedia Americana, (New York, NY: Americana

Corporation, 1951), 30 vols.

Meier, F., ‘Der Geistmensch bei dem persischen Dichter Attar’, Eranos-Jahrbuch, 13,
(1945), 283-353.

Meninski, Franciszek, Thesaurus linguarum orientalium, Turcicae, Arabicae, Persicae ... et

grammatica Turcica cum adjectis ad singula ejus capita praeceptis grammaticis Arabicae et
Persicae linguae etc, (Vienna, 1680).

372
Modares-Razavi, Mohammad-Taghi, Ahval va Asaare-e Khajeh Nasir-odin-e Toosi, (Tehran:
Bonyad-e Farhang-e Iran, 1975).

Moein, Mohammad, ‘Amir Khosro Dehlavi’, Mehr, 1, (1952), 15-25.

Moharramov, T., ‘The Khamsas of Nizami and Amir Khusrau’, Life, Times, & Works of Amir
Khusrau Dehlavi, Z. Ansari (ed.), (New Delhi: National Amīr Khusrau Society, 1975).

Mojadadi, Gholam Hosein, Bidel-Shenasi, (Herat: Matboe Pohntoon, 1972).

Moshir Salimi, Ali Akbar, The Eloquent Women of the Past Millennium, (Tehran: Elmi
Publishers, 1956).

Muir, Sir William, The Life of Mohammad From Original Sources, (Edinburgh: J. Grant,
1923).

-----The life of Mohammad, (Whitefish, MO: Kessinger Publishing, 1878), 207.

Nabi, Hadi, Dictionary of Indo-Persian Literature, (Delhi: Abhinav Publications, 1995).

Nafisi, Saeed, ‘Amir Khosrow’, Armaghaan, 8, (1929), 560-80.

----- Jostetoo dar ahvaal va ash’aar-e Attar, (Tehran: Eghbaal, 1941).

-----The Enviroment, Life, and Poetry of Roodaki, (Tehran: Ibn-Sina Library, 1931).

Najafi Barzegar, Karim, Mughal-Iranian Relations: During Sixteenth Century, (New Delhi:
Indian Bibliographies Bureau, 2000).

Najmuddin, Shahzad Z., Armenia: a Resumé: with Notes on Seth's Armenians in India,
(Bloomington, In.: Trafford Publishing, 2005).

Narang, Gopi Chand, Urdu Language and Literature, (New Delhi, 1991).

Nasafi, Aziz-odin Ibn Mohamad, Ensan-e Kamel, (Tehran: Marizhan Moole, 1971).

Nasr, Seyyed Hossein, Islamic Philosophy from Its Origin to the Present: Philosophy in the
Land of Prophecy, (Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 2006).

-----Three Muslim Sages: Avicenna, Suhrawardi, Ibn 'Arabi, (Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press, 1964).

373
Nazarian, Hasan, Nineteen Articles on Omar-e Khayyam, (Mashhad: Art and Culture
Organization of Khorasan Razavi, 2000).

Necipoğlu, Gülru, ‘Visual Cosmopolitanism and Creative Translation: Artistic Conversations

with Renaissance Italy in Mehmed II's Constantinople’, Muqarnas Online, 29:1, (2012), 1–
81.

Nichols, John, Literary Anecdotes of the Eighteenth Century, (London: John Nichols, 1812),
6 vols.

Nilchian, Elham, ‘Sufi-Romantic Self Loss: The Study of the Influence of Persian Sufism on
English Romantic Poetry’, unpublished PhD diss., University of Leicester, 2011.

Nizami, Khaliq Ahmad, Studies in Medieval Indian History and Culture, (Allahabad: Kitab
Mahal, 1966).

Nezami, Treasury of Mysteries, translation of Makhzanol Asrar, Gholam Hossein Darab

(trans.), (London: Arthur Probsthain, 1945).

Nur Muhammad, Ibrahim b., Dabistān- i Maẕāhib, (Bombay: Dar al-Ḥukūmat, 1875).

Nurbakhsh, Javad, Forty Words and Thirty Messages, (Tehran: Yalda Publication, 2002).

-----Shibli Mast-i haq va majdhub-i haqiqat, (Tehran: Yalda, 1997).

Orsini, Francesca, ‘Krishna is the Truth of Man Mir ‘Abdul Wahid Bilgrami's Haqā’iq-i
Hindī (Indian Truths) and the circulation of dhrupad and bishnupad’, Culture and
Circulation, Thomas de Bruijn, & Allison Busch (eds.), (Leiden: Brill, 2010).

