مقایسه استعاره های عرفانی و استعاره های بلاغی بر اساس نظریه «استعاره کلی» در دیدگاه های هانس بلومنبرگ (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
بلومنبرگ تفاوت استعاره های حقیقت و دیگر استعاره ها را با توجه به تفاوت مفاهیم موجود در آن ها، ذیل مفهومی به نام استعاره کلی بررسی می کند. استعاره هایی که به شرح مفاهیمی می پردازند که به نحو نظری- مفهومی قابل بیان نیستند. این استعاره ها عبارت اند از ایده هایی که تحت دسته بندی یک ایده اصلی تجمیع یافته و در ساحتِ شناخت، به موقعیت «اعتقاد» می رسند و تثبیت می شوند. قدرت روایتگری موجود در استعاره های کلی موجب می شود جایگزین مفاهیم وجودی شوند و این اولین و مهم ترین تفاوت این استعاره ها و استعاره های بلاغی است. تا سال 1936؛ یعنی تا پیش از آنکه آی.ا.ریچاردز اصطلاحات tenor و vehicle را به عنوان اجزای استعاره معرفی کند (موضوع و محمول در استعاره). مبنای شناخت استعاره ها، همان دیدگاه سنتی مبتنی بر شباهت؛ یعنی دیدگاه ارسطو بود؛ اما در دیدگاه های مدرن و خصوصاً نظریه هانس بلومنبرگ استعاره را به نحو دیگری تقسیم بندی می کنند. بلومنبرگ بر اساس وجود استعاره هایی که بداهت و کلیت آنها دیدگاه های سنتی را نقض می کرد، به رویکردی در استعاره شناسی دست یافت که بر اساس آن، ساختار استعاره ها در ارتباط با محتوای آنها تعریف می شود. وی در مقاله «نور به عنوان استعاره ای برای حقیقت» از استعاره های حقیقت نام می برد و با در نظر گرفتن تاریخچه ای برای آن، ویژگی های حقیقت را به ویژگی استعاره های حقیقت تعمیم می دهد. در این پژوهش کوشیده ایم با بررسی تاریخچه یا سابقه استعاره های حقیقت در اندیشه های هانس بلومنبرگ و مقایسه آن با استعاره های کلی مطرح شده در عرفان، به ساختاری دست یابیم که بتواند قالب مناسبی برای بررسی استعاره در متون عرفانی باشد. روش ما در این بررسی مقایسه نمونه های استعاره در بلاغت سنتی (قصاید خاقانی، غزل های حافظ) با استعاره های کلی در متون عرفانی (تذکره الاولیاء عطار) و کارکرد متفاوت هریک از آنها در متن است. در بررسی استعاره ها به ویژگی هایی از جمله خودکاری، بافت معنایی، بحث شباهت و تجانس، تاریخچه مفهوم و بُعد طبیعی و متافیزیکی پرداخته شده است.A Comparison between Mystical Metaphors and Rhetorical Metaphors in Light of Hans Blumenberg’s Notion of Absolute Metaphor
Metaphors are not solely about form; in fact, they carry entire pieces of meaning. This fact can be determined by surveying the history of a single metaphor, but it is not as easy as it seems, as there have been some alterations in research methods during this period. The process of studying literature and the way it changed through the centuries indicates that form-based approaches have gradually transformed into cognitive ones. This shift explicates the remarkable role of concepts in rhetoric. Introduction As Hans Blumenberg (1920-1996) distinguishes between metaphors of truth and other types of metaphors, he regards this distinction as a fundamental conceptual matter in this field. In "Light as a Metaphor for Truth," he implicitly characterizes these two groups in terms of meaning, stating that the concepts conveyed by absolute metaphors could not be expressed by any conceptual or theoretical method. These metaphors are formed by a cluster of ideas that aggregate beneath a fundamental, major idea and reach the status of "belief" in human knowledge, thereby becoming stabilized. The narrative power of absolute metaphors, which lies in their totality, has made them a replacement for existential concepts, and according to Blumenberg, this point is the major difference between these two groups of metaphors. Thereupon, a metaphorical analytic study can be divided by subject anew. Literature Review Until 1936, before I.A. Richards introduced the terms ‘vehicle’ and ‘tenor’ as the two parts of a metaphor, classical approaches to rhetoric (following Aristotle) predominantly considered metaphor within a similarity-based classification, while modern approaches went further. Blumenberg, whose focus on self-evidence and generality contravenes traditional rhetorical standpoints, proposes a ‘metaphorology’ that succeeds in defining a metaphor by its own content. In "Light as a Metaphor for Truth," Blumenberg also named and categorized metaphors of truth by tracing their history, thereby attributing the features of truth to its metaphors. For years, the conceptual approach of Lakoff and Johnson has been the main theory for analyzing literature in Iran, resulting in numerous studies on the subject. In mystical literature specifically, these have been based on explaining the metaphorical link between two concepts in the form of a ‘source domain’ and ‘target domain’ as a discovery (which I will not enumerate to avoid prolixity). Although Blumenberg’s studies barely pursued a rhetorical direction—as they are philosophical in nature—an objectified perspective can be perceived in his research on the history of a concept. Thus, his framework can provide a system to survey a text on the subject of ‘Truth’ and is highly suitable for mystical literature. In this study, it has been utilized to characterize the content of two major works in Persian mystical literature: Tazkirat al-Awliya and Asrar al-Tawhid . This framework is used to distinguish between mystical metaphors and rhetorical metaphors, such as those in the verses of Khaqani (1120-1190). Khaqani was a major Iranian poet known for his prose filled with intricate metaphors, which serve as excellent examples of rhetorical metaphor for comparison with absolute metaphor. No independent or dedicated study has been conducted specifically on Blumenberg’s notion to analyze a rhetorical concept. While some research has been carried out on Blumenberg’s thoughts, such as Hans Blumenberg Zur Einführung by Franz J. Wetz (1985), translated by Amir Nasri and Farideh Farnoudfar, these are generally philosophical in nature. Methodology As a descriptive-analytical record, this study has examined specific examples of each category to establish a prototype, thereby validating the methodology we derived from Blumenberg’s thoughts. For this purpose, an analytical comparison between these two fields was necessary, moving beyond customary existing models to contemplate their distinctive features. These features include ‘self-activating,’ ‘semantic context,’ ‘resemblance,’ and ‘proximity’ on the one hand, and foundational terms from Persian rhetorical traditions such as ‘image,’ ‘idea,’ and ‘subject’ on the other. Conclusion The analysis reveals several key differences between absolute metaphors (which are considered mystical metaphors) and rhetorical metaphors. A primary distinction is that an absolute metaphor always exists within a semantic context, which arises from primordial dualistic concepts such as ‘truth’ and ‘being’. According to Blumenberg, the contrast between these two—as in light and darkness—generates a spectrum of metaphors, and indeed, there is no way to represent such fundamental concepts except through metaphor itself. The antithetical context—which, by the way, grants an extraordinary narrative capacity to absolute metaphors—extends concepts to encompass multiple dimensions of a subject. This is particularly practical in didactic spheres such as mysticism and Sufism. Hence, the absolute metaphor is not redundant compared to the rhetorical metaphor, which is generally intended to grace poetry, specifically lyrical poetry; in mystical literature, substantial parts of meaning depend on metaphors to be perceived. Whereas we create rhetorical metaphors, absolute metaphors already exist at the very beginning of any knowledge we initiate. This is where the inevitability of absolute metaphors comes from, and it is also the point of departure for categorizing the mystical metaphor as self-determining literary content grounded in a philosophical notion. Resemblance in mystical metaphors sometimes involves the diminishing of one subject to another, and sometimes, vice versa, it is the outcome of expansion. In both cases, however, it is not something artificial; rather, it could be claimed that the totality of the concept imposes its own rules on the metaphor. Although discussing "meaning" brings out many notions in this field, it never argues against the immediate impact of absolute metaphors. Absolute metaphors are self-evident, and that is the reason mystical authors and poets have employed them ever since.
تبلیغات
