Was Mevlana the person who caused Nasreddin Hodja’s death?

While some research shows that Nasreddin Hodja, who is talked about among the public, was actually a person who actually lived, his death also Mevlana He claims to be by.

Two important things in terms of Turkish history contemporary personality There are also more than one opinion on the subject. So why would something like this happen?

First of all, we need to mention who Nasreddin Hodja is.

Seljuk historian Prof. Dr. Mikail BayramIn his work titled “Ahi Evran: From Folk Philosopher to Joke Tradition”, he says that Ahi Evran, the leading name of the Ahi Organization and a great thinker, is the same person as Nasreddin Hodja, who is widely known for his humorous side.

who lived during the Anatolian Seljuk period and especially Gained fame among Turkmen tradesmen and craftsmen The person known as the founder of the Akhism Organization is actually Hâce Nasîrüddin Mahmûd el-Hûyî.

One name similarity and personal characteristics in history When you consider it, there really seems to be a similarity, right?

But Prof. Dr. Hayri Kaplan provides evidence that Ahi Evran is not Nasreddin Hodja.

Falsification and Correction In his work, he says that these names were just a scribe’s mistake, and that Mikail Bayram also fell prey to this mistake:

“These two writings, one on the front and the other on the back of the same leaf, are related to the same date, the same subject, the same place and the same person names, and more importantly, one is the second step of the other, and more importantly, one is from Kırşehir and the other is from Akşehir Council of Governors. that there are not two separate certificates of record, they are two articles prepared by using the same certificate, that the word ‘Akşehir’ in the expression ‘Ahi Evran buried in Akşehir’ in the second one originates from the scribe’s mistake, the correct one is ‘countryside’ “We have no difficulty in understanding that it should happen.”

“Otherwise, considering one of them as official writings issued from Kırşehir and the other from Akşehir, and in the words of Bayram, in a certificate originating from the ‘Kırşehir Assembly-i Vala’, it is recorded that the Ahi Evren Zawiya and the postnishins of these zawiyas are in Kırşehir. If we say that in the certificate of the Akşehir Council of Valâ, it is mentioned that Ahi Evren Zawiya and the post-nishins of these zawiya are in Akşehir.

It means that we can say that Sheikh Osman and Sheikh Abdullah, the postnishins of Ahi Evran Zaviye, served as sheikhs in both Kırşehir and Akşehir on the same date, and that the place (karye) called Çanakcı, also known as Kurna Hill, was in both Kırşehir and Akşehir. income.”

So where does this hostility between Mevlana and Nasreddin Hodja come from?

Another thing Mikail Bayram said; Nasreddin Hodja’s He was killed by Nûreddin Caca, a disciple of Mevlana. According to Kaplan, the spaces in Bayram’s work also differ.

Considering the sentences quoted by Mikail Bayram, It is seen that Nûruddîn Caca was the emir of Kırşehir, but this event took place not in Kırşehir, but in the place where Salime Castle is located in Aksaray.

Esed (üddîn), who continued his rebellion in Caca, Aksaray and its surroundings for 6 months. Emir Âhur settled in Salime Castle. He surrounded this castle with his army and killed it and the rebels who were subject to him, that is, the Kharijites.

According to Bayram, the tension stemmed from the fact that Mevlana was a Mongolian agent and Nasreddin Hodja was a Turkmen.

Mikail BayramWhile he claims that Mevlana supported the Mongol army, he states that Nasreddin Hodja resisted the Mongol invasion. Mevlana’s closeness to Iran is already a known fact. But his attitude towards the Mongol army is completely different.

According to Bayram, Mevlana accused Nasreddin Hodja of perversion, mocked him for not having a child, and accused him of homosexuality. However, when we look at the records, it appears that Nasreddin Hodja had a daughter. So it is difficult to say that Mikail Bayram’s research reflects the truth.

Mevlana, Hacı Bektaş-ı Veli and Nasreddin Hodja are contemporaries.

During this period, the Seljuk throne There was Gıyaseddin Keyhüsrev. Anatolia, on the other hand, was in chaos and the fuse of major events such as the Babai Rebellion was ignited.

In this difficult period, while Mevlana warned Keyhüsrev to ensure the stability of the state, Hacı Bektaş-ı Veli stood out with his representation of reason and unity. Hacı Bektaş-ı Veli’s efforts to bring together a broad base in Anatolia under the leadership of the Hacı Bektaş Organization, He was also appreciated by Mevlana.

The state was shaken by the Mongol threat.

The confusion caused by the Babai Rebellion also mobilized the Mongols. The Mongol army, seeing the weakness of the Seljuk Empire, attacked Anatolia. Battle of Kösedağ The result was complete destruction.

In the complex and occupied periods of Anatolia, Hz. Mevlana’s attitude against Mongol dominationAlthough criticized by some, it actually reflected a deep strategy. Mevlana believed that the Mongol power would melt the spiritual fabric of Anatolia and cause new massacres. Therefore, he thought that accepting Mongol domination and cooperating with them would serve the long-term interests of Anatolia.

The Ahi sheikhs’ independence and devotion to the Islamic faith, It triggered their resistance against the Mongols. They, too, were trying to maintain a difficult balance under Mongol pressure. Beyond Mevlana’s claim that he was a spy, it seems unreasonable for him to take such an action as having Nasreddin Hodja killed.

Even if they lived in the same era According to historical sources, the two never met.

Our historical contents that may interest you: