İhsan Fazlıoğlu: "Forcing the Boundaries in Religion, Politics and Philosophy-Science in the Fifteenth Century"

İhsan Fazlıoğlu: "Forcing the Boundaries in Religion, Politics and Philosophy-Science in the Fifteenth Century"

This paper is delivered in: "Historiographical Introduction to the Fifteenth Century: The Islamic Perspective: An Age of Exploration: Forcing the Boundaries in Religion, Politics and Philosophy-Science in Fifteenth Century" Before the Revolutions: Religions, Sciences&Politics in the Fifteenth Century, 13-15 January 2005, Berlin.

An Age of Exploration: Forcing the Boundaries in Religion, Politics and Philosophy-Science in the Fifteenth Century I. Theoretical Framework: The history of each century is shaped by the fears and dreams of its narrator, the historian. For this reason, the fifteenth century is framed in the Muslim world based on the mental image created by its historians as they search both for meaning in their past culminating in the establishment nation states in modern times, and hope for the future. Furthermore, each modern Muslim nation has tried to construct the fifteenth century based upon the way its people have related to this past. For some, this century was a beginning; for others, a retreat; and for yet others a period of deterioration. Shaped by variety of anxieties, this type of historiography, instead of picturing the fifteenth century as a whole, has tended to be fragmented in its approach; more recently, this has become characterized by utilitarianism, i.e. picking up only what is workable and useful for the moment. Is it possible to imagine the fifteenth-century Islamic world as a whole distinct from the anxieties of today? This goal can only be accomplished to some extent by conceiving history as a living entity rather than as something that has passed completely away. The first and foremost condition of this conception is, primarily, to take into consideration the primary actors' beliefs, thoughts, fears, and hopes rather than those of our contemporary historians. Of course this desire is the ideal goal comparable to the ideal sentence in grammar; we all know that no one can come up with a perfect sentence structure when s/he begins to utter words. However, we are aware of the fact that the rules of grammar do not exist for discussion, but rather to monitor what is spoken, even written. As a Serbian proverb says, "The future is crystal clear; but the past is dark because the past constantly changes." Therefore, in this work, we will try to clarify an important aspect of the fifteenth century: that is the fact that this century was an age of exploration, i.e. a search for political, religious, and philosophical-scientific knowledge. In other words, this century was an era when religious, political and philosophical-scientific boundaries were extended. This exploration was intensified in the political-geography of the Ottoman State, centered around Istanbul. It would influence all who were searching, crossing boundaries of the age, and carrying anxieties and hopes for the future. Another reason to study this century is our belief that these explorations contributed significantly to the formation of Europe and to the world of the future. This exploration during the fifteenth century can be summed up in three major points: 1) The first one is religious: the tendency was a search for the unification of all religions. 2) The second is political: the purpose was a desire to establish a world-state. 3) The third is philosophical-scientific: the goal was the search for construction of a new metaphysics and physics beyond the philosophical-scientific systems of Aristotle, Ibn Sina, and the Asharite theologians. Therefore, with Istanbul as a locus of all these explorations, an order would be established in religion, politics and philosophical-scientific knowledge. The ultimate purpose of this order was to gain happiness and live according to the decrees of this unified knowledge that was postulated by physical and metaphysical wisdom. How did these three explorations start, how did they develop, and what were the outcomes? Before answering these questions, and to facilitate our conception of the era, it is necessary to draw a political, religious, and philosophical-scientific map of the fifteenth-century Muslim world. II. The political, religious and philosophical-scientific map of the Muslim world in 15th century From the perspective of Islamic history, the fifteenth-century witnessed the rise and collapse of political powers. New ideas and new trends emerged in religion, politics, and philosophy-science. In short, the fifteenth century, despite the prevalent image, witnessed many interesting and exciting concrete projects in the range of human endeavors. In this period, the Timur Empire in Central Asia rose rapidly and collapsed just as rapidly. Centered in Egypt, the Mamluk Dynasty, which once had a powerful political structure, was on the verge of breakdown. The Altın-Orda State in Russia was decaying due to pressure from the Timurids. In Andalusia, Islamic culture was totally obliterated; Muslims and Jews were either persecuted or sent into exile. Constantinople was captured by the Ottoman Beylik (Frontier State), which would become an Empire. During the reign of Sultan Bayezid the Second, the Ottomans assisted Muslims and Jews who were forced into exile. At the turn of 15th century, initial steps were taken to establish the Shiite Safavid State in Iran and the Babur State in India. As a consequence of these changes, political power in the Muslim world was shifting and consolidating in the hands of the Ottoman Turks. Ibn Khaldun, who died at the beginning of the century (1406) in the western part of the Muslim world, wrote his magnum opus, al-Muqaddimah, in which he introduced his system and philosophy of history and society. A prominent historian, Ibn Hajar al-Askalani, narrates that Ibn Khaldun made a prediction when he was in Cairo: the Ottomans would become the key state for the future of the Muslim world. It is unknown what evidence Ibn Khaldun based this prediction, but history would bear him out. In the Maghrib as well, we find al-Kalasadî (d. 1486), the last representative of school of Ibn al-Banna (d. 1321), and Ibn Gazi al-Miknasi (d.1513). Al-Kalasadî, who made significant progress in Khwarizmian algorithms and calculations, also put forth a system of algebraic symbol and notation. The mathematical works and conclusions that al-Kalasadî reached were transmitted to Western Europe, especially to Italy. Mathematical-astronomical studies continued in the Egyptian-Syrian region through the works of Ibn Shatir (d.1375), Ibn al-Ha'im (d.1412), Ibn al-Majdi (d.1447), Sibt al-Mardini (d.1506), who were followers of Shams al-Din al-Khalili (d.1365). The school of Egypt in particular constructed mathematics and astronomy within the framework of fiqh (Islamic law). Preferring to specialize in details rather than extending the theoretical content, this school composed enormous works (both in size and numbers) for the calculation of practical astronomy. Another characteristic of this school is that it successfully managed to put together practical techniques of astronomy and calculation in the Western and Eastern regions of the Muslim world, and produced many important works on astronomical instruments. On the other hand, since all these works were written for pedagogical purpose, they are all critical materials for assessing the education of mathematics and astronomy in this period. Another crucial thinker in this era is Muhyiddin al-Kafiyejî (d. 1474), who spent his life in Egypt even though he was originally from the Ottoman region. al-Kafiyejî, who wrote many works, primarily on language and philosophy of history, followed in the steps of a linguist and scholar of fiqh, Akmaladdin al-Babertî (d.1384), who also migrated to Cairo from Anatolia, and continued his method; moreover he trained many students such as Shamsaddin as-Sahawî (d.1497), an important name in philosophy of history, and Jalaladdin as-Suyutî (d.1505), who, following Ibn Taymiyya (d.1328), strongly criticized Aristotelian logic and the theory of syllogism. In the process of moving from Tribe to Beylik (frontier state), from Beylik to State, and from State to World Empire, the most important century for the Ottomans was the fifteenth. Defeated at the turn of this century by the Timurid army, the Ottomans managed to establish their unity and solidarity after struggling for eleven years, a time called fetret devri (chaotic period). In the following years, Badraddin as-Simavî, a student of Abdurrahman al-Bistamî (d.1453), who was a mystical-numerologist Plato follower, manipulated the political and economic conditions and turned them into a rebellious movement using the mystical ideas defended by his master. Even today, the idea of sharing equally, called the Badraddinean approach, is not only common in the Balkans and Turkey, but is also prevalent among Jews and Christians in Ottoman regions. The Eastern Roman Empire collapsed when Constantinople was captured in 1453, and the Ottomans achieved tremendous progress in institutionalizing the state by establishing several civil, military, scientific, and technical institutions. Sultan Bayezid II followed in the footsteps of his father, Mehmed II, The Conqueror, and improved the political, scientific, and governmental structures he inherited. He especially made significant progress in the arts and literature. The fifteenth century is very important with respect to the development of an Ottoman intellectual mentality. Sultan Yildirim Bayezid, long time before the fall of Constantinople, appointed Shamsaddin al-Fanarî (d.1431), who reorganized the curriculum and the perception of theology and knowledge by synthesizing the work of the philosopher-theologian Fahruddin al-Razî (d.1209) and that of the sufi-philosopher Ibn Arabî (d.1240), that was established firstly by Dawud al-Qaysarî in the first Ottoman madrasa at Iznik (Nicea). The most significant aspect of this intellectual mindset is that in both cases, Fanarî and Kayserî, they were fundamentally followers of Ibn Sina (d.1037) filtered through al Ghazali (d.1111). Along this line of thinking, several thinkers and scientists emerged in Ottoman geography before or after the Fall. Among the names are: Sinan Pasha (d. 1486), Hocazade (d. 1487), Molla Husrav (d. 1480), Hasan Chalabî (d. 1481), Ali Tusî (d. 1482), Hatipzade (d. 1495), Molla Lutfî (d. 1495) ve Ahawayn (d. 1499) and Haci Pasha (d. 1417), the pioneer of the Ottoman medical tradition. The Iran-Turkistan region, always considered a dynamic locale throughout Islamic history, witnessed many developments under the Timur state, which quickly rose to power in the first half of the century. Sayyid Sharif Jurjani (d.1413), the theologian, philosopher and mathematician, initiated this process along with his students. Jurjani developed the idea that acquiring knowledge of reality was through a symbiotic relationship with theology, physics, mathematics and philosophy, in which all were on an equal status. This paradigm of knowledge and teaching dominated the Ottoman lands and the Iran-Turkistan region for nearly five hundred years. 1 The work that Sayyid Sharif wrote in Samarkand in 1404, entitled Sharh al-mawaqif fi ilm al-kalam, heavily influenced the elite level of thought in theology-philosophy-science among the Ottoman scholars. 2 In this respect in the city of Herat, around the circle of Baysungur, a descendant of Timur, initiated a major movement in Islamic art, which later was called Baysunguri. In the hands of Abdulkadir al-Maragi, the music in the Muslim world reached its peak. All these works were transferred to the Ottoman region with the help of Maragi's son. Mehmed al-Ladiki improved and enriched music theory in his works and he wrote both in Turkish and Arabic. The Samarkand school of mathematics-astronomy was established around the circle of Ulugh Bey, another descendant of Timur, which later left an unprecedented impact on the history of Islamic philosophy and science. Many great thinkers and scientists were educated in this circle. Among the mathematicians and astronomers are: Kadizada-i Rumi (d.1440), Ali Kushji (d.1474), Fathullah Shirwani (d.1486), Mirim Chalabi (d.1525), and Abdullah Birjandi (d.1528). In the first half of the fifteenth century, numerology (hurufilik) turned into a religion as Shiism was becoming more and more widespread in the second half of the century in Iran. In the midst of this condition, mystical thinkers like Jalaladdin Dawwani who was the follower of the teachings of Nasiruddin Tusi and Ibn Sina, and Molla Jami, who followed the method of pantheistic thinking of Sadraddin Konawi (d.1275), Shamsaddin Fanari (d.1430) and Dawud Kayseri (d.1350), emerged. In sum, the fifteenth 15th century in the Islamic world, unlike its image in modern literature, was neither an era of stagnation nor of collapse. If there is a search for something, it means there is a step made towards progress. We observe that Gelibolulu Ali, who died towards the end of 16th century, called this age (15th century) the golden age, and affirmed that this era should be taken as a model for any revival or reform. Having given this synopsis of politics, religion, and science in the Muslim world in the fifteenth century, we can now turn to a discussion of the process of exploration that we mentioned earlier. III. Search for Religious Unification As Ottoman Turks gradually moved into the interior parts of Byzantium (the Eastern Roman Empire), the Byzantine intellectuals became more familiar with the Turks, and they tried to find a way to live side by side with the newcomers. In the second half of the 14th century, Gregory Palamas (d.1359) gave the first examples of this attempt, and Georgios Gemistos Plethon (1355/60-1450/52) wrote his ideas on how to implement it. During the period when Byzantium was still a potent political power, Plethon endeavored to create a superior language for unifying the two monotheistic religions, i.e. Christianity and Islam, without reducing one to the other. Plethon considered both religions equal in principal and envisioned merging them using a Neo-Platonic approach. With this goal in mind, he visited Ottoman palaces in Bursa and Edirne, and Sufi circles where he spent a considerable amount of time. He later realized that the Sufi philosophy of pantheism (wahdat-i vujud) had already accomplished his project. Thus, according to Plethon, it was very possible to incorporate Christianity, Islam and even Judaism in the Neo-Platonic philosophical system as it was done in wahdat-i vujud. It can be seen that Plethon's attempt overlapped fairly well with the existing trends of Ottoman scholarship in the pre-Istanbul period. Indeed, the first Ottoman madrasa teacher, Davud al-Kayseri, and the pioneer of the Ottoman intellectual class, Shamsaddin al-Fanari, both were rooted in wahdat-i vujud. It could be assumed that Plethon might have met with al-Fanari in Bursa and Edirne since he was the head of the class of scholars (ilmiyya), but we cannot verify it today. In the same period as Plethon, Abdurrahm al-Bistami, nicknamed as Arif Bi'l-lah, who probably met with Plethon and collaborated with him, also had similar ideas and projects regarding the unification of all religions and philosophies under the