Ismā‘īl Anqarawī’s Commentary on Book Seven of the Mathnawī: A Seventeenth-Century Ottoman Sufi Controversy Eliza Tasbihi A Thesis In the Department of Religion Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Religion) at Concordia University Montreal, Quebec, Canada September 2015 © Eliza Tasbihi, 2015 CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES This is to certify that the thesis prepared By: Eliza Tasbihi Entitled: Ismā‘īl Anqarawī’s Commentary on Book Seven of the Mathnawī: A Seventeenth-Century Ottoman Controversy and submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Religion complies with the regulations of the University and meets the accepted standards with respect to originality and quality. Signed by the final examining committee: Dr. Sally Cole Chair Dr. Jamal Elias External Examiner Dr. W. Chacko Jakob External to Program Dr. Lynda Clarke Examiner Dr. Bilal Kușpinar Examiner Dr. Richard Foltz Thesis Supervisor Approved by Graduate Program Director Chair of Department or Graduate Program Director Dr. Leslie Orr Dean of Faculty ABSTRACT Ismā‘īl Anqarawī’s Commentary on Book Seven of the Mathnawī: A Seventeenth-Century Ottoman Sufi Controversy Eliza Tasbihi, Ph.D. Concordia University, 2015 It is commonly accepted by Rūmī scholars that Rūmī’s Mathnawī is composed of six volumes. However, a few sources indicate the possibility of an extra volume known as “Book Seven” of the Mathnawī. My study particularly focuses on the unpublished commentary (sharḥ) on Book Seven written by Ismā‘īl Anqarawī (d. 1631), the most important Ottoman commentator on the Mathnawī. It is an addendum to his commentary on the Mathnawī entitled Majmū‘at al-Laṭā’if wa Maṭmūrat al-Ma‘ārif (Collection of Subtleties and Hidden Store of Knowledge). Since the commentary and its publication received major criticism from Sufis belonging to the Mevlevī order, it is the aim of this study to explore the reasons for the composition of the commentary. Why did Anqarawī, a respected Mevlevī shaykh who was in charge of Gālātā Sufi lodge and taught the Mathnawīfor several years, devote his energy to writing a separate commentary on a text widely considered to be spurious? My study is based primarily on the textual analysis and close examination of 45 Ottoman manuscripts of Anqarawī’s sharḥ, which I consulted in the Süleymāniye library, Konya’s Mevlānā Museum, Bursa’s Inebey Manuscript Library, and Ankara’s Mellī Library. I argue that the debate in which Anqarawī engaged can be divided into two parts: First, that the sharḥ encountered heavy criticism within the Mevlevī circle for its falsification and spurious nature, and second, that the subjects discussed in the sharḥ resulted in strong opposition from orthodox ‘ulamā’ on the grounds that it promoted bid‘a (“innovation” or “heresy”). By iii examining Anqarawī’s introduction, which presents a detailed account of his debate with Mevlevī Sufis and Shaykhs, I argue that Anqarawī claimed authority as the ultimate commentator and Mathnawī-khān (Mathnawī-reciter) among the Mevlevī Sufis, a claim that was bolstered by his closeness to Sulṭān Murād IV (d. 1640). Given that Anqarawī scholarship is only recently emerging and his monumental commentary has not been studied properly, the present work contributes to the study of Rūmī and reception of his Mathnawī not only in the Persian speaking regions, but also within Ottoman society. This study will shed light on various aspects of the social and religious debates among the ‘ulamā’ in the 17th-century Ottoman Empire. It will also allow for a better understanding of the intellectual milieu of the empire, the social status and political roles of the ‘ulamā’ and the power wielded by official religious institutions and their affiliated scholars. iv Acknowledgements In carrying out this study I received valuable guidance, assistance and support from various people to whom I now have the pleasure of extending my deepest thanks. First and formost I would like to thank my supervisor Prof. Richard Foltz, and my thesis committee members Prof. Lynda Clarke and Prof. Bilal Kuşpınar for their guidance and advice. I am also thankful for the assistance I received from Prof. Semih Ceyhan, and for his generosity and the countless meetings and insightful conversations we had while I was conducting my research in Istanbul. I am greatful for the financial support I received from the Soudavar Memorial Foundation and the Graduate Student Mobility Award at Concordia, which allowed me to pursue my research and field trips to Turkey, Sarajevo and Iran. Special thanks go to Prof. Leonard Lewisohn and Prof. Mohammad Este‘lāmī for their sincere encouragement and valuable advice. I am especially greatful to Adam Gacek for his courses on Islamic manuscripts, offered at McGill University. They were insturmental in teaching me how to evaluate and work with complicated and often hard-to-read manuscripts. I am very appreciative of the help and assistance I received from the staff members of the following manuscript libraries in Turkey: in Istanbul, Süleymaniye Kütüphanesi, Hacı Selim Ağa Kütüphanesi, ISAM: Center for Islamic Studies, Istanbul Üniversitesi Merkez Kütüphanesi, Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Halk Kütüphanesi, Millet Yazma Eser Kütüphanesi and Beyazit Devlet Kütüphanesi; in Konya, Mevlānā Müzesi; in Ankara, Melli Kütüphanesi; and in Bursa, İnebey Yazma Eser Kütüphanesi. I am likewise grateful to the staff of: the Kitābkhānah-i Majlis in Tehran, Iran; The Centre for the Great Islamic Encyclopaedia (Markaz-i Dā‘irat al-Ma‘ārif-i Buzurg-i Islāmī) and the Kitābkhānah-i Āstān-i Quds-i Raḍavī in Mashhad, Iran; the Royal Library of Copenhagen, Denmark; and the Ghazi Husrev Beg v Library in Sarajevo. I am indebted to the staff of the library of the Institute of Islamic Studies in Montreal, particularly to the late Stephen (Steve) Millier and Sean Swanick for their friendship and the help they extended to me and for making the library a welcoming place to do research. Speial thanks to Dr. Bilal Kuşpınar, Naci Bakerci of Mevlānā Müzesi, Dr. Arzu Meral and Kahraman Özkök of Revak Kitabevi, Shokry Gohar, Naser Dumairieh, Cahid Senel and Kubra Senel, Teymor Morel, Alberto Fabio Ambrosio, Hussein Gursel, and Hamit Dadizadeh, with whom I consulted or sought help from in obtaining resources that I needed, and whose valuable conversations I have highly benefited from. I am likewise thankful to the Graduate Program Director, Prof. Leslie Orr for her assistance and support and the administrative assistants of the Department of Religion at Concordia University, especially Munit Merid, whose patience, kindness and continued help was deeply appreciated. Special thanks also go to the late Stephen Millier for the help I received for this work and whose valuable comments and feedback were very beneficial. Among my friends, I must offer sincere gratitude to Heather Empey, who kindly assisted me with proofreading this thesis. I am greatful for our friendship, which goes beyond geographical bounderies and has been fruitful and inspiring ever since we came to known each other. Heather, thanks for being there anytime I have needed you! To Dr. Elizabeth Alexandrin, Perwaiz Hayat, Dr. Abdul Muthalib, Domenico Aversano, Usman Hamid, Christopher Anzalone, Dr. Ayesha Irani, Barbara Empey, Dr. Damien Janos and Dr. Inci Ayranci, whose inspiring words, warm company and valuable friendship have been priceless, let me express here my deepest thanks. I have very much enjoyed participating in the weekly sessions of the Mathnawīcircle in Montréal and being part of the lively discussions among vi its participants; thanks to Nasser and Jila Ghalkhani for inviting me into their circle and making me feel at home. Words fall short to describe the spiritual light that ‘Abdullāh Wā‘iẓ brought to my life, and the warmth and heartfelt moral support offered to me by Karim Zayyani throught his many visits to Montreal. Last but not the least, I would like to turn to my family who have been my support and encouragement and express my sincere indebtedness and gratitude. I wish to acknowledge my gratitude to my cousin Ms. Raf‘at Asadian, who assisted me with obtaining a manuscript from Mashhad’s Āstān-i Quds-i Raḍavī Library. I particularly wish to express my appreciation and love to my brother Fakhr al-Dīn, who has been of great moral support to me throughout my studies, and offered his tireless asssitance and constant support in obtaining any materials and documents I needed to complete my thesis. Finally, I wish to dedicate this work to the memory of my parents, as well as to the memory of a dear friend and colleague Stephen Millier, who was of great help in preparing this dissertation but passed away before seeing its defense and completion. vii Table of Contents List of Figures ………………………………………………………….. ix Transliteration Table ………………………………………………….. x Introduction ………………………………………………………………... 1 Chapter One: Literature Review ……………………………………………... 8 Chapter Two: The Seventh Book of the Mathnawī …………………............ 33 Chapter Three: Literary Examination of Book Seven ……………………… 51 Chapter Four: Anqarawī’s Commentary on Book Seven of the Mathnawī: A Survey of Existing Manuscripts in Turkey’s Libraries ……………………… 84 Chapter Five: The Intellectual Milieu in the Ottoman Empire in the Seventeenth Century ………………………………………………………………………… 115 Chapter Six: Anqarawī’s Theosophical Approach in his Sharḥ-i Mathnawī: The Influence of Ibn ‘Arabī ……………………………………………………….. 172 Conclusion ………………………………………………………………… 205 Bibliography ………………………………………………………………… 210 Appendix I: Manuscripts of Book Seven ………………………………........ 229 Appendix II: Manuscripts of Anqarawī’s Commentary on Book Seven …….. 250 viii List of Figures Figure 1. MS. AEarb1056, Mellat Kütüphanesi, f.10 b. ………………………. 19 Figure 2. MS Yāzmā Bāgişlar, No. 6574, verso of the first protective leaf ……. 97 Figure 3. MS Yāzmā Bāgişlar, No. 6574, verso of the first protective leaf …….. 98 Figure 4. Ḥālet Efendī, No. 274, f.1b. Book One of the Mathnawī ……………… 99 Figure 5. Şehid ‘Alī Pāşā, No. 1269, f.1b.