Hayâlî’nin Düşüncesinde Değerin Kaynağı ve Fiillerin Değeri.

The article aims to examine the problem of the possibility of value and the source of attributing value to actions in the context of the thought of the Ottoman scholar Shams al-DīnAhmad b. Mūsā al-Hayālī. The question of what is the approach to the issue of value in the Hanafi-Maturidi tradition vis-à-vis the Mu'tazila and Ash'arites is discussed with reference to al-Hayālī's views. al-Hayālī expressed his own thoughts in the commentary he wrote on his teacher Hızır Bey's ode called al-Qasīda al-Nūniyya. He especially examined the issue of husn and qubh in the interpretation of the lines of this ode: "Goodness and evil are religious, but / we say that they can be known by reason". In analyzing and interpreting his thoughts, Muhammad 'Umar b. al-Shaykh 'Abd al-Jalīl b. al-Shaykh 'Abd al-Jamīl al-Baghdādī al-Hanafī’s work titled alHawāshī al-Futūhiyya li-Sharh al-Nūniyya and Mehmet Emin Uskudārī's work titled Hāshiya 'alā Sharh al-Hayālī 'alā alQasīda al-Nūniyya are used. Ash'arites claimed that knowledge of value is not possible for humans and accepted that the source of our knowledge about good and evil is religion. Mu‘tazilite thinkers, on the other hand, associated good and evil with the essence of actions or with the attributes found in the essence of actions. Some Mu‘tazilite thinkers, such as the al-Jubbā’ī stated that the context and conditions in which actions are performed are also important in attributing value. Regarding value, Hanafī scholars from Bukhara stayed close to the Ash'arite understanding of value, while Māturīdīs stayed close to Mu‘tazilite ideas. Although Māturīdīs accepted that religion gives information about good and evil, they claimed that the value of some things could be known through reason. In our study, it has been shown that al-Hayālī’s basic approach is in favor of al-Māturīdī’s understanding of values. Attention has been drawn to the similarities between the Mu‘tazilite and Māturīdī scholars regarding the meanings of good and bad attributed to actions. It has been explained that good and evil have three meanings. First, goodness means that a person's deeds are praised in this world and rewarded in the afterlife. Evil means being blamed in this world and punished in the afterlife. Secondly, good is what is fit for purpose, and bad is what is not fit for purpose. This also means that good is what is beneficial and bad is what is harmful. Thirdly, good is an attribute of perfection and evil is an attribute of deficiency. For example, knowledge is good because it makes people more perfect. Ignorance is bad because it leaves man in a deficient and low state. According to Mu'tazila, the goodness and evil of everything can be known through reason, while according to al-Māturīdī the goodness and evil of some things can be perceived through reason. In this context, Mu'tazilite and Māturīdī thinkers criticized the arguments of the Ash'arites, who accepted that religion is the source of value knowledge that necessitates responsibility. The article also discusses the relationship between the source of value and the liar paradox which arises from the combination of truth and falsehood in a single sentence. Believing that there is a solution to the liar paradox, al-Hayālī stated that al-Māturīdī’s understanding of value can be justified through this solution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]