Neo-Platonic/Pythagorean system. He visited Bursa and Edirne as well as several other cities in the Ottoman region, for instance Egypt and other centers in the Middle East. He also visited the island of Crete in 1408-1409 and met with some Christian scholars. Bistami, who also had a contact with Mahmad Shah, the son of Fanari, tried to establish a new kind of meta-religious tradition, which was based on a religio-political order that eventually aimed to unite all humanity. Among his supporters were not only Sufi Muslims, but also Christians and Jews. His followers included Badraddin Simavi, who later declared himself a messiah. Bistami particularly defended the idea of a transcendental unity of all religions in his work, Miftah al-jifr al-jami. He left Anatolia after the failure of Badraddin Simavi's rebellious movement, but returned after the situation calmed down. He spent the rest of his life writing on numerology regarding existence and history. With his works on political philosophy, he especially became influential in 1430-1431 in the state circles of the Ottoman palace. After the fall of Constantinople, i.e. when the Eastern Roman Empire ended politically, the inheritors of the Byzantine cultural legacy not only tried to integrate with the new comers in matters of religion and philosophy, but also in politics to seek commonalities. In this new phase, Georges Amirutzes (d.1475) attempted to find an appropriate position in the political structure on the one hand, and to familiarize the Turks with the rational aspect of Christianity on the other. Amirutzes did not try to convert cultivated Muslim Ottomans, but rather attempted to inform them about Christianity and eliminate negative perceptions of it in the eyes of educated Muslims. Later he sought to unify the three religious/philosophical traditions using the concept of a single Abrahamic tradition. Even though the harmony that he struggled to establish among the three religions is debatable, his closeness to Sultan Mehmet, whom he called a philosopher, and the relationships he cultivated with the elites of the Ottoman state, moved Amirutzes' project into a new phase politically: the quest for a world empire. IV. Quest to Establish a World Empire If we consider the appellations that Fatih Sultan Mehmet used for himself, a clear idea about his ambitions can be easily attained. For Turks he used the title of Khan; for Persians Shah; for Arabs Sultan; for Muslims throughout the world Caliph; and to the Roman world, particularly the orthodox community, Caesar. This civilizational and historical perspective of Fatih had certainly been implanted by his exceptional education. He was taught high Islamic culture by various leading scholars, primarily Molla Husrev and Molla Gurani (d. 1488). He took lectures in Greek and Latin history from the Italian humanists who had come to his palace when he was a prince at Manisa. He had always two translators by him during his lifetime, one for Latin and the other for Greek, in order to keep up with his readings. According to the information given by Byzantine historians, Fatih Sultan Mehmet had a special interest in Aristotelian and Stoic philosophies. He studied these philosophies for a while and read their fundamental texts. Furthermore, he was interested in mathematical books generated by the Alexandria School, especially geometrical and astronomical ones. About one hundred Greek books in philosophy and science at his private library confirm these interests. Our studies in the manuscript libraries of Istanbul have revealed to us a fact that has not been communicated by either Byzantine or Ottoman sources: Fatih Sultan Mehmet showed a deep interest in the philosophical system of Plato and was especially attracted to Plato's world of Ideas. The oldest manuscript copy of the anonymous al-Musul al-akliyya al-Eflatuniyya (copied in 740 AH) is the one that Fatih Sultan Mehmet and then his son Sultan Bayezid II studied. This copy carries notes in the margin made by both of these Sultans (Ayasofya no. 2455, 105 folios). The manuscript deals with universals, ideas, the ontological status of physics, mathematics, and metaphysics, and the relationship of these last three with their objects. The text deals with its subjects from a Platonic point of view and discusses all the different ideas on a subject in detail. More interestingly, other evidence indicating that Fatih Sultan Mehmet was a true follower of the philosophy of Plato comes from an author's comparison of Fatih with sayings of Plato in Kitab al Siyaset al-mulukiyye va al-ahlak al-ihtiyariyye (al-murdiyye) [Ayasofya, n. 3990, copied in 875 AH by Ahmed el-Kudsi]. This book was dedicated to Fatih Sultan Mehmet himself and comprises the sayings of Plato on various philosophical issues, chiefly on politics and ethics. The author of the manuscript shows that Fatih Sultan Mehmet was a ruler in the Platonic mold inasmuch as he mentions Sultan Fatih name as the Platonic manifestation several times after Plato's sentences. This fact is noteworthy and shows the impact of Platonic philosophy on the political-intellectual goals of Fatih