[199] A novice in the language would say, "Here a distinction seems to be drawn between the words zaban and jibh. Both signify 'tongue,' but the former applies to men and the latter to animals." To this profound bit of criticism I should reply—Not so fast, Mr. Novice; a distinction there is, but that is not it. The word zaban in Persian and Hindustani means both the fleshy member of the body, called the tongue, and also language or speech, just like our word "tongue," which has both significations. In the former sense it applies alike to man and beast; in the latter it is mere truism to say that it applies to man only. Jibh, in Hindi and Hindustani, means the tongue only in the sense of the member of the body, never in the sense of speech; hence it is equally applicable to man or brute. Ask any physician who has practised in India the Hindustani for "show the tongue," he will tell you jibh dikla,o, or zaban dikla,o; and if he was a man of discernment, he would use jibh with a Hindu, and zaban with a Musalman; but I believe he would be perfectly understood, whichever word he used to either party.
[200] The case is Hatim's philanthropy in respect to the old woodman, which on the part of any other than Hatim might seem super-human.
[201] It is related by grave historians, that Hatim actually built an alms-house of this description. On Hatim's death, his younger brother, who succeeded him, endeavoured to act the generous in the above manner. His mother dissuaded him, saying, "Think not, my son, of imitating Hatim: it is an effort thou canst not accomplish;" and in order to prove what she said, the mother assumed the garb of a fakir, and acted as above related. When she came to the first door the second time, and received her son's lecture on the sin of avarice; she suddenly threw off her disguise, and said, "I told thee, my son, not to think of imitating Hatim. By him I have been served three times running, in this very manner, without ever a question being asked."
[202] This and the following jeu de mots cannot be easily explained to a person who does not understand a little Arabic or Persian.
[203] The original is, "as yet Dilli is a long way off," a proverb like that of the Campbells—"It is a far cry to Loch Awe."
[204] The expression in the original is so plain as to need no translation.
[205] Some would-be knowing critics inform us that "Dastar-khwan" literally signifies the "turband of the table"!!! How they manage to make such a meaning out of it is beyond ordinary research; and when done, it makes nonsense. They forget that the Orientals never made use of tables in the good old times. The dastar-khwan is, in reality, both table and table-cloth in one. It is a round piece of cloth or leather spread out on the floor. The food is then arranged thereon, and the company squat round the edge of it, and, after saying Bism-Illah, fall to, with what appetite they may; hence the phrase dastar-khwan par baithna, to sit on, (not at,) the table. The wise critics seem to be thinking of our modern mahogany, which is a very different affair.
[206] In the original, an infinite variety of dishes is enumerated, which are necessarily passed over in the translation, simply, because we have no corresponding terms to express them in any Christian tongue. They would puzzle the immortal Ude himself, or the no less celebrated Soyer, the present autocrat of the culinary kingdom. But my chief reason for passing them over so lightly is the following, viz.: I have fully ascertained from officers home on furlough, that these passages are never read in India, nor is the student ever examined in them. They can interest only such little minds as are of the most contemptibly frivolous description. A man may be a first-rate English or French scholar, yea, an accomplished statesman, without being conversant with the infinite variety of dishes, &c., set down on the carte of a first-rate Parisian restaurateur.
[207] The Asiatics eat with the right hand, and use no knives or forks; so to draw back the hand from eating is to leave off eating. Of course, spoons are used for broths, &c, which cannot be eaten by the hand.
[208] As it were intended to be stored up and not eaten.