Document Type : علمی- پژوهشی

Authors

1 PhD student in Mystical Literature, Imam Khomeini International University،Qazvin, Iran.

2 Associate Professor, Imam Khomeini International University, Faculty of Literature, Department of Persian Language and Literature, Qazvin, Iran.

Abstract

Investigating the paradox and its function in expressing the experience of the unity of existence in the poetry of the Timurid era[1]
Mysticism is the knowledge of unseen truths, and in other words, mysticism is the knowledge of the truth through names and attributes, and man’s reaching the position of eternal life in God’s presence. The mystic of God, through inner journey, passes through the mystical stations one after the other and until it reaches the position of annihilation and connecting with the truth. Every school and way of thinking has its principles and rules, and mysticism also has certain rules and principles, and anyone who steps on the path of true knowledge needs a leader and a guide, and under his supervision he should study mystical teachings and conduct exercises as well as. He becomes mystical and in this way he achieves the perception of states and positions and the discovery of secrets, which is referred to as a mystical experience. Mystical experience is the collection of perceptions and knowledge of the mystic’s secrets, which after cultivating and nurturing the soul, he is inspired.  Every mystical experience is specific to the mystic who has received it, and because these perceptions are discovery and intuition and are received through inner intuition, to express them, the mystic cannot use the language of expressions, and those truths and long meanings do not fit into the ordinary language. Thus, he uses a language appropriate to those experiences and resorts to code, simile, metaphor, and paradox. Of course, sometimes resorting to the language of allusion is completely conscious and on purpose, so as not to expose the secrets.  Because not everyone is confidant of secrets. In order to explain mystical thoughts and experiences to others and to convince the audience, mystics use the artistic capacities of language in the form of paradoxical and contradictory expression and other types of allusive language. However, many of them consider mystical experiences beyond the explanation and description, and some consider it impossible to express and describe. These facts and knowledge are very different and variable according to the condition of the seeker. The question is why it is not possible to reflect these mysterious situations in the construction of conventional and standard language.  And why after their linguistic reflection, the resulting propositions seem incomprehensible, and at first glance, sometimes seem contradictory and contrary to habit. This paradox has caused thinkers and linguists to pay special attention to the language of mysticism and the means of mystic expression. Since mystics do not use only the external forms of language, but also all the symbolic, allusive, pictorial, visual, music, dance and other symbols and conceptual signs of a society’s culture in expressing the mystical experience. The special type of expression and the use of different types and methods of language make the covering of the mystical experience more concrete and make it more difficult to understand the meaning from the form of words. According to this introduction, the purpose of this article is to examine the mystical language and the means of expressing the mystical experiences and understandings found in the texts of the mystical poems of the Timurid era. Understanding the characteristics of the language and expressing the mystical experiences of this period and its style depends on the text, and from the text and its texture, the characteristics of the language and the means of expressing the mystical experience of this era can be obtained. For the correct understanding of the experiences and the divine mystical mysteries of this period, we need to understand the concept of the environment of the text and to know the contexts of the origin of the text and in other words extratextual contexts and the culture, thought and politics of the Timurid era society. According to the necessity of the situation, culture and textual configuration of the text, it should be noted that the concepts of the mystical texts of the Timurid era society, consist of different cultural contexts and structures, different readings and religious narratives and views and perceptions and discoveries and intuitions of mystics. The pinnacle of all these views is the emergence of the ideas of the Shiite school in mysticism and the boom in reading the ideas of Ibn Arabi and other Sufi schools of ancient Xorâsân. The idea of ​​surrendering to Valiyy and humanism of the Shiite school as a type of religious interpretation and the strict and traditionalist ideas of the Naqšbandiyye Tariqat as another model of religious readings are in opposition to each other and the way out from these two points of view, is the re-reading of  Ibn Arabi’s thoughts that opens the way for the sufi orders and mystics of this age and has developed Sufism and mysticism and opened the field for all sections of the society to some extent. In this sense, the area of ​​language: open and closed signs of the language of mysticism expands. The confrontation and entanglement of religious and mystical thoughts and sayings, patterns of open and closed society, politics, Tariqat and Šariʾat, have caused the complexity of the language of this period; since many of the sensitivities and grudges of the societies are the sources of conflicting ideas in the human society, and also the breadth of signs and the expansion of cultural concepts is the source of the interveneing of religious and cultural thoughts and traditions and all these matters play a role in the expansion of language and another characteristic of the expansion of the language of mysticism. In this era, the flourishing of art, especially painting, which is a form of the language of mysticism and  means of expressing mystical experience. This case can be mentioned from the visual art of Kamâl al-Din Behzâd as an interpreter of Ibn Arabi’s idea of ​​the unity of existence in the form of painting and drawing.
 
References
Čenâri, A., (1377). Motanâqez-nemâyi dar šeʾre fârsi. Tehran: Farzân Ruz.
Faʾʾâli, M. T. (1381). “Zabâne erfân”. Našriyyeye Qabasât. vol. 24. pp. 59-69.
Fulâdi, A., (1391). Tanz dar zabâne erfân. Tehran: Soxan.
Ibn Arabi, Mohammad ibn Ali, (1367). Rasâʾele Ibn Arabi. moqaddame, ed. N. Mâyel Heravi. Tehrân: Mowlâ.
Ibn Xaldun, (1352). Moqaddameye târixe Ibn Xaldun. tr. by M. P. Gonâbâdi. vol. 1.Tehran.
Jahângiri, M., (1375). Mohyi al-Din Ibn Arabi čehreye barjasteye jahâne Eslâm. Tehran: Dânešgâhe Tehran.
Karimi, A. B., (1385). “Tajrobeye erfâni va bayâne pârâdoksi, tajrobeye didâdr bâ xodâ dar soxan”. Majalleye dâneškadeye adabiyyât va olume ensânie Dânešgâhe Tehran. vol. 75. n. 3. pp. 21-42.
Mirbâqeri-Fard A. A. & M. Mohammadi, (1394). “Ebârat va ešârat dar zabâne erfân”. Biannual of Pažuhešnâmeye Erfân. vol. 15. pp. 193-216.
Nasiri Jâmi, H., (1393). Howzeye Herât va šeʾre fârsi. Tehran: Mowlâ.
Vahidiyân Kâmyâr, T., (1376). “Motanâqez-nemâ (paradox) dar adabiyyât”. Našriyyeye dâneškadeye adabiyyât va olume ensâni dânešgâhe Ferdowsi Mašhad. Year 28. vol. 3 & 4. pp. 271-294.
 
[1] Ramazân Tafsiri: Ph.D. student of Persian language and literature of Emâm Xomeyni lnternational university.
Hamid Tâheri: Associate professor of Emâm Xomeyni lnternational university.

Highlights

Investigating the paradox and its function in expressing the experience of the unity of existence in the poetry of the Timurid era[1]

