Mesnevi Sharif, Full Text, Mevlana Jalaleddin Rumi

Book By Mesnevi-i Sharif, Full Text
Author Mevlana Jalaleddin-i Rumi
Publishing House Sağlam publishing house
Ramadan Altinok Preparing for Publication
Paper - Volume 2.Dough paper, Hardlier
Page - Size 880 page, 17x24 cm
Release Year 2015
ISBN 9786055573072


You can buy this book with a credit card, bank remnal, postal check or cash payment at the door. All debit credit cards are valid.

You are reviewing the book Of Full Text, mesnevi-i Sharif, solid publications.
Full Text Mesnevi Sharif, read reviews about the book yup you can get informationabout the subject of the book , summary , price, terms of sale in a wide way.

Read in the name of your Lord, the Creator. He created man from "alak". Readit, your Lord is the most generous. Alak 1-2

MESNEVİ

Mevlânâ Celâleddîn-i Rûmî's conception of sufism is one of the most important works of Islamic culture.

Mevlânâ Celâleddîn-i Rûmî'sPersian work, which is made up of six volumes (notebooks) and approximately 25,700 beites, is named Mesnevi, which shows that he first gave a nod based on the book's form of deeds. Mesnevi sarihs said that the name of the work, which means "do double something, make a couple", points to its shape as well as its meaning and content, and that all the beings in the world of martyrs (surrogate-mâna, existence-absence, gayb-shehâdet, like light-darkness) in double or binary opposites, they claimed that Mevlânâ gave the work this name because it was a book about the states of all double and opposite beings, from the truths of the types of objects in the world of martyrs, from the things that are heard (the mahsûsât) to the things that are laundered (ma'cult) (Ankaravî, Mecmûatü'l-Letâif I, 3). According to the sarihs, the name Mesnevi devalues both the shape (surrogate) of the book and its content (mâna). Mevlânâ also gave his work names such as Kashşâfü'l-Qur'an, Fıkh-ı Ekber, Shaykalü'l-Ervâh and Hüsâmînâme, and the sarihs stated that these names were characterizations reflecting the characteristics of Mesnevî.

After the book became widespread as Mesnevi, what it evoked in the places where the word was passed was mevlânâ's Mesnevî,which is the mesnevi form ofclassical poetry. It is anexample of how a Mesnevi text, which Mevlânâintroduces as a book of irşad for those in the pheasant, can transform people and society. Abdurrahman-i Câmî said of Mevlânâ, "He is not a prophet; But there is a book!" this function. The work, which dealt with all the subjects of sufism in a didactic style, also set the stage for a rich tradition of sherry.

According to Ahmed Eflâkî, Mevlânâ'sclerk and firstcaliph, Hüsâmeddin Çelebi, told Mevlânâ that the gazels in Divân were quite fully hired, Saying that the friends had read Senâî and Feriduddin Attâri with pleasure, he asked the disciples to turn to the kind of mesnevi in the mesnevi style as Hakim Senâî's Hadikatü 'l-Hakika and feriduddin Attâr's Logic 't-Tayr' in his teller, in terms of ingenuity secrets and leech, Mevlânâ said, "Before this idea came to your heart,my heart was inspired by the copyright of this manzum book from the realm of the gay world." He removed the first eighty-eighty-something horse, which began with themenu "Bishnev ez ney beün story mîkuned", and extended it to Hüsâmeddin Çelebi, and the writing process of the work began after this event (Menkibeleri of the Arifs, II, 326).

There is no exact information on when Mesnevibegan to be written. Mevlânâ only reported that the writing of volume II continued from the 15th day of the 662 Receb (May 13, 1264) and that it paused for a while after the end of volume I (Mesnevi, II, bethit 6-7). Eflâkî records that this pause was caused by hüsâmeddin Çelebi's remarl upon the death of his wife and lasted for two years (Menkibeleri of the Arifs, II, 329). Sahih Ahmed Dede reported that the 1st verse began in the city of Jamaziyelâ (May 1261), during which Mevlânâ was fifty-five and Hüsâmeddin Çelebi was thirty-seven years old (History of mevlevî, p. 181). Abdulbaki Gölpınarlı states that this volume of the work may have been completed before the disappearance of the Abbasid caliphate in 656 (1258), based on the evidence at the end of Mesnevî's 1st volume, and that the pause period between the 1st cicild and volume II should also be six years (Mesnevi, I, 358). Bedîuzzaman Fürûzanfer, I. suggests that the volume was written between 657-660 (1259-1262) and took the rumor of Eflâkî (Mevlânâ Celâleddin, p. 212). When different rumors are evaluated, it can be said that Mesnevî's I. volume began to be written between 1258-1261 and completed in 1263 or 1264 (Lewis, p. 304). The other five volumes were copyrighted without a break. Eflâkî and Feridun Sipehslâr do not specify any date in this regard, while Sahih Ahmed Dede gives the end date of each volume (I. volume 659 [1261], 663 [1265], Volume III 664 [1266], IV. cdt 664, V. cdt 665 [1267], VI. cdt 666 [1268] recorded the completion of the work in 666 [1268]. Bedîuzzaman Fürûzanfer correctly accepts this rumor of Sahih Ahmed Dede. (Mevlânâ Celâleddin, p. 213). Taking into account the different dates, Mesnevî'sit can be said that it took eight to ten years to write and ended in 666 (1268) (Safa, III/1, p. 464). Ismail Ankaravî, who believes that the work is seven volumes, stated that volume VII was written in 670 (1271). (Mecmûatü'l-Letâif, VII, vr. 3^b).

