The Ottoman period was a period in which important works were written in the field of language and eloquence, as in other fields. İsmail Galanbawī, one of the scholars of the period, was born in 1143 in the Gelenbe township of Kırkağaç district of Manisa. Maṣdar/infinitive, al-hāṣıl bi al-maṣdar/total meaning revealed by infinitive, and the meaning they express are discussed in areas such as Arabic language, rhetoric, theology, and fiqh. The subject has many dimensions on the linguistic axis, especially semantics and philosophy of language.

Galanbawī, who stands out for his works in the fields of mathematics and logic, also wrote many works on language and rhetoric. His work called “Risālah fī al-Maṣdar” is one such work. The issue of maṣdar and al-hāṣıl bi al-maṣdar were also discussed by many scholars before Galanbawī. It has been stated that the examination of the meanings of the infinitive from these different perspectives is based on Sadrusheria. He distinguished the meanings of verbs and proposed a new verb theory regarding the existence aspects of the meaning.

In this research, Galanbawī’s life, works, and scientific personality are first touched upon. Subsequently, discussions about the maṣdar and al-hāṣıl bi al-maṣdar and the background to the issue are included. Finally, Galanbawī’s thoughts about maṣdar are included in this work, and a critical edition of his work “Risālah fī al-Maṣdar” is given. In verifying the treatise, the “Authorized Publication Guide” published by the Center for Islamic Research (ISAM) was taken as the basis. Available manuscript copies of the treatise are indicated in footnotes with different nicknames. Any manuscript copy is not taken as the “original copy”. The published text was verified by comparing three different copies to obtain the most accurate text. The name of the treatise is not mentioned in the introduction or elsewhere. The work was recorded in library catalogs with names such as “Risālatu maṣdar”, “Risālatu al-maṣdar”, “Risālah fī al-maṣdar” and “Risāla-i maṣdar”.

There is no doubt about the Risālah fī al-maṣdar’s belonging to Galanbawī. The information in the ẓahriyya and ketebe records of the copies confirms that the treatise under consideration belongs to Galanbawī. The author’s line could not be reached in the three copies of the treatise. Three manuscript copies of this work have been found, two in the Süleymaniye Library and one in the Konya Manuscripts Regional Directorate. Minhuvāt, corrections, and records in the original copies are provided in the footnote. Because there is no harmony between the copies, abbreviations and nicknames are written clearly. The sources that Galanbawī used or referred to while writing his work were touched upon. İbn al-Ḥājib’s al-Kāfiye, Molla Jāmī’s al-Favâ’idu’ḍ-ḍıyā’iyye, ‘Abd al-ġafūr Lārī’s Ḥāşiyetu’l-Favâ’idi’ḍ-ḍıyā’iyye Sadrusheria’s at-Tavḍīḥ, Taftāzānī’s al-Muṭavval and at-Talvīḥ, Hasan Çelebi’s Ḥāşiyetu al-Muṭavval, Molla Fenārī’s Ḥāşiye ‘alā al-Muṭavval and ‘Ayn al-’a‘yān are some of them.

In this treatise, the views of language, rhetoric, and theology scholars regarding the maṣdar and al-hāṣıl bi al-maṣdar are included, and these views are analyzed. The attribution of infinitives and their meanings constitute the basic issue of the treatise. In this treatise, it is discussed whether the unknown infinitive is possible in terms of meaning and attribution. According to Galanbawī, when a verb is turned into an infinitive and the attribution is made, it becomes the subject of the word/expression and can be qualified. Thus, the delegation meaning of the infinitive, which expresses a situation, is revealed. However, infinitives such as possibility, existence (wucūd), and non-existence (‘adam) that do not have existence in the outside world.

The issue of whether the infinitive form or the verb is essential has been discussed by linguists from Basra and Kufa. Linguists from Basra followed Ḫalīl b. ’Aḥmad’s opinion and accepted the infinitive as the source of meaning. In other words, according to the Basra people, the verb derives from the infinitive. According to Kufa’s people, the source of involvement is the verb, and the infinitive form is derived from the verb. Although Galanbawī does not state it clearly, he leans toward the thought of the people of Basra who accept that the infinitive is essential. Galanbawī divided the “al-hāṣıl bi al-maṣdar” into two parts: lexical and terminological. Moreover, he used logical data and dialectical investigation methods extensively in his work. Therefore, he included different views on some issues he discussed, along with his evidence, without making any preference. This situation has sometimes made it difficult to determine which idea the author is close to. It can be seen that there are three separate problems in the background of Galanbawī’s discussion of the infinitive issue: ta‘ḳīd (complexity), the definition of the agent, and human actions/will.

Some authors did not accept the existence of the meaning of “unknown infinitive”. They considered the meaning of unknown masdar as “machūl hāṣıl bi al-maṣdar”. There is a difference in opinion among those who accept its existence whether it is real or a metaphor. Galanbawī largely follows Lārī’s line although he does not state it clearly. Galanbawī did not make a clear distinction between maṣdar and al-hāṣıl bi al-maṣdar. He stated that what is generally meant by the maṣdar is al-hāṣıl bi al-maṣdar, and he used this concept to include the maṣdar as well. Galanbawī stated that the linguists’ statement that “the infinitive of a transitive verb can be the infinitive of a known or unknown verb” should not be understood literally. Galanbawī does not agree with the idea of “Qiyām covers only what exists both in the mind and the outside world. The unknown infinitive has no existence in the mind”. In his explanation, the unknown infinitive also exists in the mind, just like the known infinitive. Galanbawī asserted that the phrase “verb-like” in İbn al-Ḥājib’s definition of agent also includes the infinitive. He stated that the problem would be eliminated if the statement in question was understood as “similar to the action in terms of effect”. In this context, the unknown infinitive is also included in the imputation relationship.

Galanbawī included different views on the subject of known and unknown infinitives and their evidence. He conveyed these views mostly without making any choice. However, he criticized the views that completely ignore the unknown infinitive, as in ‘İṣām ad-dīn alİsferāyīnī. Although Galanbawī does not agree that the unknown has an infinitive, he allows the unknown infinitive to be allowed under certain conditions of meaning and imputation. Considering the different works he compiled, Galanbawī was influenced by Kazabādī regarding the infinitive. In addition, he influenced scholars such as Karaağācī, Kırkağācī, Mustafa Şevket and Abdülhamīd Harpūtī.