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

literature, which is summarized above, tends to explain it within incompatible ideas of
Junayd and Cafer. According to this hypothesis it was Junayd who departed from the
traditional way of the order and the pursuing shi’ite ideas fell into a marginal path. The
discrepancy stemmed from the minds of two Shaykhs. However, taking into account the
later developments, it appears that such reasoning is unsatisfactory to explain the flow of
history. First of all, the dynasty and the spiritual leadership of the order were continued
by the offspring of Junayd, while Cafer’s offspring soon after disappeared from the
scene of history. Secondly during the Shaykhdom period, from Safiyuddin to Shah
Ismail, the traditional pattern of succession was always from father to son. There was
only one exception, which was a compulsory result of conditions: after the death of
Haydar, his elder son Ali succeeded. But soon after, he was killed by Akkoyunlu forces,
without having a chance to marry. Then his younger brother Ismail became the Shaykh
of the sufis. Thus, putting aside this exception, the secret of the order was always passed
down from father to son.
With the death of Ibrahim this tradition was somehow broken and Cafer became
the Shaykh of the Tekke. From this point of view, it was not Junayd who broke the
tradition but Cafer himself. Contemporary sources do not clarify whether Cafer’s
attempt to capture Shaykhdom stemmed from his personal ambition or whether he was
forced by some influential disciples to pacify Junayd. What is certainly known is that a
sharp incompatibility between the mystical views of the two Shaykhs appeared. One
advocated the continuation of traditional teaching while the other advocated the grafting
of some new ideas. It seems that in order to preserve tradition in terms of mystical
knowledge Cafer was forced to interrupt the traditional pattern of succession.
186