بانگ شیر و بانگ سگ در شب رسید ** صورت هر دو ز تاریکی ندید
(If) during the night the sound of a lion and the sound of a dog have come (into some one's ear) and he has not seen their forms on account of the darkness,
روز شد چون باز در بانگ آمدند ** پس شناسدشان ز بانگ آن هوشمند
When day breaks and they begin to make (the same) sound again, the intelligent (hearer) will know them by the sound (which they make).
مخلص این که دیو و روح عرضه‌دار ** هر دو هستند از تتمه‌ی اختیار
The upshot is this, that both the Devil and the (angelic) Spirit who present (objects of desire to us) exist for the purpose of completing (actualising) the power of choice.
اختیاری هست در ما ناپدید ** چون دو مطلب دید آید در مزید 3005
There is an invisible power of choice within us; when it sees two (alternative) objects of desire it waxes strong.
اوستادان کودکان را می‌زنند ** آن ادب سنگ سیه را کی کنند
Teachers beat (school-)children: how should they inflict that correction upon a black stone?
هیچ گویی سنگ را فردا بیا ** ور نیایی من دهم بد را سزا
Do you ever say to a stone, ‘Come to-morrow; and if you don't come, I will give your bad behaviour the punishment it deserves’?
هیچ عاقل مر کلوخی را زند ** هیچ با سنگی عتابی کس کند
Does any reasonable man strike a brickbat? Does any one reprove a stone?
در خرد جبر از قدر رسواترست ** زانک جبری حس خود را منکرست
In (the eyes of) reason, Necessitarianism (jabr) is more shameful than the doctrine of (absolute) Free-will (qadar), because the Necessitarian is denying his own (inward) sense.
منکر حس نیست آن مرد قدر ** فعل حق حسی نباشد ای پسر 3010
The man who holds the doctrine of (absolute) Free-will does not deny his (inward) sense: (he says), ‘The action of God is not mediated by the senses, O son.’
منکر فعل خداوند جلیل ** هست در انکار مدلول دلیل
He who denies the action of the Almighty Lord is (virtually) denying Him who is indicated by the indication.
آن بگوید دود هست و نار نی ** نور شمعی بی ز شمعی روشنی
That one (the believer in absolute Free-will) says, ‘There is smoke, but no fire; there is candle-light without any resplendent candle’;
وین همی‌بیند معین نار را ** نیست می‌گوید پی انکار را
And this one (the Necessitarian) sees the fire plainly, (but) for the sake of denial he says it does not exist.
It burns his raiment, (yet) he says, ‘There is no fire’; it (the thread) stitches his raiment, (yet) he says, ‘There is no thread.’
پس تسفسط آمد این دعوی جبر ** لاجرم بدتر بود زین رو ز گبر 3015
Hence this doctrine of Necessity is Sophisticism (Scepticism): consequently he (the Necessitarian), from this point of view, is worse than the infidel (believer in absolute Free-will).
گبر گوید هست عالم نیست رب ** یا ربی گوید که نبود مستحب
The infidel says, ‘The world exists, (but) there is no Lord’: he says that (the invocation) ‘O my Lord!’ is not to be approved.
این همی گوید جهان خود نیست هیچ ** هسته سوفسطایی اندر پیچ پیچ
This one (the Necessitarian) says, ‘The world is really naught’: the Sophist (Sceptic) is in a tangle (of error).
جمله‌ی عالم مقر در اختیار ** امر و نهی این میار و آن بیار
The whole world acknowledges (the reality of) the power of choice: (the proof is) their commanding and forbidding (each other)—‘Bring this and do not bring that!’
او همی گوید که امر و نهی لاست ** اختیاری نیست این جمله خطاست
He (the Necessitarian) says that commanding and forbidding are naught and that there is no power of choice. All this (doctrine) is erroneous.
حس را حیوان مقرست ای رفیق ** لیک ادراک دلیل آمد دقیق 3020
Animals (too) acknowledge (the reality of) the (inward) sense, O comrade, but it is a subtle (difficult) matter to apprehend the proof (of this).
زانک محسوسست ما را اختیار ** خوب می‌آید برو تکلیف کار
Inasmuch as (the reality of) our power of choice is perceived by the (inward) sense, responsibility for actions may well be laid upon it.
درک وجدانی چون اختیار و اضطرار و خشم و اصطبار و سیری و ناهار به جای حس است کی زرد از سرخ بداند و فرق کند و خرد از بزرگ و طلخ از شیرین و مشک از سرگین و درشت از نرم به حس مس و گرم از سرد و سوزان از شیر گرم و تر از خشک و مس دیوار از مس درخت پس منکر وجدانی منکر حس باشد و زیاده که وجدانی از حس ظاهرترست زیرا حس را توان بستن و منع کردن از احساس و بستن راه و مدخل وجدانیات را ممکن نیست و العاقل تکفیه الاشارة
The inward consciousness of having the power to choose or of acting under compulsion, of anger or self-restraint, of repletion or hunger, corresponds to the senses that know and distinguish yellow from red and small from great and bitter from sweet and musk from dung and hard from soft—by the sense of touch—and hot from cold and burning (hot) from lukewarm and wet from dry and contact with a wall from contact with a tree. Therefore he who denies inward consciousness denies the senses, and (he does) more (than that), (for) inward consciousness is more evident than the senses, inasmuch as one can bind the senses and prevent them from functioning, while it is impossible to bar the way to the experiences of inward consciousness and stop their entrance. And an indication is enough for the wise.
درک وجدانی به جای حس بود ** هر دو در یک جدول ای عم می‌رود
Inward consciousness corresponds to (external) sensation: both run in the same channel, O uncle.
