KOHAN-NAME-YE ADAB-E FARSI (CLASSICAL PERSIAN LITERATURE)
Year:2015 | Volume:6 | Issue:1|Papers Count:6

Positivist objectivism is the dominant approach in the language of science in the twentieth century but this factor has created difficulties in the language of religion, which deals with the sacred and non-experimental matters. Analysis of religious propositions with standard implementations that only considers the meaningful statements, which have external examples, causing the language of religion and mysticism to be seen as a nonsensical language. But this language has its own rules and games, understanding which requires a phenomenological view. In this study we have tried, in addition, to define mysticism, reducing it to a mystical experience, and show indicators and aspects of it in language that has carriers for any connection. For this purpose, poems of Attar Elahi-Nameh (Letter to God), Mantiq al-Tayr (Logic of Flight) and Mosibat-Nameh (Letter of Lamentation) are investigated. The results reveal that Attar’s mystical poems, before having paradoxical quality and allegorical styles, in the meaning of symbolic mysticism, have an educational quality and conscience, and is yet to reach the criteria of becoming a mystical experience.

Critical issues and style have a significant presence in Safavid period tazkarah s (biographers). Theoretical descriptions of biographers are not clear. The main approach of these biographers is the subjective approach. It means that they had no certain approach such as that of the modern researchers. Stylistics of the biographer's comments in Safavid period is still in its primitive stages. The initial spark of this genre, though unscientific, occurred because of the biographers of that period. The insight to the poet's individuality and multilateral focus on style, resulted in a more accurate understanding of the poet’s personal history and also history of the Persian language. The present study examines different approaches of biographers and indicates that the biographers, along their subjective approach, also paid attention to historical issues, content, and the linguistic and rhetorical styles (tarz).

Julia Kristeva believes that intertextuality is passing from one semiotic system to another. From this angle, text is not just a compendium of constant meanings, but intertwined with a complex interaction amongst various texts and reveals its meaning through its relationship with other texts. This paper strives to expand on the relationship and interactions of Hafiz and Roozbahan to draw a comparison based on their concept of love and the beloved’s image. The images and actions presented of the beloved, sway the line between catharsis and simile. On the other hand, the actions of the beloved and his/her treatment of the lover follow two distinct patterns of love which have been the focal point for both poets: The Story of Mansour Hallaj and that of Sheikh San’an. The place of the beloved’s (God’s) manifestation is the world of imagination in step with olfactory, visual and kinesthetic feelings of the time of the events. In this paper, we have also focused on the semiotic systems and the change of the lingual implications in a complex network of textual relationships of Hafiz’s poems and the traditions of the Persian sonnet in the visualization of the beloved.

In order to obtain an exact study of the technical response, which means writing a poem with rhyming weight and overall content similar to another poem in response to its poet, with the objective of validating him as a peer or expressing superiority, this paper tries to present a descriptive–analytical approach. Given that the abovementioned impulses are the basis of conflict and disagreement between the two poets, by focusing on Persian poetry published from the start until the sixth centuries, we have tried to define the terms of accountability and review the serious and non-serious expression techniques (parody) and also investigate the reasons for conflict and conflict-seeking questions in poetry. In addition, it has been shown that these techniques have always been one of the critical ways in which poets express their opinions about other poets and their poems.

Despite the fact that in Gadamer’s view, a work of art, in general, is considered as an “event of truth”, it is specifically the poetry that is regarded as a paradigm of the text. This is due to the relationship between poetic thinking and world wisdom rather than owing to linguistic formal characteristics of poetry.The focus in this paper is on ontological traits of poetry like autonomy, uniqueness, continuity, tone, and resonance to explain the correspondence between the “truth” and poetry. Through a hermeneutical reflection on Hafiz, the paper aims to show the capability of Hafiz’s poetry to possess traits mentioned above; Ensuing Gadamerian reasons could be counted for this idea, including classicality, intertextuality, and therefore, constructive function in Persian tradition, “loud voice” till “here” and “now”, and finally Hafiz’s dialogical essence. In this paper, we examined the possibility of understanding Hafiz's poetry using Gadamer's dialectic, followed by showing how ' existence', as is meant by Gadamer, is ' unfolded' in Hafiz's poetry.

The present study strives to compare the contents of two prominent mystic works: Attar Neishabouri’s Mantiq al-Tayr (Road of Flight) and Ibn Sina’s Risalat al-Tayr (Book of the Flight), which has been conducted through research and the qualitative and quantitative content analysis method. To facilitate the understanding of the comparisons, tables and charts have been provided. The findings suggest that similar effects are mainly found in the contents. The most important similarity between the two works is that of their subject. The sign of "Bird" (‘Tayr’)and the theme of unity are prominent. The other similarities include destination, purpose of flight, the story of the process of "self-discovery", and expression of distrust. The differences in form include: 1. difference in the form of expression, 2. Word choice, and 3: elements of the story. The differences in content include: 1. difference in the need for a sage, 2. how to express themselves, 3. in considering the worthiness of the mystic, 4: attitudes towards the divine source, 5: in being epic, 6. in the quest plan, and 7: in attitude towards the job of the seeker.