Research Paper
الادب المقارن
Gholamreza Boloori; Rooh Allah Nasiri
Abstract
This study offers an in-depth comparative analysis of Mohammad Khaghani Esfahani's significant work, "Reason and Love", exploring its relationship with the aesthetic principles of the Parnassian school through an analytical-comparative approach. The research explores the dynamic interplay between form ...
Read More
This study offers an in-depth comparative analysis of Mohammad Khaghani Esfahani's significant work, "Reason and Love", exploring its relationship with the aesthetic principles of the Parnassian school through an analytical-comparative approach. The research explores the dynamic interplay between form and content in this prominent work of contemporary Persian literature, employing modern literary theories and scientific methodologies to reveal its distinctive characteristics. The investigation begins with a meticulous examination of the Masnavi's formal and structural elements, highlighting the poet's mastery of the classical Masnavi form, precise metrical composition using the Ramal Musaddas Mahzuf meter, sophisticated rhyme schemes, and intricate rhetorical devices.
The work's distinctive bilingual presentation (Persian-Arabic) and its coherent dramatic structure across five principal acts demonstrate its alignment with Parnassian standards of formal perfection and aesthetic refinement. However, at a deeper conceptual level, the study reveals fundamental divergences from core Parnassian principles, as Khaghani Esfahani deliberately employs artistic form to convey profound mystical, philosophical, and religious themes, rather than adhering to the doctrine of art for art's sake. Through its innovative transformation of form into a vehicle for expressing content, the masnavi establishes a dramatic dialogic structure that facilitates fundamental ontological and epistemological inquiry, creating an intellectual and spiritual space that transcends mere descriptive representation. The poet's active narrative presence, as both artist and concerned intellectual, introduces an existential and personal dimension that distinguishes the work from Parnassian objectivity. Situated within the Persian literary tradition, "Reason and Love" extends the didactic-mystical Masnavi heritage while synthesizing tradition with innovation. Ultimately, it presents a unique model of reason-love unity through religious teachings, exemplifying the successful integration of literary form with philosophical depth.
Introduction
The duality of Reason and Love has long been one of the most fundamental and enduring intellectual concerns in the history of human thought. In Persian literary and mystical traditions, this duality frequently appears as a central theme through which poets, mystics, and philosophers explore the limits of rational knowledge, the possibilities of intuitive experience, and the conditions for human perfection.
Reason is generally associated with order, argumentation, conceptual clarity, law, and systematic reflection, whereas love signifies intuition, spiritual immediacy, existential warmth, unity, and transcendence. The encounter between these two forces is therefore not merely a literary opposition but a profound epistemological, ontological, and spiritual problem.
Mohammad Khaqani Isfahani’s "Masnavi of Reason and Love" represents a contemporary poetic effort to revive this classical debate within a modern intellectual and cultural context. The work is significant not only for its philosophical and mystical depth but also for its remarkable formal craftsmanship. Its use of the classical masnavi form, disciplined metrical structure, dramatic organization, and bilingual Persian-Arabic presentation all demonstrate the poet’s deliberate attention to poetic form, linguistic mastery, and structural coherence. At first glance, this emphasis on technical precision, formal refinement, and aesthetic discipline aligns the work closely with the ideals of the nineteenth-century French Parnassian school. Parnassianism, commonly associated with the principle of “art for art’s sake,” emphasized formal perfection, artistic objectivity, impersonality, descriptive precision, and the autonomy of the literary work from moral, religious, social, or political functions.
Nevertheless, a deeper examination of Reason and Love reveals that Khaghani Esfahani’s poem transcends the confines of self-sufficient formalism. Although it employs a refined and disciplined artistic form, it ultimately places that form in the service of philosophical, mystical, religious, and cultural meanings. The central purpose of this study, therefore, is to analyze the progression of this masnavi from Parnassian-like formal perfection toward a meaningful and unifying literary mission.
Methodology
This research adopts a qualitative, analytical-comparative method. The study first identifies the major theoretical principles and stylistic features of Parnassianism, particularly formal perfection, artistic autonomy, objectivity, impersonality, technical mastery, and the doctrine of “art for art’s sake.” These principles provide the conceptual framework through which the formal and aesthetic aspects of Masnavi of Reason and Love are examined.
In the second stage, the primary text of Khaghani Esfahani’s masnavi is analyzed as the central corpus of the research. The study examines the poem’s formal structure, metrical discipline, bilingual composition, dramatic organization, symbolic characterization, and dialogic movement. These elements are compared with Parnassian aesthetic standards in order to identify areas of convergence between the poem and Parnassian poetics.
In the third stage, the study analyzes the thematic, philosophical, and spiritual orientation of the poem in order to determine its points of divergence from Parnassianism. Particular attention is given to the role of Revelation as a mediating and synthesizing principle, the poet’s active presence as narrator and guide, and the poem’s commitment to reconciling Reason and Love within a higher religious and mystical framework. Through this method, the research seeks to clarify how the poem both approaches and transcends Parnassian formalism.
Theoretical Framework: Parnassianism and the Ideal of Form
Parnassianism emerged in mid-19th century France as a reaction against the excessive emotionalism and subjectivity of Romanticism. Its proponents, such as Théophile Gautier and Leconte de Lisle, sought a return to Classical values of restraint and technical mastery. Key principles include:
Art for Art's Sake: The belief that art should be free from moral, social, or political obligations.
Technical Perfection: A focus on the craft of poetry, emphasizing precise word choice and rhythmic harmony.
Objectivity and Impersonality: The removal of the poet's personal I from the work, favoring a cold, detached observation of the world.
Plasticity: A preference for vivid, three-dimensional descriptions akin to sculpture or painting.
Discussion and Analysis
4-1. Formal Excellence: The Parnassian Parallel
Khaghani Isfahani’s Masnavi exhibits several traits that align with Parnassian ideals. The choice of the Ramal Musaddas Mahzuf meter—the same used in Rumi’s Masnavi-e Ma’navi—provides a rhythmic flow that is both heavy and fluid, suitable for deep philosophical discourse. The poet's obsession with hard work and polishing the verse is evident in the bilingual structure, where the Persian and Arabic versions move in perfect metrical and thematic harmony. This technical virtuosity serves as a showcase of linguistic mastery, much like the Parnassian emphasis on the poet-as-craftsman (métier). Furthermore, the work is organized into five distinct acts, creating a coherent and disciplined dramatic structure that mirrors the Parnassian love for order and formal symmetry.
4-2.The Hegelian Dialectic: Thesis, Antithesis, and Synthesis
The Intellectual structure of the poem follows a classic Hegelian triad.
