Bu ümmetin alimleri, Peygamber’in sünnetine özellikle fitnelerin zuhurundan sonra ziyadesiyle önem göstermişlerdir. Böylece nebevî sünneti muhafaza etmek, derlemek ve isnadlarını incelemek için uzman kimseler ortaya çıkmıştır. Bunlardan bir İmam vardır ki onun şöhreti pek duyulmamıştır ancak hadiste büyük bir şânı vardır. O; Hafız Muhaddis Vezir Ebû Fadl Cafer b. el-Fadl b. el-Hasan b. el-Furat’tır. İbn Hinzâbe künyesiyle tanınmıştır ve h. 308 yılında doğup 391’de vefat etmiştir. Biz de onu tanıtmaya, nesebini, doğumunu, yaşamını zikretmeye ve İhşidiler Devleti’nde yaptığı vezirlik (...) dönemi hakkında bilgiler vermeye daha sonra hadis ilmindeki ilmi şahsiyetine, bu konudaki önemli musannefatına ve alimlerin kendisi hakkında yaptığı övgülere değinmeye çalıştık. İbn Hinzâbe, hadisi talep etmede ve alimlerin ilim meclislerine katılmadaki hırsıyla şöhret bulmuştur. Muhaddis ve hafız olana kadar sürekli ehl-i hadisin meclislerine katılırdı. Nitekim devrinin alimleri ve başkaları bu hususta ona şahitlik etmiştir. Uzak ülkelerden seçkin kimseler ondan ders almak ve ilminden yararlanmak için ona uğrarlardı. Ebu'l-Fadl İbn Hinzabe, Irak ve Mısır'daki hadis âlimlerinden dersler almıştır. Aynı şekilde İmam Dârekutnî gibi zamanının büyük âlimleri de ondan ders almışlar. Vezir İbn Hinzabe Allah'ın onu, ilmi ve âlimleri sevmesiyle ödüllendirmesine ilaveten ibadet ve takva sahibi olduğuyla da nitelenir. Gece namazına olan düşkünlüğü ve çokça sadaka vermesi de bu kabildendir Daha sonra kendisinin cerh ve ta'dil ilmine ilgisi açıklamak suretiyle onun suretiyle onun bu ilme yönelik çabalarını vurğulamayaolan ilgisin gayret ettim. Vezir Ebu'l-Fadl İbn Hinzabe bazı raviler hakkında değerlendirmelerde bulunmuştur ki bu, onun rical ilmi hakkındaki bilgisinin olduğunu gösterir. Bu, ancak Allah'ın bol ilim ve keskin hafıza verdiği kimselerin araştırabileceği hassas ve üstün bir ilimdir. Onun bu konudaki değerlendirmeleri genellikle cerh ve ta'dil eleştirilerini yapanlarla uyumlu olmuştur. O, İmam Darukutni’nin cerh ve ta’dildeki bazı sözlerinden nakilde bulunurdu. Bazen de diğer bazı âlimlerin sözlerinden alıntı yapardı. Görüşüyle uyumlu olduğunu gösteren sözlerde yorum yapmazdı. Büyük imamlar, râvinin cerh sebebini öğrenmek için İbn Hinzâbe'nin kitabına başvurmuşlardır ki bu, onun yeteneğini ve kitaplarının âlimler arasındaki yerini göstermektedir. Akabinde kullandığı cerh lafızlarını işlemeye çalıştık ki bu konuda ekseriyetle kullandığı kelime “zayıf” lafzıdır. Cerh'de İbn Hinzâbe'nin sözlerini nakledenler arasında, zamanında hadiste müminlerin emiri olan Hafız İbn Hacer de vardır. Bu, Vezir İbn Hinzabe'nin konumunu ve rical ilmindeki bilgisini gösterir. Sonrasında, diğer münekkit alimlerin sözleriyle kıyaslayarak tadil lafızlarına değindik. Taʿdîlde kullandığı lafızlar; sika, şeyhun salih, sadûk, muğrakun fi’l-kitâbe ve daha başka lafızlardır. Vezir Ebu'l-Fadl İbn Hinzabe, bazı ricalin şeyhlerinin isimleri gibi küçük meselelerde olumsuz yorumlara maruz kalmıştır. Bazı görüşleri de büyük imamlar tarafından tercih edilmiştir. (shrink)

Los Massalik al-absar de Ibn fadl Alláh al-Umari incluyen un breve resumen de la Historía de los omeyas en al-Andalus. En este trabajo se analizan las relaciones textuales entre ese pasaje y el Muqtabis de Ibn Hayyán, crónica que resulta ser la fuente casi única utilizada por al- Umari para redactar ese capitulo.

Los Māsilik al-abṣār de Ibn Faḍl Allāh al-'Umarī incluyen un breve resumen de la Historia de los omeyas de al-Andalus. En este trabajo se analizan las relaciones textuales entre ese pasaje y el Muqtabis de Ibn Ḥayyān, crónica que resulta ser la fuente casi única utilizada por al-'Umarī para redactar ese capítulo.

