پیشنهادی برای تصحیح و معنای چند بیت از داستان «رستم و سهراب»

تصحیح شاهنامۀ جلال خالقی مطلق و همکارانش محمود امیدسالار و ابوالفضل خطیبی یکی از تصحیح‌های درخور اعتماد و استنادِ شاهنامه‌پژوهان است. در تصحیح‌های گذشته اشکالاتی دیده می‌شود که خالقی مطلق و همکارانش با در نظر گرفتن آنها کوشیده‌اند تصحیح دقیق‌تری از شاهنامه در اختیار خوانندگان قرار دهند؛ البته تصحیح خالقی مطلق نیز کاستی‌هایی دارد که می‌توان با اشاره به این کاستی‌ها و اصلاح آنها، متن ویرایش‌شدۀ بهتری از شاهنامه ارائه کرد. ازاین‌رو در اینجا این پرسش مطرح می‌شود که با دقت در معنای برخی از واژگانِ شاهنامه و ضبط دست‌نویس‌های متعدد و معتبر این کتاب، تصحیح چه بیت‌هایی از داستان رستم و سهراب را می‌توان پیشنهاد کرد. بر همین اساس در این مقاله با توجه به دست‌نویس‌های معتبر و چاپ‌های عکسی دست‌نویس‌های شاهنامه و ویرایش‌هایی که از این کتاب ارائه شده است و همچنین پژوهش‌هایی که شاهنامه‌شناسان در کتاب‌ها و مقاله‌های خود ارائه کرده‌اند، کوشش شد پیشنهادهایی برای تصحیح و معنای برخی از بیت‌های داستان «رستم و سهراب» مطرح شود؛ از‌این‌رو با توجه به شواهدی که در شاهنامه آمده است، بهتر است در تصحیحِ بیت‌هایی از این داستان «بداندیش» به معنی «بیمناک و نگران»، «خَنبیدن» به معنی «خم‌شدن» و «آهون» به معنی «رخنه و نَقب» در نظر گرفته شود.

A Suggestion for the Correction and Meaning a Few Verses of the Story of Rostam and Sohrab

Abstract The correction of the Shahnameh by Jalal Khaleghi Motlagh, Mahmoud Omid Salar and Abolfazl Khatibi, is one of the most trusted and cited corrections of the Shahnameh. In the previous corrections, there were some drawbacks that Khaleghi Motlagh and his team tried to minimize and resolve it in their work. However, their correction also has some shortcomings that can be addressed and corrected to make a betteredited text of the Shahnameh that can help researchers to have a more trustable source for further studies. Therefore, this question arises: which corrections of verses of the Shahnameh can be suggested by focusing on the exact meaning of some vocabulary and numerous authentic manuscripts? Accordingly, in the present study, regarding the authentic manuscripts and photographic prints of the Shahnameh manuscripts and its provided edits, as well as the reserch presented by the epic scholars in the field of Shahnameh in their books and articles, attempts have been made to suggest the correction and meaning in some of the verses of Rostam and Sohrab story. These suggestions are in accordance with the evidence presented in the Shahnameh including ‘Badandish’ in the meaning of ‘Apprehensive’ or ‘Suspicious’, ‘Khanbidan’ in the meaning of ‘Bend’ and ‘Ahoun’ in the meaning of ‘Tunnel’. Introduction       After completing the correction of the Shahnameh by Khaleghi Motlagh and his colleagues, some scholar that worked on the Shahnameh criticized that the published work, although some of these criticisms were based on scientifically accurate points, on the other hand some were based solely on personal tastes. But, over time, this correction has attracted a great deal of attention and has found many fans who, in defense of the khaleghi Motlagh endeavor, consider it to be the best and most accurate edit of Shahnameh that has been done by using of countless manuscripts in a scholarlycritical manner. The considering of multiple versions of Shahnameh is one of the advantages of the Khaleghi Motlagh’s correction, while past editors have used only a few manuscripts and even critique the Shahnameh manuscripts regardless of their true value. Khaleghi Motlagh has done a tremendous and hard amount of work on the selection of Shahnameh manuscripts. He has collected almost all known manuscripts of the Shahnameh and has chosen fifteen out of the fortyfive cases that were written between the seventh and the tenth AH centuries. In evaluating them, he has considered six principles for the selection of these fifteen manuscripts: punctuation, arrangement, subtraction and adjunct of verses, adjunct narratives, and recorded words in the manuscript. Khaleghi Motlagh has presented his research in three detailed articles entitled ‘Introduction and Evaluation of Some Shahnameh Manuscripts.’ In the meantime, he has carefully examined the oldest version of the Shahnameh in separate articles titled ‘Manuscript of the Shahnameh of the Sixteenth and Fourteenth AH (Florence Manuscript)’ and ‘Review and Evaluation of the Manuscript of the Florence Shahnameh’. He has used it as a basic manuscript in the correction of the Shahnameh. Although the Florence manuscript contains half of the Shahnameh until the end of the ‘The GreatWar of Keikhosrow’ story, it is significant in terms of ancient recordings. Khaleghi Motlagh eventually by using the newest found manuscript of ‘Saint Joseph’ (probably late 7th or early 8th AH), ‘The Second Little Shahnameh’ (probably early 8th AH), ‘Karachi’ (752 AH), ‘Hashiye Zafarnameh’ (807 AH), ‘Saadlu’ (probably from the 8th AH), and ‘Cama’ (the Cama Foundation for Oriental Studies in Mumbai (undated)), and with the suggestions and criticisms of scholars presented his second edition of the Shahnameh. This edition also received the attention of the Shahnameh scholars. Material Methods Considering the eightvolume edition and the second edition of the Shahnameh by Khaleghi Motlagh written to explain the verses of the story of Rostam and Sohrab, as well as careful attention of the meaning of some words and terms in the Shahnameh, Persian literature texts and dictionaries, some correction of the verses in the story of Rostam and Sohrab can be suggested which had previously received less attention. Discussion of Results Conclusions One of the stories of the Shahnameh that has controversial and difficult verses is the story of Rostam and Sohrab. To understand these difficulties and complexities, it is sufficient to pay attention to the previous articles about the first verses of this story. Moreover, there are other verses that can be focused to find some useful details and corrections. In the following there are some of these verses: 1. ‘Badandish’ means ‘Apprehensive’ or ‘Suspicious’ instead of ‘Barain’: ‘Yaki Khaharash Bood Gord va Sovar/ Badandish va Gardankesh va Namdar’. 2. ‘Bekhanbid’ from infinitive ‘Khanbidan’ means ‘bend’ instead of ‘Bepichid’ and ‘Bekhammid’ :’Cho Amad Khorooshan be Tang Andarash/ Bekhanbid va Bardasht Khood az Sarash’ 3. Furthermore, in the story of ‘Kineye Siavash’, the verse: ‘Gerayande Bod Bande Romi Zereh/ Bepichid va Nagshad Bande Gereh’ should be replaced by the following verse: ‘Gerayande Bod Marde Romi Zereh/ Bekhanbid va Bogshad Bande Gereh’ 4. ‘Soon’ instead of ‘Sooy’ or ‘Soo’ and ‘Bi Ahoun’ instead of ‘Pay Ahou’ or ‘Bi Ahou’ in the following verse should be corrected: ‘Bedoo Goft az Idar be Yak Soon Shavim/ be Avardgahi bi Ahoun Shavim’. Finally, it should be noted that despite the particular value and validity of Khaleghi Motlagh’s correction, scholars can accurately reach the points that would lead to a more accurate correction of the Iranian National Epic by considering the meaning of numerous words and manuscripts of the Shahnameh and avoiding the apparent meaning of the verses.