Thesis (Reason): Reason Is introduced as the initial stage of systematic, logical, and law-oriented thinking. It represents the Rational and Industrial aspect of the work, emphasizing structure and precision.
Antithesis (Love): Love rises In opposition to Reason, representing intuition, direct experience, and the rebellion against the cold calculatIons of logic. In the poem, Love provides the spiritual heat that separates the work from Parnassian cold objectivity.
Synthesis (Revelation/Wahy): The peak of the poem is the synthesis achieved through Wahy (Revelation). This third force does not negate Reason or Love but situates each In its proper place. Revelation saves Reason from narrow-minded pride and Love from destructIve rebellion, leading to a Sublime Unity.
The Transition toward Meaningful Mission
The fundamental point of departure from Parnassianism lies in the poet’s mission. While Parnassians viewed form as the final goal (Art for Art), Khaghani Isfahani views form as a vehicle (Art for Meaning). The Masnavi carries a didactic and unifying message, seeking to reconcile:
Science and Faith
Tradition and Modernity
Diverse cultural and linguistic heritages
Unlike the Parnassian observer who remains indifferent, the poet in Reason and Love acts as an active narrator and guide. His presence Is not a cold objectivity but a sublime subjectivity that seeks to lead the audience toward a spiritual conclusion. The focus on The Unity of Reason and Love under the shadow of Revelation is a direct critique of the spiritual crisis of the modern world, which the poet attributes to the disconnect between knowledge and faith.
Conclusion
The Masnavi of Reason and Love" is a successful synthesis of formal perfection and committed meaning. While it satisfies the Parnassian criteria for technical mastery and structural discipline, it refuses to remain within the confines of "art for art's sake." Instead, the poet utilizes the aesthetic power of the Masnavi form to facilitate a profound ontological and epistemological inquiry.
The transition from "form-as-end" to "form-as-means" allows the work to find its place within the rich tradition of Persian didactic and mystical poetry, while also addressing contemporary global crises of meaning. This work proves that an artist can achieve the highest levels of formal excellence without sacrificing intellectual and spiritual commitment. It stands as a modern model for Meaningful Art, demonstrating that the perfect form is most powerful when it serves a perfected mission of unity and truth.
Research Paper
الادب المقارن
Atefeh Rahmani; Mahin Hajizadeh; Abdolahad Gheibi
Abstract
Giro's theory of logical semiotics is a component of his broader semiotics theory, in which he categorizes ciphers into three types: logical, aesthetic, and social. Logical codes are grounded in humans' rational and objective experience and address the cause-and-effect relationships between phenomena. ...
Read More
Giro's theory of logical semiotics is a component of his broader semiotics theory, in which he categorizes ciphers into three types: logical, aesthetic, and social. Logical codes are grounded in humans' rational and objective experience and address the cause-and-effect relationships between phenomena. Since this theory can also be applied to the analysis of poems and literary texts, the current research, conducted using an analytical-descriptive method, examines the poems of Ezzeddin Mihoubi and Ahmed Shamlou through the lens of Giraud's theory of logical semiotics and the American school of comparative literature. The research results indicate that logical ciphers in the poems of two poets manifest as practical, epistemological, and paralinguistic symbols. The use of the martyrs' blood as a practical symbol, especially in a context where the country is engulfed in darkness and suffocation, serves as a catalyst to mobilize the collective movement of the people against oppressive rulers. The use of the Christ archetype as an epistemological symbol, which is both hopeful and sorrowful, embodies the melancholic state of the homeland shared by the two poets. Paralinguistic devices are also employed, including collocational ciphers, spaced ciphers, and language substitutes. These examples highlight some of the similarities between the poems of these two poets, which have been analyzed through logical ciphers. By applying each cipher, one can uncover the hidden layers of their poetic meanings and concepts. The differences between their poems lie in the types of poetic feelings expressed (personal and social) as well as in cultural and religious influences.
Introduction
Semiotics seeks to analyze texts and uncover hidden meanings. Two of the main founders of modern semiotics are Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles Sanders Peirce. In his semiotic theory, Pierre Giraud goes beyond a purely structuralist examination of the text and explores language in relation to its various dimensions. According to him, language has several functions that he outlined, along with its definition within the linguistic context of the subject discussed and examined in the field of semiotics. These functions, which carry real or implied meanings, are defined based on their applications and derive meaning from their specific linguistic situations. According to Giro's symbolic division, one type of cipher is the logical cipher, which includes symbolic ciphers and executive programs designed to organize actions in general. These are formed based on objective-subjective distinctions. On the other hand, aesthetic ciphers aim to engage the recipient's participation and are based on cognitive-emotional distinctions. This research examines the poetry, ideas, context, and era of two prominent poets from different cultures—Ezzeddin Mihoubi Al-Jazairi and Ahmad Shamlou—using the components of Giro's logical semiotics, grounded in the American school of thought. Therefore, the upcoming research focuses on re-reading and analyzing the poems of two poets to uncover the hidden and profound meanings within these works, examine the elements of logical semiotics, and open new horizons for future researchers.
Method
Analytical-descriptive research method has been carried out by comparing the poems of Ezzeddin Mehubi and Ahmed Shamlou, relying on the logical semiotics of Pierre Giro, and the poems of the two poets have been selected in the form of common social themes and themes.
Results
In this section, the definition of each of the logical ciphers is briefly discussed, along with the examples that fit the theory:
1.Practical codes: signs and programs
Signs and programs are practical codes. The function of these signs and programs is to coordinate actions through command, training, notification or warning. Also, signs provide the possibility of regulating the flow or collective movements. There are different types of symptoms and they appear in different forms.
2.Epistemological codes
One of the most used levels in Girou's theory is the study of ciphers that play an epistemic role in the text. As a language mechanism, these ciphers seek to create insight, attitude and knowledge in the eyes of the reader or recipient. Signs and symptoms in this type of codes are communication signs. The obvious function of these signs is to inform us of the identity of individuals or groups and to give us information to coordinate actions.
3.Paralinguistic codes
These ciphers are of three types, and it depends on whether we are dealing only with re-encoding (re-encoding), or with independent ciphers, or with parallel ciphers applied in parallel with the language. These codes include the following:
A). Language interpreters
The function of these ciphers is that whenever there are time and place restrictions and other restrictions for the use of the above language, they replace it. Cryptographic ciphers belong to this category of ciphers; These ciphers substitute numbers or other shapes to describe an event, or change their usual order based on certain rules.
b). Language alternatives
These are self-organized codes independent of the language: the street language (market street) and the code names of secret populations, which are specific to a particular region or country, are codes of this kind.
c). Language helper
Linguistic communication is based on the use of prominent signs; But speech is often accompanied by parallel signs: the tone of speech, facial expressions and gestures. These signs are natural and spontaneous profiles that have a purely expressive function; But some of them can be converted into conventional signs for communication purposes, and language aids are divided into three types of homophonic, spaced and modal codes.
Conclusion
In general, after examining the poems of these two poets, it was determined that they were not influenced by each other; however, many common themes appear in their work. In terms of practical examples, only one shared instance was found between Shamlou and Mihoubi. In the poems of Shamlou and Mihoubi, both poets use the image of martyrs' blood to urge people to awaken. Epistemological symbols also appear in their works, notably through the recurring theme of the character of Christ. These archetypes play a significant epistemological role in the poems of Shamlou and Mihoubi, often used to convey themes such as suffering and hardship. The word evokes the birth of pain and sorrow; therefore, the poets aim to remind readers of the tragic state of their land by invoking the sorrow of Christ. The cross-linguistic symbols in the works of these two poets can also be categorized into three groups.
First, they are the interpreters of the language. These ciphers are used in the form of using numbers in the poems of Mihoubi and Shamlou, whose purpose is to help the language of the poem to be clear and simple and to arouse the curiosity of the audience. The second group is language substitutes, which are manifested in the form of market street language and code names of populations, and only the meaning of such phrases and words can be understood by the people of a certain region or group, and the third group of paralinguistic codes are language assistants, which themselves are composed of three categories of homonymous, distance, and modal codes. In the section of Ramzegan Hamwandi, Shamlou and Mihoubi have discussed the duty of the poet towards the society. Using poetic images and rich language, Shamlou portrays the sadness and discomfort of the society and invites to reflect on time and history. By depicting past glories and describing present obstacles, Mehubi encourages efforts to preserve the past he likes. Two poets have expressed their attitude towards the poet's duty towards the society from different angles. Also, in the poem "Elegy", Shamlou depicts the sadness and discomfort of the society with poetic images and rich language, and by describing the current obstacles and destructions, he shows the feeling of backwardness. He invites the reader to reflect on time and history. On the other hand, Mihoubi highlights the contrast between the past and the present by depicting the glory of the past alongside the current obstacles and destruction. By pointing to hope for the future, he encourages the reader to preserve the cherished past. Additionally, distance and Atwari symbols are employed as common themes of parting, along with descriptions of facial expressions and gestures in the poetry.
Research Paper
الادب المقارن
Touraj Zinivand; Parisa Amiri
Abstract
Reynolds Alan Nicholson (1868–1945) was a prominent English orientalist. Although he was not widely recognized as a theorist or scholar in the field of comparative literature, he gained a strong reputation for his translations, corrections, and explanations of notable works of Islamic mysticism. ...
Read More
Reynolds Alan Nicholson (1868–1945) was a prominent English orientalist. Although he was not widely recognized as a theorist or scholar in the field of comparative literature, he gained a strong reputation for his translations, corrections, and explanations of notable works of Islamic mysticism. His book, “History of Arabic Literature,” is a concise and methodical work that has had a significant impact on the field, offering comparative analysis and insightful commentary. The findings of this analytical-descriptive study suggest several examples of adaptive Nicholson in various prominent dimensions of comparative literature, including "inference," "analysis," and "categorization": 1. Impact and affected flow. 2. Comparative literature and cultural territory (oral culture, cultural image recognition, post-colonial studies). 3. Distinctions and similarities between writers and cultures. 4. Review and aesthetics of comparative literary texts.Moreover, Nicholson's work primarily addresses two areas of impact and influence, focusing on the comparison of similarities and notable literary differences. The first area concerns the presence of Iranian culture within the broader context of Islamic civilization, which receives the most extensive discussion. The second area involves the critique of aesthetics and a comparison between Arab scholars, traditional elders, and Western thought, although this section is treated more briefly.IntroductionReynolds Alan Nicholson holds a distinctive position in the history of comparative literature because of his sustained focus on how literary forms travel across linguistic boundaries while remaining embedded within specific cultural contexts. Rather than treating “influence” as a unidirectional or purely textual transmission, Nicholson’s scholarship emphasizes intercultural mediation: the ways in which poets, scribes, performers, and audiences reinterpret inherited motifs to address new aesthetic and social demands. In this regard, his work offers an interpretive model for comparative inquiry that combines philological sensitivity with an appreciation of the cultural functions performed by narrative and lyric traditions.This extended abstract revisits Nicholson’s perspective by highlighting several interrelated themes: intercultural influence, the impact of Persian literature on Arabic literature, the circulation of oral and folk traditions, and the comparative aesthetics that arise when literary beauty is evaluated across different traditions. Comparative literature, according to Nicholson, is not merely the listing of parallels; it is an effort to understand how similarities can coexist with differences, how shared narrative techniques or poetic devices can produce distinct emotional effects, and how aesthetic judgment can be both rigorous and culturally sensitive.A particular focus is Nicholson’s treatment of Persian-Arabic literary relations. Persianate learning and literary production did not simply “enter” Arabic literature as foreign content; rather, Persian poetics reshaped Arabic literary sensibilities through translation, adaptation, imitation, and the transformation of genre conventions. Such processes illuminate what comparative literature gains by examining the conditions under which influence transforms into creative recomposition. Nicholson’s perspective thus encourages the study of cross-cultural literary history as a dynamic field where borrowed structures are reshaped into forms that resonate locally.Finally, Nicholson’s sensitivity to oral and folk traditions—especially the types of stories, songs, and performative narratives that circulate beyond elite literary institutions—enriches comparative aesthetics. Oral culture complicates the concept of a stable “source text” by emphasizing variation, performance contexts, and communal authorship. This paper argues that Nicholson’s focus on these dimensions enables comparative literature to move beyond mere textual comparison toward a deeper understanding of how literature exists within voices, communities, and repertoires.MethodThis study employs a qualitative comparative approach grounded in Nicholson’s methodological commitments: close attention to textual forms, attentiveness to cultural mediation, and cautious inference regarding influence. The analysis proceeds in three methodological stages.First, the key claims attributed to Nicholson’s comparative perspective are identified through a thematic analysis of his discussions on intercultural transmission.Second, representative examples are analyzed in terms of narrative structure and poetic form.Third, oral and folk traditions are incorporated through their unique modes of transmission.Throughout, the analysis