The core of masculinity does not derive from being male,

This first line makes the poem universal. The title makes me think of muscles and toughness, all kinds of other manly things. It makes me think of myself (how I don't really fit many of those images), and how this poem is for men. This first line debases these thoughts by separating masculinity's core from the male body.

nor friendliness from those who console.

I think "those who console" is referring to women. This line continues the previous by removing male/female relationships and sexuality as the core of masculinity.

Your old grandmother says,

This figure of my old grandmother is an interesting one. It makes the poem personal, directs it at me. My old grandmother makes me think the following words will be encouraging and supportive. It is unexpected that the first person in a poem about masculinity is an old grandmother.

You look a little pale.

This line is what I expected, grandmother is being careful, maybe too careful.

Run when you hear that.

This instruction contradicts every feeling I would have had given this chance in high school. I can think of nothing better than spending a day with grandma instead of the boredom of school. The strong, powerful voice of the narrator makes this command. Who is this voice of the narrator? Is it a father/my father/ my grandfather? Is it a man or a woman (both, neither)? Or am I thinking too much, and its Rumi?

A father's stern slaps are better.

The first time I read this I thought it was a very negative image, but now I see it as slightly less negative. The slaps are stern, they are disciplinary. I think in my position this line carries with it more weight than in the author's time. It sounds like he is saying this discipline is better than receiving sympathy, which should be avoided. I strongly disagree with this and hope there is something different coming (I know there is something greater than that ahead).

Your

This single word brings the focus of the poem back to me, the reader. Not just me, but something of mine. Something connected to me. I remember that this is the me of earlier, when I was very young.

bodily

The line is leading to something strong and personal about me and everyone. Maybe not, maybe it is just something physical.

soul

This word next to the last is paradoxial. The previous adverb describes something as temporal and relating to matter, while this noun is spiritual and weightless. This is the strongest word of the line, but it seems weakened by its modifier.

wants

Now this word feels very weak. It reminds me of a person's childhood; it is assumed that needs will be met, children are concerned more with wants than needs. This soul doesn't need or thirst or starve, it merely wants.

comforting

This ends unfulfillingly, as it should. I now feel this comforting is of little consequence, there must be something greater, perhaps a spiritual soul alluded to earlier. I think this is the goal of the author. To show that this comforting appears to hold great value, but it is not complete.

The severe father wants spiritual clarity.

The father wants spiritual clarity as the child's bodily soul wants comforting. The father's want is different, though. For some reason this want seems almost admirable. I believe this is because it is the father's want, carrying more clout as the father is wiser and more experienced than the child and because he wants spiritual clarity, but not bodily spirituality.

leads you into the open.

The father doesn't employ the comforting support of the old woman, he pushes you down a difficult, independent path. This path leads to the open, to clarity, to reaon, logic, to reality. I wonder here if this open is where a person should be led. Do we want to be led to this reality? In the last class we talked about people's illusions, which I think it was Fr. Mark who said these illusions were necessary. If these illusions are necessary, and aid us in our lives, should true reality (if there is such a thing) be a goal. And does the father's path really lead to the open? Or is it just a set of illusions that so many people share it seems to be the truth? Or is the open simply independence?

to hear and act and stay within you.

Maybe my previous interpretations were wrong, maybe my thoughts have been overtaken by philosophy and Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics. Either way, I'll consider a new one. The father's action and what he gives is maculinity. That maculinity is discipline, reason, and morality. This masculinity is opposed by the empathy and feeling of the old woman, but does not seek to destroy it. They are opposites that work together. The tough instructor holds the father's role after the father is gone. It is the rules and morality, the character of the individual. The instructor is reasonable enough to hear, to perceive. The instructor is disciplined enough to act, life is action. The instructor is strong enough to endure. This instructor is part of the bodily soul, the very same soul the father seeks clarity in. The father seeks clarity, clarity in the balance of the soul. This balance is achieved between the instructor and its counterpart femininity, which seeks its own goals. I see this balance in the poem in its images. The second stanza is warm, with the old grandmother and her caring words. The third is harsh. In the fourth stanza the first two lines are mixed with positives and negatives. The fourth line is negative, scolding, but it slides into the fifth line which is beautiful. The fifth stanza is first stiff, second flexible. The first and last stanzas are different, they bring the poem in and out of the example and bring the poem out of reality and into the theoretical, the discussion of masculinity.

I have one more thing to add about this stanza. I think it is wonderful how the visible instructor is connected to the spiritual with pray as the first word of the first line.

Make us afraid of how we were.

"Maybe you shouldn't go to school.

"afraid"--the words brings back the earlier father images of "severe slaps." who is Rumi asking to "make us"? I am unclear what Rumi means with "how we were." Does he mean he wants to get rid of their masculine, severe selves of the past and move into the "open"? Or does he want to return to the concrete/black/white images of masculinity. He doesn't like all of this questioning of identity.

If anyone has any words of wisdom about this poem, feel free to share!

First off, i would like to say i really enjoyed reading everyone else's posts. I chose to talk about this poem cause noone else had yet, and it really aggravated me. I am gonna look at the lines that i believe to be at the heart.

Your bodily soul wants comforting.

Rumi here is using a double meaning. The youth has been punished. Bodily he/she needs might need treatment or ice for bruises. The soul needs comfort, someone to tell them its ok, and that things will be allright. It really sounds like they need a good hug.

The severe father wants spiritual clarity

How many of you out there have heard the expression, "this is gonna hurt me more than it will hurt you?" The father is unsure whether or not he is doing the right thing. He wishes he could just see years into the future and see how his child turns out. He is plagued by uncertainty.

He scolds, but eventually// leads you into the open

At some point the father stops being the harsh disciplinarian. He will, at some point, step back and let you live, he will even become your friend. That is the ultimate goal.

Pray for a tough instructor// to hear and act and stay within you

We should all wish that our parents are strict, so that we may grow up and "know the right way" to live.

We have been busy accumulating solace

Websters defines solace as "1. comfort in sorrow or distress. 2.a source of comfort." The child wants someone to care for them. Since it was absent from their father, they try and get it wherever they can.

Make us afraid of how we were

"Where is a foot worthy to walk in a garden" (Rumi in Rag and Bone, p 9). A dichotomy of nature and man. As I stated in class yesterday, I do not feel that man and nature can fully be reunited. What is it about humans, when were we cast out of the garden? For the animals and nature, it is easy. We humans create a microcosm around ourselves, building our egos and illusions that we are actually in control of anything. We are not. Rumi's poetry is about his incredible faith in God, and it is very apparent even in this first line. Reminds us that we are here only because God allows us to be here.

"Or an eye that deserves to look at trees?" (Rumi in Rag and Bone, p 9). Another line in the same vein as the first. Who is truly worthy to desecrate the supreme beauty of a tree with our filthy glances? Has anyone ever really looked closely at a tree? The intricate veins in its broad, semi-translucent leaves or the tiny crawling things that live in the grooves in its rough bark are all tiny miracles that are taken for granted.

"Show me a man willing to be" (Rumi in Rag and Bone, p 9). This line is very interesting. Although it is only half of a sentence, it says much without its remainder. This line illustrates the illusional world in which we dwell, and the rarity of someone who wishes to be. The rare person who seeks the truth only found in God.

"Thrown in the fire." A sort of shocking conclusion to the sentence. This line was obviously constructed to make the reader expect one thing and get another. Being thrown into something is a feeling of helplessness, but Rumi wants this man to willingly be thrown. A definite act of faith.

"In the shambles of love, they kill only the best" A reference to Christ? After a failing of love, the best are selected and killed. A sort of sacrifice perhaps. Rumi seems to speak of a kind of love where absolutely nothing is held back. Loving from head to toe, every moment of life. Does anyone love anything this much?

