جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « ترجمه رساله قشیریه » در نشریات گروه « ادبیات و زبان ها »

AbstractAttar Neyshabouri's Tazkirat al-Awliya has a special place among Persian mystical works. Attar has used the mystical works before himself to compile Tazkirat al-Awliya, but he did not act in the same way in using all the sources. The intertextual comparison of Tazkirat al-Awliya with pre-Attar texts is one of the methods through which the main sources of Attar can be accessed. It can be used to analyze Attar's position as the author of a mystical literary text. In the present study, the sayings related to "Reza" from Tazkirat al-Awliya have been intertextually compared with Kashf al-Mahjoob and the translation of the Qushayriyah treatise. The main question of the research is: what is the intertextual relationship of Tazkirat al-Awliya with two mystical works before it? The results of the research show that the intertextual relationships of Reza's sayings in these three works are placed in five categories: direct intertextuality, reductive intertextuality, additive intertextuality, multiple intertextuality, and mixed intertextuality. Most of the intertextual relationships between Tazkirat al-Awliya and the translation of the Qushayriyah treatise are direct intertextuality, and between Tazkirat al-Awliya and Kashf al-Mahjoob are reductive intertextuality. This comparison shows that Attar has quoted the sayings in accordance with the goals he had in writing Tazkirat al-Awliya and also the characteristics of the previous texts. Removal of Arabic phrases, description and interpretation are changes that Attar has made in the sayings taken from Kashf al-Mahjoob.IntroductionWith the emergence of Islamic Sufism in the second century of Hijri, the creation of mystical works gradually began. At first, these works did not have a specialized approach and were mostly written based on Sharia-based topics. But from the 4th century of Hijri, mystical opinions and thoughts were organized and codified so that they could be transferred to others in the form of educational texts (Dehbashi & Mirbagheri Fard, 2004, p. 108). A significant part of the topics of these texts was explained by quoting sayings and anecdotes related to mystics. These sayings and anecdotes that passed from one text to another created an intertextual chain among mystical works. Attar Neyshabouri's Tazkirat al-Awliya is one of the main links in this chain that has transferred the sayings and anecdotes of the previous works, which were mainly Arabic and a few Persian, but with simple and didactic language to the later links with a literary and imaginative expression. Since intertextual studies are considered a suitable platform for analyzing common sayings and anecdotes in mystical texts, in this study, this platform has been used to compare the sayings related to Reza in Tazkirat al-Awliya with two Persian pretexts of this work, in order to explain what method Attar had in quoting the sayings from previous texts and why he chose this method.Materials and MethodsIn the present study, the position of the translation of the Qushayriyah treatise and Hojviri's Kashf al-Mahjoob among Attar's sources (focusing on Reza's sayings) has been explained using a descriptive-analytical method based on the intertextual approach and Genette’s theory of intertextuality.Research FindingsTazkirat al-Awliya has the most direct intertextual relationship with the translation of the Qushayriyah treatise. Also, the most intertextual relationship between Tazkirat al-Awliya and Kashf al-Mahjoob is of a reductive type which includes the removal of description and interpretation and Arabic phrases. The additive intertextuality can be seen only between Tazkirat al-Awliya and the translation of the Qushayriyah treatise where a part has been added to the narration of the pretext to complete the meaning. A quote is also common among all three works and is of multiple intertextuality type. In this type of intertextuality, the narration of Tazkirat al-Awliya has a direct intertextuality with the translation of Qushayriyah treatise, and a reductive intertextuality with Kashf al-Mahjoob in the example found in Reza's sayings.Discussion of Results and ConclusionsConsidering the results of the present study, examples of common sayings with one of the pre-texts can be found in Tazkirat al-Awliya which has been reduced in one part of the narration and increased or changed in another part. This type of intertextuality can be called mixed and according to different examples, sub-categories can be obtained for it. In Reza's common sayings, there are two examples of mixed between Tazkirat al-Awliya and the translation of the Qushayriyah treatise and one example with Kashf al-Mahjoob. This research shows that Attar made changes in Reza's sayings according to his goals. Removal of Arabic phrases and description and interpretation of the pretext, lexical, morphological, and syntactic changes appropriate to the Persian language and the increase of imaginative and emphatic elements are among the changes that Attar has made in quotations.