In Mesnevî, which was printed irtically in Hüsâmeddin Çelebiye, a systematic method wasnot followed in terms of content and shape. The work discusses issues such as what Mevlânâsaid sometimes until morning during the copyright process and thatHüsâmeddin Çelebi was therefore sleep-ins sleepless (I, beyit 1807-1809), when he was hungry and ate something, his inspiration was found (I, beyitl094,1645,3817). Hüsâmeddin Çelebi says that Mevlânâ did not apply to any books when he printed Mesnevî, that I did not take pens in his hand, that he said what he thought in madrasah, Ilgın hot springs, Konya bath, Meram, and that he immediately restrained them and even could not keep up with writing. Sometimes a few days a day and night, he says it nonstop, sometimes he shuts up for months. This situation indicates that the meanings of divine truths are always manifested in the heart of the universe in the mirror and in some moments it is overflowing from the tongue (feyiz).

When each volume of Mesnevîwas completed, mevlânâ was read to Mevlânâ(mukabele), Mevlânâ personally signed the places to be corrected to Hüsâmeddin Çelebi (Ahmed Eflâkî, II, 329), because of his service, he wrote it in various places of the volumes, "Rights ziya, sâmînâme, soul cilâ, nazh and nazenin existence" (I, beyit 428, 1149, 3998, II, beyit 3, III, beyit 14, IV, beyit 1, VI, beyit 183) and dedicated the work to him (VI, beyit 3). Mevlânâ printed arabic dibaces on the head of the skin after the end of each volume, and the titles called "surh" were printed during the readings at the end of each volume because they were written in red ink. Eflâkî notes that besides Hüsâmeddin Çelebi, there were also scribes (Osman b. Isâ al-Mevlevî, Sultan Veled) who were tasked with writing Mesnevi. Sahih Ahmed Dede tells Mevlânâ that Sultan Veled's three brother stories at the end of volume VI are unfinished and that he completed the story himself and added it to Mesnevî (History of mevlevî, p. 188). However, it is seen that the story is not over in Sultan Veled's zeyli.

Mevlânâ sees himself as a continuation of the Line of Senâî and Attâr within the tradition of the sufism and uses praise statements about these two. It can be said that Mevlânâfollowed the path of the sheikh Muhakkık-ı Tirmizî, who frequently made iktibas fromSenâî's Hadîka in his chats, and therefore his Senâî influence on him was more than that of Attâr.

Mevlânâ, who did not copyright Mesnevîfor the purpose of poetryIn poetics, poetry is no more than a tool to express its thoughts; in fact, he uses expressions that despise poetry, without mâna can fit into poetry, and he cannot be a surrogate by the word of the letter. He sees the surah as a surrogate depicting the meaning, but he also emphasizes that the unsusthical mâna cannot be redemptioned (I, beyit 296, 1528) and considers it appropriate to sing sufism in the form of poetry and glorifys poetry in this sense (IV, verse 1188).

Mesnevi aruzun was written with remel bahriyle (fâilâtün fâilâtün fâilâtün fâilün fâilün). Saying that Mevlânâ Mesnevîis not just a word, a vezin, a poem and a story (a surrogate), the main purpose is to deliver the meaning to the interlocutor (He is the prophet, the foul isnot a joke; VI, beyit 160) has given warnings not to get stuck in the surah, those who are stuck in the surah will not receive the right from the meaning, and those who receive it from the mâna perform it by means of a surrogate.

Muhteva: Mevlânâ revealedthe subject and content of the work in general in thedibaces printed on the head of each volume. Most of the Mesnevi sarihs interpreted the word "usûl" as sharia, cult and truth, which was the first sentence of the dibace of the first volume, which was twice stated in the phrase "The Mesnevi is the way of the religion". Mesnevi is in this chain of originals and the originals are based on the need for each other. In this respect, the main subject of Mesnevîisthe deed (sharia), state (cult) and truth, which are the three mainslies of religion and religion. Obtaining the truth takes the deed and the state as it requires, and then my meaning takes it from the truth. Mesnevi, who is the subject of the knowledge of the fact of obtaining the truth in this context, is also discussed in the context of amellers (evil dims) and information about the state (leech science) in the context of knowledge of truth (science). The sufisms gained as a result of such deeds as Ablution, Prayer, Fasting are explained in the context of hakkin knowledge called truth or accrued genius knowledge. Therefore, Mesneviis a work that speaks of the zuhur ranks of the body and body (merâtib-i vücûd), the ways of vuslat (leech and ranks) to insân-ı kâmil and Hakk. As a matter of fact, Mevlânâ says that Mesnevîisa guide (burhan) in discovering the secrets of vuslat and the near. It is important for Mesnevîto show how Mesnevîwas evaluated in the first period, noting that he was the great of those who took the path of the order, that all the ranks ofthe sâliks were defected in him, and that the secret of the qur'an and hadith, the wording of theQur'an and Hadith,and the essence of the truths (Mevlânâ and Those Around him, p. 22) were evaluatedin the first period.

Since Mevlânâ is a subject of religion as a whole, his analogy to the Mesneviyi Quran in terms of content and style and his compulsiveness of it withvarious Qur'an adjectives should not be considered as a lafzî-sized relationship between The Mesnevi and the Qur'an, as some Mesnevi's münekks misunderstood. Mesneviis the one that describes the absolute mâna from the same source as the Qur'an and receives a share of the ash (magz-i Quran). Mevlânâ, MesnevîIt also describes the Qur'an as a book that explores the prophets of the Qur'an and explores the signs te'vil and the qur'an. In this respect, the work can be seen as a spiritual conception, and the creation of fifty-odd of the approximately 950 headings reflecting the content of the stories it contains is proof that these stories are based on how these stories are based.
Mevlânâ follows theclassical tradition of sufism by discussing the zuhuru of existence in the firsteighteen of mesnevî's "bishnev" (listen!) address. Sarihler states that the letter "be" in the word "bishnev" primarily points to the feeding and the rank of the right muhammadiyye in which the zuhur of existence begins, that the divine truths that are being heard more will be achieved by hearing more, and that the sufism thought detailed in Mesnevîis expressed in the first eighteen chapters. In these verses, the enjoyment of the body, which started from the rank of muhammadiyye and passed through all the ranks of the body and end in the insân-ı kâmil, was explained in a metaphorical language. The subject is based on the idea that the body is actually one, and that it is the existence of the Right (VI, bethit 3773-3775). Hakkin's body is ranked in ranks through its names, adjectives and verbs; The zuhur process reaches the bone in the order of insân-ı kâmil. The prophet is one in absolute terms, and he is Muhammad. The other prophets, regardless of their ranks, are the prophets who believe in it. Mevlânâ explains this idea based on the metaphors of ney (insân-ı kâmil) and nestan (cane).

