sunnuntai 27. toukokuuta 2018

TURKIN VIIMEINEN PÄÄMINISTERI BINALI YILDIRIM

Binali Yıldırım, kuva: pixabay.com

Rauhallinen, ystävällinen, kohtelias ja päättäväinen. Hän on Binali Yildirim, Turkin viimeinen pääministeri. Tulevien vaalien jälkeen ( 24.6 ) presidenttijärjestelmä astuu voimaan Turkissa, jossa ei ole enää pääministerin virkaa. 

Pääministerin virka lopetetaan, mutta presidentillä tulee olemaan 1 tai 2 varapresidenttiä, jotka presidentti itse valitsee, niinkuin Yhdysvalloissa. Erona vain se, että Yhdysvalloissa presidentti ilmoittaa jo ennen vaaleja tulevan varapresidenttinsä. Turkissa presidentti valitsee varapresidentin vasta voittonsa jälkeen. Yhdysvalloissa, jos esim. presidentti keskeyttää kautensa. sairastuu, kuolee tai ei muuten ei pysty hoitamaan enää virkaansa, niin silloin varapresidentti hoitaa presidentin tehtävät koko kauden loppuun asti. Näissä tapauksissa Turkissa varapresidentti järjestää presidentin vaalit viimeistään 45:ssä päivässä, kuitenkin mahdollisimman pian, eli ei vie presidenttikautta loppuun asti.

Binali Yildirim on Izmiristä Akp:n kansanedustajaehdokas. Voittaessaan hän pääsee vaikuttamaan päätöksentekoon parlamentissa (lainsäädäntö valta). Hitaasti puhuvasta, mutta tehokkaasti toimivasta Binalista on tullut nopeasti kansan suosikki. 

sunnuntai 20. toukokuuta 2018

LOMALLE TURKKIIN 

Tällä hetkellä näyttää siltä, että Turkkiin on tehty paljon varauksia. Oletteko varanneet lomanne Turkista? Jos ette vielä ole, niin kannattaa pitää kiirettä. Vuosi 2018 on Turkin turismin kultavuosi. Muistakaa Turkki on turvallinen maa ja tarjoaa monenlaista viihdykettä. Turkki ei ole pelkkää aurinkoa ja rantaa. 

Turkin sisällä liikkuminen on helppoa. Auton vuokraaminen on helppoa ja busseilla, juneilla ja lentokoneilla on kätevä matkustaa. Tutuskaa turkkilaiseen kulttuuriin ja älkää tyytykö vain turistikohteiden kansainväliseen ilmapiiriin. Turkin kulttuuri on todella rikas.

Suosittelen ottamaan kontaktia myös paikalliseen väestöön. Turkkilaiset ovat todella vieraanvaraisia. Nauttikaa lomastanne ja toivotan teille hyvää kesää. Jos jokin askarruttaa mieltä Turkin matkailuun tai Turkkiin liittyen, niin voitte olla yhteydessä. 


NOIN VIIKON UUTISET TURKISTA

Turkissa on kuusi presidenttiehdokasta. Ehdokkaat ovat: Erdogan ( AKP, MHP,BBP ), Muharrem Ince ( CHP ), Meral Aksener ( IP ), Temel Karamollaoglu ( SP ), Selahattin Demirtas ( HDP ), Dogu Berincek ( VP ). 

Presidenttiehdokkaista Selahattin Demirtas on vankilassa. Turkissa on puhe siitä, että pitäisikö hänet vapauttaa, mutta presidentti tai pääministeri ei päätä siitä vaan Turkin oikeusjärjestelmä. 

Parlamenttivaaleja varten puolueet tekivät kaksi vaaliliittoa ( AKP, MHP, BBP, ) ( CHP, IP, SP ). Kukaan vaaliliitoista ei halua olla tekemisissä HDP:n kanssa. Siihen on syynsä ja se on HDP:N tuki PKK:lle. 

CHP:n ehdokas Muharrem Ince on ollut CHP:n puoluejohtaja ehdokkaana, mutta puolueen delegaatio ei ole äänestänyt häntä, koska ei ole luottanut häneen. Tällä hetkellä kansa puhuu siitä, että kuinka kansalaiset voivat luottaa ehdokkaaseen, jos oma puoluekaan ei luota. 

Näyttää siltä, että Erdogan voittaa presidenttivaalit. Turkin oppositio keskittyy enemmän parlamenttivaaleihin, kuin presidentinvaaleihin. Koska jos he saavat enemmistön ( 301 ) kansanedustajaa, niin he voivat jarruttaa presidenttiä ja voivat hankaloittaa presidentin työtä. Mikään puolue ei ole vielä julistanut kansanedustaja ehdokkaitansa, koska karsinnat tehdään tarkan seulan läpi. Tällä tavoin jokainen puolue haluaa saada enemmän ääniä hyvien ehdokkaidensa kautta. Tällä hetkellä näyttää siltä, että naisehdokkaita olisi enemmän kuin  aikaisemmissa vaaleissa ja myös 18-vuotias voi asettua ehdolle. Nuoria ehdokkaitakin on todennäköisesti mukana. 

Kenelläkään ehdokkaalla ei ole valittamista siitä, ettei pääsisi kuulluksi. Koska vaihtoehtoinen media ( Twitter, Facebook, You Tube jne.. ) on vahvempi nykypäivänä kuin perinteinen media. Jokainen kansalainen itse päättää milloin, missä ja miten haluaa ehdokkaitaan kuunnella. 

keskiviikko 16. toukokuuta 2018

HAREM-2

 (Lue edellisen kirjoituksen ensin)


202-What parts of female slaves’ bodies which have to be covered is the master permitted to see?

In the books on Islamic law, this issue falls under the heading Naẓar. These books state that, other than in cases of necessity, it is forbidden (ḥarām) to look at those parts of the body called ‘avret, which were described. Cases of necessity were the examīnations by a doctor, midwife, nurse, etc.
People may be categorized in five groups in respect of those parts of the body they may see.

The First Group. Men may look at other men’s bodies except for the parts that have to be covered for prayer; those parts are between the waist and the knees and are called ʻawret; according to Islam, it is forbidden to look at them. But the degree of the knee and leg is not the same as that of the private parts, which are known as ʻawret-i ghaliẓa.

The Second Group. Women may view the same parts of other women’s bodies that men may view of other men. Thus, the ruling for women is the same as that for men. The condition for both is that no lust is involved.

The Third Group. A man may look at the entire body of his wife or female slave over whom he has the right of concubinage. Some legal authorities have stated that it is “disapproved of” (makrūh) to look at the reproductive organs.

The Fourth Group. Men may look only at the heads, chests (not breasts), arms, and legs below the knees of women who fall within the stipulated degrees of blood and marriage relationships, and foster sisters and mothers, like mothers, sisters, foster mothers, and so on, and female slaves over whom others have the right of concubinage, i.e. all female slaves including those employed as servants. The condition is that they feel no lust; they may also touch those places they are permitted to see. It is not permissible for them to look at their stomachs, backs, upper legs, and so on, even if they feel no lust.

The Fifth Group. Men may look only at the hands and faces of women outside the stipulated degrees of kinship. And the condition for this also is that they not feel any lust.[14] The difference, therefore, between free women and female slaves is that, it is permissible for the slaves’ heads, hair, chests (but not breasts), arms, and legs below the knee to be visible to men outside the stipulated degrees of kinship, the same as free women within the stipulated degrees of kinship. The view that the position of female slaves is similar to that of men is not found in the books on law and is not correct. The assertions that those parts of the female slaves’ body have to cover are different and that the Sulṭāns had them bathe naked while they looked on are complete fabrications and calumnies, arising from ignorance of Islamic law.

