The political scientist and former Bavarian Minister of Culture Hans Maier has created a historically profound, theologically educated, literarily and musically highly sensitive, politically mature body of work, with which he has inscribed himself in the (intellectual) history of the Federal Republic. This book is the first to contain contributions by renowned scholars and politicians on the rich work and impact of the Catholic scholar and politician Hans Maier. It thematises and appreciates in detail his view of German history and (...) the traditions of political thought, his critique of political language, political theology, totalitarianism and political religions, but also his contributions on Catholicism and modernity, his writings on literature and music, and finally his influence as an academic teacher, public intellectual and politician. With contributions by Udo Bermbach, Thomas Brose, Ahmet Cavuldak, Horst Dreier, Hermann-Josef Große Kracht, Jens Hacke, Oliver Hidalgo, Hans Günter Hockerts, Patrick Horst, Horst Möller, Heinrich Oberreuter, Henning Ottmann, Mark Edward Ruff, Hans Otto Seitschek, Michael Stolleis, Bernhard Vogel, Peter Graf von Kielmansegg, Theo Waigel and Markus Zimmermann. (shrink)

Varlığın kategorize edilmesi ve yüksek hakikatin anlaşılması noktasında fark edilen kavramsal zenginlik dikkat çekicidir. Örneğin milattan üç yüz yıl önce Aristo’nun ortaya koymuş olduğu doğa bilimleri müktesebatı ve mantık ilkeleri yahut onun da gerisinde tasavvufi imgeleme yoğun etkisi olan Platon’un ideler âlemi, gölgeler ve asılları kurgusu hatta hocası Sokrates’in ahlakı temellendirme biçimi ve hususan ölüm cezasıyla yüzleştiğinde vicdani bir adaleti önceleyen tavrı göz önünde bulundurulduğunda soyut düşüncede, etik algısında lineer bir ilerlemeden bahsetmenin zor olduğu fark edilecektir. Tasavvuf ilmi dairesinde düşündüğümüzde (...) vahdet-i vücûd yahut şühûd müktesebatı, İbnü’l-Arabî ile İmâm-ı Rabbânîarasında kurgulanan resmî anlatının çok öncesinde fikrî departmanını oluşturmuştur. Hallâc-ı Mansûr’un “O, Odur.”, “Ben sevdiğim şeyim, oyum; O da bendir. Biz adeta tek bir bedende birbirine katışmış iki ruhuz.” şeklinde karşımıza çıkan ifadeleri hem kadim zamandaki varlığın tek bir özde anlaşılma pratiklerine hem de mecazi dilin hakikate köprü olmak bakımından taşıdığı değerlere atıfta bulunmaktadır. Yüksek Zât yahut müteâl varlık fikri Hallâc-ı Mansûr’da kesin biçimde hatları çizilmiş bir tenzih alanında görülmesine rağmen Dīvān’ındaki ve Kitābü’ṭ-Ṭavāsīn’deki bazı ifadeleri okuyucunun zihnini karıştırabilir. Bu noktada kuşdili/manṭıḳu’ṭ-ṭayr, şathiyeşeklinde tabir edilen ifade/üslûp biçimlerini göz ardı etmemenin zorunluluğu kendiliğinden ortaya çıkar. Merkeze aldığımız şahsın, sufinin yahut sanatkârın anlaşılabilmesi ancak onun hayat hikâyesi ve eserleri vasıtasıyla oluşan büyük resme bakmakla mümkün olabilir. Buradan hareketle Hallâc-ı Mansûr’un hayatındaki kırılış noktaları, şeyhleri ve seyahatleri onun düşünce dünyasına damga vuran batıni rengi görmemize ve sekr merkezli varlık görgüsünü kavramamıza imkân tanır. Böylece Ene’l-Hak diyen birisinin niçin ve hangi maksatla bunu söylediğini kısmen de olsa anlamamıza düşünsel bir geçit açılabilir. (shrink)

