مدح در بدیع (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
یکی از مضامین عمده در تاریخ ادب فارسی، مدح بوده است که شاعران به شیوه های مختلف آن را بیان کرده اند. علمای بلاغت هریک از این شیوه ها را یک صنعت به شمار آورده و ویژگی ها و شرایط خاصی برای آن ها در نظر گرفته اند. این پژوهش، به روش توصیفی تحلیلی به بررسی و نقد این صنایع در آثار بلاغی زبان فارسی پرداخته است. در مجموع سیزده آرایه از صنایع بدیعی به مضامین مدحی اختصاص دارد که همه جزو صنایع معنوی بدیع محسوب می شوند. این جدا از صنایعی است که افزون بر مدح، مضامین دیگر نیز از طریق آنها ارائه شده است. از این تعداد، سه صنعت ابداع، تأکیدالمدح بمایشبه الذّم و استدراک به دلیل ایهامی که در ذهن خواننده ایجاد می کنند، دارای ارزش های بلاغی بیشری هستند. در این میان صنعت تأکید المدح بمایشبه الذّم، بیشتر مورد توجه بلاغیون بوده است؛ به گونه ای که در همه کتب بدیعی مطرح شده است. از بین آثار بلاغی نیز کتاب بدایع الافکار فی صنایع الاشعار بیشتر از بقیه، یعنی نُه صنعت مدحی را مطرح کرده است. آنچه دراین میان آشکاراست، تشتّت و گاه اختلاف آرای بلاغیون در زمینه نامگذاری، تعاریف و ذکر شواهد این صنایع است.Praise in Rhetoric
Abstract One of the main themes in the history of Persian literature is praise which has been used by poets in different ways. Rhetoric scholars have considered praise as a technique with unique characteristics. This research investigated the technique applied in the rhetorical works of the Persian language by using a descriptive-analytical method. There were a total of 13 arrays of rhetorical techniques assigned for praise themes, all of which were regarded as rhetorical semantic techniques. Among them, 3 techniques of Ebdā’ (innovation), Ta’kid alMadh bemā Yashbah al-Dham (emphasis on praising, which is like blaming), and Estedrāk (paradoxical praise) had greater rhetorical values because of the equivocalness they created in the reader's mind. Still, the technique of Ta’kid alMadh bemā Yashbah al-Dham had been further the focus of rhetoricians and mentioned in all the rhetoric books. Among the rhetorical works, the book of Badāye’ al-Afkār fi Sanāye’ al-Ash’ār mentioned more praise techniques than others (i.e. 9 techniques). What was clear in this regard was the rhetoricians’ diverse and sometimes disparate opinions in terms of naming, defining, and mentioning examples of the techniques. Introduction One of the main themes in the history of Persian literature is praise which has been used by poets in different ways. As it appears from the history book of Sistan , the first Persian poem has also had a praise theme. Even one of the researchers believes that the history of praise poetry goes back not only to the time of establishing the courts’ power but also to prehistoric times. According to (Shamisa, 2004, p. 256) “praise poetry is somehow rooted in the prayers, praises, and hymns that have been written about the gods and their manifestations in ancient times". The subject of praise is one of the first critical themes in the field of literature and has been the focus of writers and critics. Qudāma ibn Ja’far considered praise as the first goal of poetry in his famous book entitled Naqd al-She'r (critic of poetry) written in the 4 th century and has assigned particular characteristics and conditions for praise poetry. “Madiha (eulogy) has several parts as desired by the praisers and it is necessary to focus on the special meaning of each of these parts of praise” (Qudāma ibn Ja'far, n.d, p. 174). In this research, various ways of praising were examined in the authentic rhetorical works, from Tarjomān al-Balāgheh (rhetoric translation) to present a new look at rhetoric. The main goal of the present study was to find out what techniques the court poets had innovated in order to express praise themes and how successful they had been in creating literary beauties. The basis of this research was referring to Persian rhetorical works though in some cases, the Arabic rhetorical scholars’ opinions were cited as well. In most of the Persian praise poems, the praised one was one of the persons related to the court, especially the