نغز می‌آید برو کن یا مکن ** امر و نهی و ماجراها و سخن
‘Do’ or ‘don't,’ command and prohibition, discussions and talk are suitable to it (the inward consciousness).
این که فردا این کنم یا آن کنم ** این دلیل اختیارست ای صنم
(The thought), ‘To-morrow I will do this or I will do that,’ is a proof of the power to choose, O worshipful one;
وان پشیمانی که خوردی زان بدی ** ز اختیار خویش گشتی مهتدی 3025
And (in the case of) the penitence which you have felt for (having committed) an evil deed, you have been led (into the right path) through your power of choice.
جمله قران امر و نهیست و وعید ** امر کردن سنگ مرمر را کی دید
The entire Qur’án consists of commands and prohibitions and threats (of punishment): who (ever) saw commands given to a marble rock?
هیچ دانا هیچ عاقل این کند ** با کلوخ و سنگ خشم و کین کند
Does any wise man, does any reasonable man, do this? Does he show anger and enmity to brickbats and stones?—
که بگفتم کین چنین کن یا چنان ** چون نکردید ای موات و عاجزان
Saying, ‘I told you to do thus or thus: why have ye not done it, O dead and helpless ones?’
عقل کی حکمی کند بر چوب و سنگ ** عقل کی چنگی زند بر نقش چنگ
How should reason exercise any authority over wood and stone? How should reason lay hold of the painted figure of a cripple,
کای غلام بسته دست اشکسته‌پا ** نیزه برگیر و بیا سوی وغا 3030
Saying, ‘O slave with palsied hands and broken legs, take up the lance and come to battle’?
خالقی که اختر و گردون کند ** امر و نهی جاهلانه چون کند
How, (then), should the Creator who is the Maker of stars and sky make commands and prohibitions like those of an ignorant person?
احتمال عجز از حق راندی ** جاهل و گیج و سفیهش خواندی
You have removed from God the possibility of impotence, (but) you have (virtually) called Him ignorant and stupid and foolish.
عجز نبود از قدر ور گر بود ** جاهلی از عاجزی بدتر بود
(Divine) impotence does not follow from the doctrine of Free-will; and even if it do, ignorance is worse than impotence.
ترک می‌گوید قنق را از کرم ** بی‌سگ و بی‌دلق آ سوی درم
The Turcoman says graciously to the stranger-guest, ‘Come to my door without a dog and without a tattered cloak,
وز فلان سوی اندر آ هین با ادب ** تا سگم بندد ز تو دندان و لب 3035
And hark, come in respectfully from such and such a quarter, in order that my dog may keep his teeth and mouth closed (and refrain) from (biting) thee.’
تو به عکس آن کنی بر در روی ** لاجرم از زخم سگ خسته شوی
(But) you do the reverse of that and advance to the door: necessarily you are wounded by the violence of the dog.
آن‌چنان رو که غلامان رفته‌اند ** تا سگش گردد حلیم و مهرمند
(You must) advance in the same manner in which slaves have advanced, so that his dog may become gentle and affectionate.
تو سگی با خود بری یا روبهی ** سگ بشورد از بن هر خرگهی
(If) you take a dog or a fox with you, a dog will rage (at you) from the bottom of every tent.
غیر حق را گر نباشد اختیار ** خشم چون می‌آیدت بر جرم‌دار
If none but God have the power of choice, why do you become angry with one who has committed an offence (against you)?
چون همی‌خایی تو دندان بر عدو ** چون همی بینی گناه و جرم ازو 3040
Why do you gnash your teeth at a foe? Why do you regard the sin and offence as (proceeding) from him?
گر ز سقف خانه چوبی بشکند ** بر تو افتد سخت مجروحت کند
If a piece of timber break off from your house-roof and fall upon you and wound you severely,
هیچ خشمی آیدت بر چوب سقف ** هیچ اندر کین او باشی تو وقف
Will you feel any anger against the timber of the roof? Will you ever devote yourself to taking vengeance upon it,
که چرا بر من زد و دستم شکست ** او عدو و خصم جان من بدست
(And say), ‘Why did it hit me and fracture my hand? It has been my mortal foe and enemy’?
کودکان خرد را چون می‌زنی ** چون بزرگان را منزه می‌کنی
Why do you beat little children (when they do wrong), since (in theory) you make out that adults are exempt from blame?
آنک دزدد مال تو گویی بگیر ** دست و پایش را ببر سازش اسیر 3045
(In the case of) a man who steals your property, you say (to the magistrate), ‘Arrest him, cut off his hand and foot, make him a captive’;
وآنک قصد عورت تو می‌کند ** صد هزاران خشم از تو می‌دمد
And (in the case of) a man who visits your wife, a hundred thousand angers shoot up from you.
گر بیاید سیل و رخت تو برد ** هیچ با سیل آورد کینی خرد
(On the contrary), if a flood come and sweep away your household goods, will your reason bear any enmity towards the flood?
ور بیامد باد و دستارت ربود ** کی ترا با باد دل خشمی نمود
And if the wind came and carried off your turban, when did your heart show any anger against the wind?
خشم در تو شد بیان اختیار ** تا نگویی جبریانه اعتذار
The anger within you is a clear demonstration of (the existence of) a power of choice (in Man), so that you must not excuse yourself after the fashion of Necessitarians.
گر شتربان اشتری را می‌زند ** آن شتر قصد زننده می‌کند 3050
If a camel-driver goes on striking a camel, the camel will attack the striker.
خشم اشتر نیست با آن چوب او ** پس ز مختاری شتر بردست بو
The camel's anger is not (directed) against his stick: therefore the camel has got some notion of the power of choice (in Man).