Comprehending the messages of Qurʾān in terms of the relationship between occasions (sīra) and revelation has a profound influence on determining the contextual purpose and shades of meanings. Establishing such relationship necessitates dating sūras and verses. Although there are some oral transmissions (riwāya) that verses 12, 45, 47 and 77 were revealed in Madīnah, and some weak transmissions date this sūra as Medinan, this sūra is unanimously regarded as Meccan. Like many Meccan verses, not only the order of revelation and (...) causality of verses but also the content of the script do not provide concrete evidence about whether the whole sūra was sent down at once or revealed piece by piece or the date of the revelation. In this regard, in studies carried out on the dating of Sūrat Yāsīn, the dating of this sūra is established on the basis of the dates of the sūras coming before or after Yāsīn since they apparently have more definite datings. In recent studies done on the nuzūl order, Sūrat Yāsīn is dated on the basis of a time frame before the emigration to Abyssinia (615-616) in terms of Sūrat Maryam and Ṭāhā, or Muhammed’s return from Ṭāif and his Ascension (Isrāʾ) (620) in terms of Sūrat al-Jinn. The dating of the sūra covers a time span of 4 to 5 years and points out two discrete occasions of revelation. With this reason, there is a need for further studies to be carried out on dating Qurʾānic sūras, especially within the specific context of Sūrat Yāsīn. Traditional Islamic studies dispute the chronological order of the sūra, offering various chronological orderings for the sūra: 31, 36, 37, 39, 40 and 41. In the first part of this study, such variations and their causes are tentatively established and determining the precise chronology and listing of the sūra was attempted. Based on the analysis of the variations in the disputed ordering of the sūra, it has been found to be caused by five different reasons. When such discrepancies are accounted for and conflicts are resolved, the conclusion was reached that in almost all riwāyas, sūrat Yāsīn can be dated as the 41st chapter (sūra). In the second part of the study, on the basis of the discourse analysis of the sūra, new arguments to date the chronology of the sūra were put forward. These are; a- Because of their obstinacy, unbelievers will not heed the warnings directed at them (36/11), b- The speeches of unbelievers should not grieve Prophet Muhammad (36/76), c- The use of the word Rahmān the Most Gracious (36/11, 15, 23, 52), d- In return for conveying the message of Allah, prophets do not ask people for any wage (36/21), e- Regarding Qurʾān as book of poetry and calling Muhammad a poet (36/69), f- The possibility of recreation and reviving bones (36/78). Such arguments presented in a – f usually refer to events happening in Mecca and in particular the second part or the end of Meccan period, yet there is no exact date. g- Based on the phrase “al-Fulq al-Mashhūn”, the fact that sūrat Yāsīn should be dated after the emigration to Abyssinia (615-616) presents strong evidence that it was revealed after sūrat Maryam, though this is still not enough to give an exact date. h- In sūrat Yāsīn, in phenomenon of (a man coming from the farthest part of the City) (36/20), two names (Hazrat Abū Bakr and el-Hāris b. Abī Hāla) and two dates (month of Dhu al-Qiʿdah/April 5 – May 4, 615 and three days after Shawwal 15/February 27, 617) are mentioned in Sīra for the purpose of consolation and encouragement. In the third part of the study, in the chronological ordering of sūrat Yāsīn, information regarding the dating of sūras coming before and after Yāsīn are evaluated based on their similarity with Yāsīn in terms of discourse and diction. In nuzūl orderings, when riwāyas regarding dating sūrat al-Qamar, Ṣād and al-Jinn coming before Maryam and Ṭāhā are analysed, events happening during 7th or 10th year after emigration were observed. In addition, there were close connections between the discourse and diction of Yāsīn with those of Ḥavāmīm sūras. This brings to the mind the possibility that some sūras might be listed in the wrong place because of the vagueness of the piecemeal character of the Qurʾānic revelation and its effects on riwāyas. Based upon the findings and inferences in the first three sections of this study, sūrat Yāsīn was determined to be the 41st chapter (sūra) of Qurʾān. The dating of sūrat Yāsīn presented some difficulties especially while trying to date it according to the interrupted revelation order approach, and considering it together with Sūrat Maryam and Ṭāhā. However, listing sūrat Yāsīn on the basis of uninterrupted revelation order along with Sūrat al-Jinn, the previous sūra and Ḥāmīm sūras is found to be a more coherent strategy since it gives priority to the succession of two sūras. (shrink)

