بررسی و تحلیل نسب و جایگاه «خطیب قزوینی» در تاریخ تطوّر علوم بلاغی
محورهای موضوعی : پژوهشهای ادبیات کلاسیک ایران
1 - استادیار گروه آموزش زبان و ادب فارسی، دانشگاه فرهنگیان، تهران، ایران
کلید واژه: خطیب قزوینی, تاریخ بلاغت, ملیّت, ایرانیان, تمدن اسلامی.,
چکیده مقاله :
نقش ایرانیان در پیشبرد تمدن اسلامی بر کسی پوشیده نیست. در تکوین علوم بلاغی نیز ایرانیان، نقش اساسی داشتهاند؛ هرچند در پردة اسامی و گاه انساب عربی، ملیّت آنان فراموش شده است. «خطیب قزوینی» از جمله کسانی است که با دو اثر مهم خود یعنی «تلخیصالمفتاح» و «الایضاح» مورد توجه بسیار قرار گرفته است و علیرغم داشتن نسبتی عجمی، او را یک عرب اصیل دانستهاند. احمد مطلوب معتقد است که وی پایههای بلاغت عربی را بنا نهاده و مطابق با اغلب منابع عربی، وی را منسوب به «ابودلف عجلی» میداند و بر اصالت عربی او تأکید میکند. نحوۀ استدلال وی، این سؤال را به ذهن میرساند که چقدر این موضوع معتبر است. بر این اساس هدف این مقاله، بررسی صحت و سقم این مطلب و زمینههای پیدایش آن است که با مراجعه به منابع عربی و فارسی و با روش اسنادی صورت گرفته است. نتایج این بررسی نشان میدهد که هرچند اثبات نسب اشخاص بعد از قرنها و ذکر آن در منابع، کار ممکنی نیست، حضور شگفتانگیز ایرانیان در تدوین علوم مختلف عربی بهویژه علوم بلاغی و تسلط بینظیرشان بر زبان عربی در دورة عباسی و وجود جریانهای شعوبی و ضد شعوبی و نیز اندیشههای عربگرایانة معاصر، این فکر را تقویت میکند که شاید انتساب خطیب قزوینی به دلیل آنکه بیشتر عمر خود را در دمشق و شام گذرانده و مولد او را اغلب منابع شهر موصل دانستهاند و نیز تسلط او بر زبان عربی و دیگر محاسنش، از مقولة انتساباتی باشد که قابلاثبات نیست.
in the History of the Development of Rhetorical Sciences
Nahid Tehrani Sabet*
Iranians have played an important role in the development of sciences within Islamic civilization, especially in the formation of the rhetorical sciences. Their mastery in this field was so remarkable that Shawqi Ḍayf spoke explicitly about it. This may be one of the reasons why some of them were attributed to Arab lineage. Al-Khatīb al-Qazvīnī, a prominent scholar of rhetoric in the 7th and 8th centuries AH, is one such figure. Ahmad Maṭlūb believes that he laid the foundations of Arabic rhetoric, and—according to most Arabic sources—associates him with “Abū Dulaf al-ʿIjlī,” emphasizing his Arab origin. The purpose of this article is to examine the accuracy and validity of these claims and the context in which they emerged, based on Arabic and Persian sources and through a documentary research method.
Keywords: Khatib Qazvini, history of rhetoric, nationality, Iranians, Islamic civilization.
Introduction
Rhetoric has attracted attention since the time of Plato and Aristotle, and after the advent of Islam, Muslims paid even greater attention to it because it helped explain the miraculous nature of the Holy Qur’an. In this context, the role of Iranians in developing the rhetorical sciences is remarkable, both in the creation of literary works in poetry and prose, and in the field of literary scholarship. The four stages in the evolution of rhetorical sciences in the Arabic language—emergence, growth, flourishing, and stagnation—are well known. Beginning in the second period, the early Abbasid era (132–232 AH), rhetorical considerations expanded significantly. The role of Iranians during this period is notable because the second century witnessed major developments following a political revolution: the Umayyad government in Syria collapsed, and the descendants of Abbas, the uncle of the Prophet (PBUH), came to power. From that point onward, the foundations of the Abbasid state rested largely on the support of Iranians and the Shuʿubiyyah movement in general. Iranians penetrated all aspects of governance, and the capital was moved from Damascus to Baghdad, on the border with Iran and near the city of Mada’in, the former capital of the Sasanian Empire. After that, innovation and the adoption of the best elements found in non-Arab civilizations became a common practice.
Shawqi Ḍayf considers the most important reason for the expansion of rhetorical discussions in the early Abbasid era to be the evolution of poetry and prose, along with the growth of intellectual and urban life. According to him, this transformation was the result of the widespread presence of mawālī and Iranians who had mastered the Arabic language and entered the field of literature with great skill. Their presence enabled Arabic poetry to break free from the dryness and limited themes of Bedouin life and to incorporate precise meanings, philosophical reflections, reasoning, analogies, and allegorical expressions. As a result, themes related to Iranian culture and life entered the poetry of the second and third centuries AH. Among the influential Iranian poets of that time, Bashshār ibn Burd (the pioneer of modern poetry), Abū Nuwās, and Abū al-ʿAtāhiyah played prominent roles. Ibn al-Muʿtazz wrote al-Badīʿ in response to these Abbasid poets in order to show that they were not superior to the ancient poets in rhetorical innovations (badī). This was because the Shuʿūbiyyah held the view that rhetorical ornaments (badīʿ) were introduced into Arabic poetry by Iranian poets. In prose, Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ—who was Iranian—established the new Abbasid prose style (known as the muwallad style). Other major scholars such as Abū ʿUbaydah Maʿmar ibn al-Muthannā, Ibn Qutaybah al-Dīnawarī, Abū Hilāl al-ʿAskarī, Abū al-Ḥasan ʿAlī ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz al-Jurjānī, as well as ʿAbd al-Qāhir al-Jurjānī, Qāḍī Abū al-Ḥasan ʿAbd al-Jabbār al-Muʿtazilī (al-Hamadanī al-Asadābādī), Jar Allāh al-Zamakhsharī, Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, al-Sakkākī, and Saʿd al-Dīn al-Taftāzānī—who were all followers of ʿAbd al-Qāhir—were likewise of Iranian origin.
Discussion
Khatīb al-Qazwīnī was a judge and scholar of the 7th and 8th centuries AH. Some biographers have referred to him as Dhu al-Funūn and ʿAllāmah. Before the age of twenty, he was appointed as a judge in Anatolia under the Rum (Byzantine) Empire. He later traveled to Syria, and after mastering the principles of maʿānī, bayān, and the techniques of Arabic rhetoric, he became the preacher (khaṭīb) of the Jāmiʿ Mosque of Damascus. He was then promoted to the position of judge in the Levant. After some time, he was appointed judge of that region by King al-Nāṣir Ayyūbī of Egypt, and eventually he assumed the judiciary of the entire Levant. Ibn Kathīr (701–774 AH) writes in al-Bidāyah wa al-Nihāyah about Khatīb al-Qazwīnī and his brother that “they entered Damascus from their homeland during the Tatar era,” but he does not mention any connection to Abū Dulaf al-ʿIjlī. According to The Dictionary of Notable Figures of Qazvin, the family of Khatīb al-Qazwīnī originally resided in Tabriz, having migrated there from Qazvin due to the insecurity caused by the Ismaili uprisings and later the Mongol invasion. Arabic sources report that Khatīb al-Qazwīnī was born in Mosul in 666 AH, while his brother was born in Tabriz. There is no disagreement that his family was from Qazvin, for all sources consistently maintain the title “al-Qazwīnī.” Shawqi Ḍayf writes that the title “al-Qazwīnī” is due to the fact that some of his ancestors lived in Qazvin. However, like Ahmad Maṭlūb, he considers Khatīb al-Qazwīnī to be of genuine Arab origin, tracing his lineage back to Abū Dulaf al-ʿIjlī, the general of al-Maʾmūn. Safadī (696–764 AH), who was his contemporary, also writes: “He is attributed to Abū Dulaf al-ʿIjlī.”
