Ahmed Feyzi Çorumî'nin Müntehab Adlı Risalesi'nin Tahkik, Tercüme ve Değerlendirmesi

Abstract

Abstract In our tradition a great amount of work have been written on the classification of sciences. Sacaklizâde’s Tertibu’l-‘Ulum has a significant place among them. In Tertibu’l-‘Ulum , information on the definitions of the sciences, the order of studying these sciences and the verdicts on studying them is given. Additionally, the names of the suggested literature to be read in the madrasas, the educational institutions of the period, and some suggestions are also given to the teachers and students. Ahmed Feyzi Corumi’s work, al-Muntehab min Tertibi'l-‘Ulum , is based on some selections from Tertibu'l-‘Ulum . The selections are mainly on the definition of sciences and the suggested literature for those who want to learn these sciences. While making this selection, sometimes he conveys the sentences of Sacaklizâde as they are, and sometimes combines the sentences of Sacaklizâde from different parts of his book. In addition to utilise the information given by Sacaklizâde, Ahmed Feyzi occasionally explains the sentences of Sacaklizâde and refers to some works that Sacaklizâde does not mention as well. Sometimes he disagrees with the literature suggested by Sacaklizâde and refers to the ones more suitable for him. In this paper, al-Muntehâb is analyzed, translated and evaluated, and the differences between the two works are revealed. The analysis is done on the only available copy of al-Muntehab. The text is made more clear by adding some pieces and headings that are indicated in the square brackets and adding some footnotes. When the meaning is unclear, the expressions of Sacaklizâde are consulted, and this situation is stated in the footnotes. Summary The topic of the classification of the sciences has gained the attention of various scholars. A great amount of works was composed in both Western and Islamic tradition, and many of them has reached today. One of these works is Tertibu’l-‘Ulum . It is written by Sacaklizade Mehmet Efendi of Maras (d. 1145/1732), an Ottoman Scholar who wrote on various sciences such as Fiqh, Kalam, Logic, Tafseer. This work has an important place in terms of showing the curriculum of madrasahs, educational institutions of the period. Sacaklizâde’s book consists of five sections; an introduction, two chapters, one appendix and a conclusion respectively. In the introduction, the sciences are classified as canonic and non-canonic sciences and the verdicts on employing in them are given. First chapter gives the definition of useful sciences. In the second chapter, the useful sciences are graded for the students who are going to study them. While a very brief information on the praise of Qur’an, its names and its place in Hadith are given in the appendix, the writer devotes the conclusion to various topics related to philosophy. Various information such as the definitions of sciences, the order of studying them, the verdict on studying them, the names of works that are studied in madrasahs, which are educational institutions in the period, are given. In addition to all these, Sacaklizâde mentions the method used in the madrasahs, criticizes the arrogant behavior and attitudes of the lecturers and states wrong choices that the students make during their study. As well as giving advice to teachers and students for a better education, he also recommends various books for some sciences by drawing attention to the proper literature. Sacaklizâde recommends books for each level by stating beginner, intermediate and advanced levels for some of the sciences and tells that other sciences can be leveled in comparison to them. Ahmed Feyzi Corumi, who was born after 107 years from Sacaklizâde, wrote his risalah, al-Muntehab min Tertibi’l-‘Ulum , by selecting some parts from Sacaklizâde’s work. The selections are mainly on the definition of sciences and the suggested literature for those who want to learn these sciences. While making this selection, sometimes he conveys the sentences of Sacaklizâde as they are, and sometimes combines the sentences of Sacaklizâde from different parts of his book. For example, while giving information on steep oneself in Kalam, he quotes a sentence from 105th page of Sacaklizâde’s book, and also refers to the the sentences from 215th, 153th, 109th and 214th pages.. This simply shows that Ahmet Fevzi did not write an ordinary summary. While Sacaklizâde classifies the literature for Tafseer, Hadith, Fiqh, Kalam, Quran Systems , Rhetoric, Logic, al-Nahw as beginning (iktisâr), intermediate (iktisâd) and advanced (istiksâ) levels, Ahmed Feyzi makes the same classification for the Methodology of Hadith, Mysticism, Inspiration, Counsel, Reading, Tajwid, the Methodology of Fiqh, Discussion, Anatomy, Medical Science, Inheritance, Mathematics, Prosody, Wad’, Grammar and Etymology sciences as well. In addition to utilize the information given by Sacaklizâde, Ahmed Feyzi sometimes explains the sentences of Sacaklizâde, and mentions the works that Sacaklizâde did not talk about. The alteration of the works given as an example, namely, the fact that Ahmet Feyzi recommended different books shows that, the choice of the works used in education has changed in the course of the time. The reason for this shift could be due to the appearance of more up-to-date works that is more proper for the education of the time, and on this basis it can be said that new works shows the change in the education culture. For example, unlike Sacaklizâde, Ahmed Feyzi suggests that Hâdimi’s (1176/1762) work should be read in the beginning level of Usul al-Fiqh. Sacaklizâde was very likely did not see this work of Hâdimi, who died thirty years after him. This clearly shows us that Ahmed Feyzi takes the works that were interesting during his time into account. In this study; firstly, a very brief information about the lives of Sacaklizâde Mehmed Efendi and Ahmed Feyzi Corumi is given. Then the work of al-Muntehab min Tertibi'l-‘Ulum is analyzed after the short introduction of Tertibu'l-‘ulum . In doing the analysis of el-Muntehâb, while translating and evaluating it, the differences between the two works are revealed. Theanalysis is done on the only available copy of the work, which is present in Corum Hasan Pasa Manuscript Library. Additional information is added in order to make meaning more accurate; they are indicated in brackets. The manuscript is divided into paragraphs where it is appropriate in the process of transcription. In addition, titles are added for the readers to follow the text better and some words are highlighted where it is necessary. While evaluating the texts, the issues addressed by Ahmed Feyzi in his risalah are compared by finding their place in the relevant sections of Sacaklizâde, and the differences and similarities are mentioned in twenty-four items.