Postu yiten Hatayi ve tahtı kalan İsmail: Hatayi divanında on iki hizmet ve cem
This study deals with the fact that Shah Ismail and Hatayi are considered as two different people in Khorasan, Azerbaijan, Anatolia and the Balkans. Shah Ismail is recognized as a great commander who founded the Safavid State in half of the region and is known for his military achievements. Hatayi, on the other hand, is regarded as the last representative of the Ardabil Tekke and the marifat that it represents in half of the geography. Accordingly, Shah Ismail, known as a political and military figure, protects his throne and loses his skin. Hatayi, on the other hand, protects his hide and loses his throne. Accordingly, one person represents two different spheres with two different names. Therefore, the example that this study points to and that will facilitate the understanding of this problem is the idiom “Haktan Bize Name Geldi Pirim Sana Haber Olsun” recited under the pseudonym Hatayi. This idiom is among the poems of Shah Hatayi by Shah Ismail and describes the stages of the dhikr of the dervishes of the successors of the Ardabil Tekke. This dictation is recited by the zakir and the dhikr/cem begins and the dhikr is described by mentioning the names of the twelve services. The dhikr of the Ardabil Tekke and the steps followed by the disciples who take part in these dhikr are described in stages. As a result, Shah Ismail is referred to as the sultan with a throne and the commander with an army, strong and powerful. However, when Shah Hatayi is referred to as the sheikh who owns the post and the suitor, weaker and more ambiguous expressions are used. In other words, Shah Hatayi’s dhikr as a sheikh determines the dhikr/semi-determining idiom of the sultan and the commander.
Authors
- Hakkı Taşğın (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1454-6667)
- Ahmet Taşğın (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2751-9924)
Publication Details
- Published
- 2024-12-18
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.59402/ees02202410
- Primary Topic
- Turkish Literature and Culture
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00