"None of the weak or deformed" The love Rumi writes about is only a perfect love. Those unable of such a relationship need not apply. "They" select only the most worthy, the most perfect to sacrifice for this perfect, all giving love in shambles.

"Don't run away from this dying." Yes, this love is painful and demanding, but be not afraid! To give all you have, you must give all you have. If you face this dying, you have been selected, one of the worthy tested by fire. You are the foot worthy to walk in the garden and the eye that deserves to look at trees. Yet it is a dying. You must let go. Leave your microcosm behind and give yourself over to the rare and diving love.

"Whoever is not killed for love is dead meat." Oh, the blatant truth of this simple line! If you think about it, what else is there really to live for than love? Why live at all if you cannot live happily and in peace?

"Tonight with wine being poured" Very sensual images. The pouring of wine has many meanings from promises of drunkenness and wildness, to a night of luxury, to a romantic evening. This imagery definitely sets a mood in a single sentence and energizes the next stanza with an image of two wine glasses filled full in the light of a solitary candle.

"And instruments singing among themselves," On this magical night of wine and excess, even the instruments come to life to join in the festivities. This is a powerful image of joy, like a wild party spinning around at a feverish pace late into the night. Inhibitions definitely not welcome.

"One thing is forbidden" An evening that is spinning wildly out of control with ecstasy and pleasure is held short by only one single rule. What could it be? Why does Rumi divide the line here? The reader must pause, if only for a second, to decide what the rule could be. What rule could there be that could steal the magic from this night?

"one thing: Sleep." An excellent surprise. Rumi leads the reader one way and then suddenly pulls them back another. There is nothing that can ruin the festivities except for slumber. People can live like this party everyday if they so choose, they only need desire to continue. Through this line Rumi questions his reader by asking, "the choice is yours; will you sleep?"

"Two strong impulses: One" A foreshadowing. The reader must ask what the two impulses could possibly be.

"To drink long and deep," Wow. Another sort of rule like the forbidden sleep. Let go of yourself, lose you ego, give in to the incredible love of God. The reader can choose to live this amazing life of pleasure, and the only price they have to pay is to have fun and follow your impulses.

"The other" Again, Rumi breaks up the sentence for emphasis.

"Not to sober up too soon." A clever trick played by the poet. The reader expects something different, not the same impose mentioned before. This line washes away all the anxiety of wonder and mystery in the poem and leaves the reader fulfilled with promise of happiness. We truly create our own destiny.

Has anyone seen the boy who used to come here?

In looking at the poem itself, I am wondering who the speaker is, and who he/she is talking to. I can imagine the speaker talking to a group of people, whether it be friends or neighbors, at a spot in town where people gather, maybe at a church/store/street corner, etc. From this line, I understand that the boy no longer stops by, and while the boy may be 10 years old, I wonder how much time has passed since the boy came, and how old is he now. Is he still a boy?

Round-faced trouble-maker, quick to find a joke,

I see a boy, with red cheeks, darting around, picking on people, causing trouble, I am reminded of kids in my class from high school.

slow to be serious, red shirt

This kid likes to have a good time. The color red sticks out. While the speaker may not approve of the antics of the boy, he/she must like the kid to remember so much and to ask about him.

with things always in his pocket: reed flute,

typical kids, frogs and rocks and things in his pocket. significance of flute?? is the boy a musician who plays for people?

worn pick, polished and ready for his Talent

you know that one.

is the pick used to play a guitar? it seems like another reference to musical talent. the pick is worn, the boy uses it often. why is Talent capitalized?? His talent must be more than music if it is capitalized. In society, words relating to God/Jesus are often capitalized: Divine, He/She, Word, etc.

Have you heard stories about him?

It seems as if the speaker is trying to find someone who can recall memories with him about the boy.

collapsed for such a Joseph.

This may be an intertextual comment, but this line refers directly to the Bible, and the story of Joseph. Is the boy Joseph?? I think so? Maybe the speaker is talking to people, they remember Joseph as a boy and now have heard that he is a powerful leader in Egypt.

I'd gladly spend years getting word of him, even third or fourth hand.

This boy--Joseph--has really impressed the speaker. Maybe he and the boy share a special bond. The speaker is dying to hear anything about the boy, who is probably now a man. Perhaps the speaker has been searching for knowledge about the boy for a long time. The speakers says he/she would be spend years searching just to hear a word. Now that's dedication. I wonder who this boy really is? Perhaps he is Joseph. The red shirt--the coat of many colors??

Rumi, "Four Quatrains," in Rag and Bone, p.9

"Where is a foot worthy to walk a garden,"

Ah. Isn’t this nice? Walking BAREFOOT in a garden. How I would like to just kick off my shoes and walk in the black dirt. Geez, we are human and we complain about being so distant from our earth. I wonder why! We don’t even walk on the earth! We walk in our shoes which walk on the earth. How many of us actually come in contact with the earth everyday? Hmm. After thinking about this I sadly really do not touch the earth everyday! I walk on sidewalks and streets. I live in buildings and this built environment we’ve created for ourselves. I should take the time to touch the earth: one-on-one contact. I should at least touch a tree or look at the brilliance of a single snowflake. I haven’t stopped to look at a single snowflake for about a year now!

"or any eye that deserves to look at trees?"

I see that Rumi has a deeper question here. He’s pondering how unworthy we are as humans to live in this most beautiful world. We are not worthy to live on earth. I see this when Rumi asks where are these things (a worthy foot and a deserved eye)? We must not have these things. Thus, we are not worthy and deserving. Is he saying that we are foreigners to earth? That we don’t belong? It is true that we as humans really are quite purposeless on this earth. (We discussed this in my science class this semester.) What is our great contribution to the earth? Nothing really. When humans become extinct, the earth will keep on rotating without us. Seeing is a privilege. Without glasses, I would be one of those people who didn’t deserve to see a tree in the distance.

"Show me a man willing to be / thrown in the fire"

Though we recognize our unworthiness, we do not want to give up what we are given. It’s like being tempted with dessert and being told it’s not for you to eat. As greedy humans, we want what we are given and MORE. Some men have willingly chosen to be thrown into the fire. Consider martyrs for example. Is Rumi forgetting about these people? They are exceptions to this poem, I’m assuming. Or were there not martyrs back then in the 13^th century when Rumi was living? I’m pretty sure that there were. Why does Rumi correlate death with unworthiness? I guess if we are unworthy in this life, we will suffer the fires of Hell. Will a man willingly jump in Hell though. No. A man must be forced to jump in hell. Maybe this is what Rumi is trying to get across. Martyrs knew their fate was not Hell but Heaven. They died for a greater cause.

"In the shambles of love, they kill only the best,"

Shambles according to dictionary.com means disorder or ruin. Who are they? Why is love in shambles? Is the best implying those worthy humans? I really don’t understand this line. Maybe the lines proceeding it will reveal something more.

"none of the weak or deformed."

Is he implying that the weak and deformed are unworthy? Just because you’re weak and deformed on the outside doesn’t mean you are on the inside too. I guess early medicine believed in this. But Rumi is talking about only external qualities of a person in the first quatrain in the images of an eye and a foot. So the weak and deformed are not killed. Those who are maybe termed worthy (true worthiness on the inside) are saved. Are "they" the gods. Rumi did believe in the Turkish religion. I tried to search for something on it, but I just came up with cultural customs and foods of the Turks. OOOhh. Look at the preceding line: "In the shambles of love." These unworthy and worst people are killed out of LOVE. Isn’t that insane? Well, I guess if you want to keep what’s good, you need to throw away the bad apples in order to preserve the good apples of the bunch.

"Don’t run away from this dying. Whoever’s not killed for love is dead meat."

WHAT??!! Now this makes me laugh to the point of real confusion. So what Rumi says here is that all those GOOD people who are saved who are running away from the dying are "dead meat." This doesn’t make sense. Maybe I’ve got it ALL wrong.

Are we all "dead meat" then? If those who are unworthy are killed AND those who are left are killed, then everyone dies. Which is in a sense true. We all will die. Maybe I’m missing the very FEW who are saved. Yes, this is it. Those who don’t run away are saved! There we go! Some people do live! Ok, so in order to live we must 1. Be worthy 2. Don’t run away from the dying. Ok. So if you’re going to make it to heaven this makes sense. You must not be afraid. You must stay with the dying, console them, and be at their side. Good tip Rumi.

Ok, I see I’ve got another error floating around up there. Rumi says, "they kill only the best." So the good people are then killed too? I think I mistakenly said the unworthy people were killed…

Could it be a Christ-like reference. We humans did kill the best. We killed Jesus Christ.

"Tonight with wine being poured / and instruments singing among themselves,"

This is a nice image. An orchestra is best when you don’t see the people, but you see only the music and instruments. The instruments take on a life of their own. This reminds me of the hollow flute in the bed of Mallarme’s "A Lace Curtain Self-Destructs." No person is present at all in this poem. The instrument takes on the role of the person.

"one thing is forbidden, one thing: Sleep."

Ok, so are these quatrains completely separate or what now? I need sleep right now. That’s about all I can relate to. HA! But Rumi is telling me right now NOT to sleep. Oh, but Rumi, Why? Why? Why? I hear Rumi telling me to dance and sing and make the most of my life this very night. I was doing some research on Rumi (I lost the website, but it’s connected to the one cited above where I took the picture from), and I found that the reference to drinking does not have connotations with alcohol! In Islam they actually frown upon drinking and getting drunk. What Rumi is trying to say here is that they are getting drunk on GOD, not alcohol!

"Two strong impulses: One / to drink long and deep,"

Yes, I do need an impulse for God. I don’t think I really have one to the extent that Rumi asks of me. I need to have an impulse to God like some people have an impulse to drink. I need to forget when to say when with God. I need to drink so much that I’ll have to have my stomach pumped.

"the other, not to sober up too soon."

Oh. Ok. So let’s just leave me in the hospital drunk and half unconscious. Yeah. This is actually the best way to die: to be so drugged up on God that I don’t have a fear of dying. Wouldn’t this be a good wish? Instead of wishing my death in sleep, I should wish my death to be at a point when I’m fully at peace and at the pinnacle of love with my God.

Ok. So it looks like I’ve totally demolished trying to find any sort of a theme throughout this poem. My subconscious took over and I began to see the poem line by line rather than quatrain by quatrain. What would happen if I went word by word? Scary. I don’t think I should go do that anytime soon yet. I think when I try breaking it up into tinnier bits and pieces, I lose sight of the whole. If I went word by word, I would just be reading MYSELF and not the poem, the world it might represent, or the work itself in which it comes from.

We must find a balance when reading our poetry: between words, lines, and the entire whole. This experiment just did not work for deriving any deeper meaning or understanding on the poem itself. I think I had a better picture about what this poem was about when I just read it straight through without stopping.

This phrase caught me the most as religious because of its implications of faith and salvation within love. To die within love as in to completely accept the love of god and within this find salvation (your common everyday relgious idea)

The line to not fear the death of that which is known tells me that the death that is known is death as in life & death, and all that jazz, but to die within the context of the rest of the poem is to give over to God. So dont fear real death because if you accept god you will be timeless (salvation again)

Give up the ties to life as a human. salvation is in the next life so throw out the attachment to this one.

resign yourself to God and the church (the deathless in the sense that the church is the faithful) and you will find salvation

when you give over to god you become a brite reflection of his being. The moon being the reflection the cloud being the world that you are attached to.

Die in This Love

Die, die, die in this love.

This is one powerful way to begin a poem. Often, death is perceived to be the worst of all possible things. On the other hand, love is seen as the best. The first three words appear evil. I picture an enemy on the battlefield saying to a fallen warrior that it's time to die, to give up since there is no chance for victory. But then I wonder why we need to die in this love. How can one suffer the pain of death during the greatest love of all? The opening line is a simple command. It has nothing more to say. The period really seems to stand out in the sentence. There is no opening for dissent or a question. There is no question mark. A period. Period.

If you die in this love your soul will be renewed.

At first, I wonder why I need to die in love. Now I am told. It is the one true chance for a soul to be renewed. I'm thinking of religious commitment. I must be willing to surrender my wants and desires for something much greater than myself. That is how I can connect with my true being. The author wants me to realize that not all forms of life are similar. Sometimes I must be willing to suffer for goodness. I cannot go on living a life of isolation and disillusion. I need to make a decision, a commitment, a promise, to get to my final and greatest destination. Now the poet has given me the cure for my instant apprehension.

Die, die, don't fear the death of that which is known.

The poet can see my trouble. I live in a world that wants answers to everything. I need to know the answers to life's greatest questions, how many planets make up our solar system, whether Bill Clinton lied to his wife. But deep down I have little commitment to myself. Inside, I know that God has a plan for my life. Now I must be willing to act. The poets seems to be pleading with me -- he tells me I already know the answer. Then why am I still afraid? The things I thought I knew might die. But need not fear.

If you die to the temporal you will become timeless.

When I die to the limits of time, I become timeless. It seems simple enough. I can take control of my life, make it my own, for my own reasons, the best reasons. I worry too much about the modern world and how it perceives me. Do I look strange because my clock ticks a little different than others? The poet never wants me to ask such questions. When I do, I limit the power that lives inside me, as I give in to the deadlines of time.

that hold you prisoner to the world of attachment.

I must break free from this world. I'm too attached to my surroundings. The physical world has few answers. It holds me down, suffocates my ambition and goals. The world of attachment is the one I live in right now. I try to become attached to things. I cannot die, I cannot destroy the pain I feel when something close to me leaves. But the author wants me to recognize the limits of this world. I can choose to cut off the chains myself; they only hold me when I let them.

Die, die, die to the deathless and you will be eternal.

Here and elsewhere, die seems to mean give in and believe. If I give in and believe in eternal life, I will never meet death. Instead, I've been letting this world tell me the limits to life. The words in this line are not so commanding, but soothing. Repeating die seems to conjure op strange images in my mind. Although the poet doesn't seem to use death in a evil way, my mind immediately connects death to pain.

Die, die, come out of this cloud.

It is time to clear my head and find the answers. Right now, the world has clouded my vision and judgement. I've lost sight of the real meaning in life -- the meaning that I discover and make for myself. The poet wants me to leave this world and come join him. He has figured out a better way of living. The troubles and struggles in my life are unnecessary. Can't I see? Please let me see the answers. I want to see the answers.

you will be the effulgent moon

Effulgent, from Dictionary.com: Shining brilliantly; resplendent. When the disappear from the sight of the moon, the night is lit. I can be the moon to the common world. When I choose to live life how the poet wants, I can light the path for my friends and family. The darkness of the normal and pitied life has no light. I need to focus on something greater, something that will let me see in during a misty night.

Die, die, die to the din and noise of mundane concerns.

Here and elsewhere, die seems to mean give up or break away. When I focus on mundane concerns, the noise is too loud for me to hear my true calling. When I'm distracted, time passes just the same, but I have no true vision or focus.

In the silence of love you will find the spark of life.

GO TO THIS SITE!!

It is a webpage that has a really neat "morphing" effect that morphs one of Rumi’s poems from Persian to English. Just read the directions.

This webpage is a division of http://www.rumi.net/. It’s a pretty cool site. There’s a section on it that briefly talks about "How to Whirl." I guess whirling is based on the concept that all things in our universe are constantly spinning from atoms right on up to the planets.

Okay, here is my big question: Why doesn’t Rumi ever say those three big words? ("I love you.")

I wouldn’t say he’s beating around the bush. Maybe the type of love he is experiencing is better than love itself and "I love you" just doesn’t cut it. Or is this kind of love the same as what is meant in the phrase "I love you" ?