Fiqh works have been written in order to find answers to the questions that society needs and to provide solutions to existing problems, at the time they were written. In the following periods, annotations were written on them in order to benefit more from these sources in education and current fatwa issues. In such studies, the information in the works, which are often considered basic, has been defended in kind and an intense effort has been made to adapt them to their own periods. Some faqihs, on the other hand, made critical approaches to some of them and wrote refutations to them. One of these lawyers is Kemalpashazade (İbn Kemal), who lived during the rise of the Ottoman Empire and also served as a sheikh ul-Islam. Ibn Kemal, who has a great knowledge to produce important works in many fields, also has a unique perspective in his approach to fiqh issues. For this reason, he not only gave and explained the existing fiqh information in his works, but also distinguished himself with his criticisms of rejection of the classical Hanafi tradition. He made objections to Viqaya and its commentary, Sherhu'l-Viqaya in particular, which have an important place in Hanafi literature, and to the form and content of texts written with a classical understanding in general. In response to these criticisms, he tried to create a new text with his work el-Islah and he commented on this work with his book el-Izah fî sherhi'l-Islah. Thus, he did not accept the phrases of the works, which are accepted as the main source in Hanafi literature, and the information he conveyed as purely correct, and made a breakthrough in this field by making critical approaches. These criticisms of his were evaluated by the faqihs and necessary criticisms were made and this contributed to the enrichment of fiqh by bringing new perspectives to fiqh. In this study, Kemalpashazade's critical approaches to the classical Hanafi tradition in these two works and his evaluations on it will be discussed.