Mysticism is the knowledge of unseen truths, and in other words, mysticism is the knowledge of the truth through names and attributes, and man’s reaching the position of eternal life in God’s presence. The mystic of God, through inner journey, passes through the mystical stations one after the other and until it reaches the position of annihilation and connecting with the truth. Every school and way of thinking has its principles and rules, and mysticism also has certain rules and principles, and anyone who steps on the path of true knowledge needs a leader and a guide, and under his supervision he should study mystical teachings and conduct exercises as well as. He becomes mystical and in this way he achieves the perception of states and positions and the discovery of secrets, which is referred to as a mystical experience. Mystical experience is the collection of perceptions and knowledge of the mystic’s secrets, which after cultivating and nurturing the soul, he is inspired.  Every mystical experience is specific to the mystic who has received it, and because these perceptions are discovery and intuition and are received through inner intuition, to express them, the mystic cannot use the language of expressions, and those truths and long meanings do not fit into the ordinary language. Thus, he uses a language appropriate to those experiences and resorts to code, simile, metaphor, and paradox. Of course, sometimes resorting to the language of allusion is completely conscious and on purpose, so as not to expose the secrets.  Because not everyone is confidant of secrets. In order to explain mystical thoughts and experiences to others and to convince the audience, mystics use the artistic capacities of language in the form of paradoxical and contradictory expression and other types of allusive language. However, many of them consider mystical experiences beyond the explanation and description, and some consider it impossible to express and describe. These facts and knowledge are very different and variable according to the condition of the seeker. The question is why it is not possible to reflect these mysterious situations in the construction of conventional and standard language.  And why after their linguistic reflection, the resulting propositions seem incomprehensible, and at first glance, sometimes seem contradictory and contrary to habit. This paradox has caused thinkers and linguists to pay special attention to the language of mysticism and the means of mystic expression. Since mystics do not use only the external forms of language, but also all the symbolic, allusive, pictorial, visual, music, dance and other symbols and conceptual signs of a society’s culture in expressing the mystical experience. The special type of expression and the use of different types and methods of language make the covering of the mystical experience more concrete and make it more difficult to understand the meaning from the form of words. According to this introduction, the purpose of this article is to examine the mystical language and the means of expressing the mystical experiences and understandings found in the texts of the mystical poems of the Timurid era. Understanding the characteristics of the language and expressing the mystical experiences of this period and its style depends on the text, and from the text and its texture, the characteristics of the language and the means of expressing the mystical experience of this era can be obtained. For the correct understanding of the experiences and the divine mystical mysteries of this period, we need to understand the concept of the environment of the text and to know the contexts of the origin of the text and in other words extratextual contexts and the culture, thought and politics of the Timurid era society. According to the necessity of the situation, culture and textual configuration of the text, it should be noted that the concepts of the mystical texts of the Timurid era society, consist of different cultural contexts and structures, different readings and religious narratives and views and perceptions and discoveries and intuitions of mystics. The pinnacle of all these views is the emergence of the ideas of the Shiite school in mysticism and the boom in reading the ideas of Ibn Arabi and other Sufi schools of ancient Xorâsân. The idea of ​​surrendering to Valiyy and humanism of the Shiite school as a type of religious interpretation and the strict and traditionalist ideas of the Naqšbandiyye Tariqat as another model of religious readings are in opposition to each other and the way out from these two points of view, is the re-reading of  Ibn Arabi’s thoughts that opens the way for the sufi orders and mystics of this age and has developed Sufism and mysticism and opened the field for all sections of the society to some extent. In this sense, the area of ​​language: open and closed signs of the language of mysticism expands. The confrontation and entanglement of religious and mystical thoughts and sayings, patterns of open and closed society, politics, Tariqat and Šariʾat, have caused the complexity of the language of this period; since many of the sensitivities and grudges of the societies are the sources of conflicting ideas in the human society, and also the breadth of signs and the expansion of cultural concepts is the source of the interveneing of religious and cultural thoughts and traditions and all these matters play a role in the expansion of language and another characteristic of the expansion of the language of mysticism. In this era, the flourishing of art, especially painting, which is a form of the language of mysticism and  means of expressing mystical experience. This case can be mentioned from the visual art of Kamâl al-Din Behzâd as an interpreter of Ibn Arabi’s idea of ​​the unity of existence in the form of painting and drawing.

 

References

Čenâri, A., (1377). Motanâqez-nemâyi dar šeʾre fârsi. Tehran: Farzân Ruz.

Faʾʾâli, M. T. (1381). “Zabâne erfân”. Našriyyeye Qabasât. vol. 24. pp. 59-69.

Fulâdi, A., (1391). Tanz dar zabâne erfân. Tehran: Soxan.

Ibn Arabi, Mohammad ibn Ali, (1367). Rasâʾele Ibn Arabi. moqaddame, ed. N. Mâyel Heravi. Tehrân: Mowlâ.

Ibn Xaldun, (1352). Moqaddameye târixe Ibn Xaldun. tr. by M. P. Gonâbâdi. vol. 1.Tehran.

Jahângiri, M., (1375). Mohyi al-Din Ibn Arabi čehreye barjasteye jahâne Eslâm. Tehran: Dânešgâhe Tehran.

Karimi, A. B., (1385). “Tajrobeye erfâni va bayâne pârâdoksi, tajrobeye didâdr bâ xodâ dar soxan”. Majalleye dâneškadeye adabiyyât va olume ensânie Dânešgâhe Tehran. vol. 75. n. 3. pp. 21-42.

Mirbâqeri-Fard A. A. & M. Mohammadi, (1394). “Ebârat va ešârat dar zabâne erfân”. Biannual of Pažuhešnâmeye Erfân. vol. 15. pp. 193-216.

Nasiri Jâmi, H., (1393). Howzeye Herât va šeʾre fârsi. Tehran: Mowlâ.

Vahidiyân Kâmyâr, T., (1376). “Motanâqez-nemâ (paradox) dar adabiyyât”. Našriyyeye dâneškadeye adabiyyât va olume ensâni dânešgâhe Ferdowsi Mašhad. Year 28. vol. 3 & 4. pp. 271-294.

 

[1] Ramazân Tafsiri: Ph.D. student of Persian language and literature of Emâm Xomeyni lnternational university.

Hamid Tâheri: Associate professor of Emâm Xomeyni lnternational university.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Books:
1) Ibne Khaldoun (1352). Introduction to the history of Ibne Khaldun, geld. 1, translated by Mohammad Parvin Gonabadi, Tehran: Bija.
2) Ibne Arabi, Mohammad Bin Ali (1367), Ibne Arabi's letters, introduction, correction and notes by Najib Mayel Heravi, Tehran, Moli.
3) Stace, Walter (1388), mysticism and philosophy, translated by: Bahauddin Khorramshahi, Tehran, Soroush.
4) Iskandar Big Monshi (1364), Tarikhe Alam Araye Abbasi, correction and confrontation: Shahroudi, Tehran, Tolo.
5) Amoli, Seyyed Haider (1367). Jame al-Asrar and Manba al-Anwar, Tehran: elmi va farhangi.
6) Babataher, oryan (2017). Words of Babataher's Qasar. Description of Ibrahim Dinani. Written by Amir Esmaili and colleagues. Qom: Nursokhan.
7) Boshaq, Maulana Jalaluddin (1382). Kulliyat of Boshaq Atameh Shirazi, edited by Mansour Rostgar Fasaei, Tehran: miras e maktob.
8) Proudfort, Vien (1383), Religious Experience, translated by: Abbas Yazdani, Qom, Taha.
9) Pournamdarian, Taghi (1367) Code and secret stories in Persian literature, second edition, Tehran: motaleat e helmi v farhangi.
10) Peter, Walter. (2016). Style. Translated by Rahim Sorah. Tehran: Sabzan.
11) Jami, Abdorrahman (2001). Naqd al-Nosus fi Sharahe Naqsh al-Fusus, with introduction, corrections and notes by William Chittick and foreword by Jalaluddin Ashtiani, Tehran:anjomane falsafai Iran.
12) ـــــــــــــــــــــ (1370). Haftorang Masnavi, edited by Morteza Modarres Gilani, sixth edition, Tehran: Golestan Kitab.
13) Jahangiri, Mohsen (1375). Muhyiddin Ibne Arabi, the outstanding face of the Islamic world, Tehran: daneshgahe Tehran.
14) Chenari, Amir (1377), Contradictions in Persian Poetry, Tehran, Farzan Rooz.
15) Hafez, Shamsuddin Mohammad (2013), Diwan, corrected by Mohammad Qazvini and Qasim Ghani, Tehran, Javaidan.
16) Khayali, Ahmad (1352). Divan Khayali, edited by Aziz Dolat Abadi, Tabriz: moasesai tarikh va farhange Iran.
17) Dad, Sima (2005), Dictionary of Literary Terms, third edition, Tehran, Morwarid.
18) Deitches, David (1375), methods of literary criticism, translated by: Gholamhossein Yousefi and Mohammad Taghi Sofiani, Tehran, Elmi.
19) Rassell, Bertrand (1375), mysticism and logic, translation: Najaf Daryabandari, fourth edition, tahran: sherkate sahami ketabhai jibi.
20) Saadi, Mosleh al-Din (1381), Kulliyat, edited by Foroughi, third edition, Tehran, Tahuri.
21) Sanai, Majdod bin Adam (1377) Hadiqat al-Haqiqah and Shari'at al-Tariqah, corrected by Modarrese Razavi, seventh edition, Tehran: daneshgahe Tehran.
