Uygurca Bir Sivil Hayat Belgesi: Maitrisimit

Öz

The Uighur that politically dominant on the stage of history since the 8th century, spread across different geographical regions based on such political structuring encountered different languages and cultures due to political, cultural and religious reason and interacted with these. There is court of Buddhist in those different interacted fields, too. The work called Maitrisimit translated from Tocharian is one of texts of Buddhist court that took an important place in Old Uighur Turkish works. GABAIN and TEKİN previously laid emphasis on the fact that Maitrisimit which has a dynamic and dramatic narration was a theatrical production and staged. Based on these remarks, this assertion in which the theatrical terms and concepts in the work were first identified focuses on the question why such a religious work includes theatrical aptitude style wise by giving examples from the Berlin (B) collection and the copy of Hami (H). It is seen that this work in an attempt to convey the Buddhist doctrines to the public in a more understandable way can be considered more of a civilian life documentary in terms of language and style, as compared to Sūtra and Abhidarma’s, the other religious texts of the period, which belong to Buddhist community.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Maitrisimit,Old Uighur,Buddhism,theatre

A Civilian Life Documentary in Uighur: Maitrisimit

Abstract

The Uighur that politically dominant on the stage of history since the 8th century, spread across different geographical regions based on such political structuring encountered different languages and cultures due to political, cultural and religious reason and interacted with these. There is court of Buddhist in those different interacted fields, too. The work called Maitrisimit translated from Tocharian is one of texts of Buddhist court that took an important place in Old Uighur Turkish works. GABAIN and TEKİN previously laid emphasis on the fact that Maitrisimit which has a dynamic and dramatic narration was a theatrical production and staged. Based on these remarks, this assertion in which the theatrical terms and concepts in the work were first identified focuses on the question why such a religious work includes theatrical aptitude style wise by giving examples from the Berlin (B) collection and the copy of Hami (H). It is seen that this work in an attempt to convey the Buddhist doctrines to the public in a more understandable way can be considered more of a civilian life documentary in terms of language and style, as compared to Sūtra and Abhidarma’s, the other religious texts of the period, which belong to Buddhist community.

Keywords

• Maitrisimit,Old Uighur,Buddhism,theatre

Kaynakça

1. BARUTÇU, F. S. (1992). “Eski Türkçede Buddha’nın 32 Lakṣaṇası”, Türk Dili Araştırmaları Yıllığı Belleten 1987: 11-33.
2. CAFEROĞLU, A. (1968). Eski Uygur Türkçesi Sözlüğü, İstanbul: Edebiyat Fakültesi Matbaası.
3. CLAUSON, S. G. (1972). An Etymological Dictionary of Pre-Thirteenth Century Turkish. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4. ÇANDARLIOĞLU, G. (2002). “Uygur Devletleri Tarihi ve Kültürü”, Türkler, C. 2, Yeni Türkiye Yayınları, Ankara: 9-45.
5. ÇANDARLIOĞLU, G. (2004). Sarı Uygurlar ve Kansu Bölgesi Kabileleri (9.-11. Asırlar), İstanbul: Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları Vakfı.
6. DANKOFF, R.; J. KELLY (1982). Mahmut el-Kāşгarī: Compendium of the Turkic Dialects (Dīvān Luγāt at-Türk), Part I, Harvard: Harvard University Press.
7. DANKOFF, R.; J. KELLY (1984). Mahmut el-Kāşгarī: Compendium of the Turkic Dialects (Dīvān Luγāt at-Türk), Part II, Harvard: Harvard University Press.
8. DANKOFF, R.; J. KELLY (1985). Mahmut el-Kāşгarī: Compendium of the Turkic Dialects (Dīvān Luγāt at-Türk), Part III, Harvard: Harvard University Press.

9. EDGERTON, F. (1953). Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, Grammar and Dictionary, Vol. II, London: Oxford University Press.
10. ERDAL, M. (1991). Old Turkic Word Formation, a Functional Approach to the Lexicon, Vol. I-II, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
11. GABAIN, A. von (1988). Eski Türkçenin Grameri, Çev. M. AKALIN. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
12. HANÇERLİOĞLU, O. (1975). İnanç Sözlüğü, İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi.
13. İZGİ, Ö. (1987). Uygurların Siyasî ve Kültürel Tarihi, Ankara: Türk Kültürünü Araştırma Enstitüsü.
14. KAFESOĞLU, İ. (1976). “Uygurlar”, Türk Dünyası El Kitabı, Türk Kültürünü Araştırma Enstitüsü Yayınları, Ankara: 145-150.
15. KOEPPEN, C. F. (1857). Die Religion des Buddha und ihre Entstehung, Berlin: Ferdinand Schneider.
16. KORKMAZ, E. (2003). Eski Türk İnançları ve Şamanizm Terimleri Sözlüğü, İstanbul: Anahtar Yayınları.
17. MONIER-WILLIAMS, S. M. (1899). A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with Special Reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages, Oxford.
18. NADELYAYEV, V. M. et alii (1969). Drevnetyurkskiy Slovar’, Leningrad: Akademiya Nauk SSSR.
19. NUTKU, Ö. (1983). Gösterim Sanatları Terimleri Sözlüğü, Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
20. ÖGEL, B. (1948). “İlk Töles Boyları”, Belleten, 12: 795-833.
21. ÖZÖNDER, S. B. (2002). “Eski Türklerde Dil ve Edebiyat”, Türkler, C. 3, Yeni Türkiye Yayınları, Ankara: 481-501.
22. SERTKAYA, O. F. (1986). “Maitrisimit Nom Bitig”, Türk Dili Araştırmaları Yıllığı Belleten 1982-1983: 253-280.
23. SEVORTYAN, E. V. (1974-1978-1980). Etimologiçeskiy Slovar Tyurkskih Yazıkov, I-II-III, Moskva: Nauka.
24. SHİMİN, G. (1980). “Kedimki Uygurçe İptidayi Drama Piyesasi “Maitrisimit” (Hami Nüshasi)ning 2-Perdesi Hekkidiki Tetkikat”, Türklük Bilgisi Araştırmaları, 4: 101-156.
25. SHİMİN, G. (2002). “Budist Uygur Edebiyatı”, Çev. B. BEKTAŞ; M. DELİKARA, Türkler, C. 3, Yeni Türkiye Yayınları, Ankara: 786-798.
26. TAŞAĞIL, A. (2002). “Uygurlar”, Türkler, C. 2, Yeni Türkiye Yayınları, Ankara: 215-224.
27. TEKİN, Ş. (1962). “Mani Dininin Uygurlar Tarafından Devlet Dini Olarak Kabul Edilişinin 1200. Yıldönümü Dolayısı İle Birkaç Not”, Türk Dili Araştırmaları Yıllığı Belleten 1962: 1-11.
28. TEKİN, Ş. (1976). Uygurca Metinler II: Maytrısimit. Burkancıların Mehdisi Maitreya ile Buluşma, Uygurca İptidaî Bir Dram (Burkancılığın Vaibhāṣika Tarikatına Ait Bir Eserin Uygurcası). Ankara: TDK Yayınları.
29. TEZCAN, S. (2001). “En Eski Türk Dili ve Yazını”, Bilim Kültür ve Öğretim Dili Olarak Türkçe, 3. Baskı, Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları.