# Persian: دستش به داغ عشق، همان دور از آتش است



## HZKhan

Salam friends!
I am having difficulty interpreting the following couplet of Hazīn Lāhījī. Please help me comprehend it.

دستش به داغ عشق، همان دور از آتش است
پروانه‌ای که خویش نزد بر چراغ ما

I interpreted it as saying: Her hands on love's burn are still far away from the fire (of love). It is as if a moth didn't fly itself into our lamp.

Or could it mean: The moth which didn't fly itself into our lamp has its hands on the love's burn, but they are still far away from the fire itself?


----------



## colognial

HZKhan, hi. I think the second interpretation is closer to the meaning of the line. 

The moth is said to have avoided dashing its body against an actual lamp or to have not flown headlong into some real flame; the poet then reaches the conclusion that this particular moth is in the habit of keeping its hand well away from the heat given off by the fire of love. The idea is, I suppose, that in love all sacrifice is not only fair but a requirement. 

"To keep your hand sufficiently away from the fire" is an expression, by the way, implying that, despite appearances, the person the expression is used about has in fact no first-hand knowledge of the gravity or intensity of a certain situation.


----------



## HZKhan

Kheili Motashakkeram, Aghaye Colognial!
How would you translate 'dastash be dagh e eshgh'?


----------



## molana

*دستی از دور بر آتش داشتن*: از حقیقت امری بی خبر بودن، قضاوتی سطحی از چیزی داشتن



HZKhan said:


> How would you translate 'dastash be dagh e eshgh'


 Dealings with fire of love​​


----------



## colognial

دست اش به داغ عشق همان دور از آتش است literally means 'its hand, to the hot[ness] of love, is truly far from fire'. The poet alludes to the expression دستی از دور بر آتش داشتن, which changes the literal meaning to 'in the matter of the intensity of love, the moth is certainly clueless, since it keeps a safe distance away from the fire'.


----------



## PersoLatin

HZKhan said:


> دستش به داغ عشق، همان دور از آتش است
> پروانه‌ای که خویش نزد بر چراغ ما


The poet is saying that, this particular person's love, is not true love, and compares it, to the lack of true love a moth shows, when it doesn't get close enough to a fire, to burn, which is the usual instinctive behaviour of a moth.


----------



## fdb

Note that داغ means “branding iron”.

A more-or-less literal translation might be:

“His hand is upon love’s branding iron, though it is far from the fire.
(He is like) a moth which does not (dare to) cast itself upon our lantern.”

“Our” refers (I assume) to God.


----------



## colognial

fdb said:


> Note that داغ means “branding iron”.
> 
> A more-or-less literal translation might be:
> 
> “His hand is upon love’s branding iron, though it is far from the fire.
> (He is like) a moth which does not (dare to) cast itself upon our lantern.”
> 
> “Our” refers (I assume) to God.



Good point, fdb! In Persian poetry the داغ traditionally stands for everlasting sorrow, for a loss that is not recoverable. Tulips, for instance, are said to have 'it'. There are also the 'stigma of love', داغ عشق, and داغ ننگ, 'bad reputation'. Of course the moth in the line of verse under discussion seems not to have been 'branded'; it's not ready to make that sacrifice.


----------



## HZKhan

Thank you, everyone!


----------



## Stranger_

Please what does "همان" mean in this verse? how would you translate it to English or even Persian?


----------



## molana

*همان:* (قید مرکب ) حتماً. بی شک . همانا
In English, we can say truly, as colognial has already said it, or doubtlessly.

دل زن *همان *دیو را هست جای"
"ز گفتار باشند جوینده رای
_فردوسی_

پست بنشین که تو را روزی از این قافله گاه"
"گرچه دیر است *همان *آخر باید برخاست
_ناصرخسرو_​


----------



## PersoLatin

Stranger_ said:


> Please what does "همان" mean in this verse? how would you translate it to English or even Persian?


It means مانند or 'like', as the poet compares 'his' action to the moth's.

Rephrased with mânand:
دستش به داغ عشق، همان دور از آتش است
*مانند* پروانه‌ای که خویش نزد بر چراغ ما


----------



## colognial

PersoLatin, your interpretation turns the metaphor on its head somewhat! Also, it leaves us with the question, whose hand is " its hand"? ("Dastash" is necessarily a "dast" belonging to someone.) There may be an answer in the lines preceding the _beit_ quoted. So we may be inadequately equipped here. But what I understand by looking at the words we have been given tells me that our moth rather dallies with the source of light. It feels no heat, or as fdb puts it, has not been branded; it is a moth that knows how to enjoy the light from the candle or the lamp without getting its fingers burnt! The type that this moth represents is simply not in a mind to die for a bit of enjoyment, sorry!


----------



## colognial

molana said:


> *همان:* (قید مرکب ) حتماً. بی شک . همانا
> In English, we can say truly, as colognial has already said it, or doubtlessly.
> 
> دل زن *همان *دیو را هست جای"
> "ز گفتار باشند جوینده رای
> _فردوسی_
> 
> پست بنشین که تو را روزی از این قافله گاه"
> "گرچه دیر است *همان *آخر باید برخاست
> _ناصرخسرو_​



molana, would you say همان was a combination of هم and آن? (As an aside, did Ferdossi _Jan_ really say this spiteful thing about women?? You sure it was him who said it?! And, by the way, I suspect the word is probably not 'goftaar' but 'kaftaar', hyenas!)


