Sinan, Mi‘mar
Sinan, Mi‘mar (Mi‘mar Sinan - “Architect Sinan”) (Mimar Koca Sinan - “Great Architect Sinan”) (Khoca Mimar Sinan Ağa) (b. 1489/1490, Ağırnaz, Turkey - d. July 17, 1588, Istanbul). Greatest architect of the Ottomans. Born at Kayseri in Anatolia of Christian origin, he became a Janissary and took part in several campaigns, during which he attracted attention by devising ferries and building bridges. From around 1540, he was exclusively engaged in building mosques, palaces, schools and public baths from Bosnia to Mecca. His three most famous works are the Sheh-zade Mosque and the Suleymaniyye in Istanbul, and the Mosque of Sultan Selim II in Edirne. The list of his buildings is given by his biographer, the poet Mustafa Sa‘id (d. 1595).
Sinan was the most celebrated of all Ottoman architects. His ideas, perfected in the construction of mosques and other buildings, served as the basic themes for virtually all later Turkish religious and civic architecture.
The son of Greek Orthodox Christian parents, Sinan entered his father’s trade as a stone mason and carpenter. In 1512, however, he was drafted into the Janissary corps. Sinan, whose Christian name was Joseph, converted to Islam, and he began a lifelong service to the Ottoman royal house and to the great sultan Süleyman I (r. 1520–66) in particular. Following a period of schooling and rigorous training, Sinan became a construction officer in the Ottoman army, eventually rising to chief of the artillery.
He first revealed his talents as an architect in the 1530s by designing and building military bridges and fortifications. In 1539, he completed his first nonmilitary building, and for the remaining 40 years of his life he was to work as the chief architect of the Ottoman Empire at a time when it was at the zenith of its political power and cultural brilliance. The number of projects Sinan undertook is massive—79 mosques, 34 palaces, 33 public baths, 19 tombs, 55 schools, 16 poorhouses, 7 madrasahs (religious schools), and 12 caravansaries, in addition to granaries, fountains, aqueducts, and hospitals. His three most famous works are the Şehzade Mosque and the Mosque of Süleyman I the Magnificent, both of which are in Istanbul, and the Selim Mosque at Edirne.
Sinan’s first truly important architectural commission was the Şehzade Mosque, which was completed in 1548 and which Sinan regarded as the best work of his apprenticeship. Like many of his mosque constructions, the Şehzade Mosque has a square base upon which rests a large central dome flanked by four half domes and numerous smaller, subsidiary domes.
The Mosque of Süleyman in Istanbul was constructed in the years 1550–57 and is considered by many scholars to be his finest work. It was based on the design of the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul, a 6th-century masterpiece of Byzantine architecture that greatly influenced Sinan. The Mosque of Süleyman has a massive central dome that is pierced by 32 openings, thus giving the dome the effect of lightness while also copiously illuminating the mosque’s interior. It is one of the largest mosques ever built in the Ottoman Empire. Besides the place of worship, it contains a vast social complex comprising four madrasahs, a large hospital and medical school, a kitchen-refectory, and baths, shops, and stables.
Sinan himself considered the Mosque of Selim at Edirne, built in the years 1569–75, to be his masterwork. This mosque is the culmination of his centralized-domed plans, the great central dome rising on eight massive piers in between which are impressive recessed arcades. The dome is framed by the four loftiest minarets in Turkey.
Starting with the Byzantine church as a model, Sinan adapted the designs of his mosques to meet the needs of Muslim worship, which requires large open spaces for common prayer. As a result, the huge central dome became the focal point around which the design of the rest of the structure was developed. Sinan pioneered the use of smaller domes, half domes, and buttresses to lead the eye up the mosque’s exterior to the central dome at its apex, and he used tall, slender minarets at the corners to frame the entire structure. This plan could yield striking exterior effects, as in the dramatic facade of the Selim Mosque. Sinan was able to convey a sense of size and power in all of his larger buildings. Many scholars consider his tomb monuments to be the finest examples of his smaller works.
Sinan was the chief Ottoman architect and civil engineer for sultans Suleiman I, Selim II, and Murad III. He was responsible for the construction of more than three hundred major structures, and other more modest projects, such as his Qur'an schools (sibyan mektebs).
Trained as a military engineer, he rose through the ranks to become first an officer and finally a Janissary commander, with the honorific title of ağa. He learned his architectural and engineering skills while on campaign with the Janissaries, becoming expert at constructing fortifications of all kinds, as well as military infrastructure, such as roads, bridges and aqueducts. At about the age of fifty, he was appointed as chief royal architect, applying the technical skills he had acquired in the army to the "creation of fine religious buildings" and civic structures of all kinds. He remained in post for almost fifty years.
Sinan's masterpiece is the Selimiye Mosque in Edirne, although his most famous work is the Suleiman Mosque in Istanbul. He headed an extensive governmental department and trained many assistants who, in turn, distinguished themselves, including Sedefhar Mehmet Ağa, architect of the Sultan Ahmed Mosque. He is considered the greatest architect of the classical period of Ottoman architecture, and has been compared to Michelangelo, his contemporary in the West. Michelangelo and his plans for St. Peter's Basilica in Rome were well-known in Istanbul, since Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo had been invited, in 1502 and 1505 respectively, by the Sublime Porte to submit plans for a bridge spanning the Golden Horn.
At the start of his career as an architect, Sinan had to deal with an established, traditional domed architecture. His training as an army engineer led him to approach architecture from an empirical point of view, rather than from a theoretical one. He started to experiment with the design and engineering of single-domed and multiple-domed structures. He tried to obtain a new geometrical purity, a rationality and a spatial integrity in his structures and designs of mosques. Through all this, he demonstrated his creativity and his wish to create a clear, unified space. He started to develop a series of variations on the domes, surrounding them in different ways with semi-domes, piers, screen walls and different sets of galleries. His domes and arches are curved, but he avoided curvilinear elements in the rest of his design, transforming the circle of the dome into a rectangular, hexagonal or octagonal system. He tried to obtain a rational harmony between the exterior pyramidal composition of semi-domes, culminating in a single drumless dome, and the interior space where this central dome vertically integrates the space into a unified whole. His genius lies in the organization of this space and in the resolution of the tensions created by the design. He was an innovator in the use of decoration and motifs, merging them into the architectural forms as a whole. He accentuated the center underneath the central dome by flooding it with light from the many windows. He incorporated his mosques in an efficient way into a complex (külliye), serving the needs of the community as an intellectual center, a community center and serving the social needs and the health problems of the faithful.
When Sinan died, the classical Ottoman architecture had reached its climax. No successor was gifted enough to better the design of the Selimiye mosque and to develop it further. His students retreated to earlier models, such as the Şehzade mosque. Invention faded away, and a decline set in.
During his tenure of 50 years at the post of imperial architect, Sinan is said to have constructed or supervised 476 buildings (196 of which still survive), according to the official list of his works, the Tazkirat-al-Abniya. He couldn't possibly have designed them all, but he relied on the skills of his office. He took credit and the responsibility for their work. As a janissary, and thus a slave of the sultan, his primary responsibility was to the sultan. In his spare time, he also designed buildings for the chief officials. He delegated to his assistants the construction of less important buildings in the provinces. The number of buildings he was responsible for include:
* 94 large mosques (camii),
* 57 colleges,
* 52 smaller mosques (mescit),
* 48 bath-houses (hamam).
* 35 palaces (saray),
* 22 mausoleums (türbe),
* 20 caravanserai (kervansaray; han),
* 17 public kitchens (imaret),
* 8 bridges,
* 8 store houses or granaries
* 7 Qur'anic schools (medrese),
* 6 aqueducts,
* 3 hospitals (darüşşifa)
Some of his works include:
* Azapkapi Sokullu Mosque in Istanbul
* Caferağa Medresseh
* Selimiye Mosque in Edirne
* Süleymaniye Complex
* Kılıç Ali Pasha Complex
* Molla Çelebi Mosque
* Haseki Baths
* Piyale Pasha Mosque
* Şehzade Mosque
* Mihrimah Sultan Mosque in Edirnekapı
* Mehmed Paša Sokolović Bridge in Višegrad
* Nisanci Mehmed Pasha Mosque
* Rüstem Pasha Mosque
* Zal Mahmud Pasha Mosque
* Kadirga Sokullu Mosque
* Koursoum Mosque or Osman Shah Mosque in Trikala
* Al-Takiya Al-Suleimaniya in Damascus
* Yavuz Sultan Selim Madras
* Mimar Sinan Bridge in Büyükçekmece
* Church of the Assumption in Uzundzhovo
* Tekkiye Mosque
* Khusruwiyah Mosque
* Oratory at the Western Wall
Sinan died in 1588 and is buried in a tomb in Istanbul, a türbe of his own design, in the cemetery just outside the walls of the Süleymaniye Mosque to the north, across a street named Mimar Sinan Caddesi in his honor. He was buried near the tombs of his greatest patrons: Sultan Süleyman and the Sultana Haseki Hürrem, Suleiman's wife.
His name is also given to:
* a crater on the planet Mercury.
* A Turkish state university, the Mimar Sinan University of Fine Arts in Istanbul.
Sinan's portrait was depicted on the reverse of the Turkish 10,000 lira banknotes of 1982-1995.
Mi'mar Sinan see Sinan, Mi‘mar
Sinan see Sinan, Mi‘mar
Architect Sinan see Sinan, Mi‘mar
Great Architect Sinan see Sinan, Mi‘mar
Mimar Koca Sinan see Sinan, Mi‘mar
Khoca Mimar Sinan Ağa see Sinan, Mi‘mar
Sinan, Mi‘mar (Mi‘mar Sinan - “Architect Sinan”) (Mimar Koca Sinan - “Great Architect Sinan”) (Khoca Mimar Sinan Ağa) (b. 1489/1490, Ağırnaz, Turkey - d. July 17, 1588, Istanbul). Greatest architect of the Ottomans. Born at Kayseri in Anatolia of Christian origin, he became a Janissary and took part in several campaigns, during which he attracted attention by devising ferries and building bridges. From around 1540, he was exclusively engaged in building mosques, palaces, schools and public baths from Bosnia to Mecca. His three most famous works are the Sheh-zade Mosque and the Suleymaniyye in Istanbul, and the Mosque of Sultan Selim II in Edirne. The list of his buildings is given by his biographer, the poet Mustafa Sa‘id (d. 1595).
Sinan was the most celebrated of all Ottoman architects. His ideas, perfected in the construction of mosques and other buildings, served as the basic themes for virtually all later Turkish religious and civic architecture.
The son of Greek Orthodox Christian parents, Sinan entered his father’s trade as a stone mason and carpenter. In 1512, however, he was drafted into the Janissary corps. Sinan, whose Christian name was Joseph, converted to Islam, and he began a lifelong service to the Ottoman royal house and to the great sultan Süleyman I (r. 1520–66) in particular. Following a period of schooling and rigorous training, Sinan became a construction officer in the Ottoman army, eventually rising to chief of the artillery.
He first revealed his talents as an architect in the 1530s by designing and building military bridges and fortifications. In 1539, he completed his first nonmilitary building, and for the remaining 40 years of his life he was to work as the chief architect of the Ottoman Empire at a time when it was at the zenith of its political power and cultural brilliance. The number of projects Sinan undertook is massive—79 mosques, 34 palaces, 33 public baths, 19 tombs, 55 schools, 16 poorhouses, 7 madrasahs (religious schools), and 12 caravansaries, in addition to granaries, fountains, aqueducts, and hospitals. His three most famous works are the Şehzade Mosque and the Mosque of Süleyman I the Magnificent, both of which are in Istanbul, and the Selim Mosque at Edirne.
