NAQSHBANDIS IN WESTERN AND CENTRAL ASlA . CHANGE AND CONTINUITY

Papers Read at a Conference Held

at the Swedish Research Institute

in Istanbul June 9-11, 1997

Edited by Elisabeth Özdalga

SWEDISH RESEARCH INSTITUTE IN ISTANBUL TRANSACTIONS VOL. 9

The Policy of the Sublime-Porte towards Naqshbandis and Other Tariqas during the Tanzimat Period

İLBER QR;r AYLI

The Naqshbandis are faithful to the srate, and they are the representa"tives of state policies in the area of rarlqas. Can this be considered a general rule? In Islaınic history there are those among faınous Naqshbandi sheikhs that don't occupy this position. However, in the nineteenth-century Ottoman period, Naqshbandis came to represent the state within other rar/qas and were even appointed by the state to caretaker po­sitions within ınosques. It was even possible for a Naqshbandi rarlqa member to become a miirid, disciple, of other rarfqas. Asa matter offact, in this century, Naqshl sheiks went along with this permission and possibility; thus it was frequently possible to come across a Naqshi sheikh occupying a posirion among the Rufaiyah or MawHiwi dervish orders or a Bektashi dervish dressing !ike a Naqshbandi or MawHiwi.

The Ottoman administration kept a vigilant watch on what is called village Alevism and some Bektashi groups. This is witnessed beginning with the sixteenth century. The fifteenth-century Sheikh Bedrettin movement (the last example of its kind) especially drove the state to be vigilant in this area. Moreover, in a decree sent by the imperial divan, divan-ı lıiimayum in the sixteenth century, it was ordered that "Simawnalu (intriguers) who were involved in affairs contrary to the holy law and who were determined to be thieves and robbers were to be sent to ships to be worked as oarsmen" (BOA, Miilıimme [Imperial Records] 12, decree: 784, 18 Ramazan 978/13, February, 1571, p. 398). The decree continues: "those in your jurisdiction who are like the Simawnalu and are opposed to the sacred law ... " Despite 150 years having passed since the Simawnalu Sheikh Bedrettin revolt, the government still recoils from the remains of this religious movement.

Moreover, the dervishes of heLerodox tarlqas were being violently pursued. For example, it was ordered that dervishes who planred grape vines araund dervish lodges and made alcohol be sent to Istanbul. It was requested that dervishes of non­SunDi lodges be outlawed (BOA, Miilıimme 3, decree: 172, 29 Muharrem, p. 73; ibid, 2 Rebiyülevvel 965/10 November 1561).

In 1826 the Janissaries were abolished with great tumult, bloody slaughter, betrayals and murders. These events that were deseribed with great horror by Adolphus Slade Pasha (the British Naval Adviser) make it necessary to view with suspicion the title, "the just", adlı, given to Sultan Mahmud IJ.l The effect of these events were to be long-lasting. Moreover, the histarian Ahmed Cevdet Pasha, com­pares the abolition of the Janissaries with the destruction of the Strelitsy by Peter the Great, a similar event in Russia, and says that "Even the dissolution of the Janissaries resembles the dissolution of the Strelitsy, with the exception that whereas the

1 Adolphus SI ade, Records ofTrave/s in Turkey and Grcece, vol. I , London, 1832, pp. 258-61 .

İlber Ortaylı 67

Janissaries had been a cancer in the very heart oİ our state, the Strelitsy had been a turnar on Russia's back. Here, once the Janissaries were dispersed, continuous reform s in every administrative department became inevitable ... "2 Together w ith the Janissaries, anather group that needed to be gotten rid of was the Bektashis. This decision resulred in the denunciation, slander and punishment of many innocent people. Many Bektashi dervish lodges were confıscated. Even the pirevi in Hacıbektaş (Nevşehir) was confıscated and turned over to the Naqshbandi administration. The Naqshbandis assumed an active role in this process. In this way, the state sametimes chose to prop up tariqas and their lodges, and sametimes to close them down. In fact, this method - the control of religious life by the state - prevented certain develop­ments from occurring, with the reform that it would give birth to in 1925 being inevitable. For example, writers and annalisrs of official chronicles openly speaking ili of Bektashis advocated the dosing of their lodges. Anather example is the hista­rian (Sahhaflar Şeylıizade) Mehmed Esad Efendi, who in his work Üss-i Zafer (a book about the abalition of the Janissaries), deseribes the Bektashis as members of a

heretical and immoral tariqa which provoked the Janissaries.3 Mahmud II, in order to restore central authority, or perhaps more accurately, in