For Iranians, despite the presence of figures such as Abū Muslim, the Barmakids, the Sahl family, and others, the idea that the Abbasid movement was purely an Arab movement is unacceptable. Likewise, even with the involvement of religious Mazdakite missionaries such as Khaddāsh, the Abbasid movement cannot be regarded as a purely Islamic one.However, contemporary Arabist scholarship offers a different interpretation of the Abbasid movement, the most detailed of which appears in Dr. Faruq ʿUmar’s book Studies on Abbasid History. He argues that the early Orientalists became acquainted with the history of the East and Islam only by coincidence, and that their incomplete familiarity with the language and sources—combined with certain preconceived assumptions—prevented them from reaching an accurate understanding. For example, the Orientalist Flotten, influenced by the nationalist spirit that dominated Europe at the time, especially Germany, offered a racial interpretation of the Abbasid revolution and considered it an Iranian rebellion against Arab rule.Newly discovered manuscripts, however—such as Akhbār al-ʿAbbās wa Waladih, whose author was a loyalist of the Abbasids and whose narratives apparently rely on secret documents—demonstrate how Hamza al-Isfahani and al-Dīnawarī exaggerated the role of Abū Muslim.According to Faruq ʿUmar, the Abbasid movement was actually an uprising led by Arabs living in Khurasan—specifically, the mujāhidīn of the Turkestan frontier and local governors—against the Umayyad government. It was not an ethnic Iranian movement; rather, it was supported by both Arabs and Iranians who held an understanding of Islam different from that of the Umayyads. He further argues that if some of the insurgents appear to have Iranian origins, it is because they were Arabs who had settled in Iran and were known by the names of Iranian cities—leading historians to mistakenly classify them as non-Arabs.
In contrast, Zakāwati Qārqazlū believes that behind all major spiritual and cultural movements—such as Shiʿism (Zaidi, Ismaili, Imami), Sufism, philosophy, mysticism, literature, and science—there were predominantly Iranians. A high proportion of great Islamic philosophers, mystics, and scientists were Iranian. Likewise, prominent narrators, principal Shiʿite authors, and a number of the most influential writers and poets in Arabic, from ʿAbdul-Ḥamīd Kāṭib, Badiʿ al-Zamān, and Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ to Bashār, Abū Nuwās, and Abū al-ʿAtāhiya, were also Iranian. The Fatimid administration in Egypt, along with its civilization and culture, was significantly influenced by Iranians. Even the Muʿtazilite movement gained power and legitimacy through al-Maʾmūn, who was born to an Iranian mother and his Iranian advisors. All of this demonstrates the influence of an inclusive popular movement. It was the Shuʿūbīs who recorded and organized Arabic syntax, grammar, vocabulary, meanings, expressions, prosody, rhyme, historical narratives, and dates; in other words, they collected and systematized these elements.
