A New Attempt at Theology in The Theological Faculty of Dârülfünun; An Evaluation of Şerefeddin Yaltkaya (1880-1947)’s Project of Ijtimâi Ilm-i Kalam
Mehmet Şerefeddin Yaltkaya, a figure from the late Ottoman Empire, which was characterised by significant turbulence, possessed a multifaceted personality. Consequently, he engaged in self-education across numerous disciplines and pursued a career as a professor at the Faculty of Theology at Dârülfünun until its closure. In response to the prevailing developments in the West and the Islamic world’s subsequent lag in various domains, he endeavoured to identify a solution to this circumstance, akin to many scholars of that era. In this regard, he initiated the project entitled “Ijtihāmi Ilm-i Kalam”, which posited that theological concepts could be elucidated through the lens of sociological data. In this study, an analytical approach was adopted, starting with a comprehensive examination of Yaltkaya’s life and his role as a faculty member at the Faculty of Theology at Dârülfünun. Subsequently, a meticulous examination of his “Ijtihāmi Ilm-i Kalam” project was undertaken. The study’s findings indicated that Yaltkaya was unable to fully develop his project. However, the most problematic aspect of his theological project is his association of the nature of the sacred with the general acceptance of society. The positivist and materialist movements in the West exerted intense pressure on Yaltkaya, causing various problems to emerge in the social theology project.
Dârülfünun İlahiyat Fakültesi’nde Yeni Bir Kelam Denemesi; Şerefeddin Yaltkaya (1880-1947)’nın İctimâi İlm-i Kelam Projesi Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme
Osmanlı Devleti’nin oldukça çalkantılı olan son döneminde yaşamış olan Mehmet Şerefeddin Yaltkaya, çok yönlü bir kişiliğe sahiptir. Bu sebeple birçok alanda kendisini yetiştirmiş ve Dârülfünun İlahiyat Fakültesi’nin kapanışına kadar burada müderrislik yapmıştır. Batıdaki çeşitli gelişmeler ve İslam dünyasının birçok alanda geri kalması sebebiyle dönemin birçok alimi gibi bu duruma çözüm bulmaya çalışmıştır. Bundan dolayı o, “İctimâi İlm-i Kelam” projesini geliştirerek kelamın sosyoloji verileriyle açıklanabileceğini savunmuştur. Çalışmamızda öncelikle Yaltkaya’nın hayatı ve Dârülfünun İlahiyat Fakültesi’ndeki hocalık görevi incelenmiş, ardından İctimâi İlm-i Kelam projesi incelenerek tahlil edilmiştir. Çalışma sonucunda Yaltkaya’nın projesini tam olarak geliştiremediği müşahede edilmiştir. Bunun temel nedeninin Émile Durkheim’den yoğun bir şekilde etkilenmesi ve kelam ilmini sosyolojik verilerle açıklamaya çalışırken dinin ilahi yönünden daha çok beşerî yönünü ön plana çıkardığı, bunun da temel sebebinin dönemin şartları ve ihtiyaçları dolayısıyla olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Özellikle kutsalın mahiyetini toplumun genel kabulüyle ilişkilendirmesi, kelam projesinin en problemli yönünü oluşturmaktadır. Aynı zamanda Batıdaki pozitivist ve materyalist akımların da Yaltkaya üzerinde yoğun bir baskı oluşturduğu müşahede edilmiş ve ictimâi kelam projesinin çeşitli problemlerinin ortaya çıkmasına neden olduğu saptanmıştır.
Mehmet Şerefeddin Yaltkaya was an influential scholar who lived during the late Ottoman period and the early years of the Republic of Turkey, a time of immense political and intellectual transformation. A polymath, Yaltkaya cultivated expertise in multiple disciplines and held a professorial position at the Dârülfünun Faculty of Theology until its closure. His career coincided with the most challenging period of the Ottoman Empire and the transition to the modern Republic. His contributions were not only academic but also administrative, as he later served as the Deputy President and then the second President of the Directorate of Religious Affairs. Like many intellectuals of his time, Yaltkaya was deeply concerned with the stagnation of the Islamic world and sought ways to address its intellectual and social backwardness, particularly considering Western advancements.
During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Western thought dominated by positivist and materialist philosophies, which reshaped discussions about religion and society. Concepts such as the nature of the sacred and the origins of religion are being increasingly interpreted through human-centred and naturalistic perspectives. These intellectual movements found their way into the Ottoman and later Turkish intellectual landscape, significantly influencing scholars like Yaltkaya. Faced with these new currents, he sought to redefine the discipline of Kalam (Islamic theology) in a manner that could engage with contemporary sociological thought. His most significant intellectual contribution in this regard was his proposal of “Ijtimâî İlm-i Kelam” (Sociological Science of Kalam), which sought to explain Kalam using sociological methods and data. The originality of this project is evident in that Yaltkaya was the first to both name and outline its framework.
