The Life of Feyzullah Efendi: A Typical Rocky Career Path of an Alim



Throughout his life Feyzullah Efendi experienced a series of upheavals. His biography exemplifies and explains the basic concepts of the legal-academic establishment of his time, something that is vital for understanding the period and cultural milieu in which he acted. Above all, his personal history is bound up with the processes undergone by the ulema in the 17th and 18th centuries.1 This book will show that Feyzullah followed a rather typical rocky career of progress and delay, together with a major fall from favor. Typically, too, a congruence of events made it possible for him to return to the centers of power.


Senior Member Daily Wage Senior Position Islamic Society Imperial Order 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    For biographical sources on Feyzullah Efendi see, for example, Derin, Feyzullah; Derin and Türek, Hal Tercümesi, I; Idem, Hal Tercümesi, II; Şeyhî, Vekayi, II-III, pp. 247–9; Orhan F. Köprülü, “Feyzullah Efendi”, İA, IV (1948), pp. 593–600Google Scholar
  2. Huriye Gerçek, Feyzullah Efendi ailesi, ecdadi, akrabalari, İstanbul Üniversitesi: Basümamiş Mezuniyet Tezi, Edebiyat Fakültesi, Tarih Semineri Ktb. Nr. T. 506, İstanbul, 1949–50Google Scholar
  3. Serhan Mehmed Tayşi, “Şeyhü’l-islam Seyyid Feyzullah Efendi ve Feyziyye Medresesi”, Türk Dünyasi Araştirmalari, 23 (1983), pp. 9–100Google Scholar
  4. Müstakimzade Süleyman Sadeddin Efendi, Devhatül-Meşayih, İstanbul: Çağri Yayinlari, 1978, pp. 74–6.Google Scholar
  5. 2.
    On the Halveti Sufi order and its importance in Ottoman Society see Zilfi, The Politics of Piety, pp. 30–6, 139, 165–6; B. G. Martin, “A Short History of the Khalwati Order of Dervishes”, in Nikki R. Keddie (ed.), Scholars, Saints and Sufis: Muslim Religious Institutions in the Middle East Since 1500, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1972, pp. 275–305Google Scholar
  6. J. Spencer Trimingham, The Sufi Orders in Islam, New York: Oxford University Press, 1998, pp. 74–7Google Scholar
  7. Alexander Knysh, Islamic Mysticism: A Short History, Leiden: Brill, 2000, pp. 264–71Google Scholar
  8. John Curry, The Transformation of Muslim Mystical Thought in the Ottoman Empire: The Rise of the Halveti Order, 1350–1650. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 5.
    Ibid.; Meservey, Feyzullah, p. 33; Yilmaz Öztuna, Devletler ve Hanedanlar: Türkiye (1074–1990), Vol. 2, Ankara: Kültür Bakanliği, 1989, p. 651.Google Scholar
  10. 8.
    On the role of the judge under the Ottomans see, for example, Zilfi, The Politics of Piety, pp. 28–9; Idem, “The Ottoman Ulema”, in Suraiya Faroqhi (ed.), The Cambridge History of Turkey, Vol. 3, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006, p. 213Google Scholar
  11. Kaldy Nagy, “Kadi”, EI2, IV (1978), p. 375.Google Scholar
  12. 11.
    Gibb and Bowen, Islamic Society, II, pp. 139–43; Cahid Baltaci, XV ve XVI Asirlarda Osmanli Medreseleri, İstanbul: İfran Matbaasi, 1976, pp. 18–19Google Scholar
  13. Selçuk Akşin Somel, The Modernization of Public Education in the Ottoman Empire, 1839–1908, Leiden: Brill, 2001, pp. 17–20Google Scholar
  14. J.M. Landau, “Kuttab”, EI2, V (1986): 567–70Google Scholar
  15. 12.
