Dianoia: The Distinguishing Aspect of Ta'zieh from Tragedy

Adopting a qualitative-explanatory approach and drawing upon available library resources, this study aims to delve into the tragedy of Karbala, with a focus on the concept of Dianoia/Thought as proposed by Aristotle. In Islamic perspectives, death is not viewed as the ultimate end, especially when it is seen as a martyr's sacrifice for truth in the face of oppression. One could propose that the divine Siavash transforms into Hussein, and the mourning associated with Siavash evolves into Ta’ziyeh. However, neither the historical-human persona of Hussein resembles the mythical or Aristotelian hero, nor does the underlying ideology of this event mirror Aristotle's concept of Dianoia, which is predominantly myth-based. On the contrary, Ta’ziyeh is deeply rooted in the religious and national myths of Iran through which the perpetual conflict between good and evil transcends the common time and space. Imam Hussain's (AS) actions during his uprising against the tyrants of his era align with the quest for human salvation as taught in the Quran as well as the Prophet's and the infallible Imams’ traditions. Initially, the commemoration of this uprising involved recitations of eulogies in gatherings, evolving over time into what is now recognized as mourning or lamentation ceremonies. These ceremonies serve as a representation, reenactment, and portrayal of the tragedies within the Quranic narrative of the Prophet's family. In Christian discourse, there are also performances about the suffering and pain of Jesus (AS). However, determining the exact origin and nature of what we now know as mourning, especially in Shia discourse, is a difficult task. Some consider its origin to be solely the Karbala uprising, some see it as influenced by ancient rituals, and others view it as similar to Christian rituals or even modern drama. Nonetheless, the religious underpinnings derived from Quranic teachings significantly shape the religious essence of mourning. In conclusion, mourning exhibits fundamentally distinct foundations and principles compared to Aristotelian drama. Key findings include the similarities in origin and lineage between Ta’ziyeh and tragedy: 1) both Ta’ziyeh and tragedy are similar in origin and ancestry, but have completely distinct goals. 2) In Ta’ziyeh, "Thought" is based on the eternal conflict between absolute good and evil, while in tragedy, "Thought" is devoted to the conflict between individuals. 3) In Ta’ziyeh, the hero is aware of his inevitable fate, while in tragedy, the hero has no escape from death. 4) In Ta’ziyeh, the hero has no tragic flaw and is free from error, while in tragedy, the hero is flawed. 5) However, in Ta’ziyeh, the wretched is not flawed but sinful. 6) Both Ta’ziyeh and tragedy try to arouse fear and mercy, called catharsis, but each in its own specific way: In Ta’ziyeh, catharsis resulting from the audience's emotional empathy with the Imam-khans and their aversion to the Mukhalif-khans. In tragedy, catharsis resulting from the human fear and compassion for the action that is performed before their eyes. However, the similarities and differences between Ta’ziyeh and tragedy are not only related to Dianoia/Thought, but also include the components of ethos, lexis, and opsis, which need to be examined and analyzed separately.