Zal Seeks Counsel
Zal turns private desire into a public argument about marriage, continuity and lawful conduct. The council’s silence reveals how ancestry can obstruct an otherwise acceptable act.
The chapter in five texts
| Text | Chapter treatment and distinctive choices |
|---|---|
| F&R English | Fifty-two couplets make Zal’s marriage argument and the petition procedure accessible while condensing some theological and conditional wording. |
| Moscow | Pp 174–177 carry the counsel and its political caution, with local brackets in the longer speeches. |
| Mohl | Pp 136–138 retain the fuller doctrinal and dynastic argument before the letter. |
| Ganjoor | Sh10.1–53 supplies this chapter; the Tablet-and-Pen couplet is shown separately because the English does not render it explicitly. |
| Khaleghi | The counsel is consulted within pp 200–205, including the main-text/apparatus distinction around fuller statements. |
Parallel text
English left · Persian right. Ganjoor is the reference except where a row names a printed source. Select a number to open the relevant note. G identifiers distinguish digital sections across chapter boundaries.
Narrative and poetic form
The English succeeds in presenting a reasoned petition rather than a sudden demand. The scholarly note preserves the limits: lawful marriage alone does not settle hostile ancestry, and a conditional path is not yet an authorization.
Couplet commentary
Quoted text · evidence · interpretation1–7From night meeting to daylight counsel
The warriors’ morning departure precedes a summons to wise men, Dastur, Mobads and chiefs. Zal begins with praise of the Creator.
The English preserves the change of forum. An encounter conducted in secrecy now requires a case that others can hear and carry to higher authority.
8–14Dependence expressed through ordered creation
The prayer moves through hope, fear, praise, the two worlds, seasons and the ant unable to step without divine permission. Ganjoor’s following Tablet-and-Pen couplet has no separate English counterpart and is displayed as source-only.
English reorders the sun-and-moon address and condenses the moral vocabulary. The source-only image makes the predestination strand visible without pretending that the ant image or a later monotheistic statement translates the missing Tablet and Pen.
15–23Pairing becomes an argument for succession
The Persian moves from increase through pairs to human society, a fitting union, illustrious ancestry and renewed life through a child. English 16 states that God has no partner; this is not the wording of Ganjoor’s Tablet-and-Pen couplet.
The argument’s purpose is practical: a lawful marriage sustains a lineage. The unpaired Creator and paired creation form an intelligible theological elaboration in the English, but it should not be counted as a literal match to an unrelated Persian image.
24–33The general argument becomes a personal petition
Zal identifies the story as his own garden, names Sindokht’s daughter and asks whether Sahm and Manuchehr will approve.
The English preserves his logic: the union is ordinary in law and custom, yet extraordinary because of this family. His description of marriage is an interested plea, not a demonstration that political objections have already been answered.
34–42Silence is political, not lack of understanding
The council fears Zahhak’s ancestry and the Shah’s hostility. Zal recognizes blame, asks for a way out and offers exceptional reward and protection.
The English allows impatience and persuasion to coexist. The wise men deliberate under a powerful patron’s pressure, so their eventual compliments should not be cited as detached proof that every aspect of his reasoning is beyond criticism.
43–52A procedural route around an inherited barrier
The council acknowledges Mehrab’s worth despite lower standing and dragon ancestry, proposes a letter to Sahm and anticipates a further petition to the Shah. Ganjoor 49 explicitly makes freedom from family disgrace conditional on the Shah’s not suspecting harm.
The English makes the chain of authority particularly clear. Its smoother ending absorbs the conditional into the diplomatic proposal; the note preserves that the council has found a route to judgment, not a guarantee of approval.
New Naqqali