It should also be pointed out that the position of a male slave before his female owner was similar to that of any male outside the stipulated degrees of kinship, and falls into the Fifth Group above. Eunuchs are considered to be the same as normal males in this case. Nevertheless, some authorities state that it is permissible for eunuchs who are bereft of all sexual feeling to mix with women within the limitations described in the Fourth Group above. The eunuchs entering the Ḥarem freely, if only to a limited extent, during some periods, was based on this ruling. But generally speaking, all eunuchs were regarded as normal males in this respect. A Western writer describes this situation that:

No man apart from physicians could step foot inside the Ḥarem, and they could only enter it with the special permission of the Sulṭān and accompanied by the eunuchs. Those attending the sick woman were wrapped entirely in long shawls. If the doctor wanted to take the patient’s pulse, her wrist was covered in a fine cloth. And if he needed to examīne her tongue or eyes, he could only do so if the remainder of her face was entirely covered. The chief eunuch even could not look at any of the Ḥarem women directly.[15]

As is well known, a great distinction was made during Ottoman times between the garments women wore indoors and those they wore outdoors. Around the beginning of the sixteenth century, women's outdoor clothing consisted of a ferace (overcoat), a yaşmak (light-colored veil), and a peçe (black veil). Winter overcoats were made of wool while those worn in summer of silk. They had full sleeves and wrapped the body very loosely. Opening in the front, they reached the ground. During the eighteenth century, trimmed collars were added. Over the years, the length of the “collars” varied, sometimes reaching as far as the lower hem, as during the reign of Mahmud II. During the second half of the nineteenth century, skirt fronts were cut round and were fastened by a single button. Edges were embellished with pleating. Overcoat colors played an important role during Ottoman times: Muslim women wore red, blue, or green feraces while those worn by non-Muslim women were of paler shades. Yaşmaks were made from a fine, soft, white fabric and consisted of two parts: one that was wrapped about the head covering it to the eyebrows and another that covered the lower part of the face to just below the bridge of the nose.

The çarşaf, a baggy outer garment, is a fairly late addition to the Ottoman woman's wardrobe, having been introduced from Syria after 1872. Made from two long pieces of cloth joined together and fastened in pleats at the waist with a drawstring, it was worn together with a transparent veil over the face. This innovation did not always meet with approval, Sulṭān Abdiilhamid II, for example, expressly forbade the women of his palace to wear it. The baggy çarşaf was in some cases replaced by a two-piece affair consisting of a skirt and cape.
Within the home, Ottoman women of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries dressed in ankle-length trousers called şalvar, long-sleeved shifts of a seersucker gauze that reached down to the heels, long-sleeved cardigans, and robes known as kaftan. Open in the front and lacking any trimming, the fullness of the skirts of these robes was increased by the addition of narrow godets from the waist down. This style was common in skirts until the 19th century.

The dresses called üç etek (having a three-panelled skirt) and dört etek (having a four-panelled skirt) made their appearance in the early nineteenth century. Another costume consisting of baggy şalvars, a short, tight-fitting jacket embroidered with silver thread, and a sash with embroidered ends bound at the waist was as elegant as it was comfortable to wear. Blouses were made of seersucker or silk and had cuffs and collars trimmed with lace. A type of dress called bindalli, made from velvet or satin and heavily embroidered with elaborate patterns in silver and gold braid, was indispensable attire for special occasions like bridal henna parties.

One result of steadily increasing European influence on the Ottoman Empire was the occasional use of imported European fabrics for traditional woman's garments beginning in the eighteenth century. During the nineteenth century, such traditional garments as the üç etek and şalvar were cast aside in favor of costumes influenced by Parisian fashions. Traditional dresses were replaced by close-fitting corseted garments, blouses with long, full sleeves, and long, flounced skirts. Such attire was naturally accompanied by accessories such as silk stockings, fans, gloves, and parasols. The most important garment in any woman’s life is her wedding dress. In every period, wedding dresses have been made from the most expensive fabrics available according to the prevailing fashion and style. Until fairly late in the nineteenth century, Ottoman brides dressed in lively colors (red was a particular favorite) at their weddings. The bridal veil was also made of red gauze well into the nineteenth century and was embroidered with silver and gold braid. European fashions, however, begin to weigh heavily in the design of Ottoman bridal costumes from about the 1870s on. While the fabric was silk, the colors tended to be pastel pinks, blues, and creams. The gowns were made in two parts and had a train while the traditional silver and gold braid embellishments are augmented with lace, pearls, and sequins. During this period, bridal gowns were sometimes worn beneath a matching fur-lined kaftan. In 1898, Princess Naime, daughter of Abdülhamid II, wore a pure-white bridal gown at her wedding. The fashion of the bride wearing white thus introduced by the court was to influence the rest of Turkish society in the following century.

203. Gold and silver dishes were used in the Topkapı Palace and the Ḥarem, which Islam forbids

I should say first that up to four or five years ago I thought the same thing, and I used to be upset when I saw the ruling in books on Islamic law. Nevertheless, although I only knew a little about the Sulṭāns’ daily lives and had read about one or two aspects of them, I always told myself that they would not infringe such a ruling. Two things should be known in respect to this question. First, eating from pure silver or gold dishes is forbidden by Islamic law, but it is permissible to use gold and silver plate (that is, utensils covered with a thin coat of gold or silver). Second, the gold and silverware in the Topkapı Palace and the Ḥarem is of two kinds. The first are ornāmental objects like clocks and candlesticks which are pure gold and silver, while the others are the kitchen utensils and tableware. According to the information I obtained from the Director of the Topkapı Sarayı Museum and other officials, all the latter, which are thought to be pure silver or gold, are in fact all plate. Some inaccurate statements have been made on this subject. I will suffice with a single quote from the books of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence): It is permissible to eat from both gold and silver plate, and to sit on furniture covered with gold embroidery. But some authorities have stated that to use such wares is, at the least, “disapproved of” (makrūh).[16]

204. Castration, the Ottoman padişahs and their intimate relations with women in the Ottoman Ḥarem

Eunuchs are males who have either been castrated or who were born lacking that part of their anatomy. It is not known what means were used to castrate males in that period. Islamic law does not permit depriving a human being of his or her natural means of procreation. None of the Ottoman Şeyḫulislams considered castration to be lawful, and many issued categorical fatwās stating this. Both cutting off the male organ and the removal of the testicles are prohibited by Islamic law. The second, castration, is called iḫtiṣā. The following is the meaning of a Hadīth of the Prophet (pbuh) connected with this subject.
Abu Hurayra said to the Prophet: “O Messenger of Allah! I am young and am frightened of committing adultery. I don’t have the means to marry. If you permit it, I shall have myself castrated.” Three times he received no reply to his question. The fourth time Allah’s Messenger replied a little impatiently: “Abu Hurayra! Your destiny has dried the ink of your pen! It makes no difference whether you do or not.” Abu Hurayra was not only left at odds here, but he was being scolded for wanting to change the Divinely determined nature of his creation.[17]

The chief argument, however, that castration is not permitted in Islam is based on the following verse, on which the Ottoman Şeyḫulislams based their fatwās:
(Satan said:) “I will mislead them, and I will create in them false desires; I will order them to slit the ears of cattle, and to deface the (fair) nature created by Allah.” Whoever, forsaking Allah, takes Satan for a friend, has of a surety suffered a loss that is manifest.[18]

Explaining this verse, Islamic scholars have stated that it is prohibited to castrate human beings, but if it helps humankind, one may castrate animals, such as horses and oxen. Scholars, including some Şeyḫulislams, also said that it was makrūh to employ castrated men, since it encourages the castration of others. The difference between ḥarām, what is prohibited, and makrūh, what is strongly disapproved of, is only one of degree.

