This article analyzes the position of Ibn Hilāl, who is regarded as nāsıbī and ghālī, in the science of Shia rijāl, his reports and the validity of the accusations against him. It is found that narrators are criticized for various reasons in the science of Shiʻa rijāl. Some of them are the Shiite followers that the imams cursed and wanted to be kept away from their adherence. It is seen that the narrations reported by some of the narrators are included (...) in the main sources of Shiite hadith, albeit these narrators were cursed by the innocent imams. Ahmed Ibn Hilāl (d. 267/880) is one of these narrators cursed by the imams and his name is found in the report (the isnād) of many early narrations. Ibn Hilāl, one of the close companions of Shia's 10th imam Ali b. Muḥammed al-Hādī (d. 254/868) and 11th imam Ḥasan al-ʻAskarī (d. 260/874), was first cursed by the letter of al-Askarī allegedly sent, and the Shiite followers were ordered to move away from him. Ibn Hilāl refused to accept the ambassadoriality of Muḥammed b. Osman (d. 305/918), the ambassador of the 12th Imam. Thus, he was cursed by Muḥammad al-Mahdī as well. In later periods, Ibn Hilāl was accused of being nāsıbī and ghālī. However, there are also some Shiite scholars who supported (tavthîk) Ibn Hilāl. In the Shi'a tradition, Nāsibism indicated the meaning of hating ʻAli and Ahl al-bayt or feeling anger towards them. Later on, this meaning has been changed into a meaning including the haters of ʻAli and then the Shiʻa Nāsibism is regarded as a position towards Shiʻa outside of Shiʻa. Ghulāt is a form of a belief generally found in the Shi'a tradition. In the belief of Ghulāt, holiness is attributed to the imams. When the Shiite sources are examined, it can be seeb that Ibn Hilāl represents neither a ghālī nor a nāsıbī position. In the Shiʻa, when the narrator leaves his sect, his narrations are evaluated differently. Therefore, among Ibn Hilāl's narrations only those which narrated before he left can be accepted. The likely reason for this attitude can be those narrators such as Ibn Hilāl brought in many narrations to the Shiite hadith literature. Ibn Bābeveyh and Sheikh Sadūk reported many narrations that includes Ibn Hilāl in their report chain (the isnad). Among these narrations, they criticized only one. Again, in the 4th century of Hijrī, Numānī, al-Hazzāz, Ibn Qavlaveyh and Mufīd reported many narrations transmitted by Ibn Hilāl. However, none of them mentioned about the negative perception on Ibn Hilāl in any of these narrations. This shows that Ibn Hilāl was not regarded as nāsıbī or ghālī in the eyes of the these scholars. As regards to, Tūsī, in the 5th century after Hijra, claimed that Ibn Hilāl was a ghālī and he was accused of being an adherent to this religion. He narrated in sum fifty narrations that included Ibn Hilāl in the report chain, but Tūsī criticized only three of them because of including Ibn Hilāl. The reason why Ibn Hilāl was accused of being nāsıbī and ghālī, which Shiʻa deemed the worst, was probably related to the political conditions of that period. On the other hand, there is no report that Ibn Hilāl shared a nāsıbī and ghālī thought or had a tendency towards them. It is obvious that if Ibn Hilâl, who has an important place in the eyes of the Shiite community, does not accept the second ambassador of al-Mahdī, and that this would cause discord among the followers. This complex situation was tried to be remedied by letters alleged to have been written by the imams, cursing Ibn Hilâl and ordering them to stay away from him. Later, Ibn Hilāl was accused of being a nāsıbî or ghālī who expressed the attitudes and thoughts that Shiʻa saw the most distant from him. Sadūk first reported the narration that Ibn Hilāl was Nāsıbî. Tūsī, on the other hand, described Ibn Hilāl as ghālī in the 5th century (after hijra). This study tries to reveal that there is no explicit evidence that proves Ibn Hilāl’s nāsıbī or ghālī position. (shrink)

Many mawlids (mawlid al-nabī) have been written as a reflection of the love for the prophet Muhammad. Süleymān Çelebi’s (d. 825/1422) Wasila al-nacāt, has been seen as the founding work in Turkish literature in this category. The effect of Wasila al-nacāt has continued for centuries, and inspired many other mawlids. One of them is Enverī Erzincānī’s work named Mawlūd al-sharīf (Sumbul al-gulzār al-kalām al-kadīm). In literature tradition, mawlids are written in masnawī in ​​verse form, Mawlūd al-sharīf was written in style. (...) ode. In this respect, the work can be seen as an exception between the other ones. Another remarkable aspect of the work is the similarity between the two stories in Nasibī al-mawlid which is estimated to be written in XV. or XVI. century. Until now, no academic work has been done about Mawlūd al-sharīf. The sources that provide information about Mawlūd al-sharīf report about, two copies, one in Çorum Hasanpasha Manuscript Library (Çorum Hasanpaşa Yazma Eserler Kütüphanesi) and the other in Kastamonu Manuscript Library (Kastamonu Yazma Eserler Kütüphanesi). Research showed that the copy in Kastamonu was in fact another copy of Wasila al-nacāt another copy of Mawlūd al-sharīf was also found in the Çorum Hasanpasha Manuscript Library (Çorum Hasanpaşa Yazma Eserler Kütüphanesi). The number of couplets of Mawlūd al-sharīf has increased to 202 with the finding of the second copy. About the author of the work that is approximatly written in the XVII. or XVIII. century no information could be found. This study, introduces the Mawlūd al-sharīf and its authors, compares it with Wasila al-nacāt and presents an critical analysis of the text.Summary: The term mawlid means