M6:1434 — از جز تو گر بدی این بچه‌ام / این فشار آن زن بگفتی نیز هم

Translation: Were this child from another than you, That woman too would utter such idle talk (fišār).

Meaning: This verse signifies that raw, unguided affections are characteristic of the ego (nafs) when unmoored from intellect (ʿaql), not specific to any one individual; a father, relying on his reason, understands that any mother unguided by intellect would act in a similarly emotional and imprudent manner.

This verse appears within a story where Mawlana recounts an ostensibly compassionate mother. This ignorant mother vehemently protests to the father about sending their child to school, claiming it has made the child frail and sickly. In the throes of her ignorant affection, she harshly tells the father: ‘Were he born of another woman, you would inflict less injustice and cruelty upon him.’ That is, if this child were from another wife, you wouldn't be so cruel as to send him to school.

The father's response to this ill-considered remark is this beyt: ‘Were this child from another than you, / That woman too would utter such idle talk (fišār).’ The key to understanding this verse lies in the meaning of the word fišār. Here, it does not denote physical pressure. Rather, as Mawlana also uses it in the story of Moses and the Shepherd (‘What idle talk and blasphemy is this, what fišār! / Stuff cotton in your mouth!’), it means 'idle talk,' 'nonsensical words,' or 'groundless fabrications.' The father is asserting that this type of talk, stemming from ignorant affection, is not unique to this particular mother. Even if the child were from another wife, she too would utter such nonsense, mistakenly believing she was acting in the child's best interest.

Mawlana then connects this story to a deeper allegory: ‘The mother is the nafs, and the father is the noble ʿaql; / At first constriction, but in the end a hundredfold expansion.’ In his view, the nafs (ego/soul) symbolizes the mother, as the psychology of his era often depicted women as immersed in emotions and less subject to the dominion of reason, although this belief is debatable today. Conversely, ʿaql (intellect/reason) symbolizes the father, as men were seen as dominated by intellect and capable of controlling their emotions. Thus, this verse expresses that unconditional affection, unchecked by rational guidance, is like the mother's tempting sweets that ultimately harm the child. In contrast, the rational hardships imposed by a father, like an awakening slap, are for the child's benefit. The old proverb ‘The father's slap is better than her sweets’ conveys this very truth.

I firmly believe that this verse illuminates a fundamental point in Mawlana's worldview: how the nafs, under the guise of love and compassion, can divert one from the path of truth and wisdom. This is not a complaint against a specific individual, but a diagnosis of a general characteristic of human nature—a nature that, if not guided by intellect and wisdom, will cause its affections to bring harm rather than benefit.

Key takeaways

• Unconditional affection, devoid of intellect, can ultimately be detrimental to an individual.
• The 'nafs' (ego/self) here symbolizes the ignorant mother, while 'ʿaql' (intellect) represents the wise and discerning father.
• The word 'fišār' in this verse means 'idle talk' or 'nonsense,' not physical pressure.
• Decisions and compassionate acts based purely on emotion, without rational guidance, often lead to undesirable consequences.
• Intellectual discipline and guidance, though perhaps initially difficult, ultimately serve an individual's well-being and benefit.