Ontolojinin tam ortasında bağlantı, aşkınlaşma ve geçişlilik sorunu tarafından kat edilen bir parça-bütün bilmecesi durmaktadır. Materyalizm, onun geleneksel formu olan determinizm ve ortaya çıkış (emergence) şeylerin aynı anda içsel ve dışsal varoluşlarını ve birbirleriyle etkileşimlerini, yani varoluşun sürekliliğini ifade etmeyi başaramayarak ontolojiyi metafizik bir boşlukla baş başa bırakmışlardır. Halbuki mevcudat, güzellik temelinde anlaşıldığı an, varoluşun kaleydoskopik sürekliliği birden kendini görünür kılar. Güzellik, aşkınlaşmayı ve zihinselliği mevcudatın zati niteliği kılarak tüm eşyayı güzellik temelinde ve yönelimiyle inşa olan kesintisiz bir estetik akışı (...) olarak yeniden kurgularken ontoloji ve estetik birbirlerinin ayna görüntüsü oluverir: “Güzellik onları komşu parçalarla olan ilişkilerinden çekip almaksızın parçaların diğer bütünler için görülebilir ve erişilebilir olmalarına izin verir.” İşte Lars Spuybroek, başta Platon, Kant ve Burke olmak üzere Alfred North Whitehead, Charles Hartshorne ve William Hogarth gibi isimleri birlikte okuyarak Heidegger’in dört katmanlı statik Varlığına alternatif, mevcudat arenasının estetik sürekliliğini gözler önüne seren kendi diyagramını ortaya koyuyor. (shrink)

Ibn al-ʻArabī, 1165-1240.; Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam; criticism and interpretation; Islamic philosophy; early works to 1800.

Abdurrahman Aliy, Felsefenin Tanrısı: Felsefi Teolojiye Giriş [The God of Philosophy: An Introduction to Philosophical Theology], 129 pp.

In terms of Arabic philology, the concept of reason performs the function of bonding and is a key to terms such as wisdom, goodness, duty, and autonomy. By using the reason in its proper place, morality that regulates the self (nafs) emerges. The reason, which is seen as the source of spiritual values, has given human beings the quality of being the subject of trust (amana). In Islamic Wisdom, human beings are distinguished from animals by the characteristics of carrying the (...) Trust and having morality. Morality is not a factual but a spiritual value produced by the self. Thus, having reason also requires being moral. Reason, which is related to both matter and meaning, must move in parallel like a clock with morality, which is related to ideas and deeds. The unity of reason and morality is like the two boat oars that must be pulled in order to navigate the boat at the sea. The disruption of this balance leads to the disruption of the order. Islamic wisdom emphasizes that when this dual plane is well established, order and dynamism arise, and when it is disrupted, chaos and stagnation occur. In this paper, the unity of reason and morality relationship in Islamic wisdom is discussed. (shrink)

