doi:10.1093/jis/ets067
1. INTRODUCTION
Sufi hagiographies (menakibname) produced in late medieval Anatolia
sometimes reveal characteristics in their subjectsmoral weaknesses,
worldly ambition and rivalry with fellow Sufisthat are at odds with the
idealized Sufi type. These characteristics are sometimes expressed
indirectly through symbols, sometimes directly in words, attitudes and
actions including fighting. How the representatives of a movement that
set out as a world-renouncing way of life oriented to individual salvation
became engrossed in worldly aspirations and ambitions is closely
connected to the fact that, over the course of time, Sufi shaykhs took
on significant social roles and commitments, not just to individual
salvation, but also to the salvation of society as a whole, with new
interpretations or models of ascetic renunciation to fit the orientation to
public service and a public role.1
1
R E S U L AY
Kirikkale University, Turkey
2 of 24
ay
From the eleventh century onwards, the Turkicization and Islamization of Anatolia went hand in hand with dervish migrations into the
region.2 The conditions there must have been propitious for the spread of
Sufi ideals and dervish settlements. Indeed, the elite of the Sufis who lived
in the capital also took a hand in administrative affairs, while others
played an important role in the colonization of the newly conquered
areas and in the process of social and economic life, as well as in the
religious life of society. Their influence was closely related to how they
were perceived by the people as well as to their social functions. The
intense spirituality and the special powers attributed to the shaykhs
were the principal reasons for their spiritual authority with the people.
That authority is evident in their relations with various sectors of society,
including the ruling elites, and is the reason why at least a significant
proportion of the shaykhs engaged in a kind of power struggle among
themselvesthey did so in order to convert spiritual influence into
temporal influence, in other words, to secure symbolic and material
benefits for themselves or for their sects.
This study focuses primarily on the extent of the influence that the
shaykhs enjoyed in the thirteenthfifteenth centuries, its causes and
effects, in particular the competitive rivalries that emerged among them
in Anatolia and Central Asia more generally.
The identity and origins of early Anatolian Sufism have been the
subject of intensive and serious scholarship.3 Apart from these, the social
SUFI SHAYKHS
3 of 24
and cultural aspects of these Sufi groups, their relations with the ruling
elites, and their living conditions, centred on dervish lodges, have also
been extensively researched.4 So too have major political events, notably
Yuzy|llar) (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu Yay|nlar|, 1992 [2nd revised and
enlarged edn., 1999]); Ahmet T. Karamustafa, Gods Unruly Friends; id., Early
Sufism in Eastern Anatolia in Leonard Lewisohn (ed.), Classical Persian Sufism
From Its Origins to Rum (London: Khaniqahi Nimatullahi Publications, 1993);
id., Yesevlik, Melametlik, Kalenderlik, Vefalik ve Anadolu Tasavvufunun
Kokenleri Sorunu in Ahmet Y. Ocak (ed.), Osmanl| Toplumunda Tasavvuf ve
Sufiler: kaynaklar- doktrin-ayin ve erkan-tarikatlar-edebiyat-mimari-guzel
sanatlar-modernizm (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 2005), 6688. Although not
directly related to Anatolian Sufism, the work of Devin DeWeese on the Central
Asian Yasavi tradition has a bearing on Anatolian Sufism, especially the question
of its origin and ties with the Yasavi tradition. See, in particular his Foreword to
Early Mystics in Turkish Literature, viiixxvii; A Neglected Source on Central
Asian History: The 17th-century Yasav; Hagiography Man:qib al-akhy:r in B.
A. Nazarov and D. Sinor (eds.), Essays on Uzbek History, Culture, and Language
(Bloomington, IN: Research Institute for Inner Asian Studies, 1993; Uralic and
Altaic Series, 156), 3850; The Mash:8ikh-i Turk and the Khojag:n: Rethinking
the Links Between the Yasav; and Naqshband Sufi Traditions, Journal of
Islamic Studies, 7/2 (1996): 180207; The Yasav; Order and Persian
Hagiography in Seventeenth-Century Central Asia: 62lim Shaykh of 6Al;y:b:d
and his Lamah:t min nafaA:t al-quds in Leonard Lewisohn and David Morgan
(eds.), The Heritage of Sufism, III: Late Classical Persionate Sufism (15011750)
(1999), 389414.
4
This research has focused mostly on the Ottoman period, but the Sufis role
in the colonization and Islamization of Anatolia and Rumelia, and some of their
social activities and cultural services, are usually mentioned. As the most typical
mer Lutfu Barkan, Osmanl| Imparatorlugunda Bir Iskan ve
examples, see: O
Kolonizasyon Metodu Olarak Vak|flar ve Temlikler I: Istila Devirlerinin
Kolonizator Turk DerviZ leri ve Zaviyeler, Vak|flar Dergisi, 2 (1942): 279
304; Ahmet Y. Ocak, Zaviyeler, Vak|flar Dergisi 12 (1978): 24768; A. Y. Ocak
and S. Faruk, art. Zaviye, Islam Ansiklopedisi, xiii, MEB Yay|nlar|, 4716. On
the Sufis relations with Sultans and ruling elites, see Halil Inalc|k, Dervish and
Sultan: An Analysis of the Otman Baba Vil:yetn:mesi, The Middle East and the
Balkans Under the Ottoman Empire, Essays on Economy and Society
ngoren,
(Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1993); ReZat O
Osmanl|larda Tasavvuf, Anadoluda Sufler, Devlet ve Ulema (XVI. Yuzy|l),
(Istanbul: Iz Yay|nlar|, 2000). For the Seljuk and Ottoman period, see: A. Y.
Ocak, Sufi Milieux and Political Authority in Turkish History: A General
Overview
(ThirteenthSeventeenth
Centuries),
Princeton
Papers:
Interdisciplinary Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 15: Sufism and Politics:
The Power of Spirituality (ed. Paul L. Heck; Princeton, NJ: Markus Wiener
Publishers, 2007), 16595; see also two as yet unpublished papers presented at
the workshop Court and Society in Seljuk Anatolia, 1617 October 2009,
4 of 24
ay
SUFI SHAYKHS
5 of 24
le role des derviches Kalenderis dans les mouvements populaires dans lEmpire
Ottoman au XVe et XVIe sie`cles, Osmanl| AraZt|rmalar|, 3 (1982): 6980; id.,
Les milieux soufis dans les territories du Beylicat ottoman et le probleme des
6Abdalan-| Rum (13001389) in Elizabeth Zachariadou (ed.), The Ottoman
Emirate (13001389) (Rethymnon Institute for Mediterranean Studies: Crete
University Press), 14558; Karamustafa, Early Sufism in Eastern Anatolia, 175
zerine Din
97; Mehmet Rahmi Ayas, Turkiyede Ilk Tarikat ZumreleZmeleri U
niversitesi Bas|mevi,
Sosyolojisi Ac|s|ndan Bir AraZt|rma (Ankara: Ankara U
1991), 3557; Resul Ay, Tasavvufi Hayat ve Tarikatlar in A. Y. Ocak (ed.),
Anadolu Selcuklular| ve Beylikler Donemi Uygarl|g| 1 (Ankara: Kultur ve Turizm
Bakanligi Yayinlari, 2006): 45965.
7
Karamustafa, Gods Unruly Friends, 13.
8
A. Y. Ocak, Kalenderler ve BektaZilik in Dogumunun 100. y|l|nda
Ataturke Armagan (Istanbul: Istanbul Universitesi Edebiyat Fakultesi, 1981),
29799; id., Kalenderler (XIVXVII.yuzy|llar) 5779.
9
M. Fuad Koprulu, Osmanl| Devletinin KuruluZu, (Ankara: Turk Tarih
Kurumu, 4th edn., 1991), 1012; Ocak, Kalenderler ve BektaZilik, 299300.
10
Kucuk Abdal, Otman Baba Vilayetnamesi (Milli Kutuphane, Mikrofilm
ArZivi. No: A-4985, 1976), fos. 50ab, 54ab, 101b102a, 104a (= in Turkish
script, ed. Wevki Koca, Vilayetname-i Wahi: Gocek Abdal (BektaZi Kultur Dernegi,
2002).
6 of 24
ay
11
SUFI SHAYKHS
7 of 24
8 of 24
ay
19
The life-story of Ruzbihan Baql gives a particularly clear idea about the Sufi
practices and spiritual experiences. See Carl W. Ernst, R<zbih:n Baql;: Mysticism
and the Rhetoric of Sainthood in Persian Sufism (Richmond: Curzon Press,
1996), 209,12130; Nazif Hoca, Ruzbihan al-Bakl ve Kitab KaZf al-Asrari ile
Farsca Baz| Wiirler (Istanbul: Edebiyat Fak. Matbaas|, 1971), 427.
20
For a more detailed explanation, see Sultan Veled, Ibtida-name, (transl., A.
Golp|narl|; Ankara: Guven Mat., 1976), 132, 207, 215, 217, 258; Sultan Veled,
Maarif (Turkish transl., Meliha Anbarc|oglu; Istanbul: MEB Yay|nlar|, 1993),
23, 77. For further detailed information and bibliography on the construction of
the dervish image and its influence, see Ay, Anadoluda DerviZ ve Toplum,
(Istanbul: Kitap Yay|nevi, 2008), 13959.
of the shaykhs, the practical services they offered were less important
than their image as holy men. Although perceptions of the figure of the
shaykh varied among different segments of the populace depending on
their social environment and exposure to Sufi teachings, it seems that
almost all people saw their shaykhs as friends of God, and capable
of doing miracles of some sort and endowed with supernatural powers.
Accordingly, the shaykhs were accorded a great deal of trust and
reverence, mixed with fear.
There are many reasons for the formation of the holy man image.
To begin with, Islamic mysticism itself played an important role in
constructing this image. Both in its oral tradition and written records, the
Sufi way presents in some detail the various stations (makam) and states
(haller) through which the Sufi aspirants must pass in their spiritual
journey. The Sufis had detailed doctrines about the insan-| kamil or
perfect human who has completed the spiritural journey, and whose
embodiment is the Shaykh or head of the order.19 According to this
doctrine, the insan-| kamil was related to God as veli or friend and
believed to act by the will of God. As he had purified himself of his self
the divinity in some form had replaced it. Some Sufis expressed this state
allegorically as being an instrument in the hand of Godlike a brush in
the hand of a painter or a saw in that of a carpenter. Therefore the
actions of a Shaykh who was considered a veli were taken to be the
effects of Gods will.20 This made the words and actions of the shaykhs
indisputable, particularly for their disciples or murids and the people
who believed in the doctrine.
In many mystical works, notably Sufi poetry collections (divan), the
creation of the universe and the secrets hidden in it and in the human
body are mentioned. Some Sufi poets strongly imply that they know these
secrets. Even if no explicit claim to that effect is made, the idea insinuates
itself in the readers mind. There are many poems in the divan of Yunus
SUFI SHAYKHS
9 of 24
21
In a poem by Kaygusuz Abdal, who was a Sufi poet of thirteenth/fourteenth
century Anatolia, the Sufis are characterized as knowing their own meanings,
having attained the station of unity and observed the inner meanings; in
another, the Sufi can see all beings in his own body and know divine
knowledge: Kaygusuz Abdal, DilguZa (ed. Abdurrahman Guzel; Ankara: Kultur
ve Turizm Bakanl|g| Yay|nlar|, 2nd edn., 1987), 27; for other examples, see: id.,
Sarayname (ed. Abdurrahman Guzel; Ankara: Kultur Bakanl|g| Yay|nlar|, 1989),
10; and A. Golp|narl|, Yunus Emre ve Tasavvuf (Istanbul: Ink|lap Kitabevi, 2nd
edn., 1992), 328.
22
Koprulu, art. Abdal in Turk Halk Edebiyat| Ansiklopedisi (Istanbul:
Burhaneddin, 1935), 37; Turk Edebiyat|nda Ilk Mutasavv|flar, 19.
