The Man in the Panther Skin (Shota Rustaveli, The Man in the Panther Skin, Text and Versions, Edited by Akaki Shanidze and Alexandre Baramidze, Tbilisi, 1966)

<< Back

Author	Shota Rustaveli
Epoch	XII-XIII
Work	The Man in the Panther Skin (Shota Rustaveli, The Man in the Panther Skin, Text and Versions, Edited by Akaki Shanidze and Alexandre Baramidze, Tbilisi, 1966)
Type	Poetry
Quote	“A lover must have sunlike beauty, Wisdom, generosity, wealth, chivalry and leisure (in Georgian: “motsaleoba”), Eloquence, comprehension (literally: mind), patience, [might] to overcome the mighty warriors; Who has not all these [qualities], lacks the virtues of lovers. “ (Stanza 23)
Term	Lover must have […] leisure Leisure ( “Nicomachean Ethics” )

Nike. Vani. II-I BC, Bronze, 22 x19 cm. The Georgian National Museum.

Comment	“The 23^rd stanza of ‘The Man in the Panther Skin’ lists necessary virtues of a lover, in fact, of an ideal person” (see E. Khintibidze, 2009, pg. 497; for details see ibid. pg. 497-518, with bibliography). The vast majority of these ten physical and spiritual qualities (in Ancient Greek: Arete) are found also in the ethical system of Aristotle (see “Nicomachean Ethics”). These are: “wisdom” - Sophia (III, 9-12); “generosity” - Eleytheriotes (IV, 1-3); “wealth” - Ploytos (IV, 1); “comprehension” - Synesis (VI, 7); “patience” - Ekgrateia (VII, 1-10); “the overcoming of the mighty warriors” - Andreia (III, 9-12). As for “sunlike beauty” and “chivalry”, these are the specific virtues of knight. “Eloquence”, means “eloquence of tongue”, that is, ability of reasoning. Only “leisure” (in Georgian: “Motsaleoba”) remains, about which the researchers of Rustaveli’s poem have expressed opinions absolutely different from each other (cf. ibid., pg. 497-498). According to the Ancient Georgian literary monuments and namely, “The Man in the Panther Skin” the main meaning of the word “Motsaleoba” / ”Motsaleba” and its derivatives is “idleness”, i.e., having free time (see: G. Imedashvili, 1966, pg. 291; K. Danelia, 1967, pg. 140-145). In fact, such a traditional interpretation of the word “Motsaleoba” - from the line 23, 2 - was to a certain extent supported by king Vakhtang VI and V. Nozadze (cf. E. khintibidze, 2009, pg. 513, with bibliography). The opinion is considered acceptable also by N. Natadze, who - out of the three probable meanings of “Motsaleoba” in the stanza under consideration (see N. Natadze, 2006, pg. 19, 467) - lists in the first place “idleness” (see ibid., 2006, pg, 19). In G. Imedashvili’s view, the so-called traditional interpretation of “Motsaleoba” - from the line 23, 2 - is unjustified, since ”idleness” (having free time or being idle even due to being in love) is not an individual physical or spiritual quality (unlike “beauty”, “wisdom” and “generosity”, etc.); moreover, it also cannot be considered as a characteristic virtue for an ideal person and, namely, for an ideal lover (see G. Imedashvili, 1966, pg. 291-292). At the same time, observation of the poems’ heroes makes it clear, that “idleness” caused by love or generally, idleness, is not considered by Rustaveli as virtue for a lover, especially for an ideal lover, but, on the contrary, it is considered as some sort of shortcoming (see: K. Danelia, 1967, pg. 149; E. Khintibidze, 2009, pg. 498-499, note 1). Thus, in Rustaveli studies started the lengthy process to establish under which meaning the poet used the word “Motsaleoba” in the line 23, 2. According to N. Natadze, the second possible interpretation for “Motsaleoba” (see above for the first one) can be “’suitability’, that is, spiritual and/or social equality of lovers” (see N. Natadze, 2006, pg. 19); this point of view actually belongs to G. Imedashvili, who paid attention to the derivative form of the word “Tsali”, which is the verb “Shegitsalo” having the meaning of “equal”, “appropriate” in the poem. Thus, “Motsaleoba” - from the line 23, 2 - might mean, that one lover must be “equal, suitable and appropriate” to another (see G. Imedashvili, 1966, pg. 293). Taking into account the doubtless - at first glance - circumstance, that ideal lovers must be suitable to each other I. Kaladze - following G. Imedashvili and N. Natadze - also supports the idea of understanding “Motsaleoba” as “suitability, “equity” (see I. Kaladze, 2000; for further on interpretation of “Motsaleoba” as “suitability”, “equality” see below). According to K. Danelia’s correct observation, Georgian “Motsaleoba” corresponds in Greek language to the noun – “He skhole” and the verb – “Skholadzo”, which apart from “idleness” have other meanings, as well. However, having reviewed those meanings the scholar finally concluded, that in the line 23, 2 “Motsaleoba” must have been used by Rustaveli in the meaning of “serenity”, “sedateness”, “calmness” (see K. Danelia, 1967, pg. 149-151). The above point of view has not been shared by researchers of Rustaveli’s poem: paying attention to the fact, that “the poet demands from a lover, on the one hand, comprehension, and on the other, patience”, it becomes clear, that “within the catalogue of virtues” of the Rustavelian furious lover “there is no room left for any kind of serenity or sedateness and calmness” (for details see E. Khintibidze, 2009, pg. 499-500). In E. Khintibidze’s view, understanding “Motsaleoba” as “suitability” and “equality” (see above) is not justified either, since, just like “idleness”, neither does the mutual suitability of lovers belong to the personal physical or spiritual virtues of human being; however, the 23^rd stanza lists virtues of exactly such kinds. Besides, it goes without saying, that ideal lovers ought to be suitable to each other (see ibid., pg. 499). Furthermore, in connection with the issue under consideration, perhaps, the completely opposite point of view is expressed