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

gegenüberstanden. Möglicherweise haben sie sich auch andern Orden
angeschlossen, wie der verwandten Halvatīza. Man kann jedenfalls nicht
voraussetzen, daß die Anhänger der frühen Safavīya ohne weiteres den Wechsel
zur Qizilbaš-Safavīya mitmachten. ... Mit dem Wandel im Orden, angezogen
durch die militanten Neigungen der Scheiche, trat auch eine andere
Anhängerschaft in Erscheinung bzw. in den Vordergrund: Angehörige
kriegerischer Türkmenenstämme, die eigentlichen Träger der Qizilbaš-Safavīya,
nach deren von Haydar eingefürhter roter Mütze sie ihren Namen „Qizilbaš“
trugen. 564
As Sohrweide underlines, the Shaykhdom of Junayd was not a period of
transformation of the whole order; but, by this time, the order experienced a schism. On
the one hand, the original quietist sufism of Shaykh Safī al-Din was continued mainly by
those followers settled at home in the neighborhood of Ardabil or by some leading
khalifas of the early Shaykhs such as Shaykh Hamid b. Musa and Abdurrahman
Erzincānī, in other towns and cities. On the otherhand, newly growing militant,
extremist-shi’ite ideals were gaining popularity among rural and nomadic Turkoman
elements. During the very early phase of this schism the first wing was led by Shaykh
Ca’fer while the second faction was developed under the leadership of Junayd. In the
course of time, however, the first wing would be destined to lose its affiliation with the
Order after one or two generations of khalifas. As Abdülbaki Gölpınarlı points out, apart
from Junayd’s offspring, another familial line stemming from Shaykh Ibrahim, namely
Kevākibzāde family, continued to practice the traditional sunni way of the Order in the
Ottoman territories without any pressure by the state. On the contrary, Ottomans
recognized their claim to be descended from the Prophetic line and made them fill
important posts either governmental or scholarly (ulemā) ranks. 565
564 Sohrweide, p. 124.
565 See Abdülbaki Gölpınarlı, Kaygusuz Abdal – Hatayî – Kul Himmet, Đstanbul, 1953, p. 15.
199