order to re-structure it according to the needs of the nineteenth century, had to take certain measures and implement firm practices. From this perspective, in order to defame the Janissaries and the Bektashis and to !essen public support and sympathy towards them, the new regime was seen to take advantage of new propaganda tech­niques. In one of the copies of the Takvim-i Vekayi (the name of the first Ottoman official newspaper) dated August 1833, it was reported asa purported case of wirch­eraft (or vampirism)- that upon opening the graves oftwo Janissaries (Abdi Alemdar and Ali Alemdar) it was seen that their hair and nails had gotten long. This was in­terpreted as evidence that they had come to life during the night and had become vampires.4 Undoubtedly, Üss-i Zafer, the work of Mehmed Esad Efendi (Salıaflar Şeylıizade), the aforementioned historian, is a history written within this genre.

It was said that the reason for go ing after the Bektashis was the spiritual influence of their rariqa and the religious education they provided for the Janissaries. This re­lationship- that of the Bektashi rites and Hacı Bektaş-ı Veli being the pir (master) of the Janissary Corps, and without fallawing the conventional wisdom - the extent to which the Janissaries held the Bektashi perspective and followed its rites has stil! not been analyzed in a detailed and convincing way. It is true that in the Iate period, it was seen that some of the Bektashi dervishes and their elders had close daily re­Jations w ith the Janissaries; however, this is insuffıcient to answer the basic questions canceming the extent to which the Janissary soldiers and officers were interested in or actually belonged to the tariqa. Most probably the state must have been hesitant because of the words of the Bektashis and the possibility that they might provoke the Janissaries p~litically. Actually, the situation can be seen more as an atteınpt of some ulama and other ınembers of the tariqa to help bring into disfavor those ulama that they didn't !ike. That the Bektashi provoked the Janissaries and caused mischief is one of the claims made, but among other things, it is seen that the same prejudice of the Naqshbandis, which the new regime protected, was directed against the Bektashis as well as the Mel:imis. Undoubtedly, the roots of this tension reach further back in history. In fact, the eighteenth-century writer, Vassaf Hüseyin, in his Sefinetü'l

Evliya, tries to prove the heresy of the Bektashis, through some incidences and in-

1 Ahmet Cevdet Paşa, Tarih-i Ceı-det, vol. 12, Dersaadet (Istanbul), 1309 (1891-92\, p. ISO. 3 Mehmed Esad Efendi, Üss-i Zafer, Dersaadet, 1243 (1827-28), pp. 140-41. 4 Takvim-i Vekayi, no. 68, 19 Rabi a/-awwa/1249/6 August 1833.

68 İlber Ortaylı

terpretations. There is atendeney for non-Bektashl criticism and madrasalı members to see and show the Bektashl as a group of-those who have veered from the path of Hacı Bektaş-ı Veli and who abuse his name and ideas.5

Thus in the orders and decrees of the govemment. while making no mention of foundations of the rites and compact of the Bektashi tariqa, a respectful language towards Hacı Bektaş-ı Veli was used; however, the Bekrashi group was being slander­ed. Even in Cevdet Pasha's history, there are references to Mehrned Esad Efendi. According to.Cevdet Pasha,

Hacı Bektaş-ı Veli, one of the famous sheikhs of the age of his exeelleney Orhan Ghazi, w asa person by the name of Seyyid Mehmet Efendi, and was on the correct path; following him appeared a fe w irreligious heretics who passed themselves off as his followers and supporters; and in order to have the same master as the Ottoman military, infiltrated the Janissaries.6

Even Cevdet Pasha's stereotypical description of the Janissary-Bektashl relation­ship in the history that he wrote much after 1826 in order to slander the Janissaries and the Bektashis is meaningfuP Cevdet Pasha points out the sheikh al-Islam giving a speech in the name of the commitlee consisting of himself, and Naqshbandi, Khalwati, Mawlawi and Celveti sheikhs gathered at the Topkapı Palace that year as saying "Hacı Bektaş-ı Veli and other saints are acceptable and are our leaders, but we oppose the beretics, and those who !ike some Bektashis distort our worship." Some of the decisions stemming from this include the giving of Bektashi lodges and tombs older than sixty years to Sunni tariqas; dosing and destroying others and banishing their sheikhs and disciples (bastards having the name of disciple) to ulama­centered (e.g., fanatical Muslim) districts such as Hadim, Birgi and Kayseriyye in order to bring about a correction of their religious conviction. As a matter of fact, during those days an imperial order (ferman) was sent to Kayseri; and in that order it was explained that

some heretics have polytheistic practices, and defame the four caliphs because of their member­

ship in Hacı Bektaş-ı Veli's order. and that their numbers have been increasing, their lodges we­re being tom down, some killed, some exiled, and that their properıy had ıo be reıumed to them.8

On June/July 1827 an order was issued to the effect that

they pray five times a day in mosques and mesjids, along with !heir congregations.9

The Bektashi lodges in Yedikule, Sütlüce, Eyyüb, Merdivenköy and Rumeli­hisari were tom down and their members imprisoned ( 4 Zilhicce, w hi ch means three days after the meeting). From the point of view of belief, these lodge mem­bers were being examined before the sheikh al-Islam; preferring the deceitful meth­ods of the shi'as, "Usul-ı Şi.a'yan", to use the words of Cevdet Pasha, they appeared as if they had adopted Orthodox Islam - concealing their true beliefs and rituals. Be­ing accused of Bektashiism, Melekpaşazade Abdülkadir Bey, Shanizade Mahmud Ataullah Efendi, physician and historian, İsmail Perruh Efendi, firıancial admirıis­trator, were exiled. In this way, the members of what is inforrnally called the

5 Vassaf, Seftnetii' 1-Evliya, vol. I, p. 210; İrfan GUndUz, Osmanlılarda Devlet Tekke Münasebetleri, Ankara, ı983, pp. 143, ı47 .

6 Ahmet Cevdet Paşa, ibid., vol. 12. 7 LeL me point out here that modem historiography has brought different critiques conceming the

profıle of Hacı Bektaş-ı Veli. For example, Ahmed Yaşar Ocak, Babailer İsyaw (fhe Revolı of the Baba is), Istanbul, ı 996, Part ll, pp. ı 78-80; idem .• Kalenderiler (wandering mendieant dervishes), Ankara, 1992. last chapıer.

8 Kayseri Şer' iyye Sicili, no. 194, year 1242, pp. 66-68 (Ankara Milli Kütüphane, Ankara National Library).

9 Mehmed Esad Efendi, ibid., pp. 140-41.

İ lber Ortayli 69

"Beşiktaş Society of Science," Beşiktaş Cemiyec-i İlmiyyesi, were dispersed with jealousy.ıo

According to the decisions made at the meeting held by the ulama and sheikhs, for a long time members of the Bektashi lodges coming from Naqshbandi, Qadiıi and Saadiyye tariqas were appointed assome sort of trustee-caretaker, kayywn. Besides many being assassinated, many were exiled - being sent to cities in Anatolia domi­nated by a strict Sunni mentality. Along with the Janissaries, Bektashis and those sus­pected as being so, those who had relations with the latter were also investigated and severely punished. ı ı

Naturally, a Mawlawi sheikh was assigned to the Janissary Corps in place of a sheikh who was a Bektashi elder. Naqshband1s were appointed to the Hacı Bektaş dervish convent and Bektashi lodges in Istanbul. (Sheikh Mehmed Said Efendi, a Naqshi sheikh, was appointed to the Hacıbektaş Center). According to information provided by Mustafa Kara, the Naqsh1 sheikh, Ahmed Hikmet Efendi, was assigned to the Ramazan Baba dervish convent in Bursa. Some Bektashis passing for

Naqshbandis reınained in these lodges. However, the possibility in Islamic ınysti­cism and tariqas to belong to two, perhaps even three tarfqas made situations !ike these easier. On the other hand, the people of the Ottoınan Palace were Mawlawl; Naqshbandiyya was not a popular tariqa at the palace. Meınbers of the dynasty who belonged to this tariqa were numbered.

Bureaucrats of the Tanzimat period, in contrast to the Mahmud period, stopped such a cruel struggle w ith Bektashilik and Malamiyya. In time, rehabilitation of these lodges was obtained. However, in general a mechanism that restricted, supervised and controlled all tariqas was developed. The lodge stood up against the state; the state became the supervisor and protector of the lodge. Moreover, in 1863, through the establishment of the Assembly of Sheikhs, Meclis-i Meşayilı, a mechanism designed to control the tariqas was created.

