مولانا و حافظ

In this article, I have tried to see whether one can find any signs of Mowlavi's influence in the poetry of Hafez. Two considerations have made me deal separately with the form and the content of works of the two poets; a) the deeply static and change resistant nature of the Persian traditional culture, which makes it difficult to say whether one is facing a case of shared culture or one of poetic influence; and b) the need for use of two theoretical standpoints (intertextuality and metaphor v. metonymy) to deal with content and form respectively. The results I have come up with are as follows: 1. As regards the content, one can detect more of an empathy arising from cultural unity rather than any trace of influence of one upon the other. 2. As for the form, one cannot help noticing that Hafez is exceedingly conscious of form, whereas Mowlavi pays little attention to it. 3. Whiltst Hafez leans heavily upon metaphor, Mowlavi is greatly inclined towards metonymy; one tends to ascension, the other to movement forward along the same route. 4. Finally, Hafez does not seem to have made any greater use of the form and content of Mowlavi's poetry with an eye to emulation than of the poetry of other poets, both previous and contemporary with him.