The following fatwā given by Şeyḫulislam Dürrizāde el-Seyyid Meḥmed ‘Arif Efendi makes the matter abundantly clear:
Question: Is it considered lawful by Sharī‘ah for the male organ of some black men and Abyssinians, and the men and boys brought from Egypt and that region, to be amputated or for them to be castrated?

The Answer: It is forbidden [ḥarām]. The great interpreters of the Qur’an have made it clear that castration is alluded to by the verse: “... and to deface the (fair) nature created by Allah.” Whoever, forsaking Allah, takes Satan for a friend, has surely suffered a loss that is manifest. Those who perform such vile works are following the orders of Satan and, by taking Satan as their protector, are included among those threatened by the verse, thus becoming great sinners.

Question: So what should be done, according to the Sharī‘ah, to those who perpetrate that forbidden act, which is the cause of the death of some men and boys of this sort, and for them to be without issue?

The Answer: They should be severely chastised and restrained through lengthy imprisonment, and any judges who are lenient in punishing this wrongdoing and connive in it are themselves sinners and deserve to be removed from office.[19]
Eunuchs, men who have been castrated or who have been in that state from birth, generally suffer from mental disorders. They tend to be childish, temperamental, and nervous, and at the same time, simple-hearted, harmless, yet two-faced.
The Ottoman Sulṭāns and officials on no account had either themselves or others castrated. Nevertheless, they bought slaves brought from Africa as eunuchs for employment in their houses and in the Ḥarem. To do so is not ḥarām, but makrūh, as described above.
We learn from the Kabusnāme that when taking on eunuchs for the palace, they had to pass a rigorous examīnation by people who were well-versed in the art of physiognomy, who looked for certain characteristics that assisted in determining their mental make-up from their physical features.

We have come now to the marks of those who are to be employed as eunuchs.... They should be very dour and sour-faced, and puckered and wrinkled. They should be weak-chested, dry-skinned, and lank-haired, with broadly spaced teeth, weak voices, and narrow calves. They should be thick-lipped, broad-nosed, short-fingered, scraggy-necked, and of bent stature. If they are like what I say, they are suitable to be eunuchs in the Palace. But there should be no white eunuchs in the Palace, especially if they are ruddy complexioned. You should avoid quiet and fair eunuchs at all costs, especially if they are hairless, with watery eyes encrusted with dried rheum. It is said that they love women themselves or else they act as pimps to make others fancy them. In short, it is said no good will come of any that resemble this.[20]

It is a fact that the organs of some eunuchs who have been castrated or have had their male organs cut off regrew later, and they have again become sexually active. The following precautions were taken in the Ḥarem to protect it against any disturbance to which this might lead.

a) In conformity with the rulings of Islam, the eunuchs were permitted to enter the Ḥarem only with the permission and under the supervision of members of the Sulṭān’s family. The Qur’anic verse inscribed over the main door, which concerns this issue, has been mentioned above. The following lines also confirm that the Ḥarem eunuchs were forbidden to enter the Ḥarem. Kösem Sulṭān, who was alive at the time of Meḥmed IV’s ascension to the throne, wrote: From now on you shall look to yourselves. You shall not interfere in the matters of either the Ḥarem or the provinces. You are all unfree slaves. You have no duties other than sitting in front of the Ḥarem door. The rooms before the Ḥarem door have been assigned to you. If I ever hear that you have cast one step inside the Ḥarem door, you will be killed instantly and without mercy. If any matter of importance arises and I have to be informed of it, you shall inform the Housekeeper (Katḫudā Kadın) by means of a memorandum, and she shall inform us.

b) The reputed immorality of the courts of China and the West were taken into consideration when it was decided that the eunuchs of the Ottoman Ḥarem should have had their male organs completely amputated. They were also chosen for the ugliness of their features.

c) In the exceptional event that the male organs of the Ḥarem eunuch regrew, they were immediately expelled from the Ḥarem and given a salary. Such an event occurred during the reign of Mahmud II. The following note was sent to the Sulṭān: “Their manhood has been restored to the slaves Gebzeli Ibrahim Ağa, Geyveli Ali Ağa, and Rumelili Abdullah Ağa, from those (employed) in the Bāb al-Saʻāde al-ʻAliyye ....” The Sulṭān’s reply was: “I have seen it. The three shall each be given a monthly allowance of fifty kuruş and the expenses charged to the necessary place.”

It is undeniable that, despite all the precautions aimed at both the female slaves and the eunuchs, troublemakers emerged, for Satan always fans the flames of mischief-making – and some undesirable incidents did occur. It is not realistic to claim that where the human element is present, and especially where men and women are together in the same place, trouble and mischief does not occur. Moreover, in some periods, the chief Ḥarem aga, and the other ağas, were not eunuchs and were permitted to marry female slaves and keep concubines. For example, the Chief Gentleman-in-Waiting Rasim Ağa kept concubines and the Chief Ağa Hayrullah Ağa had a wife.[21]


There were two categories of eunuch taken into the Ḥarem. The first were the white eunuchs. Since the castration of males is forbidden by Islam, the first white eunuchs were obtained in the period of the Ottoman expansion from the many Hungarian, German, and Slav captives brought to Istanbul. Later Georgian, Armenian, and Caucasian eunuchs were bought. These were called ak agalar, for ak means white. Until 1582, during the reign of Murad III, when the black Abyssinian eunuch Meḥmed Ağa was appointed chief eunuch (Bāb al-Saʻāde ağası), this post had been filled by white eunuchs. The most important function of the white eunuchs was to protect the Ḥarem and the mābeyn (the apartments where the Sulṭān received his viziers), and perform the necessary attendant duties. If they were posted outside the palace, they were given the rank of vizier and appointed to the governorship of Egypt.

The second were the black eunuchs. Because of both the increased possibility of trouble, the difficulty in procuring white eunuchs, and the difficulty of castrating them, and their lack of physical endurance, black eunuchs began to be obtained for the Ḥarem instead of the white ones. This was especially so from the time of Murad III. The slave traders had black children castrated whom they had obtained by various means on their travels to Egypt, Abyssinia, and Central Africa. They then sold them in the ports of the Mediterranean to be sent to – for the most part–  Istanbul and Egypt.

A school was founded in the Ḥarem for these black eunuchs, called the Ağalar Ocağı. The boys sent here were instructed and trained by older eunuchs. They were taught Turkish and the etiquette of the Ḥarem and court, both in theory and practice, and were given Muslim nāmes. The Ḥarem had a school, as did the inner palace. On completing their education and on reaching a certain age, the black eunuchs were assigned to the duties of the Ḥarem.