22) Shafiei Kadkani, Mohammadreza (2013), Music of poetry, fourth edition, Tehran, Agah.
23) Shaybi, Kamal Mustafa (1387). Shiism and Sufism until the beginning of the twelfth century, translated by Alireza Zakavati, Tehran: Amir Kabir.
24) Saeb Tabrizi (1390), Kulliyat Divan, by the efforts of Mohammad Qahraman, Tehran, elmi va farangi.
25) Safa, Zabihollah (1370), History of Literature in Iran, fourth edition, fourth volume, Tehran: Ferdous.
26) Ismat, Fakhreddin (1366). Diwan Esmat Bukharai, corrected by Ahmad Akrami, Tehran: talare ketab.
27) Ghazzali, Abu Hamed Mohammad (1367), Mishka­t­ــAl-Anwar, translated by: Sadegh Ayenehvand, second edition, Tehran, Amir Kabir.
28) Fromm, Eric. (2014). The forgotten Language Translation by Ibrahim Amanat. Chape sevom. Tehran: elmi v farhangi.
29) Fuladi, Alireza (1391), Satire in the language of mysticism, Tehran, Sokhan.
30) Qasim Anwar, Ali bne Nasir (1337). Generalities of Qasim-Anwar, edited by Saeed Nafisi, Tehran: ketabkhane sanai.
31) katebi torshizi, Muhammad bin Abdollah (1382). Diwan Ghazliat, edited by Taqi Vahidian Kamiyar and others, Mashhad: bonyad pazhoheshai islami.
32) Kingsley, Peter (1385), Dark Corners of Wisdom, translated by Del-Ara Kahraman and Sharareh Masoumi, second edition, Tehran, Sokhon.
33) Levizen, Leonardo Sairin (1386), Sufism heritage, translator: Majdaluddin Kivani, chape dovom, Tehran, markaz.
34) Mohammad Rezaei, Mohammad and others (2001), Essays on New Theology, Tehran, samt.
35) Mahmoudian, Fatemeh (1388), Paradox in Contemporary Poetry, Tehran, Faragoght.
36) Mostamli Bukhari, Ismail (1379), Sharh-al-Taaruf Lamzahb-al-Sufism, edited by Mohammad Roshan, Tehran, Asatir.
37) Molana, Jalaluddin Mohammad Balkhi (1380), Masnavi, by the effort of Mohammad Istilami, 6th edition, Tehran, Zawwar.
38) Mir Sadeghi (Zolqader), Meymanat (1376 AD), Dictionary of Art of  Poetry, second edition, Tehran, Mahnaz.
39) Nasiri Jami, Hassan (2013). The Herat and Persian poetry, Tehran: Mola.
40) Nizami, Elias-Ben-Youssef (1389), Haftapaikar, corrected by: Behrouz Sarvatian, second edition, Tehran, Amirkabir.
41) Novia, Yal (1372), Qur'anic interpretation and mystical language, translated by Ismail Saadat, Tehran, University Publishing Center.
articles
42) Payandeh, Hossein (1369), The Basics of Formalism in Literary Criticism, Kihan Farhangi, Year 7, Number 3, pp. 26-30.
43) Chenari, Amir (1374) "Contradiction in Persian literature", Kian magazine, number 27, pp. 68-71.
 
44) Afali, Mohammad Taghi. (2008) "Language of Mysticism", Qabasat Magazine, No. 24: pp. 59-69.
45) Karimi, Amirbanu (2005), Mystical experience and expression of paradox; The experience of meeting God in speech, Tehran University School of Literature and Humanities Magazine, Volume 57, Number 3, pp. 21-42.
46) Mir Bagheri Fard, Ali Asghar and Masoumeh Mohammadi. (2014). "Phrase and gesture in the language of mysticism". Two quarterly journals, Irfan Research Journal. No. 15. pp. 193-216.
47) Vahidian Kamiyar, Taghi (1376), Paradox in Literature, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad School of Literature and Humanities Journal, 28th year, numbers 3 and 4, pp. 271-294