Son Dönem Bir Osmanlı Düşünürü: Harputlu İshak Efendi’nin Din Felsefesinin Bazı Meselelerine Yaklaşımı ve Felsefecilere Karşı Tutumu
A Thinker of the Late Ottoman: Harputlu Ishak Efendi’s Approaching to Some Issues of Philosophy of Religion and Attitude to Philosophers

Summary/Abstract: What was the point of view of the Ottoman thinkers or scholars in general to philosophy and in particular to subjects of the philosophy of religion and to philosophers? In Ottoman, what was the existence and level of philosophy according to the other sciences? These kinds of questions have been frequently asked by those who deal with philosophy. The answers given to these questions are as important as at least the questions. To discuss such an important subject, what we need is to accept scientific issues as basis. To answer these questions together with a different motivation which is far from scientific methods may lead us to a vicious circle. The first thing of this kind of scientific attitude is to examine the Ottoman thinkers’ studies and try to understand them. General aim of this article is to shed a light to these discussions and in particular, to understand the approach of Harputlu Ishak Efendi to some issues of the philosophy of religion and his attitude towards some philosophers.SUMMARY: What were the perspectives of Ottoman thinkers or scholars towards philosophy in general and the subjects of the philosophy of religion and philosophers in particular? What was the presence and level of philosophy in Ottoman compared to other sciences? These are the questions usually asked by those who work on philosophy. The answers provided to such questions are as important as at least the questions themselves. To discuss such an important subject, what we need is to accept scientific issues as basis. Answers tried to be given with other motivation elements outside of the scientific frame and method can take us to a vicious circle. The first step of this scientific perspective should be an examination of the books of Ottoman thinkers. The overall purpose of our article is to shed light on such discussions to some extent, while the specific purpose is to explain Harputlu Ishak Efendi’s approach towards some matters of the philosophy of religion and his attitude towards philosophers in general terms. When the courses, which were studied by Harputlu Ishak Efendi, and the masters, who taught these courses, are investigated, it will be seen clearly that he took a good education. Ishak Efendi, who executed important duties in different bureaucratic positions of the Ottoman such as inspection duties, then was assigned to be the judge (qâḍî) of Medina and Isparta. Harputlu Ishak Efendi expressed opinions on the relationship of religion-philosophy, status of prophets and philosophers, place of the intellect in religion and especially the “Knowledge of God”, “Resurrection”, “Creation of the Universe” which are very controversial issues among Gazzâli and the Islamic philosophers. Providing a statement on such controversial issues requires being an expert on the Kalâm theology and philosophy. As for wording, we see that he has studied the subject with all dimensions. Harputlu Ishak Efendi is a unique Ottoman thinker. The reason behind this is that he has never studied on annotation and elucidation, but he was a scholar paying attention to the human intellect (ʿaql) and use of the intellect. He expresses that he prefers using intellectual evidences as a method and this is a beneficial approach and he experienced this himself. Stating that Islam is a religion definitely based on the intellect, he expresses that “God shall not propose something contrary to the sound intellect in the religion of Islam”, and claims that God does not request from human beings something contrary to the sound intellect and those requested comply with the sound intellect only. We know that some scholars educated in Ottoman Madrasas assumed took a sharp position against thoughts established and philosophy in particular. Considering the methods used by Harputlu Ishak Efendi on dealing with the issues, we see that he tries to indicate the views of other people expert on the subject while he investigates it.Because the thinkers he often refers to in his works are Ibn Sina, Nasîrüddîn et-Tûsî Devvânî and Gelenbevî, we think that his philosophical thought emerges from such views. He has more references to Ibn Sina. Harputlu Ishak Efendi tried to understand what philosophers try to explain instead of declaring the philosophers as unbelievers and showing the philosophy out of religion. As some previous Ottoman scholars, he has considered the prophets as a philosopher and so tried to bring a new perspective to the discussion of religion-philosophy relation which has been continuing for centuries. Harputlu Ishak Efendi claims that the human intellect (ʿaql) alone can know the presence of God and His attributes such as knowledge and power. For instance, regarding the oneness of God, he puts similar views with Kindî. He also states that it is not possible both rationally and traditionally that there is an existent equal and similar with God. He provides evidences from scholars, Ibn Sina in particular. However, he stresses that there are some religious matters which cannot be known by the intellect.Providing opinions on whether the resurrection will be bodily and spiritual or spiritual only, Harputlu Ishak Efendi gives his views on that God knows totals but partials, which is why Gazzâlî declared the Islamic philosophers as unbelievers. Harputlu Ishak Efendi also provides ideas on the eternity of the universe which has been one of the main problems between the philosophers and Gazzâlî. The matters studied by Harputlu Ishak Efendi are the main subject of the religion and majority of which corresponds to the three basic fields of philosophy: existence, knowledge, and value. As many of the previous scholars, Harputlu Ishak Efendi studied these matters through a method of question and answer. In explaining these subjects, he firstly provided verses from the Qur’an and then provided the hadiths, if any. Then he wrote down what the philosophers, Kalâm theologians, and sûfis said about the matter. And what is significant is that he did not provide any adverse remark while referencing such approaches of this group of three.We, recently, see more often the oral statements and approaches in this regard which signify that the philosophy of religion should be built upon its own resources and thinkers in the Islamic lands. The meaning of this excitement with regards to the philosophy of religion is more meaningful in specific terms. The problem, as often stated by the recent philosophers of religion, that we do not still have a unique philosophy of religion model despite we owe very rich, important classic and scientific works, is still under discussion. We hope that trying to understand what Ottoman scholars and thinkers remarked on such significant matters shall contribute to the project of “developing a unique philosophy of religion to us.”.

• Details
• Contents