Mohammad Abul Mufazzal
Abstract:
The Islamic civilization of the Indian subcontinent, distinguished by its multifaceted cultural and intellectual heritage, is profoundly encapsulated within a corpus of material vestiges disseminated across the region. Among these, epigraphical records constitute an unparalleled repository of historical, geographical, societal, economic, and administrative data, serving as pivotal touchstones for scholarly inquiry. As a preeminent expression of Islamic intellectual achievement, the Perso-Arabic epigraphic tradition integrates aesthetic innovation with textual utility, offering a dual lens through which to interrogate the sociocultural dynamics of the period.
This study seeks to address key questions concerning the interplay between form, function, and cultural significance in Islamic epigraphy: What are the linguistic and literary mechanisms underpinning the textual composition of epigraphs? How do these inscriptions articulate the historical and cultural ethos of their time? What insights can their materiality and spatial contexts provide about the socio-administrative structures they represent?
Through a meticulous deconstruction of its metrical and prosodic configurations, this investigation seeks to illuminate the aesthetic and rhetorical strategies employed within the text, situating them within the broader tradition of Arabic poetics. Concurrently, the study interrogates the archaeological and material dimensions of the inscription to contextualize its spatial and functional relevance.
By integrating textual, literary, and archaeological methodologies, the study transcends conventional paradigms of epigraphic analysis to explore the formative sociocultural and historical contexts in which the inscription was produced and displayed. This interdisciplinary approach enables a novel interpretation of the epigraph, yielding insights of exceptional historical and cultural import.
Keywords; Perso-Arabic epigraphy, Islamic archaeology, Material vestiges, Textual conveyances
Introduction
This study examines a significant epigraph prominently displayed in the Archaeological Museum of the Red Fort, transcribed and analyzed by Y.K. Bukhari, whose findings were subsequently published in the Epigraphia Indica Arabic and Persian Supplement (EIAPS-1959-60) under the auspices of the Archaeological Survey of India. An earlier transcription and reading of this epigraph by Maulvi Bashiruddin Ahmed were incorporated into his compendium, Waqiat-e-Darul-Hukumat Delhi, Volume 2. This research undertakes a methodologically rigorous comparative analysis of these two readings, aiming to identify textual variations, reconcile interpretative discrepancies, and offer a comprehensive explication of the epigraph’s historical and literary significance.
The importance of this epigraph is underscored by several unique characteristics. First, it deviates from established conventions in Islamic epigraphy on the Indian subcontinent. While most inscriptions of the period are bilingual, employing Arabic and Persian, this text is rendered exclusively in classical Arabic, marking a significant divergence from prevailing norms. Second, its composition in poetic form introduces a literary dimension that demands an in-depth examination of its aesthetic and rhetorical qualities. Third, the epigraph provides firsthand historical data, a rarity in the predominantly derivative corpus of historical texts from the era. Lastly, it diverges from the predominant religious focus of Perso-Arabic inscriptions, which are typically found on mosques, tombs, and other religious edifices. Instead, this epigraph commemorates a secular architectural project—a public reservoir constructed for communal welfare—thereby reflecting the civic ethos of its creators.
The present study employs a multi-pronged methodological approach to analyze the epigraph in its historical, linguistic, and cultural contexts:
- Comparative Textual Analysis: A systematic comparison of the readings by Y.K. Bukhari and Maulvi Bashiruddin Ahmed is undertaken to identify linguistic variations, interpretive divergences, and transcriptional inconsistencies. This approach facilitates the construction of a definitive reading of the text.
- Paleographic Examination: The study includes a detailed analysis of the epigraph’s script, focusing on stylistic features such as calligraphic techniques, orthographic peculiarities, and typological markers. These findings enable the precise dating of the inscription and its classification within the broader corpus of Islamic epigraphy.
- Linguistic and Literary Analysis: The epigraph’s poetic form is subjected to close reading to unpack its structural, metrical, and rhetorical elements. This analysis contextualizes the inscription within the broader tradition of Arabic poetics, while also highlighting its unique features.
- Historical Contextualization: The study situates the epigraph within the socio-political and cultural milieu of its time, exploring its implications for our understanding of urban planning, civic architecture, and the secular undertakings of the ruling elite.
- Epigraphic Comparisons: A broader comparative framework is employed to juxtapose this inscription with contemporaneous Perso-Arabic inscriptions, highlighting thematic, stylistic, and functional contrasts.
This interdisciplinary methodology is designed to achieve a nuanced understanding of the epigraph’s multifaceted significance. By integrating textual, literary, and historical approaches, this study aims to illuminate the inscription’s unique contribution to the cultural and intellectual landscape of the Indian subcontinent during the Islamic period. The findings presented herein not only enhance our understanding of this particular artifact but also contribute to the broader discourse on the evolution of Islamic epigraphy, particularly in the context of secular architectural projects.