Similar words and utterances in the Qurʾān are the subject of the technical term lafẓī mutashābih. The rephrasing of meanings (maʿnā) and use of different words (lafẓ) in the Qurʾān are dealt with under the rubric of the theme “Qurʾānic style.” The stylistic variations in the Qurʾān are expressed as takrār al-Qurʾān, tasrīf (Affix and Paraphrase), ʿudūl (inversion), and tafannun (stylistic variation). However, when compared with other terms of exegesis, “tafannun” remained in the background and its conceptualization was thwarted. This (...) could be attributed not only to other concepts brought to the fore but also to the fact that tafannun underwent semantic restriction and was confined to iftinān within the framework of badīʿ. This study aims to clarify the true meaning of tafannun which reflects stylistic variations in the Qurʾān and revealing the contribution of this term to the more appropriate interpretation of the Qurʾān, assessing its significance for the field of tafsīr. The first chapter of this study deals with the etymology of tafannun, its historical background and conceptualization as well as the relationship between iʿjāz (inimitability) and tafannun in the history of tafsīr, while the second one identifies and illustrates the kinds of tafannun to expound on the true nature of this concept.Summary: Similar words and utterances in the Qurʾān are the subject of the technical term lafẓī mutashābih. The change and variety of the rephrasing of meanings (maʿnā) and words (lafẓ) in the Qurʾān are dealt with under the rubric of the theme “Qurʾānic style.” The stylistic differences and variations in the Qurʾān are expressed in the literature with terms such as takrār al-Qurʾān, tasrīf (affix and paraphrase), ʿudūl (inversion), tafannun (stylistic variation). However, in the terminology of exegesis, the term “tafannun” remained in the background, and its conceptualization was thwarted. This could be attributed not only to other concepts brought to the fore but also to the fact that the word tafannun underwent semantic restriction and therefore was confined to iftinān within the framework of badīʿ. Yet in earlier times it was widely used in the exegesis literature as part of Arabic language to identify the stylistic variations in the Qurʾān. Starting with 8th century AH, there have been numerous references to the term tafannun. From 9th century AH to present, many Muslim exegetes, especially Ibn Āshūr (1879-1973) used tafannun as one of the fundamental concepts to understand and explain the proper meaning of the Qurʾān. This study aims to clarify the true meaning of tafannun which reflects stylistic variations in the Qurʾān and revealing the contribution of it to the proper interpretation of the Qurʾān, assessing its significance for tafsīr. The first chapter of this study deals with the etymology of tafannun, its historical background and conceptualization as well as the relationship between iʿjāz (inimitability) and tafannun in the history of tafsīr, while the second one identifies and illustrates the kinds of tafannun to expound on the true nature of this concept.According to the result of this research, iftinān means following various styles and genres (types), while tafannun denotes variations in styles and genres (types). In vernacular, these two terms are considered the same. The term iftinān was dealt with in some works under the subject of muhassināt al-maʿnaviyya within the framework of badīʿ. In the Arabic literature, when the definition of the term iftinān was given, the term tafannun was not defined under any section of any book or any other place in the rhetoric of science. Tafannun is used to express the way any action is carried out, as it is mentioned in the definition of iftinān.The word tafannun was used to demonstrate the expertise, depth and mastery of Islamic scholars in one or various fields of Islamic studies in the early works of Islamic literature. In later times, the term iftinān was used to show rhetorical and oracy skills of a person. Abū Hilāl al-ʿAskarī (d. 400/1009) define tafannun as “the variation in words while two paragraphs bear the same meaning.” His definition proved to be a turning point in the conceptualization process of the word tafannun. Al-Zamakhsharī (d. 538/1144) was the first Islamic scholar to refer to the word tafannun in the interpretation of the Qurʾān. He used the words iftinān and tafannun in the same sense in his works. He mostly regarded examples of iltifāt as iftinān. Abū Bakr al-Rāzī (d. 666/1268), establishing a connection between tafannun and repetition, stated that the term tafannun was used to avoid boredom of repetitive diction.Among other authors who used the term tafannun in their works, Bayḍāwī, (d. 685/1286), Nīsābūrī (d. 730/1329), Ibn Cemāʿa (d. 733/1333), Abū Ḥayyān (d. 745/1344), Samīn al-Ḥalabī (d. 756/1355), Zarkashī (d. 794/1392), Suyūṭī, (d. 911/1505), Ḥaṭīb al-Shirbīnī (d. 977/1570), Shihāb al-Dīn al-Khafājī (d. 1069/1659), Ālūsī, (d. 1270/1854), Muḥammad ʿAbduh (1849-1905)-Rashīd Riḍā (1865-1935) and Ibn Āshūr are the notable ones. Rather than merely defining the term tafannun, the majority of these commentators emphasized the function, benefit and aim of this word. Thanks to the use of this word by these commentators, a distinction was made between tafannun called iftinān as a literary device in the science of badīʿ and tafannun gaining a new meaning used to express stylistic variations. As a result, two words with the same dictionary definition were distinguished from each other during the conceptualization process. Among the authors using the word tafannun, Ibn Āshūr clearly defined the term and contributed significantly to its conceptualization. He defines the word tafannun as the uniqueness of the Qurʾān in employing stylistic variations by offering synonymous words in case of iʾtirāz (discursive), tanzīr, (resemblance), tazyīl (appendix) and takrār (repetition), creating the most comprehensive definition until that time.Tafannun is also defined as expression of the same meaning through re-signifying, stylistic variation in two verses, difference in the repetition of parables, variations in choice of diction and synonymous words, and avoidance of repetition. As a result of its definition, the word tafannun also denotes providing stylistic variations, using vivid language, avoiding prosaic diction, using denotative and connotative language, helping readers to grasp shades of meaning and read between the lines in the most clear and economic way.In the related literature, there are a lot of references to the word tafannun when demonstrating iʿjāz of the Qurʾān. When looked at the historical development of the relationship between iʿjāz and tafannun, it is observed that tafannun was accepted to be an element of iʿjāz. Defined as providing stylistic variation, tafannun is employed in various ways. The literary devices used to carry out tafannun are through ʿudūl, iltifāt, taqdīm and taʾhīr, change of utterances, use of synonymous words, objection, resemblance, and addition. In the proper interpretation of the Qurʾān, tafannun has a comprehensive usage, making many more academic studies a necessity with a view to making a significant contribution to a deeper and better grasp of words and shades of meanings employed in the Qurʾān. (shrink)

