مقاله کوتاه: نویافته‌هایی در باب مأخذ یک حکایت مثنوی معنوی

New findings on the source of a Masnavi Manavi 's story
Katayun Namiranian[1]
Mandana Firoozabadi[2]
The study of the literary and historical texts of the nations of the world is evidence of the similarities that have long occupied the minds of scholars. If we rely on the category of adaptation of stories, what about historical similarities? Are historical events repetitive or is it the involvement of historians and the hypothesis of narrative adaptation? However, one of the important issues in this regard is to examine the similarities and explain the reasons.
In this article, in connection with the similarities between different texts, we examined the trick presented in one of the stories of the first book of Masnavi Manavi entitled "King of Jihud who killed the Christians", and mentioned other sources and references in which that trick of Masnavi  has been mentioned.
It should be noted that the study and rooting of this trick has been discussed and researched by other researchers before: Forouzanfar in his book "References to the Stories and Allegories of Masnavi" (1991: 7) points out that this trick has been reported in the battle between the Piruz Sassanid king and Akhshnavar, the king of Hiataleh. Parsansab (2011: 36-37) in his article also talks about the similarity of the whole of this story with the story of "owl and raven" of Kelileh and Demneh and only makes a passing reference to the minister's suggestion that he be beaten and expelled. But among the researches, Rezaei Dasht-e Arjaneh and Bijanzadeh (2016: 167-189) have the most similarity to the present study. In this article, based on the intertextual approach, the authors have studied the story of "the king of Jihud who killed the Christians" and four stories of "Sheghad and Rostam, Jazimat al-Abrash, Firuz king of the Iranians and the king of the Hitalians and owl and raven ". However, it is worth mentioning that the distinguishing feature of the mentioned article and the present research is that in this work, without any presuppositions or special approach such as intertextuality, the desired war trick in different texts has been searched and presented. Also, Rezaei and Bijanzadeh's article does not emphasize the mutilation of the deceiver, which in the present study has been one of the main characteristics that has been considered in finding and selecting similar stories.
In this study, while examining the mentioned story from the first book of Molavi's Masnavi, also mentioning the promised sources, we have obtained new evidences from literary and historical sources and we have found that this trick seems to be known and famous in the region as different people were clearly familiar with the nature of these punishments and they knew that when a person is punished like that, he is a culprit expelled from the king or from the commander of the corps. It may even be said that this method of punishment was intended for those who were specifically expelled from the court of the king or commander. It should also be noted that the expelled person had a worthy position and was known among the enemy and friend, as in most of the narrations mentioned, the rejected person was the king's minister. Therefore, quoting this trick in this story may not be directly related to the origin, adaptation or intertextuality, etc., and the narrator himself has heard such stories from different corners or read them in historical books, such as the history of Tabari or Balami. It is also possible that the reason why Molavi introduced this trick in the story was its familiarity with the mind and conscience of his audience, in the hope that its easy understanding will help to better understand the rest of the story and ultimately get the purpose of the poet.
Keywords: 1. War tricks; 2. The story of the king of Jihud and the Christians; 3. Masnavi Manavi; 4. Punishment of the mutilation.