Mesnevî'The basis of the sufism in the "zahir) and the mâna (of the prophet) is the basis of the idea. According to Mevlânâ, the things in this world that make up the world of appearances (suver-i genius) are the manifestations of the truths that consist of genius names (I, beyit 3330-3333, II, beyit 1020-1026). Divine truths, which are manifestations of the names and adjectives of Allah, are made in this world by gaining surrogates. Divine truths or prophets are god's worldly sins (II, beyit 1103, 3679-3680; III, beyit 3635-3638; IV, beyit 1665-1669, 3692-3696; VI, beyit 73-83, 3172-3178). Allah (al-ma'nâ hüvallah), who is absolutely-in-the-world, provides his contact with all the leprosy in the world with divine temples; He's the one who gives everything his life. Therefore, it is important to go beyond the surrogate to know the meanings of leprosy (a'yân-ı sabite) in the realm of the martyr (I, verse 685-689). In the work, the duo Sûret-mâna is explained with signs such as sun-shadow (VI, beyit 4747), sea-foam, Mecnûn-Leylâ (V, beyit 3288), flower-fruit (I, beyit 2930). Surrogate and mâna contact is a violation of the asset-absence relationship (I, verse 602-603; II, beyit 1280-1282; V, beyit 350; VI, beyit 59, 3712). In Mesnevî, when it comes to the world of the people (martyr), the word existence is the surrogate in the space, and the absence is the mâna that is spaceless, while in the realm of the emir (gayb) the existence is the meaning and the absence is the surrogate (I, beit 602-603). This bipolar relationship between surrogate and mâna can cause doubt in man's knowledge of the lyn being. The relief from suspicion is provided only by the investigation of the information about the edible and the philosophical knowledge based on the think (IV, beyit 1960-1967, V, beyit 459-463). In the investigation, the special will of the soul is decisive. The fact that the person who comprehends the image and the meaning represented by the metaphor of the double-winged bird together reaches the truth only accrues with the divine dm-i (III, verse 1510-1515). In this respect, allah is the absolute source of information (V, bethlee 2587-2588). It is his genius nature that ensures that every person with a genius nature has contact with God both ontologically and epistemologically because it was created as a surrogate of Allah. However, the knowledge of Allah that this genius nature brings to man is reafsite (II, beyit 1720-1815).


In the nineteenth verse of the work, it is stated that the prerecament of being insân-ı kâmil with the phrase "O son, break the bond!" is to abandon the interests in the world which is considered to be a surrogate (zühd) and the necessity of being set on the road (cult) is indicated. According to Mevlânâ, it is only possible with love that man begins on the road, is on his way, and has the truth of a'yân-ı constant (I, beyit 19-34). Love is the source, sâiki and purpose of all divine and human verbs (I, beyit 10; V, beyit 2746-2749). The journey back to the homeland of the man who has moved away from his homeland (seyr-ü leech), the cases he will encounter on this journey, the stops (the authority), the tricks of the nave that will prevent him from his journey (II, bethlete 2603-2793), the necessity of obtaining a guide on a great path against these hdes, and the attitude to be taken in any case in the profits (I, beyit 78-85, IV, beyit 771-778), the relationship between the right and the false sheikhhood (III, the bethlete 685-697), the disciple-disciple relationship (II , beyit 1462-1560).

In stories, the basic elements of the subject are the verbs, experiences and observations of man. It is often emphasized that the true perpetrator is Allah, that when it comes to algebra-will, man is considered an excuse for the reliance of divine truths, which are the names, adjectives and verbs of Allah, and that good is absolute in the context of charity and evil is nisbî (IV, beit 65-69). It is stated that the person who is faced with Mongolian attacks on the social plane will be aware of the nature of the events after he has disserted his evil soul and contacted his spirit, which is no.
Mevlânâ (Dîvân-ı Kebîr, VII, 601), who says that in accordance with the principle of Sûret-mâna does not wear the aba, which is the meaning of the surrogates, strongly condemns the surrogates and the rial that shows itself as a sûfî. He clearly stated that very few of the sufs were on the right path and that the rest were from the tamah people (Mesnevi, II, beyit 532-534) and that he had a divine power.

Style and Shape Characteristics: Mesnevî'the content of the whole is transferred to the interlocutor through the representation stories, which are a small part of the whole. Stories lead you to understand the spiritual reality in which you live. Conformity, sign of what should be (irşad) and reputation are the three main features of Mesnevi stories. At the beginning of the first story, "O friends! Listen to this story. It really tells us what we are.


MEVLÂNÂ CELÂLEDDÎN-İ RÛMÎ (d. 672/1273)

Founder of the Mevleviyye order, Mutasavvf, schoth and poet.

