Passion Before Me, My Fate Behind: Ibn al-Farid and the Poetry of Recollection

Conclusion: The Poetry of Recollection

Conclusion The Poetry of Recollection I But not “Me” Within the commentary tradition on Ibn al-Fāriḍ’s poetry, al-Farghānī, al-Tilimsānī (690/1291), al-Nābulusī (1143/1731), and others declare the poet’s verse to be the product of divine inspiration. Many commentators cite the account by ˜Alī, Ibn al-Fāriḍ’s grandson, on how his grandfather would fall into a trance for days, then come to and recite verses for his Poem of the Sufi Way. In light of this story, al-Nābulusī, wrote: As for the poems of the gnostics of God, they are, in appearance, poetry in the manner of the words of poets, but at the same time they are a divine inspiration (ilhām rabbānī), a merciful utterance, a spiritual opening (fatḥ rūḥānī), and an emanation of grace!1 Furthermore, most commentators have ascribed Ibn al-Fāriḍ’s accounts of union in the Poem of the Sufi Way and other verse to the poet’s manic, mystical states, which led him to speak “with the tongue of union” (bi-lisāni-l-jam˜) or “with the tongue of the unique reality” (bi-lisāni-l-ḥaqīqati-l-aḥadīyah).2 For them, these passages confirmed Ibn al-Fāriḍ’s high spiritual status and the truth of his message. Following in this tradition, Giuseppe Scattolin has read the al-Tā’īyah al-Kubrā as a spiritual autobiography, as Ibn al-Fāriḍ passed through the three stages of “division (al-farq),” “absolute unity or self-identity (al-ittiḥād),” and “universal union (al-jam˜).” Scattolin states: The three stages follow each other and are interwoven in each other throughout the poem in ten great units. These units are the basic structure of the poem, and they progress in a dynamic movement that represents the journey of the poet in the discovery of the dimensions and true identity of his own self (anā).3 243 244 PASSION BEFORE ME, MY FATE BEHIND As we have seen, the protagonist of the al-Tā’īyah al-Kubrā certainly undergoes a process of spiritual transformation from a selfcentered youth to a penitent lover, to a mystic guide, and, ultimately, to the Light of Muhammad. However, Scattolin’s assertion that this metamorphosis accurately reflects Ibn al-Fāriḍ’s own personal mystical experience is an unwarranted assumption. Moreover, to commentators such as al-Tilimsānī and al-Nābulusī, who were also poets, terms like bi-lisāni-l-jam˜ or bi-l-lisāni-l-Muḥammadī might mean something other than that the poet was in the throes of union or possessed by Muhammad’s spirit. For these phrases also can mean “in the language of union,” and “in the voice of Muhammad,” as his commentators were well aware.4 Indeed, such a poetic or lyrical persona is essential to all of Ibn al-Fāriḍ’s poems, whether they be ghazals, qaṣīdahs, or wine odes, as the poet assumes a number of guises to deliver his musings on love and life. To gloss over these multiple voices as speaking only about Ibn al-Fāriḍ’s personal spiritual life is to lose literary depth and subtle nuance within these poems.5 For instance, in several odes, Ibn al-Fāriḍ’s hero is a well-known character of Arab legend:6 a-wamīḍu barqin bi-l-Ubayriqi lāḥā am fī rubā Najdin arā miṣbāḥā am tilka Laylā-l-˜Āmarīyatu asfarat laylan fa-ṣayyarati-l-masā’a ṣabāḥā Did lightning flash at dear Abraq, or do I see a lantern in the hills of Najd? Or did Laylā al-˜Āmirīyah unveil her face that night and so turn evening to dawn? Here Ibn al-Fāriḍ explicitly names the beloved Laylā al-˜Āmirīyah, the obsession of Majnūn who was driven to insanity and eventually death by the anguish of his love for her. Ostensibly, then, Majnūn, is the persona of this poem, implying that the lover is on the brink of madness and scorned by society, as Ibn al-Fāriḍ’s audience might well have appreciated.7 But this Udhrī lover is only one of Ibn al-Fāriḍ’s personas, which also include the novice in love, the blamer, the longing pilgrim, the intoxicated lover, the enlightened guide, the Light of Muhammad, and, on several occasions, the beloved herself, and Ibn al-F...