Rhetorical and Argumentative Analysis of Persuasive Language in Rumi's Majalis Sab’ah: A Study Based on Toulmin’s Theory

Abstract

This study analyzes the rhetorical and argumentative structures of persuasive language in Rumi’s Majalis Sab’ah using Stephen Toulmin’s model of argumentation. Using a descriptive-analytical method, the research examines claims, grounds, and rebuttals within Rumi’s sermons to uncover how he integrates mystical and philosophical concepts into persuasive discourse. The findings reveal that Rumi employs two primary types of claims: interpretive claims (symbolic readings of natural phenomena) and causal claims (cause-effect relationships). These claims are supported by transmitted grounds (Quranic verses, hadiths) and intuitive grounds (mystical experiences). Rebuttals, though less frequent, enhance argumentative flexibility by contextualizing claims within cultural and theological frameworks. Statistical analysis shows that interpretive claims dominate (50%), followed by transmitted grounds (32%), intuitive grounds (9%), and rebuttals (9%). Rumi’s reliance on transmitted grounds reflects the religious epistemology of 13th-century Konya, while his use of metaphors and analogies bridges abstract mysticism with audience accessibility. The study concludes that Majalis Sab’ah exemplifies a sophisticated fusion of logical argumentation and poetic rhetoric, tailored to persuade diverse audiences through culturally resonant reasoning. Keywords: Majalis Sab’ah, Claim, Argumentation, Rhetoric, Persuasive Language, Rumi. Introduction This research addresses the intersection of mysticism, rhetoric, and argumentation in Rumi’s Majalis Sab’ah, a collection of sermons that exemplify the persuasive power of Persian mystical prose. The study’s primary objective is to explore how Rumi constructs persuasive discourse using Stephen Toulmin’s model, focusing on the interplay of claims, grounds, and rebuttals. Existing scholarship has analyzed Rumi’s mystical themes (Gholamrezaei, 2008) and linguistic styles (Safari Bandpi, 2024), but few studies apply modern argumentation theory to his prose. The research gap lies in understanding how Rumi’s sermons balance logical rigor with poetic expression to persuade diverse audiences, from scholars to commoners. The study’s significance stems from its novel application of Toulmin’s (1958) framework to Persian mystical texts, offering insights into the adaptability of classical argumentation models in non-Western contexts. Two research questions are: How does Rumi employ claims and grounds to validate mystical ideas? What role do rebuttals play in moderating absolutist assertions? The analysis is contextualized within the socio-religious milieu of 13th-century Konya, where sermons blended Islamic scholarship with Sufi symbolism. Konya, as a cultural crossroads of Persian, Islamic, and Byzantine influences, fostered a dynamic environment for intellectual and spiritual exchange. Rumi’s sermons, delivered to heterogeneous audiences, reflect this diversity by weaving Quranic exegesis, hadith citations, and poetic imagery into a cohesive argumentative structure. This study illuminates how Rumi’s rhetorical strategies resonate with both the theological expectations of his era and the universal appeal of mystical insights. By examining Majalis Sab’ah through Toulmin’s lens, the research reveals the structural logic beneath Rumi’s lyrical prose, contributing to global discussions on spiritual rhetoric. This analysis aims to deepen our understanding of how mystical discourse achieves persuasive impact across cultural and temporal boundaries. Materials and Methods The study adopts a qualitative-quantitative approach, combining textual analysis with Toulmin’s argumentation model. Data were extracted from Majalis Sab’ah through line-by-line coding, identifying 55 interpretive claims, 35 transmitted grounds, 10 intuitive grounds, and 10 rebuttals. Statistical tools (Excel) quantified the frequency of each component, while qualitative analysis contextualized their rhetorical functions. The coding process involved: Categorization: Classifying claims as interpretive/causal and grounds as transmitted/intuitive. Validation: Cross-referencing Quranic/hadith citations with classical commentaries. Triangulation: Comparing Rumi’s arguments with Toulmin’s criteria (Toulmin, 1958). Ethical considerations included avoiding anachronistic interpretations and adhering to the original Persian text (Mowlana, 2011). Research Findings The analysis highlights Rumi’s strategic use of argumentative components (Table 1): Table 1. Frequency of Argumentative Components in Majalis Sab’ah Component Frequency Percentage Interpretive Claims 55 50% Transmitted Grounds 35 32% Intuitive Grounds 10 9% Rebuttals 10 9% Key findings are: Interpretive claims dominate, reflecting Rumi’s symbolic exegesis of nature (e.g., dawn as divine revelation). Transmitted grounds derive authority from Islamic texts, aligning with Konya’s religious norms. Rebuttals mitigate absolutism, as seen in Rumi’s paradoxical treatment of sin and redemption. Discussion of Results and Conclusions Rumi’s argumentation in Majalis Sab’ah transcends rigid logic by harmonizing mystical intuition with scriptural authority. His interpretive claims invite multilayered engagement, while rebuttals (e.g., “sin leading to salvation”) reflect Sufi antinomianism, challenging conventional theological boundaries. The prevalence of transmitted grounds (32%) underscores the cultural weight of religious texts in 13th-century Konya, whereas intuitive grounds (9%) prioritize personal spiritual experience, aligning with the Sufi emphasis on inner revelation. This study demonstrates that Toulmin’s model effectively decodes the persuasive mechanics of pre-modern texts, bridging rhetorical analysis and mystical studies. The findings highlight Rumi’s rhetorical sophistication, as he tailors his arguments to resonate with Konya’s diverse audience, from religious scholars to lay devotees. His use of metaphors, such as dawn symbolizing divine truth, transforms abstract concepts into accessible imagery, while his strategic deployment of rebuttals ensures argumentative flexibility. This balance of logic and lyricism reflects the broader Sufi tradition of conveying profound truths through evocative language. The statistical dominance of interpretive claims (50%) underscores Rumi’s reliance on symbolic exegesis, a hallmark of mystical discourse that invites continuous reinterpretation. The integration of Konya’s religious culture, rooted in Islamic scholarship and Persian poetry, amplifies the text’s persuasive force. Future research could extend Toulmin’s framework to other Sufi works (e.g., Attar, Sanai) or explore comparative analyses across religious traditions, such as Christian mysticism or Buddhist sermons. Such studies could further elucidate how spiritual rhetoric adapts universal themes to specific cultural contexts. This analysis affirms Majalis Sab’ah as a masterful synthesis of argumentative rigor and poetic eloquence, cementing Rumi’s legacy as a rhetorician of the divine whose work continues to inspire across centuries. Limitations of the study include the focus on a single text and the subjective interpretation of mystical metaphors, which may vary across readers. The study also acknowledges the challenge of applying a modern framework to a medieval text, necessitating careful consideration of historical context to avoid anachronism.