remains consistent with the core challenge of comparative literature: avoiding the reduction of difference to mere "local color" or the simplification of similarity to mere imitation. Influence is understood as a process of reinterpretation, and aesthetics is regarded as evaluative rather than decorative—focusing on the literary effects produced across different traditions.Results and DiscussionThe analysis demonstrates that Nicholson’s contribution to comparative literature can be summarized as a framework for tracing intercultural influence while preserving interpretive complexity. Several results emerge.Intercultural influence as creative mediationNicholson’s perspective clarifies that literary transmission is not merely the transfer of content but the transformation of literary methods. Influence occurs through the reworking of themes, motifs, and stylistic elements within new cultural contexts. Persianate materials, for instance, gain significance in Arabic contexts not through direct substitution but through the negotiation of genre conventions, rhetorical expectations, and aesthetic preferences. Comparative literature benefits from this insight because it redefines “source” relationships as culturally productive encounters.Persian impact on Arabic literatureA central result concerns Nicholson’s emphasis on Persian impact on Arabic literary traditions. The Persian contribution is visible both in subject matter and in the reconfiguration of poetic imagination: metaphorical patterns, narrative preferences, and formal devices circulate through networks of learning and performance. Persian poetics does not displace Arabic traditions; rather, it interacts with them. This interaction yields hybrid aesthetic possibilities, where Arabic literary agents selectively adopt Persian techniques to rearticulate local concerns—whether devotional, moral, romantic, or didactic.Oral and folk traditions as engines of circulationNicholson’s emphasis on oral and folk traditions produces a further result: it expands the scope of comparative literature beyond elite manuscripts. Oral literature and folk poetry support intercultural movement by sustaining motifs and narrative frames through repeated retelling and performance. This is crucial for understanding how widely circulating tales and poetic patterns achieve durability even when textual transmission is fragmented or varied.Similarities and differences across traditionsNicholson’s comparative approach produces a refined model for addressing similarity and difference. Shared structures—such as recurring narrative sequences, rhetorical strategies, or formal constraints—can coexist alongside unique aesthetic identities. The analysis indicates that Nicholson values the tension between comparability and distinctiveness: comparability enables scholars to identify conceptual affinities, while distinctiveness prevents the flattening of cultural histories. In this way, Nicholson’s work supports comparative literature as a field capable of accounting for both textual detail and aesthetic pleasure. Cross-cultural comparison thus becomes not an act of ranking or establishing equivalence based on superficial resemblance, but rather an effort to understand how literary forms generate value within their own horizon of meanings.ConclusionRevisiting Reynolds Alan Nicholson’s perspective clarifies why his contribution remains foundational to comparative literature. Nicholson’s work demonstrates that intercultural influence is best understood as creative mediation, shaped by institutions, audiences, languages, and modes of circulation. By focusing on the Persian influence on Arabic literature, his scholarship demonstrates how cultural exchange can reshape formal and aesthetic possibilities without eroding local identities. His attention to oral and folk traditions further expands comparative inquiry by revealing how shared narratives and poetic patterns endure through performance and communal memory. Just as importantly, Nicholson’s comparative aesthetics offers a principled approach to addressing similarities and differences. Shared structures do not diminish distinctiveness; rather, they invite explanations of how traditions achieve meaning through different rhetorical and affective mechanisms. Nicholson’s evaluative sensitivity to style, form, and emotional effect supports comparative reading as an activity that is both scholarly and aesthetically responsive.In summary, Nicholson’s approach advances the field of comparative literature by treating literary contact as a complex phenomenon and literary value as a structured outcome influenced by form and context. A renewed engagement with his perspective can help contemporary comparative studies more effectively integrate textual analysis, cultural history, and aesthetic judgment—resulting in comparisons that are rigorous, historically informed, and sensitive to the lived circulation of literary traditions.Comparative Dimensions TableCharacter or subject (similar)Similarity or difference (similarity or difference)Character or subject (similar to)The Sea of Arab PoetryQuantitatively similarThe sources are Greek and Latin poetry (p. 105)Prophetic poetry (39(In style and elegance, likeIt is the style of Victor Hugo (40) (p. 319).Molvi's poemIn the great excitement and tenderness and beauty of wordsIt is superior to the poetry of Ibn al-Farez (42) (p. 330).
Research Paper
الادب المقارن
Ali Salmani Gelian; Ahmad Reza Heidaryan Shahri; Bahar Seddighi
Abstract
Ahmad Matar is one of the Iraqi political and committed poets, who has addressed political and social concepts with his own expression. On the other hand, Jafar Qoli Zangli, known as the King of Kermanj poets in Kurdish literature, is considered one of the most prominent Iranian Kurdish poets. It is ...
Read More
Ahmad Matar is one of the Iraqi political and committed poets, who has addressed political and social concepts with his own expression. On the other hand, Jafar Qoli Zangli, known as the King of Kermanj poets in Kurdish literature, is considered one of the most prominent Iranian Kurdish poets. It is worth mentioning that both poets have used the symbol element as an integral part of their compositions and there are many religious symbols in their poems. How the use of religious symbols by these two great contemporary Arab and Kurdish poets reveals their inner thoughts and beliefs, and its comparative study can give a more comprehensive view to the audience of world literature. Therefore, the comparative study of religious symbols in their poems is important. The purpose of this research is to investigate the religious symbolism in the poems of Ahmad Matar and Jafargholi Zangali, which has compared the religious symbols of their poems with a descriptive-analytical method and based on Peirce's semiotics and the French school of comparative literature. As the results have indicated, the poets have reflected negative and positive religious characters in their divan, with the difference that Jafar Qoli's poems paid more attention to the reality of history. Also, the frequency of using holy places and times is almost similar to each other and both singers have used nature and symbols to express their purposes. Matar uses religious issues at the level of symbols with his poetic expression, and Zangli, due to its simplicity, uses these concepts in profile limit.IntroductionAhmad Matar is a renowned Iraqi poet known among his contemporaries for his sharp and humorous language. He dedicated some of his poems to religious literature. Jafar Qoli Zangali is also one of the most popular poets in Kurmanji, whose poems hold a prominent place in religious themes. A comparative study of the poems of these two poets, along with an exploration of religious symbols at various levels—such as symbols, icons, and