Sinan’s first truly important architectural commission was the Şehzade Mosque, which was completed in 1548 and which Sinan regarded as the best work of his apprenticeship. Like many of his mosque constructions, the Şehzade Mosque has a square base upon which rests a large central dome flanked by four half domes and numerous smaller, subsidiary domes.
The Mosque of Süleyman in Istanbul was constructed in the years 1550–57 and is considered by many scholars to be his finest work. It was based on the design of the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul, a 6th-century masterpiece of Byzantine architecture that greatly influenced Sinan. The Mosque of Süleyman has a massive central dome that is pierced by 32 openings, thus giving the dome the effect of lightness while also copiously illuminating the mosque’s interior. It is one of the largest mosques ever built in the Ottoman Empire. Besides the place of worship, it contains a vast social complex comprising four madrasahs, a large hospital and medical school, a kitchen-refectory, and baths, shops, and stables.
Sinan himself considered the Mosque of Selim at Edirne, built in the years 1569–75, to be his masterwork. This mosque is the culmination of his centralized-domed plans, the great central dome rising on eight massive piers in between which are impressive recessed arcades. The dome is framed by the four loftiest minarets in Turkey.
Starting with the Byzantine church as a model, Sinan adapted the designs of his mosques to meet the needs of Muslim worship, which requires large open spaces for common prayer. As a result, the huge central dome became the focal point around which the design of the rest of the structure was developed. Sinan pioneered the use of smaller domes, half domes, and buttresses to lead the eye up the mosque’s exterior to the central dome at its apex, and he used tall, slender minarets at the corners to frame the entire structure. This plan could yield striking exterior effects, as in the dramatic facade of the Selim Mosque. Sinan was able to convey a sense of size and power in all of his larger buildings. Many scholars consider his tomb monuments to be the finest examples of his smaller works.
Sinan was the chief Ottoman architect and civil engineer for sultans Suleiman I, Selim II, and Murad III. He was responsible for the construction of more than three hundred major structures, and other more modest projects, such as his Qur'an schools (sibyan mektebs).
Trained as a military engineer, he rose through the ranks to become first an officer and finally a Janissary commander, with the honorific title of ağa. He learned his architectural and engineering skills while on campaign with the Janissaries, becoming expert at constructing fortifications of all kinds, as well as military infrastructure, such as roads, bridges and aqueducts. At about the age of fifty, he was appointed as chief royal architect, applying the technical skills he had acquired in the army to the "creation of fine religious buildings" and civic structures of all kinds. He remained in post for almost fifty years.
Sinan's masterpiece is the Selimiye Mosque in Edirne, although his most famous work is the Suleiman Mosque in Istanbul. He headed an extensive governmental department and trained many assistants who, in turn, distinguished themselves, including Sedefhar Mehmet Ağa, architect of the Sultan Ahmed Mosque. He is considered the greatest architect of the classical period of Ottoman architecture, and has been compared to Michelangelo, his contemporary in the West. Michelangelo and his plans for St. Peter's Basilica in Rome were well-known in Istanbul, since Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo had been invited, in 1502 and 1505 respectively, by the Sublime Porte to submit plans for a bridge spanning the Golden Horn.
At the start of his career as an architect, Sinan had to deal with an established, traditional domed architecture. His training as an army engineer led him to approach architecture from an empirical point of view, rather than from a theoretical one. He started to experiment with the design and engineering of single-domed and multiple-domed structures. He tried to obtain a new geometrical purity, a rationality and a spatial integrity in his structures and designs of mosques. Through all this, he demonstrated his creativity and his wish to create a clear, unified space. He started to develop a series of variations on the domes, surrounding them in different ways with semi-domes, piers, screen walls and different sets of galleries. His domes and arches are curved, but he avoided curvilinear elements in the rest of his design, transforming the circle of the dome into a rectangular, hexagonal or octagonal system. He tried to obtain a rational harmony between the exterior pyramidal composition of semi-domes, culminating in a single drumless dome, and the interior space where this central dome vertically integrates the space into a unified whole. His genius lies in the organization of this space and in the resolution of the tensions created by the design. He was an innovator in the use of decoration and motifs, merging them into the architectural forms as a whole. He accentuated the center underneath the central dome by flooding it with light from the many windows. He incorporated his mosques in an efficient way into a complex (külliye), serving the needs of the community as an intellectual center, a community center and serving the social needs and the health problems of the faithful.
When Sinan died, the classical Ottoman architecture had reached its climax. No successor was gifted enough to better the design of the Selimiye mosque and to develop it further. His students retreated to earlier models, such as the Şehzade mosque. Invention faded away, and a decline set in.
During his tenure of 50 years at the post of imperial architect, Sinan is said to have constructed or supervised 476 buildings (196 of which still survive), according to the official list of his works, the Tazkirat-al-Abniya. He couldn't possibly have designed them all, but he relied on the skills of his office. He took credit and the responsibility for their work. As a janissary, and thus a slave of the sultan, his primary responsibility was to the sultan. In his spare time, he also designed buildings for the chief officials. He delegated to his assistants the construction of less important buildings in the provinces. The number of buildings he was responsible for include:
* 94 large mosques (camii),
* 57 colleges,
* 52 smaller mosques (mescit),
* 48 bath-houses (hamam).
* 35 palaces (saray),
* 22 mausoleums (türbe),
* 20 caravanserai (kervansaray; han),
* 17 public kitchens (imaret),
* 8 bridges,
* 8 store houses or granaries
* 7 Qur'anic schools (medrese),
* 6 aqueducts,
* 3 hospitals (darüşşifa)
Some of his works include:
* Azapkapi Sokullu Mosque in Istanbul
* Caferağa Medresseh
* Selimiye Mosque in Edirne
* Süleymaniye Complex
* Kılıç Ali Pasha Complex
* Molla Çelebi Mosque
* Haseki Baths
* Piyale Pasha Mosque
* Şehzade Mosque
* Mihrimah Sultan Mosque in Edirnekapı
* Mehmed Paša Sokolović Bridge in Višegrad
* Nisanci Mehmed Pasha Mosque
* Rüstem Pasha Mosque
* Zal Mahmud Pasha Mosque
* Kadirga Sokullu Mosque
* Koursoum Mosque or Osman Shah Mosque in Trikala
* Al-Takiya Al-Suleimaniya in Damascus
* Yavuz Sultan Selim Madras
* Mimar Sinan Bridge in Büyükçekmece
* Church of the Assumption in Uzundzhovo
* Tekkiye Mosque
* Khusruwiyah Mosque
* Oratory at the Western Wall
Sinan died in 1588 and is buried in a tomb in Istanbul, a türbe of his own design, in the cemetery just outside the walls of the Süleymaniye Mosque to the north, across a street named Mimar Sinan Caddesi in his honor. He was buried near the tombs of his greatest patrons: Sultan Süleyman and the Sultana Haseki Hürrem, Suleiman's wife.
His name is also given to:
* a crater on the planet Mercury.
* A Turkish state university, the Mimar Sinan University of Fine Arts in Istanbul.
Sinan's portrait was depicted on the reverse of the Turkish 10,000 lira banknotes of 1982-1995.
Mi'mar Sinan see Sinan, Mi‘mar
Sinan see Sinan, Mi‘mar
Architect Sinan see Sinan, Mi‘mar
Great Architect Sinan see Sinan, Mi‘mar
Mimar Koca Sinan see Sinan, Mi‘mar
Khoca Mimar Sinan Ağa see Sinan, Mi‘mar
Sinan Pasha
Sinan Pasha. Name of several viziers of the Ottoman Empire, mostly of Christian origin. The most important are Khadim Sinan Pasha, Grand Vizier under Sultan Selim I. He was killed in personal combat with the Mameluke Sultan Tuman Bay II; Khoja Sinan Pasha (c. 1438-1486) was the vizier under Sultan Muhammad II; Khoja Sinan Pasha (d. 1596) who was five times Grand Vizier. As governor of Egypt in 1568, he conquered Yemen and in 1574 incorporated Tunis in the Ottoman Empire. During his third grand vizierate he concluded the Hungarian campaign and captured many castles and strongholds.
Sinan Pasha. Name of several viziers of the Ottoman Empire, mostly of Christian origin. The most important are Khadim Sinan Pasha, Grand Vizier under Sultan Selim I. He was killed in personal combat with the Mameluke Sultan Tuman Bay II; Khoja Sinan Pasha (c. 1438-1486) was the vizier under Sultan Muhammad II; Khoja Sinan Pasha (d. 1596) who was five times Grand Vizier. As governor of Egypt in 1568, he conquered Yemen and in 1574 incorporated Tunis in the Ottoman Empire. During his third grand vizierate he concluded the Hungarian campaign and captured many castles and strongholds.
Sinasi, Ibrahim
Sinasi, Ibrahim (Ibrahim Sinasi Efendi) (b. 1826, Constantinople [now Istanbul] - d. September 13, 1871, Constantinople). Turkish journalist who was one of the more enigmatic figures of Turkish intellectual history. Despite his role as the founding father of modern Turkish journalism and his basic contributions to the rise of a Turkish critique of society, information about his life is insufficient to paint a portrait of him as an intellectual.
Sinasi began his career in government during the first years of the Tanzimat, the era of reforms and modernization initiated by the Gulhane Rescript of 1839. Encouraged by a patron of modernization in the Ottoman Empire, he was sent as a government funded student to Europe in 1849. He remained in France until 1853 and is known to have been acquainted with such personalities as Alphonse de Lamartine. After his return, he was appointed to the Educational Committee, which was engaged in redrawing Ottoman educational institutions.
Although quite cautious in his intellectual stance, he seems to have antagonized higher officials and was dismissed. Reinstated and dismissed once more in 1863, he eventually went into self-exile in Paris, where he devoted himself to the study of literature and linguistics. He returned permanently to Istanbul in 1870, where he lived as a recluse in some financial need.
Sinasi’s major contribution to Ottoman/Turkish intellectual life was the journal Tasvir-i efkar (Interpreter of Ideas, founded in 1862). This was not the first newspaper in the Ottoman Empire. An Englishman named Churchill had published an earlier gazette, and in 1861 Sinasi and his friend Agah Efendi had jointly published the Terceuman-i ahval (Interpreter of Events). However, Tasvir-i efkar was the first newspaper that (though careful in its approach) expressed a critique of the state of Ottoman government and society in the modern media. Sinasi’s second dismissal from his employment in the central government was due to his timid libertarianism: “mentioning matters of state too often” was the cause of his downfall. An article by Sinasi explaining the principle of “no taxation without representation” appeared in the Tasvir-i efkar the day before the order for his dismissal was drafted and may have ben the proximate cause of it.
Sinasi is unanimously considered by historians of Turkish intellectual history to be the first advocate of “Europeanization” in the Ottoman Empire, a somewhat different project than that of “modernization” voiced before him. His impact, however, stems from his development of a medium that expressed private views about the state of the empire. Until Sinasi and his use of journalism as a medium for influencing -- and, in a way, creating -- public opinion, schemes of modernization had been the result of official concern with reform. Sinasi represents a new trend in which government officials concerned with the fate of the empire began to form an intelligentsia often contradicting positions adopted by their superiors. In that sense, he may be seen as having laid the groundwork for the Young Ottomans.
Another of Sinasi’s important contributions may be described as “encyclopedism,” or the attempt to inform his readers of the new methods and the new branches of knowledge that flourished in Europe in his time. Natural law, the historical method, the history of pre Ottoman Turkey, and Buffon’s Histoire naturelle were some of the ideas that he took up in the pages of Tasvir-i efkar. In one of his most celebrated poems Sinasi praised the author of the Gulhane Rescript, Mustafa Resid Pasa (Mustafa Reshid Pasha), for having brought “the European climate of opinion” to Turkey, and for having reminded the ruler of his responsibilities. In another, the achievements of a later grand vizier were compared to those of Plato and Newton.
