Özet:

The first example of the legislation based on Islamic law, Mecelle-i Ahkâm, was the subject of criticism from different points of view, according to the form and content of the preparation. The follow-up of the Kazuistic method, its limitation to the Hanefi discipline and therefore the regulations in some matters are not in the capacity to meet the needs of the period, the existence of deficiencies and excesses that are not in accordance with the contents of the civil law is the main reason for the existence of excesses. The Mecelle sharihi Ali Haydar Efendi also criticized Mecelle from different points of view. In this study, there was no assessment of the criticism of Ali Haydar Efendi, which was intended to identify, describe and classify his tents to the Mecelle, -except for some exceptions - to the criticism of the sharia. The most comprehensive and famous charity of Mecelle, Dürerü’l-hukkâm Mülali Ali Haydar Efendi, has acclaimed Mecelle from the point of view of both law and content, justified his criticism, and brought alternative suggestions on the issues he criticized. Ali Haydar Efendi has often criticized a matter for a single reason, but some matter has been reviewed in several ways. In the article, all the criticisms addressed by Ali Haydar Efendi to the Mecelle subjects are subject to a separate title, and the subjects referred to in multiple aspects are also addressed under a particular title and as exemplary as possible. In terms of the law technique, Ali Haydar Efendi addresses Mecelle the following: that the expression of the subjects is available to make wrong judgment; that it is not general; that the concepts are not used in place; that the subjects are not compatible with each other and with the fictional books; that there are a number of missing, unnecessary or wrong expression in the subjects; that the records in the expression are not in place. It is important to note that, among the criticisms made in terms of content, first the judgment contained in the article is contrary to the judgment or the religious opinion in the fictional books. Some of them are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones. Some of the preferred opinions in this scope were criticized that they were not in accordance with the needs of the period or the preferred opinions in the discipline, that the place place preferences were contradicted and that some controversial matters were not preferred. The existence of provisions that are not in accordance with the requirements of the time and the original incompatibility is also another reason for the tenk. In such a direction, subjects are often criticized by the unsuitable aspects that have been tried to reveal the conformity of the contents of the law to the religious books from various points of view. But Ali Haydar Efendi, in addition, pointed out that the text of the law is in accordance with the disciplinary provisions, but because it does not meet the needs of time, the different disciplines must be prepared with the provisions of the law. Ali Haydar Efendi has criticized Mecelle because some issues are missing or not sufficiently organized, and has placed the ruling on crimes against animals and carbs that should not be dealt with in Mecelle. But he has not yet been discussed in Mecelle, but he has not been discussed in the matter of sarf and ribas. Lukata pointed out that in the subjects that deal with the topics such as hacker, there is also a lack of conditions for these subjects. Ali Haydar Efendi criticizes Mecelle for the discontinuity between the provisions of the materials; for the failure to provide a language, language, and terminology union between the materials; for the failure to repeat both the materials and the materials. Ali Haydar Efendi, who did not criticize any repetitions due to the preparation of Mecelle by the casuistic method, justified or criticized other repetitions, has made suggestions to avoid such repetitions. He also said that there are conscious repetitions in Mecelle. In addition, he also criticized Mecelle because of its systemic defects, such as the incompatibility of the title content, the arrangement of similar subjects in different phases/subjects/subjects or the dealing with different subjects in the same phases/subjects/subjects. Another criticism that Ali Haydar Efendi addressed to Mecelle is also related to definitions. He has made the definitions; his efrad is camî, his brother is non-manî, and he is not as comprehensive as he criticizes from the point of view of the definition technique as devir, and the other definitions in Mecelle are followed by the procedure of contradiction and not included in the books of fûh.

Anahtar Kelimeler: