298 chapter 7
current “issue of the day”, the conflict between the Kadızadeli preachers and
the Halveti dervishes over the abolition of various “innovations” (cf. above,
chapter 6).40 Kâtib Çelebi tackles a variety of subjects on which the Kadızadelis
had initiated controversy. These were as diverse as the legitimacy of singing or
dancing, of using drugs, tobacco, and coffee, various questions of belief such
as what was the religion of Abraham and whether the Pharaoh died an infidel,
and folk practices such as shaking hands and visiting saints’ tombs. Mîzânü’l-
hak contains various pieces that further elaborate the author’s views on poli-
tics and society, including his famous plea on behalf of philosophy and the
rational sciences, which, he claimed, had been expunged from the curriculum
of the medrese schools (KC4–15; L22–28).41
Though the main subject of the treatise is the list of “innovations” and issues
raised by the Kadızadeli movement during the first decades of the seventeenth
century, Kâtib Çelebi’s primary reason for discussing them is to highlight the
diversity of mankind, and more particularly the legitimacy of this diversity. He
propounds the ideas that mankind has always been divided, that this division
has its advantages, and that an intelligent polity will not interfere with what
is in people’s hearts. Moreover, such divisions are inherent in civilization and
society (mukteza-yı hikmet-i temeddün ve ictima ’) and a wise man should get
to know the beliefs and tenets of every class of people in every country, rather
than try to impose his own (KC15–17; L28–30). This basic tenet is repeated in
many parts of the treatise: Kâtib Çelebi stresses that if one tries to deter people
from practices that have become customary over time, he will only produce
conflict and war, since “human nature does not accept easily any criticism of
common usage” (KC36–37; L47–48; cf. KC75, L89–90). In such matters, “one
should [only] see if there is any public evil or any breach of order” (emr-i din
ü dünyaya zarar-ı ‘am ve nizama muhil ma ’naları göreler: KC89–90; L104). And,
after all, all these conflicts are but a sign of the natural human tendency for
“domination, individualism, and independence” (riyaset ve taferrüd ve istiklal).
Even children show this tendency, as do the various classes of men: this applies
to both worldly affairs and religious leadership, and is behind the behavior not
only of rulers, but also of sheikhs and even prophets.
This reasoning is explicitly directed against the Kadızadeli preachers with
whom Kâtib Çelebi was constantly at odds, despite his expressions of respect
40 Kâtib Çelebi 1888/89; an English translation by Geoffrey L. Lewis is in Kâtib Chelebi –
Lewis 1957; cf. Gökbilgin 1971. Lewis’ translation is fuller than the 1888 edition, which
omits, for example, the eighth chapter of the text (on the parents of the Prophet). Lewis
collated this edition with British Museum Add. 7904 (see Kâtib Chelebi – Lewis 1957, 13).
41 Cf. Tezcan 2010b, 146ff.