Sinasi’s mention in the preface of Tercuman-i ahral that he was using a language directed to “the people in general” also represents an important watershed. By the nineteenth century Ottoman Turkish as the language of officials had become a complex and flowery idiom difficult for the majority of the population, who used a vernacular called “rough Turkish.” One of Sinasi’s aims was to transcend officialese. He thus began the trend described by Grand Vizier Said Pasa, himself a writer, as “journalistic Turkish.” This trend was further promoted by the Young Ottomans. The celebrated article by Ziya Pasa, “Siir ve Insa’” (Poetry and Prose), is a good example of the further developments that much later, in the 1930s, took a more radical turn toward the “purification” of Turkish by the removal of words with Arabic and Persian roots.
İbrahim Şinasi was one of the primary authors of the Tanzimat. Sinasi began his career as an officer in the Ottoman administration, where he learned Arabic, Persian and French. From 1849 to 1853 he studied under the direction of Mustafa Reşid Pasha in Paris, where he came into contact with French literature and French intellectuals. Among other things, he was a member of the Société Asiatique.
During his time in Paris, he translated several works from French into Turkish.
From 1860 he was co-editor of the newspaper Tercüman-i ahvâl ("Interpreter of Circumstances"). In 1862, he founded his own newspaper Tasvir-i Efkâr ("Enlightenment of the Thoughts"), the first truly influential newspaper in the Ottoman Empire. He temporarily joined the Young Ottomans in 1865 and had to go into exile in Paris. He transferred the management of the Tasvir-i Efkâr to his employee Namık Kemal. Şinasi returned to Istanbul only shortly before his death.
He is regarded as a literary pioneer, not only because he produced the first collection of Turkish proverbs, but because he also wrote the first Ottoman play. Before his death he was working on a Turkish dictionary, but he did not finish it.
Şinasi is considered the founder of the modern school of Ottoman literature and was probably the first Turkish writer to feel the need for directing literary expression to the masses. To accomplish this he advocated the reform of Turkish verse forms (based largely on imitation of French models, which he carefully studied and observed) and the adoption of a pure Turkish devoid of Arabic and Persian vocabulary and grammatical constructions.
The works of Ibrahim Sinasi include:
* Tercüme-i Manzume (1859, Translation of poems from the French of La Fontaine, Lamartine, Gilbert and Racine)
* Şairin evlenmesi (1860, Play)
* Durub-i Emsal-i Osmaniye (1863, Proverbs)
* Müntahabat-i eş'ar (1863)
Ibrahim Sinasi see Sinasi, Ibrahim
Ibrahim Sinasi Efendi see Sinasi, Ibrahim
Sinasi, Ibrahim (Ibrahim Sinasi Efendi) (b. 1826, Constantinople [now Istanbul] - d. September 13, 1871, Constantinople). Turkish journalist who was one of the more enigmatic figures of Turkish intellectual history. Despite his role as the founding father of modern Turkish journalism and his basic contributions to the rise of a Turkish critique of society, information about his life is insufficient to paint a portrait of him as an intellectual.
Sinasi began his career in government during the first years of the Tanzimat, the era of reforms and modernization initiated by the Gulhane Rescript of 1839. Encouraged by a patron of modernization in the Ottoman Empire, he was sent as a government funded student to Europe in 1849. He remained in France until 1853 and is known to have been acquainted with such personalities as Alphonse de Lamartine. After his return, he was appointed to the Educational Committee, which was engaged in redrawing Ottoman educational institutions.
Although quite cautious in his intellectual stance, he seems to have antagonized higher officials and was dismissed. Reinstated and dismissed once more in 1863, he eventually went into self-exile in Paris, where he devoted himself to the study of literature and linguistics. He returned permanently to Istanbul in 1870, where he lived as a recluse in some financial need.
Sinasi’s major contribution to Ottoman/Turkish intellectual life was the journal Tasvir-i efkar (Interpreter of Ideas, founded in 1862). This was not the first newspaper in the Ottoman Empire. An Englishman named Churchill had published an earlier gazette, and in 1861 Sinasi and his friend Agah Efendi had jointly published the Terceuman-i ahval (Interpreter of Events). However, Tasvir-i efkar was the first newspaper that (though careful in its approach) expressed a critique of the state of Ottoman government and society in the modern media. Sinasi’s second dismissal from his employment in the central government was due to his timid libertarianism: “mentioning matters of state too often” was the cause of his downfall. An article by Sinasi explaining the principle of “no taxation without representation” appeared in the Tasvir-i efkar the day before the order for his dismissal was drafted and may have ben the proximate cause of it.
Sinasi is unanimously considered by historians of Turkish intellectual history to be the first advocate of “Europeanization” in the Ottoman Empire, a somewhat different project than that of “modernization” voiced before him. His impact, however, stems from his development of a medium that expressed private views about the state of the empire. Until Sinasi and his use of journalism as a medium for influencing -- and, in a way, creating -- public opinion, schemes of modernization had been the result of official concern with reform. Sinasi represents a new trend in which government officials concerned with the fate of the empire began to form an intelligentsia often contradicting positions adopted by their superiors. In that sense, he may be seen as having laid the groundwork for the Young Ottomans.
Another of Sinasi’s important contributions may be described as “encyclopedism,” or the attempt to inform his readers of the new methods and the new branches of knowledge that flourished in Europe in his time. Natural law, the historical method, the history of pre Ottoman Turkey, and Buffon’s Histoire naturelle were some of the ideas that he took up in the pages of Tasvir-i efkar. In one of his most celebrated poems Sinasi praised the author of the Gulhane Rescript, Mustafa Resid Pasa (Mustafa Reshid Pasha), for having brought “the European climate of opinion” to Turkey, and for having reminded the ruler of his responsibilities. In another, the achievements of a later grand vizier were compared to those of Plato and Newton.
Sinasi’s mention in the preface of Tercuman-i ahral that he was using a language directed to “the people in general” also represents an important watershed. By the nineteenth century Ottoman Turkish as the language of officials had become a complex and flowery idiom difficult for the majority of the population, who used a vernacular called “rough Turkish.” One of Sinasi’s aims was to transcend officialese. He thus began the trend described by Grand Vizier Said Pasa, himself a writer, as “journalistic Turkish.” This trend was further promoted by the Young Ottomans. The celebrated article by Ziya Pasa, “Siir ve Insa’” (Poetry and Prose), is a good example of the further developments that much later, in the 1930s, took a more radical turn toward the “purification” of Turkish by the removal of words with Arabic and Persian roots.
İbrahim Şinasi was one of the primary authors of the Tanzimat. Sinasi began his career as an officer in the Ottoman administration, where he learned Arabic, Persian and French. From 1849 to 1853 he studied under the direction of Mustafa Reşid Pasha in Paris, where he came into contact with French literature and French intellectuals. Among other things, he was a member of the Société Asiatique.
During his time in Paris, he translated several works from French into Turkish.
From 1860 he was co-editor of the newspaper Tercüman-i ahvâl ("Interpreter of Circumstances"). In 1862, he founded his own newspaper Tasvir-i Efkâr ("Enlightenment of the Thoughts"), the first truly influential newspaper in the Ottoman Empire. He temporarily joined the Young Ottomans in 1865 and had to go into exile in Paris. He transferred the management of the Tasvir-i Efkâr to his employee Namık Kemal. Şinasi returned to Istanbul only shortly before his death.
He is regarded as a literary pioneer, not only because he produced the first collection of Turkish proverbs, but because he also wrote the first Ottoman play. Before his death he was working on a Turkish dictionary, but he did not finish it.
Şinasi is considered the founder of the modern school of Ottoman literature and was probably the first Turkish writer to feel the need for directing literary expression to the masses. To accomplish this he advocated the reform of Turkish verse forms (based largely on imitation of French models, which he carefully studied and observed) and the adoption of a pure Turkish devoid of Arabic and Persian vocabulary and grammatical constructions.
The works of Ibrahim Sinasi include:
* Tercüme-i Manzume (1859, Translation of poems from the French of La Fontaine, Lamartine, Gilbert and Racine)
* Şairin evlenmesi (1860, Play)
* Durub-i Emsal-i Osmaniye (1863, Proverbs)
* Müntahabat-i eş'ar (1863)
Ibrahim Sinasi see Sinasi, Ibrahim
Ibrahim Sinasi Efendi see Sinasi, Ibrahim
Sinbad the Magean
Sinbad the Magean (Sunpadh) (Sinbad the Magus) (d. 754). Leader of an eighth century Persian revolt.
Sinbad the Magus was a Persian cleric from a small village called Āhan near Nishapur who incited an uprising against the Abbasid Caliphate in the 8th century.
Sinbad was a friend and confidant of the Persian general Abu Muslim Khorasani, who had begun the Abbasid revolt in 747. Nizam al-Mulk states in his Siyāsatnāma that Abu Muslim had delegated his authority and coffers in Rayy to Sinbad prior to journeying to Baghdad, where he was eventually murdered by order of the second Abbasid Caliph al-Mansur.
Following the betrayal and subsequent death of the general in 754, the enraged Sinbad swore to march on Mecca and destroy the Kaaba. Sinbad further preached that "Abu Muslim has not died, and when Mansur meant to slay him, he chanted God's great name, turned into a white dove and flew away. Now he is standing with Mahdi and Mazdak in a castle of copper and they shall emerge by and by." His doctrine received wide support among Persian Shi'i Muslims, Zoroastrians and Mazdakites and revolts occurred in Rayy, Herat and Sistan. Within only 70 days, Sinbad's forces were, however, defeated by one of Caliph al-Mansur's generals, Juhar ibn Murad, and the cleric was captured and slain.
Sinbad also preached a syncretism melding Islam and Zoroastrianism. In combination with his unusual and heretical vow to advance towards Hijaz and raze the Kaaba, this led to the belief that he was in fact a Zoroastrian, rather than a Muslim.
Sinbad the Magean (Sunpadh) (Sinbad the Magus) (d. 754). Leader of an eighth century Persian revolt.
Sinbad the Magus was a Persian cleric from a small village called Āhan near Nishapur who incited an uprising against the Abbasid Caliphate in the 8th century.
Sinbad was a friend and confidant of the Persian general Abu Muslim Khorasani, who had begun the Abbasid revolt in 747. Nizam al-Mulk states in his Siyāsatnāma that Abu Muslim had delegated his authority and coffers in Rayy to Sinbad prior to journeying to Baghdad, where he was eventually murdered by order of the second Abbasid Caliph al-Mansur.
Following the betrayal and subsequent death of the general in 754, the enraged Sinbad swore to march on Mecca and destroy the Kaaba. Sinbad further preached that "Abu Muslim has not died, and when Mansur meant to slay him, he chanted God's great name, turned into a white dove and flew away. Now he is standing with Mahdi and Mazdak in a castle of copper and they shall emerge by and by." His doctrine received wide support among Persian Shi'i Muslims, Zoroastrians and Mazdakites and revolts occurred in Rayy, Herat and Sistan. Within only 70 days, Sinbad's forces were, however, defeated by one of Caliph al-Mansur's generals, Juhar ibn Murad, and the cleric was captured and slain.
Sinbad also preached a syncretism melding Islam and Zoroastrianism. In combination with his unusual and heretical vow to advance towards Hijaz and raze the Kaaba, this led to the belief that he was in fact a Zoroastrian, rather than a Muslim.
