Advertise here

گفتا «ز که نالیم؟ که از ماست که بر ماست» - بیست دو بهمن

Balatarin

گویند عقابی به در شهری برخاست

وز بهر طمع پر به پرواز بیاراست

ناگه ز یکی گوشه ازین سخت کمانی

تیری ز قضای بد بگشاد برو راست

در بال عقاب آمد آن تیر جگردوز

وز ابر مرو را به سوی خاک فرو خواست

زی تیر نگه کرد پر خویش برو دید

گفتا «ز که نالیم؟ که از ماست که بر ماست»

 

 ناصر خسرو قبادیانی

 

In light of reviewing the last 35 years, and the revolution one is reminded of this poem:

 

From Nasir Khusraw  (1004 – 1088 CE) the Persian poet

My translation of Nasir Khusraw’s poem:

 

They say an eagle once rose high

lusting for a prey it floated to city sky

in a right corner an arrow was launched

it landed in the wing and there it staunched

he fell from the mist of clouds to the ground

then he looked at the arrow and sighed

From whom should I protest

for what fell from my pinion

has had my wing pinioned

 

Balatarin

ramintork @ramintork

I write about Iranian contemporary history in the form of stories and screenplays in order to bring the truth that the regime is so desperately trying to hide. My early Iranian.com contributions: http://iranian.com/main/member/ramintork.html

Europe

Comments 8 Pending 0

Sort comments:
Mohamad.Purqurian

Mohamad.Purqurian Peace is not subjugation آشتی کردن تسليم شدن نيست

خيلی از اشعاری که در گنجور هست درست نيست. اين هم يکی از آنهاست. اگر به حاشيه آن دقت فرمائيد شعر بلند ناصر خسرو با تفاوتهای جزئی آمده است. يکی از آنها از طرف آقای علی اميری، درست همان است که من در حافظه دارم

روزی ز سر سنگ عقابی به هوا خواست
وندر طلب طعمه پر و بال بیاراست
بر راستی بال نظر کرد و چنین گفت
امروز همه روی جهان زیر پر ماست
بر اوج چو پرواز کنم از نظر تیز
میبینم اگر ذره ای اندر تک دریاست
گر بر سر خاشاک یکی پشه بجنبد
جنبیدن آن پشه عیان در نظر ماست
بسیار منی کرد و ز تقدیر نترسید
ناگه ز کمینگاه یکی سخت کمانی
تیری ز قضای بد او گشت بر او راست
بر بال عقاب آمد و آن تیر جگر سوز
وز ابر مر او را بسوی خاک فروکاست
گفتا عجبا اینکه ز چوبی و ز آهن
این تیزی و تندی و پریدن ز کجا خواست
زی تیر نگه کرد و پر خویش برآن دید
گفتا ز که نالیم که از ماست که بر ماست

از اين مهمتر مفهوم عاميانه آن است که درست خلاف نظر ناصر خسرو است. شاعر علاوه بر به نکوهش گرفتن غرور عقاب، حماقت او را نشان ميدهد که تندی وتيزی تير را به پر خود نسبت ميدهد که واقعيت ندارد. به عبارت ساده تر پر عقاب گرفتار تير صياد شد نه بر عکس. و بهمين ترتيب از ما "نيست" که بر ماست

ramintork

ramintork I write about Iranian contemporary history in the form of stories and screenplays in order to bring the truth that the regime is so desperately trying to hide. My early Iranian.com contributions: http://iranian.com/main/member/ramintork.html

کار پر در ته تیر این است که یک ایرفویل باشد. پر لرزش را کم کرده و تیر مستقیم و بهتر پرواز میکند. پس عقاب درست فکر کرده بود که چوب و آهن برای چنین پروازی کافی نیست. من اینجا از ماست که بر ماست را عنصری که از وجود خود ما برای نابودی ما استفاده شده میبینم. و به همین دلیل این شعر مناسب سالگرد انقلاب خونین اسلامی است

Mohamad.Purqurian

Mohamad.Purqurian Peace is not subjugation آشتی کردن تسليم شدن نيست

هزار نکته باريکتر از مو اينجاست که عقاب "درست" فکر نکرده بود، فقط در "محدوده "شناخت خود "تصور" ميکرد. علاوه برآن "زی" بمفهوم "ته" نيست ودرست برعکس وقتيکه تير به عقاب اصابت ميکند به آن ميچسبد که با معنی "زی" مترادف است

ميبينيد که چگونه رابطه واژه ها با مفاهيم واقعی آن قطع ميشود وتصورات ما جايگزين ميشوند تا نتوانيم واقعيات را آنطور که هست ببينيم

Marjantaj

Marjantaj Iranian, living in UK, Christian

حرف حساب جواب نداره

Mohamad.Purqurian

Mohamad.Purqurian Peace is not subjugation آشتی کردن تسليم شدن نيست

I do agree with the fact that "writers borrow from each other." By the same token fables are not necessarily originated from a certain specific source, like those of Aesop or Nasreddin. So it is possible that some of Aesop's fables originated and/or had different variations in different localities.