By the seventh and eighth centuries AH, literary and rhetorical sciences had reached the stage of textbook compilation, summarizing, explaining, and expanding upon the works of predecessors. Khatīb al-Qazwīnī’s main reference in rhetorical sciences was Sakkākī’s Miftāḥ al-ʿUlūm, which quickly became an authoritative textbook. Khatīb al-Qazwīnī gained fame for his precise and clear summary of the third part of Sakkākī’s Miftāḥ al-ʿUlūm. In this work, he removed much of Sakkākī’s personal beliefs, disputed some of his views, replaced certain definitions with others, and enriched the text by incorporating insights from ʿAbd al-Qāhir Jūrjānī’s Dalāʾil al-ʿIjāz and Asrār al-Balāgha, as well as Zamakhsharī’s Kashshāf. Ideologically, Khatīb al-Qazwīnī was somewhat aligned with ʿAbd al-Qāhir Jūrjānī and occasionally diverged from Sakkākī’s positions. Shortly after him, successors arrived to explain his Talkhīṣ al-Miftāḥ, the most important commentator of which was Saʿd al-Dīn Maʿṣūd ibn ʿUmar Taftāzānī. Summarizing key texts (talkhīṣ al-miftāḥ) became a significant scholarly task, with numerous works published in this field. Subsequently, scholars had no alternative but to organize these summaries systematically
Conclusion
In fact, many individuals traditionally attributed to Arab tribes were related only by lineage, not by blood. Meanwhile, people also adopted Arab genealogies to gain social and cultural advantages. Figures such as Hammad the narrator, Khalaf al-Aḥmar, and Saʿīf ibn ʿUmar, who composed pre-Islamic qasīdas with greater skill than the Arabs themselves and established narrators and chains of transmission, were certainly able to claim a credible Arab lineage. This discussion is relevant to Khatīb al-Qazwīnī as well. Among the Arabic sources discussing individual biographies, often one source is considered standard, with all others referring to it indirectly. Therefore, the multiplicity of sources does not guarantee the reliability of the information, since most rely on one or two original sources. In early sources contemporary to Khatīb al-Qazwīnī, it is usually mentioned with doubt that he was a descendant of Abū Dalf ʿIjlī, and no certainty is expressed. After all these years and given the nature of the sources, it seems impossible to definitively determine whether Khatīb al-Qazwīnī was a genuine Arab or Iranian, particularly as he spent most of his life in Arab lands. The widespread acceptance of "key extraction" (ikhtiyār al-miftāḥ) is another factor that may have influenced this ambiguity. Ahmad Maṭlūb regards Khatīb al-Qazwīnī as a principal figure in Arabic rhetoric, whereas Shawqī Ḍayf considers him to have lived during a period of dogmatism and stagnation in rhetoric, when innovation had ceased, and only teaching, explanation, and interpretation remained valid.The theory of meaning and rhetoric originates with ʿAbd al-Qāhir Jūrjānī, as well as with Zamakhsharī, and later with Sakkākī, who recognized the importance of these concepts from a logical perspective and systematically extracted and classified them through textual analysis.
References
Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Ahmad ibn ‘Ali. (1993) Al-Durar al-Kamina fi A‘yan al-Mi’a al-Thamina. Beirut: Dar al-Jil.
Al-Ayyubi, Yasin. (1425 AH) Al-Khatib al-Qazwini Jalal al-Din Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman: His Life and His Book Talkhis al-Miftah. Al-Turath al-‘Arabi Journal, no. 96, pp. 167–189.
Hamidi, Mohammad Reza. (1399 SH/ 2020) Mafakhir-e Qazvin (Notable Figures of Qazvin), Vol. 2. Qazvin: Taha Publishing.
Khazaeli, Alireza. (1385 SH/ 2006) Introducing the Lost City of Karaj-e Abudolf Based on a Geographical Work by Mohammad Hasan Khan E'temad al-Saltaneh. Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Isfahan, Vol. 2, Nos. 40–45, pp. 71–87.
Al-Khatib al-Qazwini, Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman. (2010) Al-Idah fi ‘Ulum al-Balagha: al-Ma‘ani, al-Bayan wa-l-Badi‘. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al- ‘Ilmiyya.
Zekavati-Qaragozlu, Alireza. (1380 SH/ 2001) Al-Jahiz. Tehran: Tarh-e No Publishing.
Safa, Zabihollah. (1369 SH/ 1990) A History of Persian Literature in Iran, Vol. 3, Part 1. Tehran: Ferdows Publishing.
Al-Safadi, Khalil ibn Aybak. (2000) Al-Wafi bi-l-Wafayat. Beirut: Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-‘Arabi.