Sindhis
Sindhis. As the mighty Indus, one of the major rivers of the world, winds its way southward from the ranges of the high Himalayas to the Arabian Sea, it leaves Pakistan’s Punjab Province and at its northern end enters the province of Sind, homeland for more than eleven million Sindhis. The Indus, the ancient name of which -- Sindhu -- is where the name “Sind” comes from, flows south, dividing the province into two almost equal expanses of fertile land, upon which most of the inhabitants depend for their livelihood. Approximately ninety percent of the Sindhis in Pakistan are Muslim.
There are two other ethnic strains in the Sindhi Muslim population. Some Sindhi Muslims trace their origins to Arab conquerors who came to India in 711, the first to bring Islam to the subcontinent, and to subsequent waves of invaders including Persians, Turks, Mughals, and Pushtun (Pathans). By and large these groups have long since mingled and intermarried with the local population and thus are distinguishable except for some, such as the Sayyid families, who claim direct descent from the Prophet Muhammad, and the Pushtun families of northwestern Sind.
The other strain is that of the Baluch, who, attracted by the fertile land of the Indus Valley, have been coming for 500 years from neighboring Baluchistan. Those who settled on the west bank of the Indus, such as the Chandios, the Jamalis and the Khosos, have managed to keep their Baluch identity, but those who settled on the east bank, such as the Jatois and the Talpurs, have largely been “Sindhi-ized” and now speak Sindhi as a mother tongue.
The majority of Sindhi Muslims are Sunni and subscribe to the Hanafi school of jurisprudence. This is despite the fact that for centuries Sind has been exposed to, and its inhabitants have become followers of, other Islamic sects and Sufi orders. At one time, the Shi‘a sect of Isma‘ilis held sway over Sind (900-1200), and following their political eclipse, various Sufi orders made inroads through missionary activities. The Suhrawardi, the Qadiri and the Naqshbandi reached their apex in Sind in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, but their influence survives today, particularly that of the Suhrawardi in the veneration of Lal Shabaz Qalander of Sehwan, one of the most revered saints of Sind today, and of the Qadiri, to whom the influential Lakiari and Matiari Sayyids pay great respect.
Sindhis. As the mighty Indus, one of the major rivers of the world, winds its way southward from the ranges of the high Himalayas to the Arabian Sea, it leaves Pakistan’s Punjab Province and at its northern end enters the province of Sind, homeland for more than eleven million Sindhis. The Indus, the ancient name of which -- Sindhu -- is where the name “Sind” comes from, flows south, dividing the province into two almost equal expanses of fertile land, upon which most of the inhabitants depend for their livelihood. Approximately ninety percent of the Sindhis in Pakistan are Muslim.
There are two other ethnic strains in the Sindhi Muslim population. Some Sindhi Muslims trace their origins to Arab conquerors who came to India in 711, the first to bring Islam to the subcontinent, and to subsequent waves of invaders including Persians, Turks, Mughals, and Pushtun (Pathans). By and large these groups have long since mingled and intermarried with the local population and thus are distinguishable except for some, such as the Sayyid families, who claim direct descent from the Prophet Muhammad, and the Pushtun families of northwestern Sind.
The other strain is that of the Baluch, who, attracted by the fertile land of the Indus Valley, have been coming for 500 years from neighboring Baluchistan. Those who settled on the west bank of the Indus, such as the Chandios, the Jamalis and the Khosos, have managed to keep their Baluch identity, but those who settled on the east bank, such as the Jatois and the Talpurs, have largely been “Sindhi-ized” and now speak Sindhi as a mother tongue.
The majority of Sindhi Muslims are Sunni and subscribe to the Hanafi school of jurisprudence. This is despite the fact that for centuries Sind has been exposed to, and its inhabitants have become followers of, other Islamic sects and Sufi orders. At one time, the Shi‘a sect of Isma‘ilis held sway over Sind (900-1200), and following their political eclipse, various Sufi orders made inroads through missionary activities. The Suhrawardi, the Qadiri and the Naqshbandi reached their apex in Sind in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, but their influence survives today, particularly that of the Suhrawardi in the veneration of Lal Shabaz Qalander of Sehwan, one of the most revered saints of Sind today, and of the Qadiri, to whom the influential Lakiari and Matiari Sayyids pay great respect.
Sinyar
Sinyar. The Sinyar of Chad and Sudan live along the lower reaches and confluence of three seasonal rivers: the Wadi Azum, Wadi Kajaand Wadi Salih. They are bounded to the north by the Masalit, to the west by the Daju-Sila, to the east by the Fur and to the south by a congeries of small ethnic groups with whom contact is minimal -- the Fongoro, Kujarge, Fur-Dalinga and Daju-Galfige.
Sinyar oral traditions claim Arab origin for the founding father of the group, and Egypt is mentioned as his place of origin. Kinship and co-residence with the Berti of northern Darfur Province is sometimes claimed. Apparently they broke with the Arabs and migrated to their present habitat and now claim they lost their knowledge of the Arabic language because they intermarried with the women of the pagan tribe they found and defeated in battle. Remnants of this original population of Dar Sinyar are alleged to live in the northeastern part of the Central African Republic. They are the Kara, Binga and the Gula-Mamoun, indeed linguistically akin to the Sinyar language, which is Central Sudanic, Sara-Bongo-Bagirmi branch.
The historical self-portrait is not dissimilar to that of other ethnic groups in the region, which also claim Arab, even Abbasid or Quraysh descent and also use the excuse of intermarriage with pagan slave women to explain their present linguistic and cultural identity. Of immediate relevance to the Sinyar is the fact that non-Sinyar flatly reject this historical self-image and instead designate the Sinyar as former non-Muslim slaves, fertit, of the sultanates of Dar Fur and Dar Sila. Linguistically, the Sinyar are undoubtedly fertit, along with the Kreish, Kara, Yulu and other Sara-Bongo-Bagirmi-speaking populations which in the past constituted the slave reservoirs for the old sultanates. In Sudan, the Sinyar are northernmost group speaking a fertit language. In Chad, it is the Barma, who themselves established a powerful sultanate in Bagirmi in the nineteenth century. However, there is no historical evidence that the Sinyar have collectively been considered a slave tribe sucdh as the Kreish or Kara. Of course, until as late as the second decade of the twentieth century, the Sinyar were individually enslavable once they moved into the territory of another polity or after losing in battle against a superior enemy, but this was the fate also reserved for the neighboring Fur, Daju and Masalit at the time.
From time immemorial, the Sinyar have been organized as a quasi-independent, tribute-paying sultantate headed by a dynasty of petty sultans. Until 1863, they paid tribute to the Keira Sultanate of Dar Fur, since then until this century to the Daju Sultanate of Dar Sila, which was initially also subject to Dar Fur. The last two decades of the nineteenth century were turbulent in the region. The area was invaded by the Turco-Egyptian army in 1879, by the infamous slaver Babikr Zibeir in 1881, by Sultan Abu Risha of Dar Sila in 1882, and a few years later by Mahdist units led by Osma Jano. In contrast to the Fongoro, the Sinyar managed to maintain their sultanate intact, although not without bloodshed, by paying tribute to various overlords at the same time.
The British and the French fixed the Chad-Sudan border on the eastern boundary of the sultanate of Wadai in Chad, which meant that Dar Sinyar, Dar Fongoro and Dar Sila, as ancient vassals of Dar Fur, would become part of the British sphere. Subsequent developments in the region, especially two disastrous military campaigns of the French against the sultanate of Dar Masalit in 1910, led to a boder settlement in 1924 in which Dar Sila became part of Chad and in which the Masalit, the Sinyar and the Fongoro were to find themselves divided by the new international frontier.
In 1928, a dynastic conflict of succession led to the exile of part of the Chadian Sinyar to Sudan. Their leader became chief of the southernmost part of Dar Masalit Native Administration, and in 1954 he was succeeded by his son. Over the years, many Chadian Sinyar have settled on Sudanese soil because of better economic opportunities and the progressive breakdown of services and security in Chad.
In the course of time during which the Sinyar constituted a semi-autonomous buffer state of the Keira sultanate of Dar Fur, they culturally became Fur with admixtures of Daju, Masalit and above all Arab cultures. Today the Sinyar have no kinship terms, songs, dances and stories, or musical instruments such as a special type of drum, other than those adopted from the Fur. Most Sinyar are fluent in Sinyar, Fur and Arabic. Quite a few know Daju or Masalit as well. Thus in contrast to the Fongoro, who have also become Fur culturally, the Sinyar have preserved their language.
Sinyar. The Sinyar of Chad and Sudan live along the lower reaches and confluence of three seasonal rivers: the Wadi Azum, Wadi Kajaand Wadi Salih. They are bounded to the north by the Masalit, to the west by the Daju-Sila, to the east by the Fur and to the south by a congeries of small ethnic groups with whom contact is minimal -- the Fongoro, Kujarge, Fur-Dalinga and Daju-Galfige.
Sinyar oral traditions claim Arab origin for the founding father of the group, and Egypt is mentioned as his place of origin. Kinship and co-residence with the Berti of northern Darfur Province is sometimes claimed. Apparently they broke with the Arabs and migrated to their present habitat and now claim they lost their knowledge of the Arabic language because they intermarried with the women of the pagan tribe they found and defeated in battle. Remnants of this original population of Dar Sinyar are alleged to live in the northeastern part of the Central African Republic. They are the Kara, Binga and the Gula-Mamoun, indeed linguistically akin to the Sinyar language, which is Central Sudanic, Sara-Bongo-Bagirmi branch.
The historical self-portrait is not dissimilar to that of other ethnic groups in the region, which also claim Arab, even Abbasid or Quraysh descent and also use the excuse of intermarriage with pagan slave women to explain their present linguistic and cultural identity. Of immediate relevance to the Sinyar is the fact that non-Sinyar flatly reject this historical self-image and instead designate the Sinyar as former non-Muslim slaves, fertit, of the sultanates of Dar Fur and Dar Sila. Linguistically, the Sinyar are undoubtedly fertit, along with the Kreish, Kara, Yulu and other Sara-Bongo-Bagirmi-speaking populations which in the past constituted the slave reservoirs for the old sultanates. In Sudan, the Sinyar are northernmost group speaking a fertit language. In Chad, it is the Barma, who themselves established a powerful sultanate in Bagirmi in the nineteenth century. However, there is no historical evidence that the Sinyar have collectively been considered a slave tribe sucdh as the Kreish or Kara. Of course, until as late as the second decade of the twentieth century, the Sinyar were individually enslavable once they moved into the territory of another polity or after losing in battle against a superior enemy, but this was the fate also reserved for the neighboring Fur, Daju and Masalit at the time.
From time immemorial, the Sinyar have been organized as a quasi-independent, tribute-paying sultantate headed by a dynasty of petty sultans. Until 1863, they paid tribute to the Keira Sultanate of Dar Fur, since then until this century to the Daju Sultanate of Dar Sila, which was initially also subject to Dar Fur. The last two decades of the nineteenth century were turbulent in the region. The area was invaded by the Turco-Egyptian army in 1879, by the infamous slaver Babikr Zibeir in 1881, by Sultan Abu Risha of Dar Sila in 1882, and a few years later by Mahdist units led by Osma Jano. In contrast to the Fongoro, the Sinyar managed to maintain their sultanate intact, although not without bloodshed, by paying tribute to various overlords at the same time.
The British and the French fixed the Chad-Sudan border on the eastern boundary of the sultanate of Wadai in Chad, which meant that Dar Sinyar, Dar Fongoro and Dar Sila, as ancient vassals of Dar Fur, would become part of the British sphere. Subsequent developments in the region, especially two disastrous military campaigns of the French against the sultanate of Dar Masalit in 1910, led to a boder settlement in 1924 in which Dar Sila became part of Chad and in which the Masalit, the Sinyar and the Fongoro were to find themselves divided by the new international frontier.
