The Guest House part 1

[iljas]

The other day in preparation for a class I will be teaching on
alternative strategies in the treatment of drug addiction I was
listening to a talk Jon Kabat-Zinn gave on Mindfulness meditation to
the employees of Google (it’s on Youtube). It’s an excellent,
entertaining talk. At one point he recites Coleman Barks’ version of
Rumi’s verses to which he (Barks) gave the title The Guest House.
Kabat-Zinn enthuses: This was written in the thirteenth century! The
poem was used to illustrate and endorse Mindfulness meditation.
Perhaps some listeners in the audience or viewers of the Youtube video
presentation of the talk came away with the impression that Rumi
practised this form of meditation being taught by Kabat-Zinn.
Something irked me. I reread Barks’ version and then the original
verses in Nicholson’s translation from the Mathnawi V (there’s no
translation so far from Ibrahim). The differences are striking and
illuminating. Barks’ version (in contrast to the original which
specifies only joys and sorrows) mentions a whole array of thoughts,
states and emotions which we are encouraged to “Welcome and
entertain”. These are: joy, depression, meanness, momentary awareness,
sorrows, dark thoughts, shame and malice. Somehow we are invited to
“Be grateful” for them “because each has been sent as a guide from
beyond”. As I understand Kabat-Zinn, Mindfulness meditation involves
just letting these things come into our consciousness and then flow
out again. We are instructed to be non-judgemental so as not to get
caught up in them. You can see then why the poem seemed so apt for
Kabat-Zinn’s talk. But is it really the subject of Rumi’s verses? And
does it matter if it is not? I hope to answer these questions in part
2.



Iljas Baker

[Hajji]

Dear Iljas,
Salâm,

Some years ago, an opportunity was given to critique the version that
Coleman Barks entitled the "Guest House" at a sufi conference, soon
after returning from Hajj, Coleman Barks had mesmerized the audience
two days before with his poetic interpretive versions of Rumi,
including this one. My venue was smaller, as was the audience. Here
is
the link to that (the Guest House version is critiqued about two-
thirds into the article):
http://dar-al-masnavi.org/self-discovery.html

Later this was condensed into an article published in "Islamica
Magazine" (also linked on my website), but without this critique.

Here is a summary of my critique from another discussion group
listserve:

As an example, consider Coleman Barks’ interpretation entitled "The
Guest House" (“The Essential Rumi,” p. 109), based on Nicholson's
translation (Mathnawi V:3644-46, 3676-81, 3693-95). In the third
section, Nicholson's translation reads:

"(Whenever) the thought (of sorrow) comes into thy breast anew, go to
meet it with smiles and laughter, Saying, "O my Creator, preserve me
from its evil: do not deprive me, (but) let me partake of its good! 'O
my
Lord prompt' me to give thanks for that which I see (receive): do
not let me feel any subsequent regret, if it (the benefit received)
shall pass away.'"

This was modified by the version-maker (who is not a translator,
since
he does not know Persian) to: "The dark thought, the shame, the
malice, meet them at the door laughing, and invite them in. Be
grateful for whoever comes, because each has been sent as a guide
from beyond."

It can be seen that Barks’ versions of the first two sections of
Nicholson's translation miss much of Mevlana's rich imagery and
meanings, but do convey some of the basic meanings in fewer words.
However, his version of the third section actually contradict's
Mevlana's teaching. Mevlana here prays to God that he be protected
from the evil of sorrow--not that he be guided by evil thoughts! If
Barks had interpreted more faithfully he could have written instead,
". . .because each has been sent as a guest with some hidden good."
As
said before, he had an accurate translation of Mevlana's teaching on
this subject right in front of his eyes--yet he chose to interpret it
through a kind of Jungian-Buddhist attitude of, "Welcome the thoughts
coming from your dark side." Is this being a vehicle for Hz.
Mevlana's
message in the West?

--------

Ibrahim

---------------------------------------

[iljas]

Dear Ibrahim (and fellow subscribers),Salaam.

Thanks for your response Ibrahim. I guess this is my part 2. I feel
you have identified the crux of the matter here which is that Barks
takes liberties with his version and misrepresents Mevlana. And
somewhat seriously too I would add. The roots of this are undoubtedly
two things : His lack of knowledge of the language in which the poems
were written and his wish to avoid conveying too much of the Islamic
ethos. But there may be the fact that he is influenced by the
consumerist ethos. In other words seeing the poems as commodities to
be refashioned as one pleases and reselling them to a different market
- think of all the traditional medicines, sacred music and the like
that are simply and blatantly exploited for the market. And usually
there is money and reputation involved. If the origins are referred to
it's usually only superficially and for marketing reasons.

Of course there is good in Barks' versions, so I don't want to accuse
him of something he is not.I enjoy his versions as much as anyone
else. But does he have a responsibility to represent Rumi's poetry
more faithfully? I don't see how anyone knowing about Rumi could fail
to agree that he does. The story goes that it was Robert Bly who
introduced Barks to Rumi's poems in Nicholson's translations saying
something like "You must set these free from their cages". But surely
that is only part of the story. Shouldn't he also have said "But be
faithful to their spirit. Be careful not to mix in all those New Age,
Beat, Zen and Jungian ideas that will come bubbling up to ease your
task." Barks could still heed this message.

Is this just a rant? Perhaps. It wasn't intended to be. I originally
was struck by Kabat-Zinn sort of using Rumi to endorse Mindfulness
meditation and I intuitively felt that of course Rumi didn't sit down
and focus on his breath or the tip of his nose and watch his thoughts
come and go. Why would he need to? He performed the salat which of
course must be done in full consciousness, empty of all extraneous
thought and he practiced the sunnah of the prophet (start with the
right side, with bismillah, left foot first into the toilet, right
first when entering the mosque etc) which slows one down and helps one
to remain at home one's body, as does the fasting month. So Rumi's
mindfulness would be mindfulness in action and at a deeper level his
mindfulness would have a content rather than an emptiness.

So I guess the point is I could see the distance growing between
Rumi's message and what the West think is Rumi's message and Barks is
partly responsible and I wanted to say "Wait a minute!"

I will finish now. My apologies if I have said anything out of place.

Salaam,

Iljas