Muhammed b. Abdulkerim eş-Şehrestânî’nin el-Milel ve’n-nihal adlı eseri, İslam Mezhepleri Tarihi anabilim dalının en önemli klasiklerinden biridir. On ikinci yüzyılda yazılmış bu eser, sistematik oluşu ve mümkün mertebe taassup güdülmeden betimsel bir anlatıma sahip olması yönüyle benzerlerinden farklı bir konuma sahiptir. Bu değerli eser önemine binaen on yedinci yüzyılda yaşamış bir Osmanlı âlimi olan Nûh b. Mustafa tarafından Tercüme-i Milel ve nihal adıyla Türkçeye çevrilmiştir. Bu makalede el-Milel ve’n-nihal’in adı geçen Türkçe çevirisi ana metinle mukayese edilerek çevirinin mahiyeti hakkında bilgi verilecektir. İlgili çeviri metnin Türkiye Yazmalar Kataloğunda 20’den fazla nüshası bulunmaktadır. Biz bu makalede mütercimin vefatından 40 yıl sonra yazılmış 1701 tarihli en eski yazmayı esas almakla birlikte bir de zaman zaman işaret etmek üzere 1860 tarihli başka bir yazmadan yararlanacağız. Bu makalemiz bir taraftan adı geçen çeviriyle ilgili malumat verirken diğer taraftan on yedinci yüzyılda tercüme anlayışının nasıl olduğuna dair somut bir örnek olacaktır.

Muhammad b. Abdulkarim al Shahrastani’s book al Milal and nihal is one of the most important classics in the field of history of Islamic Sects. This work, which was written in the twelfth century, has a different position than its peers in that it is systematic and has a descriptive narrative without fanaticism as much as possible. Due to the importance of this valuable work, Nuh b. Mustafa an Ottoman scholar who lived in the seventeenth century, translated it into Turkish with the name of Tercüme-i Milal and nihal. In this article, the Turkish translation of al Milal and nihal will be compared with the main text and the nature and content of the translation will be given. There are more than 20 copies of this book in the Turkey Manuscripts Catalogues. In this study, we will take advantage of an early manuscript dated 1701 written 40 years after death of the translator and use sometimes another manuscript dated 1860. This article will give information about the nature of translation on the hand, and on the other hand it will be a conrete example of how was the understanding of translation in the seventeenth century.SummaryThe book of al-Milal and nihal of Shahrastani (d.548/1153) is one of the most important early sources of the History of the Islamic Sects and It was also translated into Turkish in the 17th century due to its importance. We compared the Ottoman scholar Nuh b. Mustafa’s (d. 1070/1660) Turkish translation of al Milal and nihal with the main text and in this comparative study we reached the following conclusions.First of all, Nuh b. Mustafa’s book Tercüme-i Milal and Nihal is not a complete translation of al Shahrastani’s book al-Milal and nihal. Because as the translator Nuh b. Mustafa pointed out at the beginning of the manuscript as “tebdil ve tağyire muhtaç olan mevâzi‘de ziyâde ve noksanla tasarruf olundu” he made some additions and extractions where necessary. In fact, considering this work belongs to the 17th century, it would not be realistic to expect a full translation for those periods. As can be seen in many similar examples, in the past, “the translation” has been done in the form of summary, subtractive, semi-copyrigyt and semi-translations depending entirely on the initiative of the translator.The printed publications of Shahrastani’s al Milal and nihal.are based on the text edited by Mohammed Sayyid Kaylani in 1961. Because the book chapters and subheadings in the printed publication of al Milal were made by Kaylani for the first time, the other publications used this classification of Kaylani even though they did not express this.When we compare the volume of Kaylani and the two different copies of tranlation belonging to Nuh b. Mustafa, there is a big difference in terms of content and scope. In the first part of the book, where the voluminous part of the Islamic Sects and the denominations of Jews, Christians and others are considered, the translation has been partially summarized and in some places additional information were included. In the second part al Ahwa and Nihal section of the book, which describes non-celestial human sects, the subject is dealt with in a very brief manner, roughly 10% of the main text.The translator Nuh b. Mustafa did not address some of the controversial issues contained in the main text in the translation and he added some issues that were not in the main text to the translation. Behind this attitude, it is very likely that there is an individual motive such as giving the public the necessary information and not making contact with confusing issues.Shahrastani said that he would endeavor to explain Islamic Sects based on their own resources without showing any fanaticism, while Nuh b. Mustafa started his translation with 73 sects hadith narrated in the context of Fırka-i Nâciye and Fırka-i Dâlle. He handled the non-Ahl al-Sunnah denominations critically.Another remarkable point in the translation text is that the translator does not comply with the order of contents of the main text. For example Shahrastani in the context of having opposing ideas of sects in terms of tavhed, God’s attributes, justice, promise and threat (al waad val waid), unseen matters (samiyyat) and reason handled the denominations Mu‘tazila, Jabriya, Sıfatiya, al Hawaric, Murjia, Shi‘a and Ahl al Furu (Ashab al Hadits and Ashab al Ray together) recpectively, while Nuh b. Mustafa handled the issue in order of Mu‘tazila, Shia, al Hawaric, Murjia, Najjariya, Jabriya and al Musabbiha. The author has dealt with sects under the title of Islamic Sects while the translator has made the distinction between Fırka-i Dalla and Fırka-i Najiya and he handled the sects under the title of Heretic Sects. Again under the title Fırka-i Nâciye, which is not in the main text, he has long explained the beliefs of ahl al Sunnah and al Jamaat. In this appendix, he put forward the contradictory views of the sects which he saw as Fırka-i Dâlle and took an attitude of almost rejecting them. He gave plenty of examples from Hanafi fatwa books to confirm his views.In the main text, Shi‘a is presented in sixth place in accordance with its historical chronology, while the translation is described it in the second place immediately after Mu‘tazila. In the section about the Shi'a, the translation text is not very adhered to the main text. A subjective narrative Shi'a narration based on Ghulat-ı Shi‘a was preferred. Although the Imamism, which constitutes the greatest majority of Shi'a in the past and present, has long been included in the main text, it has not been adequately translated. The reason for this may be that the Ottoman-Safavid struggle continued in the form of Sunni-Shiite opposition by moving to the field of religion in the 17th century political conditions where the translation was made. Therefore, this translation can be considered as a kind of social engineering example. Consequently, Nuh b. Mustafa’s translation of Shahrastani’s al Milal and nihal is not a literally complete translation. It is a partial translation and in this respect, it would not be wrong to say that this work is a semi-translation, semi-copyrighted work.