    Zilfi, The Politics of Piety, pp. 130, 163; Idem, “The İlmiye Registers and the Ottoman Medrese System Prior to the Tanzimat”, in J.-L. Bacque-Grammont and P. Dumont (eds), Collection Turcica III: Contributions a l’histoire economique et sociale de l’Empire Ottoman, Louvain: Editions Peeters, 1983, pp. 319–20Google Scholar
  16. Cornell Fleischer, Bureaucrat and Intellectual in the Ottoman Empire: The Historian Mustafa Ali (1541–1600), Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986, pp. 21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Steve Tamari, “Ottoman Madrasas: The Multiple Lives of Educational Institutions in Eighteenth-Century Syria”, Journal of Early Modern History, 5/1 (2001), p. 110Google Scholar
  18. Katib Çelebi, The Balance of Truth, G. L. Lewis (trans.), London: Allen and Unwin, 1957, pp. 135–41.Google Scholar
  19. 15.
    Fleischer, Mustafa Ali, pp. 222–3; Carter V. Findley, Ottoman Civil Officialdom, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989, pp. 54–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mehmet İpşirli, “Scholarship and Intellectual Life in the Reign of Sultan Süleyman the Magnificent”, in Tulay Duran (ed.), The Ottoman Empire in the Reign of Süleyman the Magnificent, Istanbul: Historical Research Foundation Istanbul Research Center, 1988, pp. 23–4.Google Scholar
  21. 16.
    Gibb and Bowen, Islamic Society, II, pp. 139, 143; Uğur, The Ottoman Ulema, pp. xxxvii, lii; Findley, Civil Officialdom, p. 55; Çelebi, Balance, pp. 135–43; Zilfi, The Politics of Piety, p. 85; Idem, “Elite Circulation in the Ottoman Empire: Great Mollas of the Eighteenth century”, JESHO, 26 (1983), p. 337; Colin Imber, Ebu’s-su’ud: The Islamic Legal Tradition, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997, pp. 9–10.Google Scholar
  22. 18.
    For studies on the medrese see, for example, Baltaci, Medreseler; Gibb and Bowen, Islamic Society, II, pp. 139–64; Uzunçarşili, İlmiye, pp. 1–81; Zilfi, The Politics of Piety, pp. 44–101, 204–9; Idem, Registers, pp. 309–27; A. L. Tibawi, “The Origin and the Character of al-Madrasa”, BSOAS, 25/2 (1962), pp. 25–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. George Makdisi, The Rise of Colleges: Institutions of Learning in Islam and the West, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1981, pp. 27–223Google Scholar
  24. Michael Chamberlain, Knowledge and Social Practice in Medieval Damascus, 1190–1350, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994, pp. 69–90Google Scholar
  25. J. Pedersen and others, “Madrasa”, EI2, V (1986), pp. 1123–54Google Scholar
  26. Davud Dursun, Yönetim-Din İlişkileri Açisindan Osmanli Devletinde Siyaset ve Din, second edition, İstanbul: İşaret Yayinlari, 1992, pp. 288–311.Google Scholar
  27. 19.
    Uzunçarşili, İlmiye, p. 67; İnalcik, The Ottoman Empire, pp. 165–81; Gibb and Bowen, Islamic Society, II, pp. 147–50; İpşirli, Scholarship, p. 18; Marshall G. S. Hodgson, The Venture of Islam, Vol. 3, Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1974, p. 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 20.
    Meservey, Feyzullah, p. 158; Tayşi, Feyziyye, pp. 31–3; Köprülü, Feyzullah, p. 599; Murat Akgündüz, Osmanli Devletinde Şeyhülislamlik, Istanbul: Beyan Yayinlari, 2002, pp. 95–6.Google Scholar
  29. 21.
    Chamberlain, Knowledge and Social Practice, pp. 69–90; Jonathan Berkey, The Transmission of Knowledge in Medieval Cairo, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Robert W. Hefner and Muhammad Qasim Zaman (eds), Schooling Islam, Princeton: Princeton University, 2007, pp. 42–5.Google Scholar
  31. 22.
    Zilfi, The Politics of Piety, pp. 24–9; Idem, The Ottoman Ulema, pp. 209–16; İnalcik, The Ottoman Empire, pp, 166–71; Gibb and Bowen, Islamic Society, II, pp. 81–3, 90–7; Berkey, Madrasas, pp. 42–5; Atcil, The Route to the Top, pp. 502, 510; U. Heyd and E. Kuran, “Ilmiyye”, EI2, III (1971), pp. 1152–3Google Scholar
  32. M. Tayyib Gökbilgin, “Ulema”, İA, 13 (1986), pp. 23–5Google Scholar
  33. Mehmet İpşirli, “The Ottoman Ulema”, In Kemal Çiçek (editor-in-chief), The Great Turkish-Ottoman Civilisation, Vol. 3, Ankara: Yeni Türkiye, 2000, pp. 339–42Google Scholar
  34. Abdülkadir Özcan, (ed.). Kanunname-i Al-i Osman, Istanbul: Kitabevi, 2003, pp. 11–12.Google Scholar
  35. 23.