Figure; Copy of the epigraph, (source; Epigraphia Indica Arabic and Persian Supplement (EIAPS-1959-60), The Director General, Archaeological Survey of India, Jan path, New Delhi, 1987, pp. 4-7)
Primary Details;
Original Site; Khanqah (convent) of “Sayyidul- Hujjab” near Mehrauli, SouthDelhi
Current Location; Archaeological Museum Red Fort Delhi, Exhibit No.40/1005
Date; Epigraph bears no specific date
Reign; Firoz Shah Tughlaq
Language; Arabic
Material; Grey Stone
Size; 2.11 in Length and 1.8 in Breadth
Writing Style; it was carved in “Naskh” form of writing
Number of Lines; 13 poetic couplets in 7 lines
Type; Foundation stone
Subject Matter; praying and invoking divine help on the occasion of the construction of a water tank
Publication; Epigraphia Indica Arabic and Persian Supplement (EIAPS-1959-60), The Director General, Archaeological Survey of India, Jan path, New Delhi, 1987, pp. 4-7, Maulvi Bashiruddin Ahmad (1919),Waqiat-e-Darul-Hukumat dehli, (ed.1, Volume 2), Shamsi Machine Press, Agra, p. 373-374
The epigraph in question, bereft of temporal markers, fails to provide substantive elucidations pertinent to its historical provenance, barring the singular attribution of the name “Maruf,” which serves as a potential nexus for discerning the inscription’s origin, chronological placement, and overarching raison d’être. Its textual composition assumes the guise of a supplicatory entreaty, invoking divine intercession while concurrently expounding upon the logistical intricacies underlying the construction of an aquiferous reservoir.
According to the testimonial rendered by Zafar Hasan, Maruf emerges as a preeminent luminary within the courtly echelons of Firoz Shah, adorning the exalted mantle of Malik Sayyidul Hujjab, emblematic of paramountcy within the chamberlaincy hierarchy. Both he and his paternal antecedent, Khuaja Wahid Quraishi, are delineated as devotees of Shaikh Nizamuddin, with Maruf himself distinguished for his piety and philanthropic proclivities. Firoz Shah’s conspicuous benevolence towards Maruf, coupled with an unequivocal deference towards the latter’s discernment; bespeak the pivotal role Maruf assumed in advising and administrating matters germane to the realm.”[i]
Additional substantiation of this assertion may be garnered through the firsthand narrative delineated by Ziauddin Barani[ii] within his Persian opus, Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi, a literary chronicle of considerable historical import. [iii]
مدام و علی الدوام درک چون عقلا می کشود – در دریای فضل و کفایت فهم و عقل بکمال داشت , همیشه در درگاه سلاطین چون عقلای باریک بین می آراست – در عهد سلطان محمد تغلق پیشوای عماد الملک سریر بود – ودر عهد سلطان فیروز شاه ملک سید الحجاب خطاب شد – وبغایت معظم گشت – پیش حضرت سلطان فیروز ندیم بود – و سلطان فیروز شاه ما آن عقل کمال و آئین ملکی که اکمل الحال بود ما آن هم در کارهای ملکی با ملک سید الحجاب مشوره میکرد – اگر سلطان فیروز نه سببی از ملک مذکور هر دو وقت پیش در سلطان به ناغه حاضر شدی بمجرد آنگه دو سه روز ملک سید الحجاب پیش تخت نیامدی حضرت خسرو خوش خصال فی الحال یاد کردی – و درعین کلام این لفظ فرمودی – که کلام ما و شرح رموزات پیام ما بجز معروف غیری نداند – و فهم نه کند –
As per the records of M. Zafar Hasan, the original site of the inscription is the village of Sayyidul- Ajaib (Probably a corrupt form of Sayyidul- Hujjab) which is now, situated near Mehrauli[iv] area of South Delhi. The said epigraph was inscribed “on a grey stone slab originally fixed on the west wall of the western dalan”[v] of Khanqah (convent) of “Sayyidul- Hujjab” and probably after whom, the village was also known as “Sayyidul- Ajaib being a corrupt form of Sayyidul- Hujjab”. The convent was a domed structure, containing three compartments. The inscribed stone slab was fixed in the west wall of western Dalan which later “removed for the safe custody of Delhi museum of Archaeology.”[vi]
Given Maruf’s distinguished status as a luminary of erudition during his epoch, coupled with his prowess in both Arabic and Persian poetic idioms, as evidenced by the presence of a Persian poetic inscription within the sepulchral edifice of Shaikh Nizamuddin Auliya, it is thereby affirmed that his appellation “Maruf”[vii] was bestowed upon him by Shaikh Nizamuddin Auliya himself. Moreover, the stylistic congruence between the Persian inscription and its Arabic counterpart further substantiates this correlation. Consequently, one may posit that the temporal nexus of the Arabic inscription likely approximates or closely corresponds to the epoch circa A.H. 781, coinciding with the dating of the Persian inscription.
Engraved in the discernible ‘Naskh’ script, the Persian inscription[viii] reads as;
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
- بعھد دولت شاہ معظم – خجستہ خسر و اولاد آدم
- مدار دین احمد شاہ فیروز – شہ صا حبقران سلطان اعظم
- موفق کشت از حق بندہ معروف – اساس این عمارت کرد محکم
- جوار روضہ شیخ المشائخ – نظام الحق والدین قطب عالم
- وحید الدین قریشی والد من – کہ ما اھل ارادت بود ہمدم
- بحسن اعتقاد و صدق اخلاص – در اسرار ولی اللہ محرم
- مرا چوں برد پیش شیخ عالم – بدست خود گرفت و کرد نامم
- بلفظ خود مرا معروف خواندہ – دریں عالم چو شیخ عیسوی دم
- رجا دارم کز انفاس مبارک – دران عالم بود معروفیم ھم
- بخوان تاریخ اتمام عمارت – درین جا چو بیائی خیر مقدم
- زھجرت ھفتصد و ھشتان یک بود – مرتب شد بنا واللہ اعلم
Translation;
- In the reign of the great king, the fortunate monarch and the descendent of Adam
- The support of the religion of Ahmad (i.e. prophet). Firoz Shah who is a king. Lord of the happy constellation and the greatest sovereign.
- The slave ‘Maruf’ was assisted by God and he made firm the foundation of this building.
- In the neighbor of the tomb of Shaiku-al- Mashaikh Nizamu-al Haq Waddin,[ix] the polar star of the world.
- Wahiduddin Quraishi, my father, who was a companion of devotees ( of Shaikh Nizamuddin)
- And who was confident in the secrets of the friend of God, (Nizamuddin) with faith and sincerity.
- When he brought me (Maruf) before the Chief of the world (Nizamuddin), he (the latter) took me in his arms and named me.
- And the Shaikh with the breath of Jesus named me Maruf in his own utterance, in this world.
- I hope through that suspicious utterance to attain to fame in the next world also.
- Read the date of the completion of this building as welcome when you visit this place.
- It was seven hundred and eighty one from Hijrat, when this building was erected; God knows the best. [x]
Through the elucidation provided by the Persian inscription, “Maruf” (Sayyidul Hujjab) personally elucidates the genesis of his appellation, while concurrently furnishing supplementary particulars encompassing temporal delineations, regnal authority, the spiritual mentorship he received, as well as his assorted titles and esteemed standing.
In light of this foundational discourse, a cogent assignment of the aforementioned Arabic epigraph bearing the name “Maruf” to the era of Firoz Shah Tughlaq becomes readily apparent. It warrants mention that the prevalent medium for epigraphical communication within the Indian subcontinent predominantly comprised Arabic, at least until the twilight of the 13th century. Subsequently, the ascendancy of Persian as the lingua franca of governance precipitated its increasing prominence within epigraphic enunciations. However, it is salient to note that Persian remained largely alien to the cultural milieu of the southwestern coastal enclave, specifically the present-day Indian state of Kerala”. [xi]
The veneration accorded to the Arabic language owing to its religious connotations has propelled its status to one of paramount significance, rendering it the predominant conduit for scholarly pursuits and diverse literary endeavors, encompassing the documentation of epigraphic inscriptions. This linguistic hegemony has engendered a prodigious corpus of Arabic literature, spanning both prose and poetry, within the Indian Subcontinent. The metric Arabic epigraph under scrutiny exemplifies the meticulous adherence to prevailing Arabic epigraphic conventions of its epoch.
This particular epigraph has undergone two distinct readings by disparate scholars at disparate junctures. Ostensibly, both interpretations evince a profusion of inaccuracies. By undertaking a comparative analysis of these divergent readings, I endeavor to proffer a novel interpretation imbued with enhanced precision, supplemented by an explication of the literary and linguistic nuances inherent within the epigraphic corpus.
The initial interpretation was articulated and disseminated by the eminent historian, Maulvi Bashiruddin Ahmad, within his seminal work “Waqiat-e-Darul-Hukumat Dehli,”[xii] wherein it is presented as follows:
Text reading- 1;
| بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم- |
فإن لم يسئل الإنسان تغضب
ووعدك أن يجيب السائلينــا
دعوتك ربنا الحق المبينـــــــــاوأسأل حاجتي بك مستعيناعطاشا عارض…………بلا ماء فأرو العاطشينــــــاونهر السائلين كرهت ربي ونحن السائلون إليك جميعـــاوكأسي في يدي هذا القديرأريد الماء رب العالمينـــــــاإذا ما العاجز الظمآن يأتيويرجو الماء باب المحسنينافأنت أحق بالإحسان حقاعلينا يا ملاذ المنسكينـــايصير في إناه العذب لطيفاورفقا يا كريم العاجزينـــــــاالى المعروف عبدك يا كريميترحم أنت خير الراحمينـــافماء المزن أصيب في غديريمداما كان بالأيد القرينـــــافعال العبد عصيــــــــــان وجرمومنك كمال ستر المجرميناأنا العبد الفقيــــــــــر بباب ربيوأنت الله يغني العائلينـــــاويا رب أعف ما نجينـــــــاإلهي لا تواخذ إن نسينـــا
Subsequently, in 1987, Y. K. Bukhari proffered a secondary interpretation, which was subsequently published within the esteemed repository of Epigraphia Indica Arabic and Persian Supplement (EIAPS-1959-60).[xiii]This rendition reads as follows:
Text reading- 2;
| (1)بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم- |
دعوتك ربنا الحق المبينـــــــــا
وأسأل حاجتي بك مستعينا
(2) فإن لم يسئل الإنسان تغضبووعدك أن نجيب السائلينــا ونهر السائلين كرهت ربيونحن السائلون إليك جئنـــا(3) عطاشا عارضين إليك كأسا بلا ماء فأرو العاطشينــــــا وكأسي في يدي هذا الغديرأريد الماء رب العالمينـــــــا(4) إذا ما العاجز الظمآن يأتيويرجو الماء باب المحسنينا يصبوا في إناه العذب لطفاورفقا يا كريم العاجزينـــــــا(5) فأنت أحق بالإحسان حقاعلينا يا ملاذ الملاذكينـــا فماء المزن أصبب في غديريمداما كان بالأبد القرينـــــا(6) إلي المعروف عبدك يا كريميترحم أنت خير الراحمينـــا أنا العبد الفقيــــــــــر بباب ربيوأنت الله مغني العائلينـــــا(7) فعال العبد عصيـــــــان وجرمومنك كمال ستر المجرمينا ويا رب أعف عنا ما جنبنـــــــاإلهي لا تواخذ إن نسينـــا
Discussion;
The literary significance inherent in this epigraph is underscored by its adherence to the metrical framework synonymous with that employed by the pre-Islamic Arab poet, Amr ibn Kulthūm, in the composition of his celebrated qaṣīdah (ode). Notably, Amr ibn Kulthūm’s qaṣīdah stands as one of the esteemed septet of pre-Islamic Arabic odes, collectively known as Al-Muʿallaqāt [xiv] which, by virtue of their distinctive status, are regarded as seminal sources in the canon of early Arabic poetry.[xv]
In accordance with the principles of Arabic prosody, it is discernible that the qaṣīdah (ode) authored by Amr ibn Kulthūm adheres to the hexametrical mnemonic (tafāʿīla) structure known as Mufāʿalatun Mufāʿalatun Faʿūlun (مُفَاعَلَتُنْ مُفاعَلَتُنْ فَعولُنْ). Each constituent hemistich of his ode may be systematically dissected to verify its compliance with this mnemonic pattern, thus:
| أَلاَ هُبِّي / بِصَحْنِكِ فَاصْ/ بَحِينَـا |
مُفَاعَلَتُنْ/ مُفاعَلَتُنْ/ فَعولُنْ
وَلاَ تُبْقِي/ خُمُـوْرَ الأَنْ/دَرِيْنَـا
مُفَاعَلَتُنْ/ مُفاعَلَتُنْ/ فَعولُنْ
Translation;
Wake up, from your sleep, Wine Pourer
And serve me, this morning, in your wine goblet
The famous wine of the Andarines
And make it sure that you will leave no wine un-served!
This is the first couplet of his ode which he closes by his famous line;
إِذَا بَلَغَ الفِطَـامَ لَنَـا صَبِيٌّ
تَخِرُّ لَـهُ الجَبَابِرُ سَاجِدِينَـا
As soon as a boy of ours is weaned
The mighty and powerful
Bow down to him on hands and knees.
Similarly, the poetic inscription presently under examination is crafted in accordance with the aforementioned mnemonic framework, contrary to the assertion posited by the reader of this inscription, Y. K. Bukhari, who contends that its metrical structure adheres to the “Hazaj” pattern.[xvi]
The mnemonic pattern characteristic of the “Hazaj” meter diverges markedly from the metrical inscription at hand, offering no congruence with its structure. The “Hazaj” meter, denoted by its trilling cadence, unfolds as Mafāʿīlun Mafāʿīlun (مَفَاعِيلُنْ مَفَاعِيلُنْ), representing a distinct metrical paradigm incompatible with the composition in question.
In classical Arabic poetry, the utilization of the “Hazaj” meter typically manifests in a dimeterical configuration comprising four feet.[xvii] Conversely, the poetic inscription in question adopts a hexametric structure characterized by three feet per hemistich. Consequently, the precise metrical designation for the inscription aligns with “Wāfir Musaddas Maqtoof.” Additionally, owing to its catalectic nature, instances of the omission of the final syllable within certain hemistiches are discernible.[xviii]
Thus, the metrical composition of the inscription can be analyzed akin to the metric scheme delineated in Amr ibn Kulthūm’s ode:
دعوتك رب/بنا الحق ال/مبينـــــــــا
مُفَاعَلَتُنْ/ مُفاعَلَتُنْ/ فَعولُنْ
وأسأل حا/جتي بك مس/تعينا
مُفَاعَلَتُنْ/ مُفاعَلَتُنْ/ فَعولُنْ
The metric inscription under discussion comprises of seven lines with thirteen couplets, and each line contains four hemistiches except the first line, as the first distich of the first line is ‘Basmalah’. Regrettably, the inaugural hemistich of this “Basmalah” is marred by severe corruption, rendering it indecipherable.
Disregarding the corrupted hemistich preceding the “Basmalah,” both interpreters of this inscription have endeavored to unravel the entirety of the text. However, Y. K. Bukhari, in his critique of Maulvi Bashiruddin Ahmad’s reading, contends that the latter’s interpretation is flawed and incomplete.”[xix]
Employing a slight reordering of couplets and refraining from delving deeply into the intricacies of the inscription, Molvi Bashiruddin Ahmad provides a comprehensive recitation of the entire text, with the exception of two words that appear to have eluded his comprehension due to their illegibility.
Subsequently, we shall undertake a meticulous examination of each “Bayt” or distich through a comparative analysis of the readings proffered by the two interpreters of this epigraph. Additionally, we shall furnish a novel rendition accompanied by a corresponding translation upon conclusion of our analysis. The first couplet reads as:
‘Bayt’ or distich’ (1)
|
دعوتك ربنا الحق المبينـــــــــا |
وأسأل حاجتي بك مستعينا |
Both scholars have transcribed this “Bayt” or distich in a congruent manner, with the sole discrepancy being that Maulvi Bashiruddin Ahmed omitted the insertion of the definite article “alif and laam” before the word “Haq” (حق), despite its explicit presence in the epigraph. This omission is linguistically significant, as the absence of the “alif and laam” renders the syntax syntactically incorrect.[xx]
‘Bayt’ or distich’ (2)
|
فإن لم يسئل الإنسان تغضب |
ووعدك أن “يجيب/نجيب” السائلينا |
In this particular line, Maulvi Bashiruddin applies a grammatical inflection to the letter “ي” treating it as a third-person pronoun in order to form the imperfect verb “يجيب.” However, this grammatical interpretation appears contextually incongruous. Conversely, Y. K. Bukhari opts to inflect the letter “ن” as a first-person pronoun, resulting in the formation of the imperfect verb “نجيب.” This grammatical approach aligns more closely with the textual content of the epigraph and offers a syntactically apt construction within the given context.
‘Bayt’ or distich’ (3)
|
ونهر السائلين كرهت ربي |
ونحن السائلون إليك جئنـــا/ إليك جميعـــا |
In this particular distich, we encounter two distinct renditions of the second hemistich. Maulvi Bashiruddin offers the second variation, employing the phrase “إليك جميعـــا,” a departure from the visible content of the epigraphic text and a discordant fit within its metrical framework. Conversely, Y. K. Bukhari presents the first variation, utilizing the phrase “إليك جئنـــا,” which appears to harmonize more aptly with the textual content of the epigraph and aligns more seamlessly with its metrical structure.
‘Bayt’ or distich’ (4)
|
عطاشا عارض)ين إليك كأسا( |
بلا ماء فأرو العاطشينــــــا |
The initial interpreter of this epigraph managed to decipher the first hemistich of this ‘Bayt’ up to the word “عارض,” opting to leave the remaining space vacant, indicated by three ellipses. Conversely, Mr. Bukhari, the second interpreter, succeeded in completing the hemistich by incorporating the words provided within the parentheses. Interestingly, no disparity between the two interpretations is discernible in the second hemistich.
‘Bayt’ or distich’ (5)
|
وكأسي في يدي هذا القدير/الغدير |
أريد الماء رب العالمينـــــــا |
The two scholars exhibit a consensus in their interpretation of this distich, save for a solitary variance discernible in the concluding word of the first hemistich. Maulvi Bashiruddin deciphers it as “القدير” (signifying ‘mighty’ or ‘capable’), a choice that, although consistent with the metric pattern of the line, is not contextually well-suited. Conversely, the second scholar renders it as “الغدير” (indicating ‘pond’), a term that aligns more aptly with the textual content and is deemed more appropriate within the given context.
‘Bayt’ or distich’ (6)
|
إذا ما العاجز الظمآن يأتي |
ويرجو الماء باب المحسنينا |
There is unanimity in the interpretation of this line; both scholars concur in their reading without any divergence of opinion.
‘Bayt’ or distich’ (7)
|
يصبوا/يصيرفي إناه العذب لطفا/لطيفا |
ورفقا يا كريم العاجزينـــــــا |
In the first hemistich, two contentious points arise between the two scholars. Maulvi Bashiruddin deciphers the initial word as[xxi]“يصير” a choice that fails to occupy the space effectively, neither in conveying the intended meaning nor in adhering closely to the textual content. Furthermore, he reads the final word of this hemistich as[xxii]“لطيفا” a selection that disrupts the meter of this poetic composition. Conversely, Mr. Bukhari reads both words as ” يصبوا” and “لطفا” thereby preserving both sense and poetic integrity without transgressing the conventions of prosody.
‘Bayt’ or distich’ (8)
|
فأنت أحق بالإحسان حقا |
علينا يا ملاذ المنسكينا/ الملاذئينا /الملاذكينـــا |
According to Mr. Bukhari, the final word of the second hemistich appears to be “الملازكينا” as evidenced by the inscription. However, he argues that this word does not conform to the meter, which suggests a deviation from the expected “Hazaj” pattern. Mr. Bukhari suggests that the engraver may have made an error, proposing that “الملاذئينا” could be the intended word instead.”[xxiii]
Upon meticulous examination, it becomes evident that the metrical composition of this poetic epigraph diverges from the anticipated Hazaj (هَزَج) mnemonic pattern of four feet, typified by the sequence “Mafāʿīlun Mafāʿīlun” (مَفَاعِيلُنْ مَفَاعِيلُنْ). Instead, it adheres to a variant of the “Wafir” meter. This departure from the expected pattern raises questions regarding the accuracy of the inscription’s engraving, as it appears to deviate from conventional prosodic norms.
Furthermore, when considering the word “الملازكينا” and the suggested alternative “الملاذئينا” in the context of the metrical and semantic integrity of the inscription, both options prove inadequate. Neither aligns seamlessly with the established meter, nor do they contribute meaningfully within the narrative context of the inscription. Indeed, they appear not only conceptually out of place but also morphologically incorrect, thereby inviting skepticism regarding their intended usage and the accuracy of their engraving within the epigraph.
Molvi Bashiruddin’s initial reading of the epigraph presents “المنسكينا”[xxiv] as the deciphered word. This choice demonstrates a discernible alignment with both the metrical demands and semantic coherence requisite within the contextual framework. Nevertheless, a palpable incongruity emerges between this proposed word and the actual inscription. Such a discrepancy is likely attributable to partial corruption of the text or a potential error made by the engraver during the meticulous process of inscribing the epigraphic content.
‘Bayt’ or distich’ (9)
|
فماء المزن أصيب/أصبب في غديري |
مداما كان بالأبد القرينـــــا |
In the preliminary interpretation, the insertion of the term “أصيب” within the first hemistich appears to present a discrepancy. This particular term not only lacks semantic cohesion with the broader context but also fails to adhere to the established metrical framework of the inscription. Conversely, the alternative proposed by the second reader, “أصبب,” proves to be a more felicitous choice. This selection not only aligns harmoniously with the linguistic and thematic nuances of the text but also preserves the rhythmic integrity of the poetic meter without introducing any disruptive irregularities.
‘Bayt’ or distich’ (10)
|
أنا/إلي المعروف عبدك يا كريمي |
ترحم أنت خير الراحمينـــا |
In the absence of significant semantic or metrical deviations, both “أنا” and “إلى” emerge as viable alternatives within the first hemistich. However, Mr. Bukhari’s choice of “إلى” appears to offer a closer alignment with the text’s contextual nuances and linguistic coherence. This selection reflects a meticulous attention to detail and textual fidelity, contributing to a more seamless integration within the broader narrative framework of the inscription.
‘Bayt’ or distich’ (11)
| أنا العبد الفقيــــــــــر بباب ربي | وأنت الله يغني/مغني العائلينـــــا |
In the second hemistich, the utilization of the third person singular non-past indicative verb “يغني” appears incongruous, particularly following a second person pronoun. Instead, the alternative reading featuring “مغني,” functioning as an active participle, seems more contextually fitting, as suggested by Y. K. Bukhari. This choice not only aligns with grammatical coherence but also enhances the semantic cohesion within the line, contributing to a more harmonious interpretation of the inscription.
‘Bayt’ or distich’ (12)
|
فعال العبد عصيـــــــان وجرم |
ومنك كمال ستر المجرمينا |
This line remains consistent in the interpretations provided by both readers, with no discernible variance observed between their respective readings.
‘Bayt’ or distich’ (13)
| ويا رب أعف ما نجينا/ عنا ما جنبنـــــــا |
إلهي لا تواخذ إن نسينـــا |
The first hemistich of this couplet presents a complex conundrum. The inherent meter of this poetic inscription fails to conform to any recognizable pattern, suggesting a potential irregularity originating from its inception. In terms of the interpretations proffered by the two scholars, the initial reader’s rendition, “ويا رب أعف ما نجينا,” lacks both syntactic cohesion and semantic clarity. Conversely, Y. K. Bukhari’s reading, while closer to the textual content of the epigraph, introduces a subtle semantic discrepancy with the last word decrypted as “ما جنبنا.” Thus, a more nuanced analysis reveals that “ما جنينا” emerges as a more plausible rendering, aligning more closely with the intended sense of the line within the broader context of the inscription.