----------



## PersoLatin

colognial said:


> PersoLatin, your interpretation turns the metaphor on its head somewhat!


To me the poet is complaining about lack of devotion/commitment, or half heartedness, to love, for God or someone, and parallels this to an attempt to heat a branding iron, or to the flutterings of a moth, both too far away from fire, to be effective. So the action of the person who's holding the داغ/iron, is the same as مانند/همان the moth's.


----------



## molana

colognial said:


> molana, would you say همان was a combination of هم and آن?


The definition I brought above was from the dictionary of Dehkhoda, and the poems are the examples mentioned for this entry.
I have no idea about the etymology of the word [همان], but I am sure that the word [همان] is here the abbreviated form of the term [همانا].



colognial said:


> (As an aside, did Ferdossi _Jan_ really say this spiteful thing about women?? You sure it was him who said it?! And, by the way, I suspect the word is probably not 'goftaar' but 'kaftaar', hyenas!)


چه نیکو سخن گفت آن رای زن/ ز مردان مکن یاد در پیش زن»
دل زن را همان دیو هست جای/ ز گفتار باشند جوینده رای»
This poem is about Rudabeh [رودابه]. She was the wife of Zaal[زال] and the mother of Rostam[رستم].

As far as I know, Ferdossi is famous for being misogynist. But personally, I think that Ferdossi only mirrored in _Shahnameh _the beliefs which were current in the patriarchal society of Iran at that time.


----------



## colognial

PersoLatin said:


> To me the poet is complaining about lack of devotion/commitment, or half heartedness, to love, for God or someone, and parallels this to an attempt to heat a branding iron, or to the flutterings of a moth, both too far away from fire, to be effective. So the action of *the person who's holding the داغ/iron*, is the same as مانند/همان the moth's.



Is there a person holding the branding device? Just going by the _beit_ under scrutiny here, the دستش به داغ bit does of course contain the palest reference to a branding iron, but, I feel, to no apparent poetic purpose. It may, of course, refer to something that was said by the poet in the earlier lines, otherwise the phrase is just there, I suspect, as a filler, to make up the beat and to allude in general to familiar classic terminology. I feel the idea is that rather than allowing love to put the sign or stigma of sacrifice on its body, or without concern for or knowledge of what light can or should do to one, the moth is circling around the source of light/love/adoration at a safe distance, i.e. without getting close enough to be scorched. In which case, دستش به داغ only serves as an introductory phrase here, something along the lines of "insofar as being affected by the heat or being branded with love goes". Moreover, I happen to think that (1) the owner of the hand, (2) the subject of the first _mesra,_ and (3) the subject of the second _mesra_, are most likely all one and the same, the moth. I quite like the little insect by now; it's got us all wondering about its mindset, isn't it!


----------



## colognial

Thanks very much, molana. This is what I found (معنی همان | لغت نامه دهخدا):
*لغت نامه دهخدا *همان . [ هََ ] (ضمیر مرکب ، ص مرکب ) اشارت است به چیزی که در خاطر ملحوظ است . (آنندراج ). مرکب است از هم + آن . در جمله بدین معنی است : این آن چیزی است که بوده است و متکلم و مخاطب میدانند


----------



## HZKhan

طبق 'فرھنگ بزرگ سخن' واژهٔ 'همان' معنای 'همچنان' را هم دارد، و برای اثبات این معنی بیت زیر از ناصر خسرو را درج کرده‌اند:
چونان که به غار شد پیمبر
من نیز همان کنون به غارم


----------



## colognial

HZKhan said:


> طبق 'فرھنگ بزرگ سخن' واژهٔ 'همان' معنای 'همچنان' را هم دارد، و برای اثبات این معنی بیت زیر از ناصر خسرو را درج کرده‌اند:
> چونان که به غار شد پیمبر
> من نیز همان کنون به غارم



The word همچنان can also function as an adverb to denote continuation of an action, e.g.,

من همچنان به آینده ی این طرح امیدوار هستم (I'm still hopeful about the future of this scheme).
قصه همچنان باقیست (The state of things remains as before).
او همچنان به راه خود ادامه داد (He continued on his way).
پرنده را از فقس آزاد کرده ام، اما او همچنان لب از آوازخواندن فرو بسته است (I've let the bird out of the cage, and still it won't sing).

Also, I am not sure how the quoted verse is a suitable example, since the sentence will make little sense if one  substitutes همچنان for همان in it.

من نیز همچنان کنون به غارم sounds wrong, because the two adverbs, همچنان and کنون, do not go together; one means 'still', while the other refers to the time of action, which is 'now'.

Perhaps همچنان and همان come to have more or less the same meaning only where they are used to make a direct comparison, e.g.,

حرف تو همان حرف من است، هرچند نتیجه گیری هامان با هم فرق دارند
(Your argument is the same as mine, although the conclusions we arrive at are different.)
حرف تو همچنان حرفی است که من می زنم، و تفاوت تنها در نتیجه ای است که هرکدام می گیریم
(Your argument is similar to mine, with the difference lying only in the conclusion each of us arrives at.)


----------

