“Self-knowledge through Self-physiognomation,” establishes the connection between scientific physiognomy (firâset-i hikemiyye) and divinely inspired physiognomy (firâset-i sher‘iyye), through a close reading of Ottoman physiognomy treatises and Ottoman scientific taxonomies. Scientific physiognomy, as the designation implies, is an occult science which can be studied and, given the requisite proclivities, learned by anyone. Divinely inspired physiognomy is a divine gift which is solely reliant on divine grace; nothing within the realm of human possibility can guarantee mastery of divinely inspired physiognomy. Although the two seem to have little in common except for a shared name – firâset – this paper makes the argument that, in fact, there is a very close tie between the two parts of physiognomy. The goal of man’s existence, according to Islamic teaching, is the attainment of divine grace – of which divine physiognomy is a manifestation. There are four general factors which determine the possibility and degree of man’s spiritual enlightenment: man’s inborn disposition; his upbringing; his self-discipline, and, finally, God’s grace. The attainment of spiritual enlightenment is predicated, first, on man’s inborn disposition and, second, on upbringing. Neither the first two nor the fourth factor are within man’s own control; man is only capable of controlling the third factor – self-discipline. In order to begin the process of self-discipline, however, clear and detailed knowledge of one’s inborn disposition is an absolute pre-requisite – self-knowledge. Scientific physiognomy, which is, by definition, the acquisition of awareness of one’s inborn disposition, thus presents itself as the ideal method for the attainment of divinely inspired physiognomy. One of the many functions of physiognomy is its potential ability to function as a method for developing self-awareness. In that sense, the two parts of physiognomy – scientific physiognomy and divinely inspired physiognomy – can be seen as working together and forming a larger whole. In the classical Ottoman context, the possibility of scientific physiognomy as a mechanism for self-awareness is hinted at and explicitly stated on numerous occasions. Through physiognomy or more specifically through self-physiognomation one could, according to many of the Ottoman physiognomical treatises, develop sufficient self-awareness to diagnose shortcomings in one’s own character and disposition. Once exposed, continued the treatises, bad characteristics could subsequently be transformed through a process variably described as self-discipline and cultivating the soul (siyânet-i nefs). Thus, scientific physiognomy served as the first and fundamental step on the path to moral and spiritual transformation.

Literary scholars have often conceptualized self-narratives – diaries, memoirs, autobiographies – as manifestations of the urge to pursue self-knowledge, due to their perceived self-reflective nature. In this paper, I will approach the question of self-knowledge in Ottoman writings from a different angle – that of knowing oneself through the self of another, through a close reading of a ‘Abd al-ghani al-Nablusi’s commentary on Aziz Mahmud Hudayi’s spiritual diary, Tajalliy?t. The common assumption that diaries are primarily self-reflective has often relegated pre-modern Middle Eastern autobiographical writing to the fringes of the genre: if pre-modern Arabic self-narratives did not reflect on their authors’ inner states like their early-modern European counterparts, we are told, how could we consider them part of the same class of writing? Critics of this argument, such as Kristen Brustad, have pointed out that in Arabic autobiographies, individualization is expressed through “descriptions of situations, actions, as well as other actors’ emotional states.” Al-Nablusi’s commentary offers an opportunity to sidestep the preoccupation with individualism in both of the above approaches. This paper will have two parts. In the first, I discuss the larger genre to which Hudayi’s diary belongs, including inadequacies of the English term “spiritual diary.” In the second part, I explore how al-Nablusi’s knowledge of his own self is not articulated through what literary theorist Robert Rowland Smith calls an “ideology of individualism,” but through close attention to Hudayi’s own rhetoric and reflections on his spiritual experiences. In the process, I contribute to ongoing scholarly conversations about the formation of pre-modern selves as well as how the generation of knowledge involves the self, the other, and the divine.

The question of learning, circulation and production of knowledge has recently attracted scholarly attention in Ottoman history. For the formative period of the empire's intellectual institutions, the focus has been in finding the core texts that constituted the learning tools of scholars and intellectuals. The appearance of narratives about learning in the Ottoman world during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, however, points out to learning dynamics that developed out of a tension between the social and the individual. In this paper, I focus on Lami'i Chelebi's autobiographical introduction to his epistolary. Lami'i Chelebi was a renowned Ottoman stylist as well as a prolific and successful poet in sixteenth century Anatolia. Furthermore, his Turkish translations of Persian and Arabic religious works were widely demanded in the madrasahs of Bursa and Istanbul, together with his commentaries on the original pieces. In the introduction to his collection of letters (munsheat), Lami'i Chelebi's defends prose as a form of religious knowledge, and in so doing describes his education as a process of unlearning in order to attain truthful knowledge. I argue that in Lami'i Chelebi 's autobiographical literary narrative, the author places self-discovery at the center of the act of true learning, emphasizing the need to diverge from traditional learning institutions and focus on the truth that lies within the self. Lami'i Chelebi's discussion, phrased as a testimony of his own trajectory as scholar, poet, and believer, presents religious truth as the result of dialectic relations between the self, the community, and God. Finally, by using Lami'i Chelebi's introduction as an example, I show how an approach to literary narratives with a focus on the arguments presented by the authors instead of an attempt to determine "accurate" biographical information will allows us to problematize Ottoman understandings of the path for mystical knowledge, traditional education in the madrasah system, and the role of poetry and literature in the making of religious knowledge in the early modern Ottoman Empire.

This paper investigates Ottoman Melami Sufi Sun'ulla?h Gaybi's (d. 1087/1676) conceptions of self-knowledge as awareness of human theomorphism (being formed in the image of the divine) and the political ramifications of this knowledge in several of his works. More specifically, in his "Treatise on the Halveti-Bayrimi Doctrine" (OTur. Risale-yi Halveti-Bayrami) and numerous poems such as "The Ode: Unveiling of the Obstruction" (OTur. Kaside-yi kes?fu?'l- g?ta), Gaybi drew on interpretations of the Qur'an, hadi?th, and Sufi theology to argue for the possibility of theomorphic self-knowledge on the part of the reader. Knowledge of one's self as "image of God" ultimately constituted "recognition" (Ar. ma?rifa) of reality of divine monism for Gaybi. Cultivating this self-knowledge occurred through intense introspection under the guidance of a realized shaykh, and had implications beyond personal salvation. For Gaybi, the result of self-awareness was cognizance of the ultimate superflousness of both spiritual and political guidance. In this vein, he often describes the self-realized Sufi as rightful possessor of "kingdom" (OTur. mu?lk) and "authority" (OTur. sultanat). As Gaybi maintains in one provocative poem, "It is the crown of ma?rifa that is the true crown. Do not suppose that there is another." In this paper, I contend that Gaybi's celebration of spiritual self-realization in terms of political enfranchisement should not be considered hyperbole. In making this claim, I draw on Paul Ballanfat's history of the Ottoman Melamis and Michel Foucault's notion of "techniques of the self." I situate Gaybi's discourses in the context of what Paul Ballanfat considers the "antipolitique" ethos of Ottoman Melamis. As Ballanfat brings to light, Melamis such as Gaybi's teacher "Og?lan" S?eyh Ibrahim (d. 1065/1665) sharply critizied the rulers of their day, and even coopted Sultanate court rituals in their tekkes to deconstruct state ideology. So too Gaybi's discourses on theomorphic self-realization and resulting "coronation" can be considered literary deconstructions of claims to authority of those not similarly self-aware. Furthermore, considering Gaybi's attempts to inspire the reader to cultivate theomorphic self-knowledge as a Foucaultian "technique of the self," I maintain that Gaybi argued for the enfranchisement of self-aware individuals as God's "images" beyond temporal authority.