31.738
Bearbeitungen
Tabakverbot: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen
→Osmanisches Reich
Tiao (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
Tiao (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
||
| Zeile 25: | Zeile 25: | ||
:Katip Çelebi (1609-1657) wrote the “Mizanü’l-haqq” (The Balance of Truth) in 1656 just after the grand vizier of the time tried to stamp out a Sufi order that endeavored to rationalize matters instead of engaging in mysticism. In his work, Çelebi discusses smoking tobacco and drinking coffee, taking a rational approach against forcing people to abandon customs that were rooted in history.- Çelebi points out that trying to enforce firmans against smoking only succeeded in driving people to smoke at home since it was too dangerous to do so in public. - As for smoking tobacco being an innovation – and the door had been closed to innovation centuries earlier – Çelebi comes down on the side of this being an innovation since even the word did not exist in Adam’s time. He further states that tobacco is mekruh, a word that in canon law means “not forbidden by God but looked upon with horror and disgust.” (Redhouse Dictionary) Although he concedes that the scent of tobacco smoke and the tobacco leaf are not unpleasant, the taste it leaves in one’s mouth is. For all of that and other reasons, he concludes by suggesting that it’s simply best to let everybody do what they want to. - De facto legal: Although the firmans against smoking were never rescinded, Yılmaz has pointed out that it became de facto legal to smoke tobacco when the government began to impose a tax on it in 1688. And smoking among the Turks has continued ever since. | :Katip Çelebi (1609-1657) wrote the “Mizanü’l-haqq” (The Balance of Truth) in 1656 just after the grand vizier of the time tried to stamp out a Sufi order that endeavored to rationalize matters instead of engaging in mysticism. In his work, Çelebi discusses smoking tobacco and drinking coffee, taking a rational approach against forcing people to abandon customs that were rooted in history.- Çelebi points out that trying to enforce firmans against smoking only succeeded in driving people to smoke at home since it was too dangerous to do so in public. - As for smoking tobacco being an innovation – and the door had been closed to innovation centuries earlier – Çelebi comes down on the side of this being an innovation since even the word did not exist in Adam’s time. He further states that tobacco is mekruh, a word that in canon law means “not forbidden by God but looked upon with horror and disgust.” (Redhouse Dictionary) Although he concedes that the scent of tobacco smoke and the tobacco leaf are not unpleasant, the taste it leaves in one’s mouth is. For all of that and other reasons, he concludes by suggesting that it’s simply best to let everybody do what they want to. - De facto legal: Although the firmans against smoking were never rescinded, Yılmaz has pointed out that it became de facto legal to smoke tobacco when the government began to impose a tax on it in 1688. And smoking among the Turks has continued ever since. | ||
Murad IV forbade tobacco and coffee. The cause of the ban is known to be the great fire of Istanbul in the early 1630s, and the coffeehouses in Istanbul have been demolished as a precaution against a rebellion that may arise after the fire. The fatwa is about the killing of tobacco smokers. [15] When the members of the army were identified from tobacco smokers, his hand was broken and his necks had been shot. | Murad IV forbade tobacco and coffee. The cause of the ban is known to be the great fire of Istanbul in the early 1630s, and the coffeehouses in Istanbul have been demolished as a precaution against a rebellion that may arise after the fire. The fatwa is about the killing of tobacco smokers. [15] When the members of the army were identified from tobacco smokers, his hand was broken and his necks had been shot. Because of the tobacco ban, even the chimneys of the houses were sniffed and people in the houses smelling tobacco were killed as punishment. In addition, the establishment of taverns and coffeehouses and the rebels to become the gathering place had made the sultan think. The ban would also be an indication of a re-establishment of the lost state authority. The sultan measured his authority according to the degree to which his ban was obeyed. For this reason, the ban was applied in a very strict manner. IV. Murad ordered the murder of those who did not comply with the ban. He changed his clothes especially in the late hours and checked whether the ban was being complied with and killed the suspects he found. He often did this practice of inspecting clothes and closed many taverns in the night himself with raids and executions. As a superior and sacred figure of the Sultan in the Topkapı Palace, the people of Istanbul, who are accustomed to be present in the palace, exhibit their power directly. That's why he looked at Murad differently. As a result of this application that the Sultan continued until his death, no sovereignty and legend have been produced against the sultan. IV. Murad's rich position in oral culture has been interpreted as a manifestation of his missing authoritarian sultan. IV. Murad also banned the drink, but he continued to drink and this addiction to death was a cause of death. From: turkish wikipedia Murad IV | ||
Madeline C. Zilfi, the Kadizadelis: Discordant Revivalism in Seventeenth Century Istanbul. Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 45, 1986, 251-269. | |||
== Zaristisches Russland == | == Zaristisches Russland == | ||