in the prologue of the poem: “His (i.e., lover’s) heart must yearn for one and one only from whom he may endure even wrath or sorrow” (25, 3). In addition, even more important is the fact, that “Motsaleoba” / “Motsaleba” in Ancient Georgian does not mean “suitability” and “equality” (see ibid., pg. 513); rather it has two meanings: the primary is “idleness”, while the secondary is “intellectual and cognitive activity” (see ibid., pg. 502-506). As it has been illustrated (see above) Rustavelian “Motsaleoba” cannot and does not have the meaning of “idleness” (cf. N. Natadze, 2006, pg. 467). It remains to be clarified, whether the term under consideration - “Motsaleoba” / “Leisure” – means “the intellectual and cognitive activity” of any type in “The Man in the Panther Skin”. In the view of E. Khintibidze, this question must be answered positively and the activity of this type is thinking about and comprehension of Love by a lover (see E. Khintibidze, 2009, pg. 509; according to N. Natadze, this is the third possible interpretation for “Motsaleoba” / “Leisure” - cf. N. Natadze, 2006, pg. 467). In particular, according to E. Khintibidze, the following famous lines from the prologue to “The Man in the Panther Skin” point to the accuracy of the above interpretation of “Motsaleoba” / “Leisure”: “So, also, should a lover love the process of being in love (literally: So, also, should a lover love Love), and understand (literally: guess) it” (11, 3) and “He must remember her and have leisure for nothing but her” (32, 3); “the main activity of Tariel’s and Avtandil’s lives and actions is having leisure for Love […], thinking about love and loving and understanding it. The lives of the heroes are guided by this philosophy” (see E. Khintibidze, 2009, pg. 516-517). In my view, to illustrate further the above interpretation of “Leisure” / “Motsaleoba” - in addition to the lines 11, 3 and 32, 3 of the prologue or the so-called theoretical part of the poem - we should pay attention also to another, no less well-known line of “The Man in the Panther Skin”, which belongs, though, to the so-called artistic part of the poem. I have in my mind the line 887, 4: “You will insult me, live me alone, I have no leisure, neither have I patience”. It is clear even without special discussion, that the words of furious (“You will insult me, live me alone”) Tariel - “I have no leisure” - addressed to his close friend Avtandil cannot be understood as “serenity” (I am not calm), or as “idleness” (I am not idle), nor as “suitability” (I am not suitable [for Nestan]). Instead, these words (“I have no leisure”) can mean only one thing, namely, that Tariel has no leisure time for something, and the hero has no leisure time to listen to what Avtandil is telling him: “What did you say, what are you saying, I cannot understand it, neither have I leisure time to listen it” (886, 1); but what is Avtandil telling to his troubled friend, what is he rebuking him for? He is rebuking Tariel for the reason, that he cannot comprehend Love, cannot contemplate it, despite the fact, that he is a sage: “Who has not been in love […]“ (875,2); “If you are a sage […]” (876, 1); “You are a sage, but you don’t know how to realize, in accordance with the teaching of the sages […]” (877, 1); “Who has not been a lover […] “(878,1). The answer of Tariel comprises one of the most well-known words of the entire poem (887, 1 / 4): “Sage? Which sage? What sage [are you talking about]? How madman can demonstrate wisdom? / […] You will insult me, live me alone, I have no leisure, neither have I patience.” Thus, Tariel, actually, admits that at given moment he is not able to act as a wise man and this is why he is not capable of accomplishing leisure, that is, contemplation of Love and by means of it enduring the vicissitudes of a lover's unhappy life. In my opinion, it must be taken for granted, that the desperate answer of Tariel reveals three out of ten virtues from the 23^rd stanza of the prologue – wisdom, leisure and patience; this fact, in its turn, undoubtedly shows the correctness of the point of view, that the “Leisure” / “Motsaleoba” of “The Man in the Panther Skin”, opposite to the standpoints established in the majority of contemporary Rustaveli studies, means neither “idleness”, nor “equality”, and nor unilaterally only “attentiveness, leisure for the lover” (cf. N. Natadze, 2006, pg. 467), but lover’s “intellectual and cognitive activity”, the subject of which is the perception of Love itself. And this is the “ancient principle of thinking” (see: Aristotle, “Nicomachean Ethics”, X, 7; Plato, “The Symposium”, XXIX; Plotinus, “On the Beautiful” – “Ennead” I, VI, 9; - E. Khintibidze, 2009, pg. 517, 511; cf. B. Bregvadze, 1966, pg. 190) and thus, one more case of the reflection of the Classical Tradition in Rustaveli’s “The Man in the Panther Skin”. Bibliography B. Bregvadze (1966) The Commentary on Plotinus’ Treatise “On the Beautiful”, The Journal Mnatobi, 9, pg. 181-190. (In Georgian) K. Danelia (1967) From the Lexicon of “The Man in the Panther Skin”, Digest of articles Orioni, Tbilisi, pg. 140-151. (In Georgian) G. Imedashvili (1966) The Leisure of “The Man in the Panther Skin”, The Collection of Works - “Shota Rustaveli” (The Anniversary Collection of Works of Shota Rustaveli Institute of [Georgian] Literature), pg. 290-295. (In Georgian) I. Kaladze (2000) Chivalry and Leisure in “The Man in the Panther Skin”, Digest of articles - Shota Rustaveli, I, pg. 272-284. (In Georgian) E. Khintibidze (2009) The World View of Rustaveli’s “Vepkhistqaosani” (“The Man in the Panther Skin”), Tbilisi. (In Georgian) N. Natadze (2006) Shota Rustaveli, “The Man in the Panther Skin”, School Edition with Introduction, Literary Review, Dictionary and Commentary, Edited by N. Natadze, Tbilisi. (In Georgian) [Z.Kh.]