Pertsch, Wilhelm, Verzeichniss der persischen Handschriften der Königlichen Bibliothek zu

Berlin, (Berlin: A.Asher & Co., 1888).

Peters, F. E., The Monotheists: Jews, Christians, and Muslims in Conflict and Competition,
(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005).

Pickthall, Marmaduke William, Islamic Culture, Muhammad Asad (ed.), (Hyderabad: Islamic
Culture Board, 1930), 4 vols.

Plotinus, The Enneads, Stephen MacKenna (trans.), B. S. Page (ed.), (Harmondsworth,

Penguin Books: 1991).

374
 -----The Essential Plotinus: Representative Treatises From The Enneads, S. J. Elmer -
O’Brien (trans.), (Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing, 1964).

Poor-Hiva, Hasan, ‘The Stylistics of Sahabi’s Quatrains’, The Persian Prose and Verse
Stylistics, 4, (2011), 43-56.

Poorjavadi, Nasrolah, Soltan-e Tarighat: The Life and Works of Ahmad Ghazali, (Tehran,
Agaah, 1980).

Prigarina, Natalia, ‘Sarmad: Life and Death of a Sufi’, 15th European Conference on Modern
South Asian Studies, (Prague, 1998).

Rai, Amrit, A House Divided: The Origin and Development of Hindi-Urdu, (New Delhi,
1991)

Raj, Kapil, ‘Mapping Knowledge Go-Betweens in Calcutta, 1770–1820’, The brokered

world: Go-betweens and global intelligence, 1770-1820, Simon Schaffer (ed.), (Sagamore
Beach, MA: Science History Publications, 2009), 105-150.

Reyshahri, Mohammad Mohammadi, Mizan-ol Hikmah, (Darl-ol Hadith, Qom: 2010), 14

vols.

Rezai Ardaani, Fazl-alaah, ‘A Comparative Analisys of Nezami’s “Khosrow and Shirin” and
“Leyli and Majnun”’, Ghanaei Literary Journal, 11, (2008), 80-106.

Rezavi, Seyed Ali Nadeem, ‘Iranian Influence on Medieval Indian Architecture’, The Growth
of Civilizations in India and Iran, (London: Anthem Press, 2002), 127-49.

Richards, John F., The Mughal Empire. The New Cambridge History of India, Gordon
Johnson (ed.), (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993).

Rieu, Charles, Catalogue of the Persian manuscripts in the British Museum, (London:
Piccadilly, 1879-83), 3 vols.

Ritter, Hellmut, Philologika: XVI, Farīduddīn ʻAṭṭār. IV. 8. Mutārnāme: 9. Pandnāme,

(Leiden: Brill, 1978).

Riyaz, Mohammad, ‘Seyed Muhammad Ashraf Semnani and his Services to the
Subcontinent’, The Journal of Islamic Education, 26, (1976), 59-68.

375
Rizvi, Saiyid Athar Abbas, & Mohammad Habib, Muslim revivalist movements in northern
India in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, (New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1995).

-----History of Sufism in India, (Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1978), 2 vols.

-----Religious and Intellectual History· of the Muslims in Akbar's Reign, (New Delhi: -
----Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, 1975).

Rizvi, Sajjad, ‘The Existential Breath of al-rahman and the Munificent Grace of al-rahim:
The Tafsir Surat al-Fatiha of Jami and the School of Ibn Arabi’, Journal of Qur'anic Studies,
8: 1 (2006), 58-87.

Rosenberg, Donna, Folklore, Myths, and Legends: A World Perspective, (Lincolnwood: NTC
Publishing Group, 1997).

Ross, Edward D., & Edward G. Browne, Catalogue of two collections of Persian and Arabic
manuscripts preserved in the India office library, (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1902).

Rounseville Alger, William, The Poetry of the Orient, (Boston: Roberts Brothers, 1865).

Rumi, Divan of Shams-e Tabrizi, Badiol-Zaman Forouzan Far (ed.), (Tehran: Daneshgah,
1957).

-----Divan of Shams-e Tabrizi, (Tehran: Badi-ol Zaman Forozan Far, 1993).

-----The Masnavi, Book One, (Oxford World's Classics), Jawid Mojaddedi (trans.)
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008).

-----Masnavi Manavi, Reynold A. Nicholson (ed.), (Tehran: Por Javadi, 1985).

-----Masnaviye-Ma’navi, (Torbat-e Jam: The Cultural, Social, and Information Site of

Torbat-e Jam, 2008).

Rypka, Jan, History of Iranian Literature, Karl Jahn (ed.), (Dordrecht: Springer, 1968).

Sadi, Koliyat-e Sadi, Mohammad Ali Foroughi (ed.), (Tehran: Hermes,1961).

-----The Complete Text of Sadi, Mohammad Ali Foroughi (ed.), (Tehran: Hermes,
2006).

376
Safa, Zabih-olaah, The History of Literature in Iran, (Tehran: Authors and Translators of Iran
Co., 1985), 5 vols.

Saib Tabrizi, Divan, Mohammad Kahreman (ed), (Tehran: Scientific & Cultural Publication
Company, 1986), 3 vols.

Sajjadi, Jafar, The Encyclopedia of Islamic Law, (Tehran: Koomesh, 1987).

Samarghandi, Dolat-Shah, Tazkerat ol-Shoara, Edward G. Browne (ed), (Leiden: Brill,

1900).

Samiuddin, Abida, Encyclopedic Dictionary of Urdu Literature, (New Delhi: Global Vision
Publishing House, 2007), 3 vols.

Sanaei, Divan of Sanaei, (Tehran: Modares Razavi: 1988).

Sattari, Jalal, A Study of the Story of Shaykh of San'an and the Christian Girl, (Tehran:
Markaz Publications, 1999).

Schimmel, A., C. Atwood, & Burzine K. Waghmar, The empire of the great Mughals:
history, art and culture, (London: Reaktion Books, 2004).

Sedarnegani, Hermel, The Persian Speakers of India and Sind, (Tehran: Bonyad Farhang
Iran, 1966).

Sell, Edward, The Faith of Islám, (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge,
1907).

Sell, Edward, The Life of Muhammad, (London: Christian Literature Society for India, 1913).

Shabistarī, Maḥmûd b.ʻAbd al-Karîm, Gulchan i raz: The mystic rose garden. The Pers. text,
with tr. and notes, chiefly from the comm. of Muhammad bin Yahya Lahiji, E.H. Whinfield
(ed.), (Oxford: Oxford University, 1880).

-----The Gulshan Ráz, Edward Henry Whinfield (trans.), (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1876).

Shafie Kadkani, Mohammad Reza, The Poet of Mirrors: A Survey on Indian Poetry and
Bidel’s Poems, (Tehran: Agaah, 2007).

377
Shamlou , Ahmad, ‘Introduction of Hafez Shirazi’, The Divan of Hafez Shirazi, Ahmad
Shomlou (ed.), (Tehran: Morvardi, 1975).

Sharif al-Raḍi, Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥusayn, Peak of eloquence = Nahjul Balagha: sermons,
letters, and sayings of Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib, Mohammad Askari Jafery (trans.), (Accra,
N.Y: Islamic Seminary Publications, 1984).

Sharma, Sri Ram, The Religious Policy of The Moghal Emperors, (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1940).

Sheikh Bahaei, Kashkul, (Tehran: Sabok-baran, 2010).

Singh Brahma, Gyani Brahma, ‘Dara Shukoh - The Prince who turned Sufi’, The Sikh
Review, 44:511, (1996), 24-7.

Siraj, Minhaj, Tabaqat-i-Nasiri, (Calcutta: Bibliotheca indica, 1863).

Smith, Bonnie G., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Women in World History, (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2008), 4 vols.

Sohrawardi, Shahab o-Din, Dar Haghighat-e Eshgh, (Tehran: Mola, 1994).

----- The Awarif ul Maarif, (Beirut: Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1983), 7 vols.

Sprat, Thomas, The History of the Royal Society of London, for the Improving of Natural
Knowledge, (London: Printed for T.R. by J. Martyn, 1667).

St André, James, & Xiaoyan Peng, China and Its Others: Knowledge Transfer through
Translation, 1829-2010, (New York, NY: Rodopi, 2012).

Stukeley, William, The Family Memoirs of the Rev. William Stukeley, M.D. and the
Antiquarian and Other Correspondence, (Durham: Society, 1882), 2 vols.

Sutherland, Stewart R., The World’s Religions, (Boston, MA: G.K. Hall, 1998).

Sykes, Egerton, & Alan Kendall, Who’s Who: Non-Classical Mythology, (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1993).

Tabatabai, Ghulam Husain Khan, A Translation of the Seir Mutaqharin; or, View of Modern
Times, being an History of India, from the Year 1118 to the Year 1195 (this year answers to
the Christian year 1781–82), Calcutta, 1789/90), 3 vols.
378
Tawney, Charles Henry, & Frederick William Thomas, Catalogue of Two Collections of
Sanskrit Manuscripts Preserved in the India Office Library, (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode,
1903).

