Pathology of Masnavi's Commentaries Disregarding Rumi's Mystical Tradition

Masnavi's significance in stating mystical subjects and the audience's favorable reaction started a genre of commentary writing on this important book gradually spreading as a literary-mystical movement in different times and regions. Each of Masnavi commentaries has been written with a different structure and approach to describe Rumi's poems. Although these commentaries have literary and mystical usage, they have also significant shortcomings. Among the most important shortcomings is the commentator's lack of attention to Rumi's spiritual disposition. The most important thing about Rumi's mystical disposition is that he is one of the elders of the early mystical tradition. Therefore, his views are totally different than those of Ibn Arabi who is a Sufi from the later tradition. Accordingly, the adoption of principles and themes of the later tradition to explain Rumi''s views is not a sound approach. In this article, Masnavi’s most important commentaries in terms of their attention to Rumi's mystical disposition are analyzed. It is argued that that almost all commentaries on Masnavi have attributed Rumi's mystical disposition to the later mystical tradition, though they are different in their application of the principles and issues of the later tradition.