A Meticulous Evaluation: Can We Really Think of Melayê Cizîrî As A Philosopher?

Can We Really Think of Melayê Cizîrî As A Philosopher?


Abstract views: 17 / PDF downloads: 14

Authors

  • Merve Arslan Şırnak University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18080659

Keywords:

Philosophy, Turkish-Islamic Thought, Sufism, Diwan Melaye Ciziri

Abstract

Melayê Cizîrî is one of the leading figures in 16th-century Sufi literature. Melayê Cizîrî's only known work, which explores the concepts of Islamic Sufism from a literary perspective and in poetic language, is the Diwan. The main theme of the Diwan is divine love. In connection with this central theme, the work also explores prophetic love in literary language. In exploring these themes, Melayê Cizîrî draws on sources of Sufi thought, such as Hallaj-i Mansur, Ibn Sina, Ibn Sab, and Ibn Arabi. Melayê Cizîrî's Diwan is currently being studied and interpreted from diverse perspectives in numerous fields, including history, philosophy, sociology, and astronomy. As Melayê Cizîrî uses some philosophical concepts in his work, some commentaries take his Diwan also as a philosophical work. How can we assess these interpretations?

With this urge, this study approaches Melayê Cizîrî's Diwan from a philosophical perspective. How and in what contexts does Melayê Cizîrî use philosophical concepts in Diwan? Which philosophical traditions are these concepts related to in the history of philosophy? How is the relationship of these concepts to the metaphysics of love established? Is Melayê Cizîrî's use of concepts consistent? In this case, how can we locate Melayê Cizîrî’s Diwan in the history of thought? Relying on these questions, this research aims to frame the philosophical concepts in Melayê Cizîrî’s work and to reassess his place in the history of thought.

Downloads

Published

2025-12-31

How to Cite

Arslan, M. (2025). A Meticulous Evaluation: Can We Really Think of Melayê Cizîrî As A Philosopher? Can We Really Think of Melayê Cizîrî As A Philosopher?. Mebadi Uluslararası Felsefe Dergisi, 2(2), 54–68. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18080659