Tehrani, Agha Bozorg, Al-Dhari'a ila tasanif al-Shi'a, (Ghom: Ismailian and Tehran’s
Islamic Library, 1908), 25 vols.

Thomas, David Richard, & Barbara Roggema, Christian-Muslim Relations: A

Bibliographical History (600-900), (Leiden: Brill, 2009).

Turkmen, E., The Essence of the Masnevi, (Konya: Misket Ltd., 1992).

Turnbull, Patrick, Warren Hastings, (London: New English Library Ltd, 1975).

Turner, Frank, ‘The Victorian Conflict between Science and Religion: A Professional
Dimension’, Isis, 49, (1978), 356–76.

Unknown Author, ‘Moses and the Stonecutter’, The Eight Books and the Tale of the
Shepherd and Moses, Hosein Ketabforoosh (ed.), (Tehran: Sangi, 1960).

Vahshi Bafghi, Divan, Saeed Nafisi (ed), (Tehran: Saales, 2013).

-----Shirin and Farhad, (Tehran: Ahmad Ranjbar, 1974).

Vaudeville, Charlotte, Kabīr: Volume I, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1974).

Vidyarthi, Abdul Haque, Mohammad in World Scriptures, (Lahore: Dar-ul-Kutub Islamia,

1940).

Watt, James, British Orientalism, 1759–1835, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

2019).

Westlake, E.J., World Theatre: The Basics, (London: Routledge, 2017).

Wilkinson, Charles, Bhagvat-geeta, or Dialogues of Kreeshna and Arjoon (London: Nourse,

1785).

Windfuhr, Gernot L., Persian Grammar: History and State of Its Study, (New York, NY,
Mouton: 1979).

379
Wittek, Paul, The Rise of the Ottoman Empire: Studies in the History of Turkey, thirteenth–
fifteenth Centuries Royal Asiatic Society Books, Colin Heywood (ed.), (Abingdon: Routledge,
2013).

Wordsworth, William, Lyrical Ballads, With Other Poems, (London: T.N. Longman and O.
Rees, 1800) 2 vols.

Zarrinkoob, Abdolhossein, ‘The Arab Conquest of Iran’, The Cambridge History of Iran,
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975), 7 vols.

-----Sedaye Paaye Simorgh, (Tehran: Sokhan, 2000).

Online Sources

Bashiri, Iraj, ‘Amir Khusrau Dihlavi’,

[http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/bashiri/Poets/Dihlavi.html].

Biegstraaten, Jos, “KHAYYAM, OMAR xiv. Impact On Literature And Society In The
West,” Encyclopædia Iranica, (2008), [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/khayyam-omar-
impact-west].

Bristow, William, ‘Enlightenment’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N.

Zalta (ed.), (Fall 2017 Edition),
[https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/enlightenment].

Corbin, H., ‘ĀẔAR KAYVĀN’, Encyclopedia Iranica, (3) 2: 183-187, 183.

[http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/azar-kayvan-priest].

Cornish, Rory T., ‘Cartwright, John (1740–1824), political reformer.’ Oxford Dictionary of
National Biography, (23 Sep. 2004),
[https://www.oxforddnb.com/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-
9780198614128-e-4817].

De Fouchecour, Charles-Henri, ‘IRAN: Classical Persian Literature’, Encyclopædia Iranica,

(2012), 8:1, 414-32. [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/iran-viii2-classical-persian-
literature].

380
France-Presse, Agence, ‘Bollywood epic about Hindu queen provokes mobs rioting in
streets’, South China Morning Post, (24 January 2018),
[https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/south-asia/article/2130408/bollywood-epic-padmavati-
about-14th-century-hindu-queen-has].

Franklin, Michael J., ‘Welsh History Month: Persian Jones helped to build India's future on
the Immensity and Pluralism of its Past’, Wales Online, (15 Oct 2015),
[https://www.walesonline.co.uk/lifestyle/nostalgia/welsh-history-month-persian-jones-
10260468].

Hasse, Dag Nikolaus, ‘Influence of Arabic and Islamic Philosophy on the Latin West’, The
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.),
[https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/arabic-islamic-influence].

Jaipur, ‘More trouble for Padmavati: Ajmer Dargah Deewan urges PM to ban release’,
Business Standard, (16 November 2017), [https://www.business-
standard.com/article/current-affairs/more-trouble-for-padmavati-ajmer-dargah-deewan-urges-
pm-to-ban-release-117111600673_1.html].