Comment

“The 23^rd stanza of ‘The Man in the Panther Skin’ lists necessary virtues of a lover, in fact, of an ideal person” (see E. Khintibidze, 2009, pg. 497; for details see ibid. pg. 497-518, with bibliography). The vast majority of these ten physical and spiritual qualities (in Ancient Greek: Arete) are found also in the ethical system of Aristotle (see “Nicomachean Ethics”). These are: “wisdom” - Sophia (III, 9-12); “generosity” - Eleytheriotes (IV, 1-3); “wealth” - Ploytos (IV, 1); “comprehension” - Synesis (VI, 7); “patience” - Ekgrateia (VII, 1-10); “the overcoming of the mighty warriors” - Andreia (III, 9-12). As for “sunlike beauty” and “chivalry”, these are the specific virtues of knight. “Eloquence”, means “eloquence of tongue”, that is, ability of reasoning. Only “leisure” (in Georgian: “Motsaleoba”) remains, about which the researchers of Rustaveli’s poem have expressed opinions absolutely different from each other (cf. ibid., pg. 497-498).

According to the Ancient Georgian literary monuments and namely, “The Man in the Panther Skin” the main meaning of the word “Motsaleoba” / ”Motsaleba” and its derivatives is “idleness”, i.e., having free time (see: G. Imedashvili, 1966, pg. 291; K. Danelia, 1967, pg. 140-145). In fact, such a traditional interpretation of the word “Motsaleoba” - from the line 23, 2 - was to a certain extent supported by king Vakhtang VI and V. Nozadze (cf. E. khintibidze, 2009, pg. 513, with bibliography). The opinion is considered acceptable also by N. Natadze, who - out of the three probable meanings of “Motsaleoba” in the stanza under consideration (see N. Natadze, 2006, pg. 19, 467) - lists in the first place “idleness” (see ibid., 2006, pg, 19).

