M6:2406 — پس بدو گفتند زین حکمت‌گری / قصد تو آن است تا تنها خوری

Translation: So they said to him, "From this act of cunning (ḥikmat-garī), your intent is that you eat alone." Meaning: This verse captures the accusation leveled by the two other travelers (the Jew and the Christian) against the Muslim, who, after secretly eating the halva at night, is charged with cunning and selfishness—that his true aim was to consume the sustenance all by himself.

This beyt, M6:2406, emerges from the celebrated tale of the three travelers—a Jew, a Christian, and a Muslim—who, having discovered a purse of gold, convert it into halva. They decide to defer eating it until the following morning, when they will share it according to whose dream proves most auspicious. The Muslim, however, being a fasting man (ṣā'im) and feeling "overpowered" (maghlūb) by hunger and the collective decision of his companions, secretly consumes the entire halva during the night. The following morning, when the other two recount their dreams of spiritual ascensions (one with Moses to Mount Sinai, the other with Jesus to the fourth heaven), the Muslim, with exquisite cunning, narrates a dream in which the Prophet Muhammad instructs him to eat the halva, since his companions have been blessed with heavenly journeys and no longer need earthly sustenance. This beyt, M6:2406, is the immediate accusation and question leveled by the Jew and the Christian: "So they said to him, 'From this act of cunning (ḥikmat-garī), your intent is that you eat alone.'"

The phrase ḥikmat-garī (cunning, craftiness) here is crucial. It does not signify the elevated wisdom spoken of in philosophy or mysticism, nor the 'art' or 'skill' that Mowlana refers to at the beginning of the story (M6:2395-2396: "Listen to a tale here, O son, / Lest you become afflicted in art/skill"). Rather, ḥikmat-garī in this context denotes worldly shrewdness and stratagem. It points to the negative aspect of intelligence, employed not in service of truth but for personal gain. Such 'wisdom' becomes a tool for deception and the advancement of mundane ends.

In this story, Mowlana, as in many others, blurs and sometimes transgresses the outward boundaries of sharīʿah (religious law) with the inward essence of ḥaqīqah (truth). On a superficial level, the Muslim traveler's act is a trick, an act of hypocrisy, even theft. Yet, from Mowlana's perspective, he is seen as "overpowered" (maghlūb) by the others and by hunger (M6:2398: "The Muslim was fasting, fasting, and remained hungry because he was overpowered"). By choosing this word, Mowlana places the Muslim in a position of weakness and necessity, implying that divine destiny has ordained a form of compensation for him. Extreme hunger has placed him in a situation where the body's natural imperative has overcome his duty. Here, right and wrong, justice and injustice, are veiled by the ḥāl (spiritual state). Can this act be considered merely a trick, or should it be viewed from a deeper perspective? On one hand, this cunning is ethically reprehensible; on the other, it speaks to the supremacy of necessity over duty, and perhaps, ironically, suggests that God accomplishes His purposes through strange means, even through human cleverness. This ḥikmat-garī in the story thus takes on a dual function: it is both a tool for self-interest and, within Mowlana's narrative, a means of divine decree to provide sustenance to the hungry.

Another point of distinction is Mowlana's approach compared to Shams Tabrizi's version of the same story. Shams recounts the narrative with brevity and without moral judgment, focusing more on the humorous and cunning aspects of the Muslim. Mowlana, however, by adding the epithet "overpowered" to the Muslim and extensively elaborating on the dreams of the Jew and the Christian, imbues the story with new depth and dimensions. The detailed dreams of the two, which Mowlana depicts with inspiration from his own mystical experiences and descriptions akin to divine epiphanies on Mount Sinai, not only justify the Muslim's action but also, in a way, appear sanctioned by the Prophet. Mowlana's method of expanding and altering earlier narratives demonstrates his "close capture" (ṣayd-i nazdīk)—he finds in existing stories a pretext to articulate his profoundest experiences and thoughts. In this instance, the Muslim's cunning becomes a vehicle for highlighting the concepts of "need," "spiritual state," and "divine wisdom," which at times emerge from an outwardly unconventional or even illicit form.

Key takeaways

• Here, ḥikmat-garī refers to worldly cunning and self-serving cleverness, not divine wisdom.
• Mowlana uses the term maghlūb ('overpowered') to contextualize the Muslim's action from the perspective of ḥāl (spiritual state) and necessity, rather than strict legalism.
• The story illustrates Mowlana's method of employing popular narratives to convey profound mystical ideas about divine decree and human circumstance.
• Comparing Mowlana's version with Shams Tabrizi's reveals his purposeful deepening and alteration of stories for spiritual ends.