0
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/up_dis.png)
Thumbs Up |
Received: 7,437 Given: 5,645 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 3,722 Given: 1,300 |
That's what Halil İnalcık says, I think that can be true they were Bektashis. Janissary corps being established by Bektashi sheikhs in late 14th century is an indication. There is always shadow of question mark ofc. First Ottomans were just superficially Muslims. They were nomads. Nomads by nature and lifestyle couldn't practice a religious lifestyle. Many things were later religion-washed. Even name in fact.
Ottomans later said their father was Uthman (Osman). However, contemporary Byzantine sources, like Pechymeres, talks about him as Atman while Byzantines have always recorded the Arabs with Osman name as 'Uthman'.
Someone with his father as Ertuğrul and son Orkhan (non-Muslim Turkic names), having an Arabic name Uthman/Osman makes actually little sense.
Atman's name has been Islamicized later most likely to make Ottoman supremacy accept better to Arabs and other religious people?
Thumbs Up |
Received: 3,722 Given: 1,300 |
Ottomans started their first madrasas in 1330's during Orkhan's reign and those madrasas were more Hanafi order style (Sunni), they carried on tradition of Seljuks who were Hanafi Sunni champions of Islam. However, it was 100 years after they came from central Asia. Sufism was stronger among nomads who were in the Yesevi school of Sufism (Bektashism also from that line) and Sunnism among the settled folk. The strong presence of Bektashism, that it was official sect of Janissaries, and removed together with Janissaries in 19th century puts question mark. In fact the religion changed after Caliphate came in 16th century from the Arab world. Bektashis were also arabized with time. But it might be that Seljuks of Konya asked them to adopt Sunni ways when Ottomans started as their clients.
There are question marks about that process.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 68 Given: 235 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 3,722 Given: 1,300 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 13,489 Given: 13,022 |
No, Shiaism might have started as a political movement but it eventually developed more theological differences. Shiaism developed in Yemen and then it crystallized in Iraq, and then it developed into many sub-sects and off sects. Shiaism was mostly in Arab phenomenon, and hence the rise of the Fatamid Caliphate, however Shiaism would diminish due to the arrival of the Seljuk Turks in the region. The Seljuk Turks would take on Persian culture, and thus would be rivals to the Fatamid Caliphate. Despite the Fatamid's being almost always victorious against the Seljuk Turks, also some Berber tribes like the Zirids would revolt against the Fatamids and would choose Sunnism, and finally after the Fatamid demise, comes the Ayyubids who would encourage Sunnism to be placed in Egypt and North Africa, and after the Ayyubids, the Mamlukes would also encourage the rise of Arabic language and Sunnism in the region. There was also Christianity once again growing in Egypt, but the Mamlukes would finish this off, and they also would wage war against Shia communities in the Levant. The Mamlukes would also destroy the last Christian stronghold in Northern Africa, in what's now modern day Sudan.
Thus Sunnism became the most dominant faith in the Arab world. However some pockets of Shias were still present in Lebanon and Bahrain, and it's original homeland Yemen. It would be not until the 15th century that the Safavids, would introduce Shiaism in Iran and would make it a political movement to be contended with Sunnism. However it would spread due to the influence of southern Lebanese sheikhs. However the Safavid adoption of Shiaism so that Persia would not be sucked in by the Uzbeks or Ottomans.
However none of these dynasties can compare to the glory, bravery, and strength of the Ummyad dynasty, which empire grew from the borders of China and India all the way to Southern France. However it would eventually be replaced by the Abbassid dynasty which also a great dynasty, but the problem they became to weak in the later years, well the Ummyads were really never weak and were strong. Then followed by the Shia Fatamids, which was quite sophisticated and tolerant nothing like the Persian Safavid dynasty, showing that Arab Shiaism was a refined movement unlike the Persianized Shiaism we see today.
My genetic results
1 50% Azeri_Dagestan +50% BedouinA @ 2.879975
One nation and one destiny
Thumbs Up |
Received: 2 Given: 0 |
You can find different history in different books.
They were all respectful for us because Allah SWT chooses them to be the companion of Muhammad S.A.W in his life.
History has been written by humans & I would love to stick with Allah SWT decision rather than human history.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 267 Given: 259 |
I came from Alevi background so Ali is rightful Caliph and incarnation of Muhammed.
jk I don't care about bedouin Arabs internal fights.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks