Sufi terminology and aspects of interaction with symbols: An investigation into the orientalists’ approaches to the study and translation of Sufi terms: The case of Massignon
The Sufi (mystical) experience is characterized by a constant quest for the divine secrets in the universe: the mysteries of life and death, soul and spirit, and the mind and the heart. This experience varies from one ʿĀrif (Gnostic, Sufi Knower) to another according to the relevant pattern of connection between the individual self (al-̱dāt al-fardiyya) of the Sufi and the global self of the supreme monism (al-ḏāt al-kulliyya li al-’uḥadiyya al-ʿulyā).
It is clear that the universe or existence itself provide innumerable symbols and unfathomable signs. It is not surprising then that the Sufi discourse is founded on the ‘symbol’, which is a problematic word whose meaning is hidden in common speech and is, therefore, only grasped by the Sufis. Synonymous with a sign, whose meaning is hidden from a speaker because it is so subtle, it is also synonymous with a ‘hint’.
Symbolism has spread through Sufi poetic and prose writings because it was needed. The Sufi express meanings and psychological sensations which are not within the expressive capacity of language. They long to transfer their experience, but this experience can only be expressed by using a set of symbols that hint but lack clarity.
In this article we address the symbols employed by the Sufis to express their thoughts in translating the set of facts and secrets that Allah revealed to them after a long struggle. We formulate the problematics of this research as follows: How was it possible for the people of the Sufi Order to resort to symbolism, which usually indicates ambiguity and secretiveness, in coining terms to name the concepts and ideas that are inspired to them or that penetrate their inner souls? In this regard, we raise the following questions: Is the symbol a sign? a term? a word? an icon? a signal? a subtlety? a fragment (šaḏara)? a piece of wisdom (ḥikma)? a proverb? a metaphor? or a case of polysemy? Or is it all of this at the same time? What criteria enable Sufi words to contain both symbolic and terminological dimensions? What is the role of context (or pragmatic field) in identifying the essence of the Sufi symbol? How can we uncover the nucleus of the symbol from its external shell? How can we unveil the essence of symbols? What is the best approach to study symbols? Can we reduce symbols to semantic features following Rastier (1987), to highlight their essential meaning and extract their original nucleus? Or is this deconstructive approach useless in our treatment of the multifaceted symbol?
We will consider orientalist approaches (through Louis Massignon’s model) in the study of Sufi terminological systems by identifying their links with Islamic and gnostic origins and considering their modes of transfer into Western languages.
Table of contents
- Abstract
- Keywords
- Introduction
- The function of symbols between two different fields
- Sending and receiving symbols
- The rationale for using symbols
- Dimensions and prospects of symbols
- Position of symbols within the hierarchy of genres
- The relationship between the symbol and the sign
- Interference between the symbol and the word in Sufi discourse
- Interference between the symbol and the signal
- The symbol between the challenges of expression and indication
- Between a symbol and a puzzle
- The relationship between symbols and divine secrets
- Disclosing the hidden aspects of terms/symbols has purely educational motives
- The power of symbols
- Relativity of recognizing the semantic dimensions of symbols
- Disadvantages of the deconstructive approach to symbols
- Imagination is an essential source in the generation of symbols
- Standards for understanding the dimensions of Sufi Symbols
- Openness of the Sufi discourse and the wide horizons of interpretation
- Existence is the common factor of the various patterns of symbols
- Levels of symbolism in Sufi terminology
- The contextually-dependent semantic dimensions of symbols
- Orientalists’ methodologies in dealing with the terminological conventions of Ahl at-Ṭariq
- Massignon’s terminological research methodology in compiling the dictionary of technical terms
- Massignon’s interest in Sufi terminology
- The term ‘Will’
- The spiritual peculiarity of the concept ‘Will’
- Mind and spirit
- The terminological meaning of the word ‘Mind’ for the Greeks and its equivalents in some Modern Western Languages
- Characteristics of the ‘Mind’ for Modern Western Theorists
- The term ‘Love’ in human thought
- Conclusion
- References
Since ancient times, the difficulties of identifying the boundaries of symbols has constituted a complex for Western people. The Sufis’ writings, on the other hand, welcomed this characteristic difficulty because it underlies the openness of symbols to various worlds in the same way ‘Hermes’ is characteristic of volatility and vagueness in Illuminationist Gnosticist Culture. It is vagueness that allows a compromise between contradictions. A symbol is a prominent feature in the mystical language of the Muslims and is always given priority in the dichotomies developed by the ’ahl al-ḏawq (people of taste) as in: sign vs. expression, that which is hidden vs. that which is apparent, al-Fuhūm, i.e. innate knowledge or taste vs. al-Rusūm, i.e. acquired knowledge or exoteric, outer learning, and the truth vs. the Sharia.