The question of whether Dīwān-e Kabīr contains poetic couplets, as in Mevlana’s Masnavi, is intriguing. It is important to consider whether there are data on the subject and the similarities and differences exist between these texts and those in the Masnavi. Although both of his works are considered to be among the peaks of Sufi literature, they have so far received little attention in terms of the art of poetry. Some literary scholars have even argued that Mevlana’s works need not be analysed from the perspective of poetics and that such an approach would be incompatible with his exalted position in the hearts of the people. Such research is required better to understand his personality and art as an artist and to pave the way for contemporary literary scholars to study Mevlana’s narration.

The fact that Mevlana wrote the Masnavi, which has 6 books and 25,672 couplets, and the Dīwān-e Kabīr, which has 36,360 couplets (around 40,236 couplets when rubais are included), in verse, does not require us to evaluate his poetry and poet identity in this manner.

Mevlana wrote his two voluminous works, the Masnavi and Dīwān-e Kabīr, in the form of poetry. The debate over whether he should be referred to as a poet with a historical perspective and whether his texts should be considered poetry is pointless at this time. At this point in literary studies, new perspectives are presented on a wide range of topics, including intertextual relations, author–text, fiction–reality, work–artist life, and the oral–written work relationship.

Mevlana’s texts, which are among the most impressive works in Eastern and Western literature, are mostly studies that caress the emotions, and prioritize a miracle-centered approach or personal gains by expressing admiration. However, studies that will contribute to our understanding of these extraordinary works are required, such as the methods by which the texts are created, the explanatory clues within them, and the relationship between the artist and the work. In this sense, our classical works will become more accessible to us if we approach them as books written by ordinary people rather than miraculous texts.

Mevlana’s use of the pseudonym Shams-i Tabrīzī and the emphasis he places on it can be interpreted as him concealing himself under his name. This situation is similar to that of Socrates, who, despite having no works, was forced to speak by his student Plato as if he had written one. Perhaps the primary motivation for this pseudonym and naming is a sense of loyalty to the fact that the work arose due to encounters and conversations with Shams-i Tabrīzī.

Dīwān-e Kabīr differs from Masnavî in terms of poetic form, word selection, internal and external sound harmony, imagery, and connotation. At this point, Masnavi is a work that focuses on meaning and considers the addressee’s feelings and thoughts. The ghazals describe the artist Mevlana’s normal state of ecstasy. The work also reflects his tendency toward sema.

In the Masnavi, Mevlana is himself; he appears as a jurist, muhaddith, and exegete, but in Dīwān-e Shams-e Tabrīzī he is ecstatic and talking to himself as if he has ascended to heaven. In the Masnavi, he wanders on earth and is guided by Hüsameddin Çelebi, whereas in the ghazals, he is in the heavens and is the murshid. 

In the Masnavi, he speaks in common idioms and must adhere to the remel bahr, whereas in the ghazals, he uses his own idioms and can employ a wide range of meters. In his ghazals, particularly in the first and fifth books, he is calmer and elaborates on the mazmun, whereas in his later poems, he expresses his intention in fewer couplets and all at once.

When viewed holistically, the state of mind in which Mevlana expresses his feelings and thoughts in Dīwān-e Kabīr reflects a consciousness that is dissatisfied with life in this world and thus wishes to reclaim the soul that was at peace and attained manifestation prior to his arrival. His poetry is an attempt to return to his eternal perfection. 

Although Mevlana, who admired the penmen’s mastery of words, preferred to speak without letters, words, rhyme, or verse, his suffering forced him to do so. Because he did not want to follow in the footsteps of those who had used the language of wisdom before him, he built a wall of silence to prevent overflow.

Mevlana’s poetry was not written only to benefit or to showcase his talent as a poet. His poetry is a song that interprets the world, people, and life by looking beyond the visible. Mevlana, who feels the truth in his soul, wants to convey it to his interlocutors and sings his ghazals with this intention.

Many of Mevlana’s ghazals contain poetic couplets, and others are almost entirely poetic. These poetic couplets are typically found in the “makta/last couplet of the ghazal” or close to it. This situation alone indicates that Mevlana was in a poetic mood simultaneously.

There has also been much discussion about language in Mevlana’s ghazals. Despite being an artist who uses language skillfully, he complains about it. His analogies about the tongue and the heart are unique in the following couplets. He attributes the beauty of the word to the speaker’s purity and expresses the theft of using someone else’s words as one’s own by bringing to our attention the issue of plagiarism centuries ago.

According to Mevlana, it is necessary not to speak and remain silent in the presence of those unfamiliar with the location where the word is spoken and may understand something other than what the speaker wishes to express. There is also the possibility of encountering people with negative attitudes in the community.