خویش is definitely self here.خویش means both "self" and "relative" as in family relative.
Here's my two cents' worth,Hey guys, I came across this stanza in bustaan of saadi. I'm having some difficulty making sense out of it.
اگر مرد عشقی کم خویش گیر
و گر نه ره عافیت پیش گیر
Does anyone have a clue what the first line is trying to say?
I have searched through a number of prints of "Bostan-i-Sa'di", both from the Subcontinent and elsewhere. Majority of them have the word "کم" but in two the word printed is "گُم". One of these books is by Platts printed in 1891 and in his notes he explains "گُمِ خویش" as "گُم گشتۂ خویش" meaning "his own lost one" that being God. This to my mind makes more sense.Hi guys,
I think I found a reasonable interpretation. The line I presented had كم, but another version I read in an Urdu book had گم.....
Surely the explanation must be that the meaning of y and z (as you have it) must be the opposite of one another, otherwise why would anyone use if and else/otherwise?I have no explanation apart from agar = if and va gar nah = Otherwise. If x is true, do y. Otherwise do z.
I think I found a reasonable interpretation. The line I presented had كم, but another version I read in an urdu book had گم.
I realized that both کام and گام share some meanings.
They both can come to mean "mouth" or دهان
However, گام also means the reign of an animal. By way of extension, کام can metaphorically also mean the same thing. Hence, the meaning of the verse would then be
"If you are a man of love, the reign of thyself hold. If not, then the path of safety choose."
Holding one's reign is alluding towards the idea that the path is extremely bumpy and requires a grip on the beast being ridden upon.
This interpretation fits nicely because it explains why the next line has ره in it.
What do you guys think?
kam: few; deficient, scarce, less; abandonment, destitution;….Or read it as: agar marde eŝqi kame xiŝ gir
where of course kam/کم stands for کام so کام خویش گیر / satisfy your own desires.
If you are a man of love [then] satisfy your own desires.
kam: few; deficient, scarce, less; abandonment, destitution;….
kam giriftan (guftan), To abandon, give up, consider as lost;-
If you are a man of love, then consider your self as lost.
And if you are not, then take the path of comfort.
Since joining this forum I have often thought, also mentioned in some posts, that there are two quite different Persians on the forum and I only understand one of them.If you read it as : agar marde eŝqi kam xiŝ gir
where kam here means kamtar and with خویش گیری meaning to be withdrawn/unsociable
If you are a man of love, [then] be less withdrawn.
My version was following yours and is precisely:I also looked at kam as few/less but kam has to be kame to make the meter right but even then it doesn't make sense, nor does your version, I am afraid to me at least.
I'm not pretending any expertise in Persian so I normally enjoy the threads at the receiving end۔Since joining this forum I have often thought, also mentioned in some posts, that there are two quite different Persians on the forum and I only understand one of them.
We can approach the couplet from two perspective in order to answer the question that whether the izaafah is necessary or not. If you analyze the couplet in terms of meaning, I agree with you on that. It makes more sense to me to ignore izaafah when I want to interpret or translate it. But when it comes to meter, I prefer to read it with izaafah. I think meter is a horse of different color. I personally have come across a lot of instances in which I had to read the verse in a way that meter allowed me to do so, even if that particular way of reading would have changed the meaning of the verse. And here I think the word "کم" should be accompanied with izaafah, as several of our friends mentioned before me.I would like to know whether there is an izaafah after کم or not? I believe there is n't.
Thank you marrish SaaHib. I think with this evidence we can safely assume that this "kam" is not the shortened form of "kaam"......I didn't copy the whole text of the relevant entry because I thought only the meaning, not the syntax was a stumbling block, but just look here:
و رجوع به کم ِ چیزی گرفتن ذیل ترکیبهای کم شود. ... va roju3 be kam-e-čizē gereftan zail-e-tarkibhây-e-"kam" šavad.
- (کم گرفتن کسی را: ترک کردن. واگذاشتن. نادیده انگاشتن:- کم او گیر (به اضافه ). (فرهنگ فارسی معین
kam gereftan kasi râ: tark kardan, vâgożâštan, nâdidé angâštan – kam-e-u gir (be ezâfé) (farhang-e-farsi Moin).....
kam gereftan-e xēš -> imp. kam-e xēš gīr....
Thank you @ Mnemon. Much appreciated for this explanation.Hello @Qureshpor ,
We can approach the couplet from two perspective in order to answer the question that whether the izaafah is necessary or not. If you analyze the couplet in terms of meaning, I agree with you on that. It makes more sense to me to ignore izaafah when I want to interpret or translate it. But when it comes to meter, I prefer to read it with izaafah. I think meter is a horse of different color. I personally have come across a lot of instances in which I had to read the verse in a way that meter allowed me to do so, even if that particular way of reading would have changed the meaning of the verse. And here I think the word "کم" should be accompanied with izaafah, as several of our friends mentioned before me.Hope it helps!
اگر عاشق پیشہ ای
پس خویشتن داری و دعوی را بگذار (کہ راہِ عشق سراپا جور و ملامت کشیدن است)۔۔
Could you validate these points?اگر از اہل دانش ای راہِ عافیت کہ طریقِ عقل است اختیار کن۔
Some points:agar mard-e 3eŝqī kam-e-xēŝ gir
vagar nah rah-e-3aafiyat pēš gir
Thank you for correcting me on this, for it seems I made an unfortunate choice of the English translation "consider as lost" from here:2 - kam-e-xēŝ gir - I can not see how this could possibly mean: consider your self as lost. kam-e can only mean 'less of', it just makes no sense. خود/کسی را کم گرفتن means 'To underestimate/undersell yourself/someone' so where does 'lost' come from?
I don't know, perhaps he mixed up his definitions with کم زدن? kam zadan, To show weakness, to be wanting in self-respect, not to assert oneself; to slight, to consider of no account, to revile.1) کم (p. 1046) کم kam, Few, little; deficient, defective, mutilated, wanting, diminished, scarce, less (hence frequently imparting a negative sense); worse; poor, wretched; base; abandonment; deficiency, destitution; excellent, precious, glorious, honoured; the waist, side; [kam āmadan (būdan, shudan), To fail, become deficient, be lessened, to run short (m.c.);--kam zadan, To show weakness, to be wanting in self-respect, not to assert oneself; to slight, to consider of no account, to revile; to speak evil; to desert;--kam kardan, To diminish; to withhold, defraud;--kam giriftan (guftan), To abandon, give up, consider as lost;--kam mānda ast, Little is wanting; almost (m.c.);--kam u besh (ziyād),More or less; all, everything;--kam u kāst, Loss, deficiency; defect and diminution;--zaḥmati āqā-rā kam kunīm, Let us not trouble his honour any more (m.c.);]
I'm trying my best to analyse the language and not to interpret the poetry. I already said there is Dehkhoda who attests and explains that ezâfé forms part of the idiom kam-e-chizē gereftan.You also need to question the ezâfé on کم (kam-e), what it is doing there, in your interpretation?
So then, Dehkhoda quotes our agar mard-e-3eshqii... as an example of kam-e (!) and provides two other couplets from the pen of Sa'adi with kam-e-xud and kam-e-xēš, so the syntax, semantics and meaning + context from the same poet allow a translation?I am not by any means saying 'it's my way or the highway' but other interpretations have to make sense semantically and need to consider the whole poetry and not just these verses and in Persian.
To consider something less [than its real worth]But wait... could you please translate the following in English?
- کم گرفتن چیزی ; او را نبوده شمردن . او را کالعدم فرض کردن . (یادداشت به خط مرحوم دهخدا) :۔
I understand kame xod gerftan to mean 'to see/identify one's own shortcomings' and I can see that fitting in the two examples above but I still can't see how that can fit in our verse, despite Dehkhoda's assertion.So then, Dehkhoda quotes our agar mard-e-3eshqii... as an example of kam-e (!) and provides two other couplets from the pen of Sa'adi with kam-e-xud and kam-e-xēš, so the syntax, semantics and meaning + context from the same poet allow a translation?
سعدیا گر نتوانی که کم خودگیری
سر خود گیر که صاحب نظری کار تو نیست .
گله از فراق یاران و جفای روزگاران
نه طریق تست سعدی کم خویش گیر رستی .
But he also mentions this possible meaning in the associated verb عافى:عَافِيَةٌ a subst. from عَافَاهُ اللّٰهُ, q. v., (S, Msb,) and from الإِِعْفَآءُ [inf. n. of 4, q. v.], (TA,) signifying Health, or soundness, and safety, or security: (TK: ) [or, as it may be best rendered, health and safety, considered as proceeding from God; i. e.] God's defence of a man (S, K) from diseases and from trial: (K: ) or freedom from evil. (KL.) See also 1, former half. -A2- [Also fem. of عَافٍ (q. v.), and used as a pl.]