La finalidad de este artículo es analizar desde un punto de vista historiográfico el capítulo que sobre los omeyas de al-Andalus incluyen dos de las obras más representativas del periodo mameluco, la Nihāyat al-arab de al-Nuwayrī y los Masālik al-abṣār Al-ʿUmarī, Ibn Faḍl Allāh, Masālik al-abṣār fī mamālik al-amṣār: qabāʾil al-ʿarab fī l-qarnayn al-sābiʿ wa-l-ṯāmin al-hiǧriyayn, Dorothea Krawulski (ed.), Beirut, al-Markaz al-Islāmī li-l-Buḥūṯ, 1985 de al-ʿUmarī; ambas enmarcadas en lo que se ha denominado «enciclopedismo mameluco». En primer lugar, se realiza (...) una aproximación a la producción escrita de este periodo, señalándose las principales características de esta producción, así como las circunstancias que las moldearon. Posteriormente, se ofrecen algunas consideraciones generales sobre estos autores y sus respectivas obras. Todo esto con el fin de ofrecer una visión general del contexto cultural en el que se enmarcan las obras objeto de estudio de este artículo. Finalmente, se procede al análisis historiográfico crítico de la información que las dos obras nos proporcionan sobre los omeyas de al-Andalus, con especial atención a las fuentes que estos autores manejaron para su composición. Este análisis nos proporciona nuevos datos sobre el proceso de transmisión textual en la historiografía árabe, además de ampliar nuestro conocimiento sobre algunas fuentes andalusíes relevantes, algunas de las cuales permanecen total o parcialmente perdidas, como es el caso del Muqtabis de Ibn Ḥayyān. (shrink)

Bişr el-Merîsî taraftarları ile Osman ed-Dârimî arasında burada tartışma konusu yapılan hadisler haberî sıfatları konu alan ve müşkil nitelikte olan rivayetlerden oluşmaktadır. Bu rivayetleri genelde Bişr el-Merîsî ve taraftarlarının tecsîm ve teşbîh içerdiği iddiasıyla münker kabul ettikleri görülmektedir. Ehl-i re’y özellikleri taşımakla birlikte ilahî sıfatlar konusunda Mu’tezilî bir anlayışa sahip olduklarından tenzih anlayışları gereği sıfatları reddetmektedirler. Yaratılmışlara ait niteliklerin yaratıcıya nisbet edilmesini tenzîh anlayışlarına aykırı gördüklerinden bu tür müşkil rivayetleri ya kendi anlayışları doğrultusunda te’vîl ya da reddettikleri gözlenmektedir. Sert bir (...) ehl-i hadîs âlimi olan Osman ed-Dârimî ise, ayet ve hadislerde bildirilen ilahî sıfatlara iman edilmesi gerektiğini kabul etmektedir. Bu anlayışı sebebiyle bu rivayetlerde bildirilen haberî sıfatlara da te’vîl etmeksizin lafzî anlamıyla yaklaşmakta; kendi görüşü doğrultusunda Bişr el-Merîsî ve taraftarlarının yaptığı te’vîlleri reddetmekte, bu te’vîllerin ta’tîle yol açacağını ileri sürmektedir. Bu rivayetlerin lafzî (literal) anlamları doğrultusunda anlaşılması gerektiğini savunmaktadır. Bu hadisler üzerinde yapılan tartışmalar, temel hadis eserlerinin yazıldığı dönemde Ehl-i re’y ve Ehl-i hadîs ekollerine mensup âlimlerin hadislere yaklaşımlarını göstermesi bakımından önem arzetmektedir. Burada vermiş olduğumuz hadisler üzerindeki tartışmalar bu iki ekolün uluhiyet anlayışını, haberî sıfatlara yaklaşımlarını ortaya koyduğu gibi bunların genel anlamda hadis perspektifi hakkında bizlere bilgi vermektedir.ÖzetBu araştırma, temel hadis kitaplarının yazıldığı dönemde, yani III./IX asırda, haberî sıfatlar ihtiva eden bazı hadisler üzerinde yapılan tartışmaları ele almaktadır. Tartışma Osman ed-Dârimî (ö. 280/894) ile Bişr el-Merîsî’nin (ö. 218/833) taraftarları arasında geçmektedir. Hadisler üzerinde Ehl-i hadîs ile Ehl-i re’y mensubu âlimler arasında gerçekleşen bu tartışmalar bir yönüyle hadislerin anlaşılması ve yorumlanmasını ilgilendirmektedir. Tartışmanın, burada ele alınan hadislerin nasıl anlaşılması gerektiği; lafızların kelime anlamı mı (literal) yoksa bu lafızların ötesindeki muhtemel mecazî anlamları dikkate alınarak mı anlaşılması gerektiği noktasında odaklandığı söylenebilir. İnceleme konusu yapılan hadisleri tartışan tarafları kısaca tanıtmak yerinde olacaktır. Sözünü ettiğimiz rivayetlerle ilgili tartışmalar Bişr el-Merîsî taraftarları ile Osman ed-Dârimî arasında geçmektedir. Ehl-i hadîs’in önemli simalarından biri olan Osman ed-Dârimî, hadislerle ilgili bu tartışmaları içeren ayrı bir eser yazmıştır. Bu eser, Allah’ın sıfatları ve bazı hadis meseleleri konusunda Bişr el-Merîsî ve onun iki talebesinin görüşlerine reddiye olarak yazılmıştır. Bişr el-Merîsî, Ebû Yusuf’tan (ö. 182/798) fıkıh tahsil etmiş, önemli bir kelâmcı olarak tanınmıştır. O, kelâmla ilgili konularda aralarında İmâm Şâfiî’nin (ö. 204/820) de bulunduğu pek çok âlimle ilmî tartışmalar yapmış bir ehl-i re’y âlimdir. Halife Me’mûn’un (ö. 218/833) danışma meclisinde bulunmuş, Kur’ân’ın yaratılmışlığı (Halku’l-Kur’ân) görüşünün benimsenmesinde önemli payı olmuştur. Osman ed-Dârimî ise, Yahyâ b. Ma’în (ö. 233/848), Ali b. Medînî (ö. 234/848-49), İshâk b. Râhûye (ö. 238/853) ve Ahmed b. Hanbel (ö. 241/855) gibi döneminin otoritelerinden hadis öğrenmiş bir ehl-i hadîs âlimidir. Hadis tahsili için önemli bütün şehirleri dolaşarak hadis öğrenmiş ve rivayette bulunmuştur.Haberi sıfatları ispat ve bunlarla ilgili rivayetlerin teviline karşı çıkan anlayış ile, bu rivayetlerin tenzih anlayışına uygun biçimde tevilini savunan kesimler ilk dönemden itibaren eserler telif etmişlerdir. Osman ed-Dârimî’ye göre, ehl-i hadîs’in eleştiri edebiyatının ortaya çıkmasında, Mu’tezile’nin ilahî sıfatları reddetmesi etkili olmuş ve pek çok müellif bu yönde eserler yazmışlardır. Ebû Hüreyre’den nakledilen bir rivayetle ilgili olarak muârız, bu rivayetin Allah için bildiğimiz göz ve kulak organlarından oluştuğu izlenimi verildiğini söyler. Osman ed-Dârimî, bu hadisin göz ve kulak organlarını değil görme ve işitmeyi ispat ettiğini söyler. Hiçbir konuda Allah’ın benzerinin bulunmadığını