Yaltkaya’s project significantly shaped by the ideas of Émile Durkheim and Ziya Gökalp, two major figures in sociology. Durkheim’s work on the sociology of religion, particularly his concept of societal sanctity, played a crucial role in Yaltkaya’s thought process. Similarly, Gökalp’s emphasis on national identity and social structures influenced the development of the Ijtimâî İlm-i Kelam project. Yaltkaya’s approach fundamentally revolved around the concept of sacredness as a social construct. His efforts aimed to modernise Islamic thought by integrating sociological insights into theological discourse, a task he saw as essential for engaging with the contemporary world.
However, Yaltkaya’s approach was not without its challenges. The primary issue with his project was the potential conflation of divinely sourced sanctity with societal sanctity. Durkheim’s theories suggest that religious beliefs and practices emerge as expressions of collective social consciousness rather than divine revelation. Yaltkaya’s adoption of this framework raised concerns about whether his project inadvertently reduced the divine aspect of religion to a mere social function. It remains unclear whether Yaltkaya was fully aware of this implication or whether he deliberately overlooked it. Nonetheless, this conceptual tension hindered the broader acceptance and development of his thesis.
Additionally, various intellectual movements in the early Republican period, particularly those advocating for religious reform, reflected elements of Yaltkaya’s ideas. However, these initiatives often faced resistance and struggled to gain traction. One of the main criticisms of Yaltkaya’s project was that it seemed to depart from a transcendental conception of God by grounding religious beliefs in social structures. This shift challenged traditional theological perspectives and invited scrutiny from scholars who argued that it compromised the metaphysical foundations of Kalam. Furthermore, Yaltkaya’s project lacked a systematic structure, making it difficult to establish a comprehensive theological framework.
Despite these critiques, Yaltkaya’s sociological insights into religion, morality, and faith were significant contributions. He attempted to make Islam more comprehensible to modern society by engaging with contemporary intellectual trends. His work demonstrated an awareness of the challenges posed by positivism and materialism, yet his attempt to integrate sociological methods into Kalam ultimately fell short of creating a fully developed theological system.
To understand Yaltkaya’s intellectual endeavour, it is crucial to consider the historical context in which he was working. The late Ottoman and early Republican periods characterised by efforts to reconcile Islam with modernity. Scholars and reformers sought ways to address the perceived stagnation of Islamic thought and institutions. Yaltkaya’s Ijtimâî İlm-i Kelam was one such attempt, reflecting the broader intellectual trends of the time. However, his reliance on Durkheimian sociology led to conceptual challenges that prevented his project from achieving a lasting impact.
Given these challenges, further research is needed to refine and develop Yaltkaya’s ideas. Although his project was incomplete, it provides a valuable foundation for exploring the social dimensions of religion. Future studies could benefit from incorporating insights from disciplines such as psychology, anthropology, and historical methodology to create a more comprehensive approach to Kalam. By broadening the scope of analysis beyond sociology, scholars may be able to address the limitations of Yaltkaya’s framework and develop new perspectives on contemporary theological issues.
In conclusion, Mehmet Şerefeddin Yaltkaya’s Ijtimâî İlm-i Kelam was an ambitious attempt to modernise Islamic theology by integrating sociological insights. However, due to its conceptual ambiguities and its heavy reliance on Durkheimian thought, the project remained an unfinished endeavour. Yaltkaya’s association of sacredness with societal consensus was particularly problematic, as it risked reducing the divine aspect of religion to a social construct. Additionally, the strong influence of Western positivist and materialist currents on Yaltkaya’s thought contributed to the shortcomings of his project. A more productive approach would involve analysing traditional conceptions of the sacred through sociological perspectives without fully adopting positivist frameworks.
Despite its flaws, Yaltkaya’s work remains relevant for contemporary discussions on Islam and modernity. His attempt to bridge the gap between theology and sociology highlights the importance of interdisciplinary approaches in religious studies. While his specific framework may not have provided a systematic Kalam model, the broader questions he raised about the role of religion in society continue to be of scholarly interest. By critically engaging with his ideas and addressing their limitations, future research can build upon his efforts to develop a more robust understanding of the relationship between religion and society in the modern world.
Ultimately, Yaltkaya’s project serves as a reminder that theological inquiry must evolve in response to changing intellectual landscapes. Although his Ijtimâî İlm-i Kalam did not achieve widespread acceptance, it represents an important step in the ongoing dialogue between Islam and contemporary thought. The challenges he faced underscore the difficulties of integrating sociological methods into theology, but they also highlight the potential for interdisciplinary approaches to enrich our understanding of religion. By revisiting and refining his ideas, scholars can continue to explore new ways of addressing the intellectual and social challenges facing the Islamic world today.
