The Imperial Heyday 125
As well as these translations, the influx of foreign scholars produced origi-
nal works as well. Among them, there were those transferring Tusi’s neo-
Aristotelism in one way or another, such as Bitlisi, Cahrami, and Barmaki,
mentioned in the previous chapter. One important trend, enhanced by the
Sunni vs. Shi’a aspect of the emerging Ottoman-Safavid conflict, emphasized
the religious purity of the Ottoman sultan and the importance of the ulema.
Muhammed b. Mehasin el-Ensari, probably an ulema from Syria, completed
his Tuhfa al-zamân ilâ al-malik al-muzaffar Sulaymân (“The gift of time for
Süleyman the victorious ruler”) around 1524. His work seems to be unique in
its emphasis on the legitimacy of Ottoman rule, probably due to his writing
shortly after the suppression of the Egyptian rebellion by Ibrahim Pasha. The
first chapter, as well as the preface, is devoted to proving this legitimacy and to
showing that the subjects were to pay allegiance to the sultan according to the
Sharia. Ensari stresses in particular the duties of the ulema: they are to urge
the sultan to be just and benevolent and to warn him against oppression, thus
being exalted even above the ruler (who has to adhere to their opinion). Writing
some decades before Dede Cöngi, Ensari was one of the first Ottoman authors
to include discussions of the public treasury in a treatise on government,
focusing on the legitimacy of the various sources of revenue. Finally, he empha-
sizes that non-Muslims should not be employed in government; this was not a
major issue for the Ottomans, but Ensari seems to have followed an Egyptian
tradition of political thought, and especially Turtushi’s Sirâj al-mulûk.77
Another work that stresses the religious role of the Ottoman ruler is the
anonymous Risâla f î mâ yalzim ‘alâ al-mulûk (“A treatise on what rulers need”),
written in Arabic and dedicated to Süleyman. The author stresses that the
sultan should conduct the Holy War ( jihâd, ghazw, mukâtala) against “poly-
theists” and seditious people, as well as with a view to eliminating internal
vice (daf ’ al-sharr) and disbelief (izâla al-kufr), while he also criticizes innova-
tions (bid’a). Similar ideas, it should be noted here, can be found in Korkud’s
works: in his Dawat al-nafs, he criticizes what he views as the Ottoman concept
of jihad, i.e. that focusing on its external, military dimension; the most impor-
tant jihad, he argues, is seeking knowledge and truth rather than plunder (in
his other works, too, he shows a concern for legal and political control of the
gaza warriors, based on Shari’a norms). As well as advice on jihad, however,
the author of Risâla f î mâ yalzim also gives instructions for people present-
ing themselves to the sultan (viziers and other statesmen and visitors): they
77 Mamluk influences are also evident in various other parts of the treatise: Yılmaz 2005,
70–73. On Turtushî see also above, fn. 74. The emphasis on not using non-Muslims in gov-
ernment is also seen in Nizam al-Mulk’s famous “mirror for princes”: Rosenthal 1958, 83.