    Although this grade was regularized only under Ahmed III (1703–30), it had been used occasionally since the late 16th century. See Uğur, Ottoman Ulema, pp. xlviii-xlix; Zilfi, The Politics of Piety, p. 230; Idem, Registers, p. 313; Itdem, “Sultan Süleyman and the Ottoman Religious Establishment”, in Halil İnalcik and Cemal Kafadar (eds), Süleyman the First and his Time, Istanbul: Isis Press, 1993, p. 112.Google Scholar
  36. 25.
    Zilfi, The Politics of Piety, pp. 26, 61; Idem, Circulation, p. 329; Idem, The (Ottoman Ulema, pp. 216–17; Uğur, Ottoman Ulema, pp. xxxix, xli; Uzunçarşili, İlmiye, pp. 1–3, 69; Dursun, Siyaset ve Din, pp. 293–5; İnalcik, The Ottoman Empire, pp. 167–8; Atcil, The Route to the Top, pp. 495–6, 500, 510; Baki Tezcan, “The Ottoman Mevali as ‘Lords of the Law’”, Journal of Islamic Studies, 20:3 (2009), p. 394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 26.
    Derin and Türek, Hal Tercümesi, I, pp. 212–13; Naima, Tarih, VI, p. 5; Defterdar, Zübde, pp. 210–11; Şeyhî, Vekayi, I, pp. 580–1; Zilfi, The Politics of Piety, pp. 146–58; Semiramis Çavuşoğlu, The Kadizadeli Movement: An Attempt of Şeriat-Minded Reform in the Ottoman Empire, Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Princeton, 1990, pp. 150–62; Ahmed Refik, Osmanli Devrinde Hoca Nüfuzu, second edition, İstanbul: Toplumsal Dönüşüm Yayinlari, 1997, pp. 137Google Scholar
  38. M. Cavid Baysun, “Mehmed IV”, İA, VII (1960), p. 556.Google Scholar
  39. 27.
    On the Kadizadelis, see Semiramis, The Kadizadeli Movement; Zilfi, The Politics of Piety, pp. 129–81;Idem, “The Kadizadelis: Discordant Revivalism in Seventeenth century Istanbul”, The Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 45/4 (1986), pp. 251–69; Ahmet Yaşar Ocak, “XVII. Yüzyilda Osmanli İmparatorluğu Dinde Tasfiye Teşebbüslerine Bir Bakiş: Kadizadeliler Hareketi”, Türk Kültürü Araştirmalari, 4 (1983), pp. 208–25Google Scholar
  40. Necati Öztürk, Islamic Orthodoxy among the Ottomans in the Seventeenth Century, with Special Reference to the Qadizade Movement, Boston Spa, England: The British Library, 1988.Google Scholar
  41. 31.
    Zilfi, The Politics of Piety, p. 57; Uzunçarşili, İlmiye, pp. 5–17, 45, 75; Dursun, Siyaset ve Din, pp. 301–3; Baltaci, Medreseler, pp. 31–4; Uğur, Ottoman Ulema, pp. xl-xli; Repp, Mufti, pp. 37, 51; Shahab Ahmed and Nenad Filipovic, “The Sultan’s Syllabus: A Curriculum for the Ottoman Imperial Medreses Systems Prescribed in a Ferman of Qanuni I Süleyman, dated 973 (1565)”, Studia Islamica, 98–9 (2004), pp. 183–218.Google Scholar
  42. 44.
    Ismail. H. Uzunçarşili, Osmanli Tarihi, fifth edition, Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, Vol. 3/2, 1995, p. 482.Google Scholar
  43. 57.
    Derin ve Türek, Hal Tercümesi, I, p. 217; Idem, Hal Tercümesi, II, p. 71; Mehmed Süreyya, Sicill-i Osmanî, Nuri Akbayar (ed.), Vol. 3., İstanbul: Tarih Vakfi Yurt Yayinlari, 1996, pp. 533–4.Google Scholar
  44. 58.