Sects such as the Vahhabi and Ismailiyye were not recognized or to!erated by the state; on the other hand, despite falling outside Islamic faith, beliefs of such sects as the Dürzi and Yezidi were shown tolerance by the administration and it is known that the state followed a path of dissolution and appeasement. In the same way, a similar attitude existed within the tariqas. In the Ottoman Empire, the Hurufi sect was not tolerated; in the fifteenth century, its members had been pursued, chastised and exe­cuted. (Even Mahmud Pasha had them burned the Christian style). The Ticani tariqa was not seen to be opposed to Islamic dogma, but nonetheless was not officially recog­nized and protected.12 The convents and lodges of tariqas that were not recognized or approved or whose members were forbidden to set up lodges, would be closed. For example, in 1851 a sheikh of an unrecognized tariqa in Anadoluhisar was accused of charlatanism and exiled. The neighborhood mctlıtar (local elected official), along with some lo~al residents, presented an official petition to the Meclis-i V ala court in which the faithful peopJ.e of Anadoluhisar complained about the aforementioned Sheikh Mustafa and asked that he be investigated. It was decided, following an investi­gation by the sheikh al-Isbm, to exile the person by the name of Mustafa, who in the

10 Ahmet Cevdet Paşa, ibid., voL 12, p. 180; Mehmet Esat Efendi, ibid., pp. 205-209; Reşat Ekrem Koçu, İstanbul Ansiklopedisi, "Arif Efendi," voL 2, p. 996.

ll Mehmed Esad Efendi, ibid., pp. 205-210; Kayseri Şcr' iY.l·c Siôli, no: 194, year 1242 (1826-27), pp. 54, 66-68; Mustafa Kara, Bursa' da Tarikatlar ve Tckkeler, vol. 2, Bursa, 1993, pp. 62-63.

12 For beliefs such as Alımedi, or Balıa, see B. Lewis, The Jell's of Islam, Princeton, 1984, p. 20; John S. Guest, The Yczidis, London, 1987. For the Yezidis and ıhe Oııoman adminisıraıion, see BOA, İrade, Meclis-i \lölii, no: 11312, 3 March 1270 (15 March 1854). For ıhe 'iczidis who moved to the province of Muş, see BOA, Meclis-i Mahsus, no: 895, ca 1277. Tlıe YeziJis and conscription.

70 İlber Ortaylı

vicinily of Göksu had misled people by saying he was a sheikh, thereby being a heretic in the eyeş of Islam. "13

Throughout the whole Tanzimat period, the Meclis-i Vala, was the organ that decided to provide financial assistance as well as food and other necessities to dervis h lodges. For example, V ali de Sultan 's donation to the Cerrahi dervis h convent having passed through the Meclis-i VaHi indicates the policy of central control in this area.ı4 Another example is the way in which some people came to occupy leadership positions within lodges. For instance, in 1854, with the death of sheikh of the Üskü­dar Bandırmalızade lodge, Abdürrahim Selamet Efendi, in order to ensure a reliable successor, his son, Fahreddin Bey, was retired early from public service with the Sublime Porte, with a full pension, so that he could take his father's place as sheikh of the lodge.l5 That same year, in Rumelia, Albania, Ioannina and Crete, cooks and ney players in different lodges were given food assistance and put on salary.ı6 During those same years, 1217-1268/1852-1853, it is seen that many lodges in Istanbul and its environs were given this type of assistance. The in tention of this financial assist­ance was to tie the lodges to a hierarchy, to obtain control and to renderthem power­less.l7 It ought to be pointed out that this type of supervision and control was extended to the madrasalıs as much as it was to the lodges. A decree based upon a decision of the Meclis-i V ala dated 19 Receb 1276/February 12 1860, demands the exile and rounding up of vagabonds who try passing for students and dervishes of madrasalıs, lodges and inns.ıs From both our observations and those of Mustafa Kara, it is clear that, especially in Istanbul, most lodges had been drawn into a hier­archical system of supervision and control by the state through the tactics of sheikhs and financial support.19 As a result, the state came to direct every move­ment of the members of lodges and tariqas - so much so that some of them could perform traditional duties and play their political roles, including socialleadership, only with govemment permission; otherwise, intervention would be made. For example, during the Crimean War, when Abdülkadir, a Rufai sheikh, unfurled a flag and started gathering volunteers, the Ministry of War issued a decree for­bidding rhis action.20

With the arrival of the Tanzimat period, w hat position d id Bektashi come to occu­py? Of the many claims that abound, the most prominent is the one that asserts Sultan Abdülmecid 's sympathy towards the Bektashi. However, apart from this exagger­ation, in centrast to Mahmud II period, the Tanzimat Decree demonstrates a tolerance and permissiveness towards every religion, religious doctrine, and especially the rariqa. Through a decree dated 1852, it is seen that the postnişin (office as head of rarlqa) position of the Hacı Bektaş convent was restored and it was retumed to the Bektastüs.ıı The large numbers of Bektashis and lodges in Rumelia, especially Albania, Ionnia and Crete, were already ina freer and more permissive environment. Among the Danube principalities and Crimean Muslims lefr outside Ottoman adminis­tration, it is a fact that this tariqa existed comfortably and innocently. According to

13 BOA, irade, Meclis-i V ala, no: 5733, 16 Muharrem 1267 /21 November 1850. 14 BOA, irade, Meclis-i Vala, no: ı ı 131, 18 Za 1287/14 Sepıember 1851. 15 BOA, irade, Dahiliyye, no: ı8623. 16 BOA,irade, Meclis-i V ala, no: 18201, 29 Şaban 1270 /27 May 1854. 17 Mustafa Kara, "Mezhepler ve Tarikaılar," Tanzimatran Cumhuriye/e Tılrkiye Ansiklopedisi, vol.

4, pp. 983-86. 18 BOA, irade, Meclis-i V ala, no: 18789, 19 Receb 12761 ı ı February l860. 19 Mustafa Kara, ibi d., pp. 983-86; İrfan GUndüz, ibi d., pp. 203-17. 20 BOA, irade. Dalıiliyye, no: 17634, 15 Muharrem 12701 18 October 1853. 21 BOA,Irade. Meclis-iVala no: 15932, no: 15825.

İlber Ortaylı 71

Friedrick De Jong's research, in places like Egypt22 and Albania, the social and administrative integration of these tariqas was more cohesive and they experience more of an atmosphere of support. Stili, later on there w as a greater intimacy between the·Young Turks and these types of tariqas. Ev en if the ties of sheikh al-Islam Musa Kazun Efendi to freemasonry and Bektashüsm have been exaggerated, they are still to some extent a reality. Irene Melikoff proposes a connection between the Young Turks and freemasonry and Bektashism. The historian T. Zafer Tunaya indicates that it was usual for an "lttihadcı" ("Unionist," member of the organization Union and Progress) to establish a connection between the tariqa and freemaisonry is normal. Prof. Kreiser has pointed out the links between the Unionisrs and such tariqas as the Meliimi and Bektashi.23

After Mahmud II, the Bektashis adopted a new lifesryle and ritual and started down the path of a new type of secrecy. They infiltrated other tariqas, including even Naqshbandiyya. They assumed some new forms of behavior. For example, spitting on the coins carrying the imperial seal of Mahmud II or on his tomb while going down Divanyolu ... 24 Beginning in the second half of the nineteenth century, they wrote countless trearises publicising their articles of faith, ceremonies and rituals. They published their hymns. They popularized Bektashl poetry and of course a Bektashi literature of humor, both oral and written, spread. Moreover, those w ith laic views continuousJy spread tltis literature; Bektashi jokes are stili part of our daily lives - both oral and written.25 This has brought about a sympathy in a variety of circles. Today, the Bektashi order, as is the case with the Malamiyya, does not exist as a regular on-going tariqa. Outside of Turkey, in Albania and the former Yugoslavia, it continues in a more organized hierarchy.

The closing of lodges, is much more than being a radicalism invented by the Republic; its origins are based on suspicion and an official control that goes all the way back to the Tanzimat. A modernizing administration could not put up with groups gathering and institutionalizing aroun4 the lodge.

Translated from Turkish by Sylvia Zeybekoğlu.

22 BOA, irade, Meclis-i Vii/ii, no: 11750; no: 11749; no: 12810; no: 6039; no: 5983; no: 6086; no: 5980. F. De Jang, "The Sufı Orders in Nineteenth and Twentieıh-Century Palesıine," Swdia Jslamica, 58 (Paris 1983), 143-181; idem., "Ma terials Relative to the History of Darqamiyya Ord er and lls Branches,"

Arabica, 22 (1979), 126-143. 23 T. Zafer Tunaya, Türkiye'de Siyasal Partiler /ll (iuilıad ve Terakki), Istanbul, 1989, p. 321;

Klaus Kreiser, "Dervischscheiche als Publizisten-Ein Bii ek in die TUrkische religiöse Presse zwischen 1890 und 1925," Zeitsclırift der Deutsclıen Morgen/aendisclıcn Gescllsclıaft, Supplement 6 (1985), 333-341.

24 J. K. Birge, The Bektaslıi Order of Dervislıes, London [1937), 1965, p. 79. 25 SUieyman Hakkı, Bektaşi Hikliyeleri, Istanbul, 1338 (1919-20), p. 94; Derviş Ruhullah, Bektaşi

Nefes/eri; A. Rıtkı, Bektaşi Sım, Istanbul, 1325-29 (1907- 1 1), vol s. I, IV.

72 İlber Ortaylı