In 1928, a dynastic conflict of succession led to the exile of part of the Chadian Sinyar to Sudan. Their leader became chief of the southernmost part of Dar Masalit Native Administration, and in 1954 he was succeeded by his son. Over the years, many Chadian Sinyar have settled on Sudanese soil because of better economic opportunities and the progressive breakdown of services and security in Chad.
In the course of time during which the Sinyar constituted a semi-autonomous buffer state of the Keira sultanate of Dar Fur, they culturally became Fur with admixtures of Daju, Masalit and above all Arab cultures. Today the Sinyar have no kinship terms, songs, dances and stories, or musical instruments such as a special type of drum, other than those adopted from the Fur. Most Sinyar are fluent in Sinyar, Fur and Arabic. Quite a few know Daju or Masalit as well. Thus in contrast to the Fongoro, who have also become Fur culturally, the Sinyar have preserved their language.
Sipahi
Sipahi (Spahi) (Sepahi) (Spakh) (Spahia) (Spahiu). Name of several Ottoman cavalry corps. The Ottoman horse soldier was typically supported by timar. In India, the term sipahi became synonymous with the word sepoy.
Sipahi were feudal cavalrymen in the Ottoman Empire which represented the most important providers for the Ottoman army until the middle of the 16th century.
A sipahi was a person who had been granted a fief, called timar, ziamet or hass. Within the fief, the sipahi could collect all the income in return for military service. The peasants living in the timar were serfs and attached to the land.
Timar was the smallest land owned by a sipahi, and would give an annual revenue of no more than 10,000 akce, which would be two to four times what a teacher earned. Ziamet yielded up to 100,000 akce, and were owned by sipahiyin with officer’s rank. Hass gave revenues of more than 100,000 akce and were only for the highest ranking in the military.
A timar sipahi were obliged to provide the army with up to five soldiers, a ziamet with up to 20, and a hass with far more than 20. Many of the sipahiyin were actual slaves under the sultan, as collected through the devshirme system. Through this relationship, the sultan could hope for loyalty and cooperation.
From the middle of the sixteenth century, the Janissaries had started to be the most important part of the army. But still the sipahi represented an important factor in the empire’s economy and politics.
As late as in the 17th century, the sipahiyin were, together with their enemies and the Janissaries, the actual rulers in in the early years of Sultan Murad IV's reign.
The sipahis were feudal cavalryman of the Ottoman Empire whose status resembled that of the medieval European knight. The spahi (from Persian for “cavalryman”) was holder of a fief (timar; Turkish: tımar) granted directly by the Ottoman sultan and was entitled to all of the income from it in return for military service. The peasants on the land were subsequently attached to the land and became serfs. The spahis provided the bulk of the Ottoman army until about the mid-16th century. From then on they were gradually supplanted by the Janissaries, an elite corps composed of infantrymen paid regular salaries by the sultanate. In part, this change resulted from the increased use of firearms, which made cavalry less important, and from the need to maintain a regular standing army. The spahis were completely discredited during the War of Greek independence (1821–32), and the timar system was officially abolished in 1831 by Sultan Mahmud II as part of his program to create a modern Western-style army.
Sipahi (Spahi) (Sepahi) (Spakh) (Spahia) (Spahiu). Name of several Ottoman cavalry corps. The Ottoman horse soldier was typically supported by timar. In India, the term sipahi became synonymous with the word sepoy.
Sipahi were feudal cavalrymen in the Ottoman Empire which represented the most important providers for the Ottoman army until the middle of the 16th century.
A sipahi was a person who had been granted a fief, called timar, ziamet or hass. Within the fief, the sipahi could collect all the income in return for military service. The peasants living in the timar were serfs and attached to the land.
Timar was the smallest land owned by a sipahi, and would give an annual revenue of no more than 10,000 akce, which would be two to four times what a teacher earned. Ziamet yielded up to 100,000 akce, and were owned by sipahiyin with officer’s rank. Hass gave revenues of more than 100,000 akce and were only for the highest ranking in the military.
A timar sipahi were obliged to provide the army with up to five soldiers, a ziamet with up to 20, and a hass with far more than 20. Many of the sipahiyin were actual slaves under the sultan, as collected through the devshirme system. Through this relationship, the sultan could hope for loyalty and cooperation.
From the middle of the sixteenth century, the Janissaries had started to be the most important part of the army. But still the sipahi represented an important factor in the empire’s economy and politics.
As late as in the 17th century, the sipahiyin were, together with their enemies and the Janissaries, the actual rulers in in the early years of Sultan Murad IV's reign.
The sipahis were feudal cavalryman of the Ottoman Empire whose status resembled that of the medieval European knight. The spahi (from Persian for “cavalryman”) was holder of a fief (timar; Turkish: tımar) granted directly by the Ottoman sultan and was entitled to all of the income from it in return for military service. The peasants on the land were subsequently attached to the land and became serfs. The spahis provided the bulk of the Ottoman army until about the mid-16th century. From then on they were gradually supplanted by the Janissaries, an elite corps composed of infantrymen paid regular salaries by the sultanate. In part, this change resulted from the increased use of firearms, which made cavalry less important, and from the need to maintain a regular standing army. The spahis were completely discredited during the War of Greek independence (1821–32), and the timar system was officially abolished in 1831 by Sultan Mahmud II as part of his program to create a modern Western-style army.
Sipihr
Sipihr (d. 1878). Pen-name of the Persian historian and man of letters Mirza Muhammad Taqi. One volume of his Effacement of the Chronicles contains the official history of the Qajar dynasty up to 1851, and has been much used by later historians.
Sipihr (d. 1878). Pen-name of the Persian historian and man of letters Mirza Muhammad Taqi. One volume of his Effacement of the Chronicles contains the official history of the Qajar dynasty up to 1851, and has been much used by later historians.
Sirafi, Abu Sa‘id al-Hasan
Sirafi, Abu Sa‘id al-Hasan (Abu Sa‘id al-Hasan Sirafi) (903-978). Grammarian and Hanafi jurist from Siraf, a town on the Persian Gulf in Iran. Among other works, he wrote a commentary on The Book of Sibawayhi, a biography of grammarians of the school of Basra, and a geographical work.
Abu Sa'id al-Hasan Sirafi see Sirafi, Abu Sa‘id al-Hasan
Sirafi, Abu Sa‘id al-Hasan (Abu Sa‘id al-Hasan Sirafi) (903-978). Grammarian and Hanafi jurist from Siraf, a town on the Persian Gulf in Iran. Among other works, he wrote a commentary on The Book of Sibawayhi, a biography of grammarians of the school of Basra, and a geographical work.
Abu Sa'id al-Hasan Sirafi see Sirafi, Abu Sa‘id al-Hasan
Siraj ud-Daulah
Siraj ud-Daulah (Mîrzâ Muhammad Sirâj-ud-Daulah) (1733 - July 2, 1757). Successor to Alivardi Khan, his maternal grandfather, as nawab of Bengal on April 15, 1756. The East India Company desired his favor and protection, which Siraj promised. From the very beginning Siraj was beset with conspiracy from close relatives and high officials of the domain -- a circumstance that did not improve his weak character. Jean Law, chief of the French factory at Kasimbazar, observed that the English gave Siraj reasons for complaint against them by building “strong fortifications” and digging a “large ditch” in the nawab’s domain contrary to established laws of the country, abusing the privilege of free passage for the company’s trade, and giving shelter to the nawab’s recalcitrant subjects.
A determined nawab decided to punish the English for disgracefully expelling his messenger from Calcutta. He captured Calcutta on June 20, 1756. It was at this time that the incident of the Black Hole took place. The English retreated to a riverside shelter nearby. The nawab, however, made no attempt to consolidate his victory. Calcutta was easily recovered by Colonel Robert Clive and Admiral Watson on January 2, 1757. The nawab accepted British terms in the Treaty of Alinagar on February 9, 1757. In the next months, a series of events began that led to the Battle of Plassey, where Siraj ud-Daulah met his death.
Mîrzâ Muhammad Sirâj-ud-Daulah, more commonly known as Siraj ud-Daulah, was the last independent Nawab of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. The end of his reign marks the start of British East India Company rule over Bengal and later almost all of South Asia. He was also called "Sir Roger Dowlett" by many of the British who were unable to pronounce his name correctly in Hindustani.
Siraj's father Zain Uddin was the ruler of Bihar and his mother Amina Begum was the youngest daughter of Nawab Ali Vardi Khan. Since Ali Vardi had no son, Siraj, as his grandson, became very close to him and from his childhood he was seen by many as the successor to the throne of Murshidabad. Accordingly, he was raised at the nawab's palace with all necessary education and training suitable for a future nawab. Young Siraj also accompanied Ali Vardi in his military ventures against the Marathas in 1746.
Ali Vardi Khan in 1752 officially declared his grandson Crown Prince and successor to the throne, creating no small amount of division in the family and the royal court.
Mirza Mohammad Siraj succeeded Ali Vardi Khan as the Nawab of Bengal in April 1756 at the age of 23, and took the name Siraj ud-Daulah. Siraj ud-Daulah's nomination to the nawabship aroused the jealousy and enmity of Ghaseti Begum (the eldest sister of Siraj's mother), Raja Rajballabh, Mir Jafar Ali Khan and Shawkat Jang (Siraj's cousin). Ghaseti Begam possessed huge wealth, which was the source of her influence and strength. Apprehending serious opposition from her, Siraj ud-Daulah seized her wealth from Motijheel Palace and placed her in confinement. The Nawab also gave high government positions to his favorites. Mir Mardan was appointed Bakshi (Paymaster of the army) in place of Mir Jafar. Mohanlal was elevated to the post of peshkar of his Dewan Khana and he exercised great influence in the administration. Eventually Siraj suppressed Shaukat Jang, governor of Purnia, who was killed in a clash.
Siraj ud-Daulah, as the direct political disciple of his grandfather, was aware of the global British interest in colonization and hence, resented the British politico-military presence in Bengal represented by the British East India Company. He was annoyed at the company's alleged involvement with and instigation of some members of his own court in a conspiracy to oust him. His charges against the company were mainly threefold. Firstly, that they strengthened the fortification around the Fort William without any intimation and approval; secondly, that they grossly abused the trade privileges granted to them by the Mughal rulers, which caused heavy loss of customs duties for the government; and thirdly, that they gave shelter to some of his officers, for example Krishnadas, son of Rajballav, who fled Dhaka after misappropriating government funds. Hence, when the East India Company started further enhancement of military preparedness at Fort William in Calcutta, Siraj asked them to stop. The Company did not heed his directives, so Siraj ud-Daulah retaliated and captured Kolkata from the British in June 1756. During this time, he is alleged to have put 146 British subjects in a 20 by 20 foot chamber, known as the infamous Black Hole of Calcutta. Only 23 were said to have survived the overnight ordeal. The real facts around the incident are disputed by later historians, but at that time the lurid account of this incident by one survivor – Holwell – obtained wide circulation in England and helped gain support for the East India Company's continued conquest of India.
The Battle of Plassey (or Palashi) is widely considered the turning point in the history of India, and opened the way to eventual British domination. After Siraj ud-Daulah's conquest of Calcutta, the British responded by sending fresh troops from Madras to recapture the fort and avenge the attack. A retreating Siraj ud-Daulah met the British at Plassey. Siraj ud-Daulah had to make camp 27 miles away from Murshidabad. On June 23, 1757 Siraj ud-Daulah called on Mir Jafar because he was saddened by the sudden fall of Mir Madan, who was a very dear companion in battle, to Siraj. The Nawab asked for help from Mir Jafar. Mir Jafar advised Siraj to retreat for that day. The Nawab made the blunder in giving the order to stop the war. Following his command, the soldiers of the Nawab were returning to their camps. At that time, Robert Clive attacked the soldiers with his army. At such a sudden attack, the army of Siraj became undisciplined and could think of no way to fight. All fled away in such a situation. Betrayed by a conspiracy hatched by Jagat Seth, Mir Jafar, Krishna Chandra, Umi Chand, and others, Siraj lost the battle and had to escape. He went first to Murshidabad and then to Patna by boat, but was eventually arrested by Mir Jafar's soldiers. Siraj ud-Daulah was executed on July 2, 1757 by Mohammad Ali Beg under orders from Mir Miran, son of Mir Jafar.
Siraj ud-Daulah is usually proclaimed as a freedom fighter in modern India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan for his opposition to the British annexation. As a teenager, he led a reckless life, which came to the notice of his grandfather. But keeping a promise he made to his dear grandfather on his death bed, he gave up gambling and drinking alcohol totally after becoming the nawab. He was a fierce fighter against the Marathas and the pirates of Southern Bengal as a prince during 1740s, but his forces were later totally routed by the greatly outnumbered British.
Mîrzâ Muhammad Sirâj-ud-Daulah see Siraj ud-Daulah
Sir Roger Dowlett see Siraj ud-Daulah
Dowlett, Sir Roger see Siraj ud-Daulah
Siraj ud-Daulah (Mîrzâ Muhammad Sirâj-ud-Daulah) (1733 - July 2, 1757). Successor to Alivardi Khan, his maternal grandfather, as nawab of Bengal on April 15, 1756. The East India Company desired his favor and protection, which Siraj promised. From the very beginning Siraj was beset with conspiracy from close relatives and high officials of the domain -- a circumstance that did not improve his weak character. Jean Law, chief of the French factory at Kasimbazar, observed that the English gave Siraj reasons for complaint against them by building “strong fortifications” and digging a “large ditch” in the nawab’s domain contrary to established laws of the country, abusing the privilege of free passage for the company’s trade, and giving shelter to the nawab’s recalcitrant subjects.
A determined nawab decided to punish the English for disgracefully expelling his messenger from Calcutta. He captured Calcutta on June 20, 1756. It was at this time that the incident of the Black Hole took place. The English retreated to a riverside shelter nearby. The nawab, however, made no attempt to consolidate his victory. Calcutta was easily recovered by Colonel Robert Clive and Admiral Watson on January 2, 1757. The nawab accepted British terms in the Treaty of Alinagar on February 9, 1757. In the next months, a series of events began that led to the Battle of Plassey, where Siraj ud-Daulah met his death.
Mîrzâ Muhammad Sirâj-ud-Daulah, more commonly known as Siraj ud-Daulah, was the last independent Nawab of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. The end of his reign marks the start of British East India Company rule over Bengal and later almost all of South Asia. He was also called "Sir Roger Dowlett" by many of the British who were unable to pronounce his name correctly in Hindustani.
Siraj's father Zain Uddin was the ruler of Bihar and his mother Amina Begum was the youngest daughter of Nawab Ali Vardi Khan. Since Ali Vardi had no son, Siraj, as his grandson, became very close to him and from his childhood he was seen by many as the successor to the throne of Murshidabad. Accordingly, he was raised at the nawab's palace with all necessary education and training suitable for a future nawab. Young Siraj also accompanied Ali Vardi in his military ventures against the Marathas in 1746.
Ali Vardi Khan in 1752 officially declared his grandson Crown Prince and successor to the throne, creating no small amount of division in the family and the royal court.
Mirza Mohammad Siraj succeeded Ali Vardi Khan as the Nawab of Bengal in April 1756 at the age of 23, and took the name Siraj ud-Daulah. Siraj ud-Daulah's nomination to the nawabship aroused the jealousy and enmity of Ghaseti Begum (the eldest sister of Siraj's mother), Raja Rajballabh, Mir Jafar Ali Khan and Shawkat Jang (Siraj's cousin). Ghaseti Begam possessed huge wealth, which was the source of her influence and strength. Apprehending serious opposition from her, Siraj ud-Daulah seized her wealth from Motijheel Palace and placed her in confinement. The Nawab also gave high government positions to his favorites. Mir Mardan was appointed Bakshi (Paymaster of the army) in place of Mir Jafar. Mohanlal was elevated to the post of peshkar of his Dewan Khana and he exercised great influence in the administration. Eventually Siraj suppressed Shaukat Jang, governor of Purnia, who was killed in a clash.
Siraj ud-Daulah, as the direct political disciple of his grandfather, was aware of the global British interest in colonization and hence, resented the British politico-military presence in Bengal represented by the British East India Company. He was annoyed at the company's alleged involvement with and instigation of some members of his own court in a conspiracy to oust him. His charges against the company were mainly threefold. Firstly, that they strengthened the fortification around the Fort William without any intimation and approval; secondly, that they grossly abused the trade privileges granted to them by the Mughal rulers, which caused heavy loss of customs duties for the government; and thirdly, that they gave shelter to some of his officers, for example Krishnadas, son of Rajballav, who fled Dhaka after misappropriating government funds. Hence, when the East India Company started further enhancement of military preparedness at Fort William in Calcutta, Siraj asked them to stop. The Company did not heed his directives, so Siraj ud-Daulah retaliated and captured Kolkata from the British in June 1756. During this time, he is alleged to have put 146 British subjects in a 20 by 20 foot chamber, known as the infamous Black Hole of Calcutta. Only 23 were said to have survived the overnight ordeal. The real facts around the incident are disputed by later historians, but at that time the lurid account of this incident by one survivor – Holwell – obtained wide circulation in England and helped gain support for the East India Company's continued conquest of India.
The Battle of Plassey (or Palashi) is widely considered the turning point in the history of India, and opened the way to eventual British domination. After Siraj ud-Daulah's conquest of Calcutta, the British responded by sending fresh troops from Madras to recapture the fort and avenge the attack. A retreating Siraj ud-Daulah met the British at Plassey. Siraj ud-Daulah had to make camp 27 miles away from Murshidabad. On June 23, 1757 Siraj ud-Daulah called on Mir Jafar because he was saddened by the sudden fall of Mir Madan, who was a very dear companion in battle, to Siraj. The Nawab asked for help from Mir Jafar. Mir Jafar advised Siraj to retreat for that day. The Nawab made the blunder in giving the order to stop the war. Following his command, the soldiers of the Nawab were returning to their camps. At that time, Robert Clive attacked the soldiers with his army. At such a sudden attack, the army of Siraj became undisciplined and could think of no way to fight. All fled away in such a situation. Betrayed by a conspiracy hatched by Jagat Seth, Mir Jafar, Krishna Chandra, Umi Chand, and others, Siraj lost the battle and had to escape. He went first to Murshidabad and then to Patna by boat, but was eventually arrested by Mir Jafar's soldiers. Siraj ud-Daulah was executed on July 2, 1757 by Mohammad Ali Beg under orders from Mir Miran, son of Mir Jafar.
Siraj ud-Daulah is usually proclaimed as a freedom fighter in modern India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan for his opposition to the British annexation. As a teenager, he led a reckless life, which came to the notice of his grandfather. But keeping a promise he made to his dear grandfather on his death bed, he gave up gambling and drinking alcohol totally after becoming the nawab. He was a fierce fighter against the Marathas and the pirates of Southern Bengal as a prince during 1740s, but his forces were later totally routed by the greatly outnumbered British.
Mîrzâ Muhammad Sirâj-ud-Daulah see Siraj ud-Daulah
Sir Roger Dowlett see Siraj ud-Daulah
Dowlett, Sir Roger see Siraj ud-Daulah
Sirhindi, Ahmad
Sirhindi, Ahmad (Sirhindi) (Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi) (Imām Rabbānī Shaykh Ahmad al-Farūqī al-Sirhindī) (b. 1564, Sirhind, Patiāla, India - d. 1624, Sirhind, India). Islamic philosopher who became the eminent divine and mystic of Muslim India. He was born in Sirhind (India).
Sirhindi is a Sufi saint of the Naqshbandi order who, on account of his scholarship, reformist views, and piety, came to be regarded as the “renewer of the second millennium.” His family claimed descent from Caliph Umar I. Shaikh Ahmad received his early education at his birthplace, Sirhind (in the Punjab), from his father, Shaikh Abdul Ahab, and later moved to Sialkot for further studies. The emperor Akbar invited him to Agra, where he came into contact with Abu’l Fazl and Faizi. At the age of twenty-eight, he joined the Naqshbandi order at Delhi and became a disciple of Khwaja Baqi Billah. Shaikh Ahmad soon gained great popularity and his disciples were spread over large parts of India and Central and West Asia. The three volume collection of his letters is an important source of information about his teachings and activities. It has been translated from Persian into Arabic, Turkish, and Urdu. His views raised opposition in certain quarters, leading to his imprisonment for a year at Gwalior by Jahangir.
Shaikh Ahmad criticized the religious experiments of Akbar. He rejected Ibn Arabi’s doctrine of wah-dat-ul-wujud (“unity of being”) and put forward his own theory of wahdat-ul-shuhud (“unity of vision”). He preached adherence to the laws of Islam and the traditions of the Prophet. Shaikh Ahmad was opposed to mystic music and preferred a life of sobriety to a life of ecstasy. Some of his ideas seem to have influenced Aurangzeb, who was deeply attached to the saint’s descendants. Shaikh Ahmad’s tomb at Sirhind is visited by a large number of people even today.
Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi was primarily a mystical thinker and Sufi master. His activities in reformulating major Sufi ideas led to his being given the epithet “Renewer of the Second Millennium” (Mujaddid-e-Alf-e-Thani) since the dates of his life (971-1034 A.H.) spanned the opening years of the second millennium of the Islamic calendar. According to a tradition of the Prophet Muhammad, a great Muslim leader would arise at the beginning of each Islamic century to renew the religion. In his writings, Sirhindi elaborated on the role of this “Renewer” -- this Mujaddid. Ultimately, Sirhindi became recognized as the Mujaddid and the branch of the Naqshbandi order which he founded came to be known as the Mujaddidi.
The influence of the Mujaddidi eventually spread far beyond India to the Arab Middle East, Central Asia, Turkey, and other regions, and it remains one of the most vital spiritual and occasionally political forces in the contemporary Muslim world.
Islamic scholars generally speak of two phases to Sirhindi’s career. The early phase featured training in the Islamic intellectual tradition and initiation in two major Sufi orders, Chishti and Qadiri, after which he attained a respectable position as a scholar of Islam at the court of the Mughal emperor Akbar.
The second phase of Sirhindi’s career began in 1598 C.C. in Delhi, where he met Khwaja Baqi bi’llah, a Naqshbandi Sufi master from Afghanistan who had recently come to India. Under this master, Sirhindi attained higher states of spiritual realization, which convinced him of the necessity of combining orthodox practice of the Islamic tradition with mystical experience.
Sirhindi became a prominent spiritual teacher in the Naqshbandi order and wrote extensively on matters of Islamic mysticism, theology, and his own spiritual experience. At certain points in these writings he also commented on the religious policies that he felt should be adopted by the Mughal state.
Scholars differ concerning the prominence of political opinions in Sirhindi’s thought. The most recent European and European American academic studies conclude that Sirhindi was primarily a Sufi theorist. In South Asia, however, Sirhindi’s image has gradually developed so as to portray him as an incipient Muslim nationalist who challenged the syncretistic religious tendencies of the Mughal court. Proponents of this view cite as evidence the fact that he was publicly reprimanded and even imprisoned for about a year in 1619 C.C. before being released and ultimately honored by the Mughal Emperor Jahangir. Those who emphasize the Sufi element of Sirhindi’s concerns note that Jahangir complains in his memoirs about Sirhindi’s arrogance and theories, rather than objecting to any specifically political recommendations on his part.
Following his release from prison, Sirhindi returned to Sirhind and for the rest of his life continued his literary and spiritual teaching activities. His sons, in particular, Muhammad Ma‘sum (d. 1668 C.C.), and their successors continued the Mujaddidi Sufi line and left their own collections of letters and practical Sufi manuals in the tradition of their illustrious ancestor.
The most important literary legacy of Sirhindi is undoubtedly his three volumes of collected letters, known as the Maktubat, most of which are written in Persian, although some entire letters and many phrases are written in Arabic. The 534 letters were collected and edited during his lifetime by three of his disciples under his supervision. About a third of the letters are in the form of answers to questions he was asked. About half of the letters run less than twenty lines, although a few of them are as long as twenty pages.
The tradition of writing one’s major ideas in the form of a personal letter but with a wider audience in mind is quite typical of this period of Sufism, both within and beyond South Asian Islam. Numerous collections of such letters exist. The challenge to the scholar is that the letters must be carefully sifted through, as the doctrines presented in them are not organized thematically or presented systematically.
Among the major points discussed in the Maktubat are “the unity of appearance,” practical mysticism, and the respective ranks of the prophet and the saint. Within each of these topics one may point to a humanistic factor, in the sense of affirming the purpose and significance of human activities in reforming both the inner self and outer world, which works throughout Sirhindi’s thought.
The concept of the unity of experience essentially concerns the relationship between the Creator and the Creation. One of the more intensely debated issues in Sufism in the later periods was tension between monism and dualism in mystical thought and, more generally, in the Islamic worldview. Since these Sufi philosophical doctrines were often expressed in very abstract symbols and expressions, it is difficult to explicitly characterize figures such as the Sufi philosopher Ibn ‘Arabi (d. 1240) as having been exclusively monistic. Based primarily on the thought of Ibn ‘Arabi’s successors and on the popularization of his ideas through vehicles such as mystical poetry, many Sufis came to consider that the doctrine of the “Unity of Existence” (wahdat al-wujud), which they attributed to Ibn ‘Arabi, was uncompromisingly monistic.
In response to this metaphysically monistic and ethically relativistic outlook Sirhindi propounded a complex cosmological system that detailed the relationship between God and the world in such as way as to provide a more positive existential status to the creation and human activities.
Sirhindi’s theory came to be known as the “Unity of Appearance” (wahdat al-shuhud). In formulating it, Sirhindi criticized some aspects of the “Greatest Shaikh’s” (Ibn ‘Arabi’s) teachings, but remained highly influenced by others and often cites him approvingly. Among the features of Sirhindi’s philosophical system is the idea that in the creative process the divine names are emanated from the mind of God into the world, where they must encounter their opposites in order to be fully discerned and experienced. The world, therefore, is not the same as the Divine Being, but rather has a shadowiy or adumbrated reality of its own. By positing this reality as apart from that of God, Sirhindi is able to assert a real existential status to evil, as opposed to the relativism entailed by absolute monism.
For Sirhindi, living according to the tenets and practice of orthodox Islam is a prerequisite for traveling the Sufi path of individual purification and realization. The main purpose of this path is certainty of faith rather than hidden knowledge. However, those who grasp the essence or the inner dimension of the Islamic Law (shari‘a), are at a higher level than those who simply enact the outer formal requirements.
Sirhindi continued to stress the element of sobriety of characteristic of Naqshbandi Sufis. In this context, he disapproved of mystical practices incorporating dancing, music, or trance states. He advocated the practice of silent dhikr, the calm and focused recitation of the names and attributes of God and other pious phrases. According to Sirhindi, the spiritual aspirant, under the close supervision and guidance of a Sufi master, pursues an itinerary of spiritual progress that reverses the process of the descent of the divine reality into physical manifestation.
Each person possesses a subtle body composed of ten spiritual centers knwon as the lata’if, including the “heart” and “spirit.” These spiritual centers are arranged at two levels, which correspond to the two cosmic levels: (1) The eternal, spiritual realm of God’s command (‘amr), which precedes empirical manifestation, and (2) the temporal world of physical creation (khalq).
Through specific practices of contemplation and recitations combined with the interventions of the Sufi master, the aspirant activates the energy focused in these centers in order to initiate and pursue spiritual awakening and ascent.
Another aspect of Sirhindi’s perspective on monism and dualism was his exposition of the respective states of the “Prophet” and the “Saint.”
All Muslims hold that the Prophet Muhammad was the best of creation. In mystical and Shi‘i thought, however, there tended to be an emphasis on the continuation of charismatic qualities in the world even after the death of the Prophet. The role of the saint (walaya) was increasingly elaborated on by Sufis as a kind of metaphysical template for human spiritual progress. Some Sufis had even seemed to suggest, according to Sirhindi, that the status of the saint was existentially higher than that of the Prophet since the saint was conceived of as having remained absorbed in the contemplation of the divine reality rather than descending into the turbidity of worldly matters.
Consistent with his upholding of the value and meaningfulness of human efforts, Sirhindi posited that the level of Prophecy (nubuwwa) both incorporated and transcended the saintly level of intoxication and union with the divine in order to return to the world with a sober approach and a focus on a reformist mission. Citing a hadith of the Prophet Muhammad – “My Satan has submitted” -- Sirhindi elaborated on the status of Prophet as one who fulfills a mission of transforming both himself and the world by being willing to descend deeply back into worldly existence even after having attained the highest level of mystical heights of annihilation (fana) in the divine, for, “the descent occurs proportionately to the ascent.”
What then, could be the highest state available to the Sufi, since Muhammad was the Last of the Prophets, according to Islamic belief? Today’s spiritual aspirants could pursue the state of being followers and heirs of the Prophet in order to ensure the continuity of this reformist mission in the world.
Sirhindi became a prominent spiritual teacher in the Naqshbandi order and wrote extensively on matters of Islamic mysticism, theology, and his own spiritual experience. At certain points in these writings he also commented on the religious policies that he felt should be adopted by the Mughal state.
Scholars differ concerning the prominence of political opinions in Sirhindi’s thought. The most recent Western academic studies, based on the content of Sirhindi’s writings and the response of his contemporaries and successors to them, conclude that he was primarily a Sufi theorist. In South Asia, however, his image has gradually developed so as to portray him as an incipient Muslim nationalist who challenged the syncretistic religious tendencies of the Mughal court. Proponents of this view cite as evidence the fact that he was publicly reprimanded and even imprisoned for about a year in 1619 before being released and ultimately honored by the emperor Jahangir. Those who emphasize the Sufi element of Sirhindi’s concerns note that Jahangir complains in his memoirs about Sirhindi’s arrogance and theories, rather than objecting to any specifically political recommendations on his part.
An interesting and controversial aspect of Sirhindi’s teaching was his idea of his own special mission. Although alluded to in a fairly esoteric fashion in his works, this stimulated controversy and even some condemnations for heresy among his contemporaries. In an esoteric reference in his work, Mabda’-o-Ma‘ad, Sirhindi claims that a new age has been initiated with the coming of the second Islamic millennium in which the cosmological state known as the “Reality of Muhammad” would unite with that of the “Reality of the Ka’ba.” A new composite higher state known as the “Reality of Ahmad” would be the result, ushering in a new period of fulfillment and spiritual progress for Muslims. This is apparently a thinly veiled reference to his own name, Ahmad. Further, using number mysticism, he spoke of the individual instantiation of the “Reality of Muhammad” in the form of the historical Prophet as having been twofold, spiritual and human. The balance between the human and the spiritual sides of the Prophet had, over time, become disturbed in favor of the spiritual dimension, with consequent detrimental effects on the Muslim community’s affairs in the world. He claimed that in the Second Millennium, following the lead of the “Renewer” (Mujaddid), the “Perfections of Prophecy” would be restored through the efforts of the heirs and followers of the Prophet.
Sirhindi's more extravagant, almost messianic claims were not entirely alien to the history of Islamic mystical thought, and thus Sirhindi’s statements, while clearly controversial, did not result in his being universally condemned for heresy during his lifetime. Over time the image of Sirhindi as a heroic reformer and advocate of uncompromising adherence to Islam became increasingly evocative for the Muslims of India and Pakistan. One can understand the appeal of Sirhindi’s more activist, world affirming outlook to Muslim reformers who partially blame mystically inspired quietism for the decline of Muslim power and influence in the world in later centuries.
Sirhindi see Sirhindi, Ahmad
Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi see Sirhindi, Ahmad
Imām Rabbānī Shaykh Ahmad al-Farūqī al-Sirhindī see Sirhindi, Ahmad
Sirhindi, Ahmad (Sirhindi) (Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi) (Imām Rabbānī Shaykh Ahmad al-Farūqī al-Sirhindī) (b. 1564, Sirhind, Patiāla, India - d. 1624, Sirhind, India). Islamic philosopher who became the eminent divine and mystic of Muslim India. He was born in Sirhind (India).
Sirhindi is a Sufi saint of the Naqshbandi order who, on account of his scholarship, reformist views, and piety, came to be regarded as the “renewer of the second millennium.” His family claimed descent from Caliph Umar I. Shaikh Ahmad received his early education at his birthplace, Sirhind (in the Punjab), from his father, Shaikh Abdul Ahab, and later moved to Sialkot for further studies. The emperor Akbar invited him to Agra, where he came into contact with Abu’l Fazl and Faizi. At the age of twenty-eight, he joined the Naqshbandi order at Delhi and became a disciple of Khwaja Baqi Billah. Shaikh Ahmad soon gained great popularity and his disciples were spread over large parts of India and Central and West Asia. The three volume collection of his letters is an important source of information about his teachings and activities. It has been translated from Persian into Arabic, Turkish, and Urdu. His views raised opposition in certain quarters, leading to his imprisonment for a year at Gwalior by Jahangir.
Shaikh Ahmad criticized the religious experiments of Akbar. He rejected Ibn Arabi’s doctrine of wah-dat-ul-wujud (“unity of being”) and put forward his own theory of wahdat-ul-shuhud (“unity of vision”). He preached adherence to the laws of Islam and the traditions of the Prophet. Shaikh Ahmad was opposed to mystic music and preferred a life of sobriety to a life of ecstasy. Some of his ideas seem to have influenced Aurangzeb, who was deeply attached to the saint’s descendants. Shaikh Ahmad’s tomb at Sirhind is visited by a large number of people even today.
Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi was primarily a mystical thinker and Sufi master. His activities in reformulating major Sufi ideas led to his being given the epithet “Renewer of the Second Millennium” (Mujaddid-e-Alf-e-Thani) since the dates of his life (971-1034 A.H.) spanned the opening years of the second millennium of the Islamic calendar. According to a tradition of the Prophet Muhammad, a great Muslim leader would arise at the beginning of each Islamic century to renew the religion. In his writings, Sirhindi elaborated on the role of this “Renewer” -- this Mujaddid. Ultimately, Sirhindi became recognized as the Mujaddid and the branch of the Naqshbandi order which he founded came to be known as the Mujaddidi.
The influence of the Mujaddidi eventually spread far beyond India to the Arab Middle East, Central Asia, Turkey, and other regions, and it remains one of the most vital spiritual and occasionally political forces in the contemporary Muslim world.
Islamic scholars generally speak of two phases to Sirhindi’s career. The early phase featured training in the Islamic intellectual tradition and initiation in two major Sufi orders, Chishti and Qadiri, after which he attained a respectable position as a scholar of Islam at the court of the Mughal emperor Akbar.
The second phase of Sirhindi’s career began in 1598 C.C. in Delhi, where he met Khwaja Baqi bi’llah, a Naqshbandi Sufi master from Afghanistan who had recently come to India. Under this master, Sirhindi attained higher states of spiritual realization, which convinced him of the necessity of combining orthodox practice of the Islamic tradition with mystical experience.