Daif, Shawqi. (1383 SH/ 2004) The History and Development of the Sciences of Rhetoric. Tehran: SAMT Publications.
‘Umar, Faruq. (1977) Studies in Abbasid History. Beirut: Dar al- ‘Ilm.
Fakhruri, Hanna. (1388 SH/ 2009) History of Arabic Literature. Translated by ‘Abd-al-Mohammad Ayati. Tehran: Toos Publishing.
Ghorbani-Zarrin, Baqer. (1401 SH/ 2022) Al-Khatib al-Qazwini. In Encyclopaedia of the Islamic World, Vol. 15 (Khaneh–Khil‘at), Tehran, pp. 739–743.
Matlub, Ahmad. (1967) Al-Qazwini wa Shuruh al-Talkhis. Baghdad: Maktabat al-Nahda.
* Assistant Professor, Department of Persian Language and Literature, Farhangian University, Tehran, Iran.
tehranisabet@yahoo.com
0009-0009-6710-4190
آذرنوش، آذرتاش (1399) دائرة المعارف بزرگ اسلامی، جلد 6، ذیل ابوالفرج اصفهانی.
ابنحجر عسقلانی، احمد بن علی (1993) الدرر الکامنه فی اعیان المائة الثامنة، بیروت، دارالجیل.
ابنطولون، محمد بن علی (1956) قضاة دمشق، دمشق، مطبوعات المجمعالعلمیالعربی.
ابنفضلالله عمری، احمدبن یحیی (1430) مسالکالابصار فی ممالکالامصار (الحکماء و الفلاسفه)، تحقیق از عامر النجّار، مصر- قاهره، مکتبة الثقافة الدینیة.
افشاری، نقی (1392) فرهنگ نامآوران قزوین، جلد اول، قزوین، حدیث امروز.
ابنکثیر، اسماعیل بن عمر (بیتا) البدایة و النهایة، جلد چهاردهم، لبنان، بیروت، دارالفکر.
ابنمعتز، عبدالهم (1945) البدیع شرحه و علقه علیه: محمد عبدالمنعم خفاجی، مصر، مطبعه المصطفی البابی الحلبی.
امیری خراسانی، احمد و آرزو پوریزدان¬پناه کرمانی (1391) «سهم ایرانیان در تحول و تکامل علم بلاغت»، نشریه پژوهشنامه نقد ادبی و بلاغت، سال اول، شماره اول، صص 1-28.
https://doi.org/10.22059/jlcr.2012.35231.
الأیوبی، یاسین (1425) «الخطیب القزوینی جلالالدین محمد بن عبدالرحمن فی سیرته و کتابه تلخیصالمفتاح»، نشریة التراثالعربی، شماره 96، صص 167-189.
تفتازانی، مسعود بن عمر (1304) مطول للعلامة التفتازاني علی التلخیص للخطیب الدمشقي، استانبول- ترکیه، مطبعة العثمانیة.
ثعالبی، عبدالملک بن محمد (1420) یتیمة الدهر فی محاسن اهل العصر، لبنان، بیروت، دارالکتب العلمیه.
حموی، یاقوت بن عبدالله (1372) معجمالادباء، جلد چهارم، بیروت، دارالغربالاسلامی.
حمیدی، محمدرضا (1399) مفاخر قزوین، جلد دوم، قزوین، طه.
خزائلی، علیرضا (1385) «معرفی شهر گمشده کرج ابودلف در اثری جغرافیایی از محمدحسن خان اعتمادالسلطنه»، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی دانشگاه اصفهان، دوره دوم، شماره 40 و 45، صص71-87.
خطیب قزوینی، محمدبن عبدالرحمان (2010) الایضاح فیالعلومالبلاغة، المعانی و البیان و البدیع، بیروت، دارالکتبالعلمیه.
ذکاوتی قراگزلو، علیرضا (1380) جاحظ، تهران، طرح نو.