23
Michael Gilsenan, Saint and Sufi in Modern Egypt: An Essay in the
Sociology of Religion (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973), 73; for the attribution of
a Aad;th stating that a shaykh as a friend of God (i.e velis/saints) will use the
mer Suhreverdi, Tasavvufun
attributes of God, see Ebu Hafs Wihabuddn O
Esaslar|: Avariful-Mearif Tercumesi (eds. H. Kamil Y|lmaz and Irfan Gunduz;
Istanbul: Erkam Yay|nlar| 1990), 116; Suleyman Uludag, art. Firaset in Turkiye
Diyanet Vakf| Islam Ansiklopedisi, xiii, 1996, 1167.
24
See, for example, Shaykh Abul Vefa, Menak|b-| Weyh Ebul- Vefa Tercumesi
(Suleymaniye (Murad Buhari) Kutuphanesi, No: 257), fo. 99b; for Otman Baba,
see Kucuk Abdal, Otman Baba Vilayetnamesi, fo. 75b.
Emre, Kaygusuz Abdal and others in this vein.21 The shaykhs disciples
contributed to the construction of the holy man sometimes attributing
qualities and powers to the shaykhs that they really did not have. The
adage, the Shaykh doesnt fly, his disciples make him fly expresses this
rather neatly. The peoples own observation of the shaykhs activities on
behalf of others and their dedication to the service of man and God, as
well as their mystical states and the miracle motifs, reinforced the holy
man image. The shaykhs enjoyed a degree of trust that helped cement
the theoretical image of the shaykhs in Sufi literature. Ancient popular
beliefs about holy men may well have contributed also by implicitly
associating the ancient holy men with the new ones. Koprulu argued
that the cult of ancient Central Asian shaman, kam and ozan still
retained its vitality in the memory of some Turkmens, at least in the early
years of their migration to Anatolia.22
Invested with such meanings, the shaykhs inevitably accrued strong
spiritual authority over the populace. Many literally believed that,
through their wisdom (feraset), the shaykhs could know the secrets in the
hearts of others and heal just by looking at the sick.23 Many penitents
therefore called on them to secure release from their sins and the negative
influences of illicit desires.24 Similarly, those who suffered from bodily
illnesses or had other problems would contact the shaykhs in the belief
10 of 24
ay
25
that they might be cured or aided.25 For these reasons, it was very
important to win the shaykhs favour. People generally showed their
respect by serving them, offering gifts, and kissing their hands. When the
shaykhs travelled, they were welcomed by large crowds competing with
each other to show their reverence and receive blessings.26
The popular perception of the shaykhs in the major Islamic city centres
did not differ much from that. When a famous Rufa Shaykh called
Seyyid Taceddin Rufa (T:j al-D;n al-Rif:6;) came to Konya with a group
of his murids, the citys dignitaries received him amid much excitement
and took him to a medrese. There the Sufis extraordinary rituals or
shows called burhan aroused great interest.27 Indeed, some shaykhs
found the excessive attention a nuisance and preferred to avoid it. When
Evhadu8d-Dn Kirman came to Tabriz, people met him with great
excitement and hospitality, and frequent requests that he preach to them.
Shown the same regard the next day he decided to leave the city.28 Some
shaykhs actually preferred to travel incognito. It seems that travelling
and its hardships were regarded by many Sufis as part of their
self-discipline and improving their dependence on Godintense public
attention was evidently a serious distraction from this purpose.
There were of course also many who did not approve of the Sufis
or their shaykhseither because they totally rejected Sufism or because
they suspected their sincerity and were put off by doctrinal differences.
Especially in orthdox circles, some Sufi shaykhs nonconformist
teachings, expressed sometimes in bizarre appearance, dress, and
behaviour, provoked negative reactions. Nevertheless, Sufi teachings,
SUFI SHAYKHS
11 of 24
29
12 of 24
ay
and secure the accession of their favoured candidate. For example, the sources
mention that Khwaja Ahrar, as head of the Naqshbandi order, used his economic
and spiritual authority to secure Abu Sads accession to the throne: see Jo-Ann
Gross, Multiple Roles and Perceptions of a Sufi Shaikh: Symbolic Statements of
Political and Religious Authority in Marc Gaborieau, Alexandre Popovic and
Thierry Zarcone (eds.), Naqshbandis: cheminements et situation actuelle dun
ordre mystique musulman (Istanbul/Paris: LInstitut Francais dEtudes
Anatoliennes dIstanbul, Isis, 1990), 10921. Khwaja Ahrar used his considerable wealth and influence to counterbalance that of the emirs, and assured
protection and fiscal privileges for those who entered his himayat or protection.
Paul, Forming a Faction, 53742.
35
For Ottoman and Akkoyunlu examples, see Faroqhi, Osmanl| Kulturu, 77;
GulZen, Menakib-i Ibrahm-i GulZen, 334, 107.
36
Inalc|k, Dervish and Sultan, 267; Ocak, Sufi Milieux, 167.
37
Ocak, Babaler Isyan|, 113; A. Y. Ocak, Osmanl| Toplumunda Z|nd|klar ve
Mulhidler (15.17. Yuzy|llar), (Istanbul: Takih Vakf| Yurt Yah|nlar| (Turkiye
Ekonomik ve Toplumsal Tarih Vakf|, 1998), 136200; Michel Balivet, Islam
mystique et Revolution Armee, 7090 (= Weyh Bedreddin Tasavvuf ve Isyan, 73
97).
38
Feridun b. Ahmed Sipehsalar, Mevlana ve Etraf|ndakiler, Risale (transl.
Tahsin Yaz|c|; Istanbul: Tercuman, 1977), 189, 98; AZ|kpaZazade, Tevarih-i Al-I
mire, 1332
Osman8dan AZ|kpaZazade Tarihi (ed. Ali Beg; Istanbul: Matbaa-yi A
[1914]), 67, 42, 467 (cited hereafter as AZ|kpaZazade); NeZr, Kitab-|
Cihan-Numa NeZr Tarihi I (eds. F. R. Unat and M. A. Koymen; Ankara: Turk
Tarih Kurumu, 1987), 163, 171, 203; Zeki Gurel, Koyun Baba (Ankara: Yoruk
Turkmen Vakf|, 2000), 49, 59.
the role of the shaykhs was more important still. They served almost
as a counterweight to local government officials or notables. They
were responsive to conditions and grievances of the people, suffering
ill-treatment at the hand of notables or officials. They would send letters
of complaint to the capital through the central tekke or its Shaykh and
politely request that the problem be resolved.35
The shaykhs, together with their murids, also had at their disposal the
power of effective propaganda, which made them very influential in
legitimizing or challenging state authority. In the Eastern literary
tradition, there was an established sentiment that a ruler was not safe
on his throne without public support.36 The Sufi shaykhs contributed
to the maintenance of peace and stability in the society by inspiring
brotherhood, but they had the potential also to do the opposite. They
could oppose the policies of the sultans and threaten their power and
authority. The uprisings of the Babais and Bedreddinis can be viewed in
this context.37 Since sultans were aware of this potential of the shaykhs,
they often presented them with opportunities and scope for their work in
order to keep them satisfied.38 The religious sentiments of the sultans
SUFI SHAYKHS
13 of 24
14 of 24
ay
42
About the formation and nature of Muslim saint cults in Anatolia see A.
YaZar Ocak, Kultur Tarihi Kaynag| Olarak Menak|bnameler (Metodolojik Bir
YaklaZ|m), (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1992), 109.
43
Menak|bname of Piri Baba (written by Hoca Ibrahim) Topkap| Saray|
Muzesi Hazine Kitapl|g|, No: 1313, fos. 12a13a; Suraiyya Faroqhi, The Life
Story of an Urban Saint in the Ottoman Empire: Piri Baba of Merzifon, Tarih
Dergisi, 32 (1979), 673. We noted above that state support of the shaykhs was
seen as source of prestige; here the refusal of it is presented as a sign of
superiority over rivals inasmuch as the shaykh is prestigious in the eye of the ruler
but, being unworldly, does not accept the rulers giftsas lesser rivals do.