belirtir. Dolayısıyla Allah’ın organlardan oluştuğu iddiasını ehl-i hadîs’e nisbet etmek iftiradır. Ebû Dâvûd, bu hadis ile Allah için görme ve işitme sıfatlarının ispat edildiğini ve Cehmiyye’nin ilahî sıfatları inkar görüşüne reddiye olduğunu belirtir. Ebû Hüreyre’in Hz. Peygamber’e nispet ederek naklettiği: "İman Yemenlidir, hikmet Yemenlidir! Ben Rabbi’nizin nefesini Yemen tarafından hissediyorum!" rivayetini de muârız münker kabul etmiştir. Çünkü Bişr el-Merîsî ve ashâbına göre nefes ancak karın boşluğu olanlardan çıkar, Allah ise bundan münezzehtir. Osman ed-Dârimî’ye göre, muârız yanlış anlamıştır. Burada kastedilen, Yemen tarafından esen ve insanı rahatlatan rüzgardır. Bu rivayet bağlamında bakıldığında, Bişr el-Merîsî taraftarlarının rivayeti literal değerlendirdiğini, Osman ed-Dârimî’nin ise rivayeti yorumladığını görmekteyiz. İbnü’s-Selcî, "Siz, Allah’a ondan çıkandan (Kur’ân’dan) daha faziletli bir şeyle yaklaşamazsınız!" rivayeti hakkında, Müşebbihe’nin bunu, karın boşluğu olan, kendisinden kelâm çıkan şeklinde anladıklarını belirtir. Allah boşluğu olmayan anlamında "samed" olduğundan bu anlayış geçersizdir. Bu hadisle, Kur’ân’ın Allah’tan değil O’nun katından çıkması kastedilmiştir. Osman ed-Dârimî’ye göre, İbnü’s-Selcî’nin asıl maksadı Allah’ın kelâm sıfatını inkâr etmektir. Kur’ân’ın O’ndan çıktığında bir şüphe yoktur, bunu sadece kelâm sıfatını kabul etmeyenler inkâr etmektedir. İbn Abbâs’a atfedilen; "Rükn (Hacerülesved) yeryüzünde Allah’ın sağ elidir, halk ile onunla musafaha eder" rivayetinde geçen "yemînullah" (Allah’ın sağ eli) sözünün anlamı, İbnü’s-Selcî’ye göre bildiğimiz sağ el değil, Allah’ın nimeti ve ikrâmıdır. Hacerülesved ile elin kastedilmediğini kabul eden Osman ed-Dârimî’ye göre, İbnü’s-Selcî’nin maksadı, geçersiz te’villerle Allah hakkında ayet ve hadislerde belirtilen iki eli inkar etmektir. İbn Abbâs’ın Hz. Peygamber’den naklettiği başka bir rivayeti İbnü’s-Selcî’nin eserine alıp nakletmesini eleştiren Osman ed-Dârimî, bu tür zayıf rivayetlerin yayılmaması gerektiğini söyler. Buna ilave olarak İbnü’s-Selcî’nin yaptığı yorumun da çirkin olduğunu belirtir ve eleştirir. Çünkü sözü edilen rivayette Allah, yeşil bir takım elbise giymiş kıvırcık saçlı bir genç olarak tasvir edilmektedir. Böyle bir rivayet Hz. Peygamber’den gelen sahih rivayetlerle çeliştiği için de güvenilmez bir rivayettir. Rivayetle ilgili bu değerlendirmeyi yapan Osman ed-Dârimî, rivayet hakkında muârızın yaptığı yorumları da reddeder. Muârıza göre, "Rabbimin yanına girdim" sözü, "Adn cennetinde Rabbimin huzuruna girdim" demektir. Osman ed-Dârimî’ye göre bu gibi müşkil (problemli) hadisler re’y ile tefsir edilmemeli, rivayet edilip bırakılmalıdır. Hz. Peygamber’e dayandırılan ve Allah’ın kendisine geldiğinden bahisle cevabını bilemediği bazı sorulan sorduğundan, sonra Rabbinin elini sırtına koymasıyla parmaklarının serinliğini hissettiğinden ve her şeyi öğrendiğinden bahseden rivayetle ilgili olarak muarız şu değerlendirmede bulunur: Allah Resûlü’ne gelen Rabbi değil güzel suretli bir melekti, o melek Allah tarafından yönledrilmekteydi ve elini koyan da o melekti. Osman ed-Dârimî, muârızın bu yorumunu reddeder. Bu yorum aynı zamanda diğer sahih hadislere de aykırıdır. Osman ed-Dârimî, sözkonusu rivayet hakkında muârızın yorumunu reddettikten sonra zikrettiği sahih rivayetlere dayanarak buna güvenilemiyeceğini ifade etmiştir. İlahî sıfatlar hakkında konuşmak en zor konular arasında görüldüğünden, selef âlimleri bu konuda susmayı tercih etmişlerdir. Ancak sonraki nesiller bu konuda farklı yollar tutmuşlardır. İlahi sıfatları anlama konusundaki temel yaklaşımları tefvîz, teşbîh ve te’vîl şeklinde üç ana başlıkta toplamak mümkündür. Tefvîz, selef alimlerinin benimsediği yol olup, Allah’ın zâtı ve sıfatlarının mahiyetine ilişkin bilgiyi ilâhî ilme havale etmek demektir. Teşbîh, Allah’ı yaratılmışlara veya yaratılmışları Allah’a benzetmek anlamına gelir. Te’vil, Allah’ın yaratılmışlara benzediği izlenimini veren ayet ve hadisleri dil bilimi ve aklî bilgilerle yorumlamaktır. Sıfatları inkar edenlere Muattıla denilmiş, sıfatları ispat edenler Sıfâtiyye diye anılmıştır. Ehl-i re’y’e göre Allah’a atfedilen ve sözlük anlamı bakımından teşbîh ve tecsîm izlenimi veren sıfatları uygun biçimde te’vil etmek gerekir. İlâhî sıfatlarda Mu’tezile tenzihi öne çıkarmış, Eş’ariyye ve Mâtürîdiyye ise tenzihe uygun te’vili benimsemiştir. Müşebbihe, Vehhâbî-Selefî anlayış da ilahî sıfatlardaki lafızları zahiri anlamlarıyla almışlardır. Hadis ilminde en önemli temel eserlerin telif edildiği II./VIII. ve III./IX. asırda yaşamış olan âlimler arasında cereyan eden inceleme konusu yaptığımız tartışma, ilk döneme ait olması bakımından önemlidir. Bunun yanında tartışma, âyet ve hadislerden oluşan naslara yaklaşımda, iki temel yaklaşımı göstermesi bakımından da önemli bilgiler ihtiva etmektedir. Bu iki temel yaklaşımdan biri ehl-i re’y ekolünü, diğeri ise Ehl-i hadîs anlayışını temsil etmektedir. Osman ed-Dârimî genel olarak rivayetin lafzına bağlı kalmayı savunmakta, Bişr el-Merîsî ve ashâbı ise münker olduğu gerekçesiyle rivayeti eleştirmekte ya da te’vil etmektedir. Nadir de olsa Osman ed-Dârimî’nin rivayeti ret ya da te’vil ettiği, Bişr el-Merîsî ve ashâbının ise rivayeti savunduğu yerler de görülebilmektedir. Müteşâbih (problemli) rivayetler hakkında Bişr el-Merîsî’nin yaptığı te’viller sonraki âlimler üzerinde etkili olmuştur. Onun te’villeri, Cübbâî (ö. 303/916), Kādî Abdülcebbâr (ö. 415/1025), Ebü’l-Hüseyin el-Basrî (ö. 436/1044) gibi Mu’tezilî âlimlerin yanı sıra, İbn Fûrek, Gazâlî (ö.505/1111), İbn Akîl (ö. 513/1119), Fahreddîn er-Râzî (ö. 606/1210) gibi sünnî âlimler tarafından da iktibâs edilmiştir. Rivayete dayalı olan hadis ilminde hakikatin ortaya konulabilmesi, "rivayet" ve "re’y" seçeneklerinden birini tercih etmekle değil; bunların her ikisini de yerinde ve dengeli olarak kullanılmasına bağlı olduğunu hatırda tutmak gerekir. Hakikatin ortaya çıkarılmasında rivayet re’ye, re’y de rivayete muhtaçtır. Rivayet ve re’y birbirinin rakibi değil tamamlayıcı unsurları olarak görmek gerekir. (shrink)

