The comparison of the two masterpieces: ?Hak dini Kur?an dili? and ?Kur?an yolu? under the concept of the regulation verses

In this study comparisons under the concept of the Regulation Verses are made between the two masterpieces written as the commentary on the Quran: ?Hak Dini Kur?an Dili? which was prepared under the control of The presidency of Religious Affairs by the direction of The Turkish Grand National Assembly in the early years of The Turkish Republic, and ?Kuran Yolu? which was also prepared under the control of The presidency of Religious Affairs in the early years of the 21st century.In the Introduction section, the biographies belong to the authors of these two masterpieces are presented.In the first part; the information about the number, classification and commentary of the Regulation Verses are given. In this part, it is observed that various numbers of Regulation Verses are mentioned, however it is not possible to determine the definite number of these verses.In the second part of this study, the two masterpieces are introduced with their main features; the information on the general properties and the commentary methods of the Regulation Verses are given.In the third part, the subjects of the two masterpieces which will be compared are classified in three main groups: worship regulations, behaviour regulations and punishment regulations; and the comparisons are made under these three titles.In conclusion of the comparisons, it is determined that there are no differences except a few sections about being exempt from worship and, the places or people which are suitable for zekât (:Islamic alms), and a few more similar subjects.In the behaviour regulations, the committee is observed to have a wider point of view proportional to the late Elmalılı. Whereas the only difference related to the law of the debts exists in the subject of interest, no significant difference is noticed in the law of economy and finance. On the other hand, the committee has explanations those allow dialogs with nonmuslims ? despite it doesn?t mean friendship with them- whereas the late Elmalılı observed to be untolerant to this subject.No significant differences are observed in the punishment regulations whereas the committee has declared a more tolerant opinion about the execution of the punishments; for instance the execution of the recm (:stone to death) punishment.With these conclusions, it is determined that The Holy Quran is not a static divine book. The availability of making new comments on some sentences which can be accepted as details related to the time and even personal conditions whereas the basic principles do not change, proves once again that it is sent for alives, not for the deads.