Similar and Opposite Freedom Metaphors in Rumi’s Masnavi: Necessity, Compatibilism, and the Simile Theory of Metaphor
Asiatische Studien – Études Asiatiques May 1, 2026 Peer reviewed DOI: 10.1515/asia-2025-0061 via OpenAlex
Summary
Metaphors of freedom in Rumi's Masnavi fall into two types: those that resemble freedom (e.g., liberation, breaking chains) and those that oppose it (e.g., slavery, imprisonment). Both can be explained by the Simile Theory, which treats metaphors as condensed similes based on similarity. The first type relies on explicit, physical similarity; the second on implicit, metaphysical similarity. Within Islamic necessitarian theology, these metaphors reveal that true freedom paradoxically involves submission and self-annihilation, aligning with love's pursuit of unity beyond dualistic perception.
Study at a glance
| Design | theoretical or philosophical paper |
|---|---|
| Key finding | Rumi's apparently opposite metaphors for freedom (e.g., slavery) can be explained by the Simile Theory as relying on implicit, metaphysical similarity, revealing that true freedom is achieved through submission and annihilation of the self. |
Abstract
Abstract This article examines metaphors of freedom in Rumi’s Masnavi through the lens of the Simile Theory, which posits that metaphors are condensed forms of similes, grounded in similarities between two conceptual domains. Rumi employs two distinct types of metaphors to convey the concept of freedom: apparently similar metaphors (e.g., liberation, breaking chains) and apparently opposite metaphors (e.g., slavery, imprisonment). The former aligns with the conventional understanding of freedom, emphasizing agency, control, and alternative possibilities. In contrast, the latter appears to negate these very components, suggesting that true freedom is achieved through submission and the annihilation of the self. The article argues that both metaphor types can be elucidated by the Simile Theory, with the key distinction lying in the nature of the similarity: ‘explicit, physical similarity’ in the case of similar metaphors, and ‘implicit, metaphysical similarity’ in the case of opposite metaphors. By situating Rumi’s metaphors within the necessitarian framework of Islamic theology, philosophy, and mysticism, the article demonstrates that these metaphors reflect different dimensions of freedom. The paradoxical nature of freedom in Rumi’s thought is further illuminated by its alignment with the metaphors of love, where the pursuit of unity and oneness transcends dualistic perceptions of existence.