This article aims at examining the limits of change in the field of worship through a study on the origins of the ḥukm[religious ruling] of Shawwāl fasting that is widely practiced in the different parts of Muslim world. The study, firstly, deals with the evolution of the ḥukm of Shawwāl fasting chronologically among four sunnī schools of law, then analyzes the solitary reports on the topic. It concludes that in Mālikīand Ḥanefīschools, the ḥukm of this specific worship changed within the (...) limits of karāha [reprehensibility], ibāha [permissibility], and nadb [recommendation]. This ḥukm was constructed based on solitary reports which later became a paradigmatic source of religious legitimacy in the Ḥanbalīschool beginning with the eponymous Imām and in the Shāfiʿīlong after the founding authorities. It also claims that it is strongly probable that the solitary reports on the topic go back to a deduced opinion in the age of companions, but then reached to a form of prophetic solitary report in the corpus of hadīth reports. Ultimately, this specific worship that has restricted number of fasting was established with the paradigmatic effect of the approach to solitary reports as the only authentic way of transmitting the sunna, even though it is at odds with the fact that this worship had not been implemented in the first two centuries after hijra, i.e. contrary to the established practice [ʿamal]. Summary: The issue of change of rulings in Islamic law comes up frequently on various occasions, and an increasing number of academic studies are trying to determine the characteristics and limits of this change in numerous books, articles and papers. These studies mostly seem to focus on bringing together the arguments that can be compiled under the title of ‘the flexibility of Islamic law in response to the challenges of modernity’. Although the change of rulings in Islamic law is an undeniable fact, reading it only from the lens of the change in Islamic law depending on the requirements of time is an inadequate reading. The change of rulings in Islamic law has different motives; and the change of time, more precisely the change of custom, is only one of them.On the other hand, another issue that comes up in relation to the change of rulings is the claim that this change can only take place in terms of the rulings regulating the interpersonal relations, i.e. muʿāmalāt. In fact, this claim relies on the abovementioned approach that limits the change in Islamic law with the change of custom. Hence, because other two main areas of Islamic law, worships (ʿibādāt) and punishments (ʿuqūbāt) are not open to change through custom, their rulings will not change at all. This article will try to reveal that the change in rulings might reside in a sort of another change emerged in relation to the sources of these rulings, which is a neglected point. Thus, by exposing that the field of worships which is mostly considered as a closed area for change in rulings is actually open to it, this article will examine the limits of this change.For this analysis, the article deals with the fasting of six days in the month of Shawwāl as an example, which is widely practiced in various parts of the Islamic world. The main evidence on which this fasting is based on is a report transmitted in the considerably authentic hadith sources of Ahl al-Sunnah, which reads as follows “Whoever fasts the Ramaḍān and adds six days from Shawwāl, will get reward of the entire year”. This fasting, which is the subject of a great agreement on its ruling as recommended (mustaḥāb) practice today, was actually regarded as reprehensible (makrūh) by the two great eponymous jurists of the first two schools of law in the second Hijrī century, namely Mālik b. Anas and Abū Ḥanīfa. In his al-Muwaṭṭaʾ,Mālik clearly expresses that he did not recognize any scholar who keeps this fast, and that no [authentic] report has reached him on this. The fact that both Mālik b. Anas and Abū Ḥanīfa declared an opinion on the subject shows that this practice started to appear in the first half of the second ḥijrī century as a practice or as a solitary report (khabar al-wāḥid). However, both imāms have stated that such a specific worship would be makrūh. In spite of these very sharp expressions, the schools of law, which were founded by the followers of these two eponymous scholars, abandoned their views and widely accepted Shawwāl fasting as mustaḥāb. This article examines why this sharp change occurred in a worship in the schools of law and in which way it took place.Accordingly, the fundamental motive in this change is a paradigmatic transformation in understanding and identifying the sunna as a source of normativity. Although an agreement was formed on the validity of solitary reports as a source of knowledge in the second ḥijrī century, it was not yet accepted that these narrations are identical to sunna as a source of normativity. For that reason, both Abū Ḥanīfa and Mālik did not hesitate to reject any solitary report that contradicted a stronger evidence. However, as a result of the extraordinary efforts of Ahl al-Ḥadīth, the epistemic value of solitary reports has reached to an authority equating them to the sunna with a very rapid acceleration as of the end of the second century and throughout the third century. This situation led later scholars of schools to abandon the views of the eponymous scholars of these schools on certain topics in favor of certain solitary reports. This was also the process for the change in Shawwāl fasting.This thesis will be put under two headings, a section that tries to determine the periods and processes for the Sunnī schools of law in considering this fasting as mustaḥāb; and another section that provides an evaluation of transmitted reports in relation to the Shawwāl fasting. Accordingly, in the Mālikī and Ḥanafī schools, due to the effect of the reports, the ruling of Shawwāl fasting has been transformed from makrūh into the mustaḥāb as a result of the interpretational activities that started in the fourth ḥijrī century. Shawwāl fasting was accepted as mustaḥāb in the Shāfiʿī school, although there was no transmitted opinion on the subject from the founding imāms, in the fifth ḥijrī century; and in the Ḥanbalī school directly by the founding imām Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal, whose main aim was to follow a concept of religion that puts the transmitted reports at the center. When the reports on the subject are examined, it demonstrates that the mustaḥāb ruling is mainly rooted in a report by Saʿd b. Saʿīd transmitted in the famous hadīth compilations including Muslim’s Ṣaḥīḥ.Yet, this report was criticized in its both chain and text. Combining the facts that the same report with the same chain was also transmitted as the words of the companion in some sources and the verse that declares good deed will be rewarded ten times higher than what it deserves will make the following explanation a valid one: As Mālik put it such a fasting practice was commonly unknown to the Muslim society in the first two centuries after the ḥijra. Sometime after the death of the Prophet, an inference was made probably by a companion(s) as that it would be a good deed if someone who fasted an entire month already and got used to the fasting to fast six more days in order to get a reward of fasting for the entire year according to the verse that rewards good deeds with ten times higher. Since it is a recommended practice in essence, i.e. fasting for the sake of Allah, this inference transformed into a report and easily passed through the filters of hadīth scholars who are linked to a sort of piety promoting worships among people. After the solitary reports gained an authority to the extent that they can rarely be challenged, the followers of later schools of law preferred to get in a process of re-interpreting the opinions of their imāms in order either to reconcile them with the content of report, or at least to show why these imāms actually spoke against this fasting. Eventually, the later scholars of madhhab decided for the standard opinion of the madhhab depending on the reports in favor of the Shawwāl fasting rather than following their eponymous imāms. (shrink)

Ölüm her canlı için kaçınılmaz bir gerçekliktir. Bu kaçınılmaz gerçeğin farkında olmasına rağmen insan, her ölümden az veya çok etkilenir. Fakat sevilen veya kendisine sevgiden daha fazla değer yüklenen kişilerin ölümü, daha acı ve derin bir sürecin yaşanmasına sebep olur. Yas süreci denen bu evre genel olarak şok, özleme, yeniden yapılanıp kendine gelme ve kimliği yeniden kurma gibi aşamalardan oluşur. Böyle değer verilen kişilerin ardından yaşanan ölüm acısının en karakteristik örneklerinden biri Hz. Peygamber’in vefatı üzerine sahâbede görülür. Bütün sahâbe içinde (...) Hz. Ömer’in ortaya koyduğu tavır ise çok daha farklı bir yere sahiptir. Zira o Allah Rasûlü’nün öldüğünü kesin bir dille reddetmiş, bayılmış olabileceğini söylemiş veya vahiy aldığı anlarda yaşadığı hale büründüğünü savunmuştur. Ona göre Hz. Peygamber ölmüş olsa bile Allah Teâlâ O’nu yeniden diriltecektir. Bu tavır, ilk bakışta, İslâm’ın yaşam ve ölüm olaylarına bakışı ve ayrıca İslâm tarihinde Hz. Ömer ile özdeşleşmiş ideal Müslüman tipi ile çelişiyor görünmektedir. Makalede öncelikle, bazı kitaplarda Hz. Ömer’e nispetle nakledilen bu sözlerin Hadis Usûlü kurallarına göre sahih olup olmadığına dair değerlendirmeler yapılmıştır. (shrink)

Ahmed b. Hanbel, vefatıyla neticelenen hastalığı esnasında oğlu Abdullah’tan, şu hadisin el-Müsned’inden çıkartılmasını istemiştir: “Allah Rasûlü ‘Ümmetimi Kureyş’ten şu grup helâk edecek’ buyurunca oradakiler ‘(bu durumda) bize neyi emredersin?’ diye sordular. O da ‘İnsanlar onlardan uzak durup ayrılsalar!’ cevabını verdi”. Ahmed b. Hanbel bu hadisin, diğer rivayetlerle çeliştiğini düşünmektedir. Oğlu Abdullah’a göre bu hadisin çeliştiği rivayetler, Hz. Peygamber’in idarecilere itaat etmeyi ve onlardan kaynaklanan yanlışlara karşı sabırlı olmayı emrettiği haberlerdir. Ahmed b. Hanbel’in tavrı ve bunun sebebi esasen açık ve (...) net gibi görünmektedir. Buna rağmen daha sonra gelen ilim adamları, onun bu tavrı ile ilgili farklı değerlendirmeler yapmışlardır. Bu değerlendirmelerden birine göre İmam’ın tavrı, kendi açıklamasında da dikkat çektiği üzere hadisin şaz olması yani halkın idarecilerle ilişkilerini düzenleyen diğer rivayetlerle çelişmesidir. Bu bakış açısı, İmam’ın açıklamasıyla uyum içinde olmasına ilaveten aynı hadisin Buharî ve Müslim gibi meşhur muhaddisler tarafından nakledilmesi açısından da önemlidir. Zira bu yorumun ulaştığı sonuca göre Buharî ve Müslim’in sadece sahih olan hadisler ihtiva ettikleri iddiasıyla takdim ettiği el-Câmi‘u’s-sahîh isimli eserlerinde, bu şarta uymayan rivayetler de bulunabilmektedir. Bununla birlikte söz konusu hadisin hem sened hem de metni üzerinde yapılan incelemeler şaz iddiasının doğru olamayacağını göstermektedir. Nitekim hadisi nakleden dört ravinin tamamı, içinde Ahmed b. Hanbel’in de bulunduğu