My point is that Nasir Khosrow had a clear message in his poem and probably defied or was sarcastic about the common belief over the eagle fable. While it is possible that he just made the fable poetic, it does not fit into his poetic style.

Nevertheless, the fable has little application in current world affairs. It is quite to the contrary. Globalization and western imperialism had a colossal and mostly malicious effect on the life of all people. In other words, the 1% hunts the 99% to servitude/misery and the 99% feels it is its own faults.

No matter how you think about our revolution, the fact remains the same that it was, and still is, the western interference that brought it to the present state. You simply cannot blame the victim.

ramintork

ramintork I write about Iranian contemporary history in the form of stories and screenplays in order to bring the truth that the regime is so desperately trying to hide. My early Iranian.com contributions: http://iranian.com/main/member/ramintork.html

I absolutely agree with your point about borrowing. Yes indeed it is true for fables, and I accept that even if the source could have had a different intention that Nasir Khosrow could have had his own play with it. Mentioning Aesop was not for a counter argument. As for your reading of the text the narcissistic element of it does come across and I was interested in that aspect of the poem. I still think that the poem can be applied to the revolution of 35 years ago. If you listen to Dr Milani's talks on the subject the event was like a perfect storm, but in that perfect storm it was ultimately a group of Iranian political leaders that acted as go-between for Khomeini and West and made the deal that he could take over possible. Shah had turned totalitarian nearer to the time and Iran was economically rising, but Iran was about to go into a revolution and could had ended in Soviet hands and the counter revolution was an act of crisis management. The naivety and arrogance of those political leaders that made the deal happen for the ignorant Khomeini was the effectively an arrow from what appeared to be of our own making piercing our wing and sealing our fate. The West is the West, and all powers are after their national interests but the problem was on our side in lacking wise opposition leaders. Of course the world was very different then so it is easy to speak with the benefit of hindsight, but good leaders should more sense. They should had stayed on Bakhtiar's side and they didn't.

Mohamad.Purqurian

Mohamad.Purqurian Peace is not subjugation آشتی کردن تسليم شدن نيست

I do not want to get into this issue because it is more complicated. Suffice to say that I disagree with Dr. Milani. Furthermore, I do not call any of the political leaders, be it the Shah, Khomeini, Bakhtiar or other political leaders, naïve or ignorant. Quite to the contrary. They played their hands right, but it was impossible to make a deal. Even if they did, it would have made no difference. The powerful western imperialism would not have allowed any of them or their collective stand bring about a barrier to its self interests. Khomeini did, and he was forced into Iran/Iraq war, and the rest of the story.

Time has changed, and the western imperialism is naked, not appreciated as it was 35 years ago. Back then, only a minority intelligentsia, mostly leftist, could see enough of the agenda. The rest was just mute.

It is, of course, just my opinion that is based on my own observation of the revolution out of the circle not within it. Because once you fall within a circle, your vision is limited to half of the circle.

ramintork

ramintork I write about Iranian contemporary history in the form of stories and screenplays in order to bring the truth that the regime is so desperately trying to hide. My early Iranian.com contributions: http://iranian.com/main/member/ramintork.html

By the way Nasir Khusraw had borrowed this from one of Aesop’s Fables.

A eagle sat on a lofty rock, watching the movements of a Hare whom he sought to make his prey. An archer, who saw the Eagle from a place of concealment, took an accurate aim and wounded him mortally. The Eagle gave one look at the arrow that had entered his heart and saw in that single glance that its feathers had been furnished by himself. “It is a double grief to me,” he exclaimed, “that I should perish by an arrow feathered from my own wings.” which I have covered in a blog on my site and explained how writers borrow from each other.
Helen Keller has also borrowed this: As the eagle was killed by the arrow winged with his own feather, so the hand of the world is wounded by its own skill.