# Persian: زین



## Jamshed Aslam

سخن هر چه زین گوهران بگذرد

نیابد بدو راه جان و خرد

خرد گر سخن برگزیند همی

همان را گزیند که بیند همی

Could somebody tell me what zayn-e gawharaan means? "The beauty of the gems"?


----------



## colognial

Hello, Jamshed Aslam. It's not 'zayn', but 'zin'. the word is a contraction of 'az' + 'in' (= from this, than this).


----------



## colognial

One more thing: I doubt that in this context the meaning of گوهران is 'gems'. I have a hunch that we may think of گوهر as meaning 'concept'. The poet is asserting in these lines that any human language, working as it does within the bounds of concepts, is unable to come up with the concept that will measure up to what the Creator is.


----------



## Jamshed Aslam

So the first two lines mean "Whenever speech passes by these gems, the soul and wisdom do not find a way to Him (God)"?


----------



## colognial

This is how I understand the first two lines: However much words may transcend the concepts available to the human mind, the soul and the wisdom of mankind will still fall short of attaining the meaning that is God. the pronoun 'و'  in 'بدو', I expect, is a reference to 'Him'.


----------



## soheil1

Jamshed Aslam said:


> So the first two lines mean "Whenever speech passes by these gems, the soul and wisdom do not find a way to Him (God)"?


Yes, the unseen, which broadly means god


----------



## Jamshed Aslam

colognial said:


> This is how I understand the first two lines: However much words may transcend the concepts available to the human mind, the soul and the wisdom of mankind will still fall short of attaining the meaning that is God. the pronoun 'و'  in 'بدو', I expect, is a reference to 'Him'.



Concepts available to the human mind? Doesn't گوھران mean "gems"?


----------



## soheil1

Yes


----------



## Jamshed Aslam

Then shouldn't

سخن هر چه زین گوهران بگذرد
نیابد بدو راه جان و خرد

be translated as "However much speech passes by these gems, the soul and wisdom do not find a way to Him (God)"?


----------



## PersoLatin

Jamshed Aslam said:


> be translated as "However much speech passes by these gems, the soul and wisdom do not find a way to Him (God)"?


No, *بدو *refers to *گوهران*, we wouldn't have had the benefit of the rest of this epic, had Ferdôsi said that 

"However much speech passes by these gems, the soul and wisdom do not find a way to them(gems)", maybe a sarcastic reference to people with no inner substance and incorrigible.

Although I would have expected به ‏او/بدو  to be in plural به ‏ان ها/بدانها but that wouldn't fit the meter, I'm sure someone will correct me.


----------



## Jamshed Aslam

Yeah, one would have expected بہ آنھا or بہ ایشان, since آنھا and ایشان would have referred to جان and خرد.


----------



## soheil1

Jamshed Aslam said:


> Yeah, one would have expected بہ آنھا or بہ ایشان, since آنھا and ایشان would have referred to جان and خرد.


بدو (pronounced  bedoo) means به او and او sometimes refer to god, in Persian literature.
However, you may wonder why Singular pronounce are used to refer to جان و خرد. I mean نیا*بَد.*
The reason is این گوهران are inanimate


----------



## colognial

PersoLatin said:


> No, *بدو *refers to *گوهران*, we wouldn't have had the benefit of the rest of this epic, had Ferdôsi said that
> 
> "However much speech passes by these gems, the soul and wisdom do not find a way to them(gems)", maybe a sarcastic reference to people with no inner substance and incorrigible.
> 
> Although I would have expected به ‏او/بدو to be in plural به ‏ان ها/بدانها but that wouldn't fit the meter, I'm sure someone will correct me.



Hi, PersoLatin. I am sorry, but I just don't understand your post. The question, for me anyhow, is 'which gems'? You seem to be taking it for granted that the poet refers to certain gems we are all familiar with. But is it in fact so? Also, where in the lines under discussion do you detect 'a sarcastic reference to people with no inner substance'? Finally, who or what does the pronoun او (in بدو) refer to, and why would you have expected a plural pronoun where there is actually a singular one?

Thank you in advance for answering. I hope I've not asked too many questions all at once!


----------



## PersoLatin

Hi colognial, I can attempt to answer your questions but I feel I will be incriminating myself further  and because I have not fully grasped the poet's intended message, the breakdown of my interpretation won't help.

Of course once I know the correct interpretation, if it is still worthwhile, I will answer the questions.


----------



## colognial

PersoLatin said:


> Hi colognial, I can attempt to answer your questions but I feel I will be incriminating myself further  and because I have not fully grasped the poet's intended message, the breakdown of my interpretation won't help.
> 
> Of course once I know the correct interpretation, if it is still worthwhile, I will answer the questions.


منت خواهید نهاد


----------



## PersoLatin

PersoLatin said:


> Of course once I know the correct interpretation, if it is still worthwhile, I will answer the questions.


Hi colognial,
I should have added, that I now rely on others to provide 'the correct interpretation' , I'm sure Jamshed Aslam must also be waiting for it, unless of course it has already been provided in this thread.


----------



## Stranger_

I know this is not related to the topic you are discussing but just for your information, the word "زین zin" on itself means "saddle", and since you are a fan of Ferdosi then let me write a famous line from his Shahnama which contains the word "زین zin", in the sense of saddle of course.

گهی پشت به زین و گهی زین به پشت
or
گهی پشتِ زین و گهی زین به پشت

I will let you figure out the meaning yourself.


----------



## colognial

I should like to add just this: in my personal interpretation of the line containing the word 'zin', the reference to gems could be understood as a brief touch upon the 'essences'. I believe the poet, having initially referred, in lines preceding the line with 'zin' in it, to Name and Place, moves on to say that anything past these two essences cannot be comprehended through either the soul (i.e. intuitively) or the wisdom of mankind. To me, Name is an allusion to concepts, essences that are used in language to refer to attributes, while Place is the objective material world, the world of existence as it is, the (im)measurable 'space' that is filled up with matter here and there. I may as well say that I am not sure Ferdossi did think the way I am suggesting here about the world, or if the terms he uses mean what I'm saying they mean. Mine is just an interpretation, one that, in my mind, binds the lines together and makes sense of them as a whole.


----------



## Ali Smith

colognial said:


> Hello, Jamshed Aslam. It's not 'zayn', but 'zin'. the word is a contraction of 'az' + 'in' (= from this, than this).


When زين is a contraction of از _az_ and اين _in_, is it pronounced _zin_ or _ze'in_? I know that از _az_ is often changed to ز _ze_.


----------



## mannoushka

Ali Smith said:


> When زين is a contraction of از _az_ and اين _in_, is it pronounced _zin_ or _ze'in_? I know that از _az_ is often changed to ز _ze_.



ZIN. ZE plus IN would be acceptable only if the two were actually two separate words.


----------

