monireh taliehbakhsh; gholamhossein gholamhosseinzadeh; Alireza Nikouei; mehdi moinzadeh
Abstract
The first trace of the critique of objective truth and the “present-at-hand” tradition can be found in Sufism and Mysticism. Mystics emphasize the outstanding role of uncovering and intuition which implies the desire to leave mediators in order to achieve the truth and reflects their creative ...
Read More
The first trace of the critique of objective truth and the “present-at-hand” tradition can be found in Sufism and Mysticism. Mystics emphasize the outstanding role of uncovering and intuition which implies the desire to leave mediators in order to achieve the truth and reflects their creative approach toward tradition, which, while rooted in tradition, is seen as revival. They considered the truth of their approach to tradition as a Naghd/critique. Naghd, in common terms, is simply translated as the assessment of something. However, in the mystical tradition, it is prior to assessment and refers to calling something that is “ready to hand” existence. Today, the way through this tradition is being inquired about and though about is groundless. Groundlessness is the indicator of the dichotomy of tradition and modernity, whereas the original foundation through the experience of a moment of "negation" is an abyss/ the nothing foundation. This article will begin with two fundamental theoretical approaches in Western thought to understand the foundations of the mystic approach to tradition. The first approach is "Romantic Hermeneutics, Historicism, Fundamentalism, and Traditionalism," which comprehends tradition as it has been spent, and the second approach with titles such as "philosophical hermeneutics, historicity and traditionality" considers tradition as something present now. This article proves that both tradition and modernity adopt the same approach while the second approach implies a different perception of the foundation / beginning, time and existence.