münekkitler tarafından güvenilir bulunmuştur. Nitekim İmam, el-Müsned’inde bu ravilerin çok miktarda hadisine yer vermektedir. Hadisin metin açısından da şaz olmadığını söylemek mümkündür. Zira metnin birinci cümlesi olan “Ümmetimin helâki Kureyş’in elinden olacak” şeklindeki tespiti, farklı onlarca hadiste görebilmek mümkündür. Bu hadislerden pek çoğu el-Müsned’de bizzat Ahmed b. Hanbel tarafından da nakledilmiştir. Şaz addedilen kısmın “İnsanlar onlardan uzak dursalar” şeklindeki ikinci cümle olması da pek muhtemel görünmemektedir. Zira zalim idarecilere karşı bundan çok daha şiddetli tepkileri emreden hadislerden onlarcası yine bizzat Ahmed b. Hanbel tarafından nakledilmiş durumdadır. Ahmed b. Hanbel’in, bu hadisi kitabından çıkarmak istemesinin sebebi bağlamında ortaya atılan ikinci iddiaya göre İmam, dönemin yönetimiyle iyi geçinmek amacıyla böyle bir talepte bulunmuştur. Zira bu dönemde Abbasî iktidarı, hadisçileri büyük bir sıkıntıya sokan Mihne sürecine son vermiş, ulemaya karşı yumuşama politikası gütmeye başlamıştır. Ahmed b. Hanbel de yönetimin bu uzlaşma arzusuna olumlu cevap vermiş ve bu çerçevede idareciye karşı sergilenecek sert tutuma işaret eden hadisleri kitabından çıkarmak istemiştir. Fakat bu iddia da yaşadığı dönemde iktidara karşı takındığı tavır sayesinde toplum önderi haline gelmiş Ahmed b. Hanbel gibi bir şahsiyetle uyuşmaz. Zira o idareci ve toplum arasındaki ilişkilerin keyfiyeti ve sıhhati konusunda gerek tavsiyeleri gerekse fiilî tatbikatı ile örnek ve simge haline gelmiştir. Hayatını Hz. Peygamber’in mirası olan hadisleri nakletmeye ve doğru anlaşılmasına hasreden böyle bir şahsiyetin, sırf iktidarla iyi geçinmek adına, sened ve metin itibariyle usûl problemi olmayan rivayetleri el-Müsned’den çıkartılması emrini vermesi çok da doğru görünmemektedir. Bu konuda yapılan üçüncü yoruma göre Ahmed b. Hanbel’in bu hadise yönelik tavrı, manasının istismara müsait olmasıdır. Nitekim İmam’ın bizzat kendisi, ehl-i bid‘attan bazılarının bu hadisi delil getirip iktidara karşı toplumda ayrımcılık yaratacak davranışlara yöneldiğini söylemiştir. Elimizde bu son yorumu güçlendiren başka veriler de vardır. Nitekim o aynı tavrı, iktidara karşı silahlı mücadeleyi emreden başka hadisler hakkında da göstermiş; bunların kitabından çıkartılmasını istemiştir. Bu tavrından anlaşıldığına göre Ahmed b. Hanbel, zalim idareciye karşı, toplumda kargaşa ve fesada sebep olacak fiilî ve silahlı mücadeleye kalkışılmasını istememektedir. Öyleyse denilebilir ki İmam’ın söz konusu hadisle ilgili tavrı, hadisin özellikle “insanların böyle idarecilerden uzak durması” yönündeki ikinci cümle ile ilgilidir. Zira İmam’ın yaşadığı dönemde Mutezile ve Haricîler gibi bazı gruplar böyle hadisleri delil getirerek toplumda tefrikaya sebebiyet vermişlerdir. Bunu bilen ve bizzat gören İmam, böyle grupların toplumsal birlik karşıtı amaçlarına alet edilebilir düşüncesiyle idarecilere karşı “uzak durmaya çalışmak” gibi basit gibi görünen tepkilere yer veren hadislerin bile kitabından çıkarılmasını istemiştir. Sonuç olarak ifade etmek gerekirse onun bu hadis hakkındaki “diğer rivayetlerle çelişiyor” şeklindeki tavrını, “Müsned’imde oluşturmaya çalıştığım ideal idareci-toplum ilişkisi ile çelişiyor” şeklinde anlamak gerekecektir. (shrink)

The Prophet, whom Allah sent the whole universe and humanity as mercy, produced not only many judicial rules and practices regarding the relations of a person with Allah and other people in Islam but also uttered sentences about the explanation of holy book, Qur’an, and about how this book can be put into practice. The issue whether and how much these sentences of the prophet (hadith) and acts of the prophet (Sunnah) are binding have been discussed by both (...) hadith methodologists and fiqh methodologists; accordingly, a great many studies were produced. In hadith methodology, the discussions about Sunnah of the Prophet had their reflections in the studies of fiqh methodology; and especially Hanafi jurists propounded considerations about this issue. Hussein b. Ali al-Saymerî (d. 436/1045) one of these jurists, is the student of Muhammad b. Mûsa al-Khwârizmî (d. 403/1012), who is the student of Abû Bakr al-Jassâs (d. 370/980), who is an authority in Hanafi methodology. al-Saymerî, who adopted the method of al-Jassâs in fiqh methodology, systematically categorized several fundamental issues which were discussed and were related to fiqh methodology during his time; and he defended the views of Hanafi scholars about these issues primarily against Shâfiʿîs and several fiqh and kalam schools. While presenting the views and evidences of Hanafis, al-Saymerî initially applied for the views of founder imams of Hanafi sect such as Abû Hanîfa, Abû Yusuf and Muhammad al-Shaybânî; following these scholars, he greatly benefited from Hanafi scholars from Iraq region, such as Abu’l-Hasan al-Karkhî (d. 340/952) and his student, Abu Bakr al-Râzî al-Jassâs. When the relevant parts of his study is analysed, it is seen that the effect of al-Jassâs is especially noticeable. In this article, we will study the binding issue of the Sunnah of the Prophet within the context of al-Saymerî’s study, which has extant and is called Mesâilu’l-hilâf fi usûli’l-fiqh. We consider that the different attitude of al-Saymerî about the Sunnah of the Prophet from the other methodologists and hadith scholars and the underlying reasons of these differences are worth to be investigated and emphasized. (shrink)