At the time of Meḥmed the Conqueror, the numbers of eunuchs employed in the Entrance of the Ḥarem, the quarters of the black eunuchs, were not more than twenty; in 1517 there were not more than forty, and in 1537, not more than twenty. Their number did not exceed one hundred, although Western sources have indicated numbers of 500, 600, and even 800. But their intention was to malign the Ottomans because they were Muslims. Such numbers are entirely fictional. As a matter of fact, those who make such allegations hold no reliable historical reference at hand.[22]


206. The musical feasts were held in the Ottoman State

In Islam some music is lawful (ḥalāl) and some is prohibited (ḥarām). Music that arouses and elevates emotions for the love of God is lawful. For instance, remembrances and glorifications of Allah in the universe, the chants of winds, the tunes of sea waves, the Divine words of rain, birds and the like fall into this group. It is as if the universe is a Divine chamber of tunes that inspires hearts through many sorts of chants and warbles with Divine sorrow and love, thus overwhelming hearts and souls with spiritual pleasures, silencing the instinctual soul and raising the mind and spirit to lofty matters and eternal worlds. In fact, Mehter, Ottoman Military Music, is the best example of this kind of music. On the other hand, music that excites lust and despair is proscribed. Therefore, music not specified by the Sharī‘ah is judged according to its effect on the spirit and the conscience.

As is well known, the Iraqi school, led by Hanafi jurists, regarded music as proscribed with very few exceptions, saying that “Inhibition is absolute, freedom is exceptional.” On the other hand, another group led by Shafi’i jurists consented to the playing of such musical instruments as ney (reed) and def (tambourine) saying that “Freedom is absolute, prohibition is exceptional.” In fact, Bitlisli Idris, an Islamic scholar, in his book Qānun-ı Shahinshahī drew attention to this issue and addressed the Ottoman Sulṭān as follows:  When it comes to relaxing by listening to the saz (Turkish guitar) and other stringed instruments and to beautiful voices, this is in keeping with the laws of Greek philosophy. The scholars of Sharī‘ah have also permitted certain sounds. The chief of these is the recitation of the Qur’an with a fine voice. The Qur’an states: “And recite the Qur’an in slow, measured rhythmic tones.” The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) corroborated this with the Hadīth: “Anyone who does not recite the Qur’an well is not one of us.” It is also lawful to recite odes and poetry. The Prophet permitted this too. Most of the authority of the Shafi‘i School permitted certain instruments like the tambourine and the flute. Some Shafi‘i scholars stated that the ud (lute) and the qānun (zither) were permissible (mubāh). This is stated in the books of fatwās. Some of the saints and the pious considered the semā‘ and similar religious activities to be permissible. I personally have written an article showing, with evidence, that certain musical instruments like the lute and flute are permissible.[23]

According to fatwās issued by religious scholars in the light of the above rulings, the people of the Ḥarem played musical instruments such as the lute (ud), violin (keman), tambourine (def), castanets (çalpare), flute (ney), and a sort of lute called the tambur. It might be said that, concerning music, Ottoman social life applied the opinions of the Shafi’i school of jurists instead of the Hanafi. As a matter of fact, seeing the soldiers’ playing the snare drums in the Niẓām-i Jadīd (New Order) of Selim III was disapproved of by both public and scholars. Munib Efendi wrote a separate treatise, Risālahh, in which he stated that for the Niẓām-i Jadīd’s soldiers to wear European-style uniforms and play the snare drums was permissible for they were merely performing for training purposes. Groups for dancing, singing, and playing consisted of male musicians. We are also informed from references that maestros were called muʻallimūn-i Enderūn-i humāyūn.

Again, we know that groups of sāzendes (instrumentalists) were formed from female slaves from the palace and the Ḥarem. The slaves selected to be instrumentalists received training in the music school or from teachers at their homes, particularly in the later period of the empire. These players were generally concubines who had risen to the rank of kalfa, on whom there were no restrictions to their being in the presence of the Sulṭān or his sons. They were called sāzende kalfa, and their chief was the sāzendebaşı or baş sāzende.
Westernization in the nineteenth century led to the introduction of the piano among the old stringed instruments, and it even became the fashion in the Ḥarem. The Sulṭān’s sons and daughters and even the kadın efendis learned to play the piano.

With the exception of some entertainments held in the later period, throughout the Ottoman period, the players played music with a religious flavor that aroused elevated emotions, and was accompanied by the flute, the lute, and similar instruments. Memoirs about court life inform us about this. Only rarely did any incidents occur that may be said to be unlawful. The unlawful musical amusements depicted in some books are entirely figments of the writers’ imaginations. On the other hand, it is impossible to regard with tolerance those musical instruments that entered the palace during the reigns of Selim III, Mahmud II, and especially Abdulmecid II, and to harmonzie some state officials’s attending jazz parties and balls with Islamic law. In fact, Aḥmed Cevdet Paşa censored some state officials in this regard.[24]

207. It is rumored that illicit entertainments were held in the Ḥarem hall, called Ḫunkār Sofası, and indecent calumnies  in this regard

Ḫunkār Sofası (the Imperial Hall) is a part of the Ḥarem that has been the subject of the most surprising misrepresentations. I will therefore first describe it and then correct some of the distortions. The Imperial Hall was one of the most magnificent chambers of the Ḥarem. Used as the main reception room of the Ḥarem, it is rectangular in shape and its walls are most lavishly adorned and decorated. It contains a canopied throne. It was also the room for receiving guests. Its most important feature is that, in addition all its walls being covered with tiles and decoration, the decorations contain Qur’anic verses, Hadīths, and other verses about the life of the family, the upbringing of children, and similar subjects.
Before correcting some of the misrepresentations about the Imperial Hall, I want to recount an experience connected with it. On a winter night in 1993 at nearly midnight, I had just arrived home from a meeting when the phone rang. It was a friend who was quite upset. “On such-and-such a channel they are showing a film about the Ottomans,” he explained, “Tell me, for goodness sake, is what they are showing true?” So I turned on the television and a film that, I was later too sorry to learn, had been made with the permission of the Ministry of Culture, was being shown on an independent channel. I later learned that the film was called Gözde (Favorite). I was horrified at what I saw when I turned on the television: a man and woman, stark naked, were embracing. But this was not what shocked me; what shocked me was seeing, through their naked legs, verses from the Holy Qur’an on the wall behind them. I was truly horrified. I learned afterwards that this was the Imperial Hall, and that the actors were portraying the world of the Sulṭān and his concubines in the Ḥarem. I could not sleep that night. The next morning, I went to the Topkapı Imperial Hall, which had been shown the previous evening and where, it was claimed, such orgies were held. What I had seen was correct; the walls of the Imperial Hall were covered with Qur’anic verses, Hadīths, and verses from the Qaṣida-i Burdah. The verses that had been visible between their naked legs began: God is the Protector of those who have faith; He takes them out from the depths of  darkness and will lead them forth into light. Of those who reject faith their patrons are the evil ones: from light they will lead them forth into the depths of darkness.[25]

The verses continue with Abraham’s admonitions to Nimrod about Divine Unity. On the wall facing are lines from Imām Busiri’s Qaṣida-i Burdah, which is reputed to preserve people, and their families and countries, from all sorts of calamities, physical and spiritual. Besmele, it is written in fine calligraphy.