رسولی، حجت و نجمالدین ارازی (1395) «بررسی و نقد کتاب ابوهلال العسکری و مقایسة البلاغیه و النقدیه»، پژوهشنامة نقد ادب عربی، دورة ششم، شماره 12، پیاپی 70، صص 109-133.
زیدان، جرجی (1369) تاریخ تمدن اسلام، ترجمه علی جواهرکلام، تهران، امیرکبیر.
سامی، علی (بیتا) نقش ایران در فرهنگ اسلامی، شیراز، نوید.
سبکی، عبدالوهاب بن علی (1378) طبقات الشافعیة الکبری، لبنان، بیروت، دارالکتب العلمیه.
سکّاکی، یوسف بن ابی بکر (1420) مفتاحالعلوم، بیروت- لبنان، دارالکتب العلمیه.
سیوطی، عبدالرحمان بن ابی بکر (بیتا) بغیة الوعاة فی طبقاتاللغویین و النحاة، بیروت، المکتبة العصریة.
شفیعیکدکنی، محمدرضا (1366) صور خیال در شعر فارسی، تهران، آگاه.
------------------- (1380) از مسائل کتابپردازی در قرن هشتم، نشریة نامة بهارستان، شماره 3، صص 5-8.
شیخ، حسین (1394) دائرةالمعارف بزرگ اسلامی، جلد 22.
صالح، ابراهیم (1424) در دیوان القاضی الجرجانی علی بن عبدالعزیز، از علی بن عبدالعزیز الجرجانی، دمشق، دارالبشائر.
صفا، ذبیح¬الله (1369) تاریخ ادبیات در ایران، جلد سوم، بخش اول، تهران، فردوس.
---------- (1370) تاریخ ادبیات در ایران، جلد اول، تهران، فردوس.
صفدی، خلیل بن أیبک (2000) الوافی بالوفیات، بیروت، دار إحیاء التراث العربی.
ضیف، شوقی (1383) تاریخ و تطور علوم بلاغت، تهران، سمت.
علویمقدم، سید محمد (1363) «بحثی دربارة کتاب مطوّل سعدالدین تفتازانی و تأثیر آن در کتب بلاغی»، نشریة مشکوة، شماره 5، صص 40-71.
عمر، فاروق (1977) البحوث فی التاریخ العباسی، بیروت، دارالعلم.
فاتحینژاد، عنایتالله (1372) دائرةالمعارف بزرگ اسلامی، جلد 5.
فاخوری، حنا (1388) تاریخ ادبیات زبان عربی، ترجمة عبدالمحمد آیتی، تهران، توس.
قربانی زرین، باقر (1401) «خطیب قزوینی»، در: دانشنامة جهان اسلام، تهران، جلد پانزدهم (خانه- خلعت)، صص 739-743.
کاردگر، یحیی (1386) «نگاهی به طبقهبندی صنایع بدیعی همراه با نقد و تحلیل صنایع لفظی»، نشریه پژوهشهای دستوری و بلاغی، شمارة 3، صص 145-178.
لوکنت، جی (1385) «ابنقتیبه دینوری»، ترجمة علیاکبر عباسی و محمدحسین الهیزاده، مجلة تاریخ اسلام، شمارة 25 صص 165-176.
مدرس، محمدعلی (1369) ریحانة الادب فی تراجم المعروفین بالکنیة و اللّقب، تهران، خیام.
مستوفی، حمدالله (1339) تاریخ گزیده، تهران، امیرکبیر.
مطلوب، احمد (1967) القزوینی و شروح التلخیص، بغداد، مکتبة النهضة.
مؤذنی، علی¬محمد و زهیر طیب (1398) «گزارش اشکالات خطیب قزوینی بر آرای دانشمندان متقدّم و معاصر خود در علم معانی با تکیه بر ربع اول کتاب الایضاح فی شرح تلخیص المفتاح»، فنون ادبی، شماره 26، صص 1-16.