Why did philosophy and the sciences in the East lose their momentum and enthusiasm in the 12th century, leaving the West to take the most importantprogressive steps from the 17th century up to the present day? Can these two intellectual traditions be separated from each other to such an extent as to justify today's theses of conflict? If they cannot be separated, how can the historical events that place these theses on the agenda can be explained? The aim of this (...) short study is to try to find answers to the above questions within the context of two representative philosophers, and to reveal the extent to which the easternand western traditions are implicated with each other, contrary to some claims, by examining the 17th century, which as a turning point is a very important historical period. (shrink)

In the history of philosophy, philosophers have defined philosophy based on their own perspectives. This situation shows that it is a difficult and meaningless endeavor to put forward an understanding of philosophy that has clear boundaries and is accepted by everyone. However, despite these differences in definitions, there are some common points. Perhaps the most important of these common points is that philosophy is a stance, a positioning activity in the face of truth. In this positioning, William James tried to (...) find the moderate path between the currents of rationalism and empiricism and took a stance based on concrete differences in life. Like the empiricists, he tried to keep people's relations with facts alive, but at the same time, he did not exclude religion by adopting a rationalist attitude. However, James argued that abstract concepts cannot have meaning unless they find their counterpart in life. According to James, a life based only on abstract principles would not be qualified. In this study, I will try reconciling William James’ attitude towards abstract principles with practical life. (shrink)

A salient tradition in contemporary affect theory heavily relies on distinguishing between emotions and affects. The former refers to structured categories of socially coded affective states, while the latter denotes the pre-social libidinal flow underlying emotions. This distinction is commonly attributed to Spinoza and is thought to have been further developed by Deleuze. In this article, I argue that this overall historical picture is misleading and inaccurate. Deleuze radically transforms Spinoza’s theory of affect for the ends of his own ethical-political (...) philosophy. Moreover, I argue that Deleuzian and similar conceptualizations of affect fail to fulfill their political and ethical promises due to two critical problems. In the last section, I show that a unified notion of emotion inspired by Spinoza, which does not create a sharp rift between emotions and affect, can perform the same explanatory function intended by the emotion-affect distinction while allowing us to circumvent these problems. (shrink)

Erken dönemlerden itibaren fıkhî meseleler üzerindeki tartışmalar, bir yönteme bağlı kalınarak icra edilmiştir. Tartışmalarda belirli soru ve cevap türlerine başvurulmuş, soruların tertibine özen gösterilmiştir. Bu sayede taraflar kendi görüşlerinin doğruluğunu, karşıt görüşün yanlışlığını çelişkiye düşmeden ortaya koymaya çalışmıştır. Bu çalışmada ilk olarak cedelden ve cedelin fıkha tatbikinden bahsedilmiş, sonrasında münâzaracı kimlikleriyle meşhur olan Hanefî fakihi Kudûrî ile Şâfiî fakihi Ebu’t-Tayyib et-Taberî arasında geçtiği rivayet edilen talâka dair bir münâzara inceleme konusu edilmiştir. Bu münâzarada, muhâlea ile boşanılan kadına, kadının iddeti esnasında (...) tekrardan ricî talâk yapılabileceğini savunan Kudûrî ile bu durumda talâkın geçersiz olacağını söyleyen Taberî’nin karşılıklı istidlal ve itirazları yer almaktadır. Bu tartışmanın temelini Kudûrî’nin muhâlea yapılan kadını ricî talâkla boşanan kadına kıyas etmesi oluşturmaktadır. Taberî bu kıyasın illetine yönelik mutâlebe, itirâz ve muâraza türü sorulara başvurmuş, Kudûrî ise kendi illetinin sıhhatini savunmaya çalışmıştır. Yer yer tartışma kurallarına atıfların yapılması yönüyle de önemli olan bu münâzara incelenirken, cedelin fıkha tatbikine dair kısımda zikredilen bilgilerin pratikte nasıl uygulandığına işaret edilmiştir. (shrink)

