The whatness question of tafsīr in the context of Jalāl al-dīn al-Suyūṭī's critique to Fakhr al-dīn al-Rāzī.

On the one hand there is Rāzī, who had been intensively interested in philosophy during his education and include this kind of knowledge in his tafsīr. On the other hand there is Suyūṭī, who closely opposed to the study of logic which was inherited by Ancient Greek. That both of them attach importance to different things in tafsīr and their mind worlds was determined by different factors, let Suyūṭī underline that Rāzī don't care and keep the lines of tafsīr in his practice by criticizing 'in Rāzī's tafsīr is everything but not even tafsīr'. This critique brings the whatness and lines question of tafsīr out. The critique points require to analyze the mind worlds, science traditions, tafsīr understandings which contain the definition and practice of both mufassirs. Only in this wise can be the scientific worth and position of the critique in the tafsīr tradition determined. In addition to these themes to determine the scientific worth, the question of tafsīr worth of the philosophic knowledge in Rāzī's tafsīr is quite important and relevant. Finally that the critique was quote by other scholars shows us that the critique is a result of a certain thought tradition and reflect the classic tafsīr understanding which definition and lines is explicitly clear and stated. Keywords: Mafātīḥ al-ġayb, ad-Dürru'l-manṯūr, mind worlds, definition, practice, whatness of tafsīr, critique.