Regretfully, I have to say that, in the majority of sources, the Imperial Hall is described as the Ḥarem’s recreation room. And where the aim is to slander the Ottomans and Islam it is described as the place where the Sulṭāns held their orgies. Such statements are the most simplistic of this sort of misrepresentation:
In the Imperial Hall, young and beautiful girls with soft voices would send the Sulṭān into transports of delight with their sweet songs, accompanied by famous and talented musicians, while he reclined on soft cushions quaffing raqi ... .[26]

Rather than reply to such claims, I want to ask the readers of this book. If you fill your bookcases in that fine room with copies of the Qur’an and Qur’anic commentaries, place open copies of the Qur’an on tables, and then invite to that room, which has inscribed on its every wall verses from the Qur’an, the most immoral woman you can find and the most immoral man, and propose to them, after pointing out the Qur’anic verses, that they commit their debauchery there, offering them a considerable sum of money, would they agree to such a proposal? Or to put it another way, would it be possible to find two people so immoral anywhere in the world? Needless to say, those whose conscience and nature have been corrupted are exceptions to this rule. In my view, anyone with any sense would decline such an offer. And so, if the two most immoral people in the world would not do such a thing, would the Ottoman Sulṭāns, who represented the Islamic world for centuries?

208. Some games and entertainments permitted in the Ottoman state

We know that the supposedly monotonous life of the Ḥarem was broken from time to time by storytellers, puppet shows, and theatricals, and that the people of the Ḥarem played games like bekizköz, and sürme. In the nineteenth century, draughts, backgammon, and dominoes were added. Card games never exceeded the permitted limits. The female slaves of the palace held musical evenings among themselves twice a week in rooms assigned to them. Dancing was also performed by a group of them. Male dancers were formerly called çengi but were later called çeks, and çengi was used for the girl dancers. Occasionally, some of the Ḥarem girls would dress up in men’s outfits and dance the köçek. After the Tanẓīmāt, these old dances were abandoned in favor of European amusements. European-style dancing was introduced to the Ḥarem in the reign of Selim III, and this was followed by the theatre and operetta. Nevertheless, it was also attempted to keep these innovations within lawful bounds. In spite of these efforts, there were incidents where the limits of legitimacy were crossed.[27]

209. It has been asserted that a thorough atmosphere of pleasure seeking and entertainment was dominant at the Ḥarem and that all kinds of amusements – legitimate or illegitimate – were held there. Are such allegations true?

As long as it is in conformity with the rule “the bounds of the licit are broad; there is no need to enter upon what is forbidden,” entertainments and recreation are permitted in Islam. But these should be within the limits laid down for the mingling of the sexes, with the members of the opposite sexes outside the stipulated degrees of kinship not mixing while taking part in any informal gatherings for recreation or entertainment. For example, the father of a family can enjoy himself within the bounds of what is lawful together with his wife and children. The Imperial Ḥarem, the Sulṭāns’ home or residence, was not exempt from this rule. The Sulṭāns certainly relaxed there together with their wives and children, and amused themselves in a lawful fashion. The concubines also took part in these families “get-togethers,” which were held in convenient places, including the Imperial Hall (Ḫunkār Sofası). But this should not be taken to mean that orgies and other excesses took place here, as depicted in some books. As was briefly described above, Qur’anic verses and Hadīths of the Prophet (pbuh) decorating the walls would not have permitted this. And, second, the sorts of diversions indulged in in certain quarters would certainly not have been lawful.

This drawing room was used for family gatherings and, as long as there were no other women present, for musical entertainment, singing, and other diversions not contrary to Islam, for the Sulṭān, his wives and children, female slaves and so on. It was the Ḥarem “sitting room” and place for receiving guests. One can learn what kinds of entertainments were held here from Safiye Ünüvar’s book on life in the Ḥarem.[28]

210. Life in the Ḥarem and entertainments called ḫalwat enjoyed by the Ottoman Sulṭāns with their families

If one heard the expression “the daily life of the Ḥarem” one would immediately think of the eating habits of those that lived there, how they dressed, and most importantly, the Sulṭān’s private family life. As a word, khalwat means retirement or privacy, and in this context refers to the women of the Ḥarem relaxing in freedom, although within the bounds of the licit in the Ḥarem gardens or in recreation spots outside. If the Sulṭān wanted to meet with his wives, concubines, or children and it was not suitable to go outside, he would summon them to his chambers, where they would converse. Such meetings solely with his family were called muḫtaṣar khalwat, which means more or less “informal recreation.”

The gatherings or meetings in the Sulṭān’s private garden should be mentioned here. Although these were also gatherings for the Sulṭāns’ immediate family, for relaxation and conversation, they were depicted by some writers as debaucheries held in the palace gardens.

With misrepresentations of this sort, certain writers have depicted entirely fanciful scenes of the Sulṭāns’ gatherings with their families and the slaves who served them in the gardens or in suitable places in the Ḥarem under the name of ḫalwat. By way of response to such falsifications, I include here a brief summary of one such gathering and its preparations.

The Sulṭān sent a decree to the officials in question informing them of his wish to hold a family gathering, and ordered that the members of his family should not be disturbed. So that the women could remain secluded, walkways and screens were erected in the Sulṭān’s private garden. On the day of the gathering, the third court was entirely emptied of all staff, and any parts of the garden that were visible from the outside were hung with cloths. In the garden, marquees were erected over the paths where the women would be wandering, with specially decked out seats where they could rest. Also readied were places where the prayers (salah) could be performed, and other places where the children could play. These were decked out with embroidered cushions, bolsters, and drapes from the Ḥarem.

Some Western writers have described the boredom and monotony of Ḥarem life, with no outside men being allowed in and the women not being allowed out when they wanted. One writer tried to explain this is terms of the Sharī‘ah rulings on the non-mixing of the sexes: The women could not even go out into the gardens without the Sulṭān’s permission. They could only spend days in the pavilions from time to time with special permission. On such occasions, the gardeners, who acted as watchmen, had orders to absent themselves, and the veils were drawn.

No man apart from physicians could step foot inside the Ḥarem, and they could only enter it with the special permission of the Sulṭān and accompanied by the eunuchs. Those attending the sick woman were wrapped entirely in long shawls. If the doctor wanted to take the patient’s pulse, her wrist was covered in a fine cloth. And if he needed to examīne her tongue or eyes, he could only do so if the remainder of her face was entirely covered. The chief eunuch even could not look at any of the Ḥarem women directly.

The family gatherings of the Sulṭāns and their families, slaves, and concubines continued to be held until the collapse of the empire and the abolition of the Sultanate, after the Sulṭāns moved from Topkapı to the Yıldız, Çırağan, and Beşiktaş palaces.[29]

211. It is known that some excursions were held and Kāğıtḫāne entertainments were enjoyed in the Ottoman state

To ensure that the women of the Ḥarem did not lead an entirely shut-in life, particularly in summer, outside trips called beylik excursions were organized. One of the most famous of these excursion spots in the Tulip Age was Kağıtḫāne, situated on the stream that feeds the Golden Horn.

Tents and marquees were sent to the excursion spot beforehand and these were set up, connected by walkways so that the necessary rules regarding the mixing of the sexes could be observed, and the women and slaves could wander about freely without being observed by any men who had joined the expedition who were outside the stipulated degrees of kinship. The same practices were observed even in the family gatherings held in the palace gardens. The excursions were organized by the chief and second secretaries. The Sulṭān’s wives, daughters, slaves, servants, and concubines climbed into their carriages and set off for the excursion spot. The convoy was led and accompanied by eunuchs on horseback.
Formerly, many of the Sulṭāns’ kadın efendis travelled to the places where their sons were appointed as beylerbeys or sancak beys, and this was called a göç-i Humāyūn or naql-i Humāyūn. Those who did not accompany them very often travelled to the palace at Edirne. After the reign of Aḥmed III, the palaces of Yıldız, Çırağan, and Beşiktaş took the place of Edirne.

