M6:2460 — گرچه پیران را درین دور لئام / در دو موضع پیش می‌دارند عام

Translation: Though in this base age, common folk Place elders first in two situations: Either with food that is hot, Or on a bridge that is ruined by defect. Meaning: Rumi observes, with a tone of lament, that in his time, ordinary people do not genuinely respect elders, only prioritizing them in specific circumstances where it serves their own interest or averts potential harm.

This couplet expresses a profound lament from Rumi, a complaint about the social distortions and inverted values of his own era. Here, contrary to what we might typically expect of him, he speaks of an external flaw in society, rather than the inner pain of separation. The narrative context is a debate among a ram, an ox, and a camel over a bundle of grass. The ram suggests that the grass should go to the oldest, upholding the Prophetic tradition of prioritizing elders. However, Rumi immediately follows this with a plaintive “though” (گرچه), unveiling the actual treatment of elders in the “base age” (dowr-e la'ām) of his time.

I draw particular attention to dowr-e la'ām (base age) and ʿām (common folk). Here, ʿām refers to the ordinary populace, the “ignoble ones,” who fail to recognize the true worth and dignity of elders and spiritual wayfarers. These people place elders first, but not out of genuine reverence or adherence to the “Prophetic traditions,” but rather due to a “corrupt motive” (qarīneh-ye fāsed). My point is that their intentions are impure, and even their apparent beneficence is tainted by ill will.

The two situations Rumi alludes to are both symbolic and highly illustrative: One is “food that is hot” (loṭī ke ān sūzān būd); loṭ here means food. These ignoble individuals offer hot food first to the elder. Why? Either so they don't burn themselves and the elder can taste it and warn them to wait, or simply to give the hottest and least desirable portion to the elder while they consume the best themselves. This is the epitome of disrespect and exploitation.

The second is “on a bridge that is ruined by defect” (pul-ī kaz khalal vīrān būd). This is another example of the same approach; a situation where there is mortal danger. They say: “O Sheikh, you go first.” Why? So that if the bridge collapses, he falls, and the others survive and can change their path. This “putting first” is not an act of honor, but of sacrifice. I myself, during a trip to the former Soviet Union, observed how police cleared the way for guests, but in reality by pushing and even assaulting ordinary people. This expression of “get away and be blind” (دور شو و کور شو) is abundant in history, and Rumi complains about it here.

This contradictory and self-serving behavior indicates that the ʿām populace, even if they outwardly offer service to a “sheikh,” their service is never “without a corrupt motive.” That is, there is always an ulterior motive and impure intention at play. This stands in complete contrast to the sincerity and purity of the mystical path. Rumi here engages in a social pathology, demonstrating that even in outward displays of respect, hidden intentions rooted in human “cunning” (makr) and “trickery” (ḥīleh) are involved. This cunning is precisely what distinguishes humans from animals, because animals lack “culture, deceit, and cunning” (farhang o kayd o makr), which is why Rumi says: “It is better for a wolf to find the saint / For the evil human soul will find him” (gorg daryābad valī rā beh būd / zān ke daryābad valī rā nafs-e bad). To be found by a wolf, which is merely predatory, is better than being found by an evil human soul that practices cunning. This is a deeply philosophical point, fitting into the discussion of first-order and second-order actions (e.g., Gilbert Ryle); actions like oppression, injustice, and cunning are second-order actions that superimpose upon natural actions and are exclusive to humans. An animal does not oppress; it merely follows its nature.

Key takeaways

• Instead of the usual theme of separation from God, Rumi here critiques the inversion of social ethics, lamenting the “base age” (dowr-e la'ām) of his time.
• The “common folk” (ʿām) prioritize elders not out of genuine respect, but for self-interest (to avert danger or test difficulties).
• Offering the “hot food” or sending them over a “ruined bridge” symbolizes hidden exploitation and disrespect.
• Unlike animals, who are merely predatory and lack cunning, humans can inflict deeper, more deliberate harm through their “cunning” (makr).
• This “prioritizing” by the common folk indicates a “corrupt motive” (qarīneh-ye fāsed) and impure intention behind ostensibly good deeds.
• The verse serves as Rumi’s critique of moral and social decline, highlighting the lack of sincerity in human interactions.