بازشناسی آراء و رویکرد یحیی بن حمزه علوی صاحب الطراز؛ المتضمن لاسرار ‏البلاغه‌ وعلوم حقائق الاعجاز در تعریف حقیقت

چگونگی تبیینِ مفهوم حقیقت به‌عنوان یکی از مباحث کلیدی در بلاغت، مورد توجه ‏متفکران اسلامی بوده و ‏پژوهش‌های فراوانی پیرامون آن صورت گرفته‌است؛ اما اغلبِ این مطالعات به نقلِ ‏دیدگاه‌های بلاغت‌پژوهان پیرامون این مقوله، ‏بسنده کرده‌اند، نقد و بازکاوی آراء متفکران، محور اصلی ‏پژوهش‌ها نبوده‌است. علوی (749ه)، نظریه‌پرداز کلاسیک در کتاب ‏بلاغیِ الطراز؛ المتضمن لاسرار ‏البلاغه‌ وعلوم حقائق الاعجاز ضمن اشکال‌گیری بر آراء اغلب بلاغت‌پژوهان، به تبیین مفهوم حقیقت ‏‏می‌پردازد. پژوهش‌گرانی که به بررسی آراء علوی پرداخته‌اند، باور به رویکردِ تکاملی یا میانه وی، دارند و ‏این باور را خلاف اصلِ ‏اندیشه وی، در پیش گرفتند. از این رو؛ مقاله حاضر با هدفِ شناختِ منظومه فکری ‏علوی با تکیه بر مباحث نظری وی در مبحث ‏‏حقیقت می‌کوشد با رویکرد کیفی و روش توصیفی - ‏تحلیلی، و تمرکز بر تضادهای موجود در آراء علوی، دوگانکی حاکم بر ‏اندیشه وی را نشان دهد و به نفیِ ‏انتسابِ رویکرد تکاملی او بپردازد. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد؛ جدالِ میان اعتباربخشی به وضع‌واضع یا اصطلاح تخاطب، سبب شده ‏نوعی دوگانگی بر آراء علوی پیرامون حقیقت سایه‎ ‎افکند و دو تعریف متعارض از حقیقت ارائه دهد. وی ‏بر بی‌اعتباری وضع‌واضع و عدم انتقال معنا تاکید داشته و آن را، مشروط به قید استعمال می‌داند؛ یعنی ‏وضع‌واضع را به‌عنوان معیار تعیین کننده نقل معنا از حقیقت به مجاز قبول ندارد؛ اما در جایی دیگر، با ‏اعتباربخشی به وضع‌واضع، ملزم به پذیرش انتقال معنا و نفیِ قید استعمال در آن، و برابری وضع‌واضع با ‏اصطلاح تخاطب می‌شود. بر این اساس، جریان عقل‌گرایی بر ابعاد فکری علوی غلبه دارد.‏ و اعتراض های وی بر دیگر متفکران، نیز مخدوش است.

recognizing the views and approach of yahya bin hamza alavi owner al taraz; al ‎mutzimin al asrar al balagha wa alum haqaiqa al ijaz in defining truth

