As the Safavid kings determined to confined the Sufis of Qizilbash power and using Shari'a for obtaining legitimacy, the raddiah (refutation) texts of some jurisprudents against Sufism also have grown significantly in the second half of the Safavid era. One of the influ
More
As the Safavid kings determined to confined the Sufis of Qizilbash power and using Shari'a for obtaining legitimacy, the raddiah (refutation) texts of some jurisprudents against Sufism also have grown significantly in the second half of the Safavid era. One of the influential Ikhbari jurisprudents was Mulla Taher Qomi, who by writing many dissertations in opposition to Sufism is also considered as the most prolific raddiah writers. This paper, by using Van Leeuwen and Laclau Mouffe's analysis patterns, explores linguistic propositions and disclose discourse constructions of one of those controversial texts, Radd-i-sufiya . The paper indicates that the author, from the point of view of his superior argument, Shia and Sharia of Islam, is against the rival discourse around the central point of tariqah and haqiqah, and thus, with the misunderstanding and diminution of semantic elements of discourse, introduce Sufism as non-Islamic and sometimes originated from the Sunnite. These pretensions and the intensification of otherness between the two discourses had a profound effect on subsequent hegemonic interventions, especially during the Qajar period. Hegemony with the means of force gave certainty and unambiguity in conflicts to the Sufi discourse. As a result of this intervention, formally, Sufism and any mystic recitations of religion was marginalized in public discourse, and the formalist discourse was the dominant discourse of the religious understanding in the society.
Manuscript profile