In G. Imedashvili’s view, the so-called traditional interpretation of “Motsaleoba” - from the line 23, 2 - is unjustified, since ”idleness” (having free time or being idle even due to being in love) is not an individual physical or spiritual quality (unlike “beauty”, “wisdom” and “generosity”, etc.); moreover, it also cannot be considered as a characteristic virtue for an ideal person and, namely, for an ideal lover (see G. Imedashvili, 1966, pg. 291-292). At the same time, observation of the poems’ heroes makes it clear, that “idleness” caused by love or generally, idleness, is not considered by Rustaveli as virtue for a lover, especially for an ideal lover, but, on the contrary, it is considered as some sort of shortcoming (see: K. Danelia, 1967, pg. 149; E. Khintibidze, 2009, pg. 498-499, note 1). Thus, in Rustaveli studies started the lengthy process to establish under which meaning the poet used the word “Motsaleoba” in the line 23, 2.

According to N. Natadze, the second possible interpretation for “Motsaleoba” (see above for the first one) can be “’suitability’, that is, spiritual and/or social equality of lovers” (see N. Natadze, 2006, pg. 19); this point of view actually belongs to G. Imedashvili, who paid attention to the derivative form of the word “Tsali”, which is the verb “Shegitsalo” having the meaning of “equal”, “appropriate” in the poem. Thus, “Motsaleoba” - from the line 23, 2 - might mean, that one lover must be “equal, suitable and appropriate” to another (see G. Imedashvili, 1966, pg. 293). Taking into account the doubtless - at first glance - circumstance, that ideal lovers must be suitable to each other I. Kaladze - following G. Imedashvili and N. Natadze - also supports the idea of understanding “Motsaleoba” as “suitability, “equity” (see I. Kaladze, 2000; for further on interpretation of “Motsaleoba” as “suitability”, “equality” see below).

According to K. Danelia’s correct observation, Georgian “Motsaleoba” corresponds in Greek language to the noun – “He skhole” and the verb – “Skholadzo”, which apart from “idleness” have other meanings, as well. However, having reviewed those meanings the scholar finally concluded, that in the line 23, 2 “Motsaleoba” must have been used by Rustaveli in the meaning of “serenity”, “sedateness”, “calmness” (see K. Danelia, 1967, pg. 149-151). The above point of view has not been shared by researchers of Rustaveli’s poem: paying attention to the fact, that “the poet demands from a lover, on the one hand, comprehension, and on the other, patience”, it becomes clear, that “within the catalogue of virtues” of the Rustavelian furious lover “there is no room left for any kind of serenity or sedateness and calmness” (for details see E. Khintibidze, 2009, pg. 499-500).

In E. Khintibidze’s view, understanding “Motsaleoba” as “suitability” and “equality” (see above) is not justified either, since, just like “idleness”, neither does the mutual suitability of lovers belong to the personal physical or spiritual virtues of human being; however, the 23^rd stanza lists virtues of exactly such kinds. Besides, it goes without saying, that ideal lovers ought to be suitable to each other (see ibid., pg. 499). Furthermore, in connection with the issue under consideration, perhaps, the completely opposite point of view is expressed in the prologue of the poem: “His (i.e., lover’s) heart must yearn for one and one only from whom he may endure even wrath or sorrow” (25, 3). In addition, even more important is the fact, that “Motsaleoba” / “Motsaleba” in Ancient Georgian does not mean “suitability” and “equality” (see ibid., pg. 513); rather it has two meanings: the primary is “idleness”, while the secondary is “intellectual and cognitive activity” (see ibid., pg. 502-506). As it has been illustrated (see above) Rustavelian “Motsaleoba” cannot and does not have the meaning of “idleness” (cf. N. Natadze, 2006, pg. 467).

It remains to be clarified, whether the term under consideration - “Motsaleoba” / “Leisure” – means “the intellectual and cognitive activity” of any type in “The Man in the Panther Skin”. In the view of E. Khintibidze, this question must be answered positively and the activity of this type is thinking about and comprehension of Love by a lover (see E. Khintibidze, 2009, pg. 509; according to N. Natadze, this is the third possible interpretation for “Motsaleoba” / “Leisure” - cf. N. Natadze, 2006, pg. 467). In particular, according to E. Khintibidze, the following famous lines from the prologue to “The Man in the Panther Skin” point to the accuracy of the above interpretation of “Motsaleoba” / “Leisure”: “So, also, should a lover love the process of being in love (literally: So, also, should a lover love Love), and understand (literally: guess) it” (11, 3) and “He must remember her and have leisure for nothing but her” (32, 3); “the main activity of Tariel’s and Avtandil’s lives and actions is having leisure for Love […], thinking about love and loving and understanding it. The lives of the heroes are guided by this philosophy” (see E. Khintibidze, 2009, pg. 516-517).