The general discourse of Islamic Sufism is a sacred attitude that was formed in the context of religion, in response to other opposing discourses such as jurisprudence, scholastic theology, philosophy and asceticism. At the end of the second century A.H., the followers of the Sufi movement incorporated the alchemy of love in the ascetic copper. Unlike other intellectual and religious movements of Islamic culture and civilization that regarded  the text of the Qurchr('39')an as a text descended from heaven to earth in a dialectical movement between heaven and earth, they considered the Qurchr('39')an to be a text for the movement from earth to heaven, that is, the Sufi ascension. With this in mind, we witness various encounters of Sufism with conceptualizing prominent and frequent signs, especially the floating sign of “trust” in Sufi discourse as well as other works of Sufism including scholastic and intuitive prose texts. In this paper, using the descriptive-analytical method and the approach of Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse theory, we have demonstrated the metamorphoses of this floating sign in several scholastic Sufi texts in Persian and Arabic, and through this we have explained the interactions of these texts.

Of the translation of Qosheiriyeh dissertation, there is a copy (number 2077) kept in the Ayasofiya library in Istanbul (Turkey) which was written back in the year 859 and which is seemingly a different script of the translation by Abu Ali Osmani. When Mr. Forouzanfar tried to edit the translation of this dissertation in 1345 (1956) for the first time, he did not make much use of this translation version perhaps because he received it in the middle of his work and also because he assumed that there was not much difference between this and the transcription kept in the British museum. So, he continued his edition by comparing it with the British transcription of the translation by Abu Ali Osmani and the transcription by Lala Ismaeil, the only known hand-written transcription of the second translation. This is while the Ayasofiya transcription is of great use in resolving the many problems in the text and despite the opinion held by the late Mr. Forouzanfar regarding the grave differences between the two copies, so much that it resulted in some doubt that there may be a third translation of the Qosheiriyeh dissertation. In this article, we introduce the Ayasofiya’s transcription, and study its station in the corrected version of the translation for Qosheiriyeh dissertation.

In fifth century، simultaneous with the flourishing of mystical issues and prevalence of various writings in the field of Islamic mysticism، via his deep understanding of mystical thoughts، Abulqasem Qusheiri created a work which had a high status from the beginning and was translated into Persian shortly after. Ascribed to Abu Ali Othmani، the translation of this work was corrected and published by Forouzanfar for the first time almost fifty years ago. Regarding the preface and annotations of Forouzanfar، this work has many advantages but there are also a number of shortcomings in the text and its annotations and، given time، the need for an authentic text of Risaleh Qushirie translation for teaching in postgraduate courses، necessitates the re-correction of this translation. Recently، a new correction by Mehdi Mohabati has been published which raised a number of questions like: Does this new translation come up to expectations of readers for an authentic text or it still repeats the very shortcomings of the previous correction? This article aims to answer such questions.

Qashiriyeh dissertation is one of the most significant educational texts by Sufi’s which was authored by Abul-Qaasem Qashiri, a prominent Sufi and lecturer of the fifth century A.H. (After Hijira). His motive for creating this work was to introduce Sufism and its principles, in an era in which corruption and deviation in beliefs, tradition and customs had become widespread by those pretending to be Sufi. For this very reason, his dissertation quickly gained popularity among the Sufis of his time. Some time towards the end of his life or shortly after his death, it was translated to Farsi by one of his students by the name of Abu-Ali Osmani. This dissertation was again translated during the middle or the end of the Sixth century. With the exception of some parts, this second translation is considered as a correction to the first one. The second translation was edited by professor Badi-u-zaman-e Foroozanfar for the first time in 1345 (1966) and was published several times along with its lengthy preface. In this essay, an attempt has been made to compare the first and the second translations with the original Arabic version and to focus on some of the existing ambiguities in translations and the corrected versions. This would call for a need to edit the translation by Abu-Ali Osmani.