Author: Bircan, Hasan Hüseyin

Annotation: As is well known, human beings utilize their so-called “faculties of perception/knowledge” in the process of producing thought. Thought is the product of these faculties and, in this sense, it is a human creation whose source is human itself. Although philosophers propose different classifications, these faculties of knowledge can broadly be grouped as the senses, reason, memory, imagination, estimation (wahm), and intuition (heart). In acquiring knowledge, a person refers to one or more of these sources, and the nature of their thought is defined by the source(s) they rely upon. These faculties also serve as tools through which the subject (human) establishes a relationship with the object (that which is known). From this relationship, different types of knowledge arise, commonly categorized as everyday, religious, scientific, philosophical, artistic, and technical knowledge. Taking these human sources of knowledge into account, they are generally classified into three categories: (a) Sensory/Empirical (based on the senses and emotions), (b) Rational (based on reason), and (c) Intuitive (based on intuition). In the context of Islamic thought, thinkers in the disciplines of theology (Kalam), jurisprudence (Fiqh), and Islamic philosophy are often categorized as rationalists, whereas Sufis are referred to as the people of kashf (spiritual unveiling). However, both the use of reason by Islamic rationalists and the appeal to intuition or the heart by the people of kashf vary significantly. These differences stem from variations in the nature and content of the cognitive faculty employed, as well as in their assumptions (premises) and methods. In short, the rational disciplines differ in terms of both their premises and the reasoning methods they apply. In the realm of kashf, since the emphasis is placed on states (hal) rather than logical conclusions (qal), the distinction lies in the degree of spiritual refinement — a matter open to debate. Based on these observations, it is possible to classify the major intellectual disciplines that emerged within the Islamic civilization as follows: If one seeks to address theological issues through reason, relying on premises derived from the Islamic faith, and employs a defensive or refutational method (known as jadal), the resulting rational product is called Kalam. If one seeks to address matters related to worship and social relations using reason, relying on Islamic premises, and utilizes methods such as analogy (qiyas), representation (tamthil), and induction (istiqra) — not to defend or refute but to provide religiously coherent explanations — the resulting rational product is known as Fiqh. If one addresses issues, particularly those concerning existence, knowledge, and value, solely through reason, deriving premises from rational inquiry and employing demonstration (burhan) as a method — where correspondence is entirely rational — the resulting rational product is termed Philosophy. If one addresses the same issues based on divine inspiration or spiritual discovery, and expresses these through poetics or rhetoric (prose or oration), the resulting human product is identified as Sufism. Given this classification, where might we place Yusuf Has Hajib's Kutadgu Bilig within the intellectual products of Islamic civilization? Judging by its method, it would undoubtedly be classified as a Sufi work, as it presents problems and their solutions through the art of poetry. However, we argue that Kutadgu Bilig is not merely a mystical and poetic work of knowledge; it is also a philosophical text with a strong rational dimension. Similar to Rumi’s Masnavi, if one approaches Kutadgu Bilig holistically, one would discern a coherent and comprehensive rational system unique to this work. Indeed, when considered in its entirety — beyond individual couplets — it becomes clear that the primary concern and perspective of the text involve an effort to reconcile the key disciplines of Turkish-Islamic thought by granting each the value it deserves, aiming for a complementary and harmonious integration. This reconciliation is of such importance that without one, the others remain incomplete and cannot achieve perfection. Yusuf Has Hajib actualizes this effort through four symbolic characters: Gün-Togdı, Ay-Toldı, Ögdülmiş, and Odgurmış. It would be reductive to rigidly categorize the intellectual content represented by these figures as rationalist, empiricist, mystic, or as belonging to the disciplines of Kalam, Fiqh, Philosophy, or Sufism. Such rigid classifications would obscure the deeper purpose of the work and prevent us from appreciating its rich details. What is clear, however, is that Yusuf Has Hajib advocates for the idea that the “knowledge of wisdom/happiness” in his society can only be achieved through a harmonious consensus, where the diverse knowledge systems and methodologies of Islamic civilization — symbolized by these four characters — complement and support one another. This paper will elaborate on these ideas in detail.

Keywords: Yusuf Has Hajib, Kutadgu Bilig, Philosophy, Happines, Sufism

Pages in journal: 61 - 87