بررسی انتقادی دیوان خاقانی تصحیح علی عبدالرّسولی از نظر اوزان عروضی

بررسی دیوان خاقانی به تصحیح علی عبدالرّسولی گویای آن است که تشخیص اوزان و بحور عروضی موارد قابل تامّلی دارد که ناشی از سهوهای مصحّح است. این کاستی ها اگرچه در کنار رنج و دقت نظر آن استاد زنده یاد در تصحیح دیوان خاقانی بس ناچیز می نماید، در مسیر استفاده از این تصحیح ارزشمند که در شمار بهترین تصحیح‌های دیوان خاقانی است، خالی از فایده نخواهد بود؛ در این نوشتار کاستی های یادشده در دو بخش شامل 1) اشتباه در تشخیص وزن و بحر، 2) اشتباه در تشخیص زحافات با نگاهی انتقادی، بررسی شده است.

A critical examination of meters in Khaghani’s complete works (Divan) emended by Abd or-Rasooli

AbstractKhaghani’s complete works (Divan), emended by Abd orRasooli, consists of 144 qasida1, 16 composites, refrains, 356 stanza and small qasidas, 462 Ghazal, 361 quatrains and 5 Arabic qasidas. Despite its weak points, current edition as the first edition of khaghani in Iran is undoubtedly of high importance and can be used by students and researchers. In spite of value and significance of Abd orRasooli efforts, this emendation has considerable defects. For exle, lack of index of all poems, disorders due to intermingling of small qasidas and odes makes it hard for readers to find poems and recognize their forms. Also Abd orRasooli analyzes some parts of Divan such as qasidas and refrains in terms of meter and leaved other parts as small qasidas, odes, Ghazals, quatrains and Arabic poems. Studying meters in Khaghani’s Divan emended by Abd orRasooli, some of them have been seemed to be incorrect. The mentioned mistakes are as below which we divided them to some groups for ease of access:Making mistake in recognition of rhythm and meter, rhythm recognition, meter and its variationsMaking mistake in recognition of meter variations.Case: falsehood in rhythm and meter recognitionIn pages 42 and 45 the rhythm of (Mufta’ellun Fa’ellat Mufta’ellun Fa’ellat “UUUUUU”) has been named “Monsare Salem” but in page 57 there is a qasida with prologue and Abd orRasooli mentioned the same rhythm for it mistakenly and named its variations as “Matvi Majdou”:Rảhe nafasam baste shod az ảhe jegartảbKu hamnafasi tả nafasi rảnam az in bảbIt should be mentioned that meter is not Monsareh but it is “musamman akhrab makfuf mahzuf”.Next qasida with prologue is:Ᾰn pir ke sobhe leghayist khezre nảmHar sobh buye khezr ảyadash ze kảmStating the word “too”, he has recognized the rhythm of mentioned Qasida in “Ramal” meter while it has the meter of “mozare’ akhrab makfuf mahzuf” and its rhythm is “Maf’ulo  Fa’elat  Mofa’elan Fa’elon” and it is not “Ramal”.The conclusion is that studying rhythm in qasidas shows that Abd orRasooli was hasty at recognizing meters and this hastiness results to inordinate number of errors such as those in determination of rhythm and meter and meter variations. It is obvious that present criticism does not underestimate Abd orRasooli’s great dignity and his scientific wisdom in first emendation of Khaghani’s Divan in Iran and the value of this work is apparent for all scholars.ay.