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

mentions only one of them. In one of the hot instances of the conversation Junayd asked:
‘Who is superior for a father, his sons or his friends?’ 556 Abdullatif answered: “in the
conditions you meant the friends are superior. For that reason, they are mentioned in the
Holy Qur’an as “muhācirīn ve’l-ensār” (the man who emigrates and the man who hosts).
Furthermore the four true sects (mezheb) were derived from the friends but not from the
sons.’ The response of Junayd to these words was quite frustrating for a sunni Shaykh:
‘Were you present when those verses (āyets) that you mentioned were descended?’ This
question ended the already stirred up discussion. Abdullatif said: ‘Now you became an
unbeliever with this faith (on the verses of Qoran) and those who follow you in this
belief are unbelievers!’ and abandoned the meeting with Aşıkpaşazāde in his arm.
Junayd also left the place with his tutor Hayreddin.
Aşıkpaşazāde summarizes this important debate in a brilliant and concise
manner. Undoubtedly, the conversation between the two Shaykhs could not have
consisted of a four-sentence dialogue. Keeping in mind that Aşıkpaşazāde began to write
his history in 889/1484 557 , approximately 36 years after the meeting, he may even have
not been able to remember details. What he remembered was the core theme of dispute,
which obviously indicates that the quarrel focused on the different convictions of sunni
and shi’ite sects. Junayd’s question clearly addresses the famous argument of the shi’ite
sect that after the Prophet the caliphate was reserved to Ali, son-in-law of the Prophet,
and to his offspring, because offspring were superior to friends. Abdullatif’s answer was
a conventional sunni argument against the shi’ite attack especially on the first three
caliphs. He put forth the Qur’an’s praising of friends (ashāb) and their being the source
556 “Ataya eshāb mı evlādur, yohsa evlād mı evlādur?”, APZ, p. 250.
557 Fuat Köprülü, “Aşık Paşa-zâde”, ĐA, p. 708.
195