saeed geravand; Mazaher Ahmadtobi
Abstract
Abstract In this article‚ after giving a brief account of characteristics and contents of Gulshan-i Rrāz (The Secret Rose Garden) and Mahāyānah Sutras‚ we try to answer ...
Read More
Abstract In this article‚ after giving a brief account of characteristics and contents of Gulshan-i Rrāz (The Secret Rose Garden) and Mahāyānah Sutras‚ we try to answer the principal questions on “Thought” and problems relating to it. This article consists of three parts. In the first part‚ the nature of “Thought” in Gulshan-i Rāz and Mahāyānah Sutras is discussed. In the second part‚ the different levels of “Thought” are studied. Furthermore, it is stated that in Gulshan-i Rāz and Mahāyānah Sutras “Thought” and “Intuition” show in two realms of rational and pararational perspectives. In the third part‚ it is stated that‚ although belonging to two different traditions‚ Gulshan-i Rāz and Mahāyānah Sutras place “Visionary Knowledge” above “Thinking”. For “Visionary Knowledge” can purify one’s heart of worldly pollutions‚ but “Thinking” cannot bring human beings to knowing all truths and setting themselves free from pain. So Gulshan-i Rāz and Mahāyānah Sutras clearly call human beings to “Visionary Knowledge”, since‚ according to the above sources‚ this level above “Thinking” is identical with union. Findings of this study show that mystical systems approximate each other in the subject of epistemology. Keywords: Thinking, Intuition, Gulshan-i Raz, Mahāyānah Sutras 1. Introduction One of the works in mystical thinking in which the mystical meanings and mysteries are versified‚ is the Rhyming Couplet (Mathnawi) of Gulshan-i Rāz (The Secret Rose Garden) by the Sufi Poet Maḥmud Shabistarī. In Buddisim‚ in addition to accepting the scriptures of Mahāyāna cult and Hināyāna sect, there exists a great collection of Sutras. Although belonging to two various traditions‚ Gulshan-i Rāz and Mahāyānah Sutras have great resemblances together in diferent subjects. In this article‚ after giving a brief account of the characteristics of Gulshan-i Rāz and Mahāyānah Sutras‚ we seek to answer some principal questions on “Thought” and problems relating to it. One of the most fundamental problems in Gulshan-i Raz and MahayanaSutras revolves around the issue of “thinking”. In Gulshan-i Raz, thinking is a spiritual quest from the appearance to the inner side. However, thinking is “an inner enlightenment” in MahayanaSutras, that is, wisdom, which is not gained through acquisitions but through presence and intuition. In the world view which is common between Gulshan-i Raz and Mahayana Sutras, thinking is divided into rational thinking and discovery thinking (Prajna). Rational thinking is achieved through theoretical understanding and striving. However, discovery thinking is manifested in the light of experience beyond the intellectual striving, that is, intuition of the human heart. Moreover, in the common world view of Gulshan-i Raz and Mahayana Sutras, intuitive thinking is of higher dignity and rank than rational thinking because this aspect of pure thinking can erase the seeker’s heart from the contaminations of the secular world and has a significant role in understanding the facts of existence in the current life. Although rational thinking, which is obtained from common forms of this world, is a valid method in its own territory, it does not have the capability of rescuing and relieving human from discomforting elements. Accordingly, despite their differences in such aspects as priority and posterity of rank and the degree of emphasis on the issue and the effects of thinking, Gulshan-i Raz and Mahayana Sutras, according to their structural similarities and common motifs, call humans clearly to intuition and intuitive thinking. It is due to the fact that this level of intuition, that is intuition in mystical rituals, is the same as the “reaching” to the Union. 2. Method This work was a library research conducted in analytical and descriptive way. The method of analysis has been comparative regarding thought and intuition in Gulshan-i Rāz (The Secret Rose Garden)and Mahāyānah Sutras (cf. Asanga, 45-7; Conze, 71). 3. Findings and Discussion The findings of this study indicate that mystical systems bear great resemblances to each other in the subject of epistemology (cf. Lāhījī, 470). As far as thought and intuition are concerned, it is evident that these two concepts are quintessential in all mystical systems which are partly intellectual and partly intuitional in nature. It is evident that rational thought means the rational endeavour to discover the truth, whereas intuition in the human beings occurs when human beings approach the internal way. Moreover, the results of the intuition are initially realized from the pararational thought. It is amazing that rational thought is accompanied with doubt and uncertainty. However, intuition is a realm which does not need to philosophy or logical demonstration. The main point these two texts stress on is that intuiton needs hardship and Monasticism. Furthermore, in these two texts, epistemology is equal to ontology. Another point is that Gulshan-i Rāz and Mahāyānah Sutras emphasize that in the realm of wisdom the more one obtanis purification and sanctity, the higher is their degree. It is concluded that in the methodology of comparative mysticism, despite some conscpicuous differences, the degree of adaptability and conformity of mystical systems, especially on the question of mystical and epistemological problems, is very high. 4. Conclusions Gulshan-i Eāz and Mahāyānah Sutras place “Visionary Knowledge” above “Thinking”, for “Visionary Knowledge” can purify one’s heart of worldly pollutions‚ but “Thinking” cannot bring human beings to knowing all truths and setting him or her free of things of pain. So Gulshan-i Rāz and Mahayana Sutras clearly call human beings to “Visionary Knowledge” because‚ according to these sources‚ this level above “Thinking” is identical with the Union. References 1. Asanga, S. (1995) ‚ Mahayana Sutra Lamkara. Translated by Surekhavijaylimaye‚ New Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications. 2. Conze, E. (1978). The prajna Parmita Literature. Second Edition, Tokyo: The Rai Yukai. 3. Lāhījī‚ S. M. (1381SH). Mafātīḥ al-I‛jāz Fi Sharḥ-iGulshan-i rāz. Introducted‚ Edited and Annotated by M. Barzigar Khālighi and E. Karbāsi. Tehran: nashr-i
