نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشآموخته کارشناسی ارشد زبان و ادبیات فارسی، واحد اراک، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، اراک، ایران.
2 استاد گروه زبان و ادبیات فارسی، واحد اراک، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، اراک، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Paradox in Persian mystical literature is not merely a rhetorical device but an epistemological tool through which the mystic articulates an experience beyond dualistic logic. This research, employing an analytical-comparative approach, examines the types and functions of paradox in two central texts of Persian mystical prose: Attar of Nishapur’s Tadhkirat al-Awliya (Memorial of the Saints) and Mawlana Jalal al-Din Balkhi (Rumi)‘s Fihi Ma Fihi (Discourses). The main research questions are: what types of paradox are present in these two texts, what functions do they serve, and what are the similarities and differences in the authors’ approaches to their use? The findings indicate the presence of ontological paradoxes (annihilation/subsistence), epistemological paradoxes (knowing through unknowing), identity paradoxes (erasure of the “self”), axiological paradoxes (reversal of reward-punishment systems), and linguistic paradoxes (speech/silence) in both texts. However, Attar employs paradox within the narrative context of the saints’ lives, adopting an experiential-narrative approach, whereas Rumi expresses paradox as a pedagogical and analytical principle within the framework of sermon gatherings. This difference stems from the generic nature of the two books: the hagiography versus the discourses. In both texts, paradox serves a cognitive function: breaking dualistic logic, creating an “epistemological shock,” and inviting the audience into the realm of intuitive experience. The conclusion is that paradox in Persian mystical literature acts as a bridge between language and meaning, between intellect and intuition, and both authors—through two different paths—reach the same destination.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)