So could ره عافیت پیش گیر mean to live a life of pardoning others and not being strict and exacting upon them?and some say that it signifies one's forgiving, or pardoning, men, and their forgiving, or pardoning, him.
I see what you mean. And I now see why the interpretation of عافيت is so crucial. So in an about-face I'll try changing the translationPlease read the whole thing here I have included two more couplets, to me is it obvious Saɛdi is not condemning the pursuit of Opt1 he is promoting it, he then gives reasons why one should pursue that rather than the easy option (Opt2).
اگر مرد عشقی کم خویش گیر ----- و گر نه ره عافیت پیش گیر
مترس از محبت که خاکت کند ----- که باقی شوی گر هلاکت کند
نروید نبات از حبوب درست ----- مگر حال بر وی بگردد نخست
(Yusofi, Bustān, Tehran: Anjoman-e ostādān-e zabān va adabiyāt-e fārsi, 1359 AH. Page 337).Gholam-Hosayn Yusofi said:کمِ خویش گرفتن: کمِ خویش گرفتن یعنی خود را نادیده انگاشتن و به چیزی نشمردن.
عافیت: سلامت، تندرستی.
You are mistaken. It has nothing to do with blessing or righteousness, not in Sa'di's time, nor in today's Persian, nor in Arabic. In addition to Yusofi above you can refer to Hayyim, Steingass, Dehkhoda, etc.، and for Arabic the Arabic Lexicon; none mention anything about blessing or righteousness.1 - I am sure 3aafiyat at Sa'di's time meant blessing/righteous as it does in modern Persian and Arabic then & now, and this matters.
I lost my way when it comes to the primary meaning of عافیت, I give you that.It has nothing to do with blessing or righteousness, not in Sa'di's time, nor in today's Persian, nor in Arabic
I honestly can’t work out what the two esteemed members’ translations were, so I offer my own translation again which may not be easy to see, and with no embellishments:The translations/explanations offered by Mnemon and Qureshpor upthread (#13, 14, 15) are totally correct
عافیت does not mean righteousness. Refer to the numerous dictionary citations I provided in my previous post.Otherwise take the path of righteousness
I recommend that you read Sa'di's Bustan (which is the source of these lines) and his Golestan. If you familiarize yourself with the moral philosophy and code of conduct (adab) Sa'di advocates in his works, you'll be able to understand the line.خود/خویش کم گرفتن is a commonly used term is Persian & its meaning is almost universally understood, at least in Iran, and I can not see how it ever fits in the verse above.
Experts can absolutely be proven wrong, but you haven't proven anything, you've just made some baseless assertions. Fdb is also mistaken in his reading of this line.Experts are right, right up to the time they are proved wrong. Please also look at fdb’s translation in post #4.
I don't know what you're trying to say here. kam-e X gereftan is idiomatic, as indicated by citations from several dictionaries earlier in this thread. It is your interpretation that Sa'di meant kaam but changed it to kam to fit the meter; I don't share that interpretation, nor do any of the published commentaries on this work.Also to assume Sa’di meant kam/little but had to use kam-e to keep the meter right, underestimate him despite the fact I personally don’t revere poets.
In this thread you can see other people's own interpretation of many of the words and some are quite flowery, ok عافیت means 'health' but in the context I 'interpret' it as righteousness but heath will also work.عافیت does not mean righteousness. Refer to the numerous dictionary citations I provided in my previous post.
This is the most important aspect to get right as the rest is straight forward and if you don't get that right the whole piece becomes incomprehensible and nonsensical.It is your interpretation that Sa'di meant kaam but changed it to kam to fit the meter; I don't share that interpretation, nor do any of the published commentaries on this work.
اگر مرد عشقی زبان را در کام فرو مبر! خامش ننشین!سخن ناگفته مگذاراگر مرد عشقی کم خویش گیر
I can see و گر نه i.e. the alternative/otherwise is correctly interpreted but how exactly does کم خویش گیر translate to or can be interpreted as:اگر مرد عشقی زبان را در کام فرو مبر! خامش ننشین!سخن ناگفته مگذار
جلو بیا و حرفت را بگو!
I think this phrasal verb is Saadi made combination. may be today we normally use خودبازداشتن.how exactly does کم خویش گیر