birth, birth time and place of birth. It was used to describe works such as the birth of the Prophet, miracles and the death of the Prophet. Next to these there also many mawlids about the lifes of Fatīma the daughter of the Prophet and her husband Alī, and few about the lifes of a spiritual guide. The first examples of this type seen in Arabic literature are Ibn Dihya al-Kalbī (d. 633/1235), Muhammad al-Azafī (d. 633/1236) and Cafar b. Hasan al-Barzancī (d. 1177/1764); Muhammad b. Masūd el-Kāzarūnī (d. 758/1356) and Sūzanī (d. 569/1173). The celebrations related to mawlid have turned into ceremonial form in the era of the Fatimies. The Fatimies held, Mawlid-al-Alī, Mawlid al-Hasan, Mawlid al-Husayin and Mawlid al-Fatīma ceremonies next to the Prophet’s. The first mawlid ceremony in the form of today was seen in the time of Muzaffar al-Dīn Gokboru (d. 630/1233).Different ideas have been put forward about the first mawlid text in Turkish literature, but Süleymān Çelebi’s Wasila al-nacat has been accepted as a pioneer work in the recognition and love of this kind. Many mawlids were written with the influence of Wasila al-nacat. The likeness of the content and the motifs of the majority of mawlids to Wasila al-nacat is interpreted as a strong sign indicating its importance in this genre. The translation of Wasila al-nacat into Arabic, Circassian, Greek, Kurdish, Tatar, Sawamish, English, German, Albanian, Bosnian... languages ​​should be considered as a factor that exposes its breadth.It is estimated that around 200 Turkish mawlids have been written, but this number is increasing with new studies. One of these mawlids is the work of Enverî Erzincānī called Mawlūd al-sharīf Ethem Erkoç and Mehmet Fatih Köksal are the researchers who have been aware of the existence of this work for the first time. Both researchers mention that the work has 142 couplets and the only copy is that in the Çorum Hasanpasha Writing Works Library (Çorum Hasanpaşa Yazma Eserler Kütüphanesi). In his work called Mawlid-nāma Köksal states that there is a second copy of the work, but the copy of Kastamonu, which is known as the second copy, is actually a copy of Wasila al-nacat. In the present study, another more bulky version of Mawlūd al-sharīf was recorded in Çorum Hasanpasha Manuscript Library (Çorum Hasanpaşa Yazma Eserler Kütüphanesi). In the catalogs of the National Library (Milli Kütüphane) and Çorum Hasanpasha Manuscript Library (Çorum Hasanpaşa Yazma Eserler Kütüphanesi), the mawlid is indicated as Persian; the reason fort his mistake might be, the fact that the first twelve of the text is Persian.Although there were many poets who used the pseudonym Enverī there is no poet in Turkish literature, who was from Erzincan and wrote a mawlid with the same pseudonym. It was understood that the poet was a sayyid.In five places the author’s name or pseudonym is mentioned. His work shows that he is from Erzincān and that he has a mawlid. As a mawlid poet Enverī, adopted a quite ambitious style. He praises himself for writing in Persian, being the best Persian speaker in this area, and boasted his pure character and wise poetry.In the headlines of the copies the work is called Mawlūd al-sharīf / Sunbul al-gulzār al-kalām al-kadīm. Therefore, it would be more appropriate to consider the work as a double name sage. The copies do not include a record of the copyright date of the work. According to the second copy, which is shorter and which has the impression that it is incomplete, the work was copied in 1249/1833. It can be said that the Mawlid was written in the XVII. or XVIII. century because of its language and style.In the mawlid tradition of writing mawlid, generally masnawī form was preferred. Rarely some mawlids were conposed in verse styles. One of these works, which are two for now, is the one in which Çizmeci-zāde Vehbī wrote the couplets of Wasila al-nacat in sixth verse form. The other one is the Mawlūd al-sharīf of Enverī Erzincān. Mawlūd al-sharīf was written entirely in the form of an ode, except of two stories with 48 couplets must have been added later. The work with 202 couplet was separated from Wasila al-nacat and other mawlids in terms of starting with a Persian tawhid and using the style of an ode. Because of the small number of citations, the subjects described in Wasila al-nacat have not been contacted or have been summarized. Mawlūd al-sharīf is one of the shortest ones. Because of the small number of couplets of Mawlūd al-sharīf, the subjects described in detail in Wasila al-nacat are either not mentioned or only summarized. The work, consists of two major sections: The birth of the Prophet and the miracle of miraj. The remarkable feature of Mawlūd al-sharīf is that the two stories told are identical to the stories in Nasībī Mawlid (XV. or XVI. century). The first story tells how, a Jewish couple living in Baghdad became Muslims because of their respect for the mawlid ceremony. The second story tells about, a young named Alī who organized a mawlid ceremony with little money left from his mother and therefore died with faith. Surprisingly, this similarity is seen in the content and narrative forms of the stories in both texts. The fact that the comparative stories are almost the same makes on think of the possibilities of imitating, quoting or saving rather than an impression of the author by the previous text. Taking into account the chronological time, it seems more likely to accept the quotations in the Mavlūd al-sharīf as duplicating. Writing the stories in Mawlūd al-sharīf after the main chapters and the line differences in the rulers reinforce the impression that the stories are added later. (shrink)