What will those who talk about Shah Ismail say to these pains?

Under every wound lies a lived experience, and behind every aching pain is an event. Sometimes it takes time to trace it, and sometimes the history of these aching wounds is as clear as day.

In recent weeks, President Erdoğan and Parliament Speaker Numan Kurtulmuş, for reasons unknown, reopened a deep wound with speeches heavily focused on Shah Ismail.

I will not state the place of the Shah in these lands or his significance in the Qizilbash Alevi faith and sociology; Alevi associations have already demonstrated this with their statements. Numan Kurtulmuş subsequently issued a statement of "regret".

However, Erdoğan's former speechwriter Aydın Ünal could not even tolerate this statement of regret; it is certainly striking in terms of seeing a mindset. We are noting this separately as well.

So, what was that wound? How could a topic opened about Shah Ismail leave us face-to-face with such a wound?

The name of that wound was fatwas, and its victims were the Qizilbash/Alevis.

Let us now take a short journey into that history together.

Please, proceed.

According to a fatwa issued by Mufti Hamza, one of his men during the reign of Yavuz Sultan Selim, the Qizilbash who supported the Shah and the Qizilbash community in general were characterized as "infidels and godless."

It is even stated that "the state of this community is worse than the state of the infidels."

According to Mufti Hamza and Yavuz, who approved this, the Qizilbash who die go to hell, and in any case, the meat they slaughter is not to be eaten. Furthermore, marriages they enter into, whether among themselves or with other communities, will not be considered valid. Mufti Hamza had not yet finished. He continues.

They have no right of inheritance. And then his words, like a murder weapon seized at a crime scene, come into play: "The Sultan of Islam," he says, "has the right to have all the people of any town belonging to them killed, and to seize their property, their inheritances, and even their children."

But what will happen if these Qizilbash repent after being captured?

"Do not believe them," says Mufti Hamza. "Do not believe them and kill them all." Let us not forget that these words are also the words of the power of the era, that is, Sultan Yavuz.

For it is he who appoints the issuers of fatwas and he who ultimately approves those fatwas.

The Yavuz Sultan Selim, whose name they now keep alive in many places and on the third bridge, stands in history exactly in such a place.

Let us continue.

It is not only Mufti Hamza who speaks this way about the period and writes what are essentially massacre manifestos disguised as fatwas. The muftis of the era, led by Ebussuud and İbn Kemal, do not speak very differently from the words above.

İbn Kemal, for instance, says, "We have no doubt about their infidelity and apostasy." He views the land of the Qizilbash as dar al-harb, meaning a land of war. He, too, does not accept marrying Qizilbash. Then he utters one of the most shameful sentences in history: "Every one of the children born to them is a 'child of adultery'."

It is possible to multiply the fatwas written in this direction. However, I think the point has been made.

From the Sultan to the Sheikh al-Islam and the mufti, the rulers of the era were practically spewing rage at the Qizilbash, aiming to kill them in masses. The issue here was not merely that the Qizilbash were politically supporting Shah Ismail. The Qizilbash had also been placed on the target board due to their theological views and were being judged for their faith. In this respect, it was a kind of "genocide" that was being carried out. Moreover, the justification for this mass killing was based on a divine reason, stating that fighting them was a duty (wajib) and that those who died fighting them were considered martyrs.

The point we have reached after all this is that, according to the power of the era, the Qizilbash were a community seen as worse than infidels both theologically and politically, and against whom death fatwas were issued. And there is no doubt that Yavuz Sultan Selim was at the head of this slaughter/massacre. Since the subject has been opened with Shah Ismail, let us say this with an open heart as well.

As we have stated before, these fatwas were written during the reign of Yavuz, whose name is given to various institutions and who is spoken of with praise. Erdoğan, who digs into history by mentioning the name of Shah Ismail at the Youth Festival organized by the AKP, does not speak so negatively when the subject comes to Yavuz. On the contrary, as he said at the opening of the third bridge, he says that Yavuz was a very great sultan. What can we say, history is there, as are the events that took place and were recorded.

Speaking of "being recorded," I cannot pass without mentioning what Erdoğan said about the Sheikh al-Islam Ebussuud. Because in a rally held in Çorum in recent years, Erdoğan had said, "Just as Çorum is proud of Akşemsettin Hazretleri, Ebussuud Efendi, Koyunbaba, and İskilipli Atıf Hoca, who were raised in these lands, we are also proud of Çorum. We are proud of you."

So, what did the pride-worthy Ebussuud say about the Qizilbash?

Let us quote from the pen of Ertuğrul Düzdağ:

"The lives and property of the Qizilbash are lawful (halal); dying while fighting them is the highest form of martyrdom."

When the subject is opened with Shah Ismail, matters branch out, and then the pages of a bloody history are opened, and there we encounter a mindset with its mufti, its Sheikh al-Islam, and its Sultan. As we said, the source of the pains that cause the wound is sometimes right before our eyes, and sometimes one needs to follow the trail a bit; I think this situation is somewhat apparent regarding the Qizilbash/Alevis. However, sometimes, far from following the trail, those wounds are being scratched and made to ache, and far from facing them, the perpetrators of those wounds are being embraced. And hundreds of years later, a pain is being made to be experienced all over again from where it left off. I do not know if they are aware, but these words cause trouble and grow trouble. Unfortunately, this is exactly what is happening.

Indeed, what was the Pir saying;

"Oh heart, why do you not know my state

The wounds within me are of many kinds..."

Sources:

Eşref Doğan-Hasan Çelik, Obstacles to Alevi-Sunni Integration. Hitit University Journal of the Institute of Social Sciences, Year 7, Issue 1, June 2014, pp. 121-138

Ertuğrul Düzdağ, 16th Century Turkish Life in the Light of Sheikh al-Islam Ebussuud Efendi's Fatwas, Enderun Kitabevi, Istanbul, pp. 109-117.

Aydın Tonga, Deep Islam, Doğu Kitabevi publications.