: The corpus of fatwa named as Bostānu Shaqā’iq al-Nuʿmān, recorded in the Veliyuddin Efendi section under the number 1414 at Beyazıd State Library. It has been ignored so far. Because of its name, it may be thought that it is a part of Tashkoprulüzāde’s book Shaḳā’iḳ-i Nuʿmāniyya, but it is a nuqullu fatwa collection of Babakūshī ʿAbdurrahmān Efendi. In the famous Shaqā’iq appendix Atā’ī, which gives information about the biography of Abdurrahmān Efendi does not mention the book with this (...) name. Abdurrahman Efendi who was from a family in Plovdiv region worked in different positions in Istanbul and Edirne. Then, he was appointed as a mufti to Kefe, Crimea. He died in 983/1576. There is no information about his scholarly identity in ‛Aṭā‛ī except being the intern of Abū l-Suʿūd Efendi. In this essay, first of all, the place of Babakūshī in Ottoman Islamic Law tradition will be determined, and the features of the manuscripts and some notes on the postscript will be studied. In assessment section, especially because of the notes on the manuscripts, it has to be studied in terms of Islamic Law literature and its place should be figured out in fatwa literature. Summary: Nuqullu Fatwa collections that included citations were the books that were created for people to have access to the ruling on legal issues of scholars who were appointed as Muslim judges or muftis together with their sources and background. Although there are several studies in the literature about fatwa collections with citations Babakūshī ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Efendi's book titled Bostânu Shaqā'iḳ al-Nuʿmān was not included in the literature. ‛Aṭā‛ī provides information about the life of Babakūshī Abdurrahman Efendi. Atâ'î explains that he climbed the stairs with the help of Baba Efendi and joined the special group of people with aptitude at the level of apprenticeship. Then he raised also to the level of being the intern of Abū l-Suʿūd Efendi. Later, Babakūshī ʿAbd al-Raḥmān started to teach. He taught as a teacher for three years in Istanbul and then became the Mufti of Kefe replacing Molla Akmal al-Dīn. Molla Ekmeleddin, who was better known as Ekmel Efendi, just like ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Efendi, was an apprentice of Abū l-Suʿūd Efendi and would later be transferred to Cyprus after the island was conquered. According to Aṭā‛ī, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Efendi remained in that position which he was appointed as Ṣahn teacher until his death and died in Zilqāda 983/February 1576. The highest position that Babakūshī took among the religious scholars organization in the Ottoman Empire was being the Mufti of Kefe. As stated by ‛Aṭā‛ī, he was appointed as the Mufti of Kefe with the title of Ṣahn teacher. Instead of giving information about his teachers, ‛Aṭā‛ī mostly concentrated on Baba Efendi who was one of his relatives. Therefore we do not have information about his mentors/teachers. We can say that he belonged to the Ottoman school of scholars since he was an apprentice of Abū l-Suʿūd Efendi. The copy which is the subject matter of this study is registered as Veliyüddin Efendi with number 1414 at Bāyezıd State Library. According to our research, the copy which has 237 sheets is the only copy of the book. From the expressions of Babakūshī in the preface, it is concluded that the book was written close to his death. There are several notes written with different pens as footnotes of the book. Here, four of them which are considered to be more important will be identified.First: Notes written with the same pen as the main text. These are generally citations from books such as Tatarkhāniyye, Hidāya, ‛İnâya, Kashf al-Asrâr Sharḥu Manār.Second: are 'maṭlabs' i.e. important matters. Third: are relatively inelaborate notes. These were written by someone who we thought was not a copyist/calligrapher when compared with the general style of the book. Fourth: Warning notes which included some questions. These are generally in Turkish. The preface of the book, provides sufficient information about who the author was and the nature of the book. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Efendi, with the intention of writing a collection, started to research taking into account imams' and shaykhs' nāsikh and mensūkh and he also considered sheikhs' explanations about what was definite and what needed caution and taqwa in practice. He recorded that this search lasted for 3 years and he referred especially to Fatāwa-yi Qādikhān and Fatāwa-yı Tatarkhāniyya within this period and additionally reviewed and studied Islamic Law books that he found in the Ottoman Empire. He described that he divided these into chapters and inserted subject matters in the footnotes. Then he described how he gave the title, Bostānu Shaqā'iḳ al-Nuʿmān to the book emphasizing especially bostan.This could be seen in the expression, Masīratan li'l-Qudāt. No reference was made to Shaqā'iḳ al-Nuʿmān in the title of the book. Probably he had his intentions due to the famous book titled Şeḳ' āiḳ-i Nuʿmaniye and his pupils). In the chapter which started with Fasl right after the preface the author said that fatwa would be issued based on the opinions of three imams, namely Abū Ḥanīfa, Abu Yūsuf and Imām Muhammed that their madhap was followed and their good morals were observed. Then, it was stated that the Mufti could issue fatwas according to the opinions of first, Abū Ḥanīfa, then Abu Yūsuf and finally Imam Muḥammed. It was also stated that if he could not find their opinions and had himself muctehid, he could give his ictihad. The Fatwa collection, Bostān, is an important work among the 16th century Ottoman books since it is an important scholar's book who had witnessed Islamic knowledge in the central Ottoman Empire and Crimean region. (shrink)