6 Rebîülevvel was born in Belh, Khorasan in 604 (September 30, 1207) (Ferîdûn-i Sipehsâlâr, p. 22; Eflâkî, I, 73). On the other hand, based on a poem in Dîvân-ı Kebîr (III, 49) It was claimed that he was sixty-two years old when he met with Shams-i Tabrizî (642/1244) and therefore his date of birth should be 580 (1184) (Gölpınarlı, Ş.M. III [1959], p. 156-161), Hellmut Ritter did not find this claim valid (El [ing.] < II, 393). Mevlânâ, at the entrance of Mesnevî, his name is Mohammed b. Mohammed b. Hussein al-Belhî. His nickname is Celâleddin. The title"Mevlânâ", meaning"Our Lord", was singed in order to glorify him. The Persian title "Hudâvendigâr", which came to the name "Sultan", was also given to him by his father. In addition, it is mentioned as "Belhî" in the city of its birth, as well as with titles such as "Rûmî, Mevlânâ-i Rûm, Mevlânâ-i Rûmî" and "Mullah Hünkâr, Mollâ-yı Rûm" due to its muderism.
Besides some of the information he gave in his works, information about Mevlânâ and his surroundings is largely based on his son Sultan Veled's Ibtidânâme (Velednâme), the Risâle of ferîdûn-i Si-pehslâr, one of his disciples, and Ahmed Eflâkî's Menâkıbü'l-Arifîn, the disciple of his grandson, Ulu Arif Çelebi. Eflâkî's contemporary Abdulkâdir al-Qurayshî al-Cevâhirü'l-Mudıyye gives briefly about him in his work on the Hanefi ulem. (III, 343-346). The information in Ibtidânâme is concise, but first-hand. Eflâkî's work, which contains the most detailed information in many aspects, has some exaggerations, contradictions and errors.

Mevlânâ'sworks do not have information about his lineage. Risâle-i Sipehsâlâr. It is stated that Mevlânâ'sfather, Bahâeddin Veled, was descended from Hazrat Abu Bakr, and in al-Cevâhirü'l-Mudıyye, the shecere that reached Hazrat Abu Bakr is recorded. Abdurrahman-ı Câmî and Devletshah, one of the authors of Eflâkî and later, also record that he is a descendant of Abu Bakr. Eflâkî, on the other hand, says that his lineage reached Hazrat Ali on his mother's side based on a saying by Bahâeddin Veled (Menâkıbü'l-Arifin, I, 75). The controversy over Turkishness is from the last period and largely says, "Don't think I'm a foreigner, I'm from this neighborhood. I'm looking for my house in your neighborhood. As much as I look hostile, I'm not the enemy. Although I sing Hindi, it is actually Turkish", and in addition to those who argue that racial affinity is meant by the Turkish word in poetry, some have claimed that the word means different things here, and some of them mean the closeness of spirit to the Turkish race.

MevlânâHis father, Bahâeddin Veled, belonged to a ulemâ family settled in Belh and was known as "sultânü'l-ulemâ". According to Sipehsâlâr, Bahâeddin Veled, who reached the cult lineage Ahmed al-Ghazali, is also recorded as a disciple of Necmeddîn-i Kübrâ, the founder of the Kübreviyye order. According to Eflâkî, Bahâeddin Veled's mother is the daughter of Alâeddin Mohammed Hârizmshah of the Hârizmshahs dynasty (a.g.e., I, 7-9). It was claimed that this rumor, which was not included in Risâle-i Sipehsâlar even though it was an older source, was a figment of Eflâkî's imagination, and it was later noted that the author said nothing about Bahâeddin Veled being the grandson of Sultan Alâeddin Hârizmşah (a.g.e., II, 1252 [note of the nesrede]). According to Eflâkî, Bahâeddin Veled (Ma'ârif), who heavily criticized Hârizmşah Alâeddin Muhammad in his sermons, who followed their views with scholars such as Fahreddin er-Râzî and Zeyn-i Kîşî for adopting Greek philosophy. I, 82) the rulers and their opponents, who had the opportunity to open up with ulemâ, claimed that he was politically steadsting and preparing a revolt with his supporters, so Hârizmshah Alâeddin Mohammed asked him to leave the country (Menâkıbü'l-Ariftn, I, 12-13), and he had to leave Belh with his family. Although Ferîdûn-i Sipehsâlâr stated that Fahreddin er-Râzî had special efforts in the decision to remove Bahâeddin Veled from the country after the opening of his esta with the ruler (Risâle-i Sipehsâlâr, p. 12-13) According to Eflâkî, Bahâeddin Veled left Belh in 609 (1212-13), at least three years after the death of Fahreddin er-Râzî (Menâkıbü'l-Arifin, I, 16). Mevlânâ is five years old at the time. Sultan Veled, on the other hand, stated that he left the city for Hejaz with the sign he received because he was hurt by the people of Belh without contacting the decision to remove Bahâeddin Veled from the country, and that Belh was instiged by the Mongols while he was still on his way (Ib-tidânâme, p. 240). Reynold Alleyne Nicholson and Hellmut Ritter claimed that Bahâeddin Veled left Belh just to escape the Mongols (Mevlânâ Celâleddin Rûmî, p. 16; I.A. III, 54) there is no record in this direction in the sources.

The information provided by Ferîdûn-i Sipehslâr and Eflâkî regarding Bahâeddin Veled's journey to Hejaz does not match each other. Mevlânâ's father stayed for a while in the cities on the road with his disciples and his family and eventually reached Baghdad, where he was met by Shehâbeddin es-Suhreverdî, and when he was about to go from Baghdad to Hejaz via Molde, I received news that the Mongols had invaded Belh (Menâkıbü'l-Arifin, I, 15-20). Bahâeddin Veled is understood to have been in Baghdad on this date, as khorasan cities are known to have been built by the Mongols in 617 (1220). However, eflâkî's dates about the later stages of the journey contradict this information. Eflâkî said bahâeddin veled stopped in Damascus on his way back from Hejaz, to Malatya in 614 (1217), In 616 (1219), he came to Sivas, then moved to Akşehir via Erzincan and taught for four years in his own madrasa, from where he went to Lâren-de (Karaman), where he was at least seven in the madrasah without making a name for him, then settled in Konya at the invitation of Sultan Alâeddin Keykubad. He also records that I married Gevher Hatun, daughter of Saderkant scholar Şerefeddin Llâ, in Lârende when mevlânâ was seventee or eighty years old, and sultan Veled was born in 623 (1226) and then his other son Alâeddin (a.g.e., I, 22-29, 48, 303). Alhowever, it is understood from Eflâkî's testimony that Mevlânâ completed and married more than seven years of education at the madrasah in Lârende, but this does not match both the age of marriage and the date of birth of his children, and the dates he gave show that he married a year or two after settling in Lârende. Mevlânâ's mother, Mü'mine Hatun, died in Lârende, and karaman mevlevîhâne was later built at the place where she was buried.

