Yakın Doğu Üniversitesi İslam Tetkikleri Merkezi Dergisi

Öz

The Ottoman administrators and populace predominantly adhered to the Hanafi school of thought, priority was given to this madhhab in their administrative, legal, and religious practices. For this reason, legal and religious decisions under the Ottoman administration were based on the views of the Hanafi school; judges (qadis) issued rulings in accordance with Hanafi jurisprudence, while muftis delivered fatwas in alignment with this school. In addition to this well-known sectarian approach, as an example of loyalty, from the moment the Ottomans brought Baghdad under their rule, the tomb of Imam Abu Hanifa, the founder of the aforementioned madhhab, located in the city, was regarded as a cherished legacy and was treated with the utmost respect and sensitivity. Following Abu Hanifa’s death in 150 AH (767 CE) in Baghdad, he was buried in a neighborhood that would later be known as Azamiya, a name derived from the honorific title “al-Azam” associated with his esteemed stature. Initially, Imam Abu Hanifa’s grave was marked by a simple clay structure. However, during the Seljuk period, Vizier Sharaf al-Mulk Abu Sa’id al-Khwarizmi commissioned the construction of a mausoleum with a muqarnas-domed structure in the distinctive Seljuk architectural style, along with an adjoining madrasa. Over time, this site evolved into a complex known as Azamiya, reflecting its expanded religious and educational significance. When Baghdad came under the rule of the Shiite Safavid ruler Shah Ismail in 913/1508, the tomb of Imam al-Azam was destroyed as a result of sectarian fanaticism. Following the first conquest of Baghdad by Suleiman the Magnificent in 940/1534, the Ottomans, out of respect for the founder of the sect to which they belonged, gave importance to the restoration and construction of Imam al-Azam's tomb. Kanûnî not only repaired the dilapidated tomb but also built a mosque, imaret, ribat and bathhouse next to it, showing the sensitivity of the Ottomans towards this relic. The Safavid recapture of Baghdad in 1032 AH (1623 CE) resulted not only in pressure and persecution against the Sunni population but also in the destruction of the tomb of Imam Abu Hanifa. In 1047 AH (1638 CE), Sultan Murad IV reclaimed Baghdad, earning the title “Conqueror of Baghdad”. One of his first actions following the conquest was the restoration of the aforementioned tomb. From that point onward, as long as Baghdad remained under Ottoman rule, significant care and attention were devoted to the tomb of Imam Abu Hanifa. Substantial waqfs (endowments) were established, and numerous officials assigned to the tomb were provided with salaries. Additionally, it is noted that Ottoman sultans and statesmen gifted valuable items to the tomb, including lamps, chandeliers and carpets, underscoring its importance and reverence within the Ottoman state. In Ottoman traditional belief culture, tombs were regarded as revered structures, carefully maintained, and counted among prominent pilgrimage sites. In line with this understanding, tombs were not only constructed across many regions under Ottoman rule but also meticulously preserved and restored when inherited or entrusted to the Ottomans. This study will examine the Azamiya Complex with a focus on the Tomb of Imam Abu Hanifa at its center. After presenting the historical background of the complex prior to Ottoman rule in the introduction, the study will highlight the Ottomans’ devotion and care toward the complex, particularly the tomb itself. This devotion is observed and categorized under several aspects, including repairs during times of need, regular maintenance, salaries and allowances provided to staff, security measures to ensure safety, efforts to improve accessibility to this pilgrimage site, ceremonies and gatherings held on religious nights, gifts presented by Ottoman sultans and statesmen, and endowments established to cover expenses and ensure the continuity of services. Since the identification of the mentioned topics relies on primary sources from the Ottoman Archives, the study's methodology has been determined as document analysis based on archival records.