Özet:

It is obvious that Islam gives privileges and importance to beauty and aesthetics as clearly appeared in the Qur’an and the Hadiths of the Prophet of Islam. Nevertheless in the early years of Islamic history, there was a serious and historically justifiable resistance against painting and sculpture scheme around sanctified objects shaped in the context of paganism. In fact, this resistance was not due to the opposition to painting and sculpture in terms of arts and aesthetics; but due to the use of them for the telos of piety and worship. Probably, the painting made by the consent of Mawlânâ represents both the inclusive character of the worldview of the Sufî tradition, and the reconstruction of aesthetic imagination of this tradition through local forms and historical codes. At this juncture, Mawlânâ became an epitome of this historical refraction point. Mu'în al-Dîn Sulaymân Parwana was in charge of administrative duties in Kayseri and his wife Gurcy Khatun was about to go to Kayseri. Due to spiritual attachment to Mawlânâ, she wanted to stay in Konya; hence she herself found out a solution to ease every grief due to this spatial separation: She sent out 'Ayn alDawlah, painter of the Seljukid palace, along with a few officers to draw Mawlânâ's portrait. Yet the painter painted saliently different Mawlânâ from what he really was. He tried to paint his portrait twenty times; however, he was not able to paint his portrait and in the end broke his pens and left the place. Later, he handed over them to Gurcy Khatun, painted on the stamped letters of the Seljukid palace. Until now, no original of these paintings have been found. In this study, based on scientific rationals we tried to prove that the six paintings that have been claimed to resemble Mawlânâ are not original ones.

Anahtar Kelimeler: