چگونگی ایجاد زنجیرۀ هم ارزیِ گفتمان مهدویت در عصر صفویه (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
آنگاه که امری همچون مهدویت از حدود قلمروهای عقیدتی فراتر می رود و به پدیده ای سیاسی-اجتماعی بدل می شود، از ظرفیت های لازم برای مطالعه به مثابه یک گفتمان برخوردار می شود، مهدویت نیز در عصر صفویه، چنین ظرفیتی داشته است. به منظور تحقق چنین مطالعه ای و با مبنا قراردادن نظریه گفتمان ارنستو لاکلائو و شانتال موفه، براساس روشی تاریخی-تحلیلی، سؤال اساسی آن است که ساختار سیاسی- اجتماعی عصر صفویه، چگونه توانسته است چنین زنجیره هم ارزی نسبتاً فراگیری را مستقر کند. در همین راستا، فرضیه پژوهش آن است که مهدویت ازطریق یکی از اصول و ارکان گفتمان، یعنی زنجیره هم ارزی، این قابلیت را یافته است که قاطبه جامعه را فارغ از تفاوت های جنسیتی، قومیتی، جغرافیایی، سیاسی و حتی دینی، در یک همگرایی چشمگیر قرار دهد. یافته های تحقیق نشان می دهد مفصل بندی حاکمیت صفوی براساس مهدویت، در توازی با ایجاد زنجیره هم ارزی، ازطریق عمومیت باور به منجی، به منزله سازوکارهای گفتمانی، موفق به ایجاد همگرایی اجتماعی فارغ از تفاوت های موجود شده و ازطریق نبود مفصل بندی دال منجی، به مثابه دال های تهی، چنین پوششی را رقم زده است. همچنین ژرف ساخت های هژمونیک سازی صفویه، ازجمله تاریخ نگری و تاریخ نگاری ها و مواضع و متون فقهی علمای شیعه، امکان ایجاد این زنجیره را فراهم کرده اند.Creating Chain of Equivalence of Mahdavi Discourse in the Safavid Era
When an issue like Mahdism goes beyond the limits of ideological realms and becomes a socio-political phenomenon, it has the necessary capacity to be studied as a discourse. Mahdism had such a capacity in the Safavid era. To conduct the present historical-analytical study based on the discourse theory of Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe, the research question is: How was the political-social structure of the Safavid era able to establish such a relatively comprehensive equivalence chain? In this regard, the hypothesis of the research is that through one of the principles of the discourse, namely, the chain of equivalence, Mahdism has found a way to bring the society into a remarkable convergence regardless of gender, ethnic, geographical, political, and even religious differences. The findings of the study show that the articulation of Safavid rule based on Mahdism, in parallel with the creation of a chain of equivalence through the generality of belief in the savior as discourse mechanisms, has succeeded in creating social convergence regardless of existing differences. The deep constructions of the Safavid hegemonic structure, including historiography and historiography, and positions and jurisprudential texts of Shia scholars, have made it possible to create this chain.
Keywords: Equivalence Chain, Null Signifier, Articulation, Mahdavi Discourse, Safavid Era.
Introduction
The starting point of a discourse such as Mahdism cannot be attributed to the Safavid era as a historical period, but a wider time frame should be assumed for it. “Not in Iran, this discourse created the movements of Horoufiyeh and Noqtouyeh, Nourbakhshiyeh and Mosha’sha’iyeh” (Sheybi, as cited in Zekavati Qaraguzlou, 1979, p. 353-362). Rather, with the presence of Horoufiyeh in Asia Minor, it created a combined Shia-Sufi ideology with the slogans of Mahdism and Hezaraism (Millenarianism). These movements were mostly based on Mahdism, and it is during the Safavid era that the discourse of Mahdism changes to Imamism.
In other words, Mahdism had turned from a limited discourse into a stream-forming phenomenon, and even the initial grounds for the establishment of Sufism were provided by the actions and movements of Sheikh Junaid and Sheikh Heydar with relative reliance on Mahdism. “The idea of Mahdism has always been the basis for the realization and success of movements that had Mahdism-like claims” (Ibn-Khaldoun, as cited in Parvin Gonabadi, 1996, p. 641).
Mahdism in Safavid was not only a political matter but an ideological issue with socio-cultural and epistemic-verbal aspects. Mahdism in Safavid has been examined in this study as a discourse by considering its linguistic and rhetorical aspects. The necessity of conducting such research can also be proposed from the point of view that the continuous line of Mahdism until the present era has turned Iran into one of the territorial areas of Mahdism and has created multi-level and extensive effects and consequences. Therefore, it deserves special study in order to become a relative index for public understanding of the background of the history of salvation thinking, promiseism, millennialism, and other overlapping themes.
Materials and Methods
This research is conducted using a descriptive-analytical method based on library sources. The basic question of the study can be posed as follows: How was the political-social structure of the Safavid era able to establish such a relatively comprehensive equivalence chain? In other words, how was the Safavid political-social structure able to gain the power of public mobilization among other factions, groups, religions, and sects through the general belief in the Savior? To answer this question, the following hypothesis was proposed: Mahdism, through one of the principles and pillars of the discourse, i.e., the chain of equivalence, paved the ground to bring the society into a remarkable convergence regardless of gender, ethnic, geographical, political, and even religious differences.
Research Findings
According to the theoretical system of Laclau and Mouffe, in the Safavid era, the kings were able to provide the deep structures necessary to establish their legitimacy, which turned into an all-encompassing hegemony. The two signifiers (symbols) of Shiism and the Savior have been accepted by deep constructions such as historiography and the positions of scholars who established and consolidated the Safavid hegemony. The historiographies and positions of scholars were deep structures that made the Safavid hegemonic with the rhetorical applications of language coexistence and substitution. Enlightening how to build this social organization of meaning in the discourse of Mahdism has resulted in several basic theories in the Safavid era.
In terms of the political structure of the time, as a source for creating the ground of equivalence and unity and national integration against the territorial territory of the Sunni Ottoman and Uzbek empires, the discourse of Mahdism was taken into consideration. For a long time and until the relative decline of the Safavid dynasty, this discourse was able to establish and continue what is called the social organization of meaning in the literature of discourse theory. Also, the sign of the Savior was mentioned as an empty sign because in the discourse of Mahdism, the belief in the Savior was common among other sects and religions such as Shia, Sunni, Christian, Jewish, and Zoroastrian. It was used as a tool that can provide a kind of public mobilization in the direction of Safavid's will among other masses of people.
Discussion of Results and Conclusions
Regarding the deep structures that lay the groundwork for stabilizing and strengthening the discourse of Mahdism desired by the Safavids, the socio-cultural context of Mahdvism and its belief, epistemological and jurisprudential foundations, intentionally or unintentionally, have been the source of the work in creating legitimacy for the Safavids. The Safavid kings did not give up calling and supporting the scholars in order to gain legitimacy, and they also promoted historiography, popular literature, and hadiths and traditions related to Mahdism. As a result, while recognizing the logical-rational and Sharia goals for the actions of scholars regarding Mahdism, these goals do not negate Safavid's exploitation of their positions as deeply constructed. In other words, since scholars and historians have not categorized the Shiites or the believers in the Savior at all, this hypothesis can be put forward that the emptiness of these signs has been recognized by them due to the power of mobilizing those signs from their generality.
تبلیغات