In the history of İslāmic thought, Māturīdī is a famous scholar both in the field of kalām and tafsir. Being approved by Māturīdī, the distinction of tafsir and ta’wīl, which makes possible to take the comments made about the verses into sistematic framework, is quite important. There is an important information both about content of the distinction approved by Māturīdī and the main reasons that necessiated this distinction in the introduction of Samarqandī’s Sharh at Ta’wīlāt. From this information, it is (...) understood that the distinction of tafsir and ta’wīl had dated back to older time than Māturīdī and previous scholars dealed with the problem that necessiated this distinction and Māturīdī inherited this distinction from his predecessors. Information in the Sharh at Ta’wīlāt reveals that according to Māturīdī the companions had made interpretation (ta’wīl) in addition to tafsir and the explanations made by certain evidences is tafsir too. Therefore this information gives us the opportunity flexing the acceptance of the idea “tafsir, is dedicated to the companions, ta'wīl is dedicated to fuqaha (jurists)” and asserting that companions and scholars made both tafsir and ta’wīl. In this paper, we will research whether the distinction tafsir and ta’wīl regarded by Māturīdī completely belonged to his or not and content of the distinction and its reasons. We will also analyze this distinction according to examples in the Ta’wîlāt. Summary: An important distinction is made between the concepts of tafsir and ta’wīl in the short preface of Māturīdī's tafsir, and this distinction is particularly prominent in contemporary tafsir studies. Because from the point of view of the value they carry, the explanations for these differences and concepts express the legitimacy of the following mufassirūn (writers of a commentary on the Qur’an) to be able to perform tafsir, as well as the value of the explanations found in tafsir literature in terms of certainty. In Ta'wīlāt, tafsir is described as the precise determination of what is intended. Determination of what is exactly intended in verse/wording is bound to certainly know the conditions under which it was revealed. Because they are the first to be addressed directly and they witnessed the context, the tafsir is only for the companions (ṣaḥābah pl. aṣḥāb). On the other hand, ta’wīl is not a definite determination of what is intended, but rather it is explained as putting the possibilities forward. In this case, ta’wīl is dedicated to the scholars after the companions. When we look at the other tafsir sources that include his views, it can be understood that this brief information in the preface of the tafsir which survived to our day is partially incomplete. Samarqandī's Sharhu’t-ta'wīlāt is the most important of these sources. According to the information here, Māturīdī states that some scholars distinguish tafsir and ta’wīl from each other. In these distinctions, tafsir is either described in relation to a definitive statement or in relation to being familiar with the conditions of revelation, while ta’wīl is described as extracting meanings from the verses and making possible meanings without claiming certainty. These explanations show that the distinction between tafsir and ta’wīl in Ta'wīlāt's preface was mainly based on the period before Māturīdī. These statements, which Māturīdī transmitted from some scholars in the beginning of Sharhu’t-ta'wīlāt, were then transmitted by Omar al-Nasafī, Mahāyimī and Molla Husrev. In some sources, it was also transmitted that similar explanations were made by scholars such as an-Nadr b. Shumayl, al-Hussein b. Fadl al-Bacelī and Ibn Durayd before Māturīdī.Some explanations of Māturīdī in Ta'wīlāt enables the theory of tafsir-ta’wīl to be understood at a wider level. When the examples are examined, it is observed that Māturīdī exhibited two types of attitude against the tafsir of the companions. He states that one of these is that if the transmission is true, what is intended is exactly what is stated in the narrated. The second is that he sometimes does not accept these explanations and suggests additional opinions. The reason he refuses is that sometimes he does not find the transmission reliable, and sometimes he thinks that companions performed ta'wīl. If this is the case, the dedication of ta’wīl to those coming later should not be absolutized. Because the companions can perform both tafsir and ta’wīl. The examples in Ta'wīlāt clearly reveal what areas tafsir, which is defined as a definite statement, covers. According to this, first, tafsir is related to the field of “invisible” about the past and the future. Secondly, its meaning and practice is only about the information of the “statement” about the issues that can be revealed by the Prophet (pbuh). In the third aspect, it is related to “revelation” information reporting the context in which the verses descended. In the beginning of Sharhu’t-ta'wīlāt, Māturīdī says that the explanations made based on the definitive evidences such as mutawātir (repetition; narration reported by large number reporters) and ijmā (consensus) also fall under the category of tafsir. However, it is also necessary to add intellectual evidence to these evidences. Because intellectual evidence is also important in the epistemology of Māturīdī. In fact, the truthfulness of nass (text) is primarily based on intellectual evidence. First, the issues of theology are proven by certain intellectual evidence, and then, on the basis of this, the meanings expressed by the nass acquire the value of certainty and truthfulness. With the definitive acceptance of reason in theology, what some nass express confirm each other and are used as evidence in the process of interpretation. Therefore, since some of the intellectual evidence, ijmā and mutawātir news provide definitive information, explanations based on them are also seen as tafsir. Considering the fact that the