معناکاوی مفهوم امنیت در شاهنامه با رویکرد نشانه شناسی پیرس (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
در شاهنامه فردوسی، به عنوان یکی از برجسته ترین متون حماسی ایرانیان، مفهوم امنیت به صورت رمزگان های مختلفی بیان شده است که با بررسی و تحلیل آن ها می توان به نظام اندیشگانی ایرانیان در باب مفهوم امنیت و اشکال مختلف آن، نمادهای آن و عوامل مؤثر در آن پی برد. چارلز سندرس پیرس، یکی از بنیانگذاران نشانه شناسی، نشانه ها را به سه نوع نمادین (رابطه میان دال و مدلول قراردادی)، شمایلی (رابطه دال و مدلول بر اساس شباهت) و نمایه ای (رابطه دال و مدلول علت و معلولی) تقسیم می کند. مقاله حاضر، می کوشد مفهوم امنیت را در شاهنامه فردوسی بر مبنای رویکرد نشانه شناسی پیرس واکاوی نماید تا بدین پرسش پاسخ دهد که در شاهنامه چگونه از نشانه های زبانی برای بیان مفهوم امنیت، مرجع امنیت و عوامل ضدامنیتی استفاده شده است. نتیجه این بررسی نشان می دهد که در شاهنامه هر سه صورت نشانه برای تعریف امنیت کاربرد داشته است. در این اثر اگرچه واژه «امنیت» به کار نرفته است است لیکن از واژه هایی چون «ایمن»، «آرام»، «خوبی»، «خرد»، «آبادانی» و «صلح» به معنای «امنیت» استفاده فراوانی شده است که از نوع نشانه های نمادین است. همچنین، در نشانه های زبانی چون قدرت، شهرت، داد و دهش، راستی، هنر، ساز و برگ جنگی، لشکر نیرومند و جان برکف، فرمانبرداری تام، تقدس مرز و سرزمین و غیره از نشانه های نمایه ای به شمار می رود که در بسیاری از داستان های شاهنامه علت امنیت سیاسی و ملی محسوب می شود. کلماتی چون ستم، بیدادگری، بی خردی، آز، بدی و اهریمنی، منیت و غرور، جادوگری از نشانه های نمایه ای هستند و رابطه دال و مدلول بر پایه علت و معلولی است. این نوع نشانه ها بر ضدامنیت روانی، اجتماعی و اقتصادی جامعه دلالت دارند. پهلوانانی چون زال، رستم، سهراب و شاهزادگانی چون اسفندیار، سیاوش، کی خسرو نشانه های شمایلی هستند که گفتار و رفتار و کردار آنان دال هایی هستند که مدلول امنیت را ترسیم می کنند. موجوداتی چون اژدها، دیو و اهریمن از نشانه های شمایلی ضدامنیت دینی و اجتماعی در نظم نمادین شاهنامه به شمار می آیند.A Semiotic Analysis of the Concept of Security in the Shahnameh, Using Peirce's Framework
IntroductionThe word “security” has a broad meaning and encompasses everything from the innermost individual feelings to the widest international relations. It can include concepts such as freedom from doubt and anxiety on one side, and peace, trust, and well-being on the other. Barry Buzan considers “security” to be the intersection of foreign, economic, and military policies of countries. Arnold Wolfers believes a nation has security when it can protect its basic values without risk, avoid war, and maintain its values when challenged.The issue of “security” is one of the topics that have always been the focus of Iranian intellectual elders such as Hakim Abulqasem Ferdowsi, Imam Muhammad Ghazali, Khawaja Nasir Toosi, Molana, and Saadi. Among them, Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh is undoubtedly the pioneer of the concept of “security.” He displays this concept, especially “national security” in different ways in the speech, behavior, and actions of the Shahnameh’s heroes. In this vein, the present paper tries to analyze this concept from various aspects in Ferdowsi's Shahnameh - as one of the prominent epic texts of Iran - using Charles Sanders Peirce’s framework of semiotic theory. The goal is to develop a security model based on the Iranian national epic, drawing from Iran's rich history and civilization. Through an analysis of the symbolic, iconographic, and profile signs of the “concept of security” in the Shahnameh, the primary questions are: Who are the referent objects of security? What defines security? And which dimensions and types of security are reflected in the Shahnameh? Methodology As one of the founders of semiotics, Peirce believes that man can only think through signs. In his model, a sign includes 'representation, interpretation, object': 'representation' is the form that the sign takes; 'interpretation' is the perception created by the sign; and 'object' is what the sign refers to. Peirce believes the relationship between the sign and the signified may be symbolic, iconic, or indexical. The meaning of the 'symbolic aspect' is that the signifier does not