نشریه مطالعات عرفانی
پیاپی 19 (بهار و تابستان 1393)

As sight of Carl Gustav Jung، humans thereto having individual unconsciousness، have other common site which is called meta-individual or communal unconscious. Consist of this mentality is archetype of shadow one of the closest face to individual unconscious and awareness too. Archetype of shadow is negative، non-human، instinctive and human being’s، which mankind attempt to conceal is. This essay analyzed by archetype of shadow As Jung has analyzed his opinions and After a brief look at the psychoanalysis of Jung، it is considered with both positive and negative role for the shadow، Then at the beginning of words and concepts and terms related to the characteristics of the language of Rumi، and finally the codes that come with that archetype -the applicable، have been investigated. According to the evidence and present the results in context، the negative aspects of the shadow of words Has been detected such as wolves، spirit animal، concepts such as «the absence of the shadow of death،» «dead wrong idea or bad idea» and codes of thief، Pharaoh، dog، and giant and etc. Finally، the brief part is dedicated to recognize the positive aspects of this archetype، the most striking feature of the shadows in this case، is self-knowledge and Theology.

The present article، using a structural semiotic methodology، is to analyze Sanāyi''s approach towards binary oppositions on the basis of his poetry. Henceforth، the binary oppositions prevalent in his poetry are analyzed according to two interdependent semiotic issues، that is، linguistic value and aligned network. This analysis reveals that there are three different perspectives in Sanāyi''s language and thought. In each perspective، his approach takes on a different format. Indeed، his different approaches، in this regard، signify that his attitude towards such oppositions، their respective value and their aligned network، constantly changes during his evolutionary thinking. Moreover، some aligned networks are revealed in each approach، all elements of which are of the same value due to the consistency principle.

The Mosibat Nāmah written by ‘Attār Nishabouri (553-627 A. H.) is the narrative of a spiritual journey in the form of a mathnavi (a story in rhyming verse). The device of spiritual journey has been also used by the poet in another work of his، The Manteq al-Tayr (The Conference of Birds). Both works have a similar ending، although narratives are different. Among the narrative elements of The Mosibat Nāmah، one can find some functions which recur in the narratives of a literary genre called the allegory of vision. Another work based on the allegory of vision among the Persian mystic texts is The Sayr al-‘Ebād elā al-Ma’ād'' (The Journey of Servants to the Resurrection) since it، too، contains some unmistakable narrative elements of the genre. When these two works are closely analyzed، one can conclude that both of them belong to the same literary genre. The present study compares and contrasts the narrative functions of The Mosibat Nāmah and The Sayr al-‘Ebād in terms of their structural narratology with a focus on functions، similarities، and differences of these two stories.

Muslim Mystics were always seeking for a new understanding of the Qurān and religious concepts in order to achieve the truth. They are certainly benefiting from the assumptions such as the meaning of the Qurānic verses for discovering significance. One of the proposed Qurānic concepts among the mystics، especially in mystics of the third and fourth centuries، was the mystical term “Tawakkol”. This term was paraphrased by different mystics with variety of thought and contemplation. Tawakkol، with its broad concepts، is very important doctrines among the mystics. This study examines the transformation of the Qurānic concept of Tawakkol and making of new concepts in the literature of the Sufis، with an emphasis on Resāleh Qoshayrieh is founded and research hypothesis based on that Sufis according to historical and cultural position. Their different scenarios and authorities، had a different take on the concept of Tawakkol; is tested through research method according to Gadamer''s epistemology and traditionalist hermeneutics in order that the nature of the difference of mystics'' perceptions and their prejudices، from interpretation of Qurānic verses about Tawakkol، is explained and recognized. Examination of these attitudes، can be effective to understand the reasons of disagreement Sufis for the definition of a term and the diversity of their perceptions.

