کارکرد استعاره مفهومی در تحلیل چالش کلامی آیه 116 سوره مائده (مقاله پژوهشی حوزه)
درجه علمی: علمی-پژوهشی (حوزوی)
آرشیو
چکیده
اطلاق نفس برای خداوند در فراز «لا اعلم ما فی نفسک» آیه 116 سوره مائده، دانشمندان مسلمان را با دو چالش مربوط به جسمانیت خداوند مواجه کرده است. چالش نخست اطلاق نفس بر خداوند که جسمانیت را به همراه دارد و چالش دوم، ظرفیت در این اطلاق است . دانشمندان مسلمان با توجه به پیش فرض های مکاتب کلامی خود و همچنین با رویکرد ادبی سعی بر تطبیق یافته های علمی خود داشته اند. پاسخ دانشمندان مسلمان تطبیق بر اسلوب مشاکله، تعیین معنای ذات برای نفس و معنای حقیقی نفس است. نگاشته حاضر ضمن بررسی پاسخ های یاد شده با روش تحلیلی عقلی درصدد پاسخ به این مسئله است که معناشناسی شناختی به ویژه استعاره مفهومی چگونه می تواند چالش های اشاره شده در آیه 116 سوره مائده را پاسخ دهد. استفاده از اسلوب شخصیت بخشی در اطلاق واژه نفس و نیز استعاره مفهومی ظرفیت در این عبارت، یافته های این پژوهش است.The Function of Conceptual Metaphor in the Analysis of the Verbal Challenge of Verse 116 of Surah Ma'idah
Introduction: One of the verses that can be examined in the knowledge of theology is verse 116 of Surah Mubaraka Ma'idah. In a part of this verse, God quotes a word from Jesus (pbuh) that he said... Ta'almu ma fi nafsi wa laa a'lammu ma fi nafsik. Translation: You know what is in my soul; And I do not know what is in your soul. Pronounced phrase "Walaa A'alam Ma fi Nafsek" whichh was expressed by God's Prophet Jesus (pbuh) on the Day of Judgment proves that God has a soul, while the soul is only applied to material beings, and also for the soul, a vessel (fi) Is placed. Given. While the soul is not a simple and capable being, Muslim scientists have tried to adapt their scientific findings according to the presuppositions of their theological schools and also with a literary approach. Without referring to the meaning of self, Zamakhshari applied it to the style of Mashakala. He believes that the word "nafsek" was mentioned because of the word "nafsi" in the previous sentence. But writers such as Jurjani, Taftazani and Sialkoti Koch, whose orientation is also theological and philosophical, did not accept the use of soul for God because of the problems and considered its meaning to be essential. This meaning is consistent with the report of lexicographers. They believe that this part of the verse is one of the similar verses. Some theologians, such as Fakhrazi, believe that it is possible to apply the meaning of the self in the verse of essence and the art of the problem. Some philosophers, such as Mullah Sadra, also consider the meaning of the word soul to be essential and believe that the soul is not only applied to bodies, but it can also be applied to God. Jovini did not accept the definition of self for God because of the problem and they consider this definition to be true. His reason for saying this is the repetition of such wording in the Qur'an and hadiths reported from the Prophet (PBUH). The second challenge is related to the capacity in the letter "phi". As mentioned in Khafaji's speech, the problem is in the letter fi. They have tried to solve the challenge in this way. But In many views, the meaning of capacity in the challenged phrase has been ignored. There is a possibility that the importance of applying self to God is the reason for this neglect. Because this application in the Qur'an means confirming the application. Based on this point of view, the interpretation "La Aalm ma fi Nafsak" is not much different from the self-made interpretation "La Aalm Nafsak".Method: The study method in this writing is rational analysis.Findings: The findings of this research are:Based on the foundations of cognitive linguistics, the view of Zamakhshari's problem is not acceptable. Because the problem is only a verbal literary style in which one word is mentioned in connection with another word in the sentence before it. While language is a reflection of the conceptualization of the mind. In this way, the mind first conceptualizes the external situation and then expresses the appropriate word and phrase based on knowledge. But there Is no conceptualization in the problem. In order to get rid of God's personification, Muslim scholars have chosen the meaning of essence for the word soul. This choice, as mentioned, agrees with the report of lexicographers. But one of the important problems of this choice is its incompatibility with the wisdom of choosing words in the Holy Quran. Three: In the challenged Quranic phrase, two metaphors are intertwined. Separating them is very important and a way for a more correct understanding. The first metaphor is in the word ego, which is a metaphorical part of personality, and the second metaphor is capacity.Conclusion: The results of this research are as follows: The difference between theologians and metaphor researchers is that in order to reject embodiment, the word can be considered in its original and tangible meaning, but it does not involve the embodiment of God. In other words, the analysis of the challenged phrase is in two ways. Some traditional literary methods try to answer and analyze it. Some have also answered the challenge through conceptual metaphor. Two conceptual metaphors can be generalized to other news attributes
تبلیغات