Johnson, Kurt Andrew, ‘Sir William Jones and Representations of Hinduism in British Poetry
1784-1812’, (September 2010), 59-62
[https://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/1236/1/Final_Thesis.pdf].

Krasnowolska, Anna, 'ḴEŻR', Encyclopædia Iranica, (2009),

[https://iranicaonline.org/articles/kezr-prophet].

Lewis, Franklin, ‘GOLESTĀN-E SAʿDI’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, (2012), 11:1, 79-86,

[https://iranicaonline.org/articles/golestan-e-sadi].

Losty, Jeremiah P., ‘Ascetics and Yogis in Indian Painting: The Mughal and Deccani
Tradition’, (July 2016),
[https://www.academia.edu/27189427/ASCETICS_AND_YOGIS_IN_INDIAN_PAINTING
_THE_MUGHAL_AND_DECCANI_TRADITION].

Marzolph, Ulrich, ‘Arabian Nights’. Encyclopaedia of Islam, Kate Fleet, Gudrun Krämer,
Denis Matringe, John Nawas, & Everett Rowson (eds), (2007),
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1573-3912].

381
Mojaddedi, Jawid, ‘ḤALLĀJ, ABU’L-MOḠIṮ ḤOSAYN b. Manṣur b. Maḥammā Bayżāwi’,
Encyclopedia Iranica, [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/hallaj-1].

Mojtaba'i, Fath-Allah, ‘DABESTĀN-E MAḎĀHEB’, Encyclopedia Iranica, (3) 5: 532-4.

[http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/dabestan-e-madaheb].

Parrello, Domenico, ‘ḴAMSA OF NEẒĀMI’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, November 10, 2010,

[http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/kamsa-of-nezami 13-06-2019].
Orsatti, Paola, ‘ḴOSROW O ŠIRIN’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, June 27, 2006,
[http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/kosrow-o-sirin 13-06-2019].
Riāḥi, Moḥammad Amin, ‘NOZHAT AL-MAJĀLES’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, December 15,
2008, [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/nozhat-al-majales 13-06-2019].
Orsatti, Paola, ‘ḴAMSA-ye JAMĀLI’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, April 20, 2012,
[http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/kamsa-ye-jamali 13-06-2019].
Beelaert, Anna Livia, ‘ḴĀQĀNI ŠERVĀNI i. Life’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, December 15,
2010, [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/kaqani-servani-poet 13-06-2019].

Perry, John R., ‘ḤAZIN LĀHIJI’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, (2012) 8:1, 97-8
[http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/hazin-lahiji].

Qasemi, Sharif Husain, 'FANĪ KAŠMĪRĪ', Encyclopedia Iranica, (4), 2: 207.

[http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/fani].

Reinert, B., ‘AṬṬĀR, FARĪD-AL-DĪN’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, 3:1, 20-25: 21,

[http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/attar-farid-al-din-poet].

Saptarshi, Ray, ‘Bounty placed on Bollywood actress' head after Hindu-Muslim film
outrage.’ The Telegraph, (17 November 2017),
[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/17/bounty-placed-bollywood-actress-head-
hindu-muslim-film-outrage].

Saptarshi, Ray, ‘Violent protests spread across India as controversial Padmaavat film finally
released’, The Telegraph, (25 January 2018),
[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/25/violent-protests-spread-across-india-
controversial-padmaavat].

Siddiqi, Moazzam, ‘BĪDEL, ʿABD-AL-QĀDER’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, (1989), 4: 244-

246, [http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/bidel-bedil-mirza-abd-al-qader-b].
382
Thomas, David, 'Kitāb al-milal wa-l-niḥal', Christian-Muslim Relations 600 - 1500, David
Thomas (ed.), [http://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/christian-muslim-relations-
i/kitab-al-milal-wa-l-nihal-COM_24627].

Times of India Reporter, ‘Sanjay Leela Bhansali assault: 'Padmavati' actors Deepika
Padukone, Ranveer Singh, & Shahid Kapoor break their silence’, The Times of India, (29
January 2017),
[https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/sanjay-leela-
bhansali-assault-padmavati-deepika-padukone-breaks-her-
silence/articleshow/56832864.cms].

Yaghoobi, Claudia, ‘Subjectivity in 'Attār's Shaykh of San'ān Story in The Conference of the
Birds.’, Comparative Literature and Culture, 16:1 (2014), [http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1481-
4374.2425].

383