بررسی اختلاف نظر شارحانِ مخزن‌الاسرار در ضبط و تحلیل ابیات

در این پژوهش با مراجعه به یک شرح قدیمی و چند شرح معاصرِ مخزن‌الاسرارکوشیده می‌شود ضمن مقایسۀ نظر شارحان در تحلیل اشعار به تفاوت‌ها و ابهام‌های شرحِ ابیات نیز توجه شود. با توجه به اینکه ابیاتِ انتخاب‌شده، بیشتر دشوار و بحث‌انگیز هستند، توجه به نظر هر شارح و مقایسۀ آنها با یکدیگر، جایگاه و اهمیت آن شرح را نیز نشان می‌دهد. از سوی دیگر ابهام‌ها و گاه نارسایی‌های معنایی هر بیت نیز آشکار می‌شود. شرح محمد بن قوام بلخی از قدیمی‌ترین شروح خطی مخزن‌الاسرار است که به قرن هشتم بر‌می‌گردد و بر بسیاری از شروح بعد از خود تاثیرگذار بوده ‌است. شرح حسن وحید دستگردی از نخستین شروح چاپی معاصر است و در کنار شرح مخزن‌الاسرار بهروز ثروتیان و برات زنجانی بسیار توجه پژوهشگران این عرصه را به خود جلب کرده ‌است. پژوهش حاضر نشان می‌دهد تفاوت معنایی و تفسیری در این شروح به‌نسبت زیاد است و در جاهایی با یکدیگر اختلاف‌‌ نظر دارند. همچنین برخی از این معانی و توضیحات، درنهایت راهگشا نمی‌شود و ابهام بیت هم‌چنان باقی می‌ماند؛ بنابراین، ضرورت دارد برای دریافت معنای دقیق‌تر ابیات، ضمن مراجعه به بافت متنی ابیات و بهره‌گیری از شواهد شعری منظومه‌های دیگر نظامی، دوباره به شرح و تفسیر مخزن‌الاسرار توجه شود. روش کار شارحان متفاوت است و بیشتر بر معنای واژگان و ابیات متمرکز شده‌اند و ساختارهای بلاغی، دستوری و ترکیب‌سازی‌های زبانی، کمتر واکاوی شده ‌است.

examining the differences of opinion among the commentators of makhzan al-asrar in recording and analyzing the poems

by referring to an old description and many contemporary descriptions of makhzan al-asrar and comparing the commentators’ opinions in the analysis of the verses in this work, the differences and ambiguities of the description of the verses are discussed. the selected verses are controversial, by focusing on the opinion of each commentator and comparing them with one another, the importance and stance of each work, ambiguities, and possibly the semantic inadequacies of each verse become obvious. mohammad qavam balkhi’s commentary 8th century (h) is one of the oldest manuscripts of makhzan al-asrar, which has influenced many commentaries. hassan vahid dastgerdi’s commentary is the first on makhzan al-asrar, followed by behrouz servatiyan and barat zanjani. the results here reveal that the difference in meaning and interpretation in these explanations is relatively high. moreover, some of the meanings do not solve the problem, and the ambiguity of the verse remains intact. it is necessary to understand the more precise meaning of the verses while referring to their textual context, and taking advantage of the poetic evidence of nizami’s other poems, descriptions, and interpretations through more scientific discussion on makhzan al-asrar. introductionmakhzan al-asrar is one of the prominent and influential works in the history of persian literature. this text, like other poetic texts of nizami, is considered a trend-setting text because, after nizami, much attention was paid to makhzan-al-asrar and many poets sought to imitate it. this work has influenced both nizami imitators and commentators. the existence of difficulties and strangeness in this book has affected many commentators. “this strangeness is apparent even in his interpretations. in many cases, his interpretation of expressing a normal meaning is odd. he presents metaphorical images with elegance in proper interpretation” (zarrinkoob, 2010, p. 213). this complexity is ultimately understood by considering the context of the words and the scope of the verses: “sometimes codes hidden in nizami poems can be understood with a little reflection before and after the words and with familiarity with the artistic language of the poet” (servatiyan mirza ebrahimov, 1991, p. 15). some of nizami’s words seem to be addressed and understood only by him. according to (zarinkoob, 2010, p. 219) “some of his words are still involved in a maze of strange themes, indicating that the poet has no audience but himself”. nizami’s special and unique style has made his language outstanding vs. other poets’ language. researcher (ehteshami honegani, 1993, p. 122) deduced that “orientalists believe that the poetry of the caucasus and azerbaijan, with its special way of expression, vocabulary, and grammar, contains features that cannot be found in other poets of eastern iran”. the ambiguity and complexity are due to the influence of the sciences and knowledge caused by some distinctions and difficulties created then. considering the focus of this article on makhzan al-asrar, it is revealed that the language of this text is more distinct than other works of nizami because “the language of the first nizami poem is very complicated. it is possible, that he wanted to expose his mastery of the complex poetic technique in it” (bertels, 1940, p. 71). his complicated language, imagination, and creation of new words with their meanings introduced a new style in literature that was not repeated after him. method and materialthe method adopted in this study is descriptive, through comparative and analytical approaches based on library sources. after studying the four descriptions of makhzan al-asrar, the interpretations and explanations of the commentators are compared. an attempt is made to analyze them to some extent by considering the context, the textual verses, and their meanings. in the review and comparison of these interpretations, the differences in the recording of the verses are of concern as well, though the complicated and ambiguous are the focus here. to exert a more correct meaning the focus must be on the textual context of the verses. muhammad bin qavam a contemporary commentator was the first to describe these verses followed by the works of dastgerdi, servatiyan, zanjani, and pournamdariyan which have attracted many researchers and readers. findingsthe approaches of these commentators are different: some with more focus on the meaning of words and verses, and the rhetorical, and grammatical structures, while language combinations are of less concern. because of the problems and difficulties in understanding some of the makhzan al-asrar verses and their descriptions, and interpretations are expressed in this work, beginning from the 8th century ah, especially the description of mohammad qavam balkhi.we come across other interpretations of makhzan al-asrar, including the description of mohammad bin lad dehlavi in the 10th century ah; the description of abdul aziz bin fakhruddin sohravardi jonpuri, and the description of qazi ibrahim tatavi in the 11th century ah. in the contemporary period, we come across commentaries like hassan vahid dastgerdi, behrouz servatiyan, barat zanjani, mehdi mahouzi, taghi pournamdariyan, naser nikubakht, and alireza nabilou. in this article, the author will rely on the description of muhammad bin qavam balkhi, dastgerdi, servatiyan, zanjani, and pournamdariyan who have corrected, explained, and analyzed makhzan al-asrar. the author here thinks that there is a need for a more complete work to explain the problems of makhzon al-asrar. it seems that a more comprehensive description can be found by comparing these explanations. in the analysis of this work, a distinction should be made between the superficial and deep meanings, while more attention should be directed toward the context and textual position of the verses if understanding the meanings more accurately is of concern. result, discussion, and conclusion the result indicates that the description of muhammad bin qavam balkhi, one of the oldest commentaries on makhzan al-asrar, is still one of the reliable sources for the interpretation of the verses of this text because the commentator’s attention to vocabulary, meanings, allusions, and rhetorical topics of the verses gives him and his work a high stance. other commentators have had the necessary freedom and initiative in their interpretation and analyses without being subject to muhammad bin qavam’s interpretation. descriptions and analyses have almost the required variety and distinction. in comparing the commentators of these verses, commentators purnamdariyan and mousavi (2022), outperform their counterparts in explaining the verses. servatiyan and dastgardi have explained some verses more than others verses. at the same time, there exist differences between these interpretations and their explanations, which may have adverse effects while promoting ambiguity. to fully understand the meanings of nizami verses, the readers should read all these explanations and not be satisfied with one explanation.