Such excursions were also done by some other families. They entertained themselves within legitimate limits too. We regret to learn that particularly during the Tulip Age and the reign of Selim III the Caique trips, Kāğıtḫāne entertainments, and ḫalwat talks greatly increased and even the limits of legitimate entertainment were crossed.[30]

212. It has been alleged that there are several books that could be said to be “Harmful Publications of the Ottomans,” like the works of Fāḍil of Andarun, viz. Daftar-i ʻAshq (The Book of Love), Ḫubānnāme, and Tusi’s Bahnāme

We should first state that we have referred to some of them in this book . However, we did not even feel it necessary to refer to some of them. Nevertheless, we have studied all of them in their original editions and have even taken photos and microfilms of some them. It would be useful to give some brief information about these books and the references that are used as research material. Nevertheless, after this brief look we would like to report some general stipulations about sexual life within legitimate limits.

We should emphasize that, when talking about the characteristics of believers, the Noble Qur’an reveals the following verses: They are those believers who preserve their chastity, with the exception of their legitimate wives and their concubines with whom they are allowed to lie, for they shall by no means be scolded for their relations with them. Whoever wishes aught other than this legitimate circle, they are verily of the transgressors.[31]

There is a lawful sexual life in Islam, with rules and manners that have been described in the verses of the Noble Qur’an, through the principles of the traditions of the Blessed Prophet Muhammad, through the Sharī‘ah decrees in the related chapters of the books of Islamic jurisprudence, as well as through the detailed explanations in chapters called Ādāb al-Jimā‘ (Ways of Sexual Intercourse) in the books of Islamic manners and ethics. Information on sexual life within lawful limits exists in books on Islamic jurisprudence, which exclude all queer or shameful acts. As a matter of fact, the Blessed Envoy of Allah even explained all the details of relations between husband and wife. Needless to say, a religion presuming to arrange all the aspects of human life cannot be thought to have overlooked such issues.

The teachings in the chapters of those books fulfilling this religious requirement are meant for all Muslims, and particularly for those couples who are to be married in the proper way. This has nothing to do with indecency. However, as in every subject, some abuses might occur here as well. For instance, if some people have gone beyond the boundaries of decency in their attempt to describe the ways of sexual intercourse within lawful limits or have penned a work dealing with illegitimate descriptions by exploiting this legitimate right, this transgression would be that person’s, not Islam’s or the Ottomans’. And such books are either the fruit of this sort of abuse or the misinterpretations of those who study these books. Let us now turn to some of these books briefly.

A) One of the most famous of such authors is Enderūnlu Fāḍil, a Dīwān poet who died in 1810 in Rhodes, who also promoted the tendency of localization. He had been educated at Enderūn (the palace school), yet we know that he fell into disrepute, and his love affairs became notorious, for which he was deported during the reign of Sulṭān Selim III and expelled from Enderūn. The books written by such a person were not read by many in the Ottoman state. Moreover, if they are studied closely, it can be seen that they do not describe completely illegitimate issues, and yet they are by no means comparable to the harmful publications of our day. Some of his books on this issue are the following.

a) Ḫubānnāme, which consists of 796 couplets, describes the beautiful. In the introduction beauty is defined in a mystical way. After some geographical information, various types of people from India to America are described, along with characteristic illustrations. Though lacking in aesthetics and decency, there are neither indecent descriptions nor illicit pictures of men therein. Ḫubānnāme was published in Istanbul at different times.

b) Zenannāme, consisting of 1101 couplets, was written in the Maṭnawi style and describes – contrary to Ḫubānnāme – types of women from varying geographical regions. In the foreword the poet remarks that it was not his intention to talk about women, to whom he was not attracted. Nevertheless, he describes women of various nations in original miniatures and talks about types of women. Other than the miniature depicting a women’s public bath there are no occurences of illicit illustrations in the book. The work was published in Istanbul at various times.

c) Daftar-i ʻAshq (The Book of Love), written by Enderūnlu Fāḍil, begins with the writer’s description of Divine Love (ʻAshq-i Ilahi). Then he relates his affaires d’amour in which he sinned and later repented and asked Allah for his forgiveness. He also describes a wedding ceremony of gypsies in this book. But the book does not at all describe his love affairs with his male partners, despite the allegations of some authors. This work composed of 438 couplets was published in Istanbul in 1286.

d) Çengi-nāme, also known as Raqqas-nāme, by Fāḍil, describes famous köçeks (dancers) in Istanbul. It was published in Istanbul.

B) Bahnāme-i Tusi, also known as Bahnāme-i Padişahi, by Reis’al-hukama Nasiruddin Tusi and presented to Sulṭān Muẓaffer Ḫan bin Sulṭān Qazān Ḫan, tells about the methods of sexual intercourse and the recommendations of physicians on this. Chapters 5, 10 and 11 in particular were allocated to this subject and the books written earlier in this field were summarized. It tells about jimāʻ, viz. legitimate sexual intercourse between husband and wife. He dealt with the question as to knowledge about sexual hygiene and legitimate sexual intercourse  


C) Dāfiʻ al-Ghumūm wa al-Humūm, written by Piyale Bey, a Dīwān poet also known as Deli Birader (Mad Brother), is full of ridiculous sayings and scandals that are against reason and Sharī‘ah. Although Piyale Bey, who is said to have died in 1535, formerly studied at a madrasah and then entered taṣawwuf (Islamic Mysticism, Ṣufism), he was later ostracized because of his immorality. The above-mentioned book relates all sorts of illegitimate acts. Because there very few copies available it was not a common book in the Ottoman state. In all the books on the biographies of poets this work was introduced as “a book full of immoral things.” Moreover, it has been reported that he was dismissed by Prince Korkut because he had written that book. As a result, no one can say there were no corrupt people in the Ottoman society and that no illicit books were written. Such rogues appear in every place and in every age, and so they did in the Ottoman state too. In fact, were it not for such people, Islamic law would not include provisions that punish zinā (adultery) and liwātah (sodomy). The important thing is if such things are accepted as lawful, which certainly was not the case in the Ottoman state. They were never published recklessly or sold at every corner as they are today.[32]




[1]        İsmail Hakkı Uzunçarşılı, Osmanlı Devleti'nin Saray Teşkilatı (Ankara: TTK, 1984), p. 147; Çağatay Uluçay, Ḥarem II (Ankara: TTK), pp. 7ff.; Meḥmed Zeki Pakalin, Osmanlı Tariḫ Deyimleri ve Terimleri Sözlüğü, I-III (Istanbul: Milli Egitim Basimevi, 1983), vol. I, pp. 742-47.