Ferîdûn-i Sipehslâr stated that Mevlânâ was fourteen years old when he came to Konya (Risâle-i Sipehslâr, p. 14-15). Accordingly, it is understood that Bahâeddin Veled came to Konya in 618 (1221). Sultan Veled, without going into any detail, recorded that Bahâeddin Veled came from Hejaz to the land of Rûm and sultan Alâeddin Keykubadin visited him in Konya (ibtidânâme, p. 241-242). On the other hand, the agreement of Hârizmşah from Mevlânâ'nm Fîhi mâ Fîh that they were there during the siege of Sadyrkanti shows that they went to Saderkant first during the journey. It is also stated that Bahâeddin Veled stopped by the city of Nîşâbur on the way, where he visited Feriduddin Attâr's kenduer and presented his sufism Esrârnâme to Mevlânâ (Câmî, p. 460; Devletshah, p. 193). According to Devletshah, Feriduddin Attâr said to his father for Mevlânâ, "This is not long before your son is, his heart will ignow on the hearts of the burned in the world." Hellmut Rit-ter found this meeting suspicious, stating that Feriduddin Attâr was probably not alive at that time (LA III, 53) but my Attâr is known to have lived until 618 (1221) (DİA. IV, 95).
Mevlânâ married Kira (Kerrâ, Gerâ) Hatun, daughter of Izzeddin Ali of Konya, after the death of her first lady, Gevher Hatun. Emir Muzafferüddin, Âlim Çelebi and Melike Hatun were born from this woman, who was a widow and had a child named Shamseddin Yahya.
Bahâeddin Veled died on 18 Rebîülâhir 628 (23 February 1231) after two years as a teacher at the Altinpa (Altunaba/Altunpâ) Madrasah in Konya. Meanwhile, Mevlânâ (Eflâkî, I, 29, 32, 48), who was twenty-four years old, took his father's place and began to work as a muder. The following year, seyyid Burhâneddin, one of Bahâeddin Veled's disciples, who was busy with his upbringing as a child, came to Konya to visit the Sheikh of Tir-mizî, but learned that the sheikh had died there (Sultan Veled, p. 244-246). It is also recorded that Sayyed Burhâneddin had previously informed the sheikh of my passing, and that in his dream Bahâeddin Veled came to Konya because he told him to kill his son (Ferîdûn-i Sipehsâlâr, p. 120. Eflâkî, I, 56-57). When Sayyid Burhâneddin came to Konya, he wrote to Mevlânâ in Lârende and called him to Konya, When they met, he said that his father was a great sheikh in both zahir and state knowledge, and that he should earn the superior degree he achieved in his zahir knowledge, and that Mevlânâ became a disciple of Sayyid Burhâneddin and served him for nine years (a.g.e., I, 57). Eflâkî, one of seyyid Burhâneddin's meetings, then Mevlânâto Damascus to further advance in zahir religions. During this trip, which was understood to have taken place in 630 (1233), Sayyid Burhâneddin accompanied Mevlânâ from Konya to Kayseri, Mevlânâ went from there to Aleppo, and Sayyid Burhâneddin did not return and kayseri's manager, Sâhib Isfahânî, stayed with me. Mevlânâ took lessons from Kemâleddin Ibn'l-Adîm, who was also the city's administrator at the Hallâviyye Madrasah in Aleppo (a.g.e., I, 77). Sipehsâlâr said that he had studied at several madrassas from Ibn'l-Adîm (Risâle-i Sipehsâlâr, p. 30) but did not mention their names. It is not known how long Mevlânâ (Eflâkî, I. 81), who then moved to Damascus and settled in the Madrasah of Mukaddemiyye, stayed in Aleppo. Although Eflâkî said that he had been residing in Damascus for four or seven years (a.g.e., I, 77, 81), bedîuzzaman Fürûzanfer said that it would not be possible for Mevlânâ to stay in this city for more than four years, taking into account the fact that Seyyid Burhâneddin (d. 639/1241) had survived for more than four years after returning from Damascus. (Mevlânâ Celâleddin, p. 60). Sipehslâr, who said that I had received an order from the spiritual and cashed-up yesterdays, especially those such as Mevlânâ's Arab Dui and Literature, Lügat, Fıkıh, Tefsir and Hadith, said that he had received an order from his Muhyiddin Ibn'l-Arabî in Damascus, Sadeddîn-i Hammûye, Osmân-ı Rûmî, Evhaüddîn-i Kirmânî and Sadreddin Konevî also say that they chatted for a long time (Risâle-i Sipehsâlâr, p. 24-25, 30).

Eflâkî said that Sâhib Isfahânî wanted to host him in his palace when Mevlânâ returned to Kayseri from Damascus, but seyyid Burhâneddin did not agree with this, and that he put him in a cell he prepared and had three men in a row, stating that he had passed through the province and that he had to go into the halvete "for the umm of the LED to make pearls come from the hope", then he records that they went to Konya together, that Sayyid Burhâneddin returned to Kayseri after giving him an answer for the attack here, and that mevlânâ visited his tomb and went back to Konya (Menâkı-bü'l-Arifin, I, 81-84). Sultan Veled said that Mevlânâ served Sayyid Burhâneddin for nine years and that they were one in the so-called, in essence and secret because their hearts were united in the world of the world, With the migration of Burhâneddin from this world, he said that Mevlânâ was left alone, that he had suffered five years of hypocrisy by turning to Allah and burning, falling into troubles, and that he had continued to preach to the people, and to chat with his disciples, many of them from the ulemâ and the executive sector (Ibtidânâme, p. 247-248).

Five years after the death of Sayyid Burhâneddin, Mevlânâmet Shams-i Tebrîzî in Konya (a.g.e., p. 249). This zat, who was called "Kâmil of Tabriz" by the pirs of the period and called "Shams-i Perende" (Flying Shams) because many places roamed, first during the service of Sheikh Abu Bekr-i Selebâf in Tabriz and chatted with many manuscripts after him. In one opinion, he became a disciple to Rükneddîn-i Sucâsî, and in another view to Baba Kemal Cendî. Câmî mentions the possibility that he met with all of the mentioned sheikhs (Nefehât, p. 464-465). Eflâkî says that Şemsin came to Konya on 26 Cemâziyelâhir 642 (29 November 1244) (Menâkıbü'l-Arifin, I, 84; II. 618) this is almost the same as the information given by Sultan Veled. The date eflâkî recorded. It is also in Makit, which is compiled from the words of Shams-i Tebrîzî (Speeches, I, 132). There are different rumors about the nature of the conversation between Shams and Mevlânâ, who said that after praying, "Introduce me to your parents," in his dream, "Let us make you a companion to a guardian", that he asked where he was, that he was in Anatolia the next night, but that it was not yet time to meet. Sipehslâr said that Shams-i Tebrîzî, who came to Konya one night and settled in the Riceçder Inn, was sitting on the sedir in front of the inn in the morning and came to the eye with Mevlânâ, the first spiritual effect was in this way, Mevlânâ"I welcome myself, my glory is great!"; He records that he said such things as "There is no one in my robe but Allah!", and that Muhammad said, "Sometimes my heart is heart-relented, so I ask God seventy times every day!" and asked how to interpret them. Mevlânâ said that in response, Bâyezîd tried to express this with the above words when he was shown the magnanimity of the tawhid office, which he came out of, al-Bâyezîd was one of the prophets, The Messenger of God said that he was pleased to see the smallness of the previous office as well as the greatness of the office he reached, and that Shams-i Tebrîzî, who liked this answer very much, stood up and embraced Mevlânâ (Risâle-i Sipehslâr, p. 126-127).

According to Eflâkî, Shams-i Tebrîzî, when he came to Konya, the Candymen settled in Hanina, Mevlânâ left the Thrush Madrasah, one of the four madrasahs he taught, with his students and went on the mule, while Shams came out of the moment and holding the mule's ship, saying, "O the slate of the world and the muna cash, Was His Holiness great or Bâyezîd-i Bistâmî?" I am the sultan of the sultans!' The glass of comprehension was immediately filled. However, muhammad's thirst increased. His chest was opened by Allah (Sûre of Insiah, 94/1). He constantly expressed his thirst, he wanted to be closer to Allah every day", shams was ecstatic when he heard this answer, and after a while they went to the madrasa together on foot (Menâkıbü'l-Arifin, I, 86-87; II, 618-620).

Describing the incident as recorded by Eflâkî, Abdurrahman-ı Câmî also conveys a rumor: Mevlânâ opened his books by the pool and while he was working, Shams came and asked: "What are these?" Mevlânâ: When he replied, "What are you doing with them?"

In Devletshah's Tezkire (p. 196-197), shamsin's question is, "What is the purpose of the debate, the hypocrisy, the claim of knowledge and its repee it?" When Mevlânâ replied: "It is to know the decency of circumcision and sharia," Shams said, "This is all a deed." To Mevlânâ's question, "What more is on this?" he said, "It is knowledge that makes man to the property." Mevlânâ was very impressed with this and after this incident he gave up interviewing books and teaching lessons and was always with Shams.

Eflâkî's contemporary, Abdulkâdir al-Qurayshî, states that the encounter took place in mevlânâ'shouse. While Mevlânâ was negotiating an issue with his students, Shams walked in and sat next to them. After a while, he points to the books and asks Mevlânâ, "What are these?" He replies, "You do not know these things." Then a fire appears among the books. When Mevlânâ said: "What is this?" shams said: "You don't know that either", and he walks out {al-Cevâhırü'l-Mudıyye, III, 345). On the other hand, it can be said that the event recorded by Ibn Battûta, which does not carry any subtleties, is unreal (Seyahatname, I, 323).
According to Eflâkî, this encounter is not mevlânâ's first encounter with Shams. While walking around Damascus, where she had previously gone to collect, Shams-i Tebrîzî was wearing a cone and felt black dress at the head of MevlânâAfter coming up to him and kissing his hand and saying, "The wind of the world, understand me!", he mingles with the crowd (Menâkıbü'l-Arifîn, I, 82). Elsewhere, Eflâkî tells this event by relocating Shams and Mevlânâ (a.g.e., II, 618).
After meeting Shams-i Tebrîzî, Mevlânâ completely cut off his relations with the people, put aside his lessons in the madrasa and his disciples and spent all his time chatting in Shams, which caused the disciples to hold grudges against Shams, who separated his sheikhs from them and did not know who he was. He also recorded thatShams left the city after various rumors spread among the people who were deprived of Mevlânâ's sermons, and the disciples apologized to Mevlânâ after this incident, which upset Mevlânâ very much. After a while, after learning that Shams was in Damascus, Mevlânâ wrote him very internal letters to return (for four letters in Arabic and Persian, see Eflâkî, II, 701-703). Since the first of these letters was 21 Shevval 643 (11 March 1246), {a.g.e., II, 630) remained in Shams Konya for about sixteen months.

Eflâkî says that Mevlânâ had a ferecî (open cardigan) made of the fabric called "hindibarî" worn by mourners during this separation, put a honey-colored wool cone on his head and wrapped a yellow in a sugary style on it, and started the semâ councils by making the four-digit rebarak six digits since then {a.g.e., I, 88-89). Sipehsâlâr states that Shams encouraged him to make a semâ (Risâle-i Sipehsâlâr, p. 128). Sultan Veled stated that his father then sent him to Damascus, that shams agreed to return to Konya in the face of the persistent invitation and that they returned to Konya together (Ibtidânâme, p. 59-60; see also Ferîdûn-i Sipehsâlâr, p. 131-132; Eflâkî, II, 695-696). Sultan Veled, who likened the relationship between Mevlânâ de Shams to the Hz. Mûsâ-Hızr relationship, says that he called Shams even though He was a prophet, and that he called Shams even though there was no one who had reached the office that Mevlânâ had reached in his time, such as his search for Hızr (Ibtidânâme, p. 48).

Mevlânâ and Shams chatted about mârifetullaha for six months, this time in his cell in Mevlânâ'smadrasa. No one could enter them except Sultan Veled and Sheikh Selâhaddîn-i Zerkûb (Eflâkî, II, 691). Meanwhile, Shams married Mevlânâ's son Kimya Hatun (Ferîdûn-i Sipehslâr, p. 133). When the disciples and the public began gossiping again, Shams told Sultan Veled that they wanted to separate him from Mevlânâ, which is unparalleled in knowledge and wisdom, this time that no one would be able to track him down after he disappeared, and one day he disappeared out of the question (Sultan Veled, p. 62, 64). It is indicated that this second disappearance of Shams-i Tebrîzî was in 645 (1247). Eflâkî says he was attempted to assassinate Shams before he disappeared. Shams came to the front of a group of seven cells while Mevlânâ was chatting, one of them asked Shams to come out, said to Shams de Mevlânâ: "They are calling me to kill me!", and at that moment Shams was stabbed with a knife. Shams threw a violent attack and disappeared, after which nothing but a few drops of blood was seen (Menâkıbü 'l-Ârifin, II, 684). Among the assassins was Mevlânâ's son Alâeddin, who, like the others, was in trouble and died, and Mevlânâhe did not attend his son's funeral. Sipehslâr said that jealousy began in Alâeddin because Mevlânâ and Shams showed more interest in Sultan Veled, He also stated that Mevlânâ allocated them the sofa of the kitchen because it was winter when she married Shams Kimya Hatun, that Shams warned her to be careful and respectful because Alaeddin had to pass by when she came to her father, and that Alâeddin's public statement about the situation caused the rumors to increase (Risâle-i Sipehslâr, p33).

Eflâkî says that Mevlânâ, who could not find Shams-i Tabrizî anywhere, wrapped a smoke-colored winding instead of a white yolk on his head forty days later, made a ferecî of Yemeni and Indian fabric and used this outfit for the rest of his life (Menâkıbü'l-Arifîn, II, 687). Sultan Veled states that after Shams disappeared for the second time, the father began to sing poems with love and I made a semâ day and night without a break {ibtidânâme, p. 65, 69). After a while, Mevlânâ went to Damascus in hopes of finding Shamsi, but returned before he could find it, went again a few years later, searched for months but could not find it again (a.g.e., p. 71, 73-76). According to Bedîuzzaman Fürûzanfer, Mevlânâ traveled to Damascus four times during this period (Mevlânâ Celâleddin, p. 117). Eflâkî records that during his third departure, he left Husâmeddin Çelebi to take care of the disciples and stayed in Damascus for about a year, and came back after the leading scholars and rulers, especially the Greek sultan, wrote letters to return to Anatolia (Menâkıbü'l-Arifîn, II, 698-699). According to eflâkî's other rumors, Shams was killed during the assassination and his body was dumped in a well. One night, Shams informed Sultan Veled of the well he had been thrown into in his dream, and sultan Veled took him out of the well with his disciples and buried him in mevlânâ's madrasa next to emîr Bedreddin, the architect of the madrasa (a.g.e., II, 700-701). According to another rumor recorded by Eflâkî and later mentioned by Câmî, shams' tomb is next to Bahâeddin Veled. Devletshah, Shamsi, mevlânâ's son Alâeddin said that a rumor had spread among the people that he had killed, but this was absolutely not true.

Sultan Veled explains that Mevlânâ then called him and told him that he wanted them to be subject to Saladin-i Zerkûb and that he did not love sheikhism (Ibtidânâme, p. 79-81). Selahaddin, who was busy jewellery, in his youth, indulged in Sayyid Burhâneddin Muhakkık-ı Tirmîzî, then mevlânâ (Eflâkî, II, 705), and after Şems-i Tebrîzî arrived, he joined his conversations (Ferîdûn-i Si-pehslâr, p. 134-135). Mevlânâ began to chat with Selâhaddîn-i Zerkûb this time. Alhowever, some disciples who said that Saladin was ignorant and not qualified for sheikhhood planned to go further and bury him in a place by secretly killing him, but the assassination was a prevented (Sultan Veled, p. 87-88, 92; Ferîdûn-i Sipehsâlâr, p. 137-138). Mevlânâ also points to the jealousy of the disciples by ingesting that cavusoglu, one of his old friends, was hostile to him after Sheikh Saladin took office of the hijam (Fîhi mâ Fîh, p. 89). Mevlânâ took Fatma Hatun, daughter of Selâhaddîn-i Zerkûb, to her son Sultan Veled and created a kinship between them. When Selâhaddîn-i Zerkûb died ten years later, Mevlânâ passed on Hüsâmeddin Çelebi of Urmia, also known as Ibn Ahî Turk, one of the disciples of the hijab office. Sultan Veled records that his father likened Shams-i Tebrîzî to the sun, Saladin-i Zerkûb to the aya, Hüsâmeddin Çelebi to the star and saw him in the same rank as the angels (Ibtidânâme, p. 143). The emergence of Mesnevî was encouraged by Hüsâmeddin Çelebi. Mevlânâ, According to Sultan Veled, ten (a.g.e., p. 153) died on 5 Cemâziyelâhir 672 (17 December 1273) after nine years (Risâle-i Sipehslâr, p. 190, 197) according to Sipehslâr. The day of his death was called "seb-i arûs" (wedding night) because he made a will not to cry and wail at his funeral and to complete the day of his death as a time of reunion, and the anniversary of his death came with this name. Sultan Veled says that a large group of people of all religions and denominations attended Mevlânâ's funeral, that Muslims saw him as the light and secret of muhammad, the Christians themselves as Jesus, and the Jews themselves as Moses (Ib tidânâme, p. 153). According to Eflâkî, Mevlânâ willed Sadreddin Konevî to perform the funeral prayers (Menâkıbü'l-Ariftn,II, 593). Sipehsâlâr states that Sadreddin Konevî passed out with hiccups when he came to the front of the coffin to perform the prayer, so Kadi Sirâceddin performed the prayer (Risâle-i Sipehsâlâr, p. 116). After Mevlânâ, Hüsâmeddin Çelebi continued his duty of hijam for ten more years and was replaced by Sultan Veled after his death.

Mevlânâ's disciples were mostly from the people's layer; people of all arts and professions attended the councils. However, he also had a close relationship with the rulers of the period. However, Mevlânâ generally maintained this relationship within the framework of advice and was careful not to get into political struggles based on the conflict and competition between the managers. Seljuk statesman Izzeddin Keykâvus II, Celâleddin Karatay, Konyali Kadi izzeddin, Emir Bedreddin Gevhertaş, IV. Kıhçarslan, Muînüddin Propeller, Mecduddin Atabeg, Emînüddin Mikâil, Tâceddin Mu'tez, Sâhib Fahreddin, Ale-müddin Kayser, Celâleddin Müstevfî, Atabeg Arslandoğmuş, Kirşehir judge Cacaoglu Nûreddin, his doctor Reîsül-etibbâ Ekmeleddin en-Nahcuvânî were those who had great respect and devotion to him. Muînüddin Pervâne's wife Georgian Hatun and Iv. Kilicarslan's wife Gömeç (Gumaç) Hatun were among his disciples.

Due to some of his statements about the Mongols, allegations have been made that Mevlânâ'nm is Mongolian sympathizer. However, Mevlânâ's visions of the Mongols are all about his interpretation of the events from an open perspective. In this context, Mevlânâ explains the rise of this great power of the period and on the other hand, he expresses the atrocities they have committed and says that they will not last long. At the heart of his interpretation of all events is the understanding that there may be positive aspects and developments even in the most negative situations. As a matter of fact, Baycu, the Mongol commander who surrounded Konya as envisioned by Mevlânâ,did not attack the city and the Mongols later became Muslims.

Mevlânâ had a close friendship with Fahreddîn-i Irâki. Irâkî was attending mevlânâ's ceremonies while following Sadreddin Konevî's lessons in Konya. It is seen that Mevlânâ's relations with Sadreddin Konevî were not good at first, but gradually improved, sadreddin Konevî, who was initially a dissident, later gave up this attitude and Mevlânâ became a friend. Mevlânâ's rumor that he attended some of his classes is not certain. Among those who met and chatted with Mevlânâ was Necmeddîn-i Dâye, the caliph of Necmeddîn-i Kübrâ, the founder of Kübreviyye, There are also Haci Mubarak Haydar, the caliph of Kutbüddin Haydar, the founder of Haydariyye, Sa'dî-i Şîrâzî, Kutbüddîn-i Şîrâzî, Hümâmüddin Tebrîzî and Hodja Reşîduddin.

Thought

Mevlânâ is a person who has the characteristics of scholars, scholars and poets in the universe. He started his childhood with his father and continued his studies in Aleppo and Damascus. He received his first sufism education from his father. It is also stated that his father Bahâeddin Veled, known by the nickname Sultânül-ulemâ, was said to be the caliph of Necmeddîn-i Kübrâ, the founder of Kübreviyye, and that he received a hijab from the cult line from Ahmed al-Ghazali. Mevlânâ was carried out by his caliph Seyyid Burhâneddin Muhakkık-ı Tirmizî, who was called "Sayyid-i Sırdan" because he knew what was in everyone's heart after his father's death or for informing him of Shams-i Tebrîzî's future. Sipehslâr's encounter with Shams-i Tebrîzî after Seyyid Burhâneddin, who is understood to be an exuberant sûfî from his nickname "Fahrü'l-Meczûbîn", is a turning point in Mevlânâ's life. Mevlânâ left aside his sermons, the lessons in the madrasah, the disciples, and the original Mevlânâ, who was born in this period, was born in this period and was hidden in love while his love was hidden in his care. He said most of the poems in Dîvân-ı Kebîr, one of the peaks of world poetry, during this period, during the period following the completion of Dîvân-ı Kebîrin, mesnevi, one of the most common and important works of Islamic culture.he followed.
The source of religious-sufism in Mevlânâ is the Qur'an and Sunnah. "I am a slave to the Qur'an as long as I have my dear skin. I am the land of the chosen Muhammad..." He said, "I'm like a pergel; I am walking around seventy-two peoples with one foot and one foot on sharia, but with the other," he said, adding that as a Muslim, I can embrace humanity.

Reza Kuli Khan's 1863 court in Tehran (Divân-ı Shamsu'l-Hakaik; This work was translated into Turkish by Midhat Baharî Beytur as Selected Poems from Divân-ı Kebir and published in three volumes [Ankara 1965]) and it was claimed that Mevlânâ was from Gulât-ı Sia due to some poems found in The Complex-i Shams-i Tebrîzi published in India in 1884.

It was discussed whether Muhyiddin Ibn'l-Arabî had influence on Mevlânâ. Some researchers presented mevlânâ and Ibn'l-Arabî's thought system in two opposite poles, while others said that Mevlânâ made the views of Ibn'l-Arabî that appealed to the high scholars understandable, thus reducing them to the level of the people, and some mentioned that it had a partial effect.

To Mevlânâ