نسخه‌ای تازه از مثنوی «محب و محبوب» و اهمیت آن در تصحیح دوبارۀ منظومه

مثنوی «محب و محبوب» منظومه‌ای است که شاعری به نام اختیار در سال 830 قمری آن را در نوع ادبی ده‌نامه به نظم درآورده است. این منظومه به ماجرای عشق شاهزاده‌ای به نام محب می‌پردازد که در خواب، دختری زیبارو به نام محبوب را می‌بیند و شیفتۀ او می‌شود. شاعر در قالب روایتی منسجم و با بیانی هنرمندانه، از عشق آتشین محب به محبوب به‌ویژه در قالب نامه‌های عاشقانه سخن می‌گوید. این نوع ادبی در تاریخ ادب فارسی با ساختاری مشخص رواج داشت؛ اما ده‌نامۀ اختیار ساختاری نسبتاً متفاوت دارد و نیز طولانی‌تر از ده‌نامه یا حتی سی‌نامه‌های دیگر است. این مثنوی براساس یک نسخۀ ناقص که در کتابخانۀ توبینگن برلین نگهداری می‌شود، پیشتر چاپ شده است؛ اما یک نسخۀ دیگر از این منظومه در کتابخانۀ عاطف‌افندی (ترکیه) نگهداری می‌شود که هم کامل است و هم صحّت بیشتری دارد. نگارندگان در این مقاله ضمن معرفی نسخۀ عاطف‌افندی و مقایسۀ ضبط‌های نسخۀ یادشده با نسخۀ چاپ‌شده (و نیز نسخۀ اساس مصحّح) و ذکر ضبط‌های برتر نسخة عاطف‌افندی، ابیات تازۀ مندرج در آن را نقل کرده‌اند. با مقایسۀ دو نسخه مشخص می‌شود که برای تصحیح این منظومه، حتماً می‌بایست از نسخۀ عاطف‌افندی استفاده می‌شد؛ اما با اینکه این دست‌نویس پیشتر در فهرست کتابخانۀ مذکور معرفی شده، در دسترس مصحّح نبوده و ازاین‌رو منظومه ناقص چاپ شده است.

New Versions of the Masnavi of Moheb and Mahboub and its Importance in Re-correcting the Poem

AbstractThe Masnavi of Moheb and Mahboub is a poem composed by a poet named Ikhtiar, who arranged it in the literary of Dehnameh in 830 AH. This poem deals with the love story of a prince named Moheb who dreams of a beautiful girl named Mahboub and falls in love with her. In a coherent narrative and with an artistic expression, the poet speaks of the fiery love of the lover to the beloved, especially in the form of love letters. Although this type of literature was prevalent in the history of Persian literature with a specific structure, ten letters of authority have a relatively different structure and are longer than ten or even other letters. This Masnavi is already based on an incomplete copy kept in the Tübingen Library in Berlin. But another copy of this poem is kept in the library of Atefafandi (Turkey), which is more complete and accurate. In the present study, the authors introduce the Atefafandi version and compare the recordings of the mentioned version with the printed version (as well as the corrected version) and mention the superior recordings of the Atefafandi version and quote the new verses contained in it. By comparing the two versions, it becomes clear that in order to correct this system, the emotional version must have been used. However, despite the fact that this manuscript has already been introduced in the library list, it is still not available for correction, and therefore the poem has been incompletely printed.IntroductionDahname or Siname is one of the famous types of Persian poetry. Although  this type of poetry could been seen  since the fifth century AH, its most popular form is from the middle of the eighth century to the end of the ninth century. Many works of this type of Persian poetry have remained in this period. The subject of this type of literature is the exchange of love letters that are sent by the lover to the beloved and the answer of the lover to the beloved, which has a romantic content and is known as the decile or the syllabus according to the number of letters in the Masnavi. One of these romantic periodicals has been identified and embellished in recent years. The Moheb and Mahboub Masnavi is a poem by a poet named ‘Ikhtiar’ who composed this Masnavi in ​​the ninth century. Of course, another work in the same type of literature remains from Katebi Tarshizi (839 AH), whose main characters are also called Moheb and Mahboub, and therefore some sources have called it the Masnavi of Moheb and Mahboub. Apart from the names of the characters, there are no other similarities in the content and structure of the narration, and if this sharing is not accidental and the names of Moheb and Mahboub have been chosen based on the narration or anecdote, they have acted independently in dealing with the content.Two versions have been identified from Moheb and Mahboub. One is a copy from the Tübingen Library in Berlin, number 3723. This version, which is related to the ninth century, is incomplete from the end, and a few years ago, Ahmad Reza Yalmeha published this poem based on this incomplete manuscript. Another version, which is, in fact, a complete version of Moheb and Mahboub, and in addition to removing the shortcomings of the Tübingen version and adding verses to it, provides more accurate additional information, is kept in the Atefafandi Library of Turkey, number 2261. This version was also written in the ninth century and is a solid version that solves many of the problems of the Tübingen version. Although this manuscript was previously introduced by Tawfiq Sobhani, the editor of the poem did not know about the Turkish version and emphasized in several parts in the introduction that the Tübingen manuscript is unique and no other version is available. Therefore, in this study, the authors, while briefly introducing the Turkish version, have removed the shortcomings and corrected some of the inadequacies of the previous versions in two parts. That is to say, they first dealt with the differences between the two versions (Tübingen and Atefafandi), which also included correcting some misreading and mistakes of the respected editor. They have completed the poem based on Atefafandi’s manuscript, and verses based on this version have been added to the poem.Materials and MethodsTo conduct the present study, we used the two main versions of the Masnavi of Moheb and Mahboub according to our purpose. One of these manuscripts had been edited by a respected editor (Tubingen Manuscripts), but he did not have the other manuscript, which belonged to the Atef Effendi Library in Turkey. Therefore, in this article, we first briefly introduced Atef Effendi’s version. Then, we corrected it based on the shortcomings in the book’s publication, and then quoted new verses that were not in Tübingen’s incomplete version. Our method in this article was to juxtapose two copies  and also to compare the printed Masnavi with the manuscript which was hidden from the view of the proofreader.Discussion of Results and ConclusionsAccording to what has been said so far, two copies of the poem of Moheb and Mahboub have been identified. One copy is kept in the Tübingen Library in Berlin, Germany, and the other in the Atefafandi Library in Istanbul. This Masnavi has been published once based on the same version of Tübingen, but due to the incompleteness of many verses, it has not been published. On the other hand, due to the poor quality of the image that was in the possession of the respected proofreader, many verses are not readable well. The obsolescence of some pages of the manuscript has also caused other problems in reading the manuscript, which results in an incomplete and confusing text. On the other hand, the incompleteness of Tübingen’s version has caused the proofreader to make a mistake in examining the history of composing the poem and considering the date of composing the poem as a century before the actual date of composing the poem. But the emotional version kept in Turkey is a complete version, and this issue firstly corrects the shortcomings of the Tübingen version. Secondly, it corrects its flaws and errors. Another important point is that it determines the time of composition because the exact date of the composition of Masnavi is explicitly stated at the end. Although Atefafandi’s version was introduced many years ago through the list of Persian manuscripts in Turkish libraries, the editor has not noticed it. The use of the emotive version helps to correct many of the shortcomings of the Tübingen version, in addition to adding verses to the text of the poem (about one hundred bits).