[2]        N.M. Penzer, The Ḥarem, pp. 178-82; Lady Montegu, Şark Mektuplari, trans. Aḥmed Refik (Istanbul: Hilmi Kitapḫānesi, 1933); Robert Withers, A Description of the Grand Signoir Seraglio (London: 1650), pp. 42-43; Uluçay, Ḥarem II, pp. 26-29; cover article, Nokta Magazine (2 April 1989): 52-53; Mualla Anhegger is also the author of the work Topkapı Sarayında Padişah Evi, which is about the Ḥarem. In essence, in our opinion, Ḥarem was the Sulṭān’s home; Uluçay, Ḥarem’den Mektuplar, p. 10; for a letter with a completely foreign origin, with respects to both its references and illustrations, see Işıl Baş, “Jāriyelik: Kadının Cinsel Köleliği,” Bilim ve Ütopya (January 1996): 12-14; Reina LewisRethinking Orientalism: Women, Travel, and the Ottoman Ḥarem (I.B.Tauris, 2004), pp. 12ff., 96ff.

[3]        Çağatay Uluçay, Ḥarem’den Mektuplar (Istanbul: TTK, 1956), p. 11; Ḥarem II, Illustration 25.

[4]        Alev Lytle Croutier, Ḥarem: The World Behind the Veil (New York: Abbeville Press, 1989), pp. 80-92; Meral Altındal, Osmanlı’da Kadın, (Istanbul: Altin Kitaplar, 1994), p. 2; Osmanlı Ḥaremi (Istanbul: 1993), p. 2; for a concrete example of this see Hans Dernschwam, İstanbul ve Anadolu’ya Seyāhat Günlüğütrans. Yaşar Önen (Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları, 1992), pp. 59, 82, 83, 88, 89, 93ff.,184; cover illustration,  Nokta Magazine (2 April, 1989); Tempo Magazine 175 (10-16 November 1994); almost all the illustrations in this magazine, which were borrowed from Western authors, are fictitious.

[5]        Çağatay Uluçay, Ḥarem II (Ankara: TTK, 1992), pp. 10-11.

[6]        PA, Cevdet Saray, nos. 681, 2838, 4405, 7139; Topkapı Palace Museum Archives, nos. D. 8254; D. 8251; D. 8199; Uluçay, Ḥarem II, pp. 34-37; Abdülaziz Bey, Osmanlı Ādet, Merāsim ve Tabirleri (Ādāt ve Merāsim-i Kadīme, Tabirāt ve Muāmelāt-ı Kavmiyye-i Osmāniyye (Istanbul: Tariḫ Vakfi, 1995), pp. 134-36; in general, this book explores the weddings of those concubines and servants employed at the mansions in Istanbul.

[7]        PA, Cevdet Saray, no. 4791; İsmail Hakkı Uzunçarşılı, Saray Teşkilati (Ankara: TTK, 1984), pp. 148-49; Mithat Sertoğlu, Osmanlı Tariḫ Lughati (İstanbul: Enderūn, 1986), p. 121; K. Mikes, Turkiye’den Mektuplar, translated by Sadrettin Karatay, vol. I (Ankara: Maarif Vekaleti Yayınları, 1944-1945), p. 196; vol. II, p. 232; Uluçay, Ḥarem II, pp. 41-50; Yilmaz Öztuna, Osmanlı Ḥarem’inde Üç Ḫaseki Sultān (Istanbul: Ötüken Neşriyat, 1983), pp. 243-44; since this book was written as a historical novel, some descriptions therein are to be assessed in that sense; some things do not reflect the facts. Also cf. Altındal, Osmanlı Ḥaremi, pp. 95-102; Damad, Majma’ al-Anhur, vol. I, p. 329; Ayşe OsmanoğluBabam Sulṭān Abdulḥamid (Istanbul: 1994).

[8]        Topqapı Palace Museum Archives, no. D. 8218, D. 9988; Çağatay Uluçay, Osmanlı Saraylarında Ḥarem Hayatının İç Yüzü (Istanbul: İnkılap Kitapevi, 1959), pp. 123-25; Ḥarem II, p. 38; Padişahların Kadınları ve Kızları, p. 124; Öztuna, Devletler ve Ḫānedanlar, vol. II, pp. 901-02; Sertoğlu, Osmanlı Tariḫ Lughati, p. 121; Meḥmed Süreyya, Sicill-i ʻUthmani, vol. I (Istanbul: 1308-1315), p. 27.

[9]        N.M. Penzer, The Ḥarem, pp. 178-82; Uzunçarşılı, Saray Teşkilati, p. 151; Altındal, Osmanlı Ḥaremi, p. 195ff.; Uluçay, Ḥarem II, pp. 26-30; Osmanlı Saraylarında Ḥarem Hayatının İç Yüzü, pp. 126-35; Öztuna, Devletler ve Ḫānedanlar, vol. II, p. 902.

[10]      Topkapı Palace Museum Archives, no. E. 10193; Topkapı Palace Museum Archives, no. E. 5038; compare Cagatay Uluçay, Osmanlı Sultānlarına Aşk Mektupları (Istanbul: Türk Dünyası Mecmuası Yayınları, 1951), pp. 42-47, 77-93.
[11]      Uluçay, Osmanlı Sultānlarına Aşk Mektupları, pp. 77-93.

[12]      Topkapı Palace Museum Archives, no. E. 10193; Topkapı Palace Museum Archives, no. E. 5038; compare Uluçay, Osmanlı Sultānlarına Aşk Mektupları, pp. 42-47, 77-93; unfortunately, Sulṭān Abdulḥamid Ḫān’s words of love towards his wife are begrudged him and the author hints that he was voluptuous person and a slave of women; Uluçay, Osmanlı Saraylarında Ḥarem Hayatının İç Yüzü, pp. 105-10; Altındal, Osmanlı Ḥaremi, pp. 45-47; in this reference, unfortunately, various items of information collected here and there at random were always distorted, like linking a verse of the Qur’an, in which Noah cursed the practice of the people of Lot (sodomy), to the charge that the Ottoman Sulṭāns were sexually perverted. Accordingly, we do not even deem all the allegations of such sources worthy of notice. Nevertheless, we shall endeavor to correct the errors of serious researchers like M. Çağatay Uluçay merely in light of the facts known to us..

[13]      Damad, Majma’ al-Anhur, vol. I, pp. 80-81; vol. II, pp. 538-39; Uluçay, Osmanlı Saraylarında Ḥarem Hayatının İç Yüzü, pp. 13-14; Altındal, Osmanlı Ḥaremi, pp. 181-83.

[14]      Damad, Majma’ al-Anhur, vol. II, pp. 541-43; Alaaddin Haskafi, Durr al-Muntaqa Sharh al-Multaqā, vol. II (Istanbul: 1331H.) pp. 541-42; Muhammad Ibn Abidin, Radd al-Muḫtār, vol. VI ( Cairo: Maktabah al-Halabi, 1967), pp. 364-74.

[15]      D’Ohson, Ignatius MouradgeaTableau General de I’Empire Othoman, vol. III (Paris: 1790); Ḥarem-i Humāyūn, trans., Ayda Düz, p. 10. Those who have studied these Sharī‘ah decrees will definitely perceive how wrongful and deliberate these allegations are: “Muslim concubines are not allowed to cover their heads; otherwise they are punished,” Neset Çağatay, Bilim ve Utopya (January 1996): 7.

[16]      Damad, Majma’ al-Anhur, vol. II, p. 537; Ibn Abidin, Radd al-Muḫtār, vol. VI, pp. 341-44; Uluçay, Osmanlı Saraylarında Ḥarem Hayatının İç Yüzü, pp. 12-13.