resemble the signified but is linked to it based on an arbitrary or conventional association. In the symbolic aspect, the relationship between the signifier and the signified is not direct (i.e., not based on physical or causal similarity), but rather it is determined by social or cultural conventions. Discussion and ResultsIn the Shahnameh, many words imply the concept of security based on the contractual relationship between the object and the representation. Some of the most important examples that indicate the issue of “security” include signifiers/words such as “safe”, “wisdom”, “calm”, “assured”, “peace/reconciliation”, “developed”, “ verdurous”, “fame” and so on. Another type of linguistic sign in the Shahnameh that conveys the concept of “security” through a cause-and-effect relationship is the “profile” sign. This means that the words/examples such as “terror”, “faith”, “covenant”, “unity and integration”, and “military power” are based on the causal relationship between “social, religious, psychological, political and national security”. The cause of the emergence of individual, social and national insecurity is mentioned in the form of index signs such as immorality, unwiseness, violence, lack of strong political power, worldliness, lack of religious faith, magic, and war. In the symbolic sign, the relationship between the representation and the object is based on similarity. Thus, based on this type of sign, the sample has characteristics that evoke the concept of security based on the similarity. In the Shahnameh, various elements symbolize security, including kings and heroes, celestial realms, seasons like spring, and the juxtaposition of opposites such as sheep and wolves. ConclusionThe semiotic analysis of the concept of “security” in the Shahnameh reveals that, although the term “security” and its modern classifications are not explicitly mentioned in the text; the word “safe” which has the same root as the word security and symbolic signs such as “wisdom”, “peace”, “goodness”, “calm” and “comfort” and “fame” have been used in the concept of security.Based on the semantic implications and the relationships between these signs, it can be inferred that the symbolic sign of “peace” represents political and national security; while signs like “improvement, prosperity, and comfort” represent economic security. Additionally, the sign “name” reflects mental and personal security. The sign of “wisdom” has a wide range of meanings and includes all aspects of security, including individual, psychological, social, economic, political, and national. In the ancient Iranian thought system and the Shahnameh, to ensure security in its broad sense, it depends on factors such as “faith”, “giving”, “treaty”, “union”, and “army”, which can be used as index signs. Also, from the perspective of the Shahnameh, threats to security include “unruliness,” “ingratitude,” “war and grudges,” and the “absence of a central government.” In semiotic terms, these can be considered as anti-security index signs.In the Shahnameh, there are two important security referent objects, “Kings” and “Warriors.” Because their actions and behaviors are an embodiment of security, they can be referred to as symbolic signs of security. Similarly, the negative actions of “dragon”, “demon” and “devil” introduce them as symbolic signs of anti-security. On the security referent object in the Shahnameh, the ancient Iranians believed that the king has “Farrah Yazidi” and that he relies on wisdom, forgiveness, and military power to expand comprehensive security over the country. Adherence to the “covenant” which includes the social and moral obligations of the members of the society towards each other, is considered to be the basis and factor for maintaining social and national security. But the signs that cause the emergence of insecurity include immorality, unwiseness, violence, lack of strong political power, worldliness, lack of Yazadi religion, magic, war, etc. These are index signs that disrupt individual, social, and national security.
تبلیغات
