118 chapter 3
condemns those ulema who consider urf, i.e. the imperial administrative
practice, equal to the Sharia. Furthermore, he also sets out a series of specific
grievances, which impressively foretell several tropes of sixteenth- and seven-
teenth-century Ottoman political writing: the material orientation and lack
of discipline of the janissaries, the postal system that causes the harm to the
peasants (this was to be a constant preoccupation for Ottoman political writ-
ers well into the eighteenth century), and the failure of the imperial adminis-
tration to enforce the religious obligations of its Muslim subjects (T232).
Although Korkud’s works were mostly not copied, they were read in the pal-
ace by high-ranking members of the ulema such as Kemalpaşazade (d. 1534),
especially on the matter of apostasy as well as on his analysis of rulership.52
The critique contained in the Dawat al-nafs against the mixture of Sharia and
dynastic law, and especially against the use of capital punishment, on the
other hand, was to become a central point in late sixteenth-century opposi-
tion, as shall be seen.
3.1 The Ulema Opposition to the Süleymanic Synthesis
Much more influential was the opposition to the kanun synthesis and its
juristic exponents, i.e. Ebussu’ud, Dede Cöngi, and the like. Çivizade Efendi,
the (not immediate) precursor of Ebussu’ud in the post of şeyhülislam (1539–
42), was one of the paragons of this opposition.53 The son of a respected
medrese teacher, Çivizade also followed a teaching career, first in Edirne, then
in Bursa, and finally Istanbul; he then moved into the higher posts of the judi-
ciary, becoming judge of Egypt in 1530–1 and Anadolu kazasker in 1537. He was
appointed şeyhülislam less than two years later, only to be dismissed from the
office in 1542. It seems that the cause of his dismissal was his zealous commit-
ment to Hanafi orthodoxy, which brought him into conflict with what seemed,
then, the consensus of the Ottoman ulema. The issue at stake may seem
irrelevant to imperial policy, as it concerned a subtle problem with the Islamic
ritual (namely, whether one can perform the ablution wearing footwear); what
seems to have played a more crucial role in his removal was Çivizade’s rigid
condemnation of Sufism, noted above. Çivizade returned to his old medrese
post and later, when Ebussu’ud, then the kazasker of Rumili, was appointed
şeyhülislam (1545), he took over the former’s position and kept it until his
death in 1547. It was during this period that he engaged in a legal dispute with
Ebussu’ud on account of the latter validating religious endowments (vakfs)
made by donating cash. Çivizade challenged Ebussu’ud’s view and succeeded
52 Al-Tikriti 2004, 181–185 and 196.
53 On Çivizade see Repp 1986, 244–256; and the very analytical dissertation by Gel 2010.