M6:2059 — لاف‌کیشی کاسه‌لیسی طبل‌خوار / بانگ طبلش رفته اطراف دیار

Translation: A boastful claimant, a bowl-licking drum-eater; the drum's bang has reached the surrounding regions. Meaning: This verse describes a hypocritical spiritual guide whose widespread fame is built upon empty boasts, sycophancy, and superficial showmanship rather than genuine insight.

In this verse, Mowlana levels a sharp critique against false claimants of the spiritual path; those who wear the mantle of a sheikh but are devoid of true spiritual insight. Though these words are uttered by the butcher-sheikh's wife, seemingly in derogation of her husband, Sheikh Abu al-Hasan al-Kharaqani, they undoubtedly echo Mowlana's own outcry against the corruption prevalent in the khanqahs of his era.

Lāf-kīšī (boastful claiming) refers to their tendency for empty boasts and false assertions, claiming spiritual knowledge they have never attained. Kāse-līsī (bowl-licking) paints a picture of servility and parasitic dependence; these are individuals who rely on the handouts of others, subsisting on fabricated miracles or superficial displays of piety. They possess no profession or craft, merely sitting idle, awaiting 'futūḥāt' (donations) from the public. Tabl-khār (drum-eater) is a harsh and startling idiom; it refers to someone whose livelihood and fame derive from the loud but empty drum of their reputation. This 'sound of the drum' that has 'reached the surrounding regions' signifies the widespread but hollow fame of such charlatans.

Mowlana, throughout the Masnavi, explicitly denounces this hypocrisy. He states, "He has cast the boast of sheikhdom into the world / And made himself out to be a Bayazid." Such individuals falsely present themselves as the Bayazids of their time. Those who judge them partially are justified, for "Among a thousand, only one is a true Sufi / The rest subsist on his good fortune." Out of a thousand Sufis, only one is genuine; the others live under his name and prestige, with no truth in their deeds. Mowlana goes even further, exposing the moral corruption within khanqahs: "Sufism among these base ones / Has become sewing and sodomy, and that's it." These frank statements reveal a dark picture of the state of some male khanqahs during that period.

These claimants were often jīfat al-layl wa baṭṭāl al-nahār (corpse by night and idle by day); by night, they lay like dead bodies, engaging in no worship or spiritual practice, and by day, they passed their time in idleness and unemployment. This conduct stood in stark contrast to the methods of figures like Ala'ud-Dawla Semnani, who compelled his Sufis to work, cultivate the land, and exert themselves physically. Furthermore, Mowlana alludes to their 'ujb-i khāneqāhī (khanqah-based arrogance); a pride born from sitting in seclusion and claiming superiority over others. They considered studying forbidden, to the extent that a pen falling from one's pocket was deemed an 'ʿawra' (shameful thing) that needed to be concealed.

In my view, Mowlana's critique of the Sufism of his time is sometimes even more biting than that of Hafez, though Hafez does not 'wash all the sheikhs and scrub them clean at once.' Hafez laments 'khanqah-based arrogance,' and Mowlana, through this verse and similar ones, exposes these spiritual and social maladies. With these expressions, he clarifies the boundary between truth and pretense, and the essence of spiritual journey versus hypocritical appearance.

Key takeaways

• This verse serves as a blunt critique of hypocritical spiritual pretenders who gain fame through outward show and empty boasts.
• Mowlana uses the term 'drum-eater' to describe those whose renown is built upon superficiality and nothingness.
• This criticism reflects Mowlana's concern about the corruption and deviation within some khanqahs and Sufi circles of his time, including moral and intellectual decay.
• The verse highlights the financial dependency and 'bowl-licking' sycophancy of these claimants, who shun work and rely on public donations.
• Through such vivid imagery, Mowlana clarifies the distinction between a true mystic and a false claimant for his audience.