Sultan Mehmet, which can be seen within the context of the many scholars in that period, especially Plethon, who were interested in Plato. This fact, at the same time, can explain the special interest of Fatih Sultan Mehmet in philosophers and scientists who had a mathematical approach, especially like Ali Kuşcu. Under the impact of Plato's philosophy, it can be argued that Fatih Sultan Mehmet seriously envisioned the idea of establishing an ideal state. In addition, Fatih Sultan Mehmet took Turkish history as a personal concern. He named his grandson Oghuz, after the legendary Turkish ancestor while naming his children Bayezid, Cem, and Mustafa. Fatih Sultan Mehmet probably learnt Uigur from bakhshis (Uigur philosophers), whom he himself had brought to Istanbul. His letters in Uigur (bitiks) and Uigurian alphabet that he ordered to be prepared for his son still exist in the collection of the Istanbul Millet Library. It is worth noting that Fatih's interest in the Oghuz legends emerged during the same period in which he laid political claim on Oghuz-Turkmen tribes. That numerous authors of the time [see al-İkna fi ilm al-misaha] referred to Fatih as Sahib-i Kıran (the two-horned, a nickname of Alexander) should not be considered a self-aggrandizing claim. As a matter of fact, the Byzantine thinker George of Trabzon (died 1486) set forth his thoughts of a universal empire and imagined the Sultan as a Roman Emperor. George, who united Ecclesia (faith) and empire in the personage of Fatih, laid his claim that all human kind could get together in the personage of Fatih and could live altogether. According to George, the affairs between Christians and Muslims that had been determined up to then by arms should hereafter be determined by intellect/reason. Hence the two religions would be united under the conception of Hak/Hakikat (Absolute Reality) through a rational /philosophical means. Another Byzantine thinker, Michael Critoboules saw Fatih as the heir of Alexander. This thought was wide-spread; indeed Ali Kuşçu, in his mathematics book dedicated Fatih entitled al-Muhammediyye fi ilm al-hisab, deemed him to be superior to Alexander. V. The Quest to Establish a New Metaphysics and Physics In the fifteenth century, one of the most interesting scientific endeavors undertaken in the Islamic World was due to the philosopher-scientists who had assembled around Ulugh Bey. This movement, to which many philosopher-scientists contributed, incorporated a number of earlier scientific work and endeavors, including that of the thirteenth-century Maragha School under Mongol patronage. This circle included the Ottoman scholar Musa Kadi-zada of Bursa, the great mathematician-astronomer Gıyasaddin Jamshid al- Kashi, and others. One of the young students produced from this circle was Ali Kushji, who would advance this movement in an unexpected direction. According to Ali Kushji, it was not enough to be a Platonic mathematician, or to simply abandon Aristotle, or to criticize kalam/theology. By taking the theses of each into consideration, he was able to offer a new solution that these three did not have: A new perception of metaphysics and physics. In the approach of Ali Kushji, theological principles (dogma) were given by Islam and by its representative, kalam/theology. As to the philosophical-scientific principles, all the systems are equal. Kushji, based on this assumption, criticizes the contents of systems but takes their methods into consideration. Before him, we find a philosopher such as Averroes, rejecting both mathematical method and its content, while mathematicians rejected Aristotelianism. This presumption formed an unsurmountable barrier between mathematics and physics. Kushji rejects Aristotelian physics but not the necessity of a physics. In short, Kushji tries to find a balance between kalam and Platonic mathematics in order to transcend the content of Aristotelianism. In order to get this point, he claims that a new mathematics and a new physics need to be established. It is noteworthy that he wrote commentary on al-Tajrid of Nasiruddin Tusi, instead of the two classics of kalam, al-Mawakif or al-Makasid: neither pure Kalam nor pure philosophy. Taking kalam as the common ground, he tried to balance philosophy-science and the world he lived in. In order to explain this understanding that we will refer to as a "new metaphysics", the background of the problem should first be summarized: The most important conflict between philosophers and theologians (mutakallims) emerges in the concept of God. According to the philosophers, the most important quality of God is necessity in itself; in this regard, God is not considered by them as mukhtar bi iradetihi (volitional by His will). But according to theologians, the most important quality of God is kadir-i mukhtar (volitional Omnipotent). In other words, according to philosophers God is the cause, not an agent; according to theologians God is not a cause, but the agent. Let us apply this to the doctrine of cause in classical physics As is known, when the doctrine of cause in classical physics (maddî, surî, fail, gaî) is considered