SUFI SHAYKHS
15 of 24
Attempts to show the saint of a rival cult as not belonging to the Ehl-i
Sunnet, and to humiliate them with other allegations, were among the
methods applied. Of course, with these efforts the disciples or murids
sought to gain legitimacy for their group identity and to increase
their prestige through their saints. This desire, as a natural impulse, was
also true for the competition between the shaykhs and its various
manifestations.
16 of 24
ay
1989), 201. This Sufi practice, i.e. gazing at young men met with great
objections by their colleagues. Hujvr (d. ca. 1071) called the practice Aar:m
(forbidden) and said that anyone who declares this to be allowable is an
unbeliever: Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions, 290.
47
Wems-i Tebrz, MakalatKonuZmalar (transl. O.N. Gencosman; Istanbul,
1974; [Milli Kutuphane: 1974 ad 4624]), 1278, 130.
48
Ahmet T. Karamustafa (ed.), V:hid;s Men:k|b-| Hvoca-i Cih:n ve Net;ce-i
C:n, Tenkidli Metin, Tahlil ve T|pk|bas|m (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 1993; Sources of Oriental Languages and Literatures, 17; Turkish Sources,
15.), fos. 28a40b; T. Yaz|c|, Hatib-i Farisi, Menakib-i Cemal al-Dn-i Sav
(Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1999), Preface, ixxx.
49
Eflaki, Ariflerin Menk|beleri, ii. 4445.
50
Kucuk Abdal, Otman Baba Vilayetnamesi, fos. 50ab, 54ab, 101b102a,
104a.
As far as can be gathered from his Makalat, Wems-i Tebrz also did not
hesitate to enter into discussions with shaykhs he met on his journeys. He
found their comments about verses of the Qur8:n very superficial and
criticized their failure to see their inner meaning. He was sometimes
so sure that his colleagues could not understand him that he avoided
openly sharing his perceptions of certain Qur8:nic verses with them and
preferred to talk with them only allusively.47
In some instances, the disputation between shaykhs constituted an
attack on or defence of particular ideas and practices. For example, a
Qalandari community from Iran were guests in the tekke of Hace-i Cihan
in Istanbul. In the face of criticism they laboured to offer a legitimate
basis for their teachings and the dress and behaviour that expressed them.
Their shaykh went into considerable detail in his explanations, but his
critics were unconvinced and presented their counter arguments. Quietly
the next day, the Qalandari shaykh and his community left the lodge.48
Ulu Arif Celebi and Otman Baba also generally did not hesitate to
enter into disputations and discussions to promote the views and techniques they upheld. In one of his long journeys, Ulu Arif C
elebi visited
the country of Mesud Bey of MenteZeoglu. Here, during a sema ceremony
organized in his honour, he was seen to enter into a controversy with a
popular Turkmen shaykh.49 Otman Baba, similarly, often argued with
the shaykhs he met on his tours. Evidently, he was engaged in a struggle
with them for legitimacy and authority.50
This sort of disputation could also turn into fighting. Otman Baba in
particular evokes the image of a bullying sheikh (eli sopal|). His rivalry
with Bayezid Baba and his disciple Mumin DerviZ, sometimes drew
them into what looked like open fighting. His violence was directed at
those shaykhs who refused to accept his status as shaykh or his greatness.
This violence (described in his menak|bname) took the form of hitting
SUFI SHAYKHS
17 of 24
51
52
53
54
55
18 of 24
ay
56
BektaZ appears to confirm (while also explaining) that this shaykh did
not pray or join the congregation of the mosque,56 and was for this
reason abused and portrayed as Ehl-i bid8at.57 Kaygusuz Abdal was also
accused of these failings, and he remonstrated with a preacher who
criticized him for his outward appearance and behaviour.58
Yunus Emre was more skillful in his rejoinders and used the power
of poetry to extol the virtues and achievements of his mystical way.
For example, he wrote: Once you see the face of the Friend (i.e. God),
polytheism is sackedfor this reason shar;6a is left at the door (Dost
yuzin goricek Zirk yagmaland|, Anuncun kapuda kald| Zeriat). He
claimed to have reached God (his maZuk or Beloved) so that the
distinction between Creator and creature (between I and He) had
disappeared and only He remained. For one such as himself, the Shar;6a
had become unnecessary. According to Yunus, Shar;6a is merely a tool for
bringing people to God, while Yunus is with Him in every moment, not
just five times a day as in the practice of namaz.59 Yunus is really sure of
himself, offering his scruffy, lunatic state as a sign of the condition
of possessing a divine mystery. According to him, to see the face of God
it is essential to be poor (miskn).60 He also argues, against those
who claimed that the meaning was hidden, that I can disclose it (i.e. the
meaning),61 and in another verse: my eyes do not see any object except
for God.62
Adopting themes in their poetry intended to show that they had
experienced the mystery of unity in their poems, Yunus Emre, Kaygusuz
Abdal and other Sufis from the school of Khorasan were probably trying
to argue a case for their own superiority and to legitimize their
non-Shar;6a practices. At the same time, they criticized their opponents
for being unaware of the mysteries and for giving more importance to the
external aspect of the Shar;6a and even being too ostentatious in that
regard. Ulu Arif C
elebi characterized such Sufis (probably all Sufis except
for Mevlevis) as a community subject to ceremony and satisfied with
appearance (torenlere tabi ve gorunuZe kani bir kavim) and he too
argued that they were ignorant of the mysteries.63 In the same way as
SUFI SHAYKHS
19 of 24
5. ON THE REASONS
64
65
66
67
What were the reasons for the attitudes and behaviour of the shaykhs
towards each other and for the competition among them? Of course, as
we have mentioned above, there were religious, spiritual reasonsto
prevent the spread of teachings seen as undesirable, to eliminate harmful
activities, and to promote their own teachings, believing them to be
superior. However, to explain the rivalry on the basis of only such
motives is not satisfactorythe fact is that every group used arguments
of this nature to assert its own legitimacy and question or discredit that
of others. This was true even of Sufi communities belonging to similar
schools that were nonetheless competing socially. Rather, we observe
that competition developed on the basis of more worldly concerns and
expectationsstruggles for influence over rulers and society, moral
weaknesses such as jealousy, and even the desire for economic benefits,
were also striking elements of the rivalries among shaykhs.
It was always an important goal for the shaykhs to spread their
teachings and extend their orders over large areas. For this purpose, they
sent their educated disciples as their halifes or representatives to the
selected regions. However, it was not easy for them to establish their
sects in areas already previously entered by other shaykhs or sects. In
such circumstances, some sort of power struggle inevitably ensued. The
debates or disputes of Ulu Arif C
elebi during his long-distance travels
undertaken for the purpose of spreading Mevlevi teachings, can be seen
as efforts to make himself accepted in that environment. Especially in the
rural areas where the semi-nomadic Turkmen were dominant, he
experienced this difficulty to a greater degree. He had a hard time in
the province of Mesud Bey of MenteZe65 and in AkZehir, a province
under the control of the EZrefogullar|.66 His relationship with the
Karamanogullar| was already poor.67 His quarrel with a very popular
Turkmen shaykh in Sivas stands out as an example of this struggle.
Moreover, Ulu Arif Celebi did not have a good opinion of the other
20 of 24
ay
68
For more on Ulu Arif Celebs view of other religious orders, see Golp|narl|,
Mevlanadan Sonra Mevlevlik, 836.
69
Eflaki, Ariflerin Menk|beleri, ii. 511.
70
Ibid, 299300.
71
Kucuk Abdal, Otman Baba Vilayetnamesi, fos. 88a, 101ab.
