كليدواژه :
اﺛﯿﺮاﻟـﺪﯾﻦ اﺧﺴـﯿﮑﺘﯽ , ﺗﺼﺤﯿﺢ ﻣﺘﻮن , ﺗﺼـﺤﯿﺢ ﻫﺎي دﯾـﻮان اﺛﯿﺮاﻟ ّﺪﯾﻦ , ﺧـﻮاﻧﺶ ﯾـﮏ ﻗﺼـﯿﺪه , ﻧﺴﺨﻪ ﻫﺎي ﺧﻄﯽ , زبان و ادبيّات فارسي
چكيده فارسي :
اﺛﯿﺮاﻟ ّﺪﯾﻦ اﺧﺴﯿﮑﺘﯽ را از ﺑﺮﺟﺴﺘﻪ ﺗﺮﯾﻦ ﺷﺎﻋﺮان ﻗﺼﯿﺪه ﺳﺮاي ﻗﺮن ﺷﺸﻢ ﻣﯽ داﻧﻨﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﻬﺮه ﮔﯿـﺮي ﮔﺴـﺘﺮده از ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻣـﺎت ﺧﻮﯾﺶ در ﺷﻌﺮ و اﺻﺮار ﺑﺮ دﺷﻮارﮔﻮﯾﯽ، دﯾﺮﯾﺎﺑﯽ و اﺑﻬﺎم، ﻣﻌﻨﺎي اﺑﯿﺎت را ﺑﻪ اوج رﺳﺎﻧﯿﺪ؛ ﺗـﺎ ﺟـﺎﯾﯽ ﮐـﻪ در ﺗـﺬﮐﺮه ﻫﺎي ﺷﻌﺮي، ﺑﺮﺧﯽ از اﺑﯿﺎت ﻗﺼﺎﯾﺪ او ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺎﯾﯽ از ﺷﻌﺮ دﺷﻮار ﻣﻌ ّﺮ ﻓﯽ ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟّ ﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﯾﮕﺎه اﯾﻦ ﺷﺎﻋﺮ در ﻋﺮﺻﮥ ادب ﻓﺎرﺳﯽ، ﭘﮋوﻫﺸﮕﺮان ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﺤﯿﺢ دﯾﻮان وي اﻫﺘﻤﺎم وﯾﮋه اي داﺷﺘﻪ اﻧﺪ؛ از ﻫﻤﯿﻦ رو، دﯾـﻮان اﺷـﻌﺎرش ﺳﻪ ﺑﺎر در ﺳﺪۀ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺗﺼﺤﯿﺢ ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. ﺗﺼﺤﯿﺢ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ را رﮐﻦ اﻟ ّﺪﯾﻦ ﻫﻤـﺎﯾﻮن ﻓ ّﺮ خ در ﺳـﺎل ﻫﺎي 1337 ـ 1336 و در ﻗﺎﻟﺐ 6537 ﺑﯿﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﮥ ادﺑﯽ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﮐﺮد؛ ﺗﺼﺤﯿﺢ دوم را ﻣﺤﻤـﻮد ﺑﺮاﺗـﯽ ﺧﻮاﻧﺴـﺎري در 1398 در دوازده ﻫـﺰار ﺑﯿﺖ اﻧﺠﺎم داد؛ و ﺗﺼﺤﯿﺢ ﺳﻮم، رﺳﺎﻟﮥ دﮐﺘﺮي ﻋﺒّﺎس ﻣﺎﻫﯿﺎر ﺑﻮد ﮐﻪ در 1399 و ﭼﻨـﺪ ﺳـﺎل ﭘـﺲ از درﮔﺬﺷـﺖ اﯾﺸـﺎن ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮ ﺷﺪ. ﺑﺮرﺳﯽ ﻣﺘﻦ ﻫﺎي ﻣﺼﺤﱠ ﺢ و ﻧﺴﺨﻪ ﻫﺎي ﺧ ّﻄﯽ دﯾﻮان اﯾﻦ ﺷﺎﻋﺮ ﻧﺸـﺎن ﻣﯽ دﻫـﺪ ﮐـﻪ ﮐﺎﺳـﺘﯽ ﻫﺎﯾﯽ در ﮐﺘﺎﺑـﺖ ﻧﺴﺨﻪ ﻫﺎ و ﮔﺰارش ﺗﺼﺤﯿﺢ ﻫﺎ راه ﯾﺎﻓﺘﻪ اﺳﺖ؛ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ اي ﮐﻪ ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮان ادّ ﻋﺎ ﮐﺮد ﺗﺎ رﺳﯿﺪن ﺑﻪ ﻣﺘﻨﯽ ﻣﻨّﻘﺢ از دﯾﻮان، ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ اي ﺑﺎﻗﯽ اﺳﺖ. ﺑﺮاي اﺛﺒﺎت اﯾﻦ ادّ ﻋﺎ، در اﯾﻦ ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ﺑﺎ روش ﺗﻮﺻﯿﻔﯽ- ﺗﺤﻠﯿﻠﯽ، ﺑﯿﺖ ﻫﺎي دﺷـﻮار ﻗﺼـﯿﺪه اي از اﺛﯿﺮاﻟـ ّﺪﯾﻦ ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﮔﺰارش ﻣﺘﻦ ﻫﺎي ﻣﺼﺤﱠ ﺢ، ﺑﺮرﺳﯽ، ﺑﺎ ﮐﺘﺎﺑﺖ ﻧﺴﺨﻪ ﻫﺎي دﯾﺮﯾﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﯾﺴﻪ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ. ﺑﺴﯿﺎري از ﻧﺴﺨﻪ ﻫﺎﯾﯽ ﮐـﻪ در اﯾﻦ ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ﺑﺪان ﻫﺎ اﺳﺘﻨﺎد ﺷﺪه، ﻫﻤﺎن ﻫﺎﯾﯽ اﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ در اﺧﺘﯿﺎر ﻣﺼﺤﱢ ﺤﺎن ﻫﻢ ﺑﻮده اﺳﺖ؛ اﻣّ ﺎ آن ﻫﺎ در ﺑﻪ ﮔﺰﯾﻨﯽ ﯾـﺎ ﺧﻮاﻧﺶ واژﮔﺎن، ﺗﺮﮐﯿﺒﺎت و ﺗﻌﺒﯿﺮات، دﻗّﺖ ﻻزم را ﺑﻪ ﮐﺎر ﻧﺒﺴﺘﻪ اﻧﺪ. ﯾﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻫﺎي ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ﻧﺸـﺎن ﻣﯽ دﻫـﺪ ﮐـﻪ از ﻣﯿـﺎن ﺳـﻪ ﺗﺼﺤﯿﺢ اﻧﺠﺎم ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ، ﺗﺼﺤﯿﺢ ﻣﺎﻫﯿﺎر ﺑﻬﺘﺮ از دو ﺗﺼﺤﯿﺢ دﯾﮕﺮ اﺳﺖ؛ ﭼﺮاﮐﻪ اﯾﺸﺎن ﺷﯿﻮۀ ﺗﺼﺤﯿﺢ ﺧﻮد را اﻟﺘﻘﺎﻃﯽ ﻗﺮار داده اﺳﺖ و دو ﻣﺼﺤﱢ ﺢ دﯾﮕﺮ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﻨﺎي ﻧﺴﺨﮥ اﺳﺎس ﮐﺎر ﮐﺮده اﻧﺪ. ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟّ ﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺴﺨﻪ ﻫﺎي ﻣﻮﺟﻮد از دﯾﻮان اﺛﯿﺮاﻟـ ّﺪﯾﻦ، ﺑـﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﯽ رﺳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﮐﺎر ﺑﺴﺘﻦِ ﺷﯿﻮۀ ﻧﺴﺨﮥ اﺳﺎس در ﺗﺼﺤﯿﺢِ آن ﻧﻤﯽ ﺗﻮاﻧﺪ ﮐﺎراﯾﯽ ﻻزم داﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﺑﺮاي ﺗﺼﺤﯿﺢ دﯾﻮان اﯾﻦ ﺷﺎﻋﺮ، ﺿﻤﻦ اﻧﺲ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﺑﺎ ذﻫﻦ، زﺑﺎن و داﯾﺮۀ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻣﺎت او، ﺑﺎﯾﺪ از ﺳﺎﯾﺮ داﻧﺶ ﻫﺎي ﺣـﻮزۀ ادﺑـﯽ ﻣﺎﻧﻨـﺪ ﻟﻐﺖ ﺷﻨﺎﺳـﯽ، ﺳﺒﮏ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﯽ و ﻧﻘﺪ ﻣﺘﻮن ﺑﻬﺮه ﮔﺮﻓﺖ.
چكيده لاتين :
Writing according to his extensive knowledge in poetry and insisting on the difficulty, complexity, and ambiguity, Athir al-Din culminated the meaning of verses. Athir al-Din, whose qaṣīdah (ode) verses have been introduced in some poetic memoirs as an instance of difficult verses of poetry, is considered one of the most prominent qaṣīdah (ode) poets of the sixth century. Owing to this poet’s position in the canon of Persian literature, contemporary scholars have paid special attention to textual criticism of his diwan; therefore, his poetry collection has textually been criticized triple in the present century. The first correction was made by Rokn al-Din Homayoun Farrokh between 1957 and 1958 in the form of 6537 verses; The second correction was made by Mahmoud Barati Khansari in 2019 in 12,000 verses. The third correction was the Ph.D. dissertation of Professor Abbas Mahyar, published in 2020 and a few years after his demise. Examination of the corrected texts and manuscripts of this poet's diwan shows that there are shortcomings in the writing of the manuscripts and the account of the criticisms so that it can be claimed there is a long way to go before reaching a revised text from the diwan. To prove this claim, in this research, by descriptive-analytical method, difficult verses of a poem by Athir al-Din will be examined based on the account of corrected texts, and their comparison with the writing of ancient manuscripts. Many of the versions cited in this study are the same as those that were available to the textual critics, but they did not use the necessary care in selecting or reading words, combinations, and interpretations. The research findings display that among the three corrections made, the correction of the late Mahyar is better than the other two since he has chosen an eclectic method of correction and the other two correctors have worked according to the base version. From a textual criticism perspective, according to the existing versions of Athir al-Din's Diwan, it seems that using the "base version" method in criticizing cannot have the necessary efficiency. Further, to criticize this poet's diwan textually, while grasping his mentality, language, and scope of knowledge, one should use other knowledge in the field of literature such as lexicography, stylistics, and criticism.