at a cosmological level, if fail cause is accepted as immanent in material cause, then either suri and gai cause also become immanent in material cause. This brings the understanding of a heliostic (organic) universe, in which cause = illat is immanent in the Universe. The Universe keeps on living this content dynamically between the concept of bi'l-kuvve (the thing in itself) and bi'l-fiil (the thing in action [Tabia]). This approach weakens the concept of a personal/individual God outside the universe, which religious understanding asserts. This approach, here discussed in brief, expresses itself best in the system of Neo-Platonism. In this context, the God of the philosophers, over time and through the influence of religious doctrine, becomes a concept/notion in the philosophical systems. Theologians try to preserve the understanding of personal/individual God [Kadir-i Muhtar]. This fundamental difference between kalam and philosophy determines their thoughts on many philosophical concepts, primarily on being. Philosophers and theologians criticized each other concerning the limits of tanzih and tashbih (similitude), using the terminology of Islamic Theology. Philosophers, in time, exceeding in tanzih, almost reduced God to a concept; and theologians, exceeding in tashbih, began to imagine God as some kind of human being. In an attempt to reconcile philosophers and theologians, mystic thinkers imagined God as stratified in order to solve the problem of tanzih and tashbih, making the side of God that does not face the universe tanzih [philosophers] while that facing the universe tashbih [mutekellimin]. Although this solution of wahdat-i vujud, which targeted both the mind and the heart, provided psychological-philosophical relief, it did not, however, encourage human beings to generate knowledge regarding nature inasmuch as this solution was not ontological but onto-theological. This mediation of the immanent cause approach represented by Ibn Sina and the transcendent cause approach of Ghazali was the basic principle for making natural knowledge possible. Being aware of this point, Fatih Sultan Mehmet asked two major thinkers of his time, Hocazade and Ali Tusi, to study this problem. From this point, Hocazade is accepted as the first scholar approaching systematically the idea of an omnipotent God. Without going into further details, we can add that Ali Kushji's critique of both philosophers and theologians and his solution to the problem suggests this kind of mediation between two groups in his work Şerh al- Tecrid. His approach to the problem may be summarized as follows: God is omnipotent but this omnipotence is a possibility, a possibility out of human understanding so that a rational framework cannot be constructed for this potential possibility. By a potential possibility, Ali Kushji overcomes the tanzih problem. But the occurrence of the divine will (action) at a proper time and place (teşbih) is compulsory for a human being. And this fact is the subject of human knowledge. Because man can know what there is, not what there might or ought to be. Ali Kushji gives the following example to clarify his idea: "We definitely know that when we leave home, the kitchen utensils don't transform into human beings qualified in theology or geometry although this is possible by the will of the omnipotent God." Apart from this, Ali Kushji makes a clear distinction between the certain and the possible for attaining knowledge of the universe/cosmos. In his example of astronomy he states that the astronomers never defend an idea like "there is no other solution or way other than the one we explained". Instead, what they defend is the idea that "although our choice is the correct one, there may be other possibilities." In some way, the astronomers imagined "one of the possible approaches/methods related to nature and systemized it according to the correspondence of the feeling/observation and reality." In his explanation, he gives the sundial as an example: the sundial is a design, but an appropriate representation to the reality and gives true knowledge; however there are other possibilities, as well. Ali Kushji's idea for a new physics might be observed better in his definition of body and in his astronomical views. According to him, one can never make an authentic astronomy by obeying the boundaries of Aristotelian physics. There is a need for physics, but this cannot be the Aristotelian one. Ali Kushji's understanding of this point will be discussed by Jamil Ragep. Another good example of the Kushji approach can be observed in his definition of body. His notion of natural body (jism-i tabii) is neither exclusively atomic (eşari) nor exclusively geometric (Aristotelian). In his idea, the essence of the natural body is atomic/discontinuous and the form (heyet) is geometric/continuous. And the qualities emerge when it is a subject to the human senses. The place where Ali Kushji's ideas could find a reception was definitely a place like Istanbul from the point of view of scientific and political stability. Long before Kushji, even before the fall of Constantinople, many