After meticulous scrutiny and detailed examination of the given epigraph, the culmination of the analysis yields a fresh reading characterized by intricate linguistic and contextual considerations. This refined interpretation can be articulated with a heightened level of detail and scholarly rigor.
|
(1)بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم- دعوتك ربنا الحق المبينـــــــــا |
وأسأل حاجتي بك مستعينا |
| (2) فإن لم يسئل الإنسان تغضب | ووعدك أن نجيب السائلينــا |
| ونهر السائلين كرهت ربي | ونحن السائلون إليك جئنـــا |
| (3) عطاشا عارضين إليك كأسا | بلا ماء فأرو العاطشينــــــا |
| وكأسي في يدي هذا الغدير | أريد الماء رب العالمينـــــــا |
| (4) إذا ما العاجز الظمآن يأتي | ويرجو الماء باب المحسنينا |
| يصبوا في إناه العذب لطفا | ورفقا يا كريم العاجزينـــــــا |
| (5) فأنت أحق بالإحسان حقا | علينا يا ملاذ المنسكينا |
| فماء المزن أصبب في غديري | مداما كان بالأبد القرينـــــا |
| (6) إلي المعروف عبدك يا كريمي | ترحم أنت خير الراحمينـــا |
| أنا العبد الفقيــــــــــر بباب ربي | وأنت الله مغني العائلينـــــا |
| (7) فعال العبد عصيـــــــان وجرم | ومنك كمال ستر المجرمينا |
| ويا رب أعف عنا ما جنينـــــــا | إلهي لا تواخذ إن نسينـــا |
Translation;
- In the name of Allah, the beneficent the merciful
O our Lord, the manifest absolute truth, I invoke you
I beg to refer to you my need, unto you the help is sought
- For, if one does not supplicate, you may become angry,
While your promise is that, we respond to those who supplicate.
O my lord, you disliked repulsing the supplicants, and now we came as supplicants before you.
- While being thirsty, showing you the goblet without water, so please quench our thrust.
My pot in my hand is just this tank, O my Lord; I want water (for this tank)
- O lord who is generous to all helpless, whenever any helpless thirsty comes to the door of benefactors in a hope to get some water; they pour sweet water into his pot out of kindness.
- (As compare to them) you are the most capable to extend favour to us, O refuge giver for those who seek for the same. Make this rainy water to fill my tank forever in a way that it would continue till eternity.
- O my kind lord; show mercy to your slave ‘Maruf’ as you are the best of the merciful. I am destitute slave standing at your door O my lord, and you O Allah are all-sufficient, above any need of the worlds.
- Each crime and sin comes from being and from you the perfection of covering the criminals. O lord, please forgive us and whatever wrong we have committed. O mater! Take us not to account if we have forgotten.
Conclusion:
In summation, the corpus of analysis dedicated to the scrutinized Arabic epigraph culminates in the unequivocal assertion of its profound literary, cultural, and historical significance. The preceding dual readings, as appraised herein, have been revealed to harbor incongruities and quandaries that not only perturb the semantic coherence and inherent informational depth of the inscription but also cast aspersions upon its delicate literary contours and poetic matrices. This discerning investigation into the intricacies of the epigraph has, thus, disentangled the threads of ambiguity, rendering a discerning clarification to its nuanced intricacies.
Of paramount historical import is the epigraph’s role as an archival repository, proffering invaluable insights into the persona of “Maruf” (Sayyidul Hujjab), an eminent nobleman and erudite scholar of the epoch governed by Firoz Shah Tughlaq (1309–1388). The confluence of corroborative epigraphic evidence substantiates the epigraph’s claim to historical veracity, thereby enhancing its stature as a veritable trove of information pertaining to the luminaries of a bygone era. In this contextual light, the epigraph not only unravels the historical tapestry surrounding Maruf but also stands as a testament to the meticulous scholarship required for the validation and contextualization of historical narratives.
Moreover, the epigraph assumes an integral role in the reconstruction of the cultural continuum prevailing during its inception, warranting meticulous attention for nuanced analysis and historical interpretation. Its manifestation as a singular deviation from prevailing norms, detailing a secular construct in the form of a water tank constructed for public welfare, elucidates the dynamic interplay between religion and public utility in the sociocultural landscape of the period.
In conclusion, the scholarly exploration of this Arabic epigraph transcends the mere decipherment of inscriptions; it encapsulates a multidimensional scholarly endeavor that not only rehabilitates historical narratives but also enriches our understanding of the interwoven literary and cultural tapestry of a bygone epoch. The epigraph, thus, stands as an enduring testament to the imperative role of meticulous linguistic scrutiny in unraveling the multifaceted layers of historical discourse.
