Anadolu’da Tasavvufun Yerelleşmesi: Abdurrahim Kara-hisârî ve Münyetü’l-ebrâr ve gunyetü’l-ahyâr İsimli Eseri Örneği
Vernacularization of the Ṣūfism in Anatolia: The Case of Abdurra-him Karahisārī and His Munyah al-abrār wa gunyah al-akhyār
Author(s): Abdullah Taha OrhanSubject(s): Theology and Religion, Islam studies
Published by: Anadolu İlahiyat Akademisi
Keywords: Ṣūfism; Vernacularization; Anatolian Ṣūfism; Ottoman Empire; Abdurrahim Ḳaraḥiṣārī;
Summary/Abstract: Turkish became a language of Islamic sciences following Arabic and Persian since the 6th/12th century. After the Eastern Turkish of Central Asia, Western Turkish could be-come a language of the Sūfism only after the 9th/15th century. This process developed concurrently with the period of principalities and the formation of the Ottoman state and gained momentum during the reign of Murad II (1421-1444, 1446-1451) thanks to his patronage to translation movements. Bayramiyye, the first local sūfī order of An-atolia, substantially supported this process initiated by translations of works produced in Khurāsān and Baghdad-centered mystical traditions. This process was begun by Ḥājjī Bayrām Walī (d. 1430) and supported by Murad II’s language policies continued by Aq Shams al-Dīn (d. 1459) and his successors. His caliph Abdurrahim Ḳaraḥiṣārī (d. circa 1483-94) contributed to this process with his works. In this study, vernaculariza-tion of the Sūfism is discussed contextualizing Ḳaraḥiṣārī’s Munya which is originally a translation of a work produced in Kubravī tradition. The words munyah means “anticipated, aimed, desired” and gunyah “abundance, not to be in need and sufficiency” in the dictionary, which words constitute the full title of the book: Munyah al-abrār wa gunyah al-akhyār. Thus, this full phrase roughly means “the aimed of the righteous, the sufficient one of the good”. Basically, this work is an an-notated translation of a book of Najm al-Dīn Kubrā’s (d. 1221) disciple Khāssī’s (d. 1236) al-Salwa fī sharāit al-khalwa. It is noteworthy that Köprülü referred his audience to Munya and Wahdatnāma of Ḳaraḥiṣārī in his Türk Edebiyatında İlk Mutasavvıflar (Early Mystics in Turkish Literature) for characteristics of Bayramiyye order alongside Aq Shams al-Dīn and Tannūrī’s (d. 1482) works, this points out to the importance of Munya in the history of Bayramiyye.There are numerous sources referred to directly/indirectly in Munya, Suhrawardī-Kubravī tradition being in the lead. The most cited work is Anṣārī’s (d. 1089) Manāzil. Following that, come Suhrawardī’s (d. 1234) Awārif, Dāya’s (d. 1256) Qur’an commen-tary, Aq Shams al-Dīn’s, Attār’s (d. 1221), and Rūmī’s (d. 1273) works. This clearly shows the weight of the Suhrawardī-Kubravī tradition among the sources of the book. Munya is a very important book in terms of both the Bayramiyye period in which it was written and its language and style. First and foremost, it is a text produced during a period in which Ottomans gained momentum in intellectual terms -reigns of Murad II and Mehmed II- and in cities like İznik, İstanbul which were the pioneering centers for learning in that time, and in Anatolian Turkish vernacular. Therefore, the contribution of the work to Turkish vernacular becoming the language of Sūfism in Anatolia cannot be denied. When it is considered in terms of its direct audience - lovers (mu-hibbān) and especially seekers (tālib) of Sūfīstic training- the work should definitely have a share in initiation of lay people to the Sūfī path who did not know Arabic or Persian. Munya comes to the forefront with its style and lucid vernacular Turkish as a text written in the mid-15th century when the initiatives of vernacularization and localization of sciences and Sūfism in Anatolia rose. The work reflects the characteristics of Anatolian Turkish of the period.It is necessary to focus on the question why Salwa, written by Khāssī, one of the caliphs of Kubrā, was preferred as the primary source of Munya. Aq Shams al-Dīn asked from his disciple Ḳaraḥiṣārī to translate Salwa since there was not any manual on khalwa, the main theme of the book. The point that needs to be questioned here is that why Aq Shams al-Dīn chose to make a work already written in another sūfī or-der’s environ translated instead of authoring himself as an already known author who penned some other works or making a disciple of him to write such a work from scratch on a topic like khalwa which would be crucially important in the formation of the newly emerging order, Bayramiyye. The reasons underlying this fact might be to fulfill the need of the seekers and disciples swiftly and, on the other hand might be also to link the newly emerging order to a deep-rooted mystic tradition. If the second option is considered valid, it can be argued that Aq Shams al-Dīn thought Suhrawardī tradition as the most convenient tradition which Bayramiyye would link to.To conclude, Ḳaraḥiṣārī not only showed that the mystical problems could be ex-plained in Anatolian Turkish vernacular, but also he played a pivotal role in utilization of mystical heritage by ordinary people and vernacularization of Suhrawardī-Kubravī tradition, and consequently in formation of Bayramiyye order such as sect’s regulars and customs.
Journal: Eskiyeni
- Issue Year: 2020
- Issue No: 41
- Page Range: 679-702
- Page Count: 24
- Language: Turkish