Sirhindi became a prominent spiritual teacher in the Naqshbandi order and wrote extensively on matters of Islamic mysticism, theology, and his own spiritual experience. At certain points in these writings he also commented on the religious policies that he felt should be adopted by the Mughal state.
Scholars differ concerning the prominence of political opinions in Sirhindi’s thought. The most recent European and European American academic studies conclude that Sirhindi was primarily a Sufi theorist. In South Asia, however, Sirhindi’s image has gradually developed so as to portray him as an incipient Muslim nationalist who challenged the syncretistic religious tendencies of the Mughal court. Proponents of this view cite as evidence the fact that he was publicly reprimanded and even imprisoned for about a year in 1619 C.C. before being released and ultimately honored by the Mughal Emperor Jahangir. Those who emphasize the Sufi element of Sirhindi’s concerns note that Jahangir complains in his memoirs about Sirhindi’s arrogance and theories, rather than objecting to any specifically political recommendations on his part.
Following his release from prison, Sirhindi returned to Sirhind and for the rest of his life continued his literary and spiritual teaching activities. His sons, in particular, Muhammad Ma‘sum (d. 1668 C.C.), and their successors continued the Mujaddidi Sufi line and left their own collections of letters and practical Sufi manuals in the tradition of their illustrious ancestor.
The most important literary legacy of Sirhindi is undoubtedly his three volumes of collected letters, known as the Maktubat, most of which are written in Persian, although some entire letters and many phrases are written in Arabic. The 534 letters were collected and edited during his lifetime by three of his disciples under his supervision. About a third of the letters are in the form of answers to questions he was asked. About half of the letters run less than twenty lines, although a few of them are as long as twenty pages.
The tradition of writing one’s major ideas in the form of a personal letter but with a wider audience in mind is quite typical of this period of Sufism, both within and beyond South Asian Islam. Numerous collections of such letters exist. The challenge to the scholar is that the letters must be carefully sifted through, as the doctrines presented in them are not organized thematically or presented systematically.
Among the major points discussed in the Maktubat are “the unity of appearance,” practical mysticism, and the respective ranks of the prophet and the saint. Within each of these topics one may point to a humanistic factor, in the sense of affirming the purpose and significance of human activities in reforming both the inner self and outer world, which works throughout Sirhindi’s thought.
The concept of the unity of experience essentially concerns the relationship between the Creator and the Creation. One of the more intensely debated issues in Sufism in the later periods was tension between monism and dualism in mystical thought and, more generally, in the Islamic worldview. Since these Sufi philosophical doctrines were often expressed in very abstract symbols and expressions, it is difficult to explicitly characterize figures such as the Sufi philosopher Ibn ‘Arabi (d. 1240) as having been exclusively monistic. Based primarily on the thought of Ibn ‘Arabi’s successors and on the popularization of his ideas through vehicles such as mystical poetry, many Sufis came to consider that the doctrine of the “Unity of Existence” (wahdat al-wujud), which they attributed to Ibn ‘Arabi, was uncompromisingly monistic.
In response to this metaphysically monistic and ethically relativistic outlook Sirhindi propounded a complex cosmological system that detailed the relationship between God and the world in such as way as to provide a more positive existential status to the creation and human activities.
Sirhindi’s theory came to be known as the “Unity of Appearance” (wahdat al-shuhud). In formulating it, Sirhindi criticized some aspects of the “Greatest Shaikh’s” (Ibn ‘Arabi’s) teachings, but remained highly influenced by others and often cites him approvingly. Among the features of Sirhindi’s philosophical system is the idea that in the creative process the divine names are emanated from the mind of God into the world, where they must encounter their opposites in order to be fully discerned and experienced. The world, therefore, is not the same as the Divine Being, but rather has a shadowiy or adumbrated reality of its own. By positing this reality as apart from that of God, Sirhindi is able to assert a real existential status to evil, as opposed to the relativism entailed by absolute monism.
For Sirhindi, living according to the tenets and practice of orthodox Islam is a prerequisite for traveling the Sufi path of individual purification and realization. The main purpose of this path is certainty of faith rather than hidden knowledge. However, those who grasp the essence or the inner dimension of the Islamic Law (shari‘a), are at a higher level than those who simply enact the outer formal requirements.
Sirhindi continued to stress the element of sobriety of characteristic of Naqshbandi Sufis. In this context, he disapproved of mystical practices incorporating dancing, music, or trance states. He advocated the practice of silent dhikr, the calm and focused recitation of the names and attributes of God and other pious phrases. According to Sirhindi, the spiritual aspirant, under the close supervision and guidance of a Sufi master, pursues an itinerary of spiritual progress that reverses the process of the descent of the divine reality into physical manifestation.
Each person possesses a subtle body composed of ten spiritual centers knwon as the lata’if, including the “heart” and “spirit.” These spiritual centers are arranged at two levels, which correspond to the two cosmic levels: (1) The eternal, spiritual realm of God’s command (‘amr), which precedes empirical manifestation, and (2) the temporal world of physical creation (khalq).
Through specific practices of contemplation and recitations combined with the interventions of the Sufi master, the aspirant activates the energy focused in these centers in order to initiate and pursue spiritual awakening and ascent.
Another aspect of Sirhindi’s perspective on monism and dualism was his exposition of the respective states of the “Prophet” and the “Saint.”
All Muslims hold that the Prophet Muhammad was the best of creation. In mystical and Shi‘i thought, however, there tended to be an emphasis on the continuation of charismatic qualities in the world even after the death of the Prophet. The role of the saint (walaya) was increasingly elaborated on by Sufis as a kind of metaphysical template for human spiritual progress. Some Sufis had even seemed to suggest, according to Sirhindi, that the status of the saint was existentially higher than that of the Prophet since the saint was conceived of as having remained absorbed in the contemplation of the divine reality rather than descending into the turbidity of worldly matters.
Consistent with his upholding of the value and meaningfulness of human efforts, Sirhindi posited that the level of Prophecy (nubuwwa) both incorporated and transcended the saintly level of intoxication and union with the divine in order to return to the world with a sober approach and a focus on a reformist mission. Citing a hadith of the Prophet Muhammad – “My Satan has submitted” -- Sirhindi elaborated on the status of Prophet as one who fulfills a mission of transforming both himself and the world by being willing to descend deeply back into worldly existence even after having attained the highest level of mystical heights of annihilation (fana) in the divine, for, “the descent occurs proportionately to the ascent.”
What then, could be the highest state available to the Sufi, since Muhammad was the Last of the Prophets, according to Islamic belief? Today’s spiritual aspirants could pursue the state of being followers and heirs of the Prophet in order to ensure the continuity of this reformist mission in the world.
Sirhindi became a prominent spiritual teacher in the Naqshbandi order and wrote extensively on matters of Islamic mysticism, theology, and his own spiritual experience. At certain points in these writings he also commented on the religious policies that he felt should be adopted by the Mughal state.
Scholars differ concerning the prominence of political opinions in Sirhindi’s thought. The most recent Western academic studies, based on the content of Sirhindi’s writings and the response of his contemporaries and successors to them, conclude that he was primarily a Sufi theorist. In South Asia, however, his image has gradually developed so as to portray him as an incipient Muslim nationalist who challenged the syncretistic religious tendencies of the Mughal court. Proponents of this view cite as evidence the fact that he was publicly reprimanded and even imprisoned for about a year in 1619 before being released and ultimately honored by the emperor Jahangir. Those who emphasize the Sufi element of Sirhindi’s concerns note that Jahangir complains in his memoirs about Sirhindi’s arrogance and theories, rather than objecting to any specifically political recommendations on his part.
An interesting and controversial aspect of Sirhindi’s teaching was his idea of his own special mission. Although alluded to in a fairly esoteric fashion in his works, this stimulated controversy and even some condemnations for heresy among his contemporaries. In an esoteric reference in his work, Mabda’-o-Ma‘ad, Sirhindi claims that a new age has been initiated with the coming of the second Islamic millennium in which the cosmological state known as the “Reality of Muhammad” would unite with that of the “Reality of the Ka’ba.” A new composite higher state known as the “Reality of Ahmad” would be the result, ushering in a new period of fulfillment and spiritual progress for Muslims. This is apparently a thinly veiled reference to his own name, Ahmad. Further, using number mysticism, he spoke of the individual instantiation of the “Reality of Muhammad” in the form of the historical Prophet as having been twofold, spiritual and human. The balance between the human and the spiritual sides of the Prophet had, over time, become disturbed in favor of the spiritual dimension, with consequent detrimental effects on the Muslim community’s affairs in the world. He claimed that in the Second Millennium, following the lead of the “Renewer” (Mujaddid), the “Perfections of Prophecy” would be restored through the efforts of the heirs and followers of the Prophet.
Sirhindi's more extravagant, almost messianic claims were not entirely alien to the history of Islamic mystical thought, and thus Sirhindi’s statements, while clearly controversial, did not result in his being universally condemned for heresy during his lifetime. Over time the image of Sirhindi as a heroic reformer and advocate of uncompromising adherence to Islam became increasingly evocative for the Muslims of India and Pakistan. One can understand the appeal of Sirhindi’s more activist, world affirming outlook to Muslim reformers who partially blame mystically inspired quietism for the decline of Muslim power and influence in the world in later centuries.
Sirhindi see Sirhindi, Ahmad
Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi see Sirhindi, Ahmad
Imām Rabbānī Shaykh Ahmad al-Farūqī al-Sirhindī see Sirhindi, Ahmad
Sitt al-Mulk
Sitt al-Mulk (Sayyidat al-Mulk) (970-1023/1024). Sister of the Fatimid Caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah. According to a popular but unreliable account, she killed her brother the caliph, became regent and brought back stability and order.
Sitt al-Mulk, ruler of the Fatimids (1021-1023), was the elder sister of Al-Hakim. After the death of her father Ali az-Aziz (975-996), she tried with the help of a cousin to force her brother from the throne, but was arrested by the eunuch Barjuwan. However, she became regent for his son and successor Ali az-Zahir. She continued to wield influence as an advisor after he came of age, as evidenced by the very generous apanages that came her way.
After her assumption of power and the elimination of her rivals, she abolished many of the strange rules that Al-Hakim had promulgated during his reign. She also severely persecuted the Druze religion, which believed in Al-Hakim's divinity, eliminating it entirely from Egypt, and restricting it to the mountains of Lebanon. She worked to reduce tensions with the Byzantine Empire over the possession of Aleppo, but before negotiations could be completed she died on February 5, 1023.
Sayyidat al-Mulk see Sitt al-Mulk
Sitt al-Mulk (Sayyidat al-Mulk) (970-1023/1024). Sister of the Fatimid Caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah. According to a popular but unreliable account, she killed her brother the caliph, became regent and brought back stability and order.
Sitt al-Mulk, ruler of the Fatimids (1021-1023), was the elder sister of Al-Hakim. After the death of her father Ali az-Aziz (975-996), she tried with the help of a cousin to force her brother from the throne, but was arrested by the eunuch Barjuwan. However, she became regent for his son and successor Ali az-Zahir. She continued to wield influence as an advisor after he came of age, as evidenced by the very generous apanages that came her way.
After her assumption of power and the elimination of her rivals, she abolished many of the strange rules that Al-Hakim had promulgated during his reign. She also severely persecuted the Druze religion, which believed in Al-Hakim's divinity, eliminating it entirely from Egypt, and restricting it to the mountains of Lebanon. She worked to reduce tensions with the Byzantine Empire over the possession of Aleppo, but before negotiations could be completed she died on February 5, 1023.
Sayyidat al-Mulk see Sitt al-Mulk
No comments:
Post a Comment