Endnote
[i] – Zafar , Hasan , M. (1922) “List Of Muhammadan And Hindu Monuments of Delhi Province” vol. III. Calcutta, p. 121
[ii] – Barni,ziyauddin. (1285-1357), “A Medieval Indian political thinker and philosopher who had been the favorite courtier and scholar at the court of Muhammad Bin Tughluq for seventeen years. He was best known for his two important texts; the Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi on medieval Indian historiography and the Fatwa-i-Jahandari on statecraft.”
[iii] – See, Shams- Siraj Afif, (1891) “Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi”, Calcutta, pp. 445-451. In his Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi, the chronicler Ziyauddin Barni had maintained the records from the reign of Ghiyas ud din Balban to the first few years of Firoz Shah Tughluq.
[iv] – While reading the inscription , Maulvi Bashiruddin Ahmad maintained that this epigraph was found in Mehrauli. For more see, Waqiat-e-Darul-Hukumat dehli, Volume 2, p. 373, 1919
[v] – op. cit. M. Zafar Hasan, “List Of Muhammadan And Hindu Monuments of Delhi Province” p. 121
[vi] – Ibid. p.121
[vii] – for more detail see, Shams- Siraj Afif, (1891) “Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi”, Calcutta, pp. 445-451.
[viii] – Zafar, Hasan, M. (1922), “ Memoire of the Arachaeological Survey of India, No. 10, A Guide to Nizamuddin” Superintendent Government Printing, Calcutta, p. 9
[ix] – It is one of the honorific title of Shaikh Nizamuddin Auliya
[x] – This translation was done by Zafar, Hasan, M. himself , see, Memoire of the Arachaeological Survey of India, No. 10, A Guide to Nizamuddin” Superintendent Government Printing, Calcutta, p. 9
[xi] – see Desai , Ziyaud-Din A., (1998) Epigraphy V. Inscriptions From The Indian Subcontinent, Vol. VIII, Fasc. 5, pp. 504-510, For online Version; http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/epigraphy-v
[xii] – For more see, Waqiat-e-Darul-Hukumat dehli, Volume 2, p. 373, 1919
[xiii] – see- Epigraphia Indica Arabic and Persian Supplement (EIAPS-1959-60), The Director General, Archaeological Survey of India, Jan path, New Delhi, 1987, pp. 4-7
[xiv] – Muʿallaqāt is the seven long pre-Islamic Arabic qaṣīdahs (odes) which presents an excellent picture of Arabic Bedouin culture. Traditionally it is stated that these 10nt century odes “were written down in golden letters on scrolls of linen that were then hung, or “suspended” (muʿallaq), on the walls of the Kaʿbah in Mecca.” It is also believed that the name Muʿallaqāt is a derivative of the word ʿilq, “a precious one,” hence; it means “the poems which are esteemed precious.”
[xv] – Wen-chin Ouyang (1997), Literary Criticism in Medieval Arabic-Islamic Culture: The Making of a Tradition, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pg. 65.
[xvi] – See, Epigraphia Indica Arabic and Persian Supplement (EIAPS-1959-60), The Director General, Archaeological Survey of India, Jan path, New Delhi, 1987, p.5 , it says, “ …… does not confirm to the meter which is a variant of “ “هزج
[xvii] – see McCarus, Ernest N. (1983). “Identifying the Meters of Arabic Poetry”, Al-‘Arabiyya vol 16. no. 1/2, (Georgetown University Press), pp. 57-83.
[xviii] – It denotes the metrically incomplete line of verse which ends in most of the cases with an incomplete foot or lacks a syllable at the end.
[xix] – Epigraphia Indica Arabic and Persian Supplement (EIAPS-1959-60), op. cit. p.5
[xx] – Syntactically, it occurs here as an attributive phrase with “alfi and laam”. In that case both the words i. e.ال-حق) ال-مبين) must come with the prefix of “alfi and laam”.
[xxi] – يَصِيرُ (yaṣīru)is the third-person masculine singular non-past active indicative of the verb صَارَ (ṣāra) derived from the root ص ي ر (ṣ-y-r), which means “ to happen” and in the case of copulative form it would mean “ to become”.
[xxi] Derived from the root ل ط ف (l-ṭ-f), it is a polysemantic word to give several meanings in the related sense of amiable, friendly, kind, civil, courteous, polite etc.
[xxiii] – Epigraphia Indica Arabic and Persian Supplement (EIAPS-1959-60), p.5
[xxiv] -it can be taken as an “active participle” or “verbal noun” derived from the root ن س ك (n-s-k), “to abstain, to renounce”. it is a polysemantic word to give more than one meaning. For more see- لسان العرب-ابن منظور الإفريقي-توفي: 711هـ/1311م، تاج العروس-مرتضى الزَّبيدي-توفي: 1205هـ/1791م