[17]      Ibrahim Canan, An Encyclopedia of Hadīth, Al-Kutub al-Sittah (Six Books), vol. II (Istanbul: Akçeg, 1995), pp. 210-11; this Hadīth was narrated by Buhari.

[18]      The Qur’an 4:119.

[19]      Al-Seyyid Muhammad Arif Efendi Durri-zāde, Natijah al-Fatāwā, Darsaadah (Istanbul: 1226), pp. 580-81.

[20]      Kaykavus, Kabus-nāme, trans. Mercimek Aḥmed, simplified by Atilla Özkırımlı, vol. I (Istanbul: Tercuman Temel Eserler, 1001), p. 222.

[21]      Haskafi, Durr al-Muntaqa Sharh al-Multaqā, vol. II, p. 553 (with Damad’s Connotation adjacent); Damad, Majma’ al-Anhur, vol. II, p. 553; Abdullah Darwish , Risālahh al-Tabardariyyah fi Ahwal Ağa al-Dār al-Saʻādah, Köprülü Library, ch. II, no. 233, dd. 29, 91; Leyla Saz, “Saray ve Ḥarem Hatıraları,” Yeni Tariḫ Dergisi, vol. II (Istanbul: 1958), pp. 430ff.; Safiye Ünüvar, Saray Hātıralarım (Istanbul: Cağaloğlu Yayınevi, 1964), p. 78; Penzer, The Ḥarem, pp. 140-49; Uluçay, Ḥarem II, pp. 128-31; Muammer Lebib, “Ḥarem ve İç Yüzü,” Tariḫ Dünyası (Istanbul: 1950), p. 67; we should emphasize here that both this author and others who write on this subject made mention of the scandals of castrated men at Chinese and European palaces and applied that shameful wrongdoing to the Ottoman Ḥarem in an attempt to disgrace the Islamic Ḥarem as much as they could. Yet the incidents mentioned in the book Abdulḥamid the Second and His Reign, written by Osman Nuri, in Istanbul 1326 – as can also be understood from the excerpts from the same book cited at the beginning of our book concerning Abdulḥamid – are false descriptions of which the majority are slanders.

Lebib Mu’ammer felt obliged to utter the following opinion towards the end of his article: “A manuscript at Köprülü Library (in allusion to the work to be mentioned in the next footnote) is aimed at eunuchs and alleges that the majority of eunuchs were actually not castrated and thus caused a great number of scandals at the Ḥarem. There is no doubt that this work was written with great bias” (p. 69).

[22]      Penzer, The Ḥarem, pp. 118, 39ff.; Uluçay, Ḥarem II, pp. 118-19, 127ff.; Uzunçarşılı, Saray Teşkilati, pp. 172ff.; Sertoğlu, Osmanlı Tariḫi Lughati, pp. 10-11; B. Miller, Beyond the Sublime Porte (London: Yale University Press, 1931), pp. 91ff.; cf. Shaun Elizabeth MarmonEunuchs and Sacred Boundaries in Islamic Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), pp. 79ff.

[23]      Akgündüz, Osmanlı Qānunnāmeleri, vol. III, p. 37.

[24]      The Qur’an 5:90; Bediüzzaman Said Nursi, Isharat al-I’jaz (Istanbul: Sozler, 1995), pp. 77-78; Cevdet Paşa, Tariḫ, vol. VIII (Istanbul: 1271-1301), p. 189; Elmalılı Muhammad Hamdi Yazır, Fıkıh Istılāhları Kamusu, vol. IV (Istanbul: Bilmen Yayinevi, 1997), pp. 491-499; Hak Dini Kur’ān Dili (Ankara: Diyanet, 1936), p. 3948; Uluçay, Ḥarem II, sh. 152-54; PA, İbnül-Amīn, Palace, no. 710, 711, 883, 877, 946, 1254, 1272, 1317; Aḥmed Yakutcan – Cuma Ömür, İslām’da Resim, Heykel ve Musiki (İzmir: Nil, 1989), p. 57-123; Cinuçen Tanrıkorur, “Osmanlı Mūsikisi,” Osmanlı Devleti ve Medeniyeti Tariḫi, vol. II (Istanbul: IRCICA, 1998), pp. 493-530; İsmail Hakkı Uzunçarşılı, “Osmanlılar Zamanında Saraylarda Musiki Hayatı,” Belleten XLI/161 (1977): 79-114.

[25]      The Qur’an 2: 257.

[26]      Cemal Dündar, “Osmanlı Sarayından Erotik Oyunlar,” Playman Magazine, pp. 85-87.

[27]      Uluçay, Ḥarem II, pp. 154-57; Osmanlı Saraylarında Ḥarem Hayatının İç Yüzü, pp. 135-42; Ayşe OsmanoğluBabam Sulṭān Abdulḥamid, pp. 73-77.

[28]      Sāfiye Ünüvar, Saray Hātıralarım; Bediüzzaman Said Nursī, Sözler (İstanbul: Sözler Yayınevi, 1993), p. 26.

[29]      Damad, Majma’ al-Anhur, vol. I, pp. 80-81; vol. II, pp. 538-39; Sertoğlu, Osmanlı Tariḫ Lughati, pp. 132-33; OsmanoğluBabam Sulṭān Abdulḥamid, pp. 24-25; Uluçay, Ḥarem II, pp. 148-49; Topqapı Palace Museum Archives, no. D.10749, E.2457; PA, Cevdet-Saray, no. 2529; for a Khalwat (private gathering) at Şimşirlik, see Topkapı Palace Museum Archives, no. D.9916; for a Khalwat at Sa’dabad, see Topkapı Palace Museum Archives, no. 9917.

[30]      PA, Cevdet-Saray, no. 3858; Topkapı Palace Museum Archives, no. 
E.4002, 11842; Ünüvar, Saray Hātıralarım, p. 19; Uluçay, Ḥarem II, pp. 151-52; Hafiz Hızır İlyas, Tariḫ al-Andarun (Istanbul: Matbaa-ı Amīre, 1276), p. 51; (Moving to Beşiktaş Palace) p. 63; (Moving to Istanbul Palace) pp. 71, 96.

[31]      The Qur’an 23:4-6.

[32]      Enderūnlu Fāḍil, Changi-nāme (Istanbul: 1286); Selahattin Küçük, “Enderūnlu Fāḍil,” TDVİA, vol. 11, pp. 188-89; IU, TY, no. 5502; Daftar al-Ashq (Istanbul: 1286); IU, TY, no. 5502; Fāḍil of Andarun, Zanan-nāme (Istanbul: 1286); IU, TY, no. 5502; Khuban-nāme (Istanbul: Ali Rıza Efendi Matbaası, 1286); IU, TY, no. 5502; Shamsuddin Sami, Qamus al-A’lam, vol. V (Istanbul: Mihran Matbaası, 1306-1316), p. 3331; Rais al-Ḥukkāma Nasiruddin Tusi, Bahnāme-i Tusi or Bahnāme-i Padişah, IU, TY, no. 7152; Deli Birader (Piyale Bey), Dafi al-Ghumūm wa’l-Humūm, IU, TY, nos. 1400, 9659; Orḫan Şaik Gökyay, Deli Birader, TDVİA, IX, pp. 135-36; Mecdi Efendi, trans. by Shaqa’iq, pp. 472-73.

Suomi-Turkki

HEI Hei kaikille. Olen Mustafa Orhan ja muuttanut Suomeen Turkista 10 vuotta sitten. Rakastan kaunista Suomea ja suo...