SUFI SHAYKHS
21 of 24
72
the teachings imparted by Otman Baba differed from those of his own
tarika.72
Otman Baba was again confronted by a few Bektashi dervishes around
the Hisar Kap|s|. Their shaykh was Mahmud C
elebi. Otman Baba tried
to impose his greatness on the dervishes there by asking who the
Hunkar was, referring probably to Hunkar Hac| BektaZ. At that time,
Mahmud Celebi came over with his dervishes and argued with Otman
Baba. According to the Menakib, Otman Baba admonished him for not
renouncing arrogance, hypocrisy and worldly pleasures, and then
punished him through his keramat.73
There was a strong economic dimensions to this rivalry between
Otman Baba and the Bektashi dervishes, especially with Mumin
DerviZ.74 During their journeys, Otman Baba and Mu8min DerviZ tried
to collect food, clothing and, more importantly, sacrificial animals, from
the surrounding villages for their winter needs. The effort of winning the
favour of villagers would probably return to them in the form of many
charitable gifts and donations because, in this environment, it was very
important for the people to be in the presence of the shaykhs,75 who
were seen as the gate of blessing and of healing (Zifa kap|s|) for all kinds
of afflictions and ailments. A poem by Kaygusuz Abdal is a good
expression of this: the sick come to demand healingall the living come
to my master Abdal Musa (Hastalar da gelur derman isteyu/Saglar gelur
prim (Sultan) Abdal Musa8ya).76 The need to secure the attention of the
people in order to harvest their offerings early is one of the reasons for
the stiff competition between Otman Baba and Mu8min DerviZ.
Important as it was for these Turkmen shaykhs to win the favour of
the people in rural areas, it was no less important for the urban shaykhs
to obtain the favour of ruling elites and other notablestheir permanence in the cities depended upon it to a great extent. The gifts, gratuities
and other financial support offered by their patrons were vital to the
livelihood of the shaykhs.77 More importantly, the prestige of association
with the ruling elite was a factor in enabling them to grow in influence.
Indeed, for some shaykhs, this support was the unique instrument for
22 of 24
ay
78
SUFI SHAYKHS
23 of 24
84
24 of 24
ay
87
his subjects, we will not play any more in Rum. Then, they cut off the
path of Rum, miraculously, by standing wing to wing. But Haci BektaZ,
with the power of his sainthood, transcended this barrier and came to
Sulucakaraoyuk in the form of a dove.87 There should be little objection
to understanding this account in the following terms: Haci BektaZ had to
undergo a period of competition with the incumbent shaykhs in Anatolia
before he was able to establish his credentials as a saint there. As
reflected in the legend, the loss of an acquired position was a significant
cause of anxiety for the incumbent saints.
We must take note of the fact that the rivalry was sometimes a struggle
for prestige, for a superior position in the hierarchy of shaykhs, or an
effort to hold on to a current position. One day, Mevlana was invited with
other notables of the city to the the palace of Pervane Mu8inu8d-Dn but he
was a little late and all the places on the corners of the sofa were occupied.
Mevlana abruptly sat down at the entrance near where the people had left
their shoes. After this protest, many participants left their place on the
sofa and sat down around him. In this way, Mevlana created his own top
corner, maintained and asserted his prestige before the others.88
In conclusion, we can say that the rivalry between the Sufi shaykhs was
closely related to their spiritual influence over society. This, of course,
does not mean that there were no other reasons for it. Differences in
doctrine, temperament or personal vulnerability and several other factors
probably also played a part in this rivalry. However, the tendency of the
shaykhs to direct their spiritual influence over society and ruling elites
toward political, social and economic profit made rivalry among them
inevitable. The institutionalization of Sufism on the basis of order,
lodge (tekke) and charitable foundation (vakf) prepared a fertile ground
for this process. This development also spread the rivalry among the
disciples or communities subject to the authority of the shaykhs,
whereas, earlier, it had been confined to the shaykhs themselves. After
the shaykhs, the Sufi communities and their followers continued this
rivalry as a means of sustaining, and an expression of, group identity and
consciousness. It took the form of attributing superior virtues to their
own shaykhs as against the shaykhs of other groups, becoming irritated
by the presence of a rival group in their sphere of influence, and giving a
strong response to the appointment to their own tekke of a shaykh from
a different tarika tradition.