    On the chief military judges of the army see Uzunçarşili, İlmiye, pp. 151–60, 177–9; Gibb and Bowen, Islamic Society, II, pp. 84–91; Erk, Meşhur, pp. 580–4; Akgündüz, Şeyhülislamlik, pp. 263, 267–8; Zilfi, The Ottoman Ulema, p. 213; Dursun, Siyaset ve Din, pp. 177–80, 270–5; Repp, Mufti, pp. 20–5, 44–5, 51–5; Atcil, The Route to the Top, p. 509; Kaldy Nagy, “Kadi Askar”, EI2, IV (1978), pp. 375–6Google Scholar
  45. 59.
    On the institution of the Şeyhülislam and its development see Repp, Mufti; Akgündüz, Şeyhülislamlik; Uzunçarşili, İlmiye, pp. 173–214; Refik, Salname, pp. 267–79;Altunsu, Şeyhülislamlar, pp. xxxvii-xlv;Dursun, Siyaset ve Din, pp. 227–85; J. H. Kramers, “Şeyh-ül İslam”, İA, XI (1993), pp. 485–9Google Scholar
  46. J. H. Kramers and R. C. Repp, “Shaykh Al-Islam”, EI2, IX (1996), pp. 399–402Google Scholar
  47. Richard W. Bulliet, “The Shaikh al-Islam and the Evolution of Islamic Society”, Studia Islamica, XXXV (1972), pp. 53–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Norman Itzkowitz and Joel Shinder, “The Office of Şhaykh Al-Islam and the Tanzimat: A Prosopographic Enquiry”, MES, 8 (1972), pp. 93–101Google Scholar
  49. Michael M. Pixley, “The Development and Role of the Şeyhülislam in Early Ottoman History”, JAOS, 96 (1976), pp. 89–96Google Scholar
  50. Ekrem Kaydu, “Osmanli Devleti’nde Şeyhülislamlik Müessesesinin Ortaya Çikişi”, Erzurum Atatürk Üniversitesi Islamî İlimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 2 (1977), pp. 201–22.Google Scholar
  51. 69.
    İnalcik, Transformation, pp. 313–23; Suraiya Faroqhi, Akdes Nimet Kurat, “The Retreat of the Turks, 1683–1730”, New Cambridge Modern History, 6 (1970), pp. 618–24Google Scholar
  52. 71.
    Silahdar, Tarih, II, pp. 483, 569–79; Abou El-Haj, The 1703 Rebellion, p. 47; Cantemir, Growth and Decay, p. 377; M. Tayyib Gökbilgin, “Köprülüler”, İA, 6 (1955), pp. 903Google Scholar
  53. 82.
    On Sultan Mustafa II see Silahdar, Nusretname, 2 vols; Abou El-Haj, Narcissism, pp. 115–31; Sakaoğlu, Sultanlari, pp. 303–14; Cengiz Orhonlu, “Mustafa II”, İA, 8 (1987), pp. 695–700Google Scholar
  54. 92.
    On the Treaty of Karlowitz and its ramifications see, for example, Kenneth M. Setton, Venice, Austria and the Turks in the Seventeenth Century, Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1991, pp. 404–12Google Scholar
  55. Rifaat Ali Abou-El-Haj, “Ottoman Attitudes Toward Peace Making: The Karlowitz Case”, Der Islam, 51/1 (1974), pp. 131–7Google Scholar
  56. 94.
    Hrand D. Andreasyan, “Balatli Georg’a gore Edirne Vak’asi”, Tarih Dergisi, 15 (1960), p. 52.Google Scholar
  57. 99.
    Zilfi, The Politics of Piety, p. 70; İpşirli, The Ottoman Ulema, p. 342; Ahmet Mumcu, Osmanli Devletinde Siyaseten Katl, Ankara: Ajans-Türk Matbaasi, 1963, pp. 125–31Google Scholar
  58. Rifaat Ali qAbou El-Haj, Formation of the Modern State, New York: New York University Press, 1991, pp. 46–7.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Michael Nizri 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ariel UniversityIsrael

Personalised recommendations