astronomers of the Semerkand School, beginning with Fethullah Şirvani, reached to the Ottoman state via Kadi-Zade. And Sultan Mehmet also had all the philosophical and scientific books produced by the Maragha and Samarkand schools brought to him. And copies of the masterpieces of astronomy, mathematics and philosophy are still present at the Istanbul libraries. From the above, it is clear that it would be expected that Sultan Mehmet would establish a policy of science teaching in his newly established institutions of higher education during his reorganization of the political system from Beylik to State. But what was more important was identifying a new science policy. And it is very interesting that Ali Kushji's coming to Istanbul coincided with the reorganization of the philosophical, theological, and mystical modes of knowledge. And it must be noted that this arrival was totally made possible by Fenarizade Ali Çelebi, the Kazasker of Sultan Mehmed who was also a pupil of Ali Kushji in Semerkand. Finally Ali Kushji found the chance to deliver his own approach and method to his students in a very short time. VI. From Exploration to Silence or To Be Ready for The "New" in the Midst of Stability The explorations mentioned above, of course, are not limited to the 15th century. The search for the unification of the religions and establishing the world state lasted until the second part of Suleyman the Magnificent's reign. The rising of some tendencies of which the essence is uncertain in Şeyh Vefa Tekke may be taken into consideration for scholars like Molla Lutfi, Sinan Paşa and Mueyyedzade Abdurrahman Efendi. We can only speak of tendencies since the actual situation remains unclear. G. Postel gives some clues about this subject when discussing his visits to İstanbul, and this shows the presence of such a group up to that time. Moreover, in the hands of Muhyi Gülşeni, a mystical scholar, this tendency turned into the construction of a universal language for all peoples in the world. Gulşeni had written the grammar book and dictionary of this language as well. As Cornell Fleischer has stated, the quest for establishing the world state belonged to the early period of Sultan Suleyman. Combined with the Hijri millennium idea, this quest foresaw a policy and a religion that included the Muslims, Christians, and Jews. In a recently found manuscript, an attempt to legitimize this quest for Muslim public opinion was made by putting it within a prophetic framework. It was stated that Sultan Suleyman was chosen by the prophet Muhammed to unite all the people of the three religions into one nation; for this reason his life was prolonged to carry out this unification on the Day of Judgment (Resurrection), which might take place at the end of the (Islamic/Hijri) millennium. The reason why this idea was put aside, and whether it has a relation with the retreat from Vienna, needs further investigation. At any rate, the death of Makbul İbrahim Paşa, The Grand vizier (Sadrazam) of Sultan Suleyman, seems to mark an end point to the idea and may indicate that Ibrahim Paşa and his circle may have played an important role in this search for unification. As for the quest for a new metaphysics and physics, some scholars, beginning with Ibn Nakib, mentioned this need. Ibn Nakib, for example, states: "There are three basic rules for the science of astronomy: observation, geometry and hads-i sahih (true intuition/anchaung). The ultimate goal of astronomy is to match the observation with the constructed models. For this reason, some rules defined by the philosophers in this science are contaminated and misleading. Thus, their principles are totally wrong." Ibn Nakib comes to a decision in his work as follows: "Astronomy such as in the Almagest and Iktisas (Planetary Hypotheses) is imaginary. And again the models put forward by Tusi, Urdi and Şirazi are not sufficient. This insufficiency is due to following the wrong physics. For this reason, the rules must be changed by a new physics in order to reach the goal". It's not so certain whether Ali Kushji's or Nakibi's radical approaches to the prevailing Aristotelian/Ptolemaic paradigm were understood or welcomed, or not. Detailed and focused research need to be undertaken to determine this. But at any rate, it can be said that although scientific work continued, the priorities of the Ottoman State changed because of the 1585 economic decline. As a result, scientific work continued on well-trodden paths, rather than taking global and radical steps. Finally, the process of exploration summarized above continued on a narrow path until the entrance of modern science to the Ottoman State undermined the stability of the classical paradigm. Although this exploration and quest never resulted in a radical transformation, it prepared the Ottomans mentally for the introduction of the new sciences from the West. 1 This can be easily inferred from the fact that in all diplomas (ijazat) issued after the 15th century, Jurjani?s name was always mentioned as an important scholar in the chain. 2 Al-Mawaqif, see for sharh and hashiyahs KZ, v. II, p. 1891-1894.