king. For this reason, there were several praise techniques that were dedicated to praising this group. Methodology This research uses a library approach and a descriptive-analytical method. It could be considered the first attempt made in the field of categorizing, criticizing, and analyzing the ways of praising in Persian rhetoric. Discussion and Results Due to the importance of the subject of praise in the history of Persian poetry, poets have used various methods to praise the praised ones. Rhetoric scholars have considered each of these methods as a separate technique and mentioned some evidence for each of them. It should be said that in this study, only the techniques related to praise themes were taken into account as there were some techniques, which were dedicated to praise and the poets could also express other themes through them. For example, San’at Moghāyira (technique of paradox), which was mentioned in Dorreh Najafi , was believed to be applied for both praising and blaming; or the technique of ‘Edmāj’ that was mentioned in the book of Abda’ al-Badāye was defined as “a technique by which the speaker addresses another issue during conveying his meaning of praise or blame or any other meanings, whether it is related to the first issue or it is of a different kind” (Gorkani, as cited in Ghasemi, 2010, p. 38). Such techniques were not regarded in this research. On the other hand, the characteristics and styles of some techniques, such as Towsim (marked praise) or Hosn-e Takhallos (well-delivered praising) are only used in poetry (although praise has been used in both poetry and prose). Therefore, since rhetoricians’ dominant focus in providing the related evidence has been on poetry, the approach taken in this study was based on poetry. The analysis of rhetorical works showed the following 13 arrays or techniques to present praise themes, : 1) Ta’kid al-Madh bemā Yashbah al-Dham (emphasis on a type of praise, which is like blaming); 2) Madh-e Movajjah (excusable praise); 3) Ebdā’ (innovation); 4) Towsim (marked praise); 5) Ettefāq (coincidence); 6) Etterād (successive ancestral praising); 7) Estedrāk (paradoxical praise); 8) Madh-e Mothannā (doubled praise); 9) Tarjih (preference); 10) Hosn-e Takhallos (well-delivered praise); 11) Tasallof (adulatory praise); 12) Jam’e Mo’talef va Mokhtalef (collective and distinctive praise); and 13) Do’ay-e Ta’bid (eternal blessing). Of course, some of these arrays were more focused on by rhetoricians. Conclusion Out of the rhetorical techniques, 13 techniques were found to have been used by the speakers presenting praise themes. All these techniques were considered to be rhetorical semantic techniques. Among them, the 3 techniques of Ebdā’, Ta’kid al-Madh bemā Yashbah al-Dham, and Estedrāk had more rhetorical values since they created equivocalness in the reader's mind. Accordingly, it could be claimed that the speakers had added to the treasure of rhetorical techniques in the Persian language by presenting praise themes while creating literary beauties. These 13 techniques were different from those like Edmāj or Moghāyereh (contradiction), which were associated with other themes besides praise. Two techniques of Ta’kid al-Madh bemā Yashbah al-Dham and Madh-e Movajjah were found to be used by rhetoricians; the former was mentioned in all the rhetorical books and the latter was used except in Al-Mo’jam . On the other hand, the 3 techniques of Madh-e Mothannā, Tarjih, and Tasallof were mentioned only in one book. Among the rhetoric scholars, Wā’ez Kāshefi, the author of the book Badaye’ al-Afkār fi Sanāye’ al-Ash’ār paid more attention to these techniques by mentioning 9 of them. The least attention was paid by Shams Qais Rāzi, who mentioned only the 2 techniques of Towsim and Ta’kid al-Madh bemā Yashbah al-Dham. In the meantime, what seemed to be more prominent was the rhetoricians’ disparity of opinions for naming and defining these techniques. For example, they mention even 5 terms for the technique of Madh-e Movajjah.
تبلیغات