indices based on Peirce's theory and the American school—can offer a unique comparison between the two Arab and Kurdish poets. It should be noted that symbols have long been prevalent among nations and are considered essential means of expressing ideas and emotions. In fact, it is impossible to imagine a society without symbols, as symbols and signs are deeply intertwined with the culture of every nation. One method of studying symbols is Charles Sanders Peirce's model, which categorizes them into three types based on their relationship to reality: index, icon, and symbol. Ahmad Matar and Jafar Qoli Zangali, two renowned poets of contemporary Arabic and Kurmanj literature, have, considering the conditions of their time, dedicated part of their poetry to religious themes expressed through symbols and codes. Therefore, the primary focus and challenge of this research is to explore how these concepts manifest in the poetry of these two writers. Although both poets engage with religious themes and symbols, they differ in their treatment of these symbols according to their respective purposes and goals.MethodThis article, using a descriptive-analytical method and utilizing a "comparative study of the concepts of religious symbolism," focuses on examining and analyzing the poems of Ahmad Matar and Jafar Qoli Zangali based on the American school of thought, because these two have not been influenced by each other. The researcher aims to examine religious symbols based on Peirce's semiotics and, relying on context and accompanying words, divides them into three categories: index, icon, and symbol.Index/indexical aspect: In this aspect, the signifier is not optional but is directly related to the signified. This connection can be inferred or observed, such as natural signs, symptoms of disease, etc. Index, in his view, indicates the cause-and-effect relationship between the signifier and the signified. Peirce gives the example of a wall that is pierced by a bullet but there is no bullet in it, and the presence of a bullet is discovered by considering its effect. The only completely arbitrary and conventional type of symbol is the linguistic sign.Icon/Iconic aspect: In this aspect, the signified is perceived because of its resemblance to the signifier or because it is an imitation of it. The signified is recognized by looking, listening, touching, etc. The signifier resembles the signified because it possesses some of its qualities such as image, replica, onomatopoeia, etc. Peirce considers the icon to be a kind of conventional-cultural sign and gives the cross as an example of an icon and a sign for Christianity.Symbol/Symbolic Aspect: In this aspect, the signifier does not resemble the signified but is linked to it based on an arbitrary convention, so the relationship between the signifier and the signified must be learned, like language.Direct indexical signs address their subject with a blind compulsion, iconic signs usually have some convention in them, and symbolic signs are highly conventional.ConclusionA symbol is an inner meaning hidden beneath the surface. A tendency toward ambiguity and layering of speech and an avoidance of directness are characteristics of symbolic literature. Symbolic poetry attempts to convey the grandeur of emotions and imaginations through clear and explicit descriptions. The use of symbols and codes is one of the characteristics of contemporary Arabic poetry and literature that distinguishes it from ancient poetry and literature. Most contemporary Arab poets use a variety of symbols, such as: Sinbad, Adonis (Tammuz), Hallaj, Ayyub and Salahuddin Ayyubi, etc. have used these symbols in their poetry. Some of these symbols have become so widespread in contemporary poetry that they are referred to as "traditional symbolic models." The use of religious symbols in poetry is one of the characteristics of contemporary poetry in many committed poems. Many contemporary poets do not have independent and explicit poetry in the religious field; but they have used religious symbols in their poems, such as: Bayati, Muzaffar al-Nawab, Ahmad Dahbour, Nizar Qabbani, and... Of course, the use of symbols and codes, the use of symbolic expression, is sometimes due to the dominance of the artist's suffocating atmosphere and inevitability; but this is not all. The use of symbols adds to the beauty, conciseness, and power of communication and impact of the text. What helps the critic's understanding of the code and determines the type of its signified is the context of the speech. Another reason for using and benefiting from symbols and codes is the pleasure of discovery after unraveling their understanding. “Common symbols and codes are abundant in the literature of the sustainability of nations; symbols such as water, sun, tree, and mountain (elements of nature) are seen in the description of warriors and martyrs in almost all literary works. Some other symbols have their roots in national, religious, and even ethnic culture. Nations that share a common religious culture also share common symbols. For example, in the literature of Islamic countries such as Iran, Egypt, Palestine, Iraq, Lebanon, and Libya, symbols such as Ashura, Prophet Joseph, Pharaoh, Hallaj, etc. with similar meanings abound. In this article, a comparative study of the poems of Ahmad Matar and Jafar Qoli Zangali is considered in the four axes of personality, symbol, time and place and nature.ResultsAhmad Matar has indirectly conveyed his political and social goals through the use of symbols and codes in his poems. In this context, religion and the personalities of the prophets are among the primary elements of Ahmad Matar's symbolism. He incorporates many verses alongside pure Quranic concepts. Similarly, Jafargholi Zangali is regarded as one of the Kurmanji poets and mystics whose pure religious concepts form an integral part of his poetry. He is constantly secretive and in need of God, calling his audience toward goodness and commitment. Some negative characters, such as Pharaoh, Abu Lahab, and Abu Jahl, also appear in the poems of these two poets. Following the Holy Quran and employing symbolism, Ahmad Matar seeks to identify contemporary negative figures with these characters and to describe the events of his time.Due to his poetic and indirect style, he elevates most of the religious themes in his poems to the level of symbols. These symbols function as signifiers, drawing meaning from the reader's prior education and knowledge. Additionally, Zangali focuses on figures such as Pharaoh, Aaron, and Mamun, mentioning them in straightforward terms and emphasizing their representation.Symbols such as the snake, the beloved who appears as the homeland for Matar and as Melvari for Jafar Qoli, the irreligious sheikh, and the enemy are present in the poems of both poets. For them, the snake symbolizes evil. The enemy also seeks to destroy the religion and culture of their country, and both poets criticize seemingly religious people who are passive and sinful. The beloved of Matar can be considered Iraq, as his lyrical poetry is written solely for his country. In contrast, the beloved in Zangali's poetry represents not only earthly manifestations but also a symbol of divine love. Sacred times and places, such as Mount Sinai and Jerusalem, have been of interest to both poets and appear with nearly the same frequency in their works.
Research Paper
الادب المقارن
Seyyed Mohammad Razi Mostafavinia,; Elham Baboli Bahmeh; Zeinab Mohammadi
Abstract
Time, as a fundamental component of narrative structure, is not merely a representation of real or imaginary events that an author seeks to recreate. Rather, it functions as a signifying system that constructs and imparts meaning to the author's subjective world. As a relational structure, time shapes ...
Read More
Time, as a fundamental component of narrative structure, is not merely a representation of real or imaginary events that an author seeks to recreate. Rather, it functions as a signifying system that constructs and imparts meaning to the author's subjective world. As a relational structure, time shapes a text's identity and serves as a framework governing other narrative elements. It is often asserted that understanding narrative discourse depends on accurately discerning the role of time. This study conducts a comparative analysis of the novel “New York 80” by Yusuf Idris (1927) and the short stories in “Az Neyestan va Digarestan” by Mehdi Shojaei (1960), focusing on the element of time. These works were selected for their shared social themes within distinct cultural contexts—Egypt and Iran. Relying on the American school of comparative literature and qualitative content analysis, this essay employs Gérard Genette's (1930) analytical framework for comparing temporal features to examine the artistic function of time in representing social issues. The results indicate that the narratives in both works are generally orderly, with the narrative pace predominantly steady and consistent. The dominant pattern is a singular frequency, emphasizing the linear progression of experience in the modern world. Both authors employ a shared narrative grammar to depict a state of crisis. Despite structural similarities, time serves distinct artistic and intellectual purposes. In “New York 80,” time is condensed and intense, whereas in “Az Neyestan va Digarestan,” it is flexible and subjective. Overall, in both works, time functions not merely as a structural element but as a discourse through which the author's ideology is expressed.
Introduction
Comparative study is a fundamental method in literary criticism that facilitates the analysis of similarities and differences between literary works across diverse cultural contexts. This approach is developed within various theoretical frameworks, with structuralist narratology being among the most influential. This approach, which assumes the structured nature of literary texts, analyzes systematic intra-textual relationships, including the arrangement of structural elements within the narrative. Among these elements, "time" holds a pivotal position. It not only forms the foundation of the narrative but also serves as a meaning-making tool that reflects the author's worldview, ideological concerns, and the aesthetic features of their style. Beyond its artistic function, the element of time plays a central organizing role: it structures the work, adds depth and dynamism to character development, and serves as a vehicle for conveying profound cultural, philosophical, and social themes to the audience. Within the domain of structuralist narratology, the French theorist Gérard Genette offers a powerful conceptual framework for critical narrative analysis through his three-dimensional examination of narrative time: order, duration, and frequency. For the present study, Yusuf Idris's novel “New York 80” and Seyyed Mehdi Shojaei's short story collections “Az Neyestan va Digarestan” have been selected.
Relying on Genette's theoretical framework, this research undertakes a comparative study of these two significant works from the Arabic and Persian literary spheres. Yusuf Idris, focusing on the representation of social issues, is recognized as a pioneering figure in Arabic critical realism. His works—both short stories and novels—employ a blend of sociological insight and symbolic language to analyze power structures, class conflicts, and the psychology of the Egyptian individual. Through a multi-layered realism, he probes both objective reality and collective consciousness, turning the lived experience of the marginalized into the focal point of literary-critical discourse. In contrast, within Iranian literature, Seyyed Mehdi Shojaei pursues social themes such as justice, hypocrisy, and the quest for truth through a critical approach expressed in an ethical-spiritual, allegorical-mystical style. By creating situations of moral testing and internal conflict, he invites the reader to re-evaluate values. Both authors view literature as an instrument for social critique. However, while Idris emphasizes material and class analysis, Shojaei focuses on inner insight and ethical reform. This contrast provides a suitable paradigm for a comparative study of social issue representation, centered on narrative elements—particularly time—within two distinct cultural contexts.
Method
This study, grounded in the American school of Comparative Literature, analyzes narrative temporality in Yusuf Idris's novel New York 80 and Seyyed Mehdi Shojaei's short story collection Az Neyestan and Digarestan. Utilizing a qualitative approach and content analysis method, data was collected via library research and note-taking. Concrete textual examples are analyzed and coded according to the three-dimensional model of narrative time in Gérard Genette's theory. Due to space constraints, examples for some components are omitted.
Conclusion
Comparing the findings of this research with the reviewed literature, it becomes evident that previous studies have often offered descriptive and one-dimensional analyses of the narrative elements in the works of these two authors. They have generally lacked a systematic theoretical framework and a comparative methodology to conduct an in-depth, structural analysis of narrative temporality. Existing research has primarily concentrated on characterization, themes, or stylistics, often neglecting the examination of "time" as an active meaning-making device that reflects the author's worldview. In contrast, this article, drawing on Genette's three-dimensional model, demonstrates that time in these two works transcends its role as a mere structural framework and transforms into an ideological discourse. The shared use of techniques such as singular frequency and a uniform pace indicates a common understanding of crisis and mundanity in the modern world. However, a fundamental divergence in the function of time reveals that Idris employs condensed, linear time as a stage for ideological confrontation and the alienation of the Eastern individual in the West, whereas Shojaei, using flexible, subjective time, engages in inner exploration and the clash of ethical values within the context of Iranian society. Therefore, by addressing the gap in structuralist comparative studies, this research demonstrates that analyzing the element of time is key to understanding formal convergences and ideological divergences in two distinct literary traditions.
Results
The study’s findings reveal significant and distinct patterns in the use of time as a meaning-making mechanism within two different cultural contexts. Both authors deliberately and systematically employ Genette’s three components—order, duration, and frequency. In both works, singular frequency is the dominant pattern, emphasizing the linear progression of experiencing crisis and disconnection in the modern world. Additionally, narrative pace is often consistent and uniform, creating a monotonous rhythm that reflects the daily routine and absurd repetition in the characters’ lives. This structural commonality indicates that, regardless of theme, both authors utilize a shared narrative grammar to represent a state of crisis.
Despite structural similarities, time serves distinct artistic and intellectual purposes. In “New York 80,” time is dense and acute—the entire narrative unfolds in a single night “New York 80” or a few hours “Wien 60.” This extreme temporal compression intensifies ideological confrontation and transforms dialogue into condensed philosophical debate. Time acts as a stage for the clash of ideas. Extensive retrospection places characters in a fragmented “present,” severed from their roots, reflecting the identity crisis and displacement of the immigrant in a pure, rootless now. The linear, monotonous time of cafes or Western streets is experienced as a temporal prison, trapping characters in repetitive dialogues or thoughts—thus, time functions as an agent of alienation.
In “Az Neyestan and Digarestan,” although the overall progression is linear, the author draws time into the characters' minds through brief, recurring retrospections. Time, rather than merely being a setting for events, becomes a stream of consciousness and memory, objectifying inner conflict and moral anguish—this is the flexible, subjective time. The integration of sacred and worldly time in stories like Mahjabin places ritual, cyclical time (e.g., bringing milk) in opposition to linear, mortal time. This contrast highlights the clash of two temporal systems (spiritual/material), which is a central theme. Narrative time is often oriented toward moments of moral reckoning or inner revelation. The pace occasionally slows through descriptive pauses to emphasize the symbolic significance of a scene, such as the depiction of a face in Santamaria. Here, time serves the awakening of both character and reader.
Overall, Idris employs time as a dramatic stage and a mold for transnational crises, narrating the absurdity and suspension of humanity in the face of Western civilization. In contrast, Shojaei transforms time into an instrument for inner exploration, examining conscience and showcasing the clash of values within a specific social context. This study demonstrates that a focused analysis of the element of time not only reveals deep similarities in modern narrative techniques within Arabic and Persian literature but also brings into sharper relief fundamental divergences in worldview, social concerns, and the literary project of each author. Thus, in these two works, time is not merely a structural category but a discourse in which the author’s ideology is manifested.
Research Paper
الادب المقارن
Elyas Nooraei; Shiva Sadeghi
Abstract
Narrative discourse analysis is one of the most effective and reliable methods for structurally examining a story. By explaining and interpreting the ways a narrative text is conveyed, it offers a means to uncover the author's hidden meaning. The two short stories by Pirzad and Ghada Alsman, including ...
Read More
Narrative discourse analysis is one of the most effective and reliable methods for structurally examining a story. By explaining and interpreting the ways a narrative text is conveyed, it offers a means to uncover the author's hidden meaning. The two short stories by Pirzad and Ghada Alsman, including "The End of the Story of Non-Bayda," employ a feminine language and style. Both authors focus on women's perspectives and attitudes toward society by centering their narratives on female characters. This article aims to uncover the hidden meanings within the text through a comparative study of these two stories, analyzing their narrative discourse techniques and identifying their structural patterns. The research method is descriptive and analytical, relying on library sources and a case study of two authors' story samples to identify the differences and similarities between the stories, independent of external influences. Ultimately, the study revealed that despite content differences, both stories are structurally very similar and suitable for narrative discourse analysis. Time return, repetition, descriptive detail, summary, external focus, general knowledge narration, dual focalization, and dialogue are among the most important narrative techniques used in these two stories. The story of Alsman centers on the mental and spiritual turmoil of the main character, whereas Zoya Pirzad’s story lacks Alsman’s intensity and instead attempts to depict a woman’s companionship with a manIntroductionNarrative discourse analysis is one of the effective and reliable ways to examine the structure of the story, which provides a way to discover the hidden meaning and concept of the author by relying on the explanation and interpretation of the ways of paying the superstructure of a narrative text. The two short stories "Perlashes" by Pirzad and "The End of the Story of Non-Bayda" by Ghada Alsman have feminine language and style, and both authors have tried to show the attitude of women towards society by focusing on the character of women in their stories.Refreshing women's stories through new linguistic approaches, particularly discourse analysis, not only highlights the role of the structural system of the text in each story but also demonstrates the author's skill in using this system to convey meaning. Additionally, it showcases the efforts of female writers to assert their scientific and cultural identity and integrity. They also demonstrate their relevance with modern currents. Each story follows a specific form, format, and structure that serves as a container tasked with conveying meaning. The extent to which the author has been conscious in choosing their own format and attentive to new structural knowledge can be assessed through a structural review of the text.MethodThis article aims to uncover the meaning and concepts embedded in the text by comparing these two stories, analyzing their narrative discourse techniques, and identifying their structural patterns. The research method employed is descriptive analysis, utilizing library sources and case studies of two authors' stories. It identifies the differences and similarities between these stories without focusing on their influences. Ultimately, the study finds that, despite differences in content, both stories are structurally very similar and can be analyzed through the lens of narrative discourse analysis.Structuralist knowledge, which respects the independence of the text and focuses on the body of the story and its patterns, aims to explain how to analyze a narrative text using simple and purposeful language while identifying its structural and linguistic features. The narrative represents the knowledge that emerged within the context of structural science. It can be described as "a new kind of literary structuralism that is less concerned with the fundamental structure of stories and more focused on the structure of the narrative itself." The structure of the narrative refers to the manner in which stories are recounted in the broadest sense of the term (Bertens, 2008: 86). Structuralists analyze stories as narrative messages to uncover the processes of narrative formation and have developed specific methods for examining narratives. Prominent figures in structuralism, such as Roland Barthes, Tzvetan Todorov, and Gérard Genette, have contributed systematic approaches to studying narratives and identifying the underlying structures and mechanisms within narrative texts. In the meantime, by presenting the pattern of narrative discourse, Gérard Genette sought to study the complex relationships between discourse and the story it aims to recount. In analyzing a story, he employs terms such as time, timing, narrative center, generalist narrator, characterization, dialogue technique, and narrator's position within the story, considering several modes for each. Given the significant similarities and differences observed in the texts of the two stories, it is important to examine them through the lens of the American comparative school.ResultsBoth stories are written in a feminine style and point of view, with the explanation that the character of Alsman’s story is demanding and troubled. Almost all the techniques proposed by Genet for the structural analysis of a narrative text can be traced in both stories. From the point of view of narrative time, although Pirzad's story follows an irregular pattern and constantly fluctuates between the present and the past, it has less internal turmoil than Alsman's story. The mental confusion of the character of Alsman’s story, by focusing on repeated repetition, has made some scenes bolder. But the repetition in Pirzad's story is mostly based on the events of the story and depending on the occurrence of each event, it is also represented in the story. Description plays a key role in Alsman's story. But in Pirzad's story, it is somehow superfluous to the story and is mostly used to explain the words. The use of omission and summary in both stories, along with description and dialogue, has caused the acceleration of the story to not reach a negative point. In the beginning, both stories use an omniscient narrator outside of the story, but Alsman's story is changed from the third person to the first person of the participant in order to attract more attention and companionship of the reader. The speaking element is more dominant in Pirzad's story, but Alsman's story, since the narrator is in the first person, has tried to be accompanied by the least absence of the narrator from the story. ConclusionTemporal returns, repetition, descriptive break, summary, external focus, omniscient narrator, double focalization and dialogue element are among the most important narrative techniques of these two stories. Alsman’s story is based on the mental and spiritual turmoil of the main character, but Zoya Pirzad's story is devoid of the sharpness and frankness of Alsman’s accent and has tried to depict a kind of companionship between a woman and a man.One of the concepts discussed by Tone and Tone is that narratives are divided into two types: homogeneous and heterogeneous. If the narrator (third person) is outside the story, the narrative is heterogeneous. Conversely, if the narrator (first or second person) is inside the story and recounts events about themselves or another character, the narrative is homogeneous. The story of Pirzad largely reflects an uneven world in which the narrator remains detached, recounting events as an observer rather than an active participant. The only exception occurs when Morad's mother recounts the introduction of Murad and the song; in this instance, the narrator becomes an actor within the same world. In the story of Alsman, the majority of the narrative is told from within the story itself. I become part of the story when it is narrated by the central character, who is also a theologian. This story also depicts two identical yet unconscious worlds, reflecting a dual or variable center.
Research Paper
الادب المقارن
Mahdi Yari; Sayyed Mahdi Nori keyzghani; Mahdi Khorrami Sarhozaki; Hosein Shamsabadi
Abstract
This study examines the theme of “Resistance to Acculturation” in the characters of two prominent Islamic mystics, Suhrawardi and Ibn Arabi, as portrayed in two novels written in Persian and Arabic. The research is based on Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, one of the most influential ...
Read More
This study examines the theme of “Resistance to Acculturation” in the characters of two prominent Islamic mystics, Suhrawardi and Ibn Arabi, as portrayed in two novels written in Persian and Arabic. The research is based on Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, one of the most influential theories of personality in humanistic psychology. According to Maslow, once basic physiological and safety needs are met, individuals progress toward self-actualization, a stage characterized by qualities such as independence, authenticity, and resistance to cultural conformity. Methodologically, the study employs a descriptive-analytical approach combined with partial induction. Within this framework, two novels—“Qalandar and the Castle,” which portrays Suhrawardi’s philosophical and mystical life, and “The Little Death” (al-Mawt al-Saghir), which narrates the experiences of Ibn Arabi—are analyzed comparatively.
The findings reveal that in both works, the protagonists begin their developmental journeys at the lower levels of Maslow’s hierarchy and ultimately reach the stage of self-actualization. At this point, they exhibit profound resistance to enculturation through their critique of prevailing intellectual traditions, defiance of political and religious authority, and disregard for restrictive social norms. In conclusion, the research demonstrates that resistance to enculturation constitutes a central and defining feature of the self-actualized personality, transcending temporal and cultural boundaries, as exemplified in the lives and thoughts of Suhrawardi and Ibn Arabi.
Introduction
When analyzing fictional characters, various theories can be applied. One such theory is Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Maslow emphasizes an important concept: growth. He argues that to achieve growth, a person must satisfy five different types of needs: physiological needs, safety needs, social needs, esteem needs, and the need for self-actualization. The fulfillment of basic needs is a prerequisite for self-actualization; one must first satisfy physiological, safety, and other foundational needs before reaching the stage of self-actualization. A self-actualized person recognizes their unique personality and becomes distinct from others. A self-actualized individual possesses specific traits and characteristics. These include simplicity and naturalness, problem-centeredness, resistance to enculturation, and others. The component examined in this paper is the concept of resistance to enculturation, which means that a self-actualized person strives to act, speak, and behave according to their own convictions. Such a person does not seek the approval of others and has no desire to conform to the crowd.
Throughout history, mystics have been recognized as self-actualized individuals who, through the difficult path of self-purification, attained levels of spiritual development admired by both the elite and the common people. As self-actualized individuals, they were not influenced by the prevailing social culture and, through their distinct words and actions, sometimes even sought to transform the culture of their societies.
Since comparative studies provide a foundation for better understanding this feature in self-actualized characters from different cultural backgrounds, this research examines two novels that depict the lives of two major Islamic mystics and thinkers: Suhrawardi and Ibn Arabi. The first novel, Qalandar and the Castle, portrays the life, thoughts, and spiritual experiences of Suhrawardi, the Iranian philosopher and mystic; the second, The Little Death (Al-Mawt al-Saghir), explores the life and works of Ibn Arabi, the Andalusian thinker and mystic.
Method
The theoretical foundation of this study is Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, which proves highly applicable in analyzing and understanding the main character of the story. This is because it is one of the prominent theories in personality studies, and both novels provide extensive details about their protagonists. The research employs a descriptive–analytical approach and a partial inductive method to examine the manifestations of the component of resistance to enculturation in the lives of the two mystics.
Conclusion
By examining both novels, it becomes evident that the two protagonists begin their journeys of growth at the lower levels of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and gradually progress to the stage of self-actualization. Upon reaching this level, they exhibit a resistance to enculturation. In his pursuit of knowledge, Suhrawardi does not become captivated by the ideas of earlier scholars and considers it his natural right to critique their theories. He refuses to submit to the dominant intellectual climate of his time—a culture founded on the unquestioning acceptance of past authorities. Similarly, Ibn Arabi, when encountering a great philosopher such as Ibn Rushd (Averroes), is not intimidated by his scholarly status and openly expresses his own views. Both self-actualized figures defy the intellectual norms of their era in their quest for knowledge and understanding, showing little concern for others’ opinions of them.
Furthermore, neither of these figures submits to ruling powers; instead, they critique the actions of unjust rulers. Suhrawardi considers silence in the face of tyranny against ordinary people a form of betrayal and seizes every opportunity to condemn injustice. Ibn Arabi likewise criticizes rulers and their decisions whenever circumstances allow.
Another manifestation of this component lies in their behaviors and attitudes that go against societal conventions. For instance, Suhrawardi does not hesitate to dance or express joy publicly, acting according to his own inner state. He pays no heed to his formal status as a seeker of religious sciences and sets no limits upon himself. He also joins gatherings of Zoroastrians and benefits from their wisdom and teachings. When reproached for this, he cites traditions that emphasize the unrestricted pursuit of knowledge.
Ibn Arabi, too, does not conform to public opinion and maintains independent views. He makes no distinction between men and women, rejoicing at the birth of his daughter. He believes that seclusion—a means to attain divine union—is not exclusive to men and encourages women to pursue it as well. Moreover, unlike most people, he is detached from material possessions and easily renounces them; for example, at one point in the novel, Ibn Arabi gives away a house that had been gifted to him to a poor man.
This study clearly demonstrates that the component of resistance to enculturation manifests itself in the personality of the self-actualized individual, regardless of the time or place in which that person lives.
Results
Based on the analysis, Suhrawardi and Ibn Arabi, as self-actualized individuals, clearly embody the notion of resistance to enculturation. They act solely according to their own beliefs and judgments, without fear of others’ opinions. In Qalandar and the Castle, Suhrawardi resists the imitative intellectual atmosphere of his time by critically examining the ideas of prominent scholars, especially Ibn Sina (Avicenna). He is unafraid of rulers and religious authorities, openly critiques their misconduct, disregards conventional appearance and dress, and draws upon the teachings of various religions.
Similarly, Ibn Arabi demonstrates this intellectual independence throughout his life. He questions established ideas and revered figures, shows no fear of power, turns his life into a continuous journey, and regards men and women as equals on the spiritual path. Detached from worldly possessions, he embraces simplicity and ascetic living.
In essence, both figures share a resistance to accepted doctrines and an unwavering stance against dominant powers, speaking and acting solely according to their own insight and conviction.