Some gnostics have used knowledge and insight synonymous. Still there are many who give gnosis the upper hand. This is because، in this position، they intend knowledge as rudimentary science، acquired and logical while gnosis is based on exploring and evidence. From Mohammad ibn ‘Abd Allah Neffari’s-4th century (A. H.) gnostic—mystical stand، everything but Allah is considered as creature; therefore، gnostic needs to abandon customs، rules and everything except Allah. On the way of Allah، knowledge and its teaching، which is viewed either by Divine laws or narrated and logical sciences، are taken as everything except Allah. From this point of view، gnostic is one who is able to set himself، free of laws and customs but is captured by a pleasant veil called gnosis. Therefore، in Neffari’s Gnosticism، approaching real gnosis is possible via uncovering the veil of gnosis. This article، with the importance of the subject in Islam and the Holly Qurān، as well as elevated value of gnosis among Gnostics and “Awlia al-Allah”، analytically studies the differential position of knowledge and gnosis، their degrees، differences، the way to gaining them as well as the relation between knowledge and ignorance according to Neffari’s Gnosticism. This distinction is especially noticeable because of Neffari’s historical priority to great gnostics such as Imam Mohammad Ghazzali. This article studies distinction between Knowledge and Insight In abd Allah Neffari With method Descriptive and Content Analysis.

Non-Being، in parallel with being، has always been among the major thoughts of philosophers as well as mystics. ‘Attār، proficient enough in the fundamentals of Islamic philosophy and mysticism، has made clear his viewpoint about Non-Being with subtle allusions and elegant purports. The present study aims to، first investigate the attitudes of eminent figures regarding the relationship between Non-Being and being، the semantic field of Non-Being، the unconditional birthplace of being، and the semantic perspective of death and mortality. Then، with reference to some of ‘Attār’s poems، it will represent his worldview regarding this matter. From the viewpoint of ‘Attār، “Non-Being is only a nominal Non-Being”، and as a matter of fact، it is one of the stages of the emergence of the light of being. As he states in a dialectic way، there is nothing beyond the Essence of God، and the two worlds are the offsprings of Non-Being، and it is through the eye of love that Non-Being and being become the same. The Present study، which has been carried out in a documentary (library) method، therefore tries to investigate this prominent figure’s position on Non-Being because we can analyze many of the Islamic mysticism points and facts in the light of exactly understanding ‘Attār’s mystic share of Non-Being.

Abu al-Qasem Korrakāni (380- 469 A. H.) is one of the mystics and school leaders of Khorāsān that knowledge of his speech and mystical thoughts in examination of analytical history and determination of movement of Sufism is essential. Despite his unknowingness in Sufism، he served with many great and major leaders of Sufism; and in his era، he was of monastery and disciples some of whom such as Abu Ali Fārmadi and Abu-bakr Nassāj attained great degrees in Sufism and were responsible for transmitting his teachings to great people like Ahmad Ghazāli and ‘Ein al-Quzat. Unfortunately، based on a story، some biographers like Hamd-Allah Mostawfi and Dowlat Shāh Samarqandi recognise Abu al-Qāsem Korrakāni as the man who didn’t say prayers on Ferdawsi’s corpse and didn’t let him be buried in Muslim’s graveyard. Others have quoted this legend slavishly and without doing research and pondering upon the story of ‘Attār and intentionally or unintentionally introduced him as “fanatic jurist” and “narrow-minded man”. For this reason، they have been silent before the legacy and his fruitful thoughts. In this article، meanwhile stating reasons and witnesses to deny such attitudes towards Korrakāni، we have proposed general views of his life، states، works، masters، students and contemporaries، we have expressed some of his speeches and mystical thoughts، such as defense of Iblis، the accompaniment of contentment by supplication، the importance of annihilation in Allah، the superiority of brethren’s connection، the trap of delusion، the snake of soul، the absolute obedience of spiritual guide، the distinction between the creator’s object known and the knowledge of created one، trust، and finally the remembrance of Allah.

Monastic commands of St. Benedict (480- 547 BC.) to his monk disciples and mystic commands of Khājeh ‘Abd Allah Ansāri (481-396 A. H.) with an emphasis on “The Rule of St. Benedict” and “Manāzil al-Sāyerin” is compared in this article. This comparison has done in a descriptive –analytic way، in order to reveal convergence between these two figures. Considering that impressive place of these two figures in mysticism of two religions and the necessity of convergence for monotheists، prove the importance of this subject. Wakefulness، repentance، thinking، remembering death and the day of judgment، renunciation of the world، avoidance sin، purify intention، pure obedience، patience، ethics، humility، pray and love are common commands of both two orders. Benedict and Khājeh have different ideas about repentance and their attitude to the world. Two orders have most similarities in commands. The mystical origin of both is two Divine religions of Christianity and Islam both of which based on common humanly nature.