Abstract:

One of the important symbols of the Ottoman Ulema of the last period, Mehmed Tevfik Efendi was born in Ankara in 1242/1826 as the son of a family of scientists and tasavvufs. After receiving his first taxation in the city where he was born, he came to Istanbul, where Vidinli Mustafa Efendi and Hafız Seyyid Efendi followed the lessons of the allies and received the taxation from them. He was present in various regions of the empire, performed femininity in Medina, and then returned to Ankara, and performed femininity. In addition to these, it was also found in various duties, last 1899 respectively first with the Anatolian and then with the Rumeli Kazaskerity share. He died in 1901 and was recorded in Istanbul Aksaray. After that, in the fields of sarf, nahiv, literature, health, fıkıh, logic, philosophy, tasavvuf and kelam, many works in the style of risale have been left in Cherkesheyhizâde Mehmed Tevfik Efendi, who has expressed his opinion on the fundamental issues of Islamic faith. He also expressed his thoughts on this matter. He tried to prove the existence of the god who will reveal his unity (isbât-i vâcib) before the entrance of the Tevah, and he focused his explanations in this man on the creatures of the existence of the vâcib, the possible and the credible parts. He has demonstrated the necessity of an obligatory existence by reason, depending on the advantages of these concepts. After that, a part of the world’s order was revealed from the signs, trying to show that the existence of a god was mandatory. When he worked on the subject of the Tohid, he discussed the possibility of the mind alone to reach this principle, and the philosophers also made an assessment of the water theory in the context of the Tohid thought. He is the creator of God, the creator of God, the creator of God, the creator of God, the creator of God, the creator of God. God’s faith is not the same, but the faith is not the same, and the faith is not the same, and the faith is not the same. In this regard, the Islamic philosophers defended that the views they presented in the framework of the water understanding brought the idea of the ancientness of the bodies to their side because they were removed from the Islamic understanding of the Tevhîd. The main question he focused on this is, of course, the proof of the Tevehed. In this sense, he first attempted to reveal the unity of God by moving from the vâcib/obligatory concept that he was placed in the proof stage of existence. In this phase, he said that the universe was able to exist, and that he needed an obligatory existence. Then he revealed that his absence was the cause of the unmistakable existence, and the necessity of the necessity. In this point, he said that the absence of a second pharaoh of God, like Himself, did not lead to any trouble, and it was clear that the vâcib is one. The Lord Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was the one of the greatest people in the world, and he was the one of the greatest. The Qur’an says that the Qur’an is like the Qur’an, the Qur’an is like the Qur’an, the Qur’an is like the Qur’an, the Qur’an is like the Quran. This proof is a proof of the possibility of a dispute that will arise between them, and a proof that is revealed on the basis of the obligation of existence of the god, if the existence of another pharaoh is accepted by the god. This is the proof of the minivan. According to this, if one of the gods, when the one mourates the movement of an existence, and the other mourates the calmness of it, it is not possible, because it means that one thing carries over two opposite qualities at the same time. If both of them do not say that the divine weakness will be revealed, this option will not be made. If only one is said, then the other is the god that he says that the weakness will appear again and that the claim of divinity will rise from the middle, and he remains the only one in this divinity. He said that he did not know the truth, and that he did not know the truth, and that he did not know the truth. He also expressed his objection against some of the personalities he believed that he was misleading the evidence. And the other thing that I have to do is to be the one who is more likely to be the one who is more likely to be the one who is more likely to be the one. Thus, the prophet of the god who claims to be one is the miracle that he shows to prove his own case, while the unity of that god is also the proof, the other pharaoh demonstrates that the god remains silent about this, that the god is one. The Mulif tries to show that if more than one god claims divinity on separate possessions, the god is one by movement from a number of disappointments such as ignorance and weakness that will arise. Again, if he accepts the existence of multiple gods, he first reveals the choices that one of them will either be missing or equal to the other. The first possibility is disabled by the thesis that the missing existence cannot be a god. If it is equal, it is not possible that the universe which we have in its existence will either gain existence or that it will gain existence, this time the dispute between the gods will come out, and this will also eliminate the order of the universe and it will not be possible. In this case, it is clear that God is one. In addition to these evidence, the author examines the natural understanding of the elements opposed to the Tevah from the bar and the approach to God to a child. The first approach in this sense is criticized by carrying a great mission on the concept of nature, which contains more uncertainty, and by explaining nature and the order in the universe, which is far from the characteristics of science, consciousness and consciousness. If the son who is instructed to Allah, whether he wishes to form in a other way through a nutfe, the result is that he must be tested with the thesis of the future of the judgment.

Keywords:

Abstract:

Çerkeşşeyhizāde Mehmed Tevfik Efendi (Cherkessheyhi-Zāde Meḥmed Tawfīq Afandī), who is one of the important figures of the recent Ottoman ulama, was born in Ankara in 1242/1826 as the son of a family with knowledge and tasawwuf. After receiving his first education in the city where he was born, he moved to Istanbul, where he followed the lessons of scholars such as Vidinli Mustafa Efendi (Vidinli Muṣṭafā Afandī) and Hafız Seyyid Efendi (Ḥāfiẓ Sayyid Afandī) and received ijazat from them. He served as a Mawlawiyāt Qadi (the highest judge/qadi) in various parts of the empi-re, served as a qadi in Madinah, then returned to Ankara and became a professor. Apart from these, he also served in various positions, and was awarded with the rank of Anatolia and then Rumelia Qāḍī-‘askar (highest ranking qadi’s of the Ottoman judiciary) in 1899, respectively. He died in 1901 and was buried in Aksaray, Istanbul. Çerkeşşeyhizde Mehmed Tevfik Efendi, who left behind many works in the style of treatises in the fields of grammar (sarf), nahw (syntax), literature, health, fiqh, logic, philosophy, mysticism and kalām, expressed his views on the most fundamental issues of the Islamic faith. In this sense, he also expressed his opinions on tawḥīd. He tried to prove the existence of the God (ithbat al-wajib), which he will reveal in unity in the way of entry, in this sense, he focused his explanations especially on the rankings of existence consisting of necessary, possible and impossible. He pro-ved the necessity of a necessary being in a rational inferences by depending on the premises he created based on these concepts. After that, he tried to ground that necessity of the existence of a God, based on some verses that indicate the order in the universe. While examining the subject of tawḥīd, the he discussed its nature, the relation between dhāt (essence) and atributes, the possibility of the reason reaching this principle alone and also made an evaluation of the sudūr (emanation) theory of philosophers in the context of the idea of tawḥīd. Regarding these issues, he explained the tawḥīd as the oneness of Allah about being wajib al-wujûd, creator and maʽbood. He also tried to prevent the jeopardise of the doctrine of tawḥīd by expressing that the attributes of Allah are neither the same nor the informal of His dhāt. He argued that the views put forward by Muslim philosophers in the framework of the understanding of sudūr doctrine cause the idea of the eternal of objects, by doing so they have distanced themselves from the understanding of tawḥīd of Islam. The main issue on which he focused on was undoubtedly the proof of tawḥīd. In this sense, he first urged His oneness based on the concept of wajib, which he included at the stage of proving Al-lah’s existence. At this stage, first of all, he stated that the world needs a necessary being, consi-dering that it is possible being. He then demonstrated the necessity of the wajib being by stating that the idea of His absence causes the dilemmas. Then, he stated that assuming the absence of a second hypothetical deity did not lead to any dilemma, and that it was understood that the wajib being must be only one. Çerkeşşeyhizāde Mehmed Tevfik Efendi focused mostly on the burhān al-tamānuʽ (proof of al-tamānuʽ) among the proofs of tawḥīd. The fact that it originated from the Qur'an and that the predecessor scholars gave weight to it seems to have been effective in this preference. This proof is a arguing the possibility of a conflict between them and its outcome if the existence of a hypot-hetical deity is accepted in addition to the existence of God. The author conveys the proof in this manner. According to this, if one of the gods wants the movement of a being and the other wants its quiescent, and both say it, this is not possible because it involves the meaning of something to carry on two opposite qualities at the same time. If neither of said fulfilled, this option is out of the question, as there will be an insolvency contrary to divinity. If only one order fulfilled and others didn’t, in this case other’s claim of deityness would weaken. Consequently the first being will be true god since his order fulfilled. The author has expressed his own opinion on whether or not this proof provides certainty. He also opined his objections to some scholars who misrepre-sent this evidence. Another proof of tawḥīd given by the author on this subject is that mostly identified with the Imam al-Māturīdī. According to this, the miracle shown by the prophet in order to his message is also prove the oneness of that God; while the other hypothetical deity’s silence on this proves that the God is one. He also tries to demonstrate that the God’s oneness based on a some of dilemmas such as ignorance and impotence, which arise if more than one deity claims sovereignty on diffe-rent scopes. Nevertheless, he presents the options that if more than one deity is accepted, one of them will be either imperfect or equivalent to the other. He eliminates the first possibility with the thesis that the imperfect being cannot be a deity. The author states that if both gods are equal, the world either exist or not; if it exists, there would be conflict between both and this option is not possible as well, since it would eliminate the order of the world. According to him, all these possibilities revealed that God is one. Apart from these proofs, the he also considers and examines the naturalist approach, which contains elements contrary to monotheism and the approach that attributes a son to God. He criticizes the first approach, which imposes a great mission on the concept of nature that conta-ins more uncertainty and their explanation of the order in the universe through nature, which is lack of knowledge, perception and consciousness. As for the son attribute to God, he criticizes with the thesis that the son would be created being whether it is formed through semen or in some other way.