In my view, to illustrate further the above interpretation of “Leisure” / “Motsaleoba” - in addition to the lines 11, 3 and 32, 3 of the prologue or the so-called theoretical part of the poem - we should pay attention also to another, no less well-known line of “The Man in the Panther Skin”, which belongs, though, to the so-called artistic part of the poem. I have in my mind the line 887, 4: “You will insult me, live me alone, I have no leisure, neither have I patience”. It is clear even without special discussion, that the words of furious (“You will insult me, live me alone”) Tariel - “I have no leisure” - addressed to his close friend Avtandil cannot be understood as “serenity” (I am not calm), or as “idleness” (I am not idle), nor as “suitability” (I am not suitable [for Nestan]). Instead, these words (“I have no leisure”) can mean only one thing, namely, that Tariel has no leisure time for something, and the hero has no leisure time to listen to what Avtandil is telling him: “What did you say, what are you saying, I cannot understand it, neither have I leisure time to listen it” (886, 1); but what is Avtandil telling to his troubled friend, what is he rebuking him for? He is rebuking Tariel for the reason, that he cannot comprehend Love, cannot contemplate it, despite the fact, that he is a sage: “Who has not been in love […]“ (875,2); “If you are a sage […]” (876, 1); “You are a sage, but you don’t know how to realize, in accordance with the teaching of the sages […]” (877, 1); “Who has not been a lover […] “(878,1). The answer of Tariel comprises one of the most well-known words of the entire poem (887, 1 / 4): “Sage? Which sage? What sage [are you talking about]? How madman can demonstrate wisdom? / […] You will insult me, live me alone, I have no leisure, neither have I patience.” Thus, Tariel, actually, admits that at given moment he is not able to act as a wise man and this is why he is not capable of accomplishing leisure, that is, contemplation of Love and by means of it enduring the vicissitudes of a lover's unhappy life. In my opinion, it must be taken for granted, that the desperate answer of Tariel reveals three out of ten virtues from the 23^rd stanza of the prologue – wisdom, leisure and patience; this fact, in its turn, undoubtedly shows the correctness of the point of view, that the “Leisure” / “Motsaleoba” of “The Man in the Panther Skin”, opposite to the standpoints established in the majority of contemporary Rustaveli studies, means neither “idleness”, nor “equality”, and nor unilaterally only “attentiveness, leisure for the lover” (cf. N. Natadze, 2006, pg. 467), but lover’s “intellectual and cognitive activity”, the subject of which is the perception of Love itself. And this is the “ancient principle of thinking” (see: Aristotle, “Nicomachean Ethics”, X, 7; Plato, “The Symposium”, XXIX; Plotinus, “On the Beautiful” – “Ennead” I, VI, 9; - E. Khintibidze, 2009, pg. 517, 511; cf. B. Bregvadze, 1966, pg. 190) and thus, one more case of the reflection of the Classical Tradition in Rustaveli’s “The Man in the Panther Skin”.

Bibliography

B. Bregvadze (1966) The Commentary on Plotinus’ Treatise “On the Beautiful”, The Journal Mnatobi, 9, pg. 181-190. (In Georgian)

K. Danelia (1967) From the Lexicon of “The Man in the Panther Skin”, Digest of articles Orioni, Tbilisi, pg. 140-151. (In Georgian)

G. Imedashvili (1966) The Leisure of “The Man in the Panther Skin”, The Collection of Works - “Shota Rustaveli” (The Anniversary Collection of Works of Shota Rustaveli Institute of [Georgian] Literature), pg. 290-295. (In Georgian)

I. Kaladze (2000) Chivalry and Leisure in “The Man in the Panther Skin”, Digest of articles - Shota Rustaveli, I, pg. 272-284. (In Georgian)

E. Khintibidze (2009) The World View of Rustaveli’s “Vepkhistqaosani” (“The Man in the Panther Skin”), Tbilisi. (In Georgian)

N. Natadze (2006) Shota Rustaveli, “The Man in the Panther Skin”, School Edition with Introduction, Literary Review, Dictionary and Commentary, Edited by N. Natadze, Tbilisi. (In Georgian)

[Z.Kh.]

Search query