TURKOMANS BETWEEN TWO EMPIRES: THE ... - Bilkent University

4.2. SHAYKH JUNAYD (1447-1460): TURKOMAN DOMINATION AND THE
SCHISM WITHIN THE ORDER
4.2.1. The Succession of Shaykh Junayd and his Removal from Ardabil
As the previous section of this paper described, the Safavid Order under its eponymous
founder and his immediate successors was a peaceful and contemplative order, one that
did not differ in any aspect from countless other sufi orders established in other parts of
the Muslim world. 476 Shaykh Junayd is generally accepted by the historical and modern
scholars as the one who was responsible for transforming the theological frame of the
order from sunnism to shi’ite militancy. 477 However, whether or not elements of shi’ism
within the order can be traced back to before Junayd’s time is not clear. What is clear is
that under the leadership of Junayd the transformation process, which will be discussed
below, was more or less accomplished. Contemporary evidence reveals that one, Junayd
476
See Michel M. Mazzaoui, “The Ghāzī Backgrounds of the Safavid State”, Iqbāl Review, XII/3,
Karachi, 1971, p. 82.
477
Minorsky states: “The early shaykhs were strictly orthodox and their religious authority could not be
called in question and opposed. The turning point came in the years 1449-56, when a descendant of
Shaykh Safī in the forth generation, the young Shaykh Juanyd, appeared ...” See V. Minorsky, “Shaykh
Bālī-Efendi on the Safavids”, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, vol. 20, no. 1/3,
1957, p. 439. Hanna Sohrweide follows the same line of argument: “Ğunaid ist der Verantwortliche für
den radikalen Wandel im Orden, durch den dieser, das heißt der sunnitisch ausgerichtete, eher gemäßigte
Orden Safī ad-Dīns, zu der militanten, extrem-schiiteischen Qizilbaš-Safavīza wurde.” See Sohrweide, p.
122. Also consider Aubin, “Les notables”, pp. 45-46; Ahmet Yaşar Ocak, “Babīler Đsyanından
Kızılbaşlığa: Anadolu’da Đslâm Heterodoksisinin Doğuş ve Gelişim Tarihine Kısa bir Bakış”, Belleten,
LXIV/239, 2000, p. 147. Among the foremost specialists on the Safavid history, Minorsky, Horst, Aubin,
and Efendiev accept the turning point in the ideology of the order as the Shaykhdom of Junaid. Some
other scholars, such as Browne, Hinz, Savory, and Roemer, however, argue that the first signs of shi’ism
were already discernable during the time of Hoca Ali. See V. Minorsky, Tadhkirat al-Mulūk, A Manual of
Safavid Administration, London, 1943, p. 189; Jean Aubin, “Notables”, p. 9; Heribert Horst, Tīmūr and
Hōğä ´Alī, ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Safawiden, in Abhandlungen der Geistes- und
Sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse Jahrgang, Wiesbaden, 1958, p. 49; Efendiev, “Le role des tribus de
langue Turque”, p. 25; Browne, p. 19, 46; Hinz, p. 23; Savory, Iran under the Safavids, p. 13; Roemer,
“Die Safawiden”, Speculum, IV, 1953, p. 28; “The Safavid Period”, pp. 193-6. Indeed, Roemer draws
quite a vague picture regarding Safavid’s adherence to shi’ism. Stressing the obscure line of separation
between sunnism and shi’ism, especially at the folk level, during that period, he says one might trace the
traits of shi’ism even back to the founder himself. Conversely, one might argue that the discernable shi’ite
tinges in Junayd and Haydar should be regarded as a natural feature of folk Islam.
168