the science of rhetoric, as one of the most theoretical sciences, has been exposed to the ‎attention of islamic thinkers from different fields to the extent that they have combined the ‎topics of this science with their different currents of thought. on the other hand, the history ‎of this science shows many studies about the viewpoints of thinkers in relation to the topics ‎of the science of rhetoric. what is the word truth, as one of the main categories in ‎classical rhetoric, has always been in the focus of rhetoricians' attention, and it has turned ‎into one of the controversial debates in theoretical debates that have a direct connection ‎with the thoughts of thinkers‏.‏‎ the difference of opinion about this concept is mostly ‎focused on the intellectual approaches of rhetoric scholars in relation to the scope of the ‎concept of truth and permission, which is expressed in the science of rhetoric with the terms ‎‎hadd al haqiqah and hadd al majaz. the division and emphasis on the concept of truth ‎by some theorists became the main source of these differences. on the other hand, truth is ‎necessary as a tool to know the reality of the thought of partial thinkers. hence; the ‎requirement of this type of knowledge is their precise understanding and idea of what the ‎truth is, and this idea can be considered as the intellectual infrastructure of thinkers in their ‎general approach.‎therefore explaining the concept of truth in rhetoric has always been the focus of islamic ‎thinkers and researchers; but most of the studies have been restricted to quoting the views ‎of rhetoricians, and criticizing the opinions of thinkers has not been the focus of them. ‎yahya bin hamzah alavi (749 ah), one of the classical theorists, explains the concept of ‎‎truth in the rhetorical book al taraz; al mutzimin al asrar al balagha wa alum haqaiqa ‎al ijaz while criticizing the opinions of most rhetorical scholars. with the aim of ‎understanding alavi's intellectual system, relying on his theoretical discussions about ‎‎truth, this article tries to show the duality governing his thought using a qualitative ‎approach and descriptive analytical method. ‎methodologythe current research, based on the approaches governing the rhetoric and knowledge of ‎alevi thought, and with the main goal that the concept of truth can be a determining ‎element for knowing the alevi intellectual system, is trying to negate his evolutionary ‎approach. to pay it is worth mentioning that the focus of the current research was on the ‎theoretical issues that are considered the intellectual foundation of rhetoric scholars, and on ‎the other hand, the main reliance was on deriving alavi's opinions from the core of his ‎objections to other classical thinkers, which in the discussion to some extent, these ‎objections are investigated.‎results and discussionthe concept of truth and how to explain it is one of the basic themes in the science of ‎rhetoric that has attracted the attention of many thinkers of arab islamic heritage. since the ‎category of truth is a tool for knowing the reality of a thinker's thought; therefore, to ‎understand his thought, it is necessary to have a precise understanding of his idea of what ‎truth is, and this idea can be considered as the intellectual support of the thinker in his ‎general approach. among the theorists who had important opinions in this field is yahya ‎bin hamza alavi, as one of the thinkers attributed to the evolutionary approach and the ‎author of the book al taraz‏.‏‎.‎analyzing his opinions in this regard, relying on the main axes such as al wawaf, al wawaf al ‎asala, al haqiqa al linguistic, language al wawaf, al mawwaizah, usage in the original ‎topic, and original meaning , which has become the cornerstone of alavi's views and highlights ‎his conflicting thoughts, indicate that alavi examines the concept of truth in two stages‏:‏a: according to the validity of the statement, which is referred to as the first type of ‎matching implication. first, he emphasized the invalidity of this category as a criterion for ‎determining the truth of the word and excluded it from the scope of truth, and he established ‎this invalidity even in the thought of jurjani and ibn jani. is. in a way, at this stage, he ‎believes that the truth does not apply to the word before it is used, and there is no transfer of ‎meaning in it‏.‏b: according to the term of discourse, which is referred to as the second type of ‎congruent implication. he considered this category as a criterion for determining the truth ‎of the word; that is, the word is subject to the concept of truth after being used; because it ‎is at this stage that the transfer of meaning takes place, even though in another topic, by ‎giving validity to the position of the narrator (the first type of matching implication), he is ‎required to violate such a point of view.‎alevi's controversy between the validity of the author's position or the term of discourse, ‎has led to a kind of duality and conflict speak surrounding his opinions around the concept ‎of truth. by stipulating the adverbial condition to the adverb of use, he somehow ‎distinguishes between the first and second types of concordance, and he tries to define the ‎adverb of use in the idiom of discourse; it means to advance the use of the word in lexical, ‎customary and religious contexts‏.‏‎ on the other hand, alavi has put the initial position of the ‎word or the first type of matching signification as the introduction of the term ḥathab; but ‎in defining a type of truth (sharia) by relying on axes, he negates this point of view and ‎advances the first and second types of compatibility in the same direction; therefore, with ‎such an approach, it is required to violate the clause of use, invalidate the mode of the ‎author, not to convey the meaning in the first type of concordance, and even object to ‎jarjani and ibn jani. according to the above points of view, in the theoretical debates that ‎are closely related to alavi