above-mentioned evidence was also used by those coming after the companions, it can be concluded that tafsir can be performed by not only the companions but also those coming after them. In this case, it should be accepted that tafsir is not performed only by the companions, and that the succeeding mufassirūn can also perform tafsir as well as ta’wīl. When we look at the examples based on these evidence, there are two different situations in Ta'wīlāt. The first is that Māturīdī sometimes has views on evidence based on mutawātir and ijmā and sometimes suggests different opinions from the assumptions that he said there was ijmā in particular. Because these evidences are certain, it is understandable that he remains bound to them. However, as a possible reason for his opposition to ijmā, it can be said that he thinks only the following generations enter the scope of ijmā. Because, according to Samarqandī, Māturīdī's objection to such information does not seem possible, since ijmā of the companions in a matter is accepted. Although he sometimes said that there was ijmā, the reason why no such ijmā was mentioned in other tafsir sources and sometimes, it may be considered that he did not respect other views in the face of ijmā as a reason for including different views or it may be thought that he was unaware of the different views that were transmitted. The second remarkable situation is that according to Māturīdī, intellectual evidence, in particular, can reveal only the “knowledge of existence” of the issues related to theology. Māturīdī thinks that their nature cannot be certainly known, and that the explanations made regarding their nature are only ta’wīl. For this reason, he firmly rejects the interpretation of the khabarī attributes about Allah in accordance with the idea of tashbīh and tajsīm (anthropomorphism). (shrink)

In Islamic theological writings, under the heading of sustenance, the focus is generally on issues such as who is the provider of sustenance, whether haram is considered sustenance, and whether Allah’s consent exists for haram sustenance. Another issue that can be found between the lines of the subject of sustenance is whether it is haram for a person to work for sustenance or not. In fact, the pursuit of means of livelihood in order to sustain one’s life is, according (...) to the general and predominant acceptance of Muslim scholars, permissible and, in cases of necessity, wajib. According to a record in Uṣūl al-niḥal, during the formative period of itizālī thought, there were Mu‘tazilite sufis (ṣūfiyyat al-Muʿtazila) such as Bishr b. al-Mu‘tamir’s disciple Abū Imrān Mūsā b. al-Raqqāshī, al-Naẓẓām’s apostate disciple Fadl al-Hadathī, and Husayn al-Kūfī, about whom no information is available. These names, who seem to have earned their livelihood through almsgiving, defended the forbiddenness (taḥrīm al-makāsib) of all kinds of endeavour for sustenance, contrary to the acceptance of Muslim thinkers. However, it should be noted that for them, the forbiddenness in making an effort for sustenance does not cover the definition of sustenance, which is ‘all the benefits’, but only the effort in obtaining sustenance through means such as trade and agriculture. It is interesting to find such an extreme tendency among the Mu‘tazilites, who came to the fore with their rationalist discourses. “How could a Mu‘tazilite defend tahrīm al-makāsib?”, the issue of abandonment of striving for sustenance (tark al-makāsib), from which the idea of tahrīm al-makāsib is thought to have evolved, is mentioned, and then the Mu‘tazilite sufis views on tahrīm al-makāsib are tried to be based mainly on Mu‘tazilite sources and the criticisms of Mu‘tazilite authors against them are included. It has been determined that Mu‘tazilite sufis justifications for defending tahrīm al-makāsib concentrate on three points: (i) the absence of a just order due to the absence of a just imam and the possibility of supporting the oppressors (rulers) intentionally or unintentionally, and as a result of this, some of them describe the land of Islam as dār al-kufr, (ii) again in relation to the issue of imamate, in an environment where there is no justice, i.e. legal/moral order, the halāl and harām are so intertwined that they cannot be separated from each other, and in order to protect oneself from harām, the things that are subject to sustenance can only be purified through charity and become halāl, and (iii) the fact that trust in Allah is obligatory and any effort to pursue sustenance is contrary to tawakkul. The Mu‘tazilite authors criticised the proponents of tahrīm al-makāsib on the grounds that it is permissible to trade while maintaining a rational and ethical attitude, that one’s intention and interest in trade are important, and that tawakkul cannot be built on the right ground. As a result, the proponents of tahrīm al-makāsib disappeared because they could not gain a foothold in the Mu‘tazilite intellectual climate due to their erroneous reasoning. (shrink)

In this study, the classification of Zaydī fuqahā’ that emerged in the mutaaḫḫirūn period of Zaydī fiqh and related terms are examined. The book named Bulūgh al-arab wa-kunūz al-dhahab fī-maʿrifat al-madhhab, which has great importance among the studies aiming to present the Zaydī fiqh accumulation as a uniform doctrinal structure was taken as a basis in the processing of the subject. After an introduction in which Zaydī fiqh studies are evaluated in their relationship with the subject, the issue is handled (...) under three main headings. In the first title, the author and his work are introduced, and in the second and third titles, the methods and terms used in the classification of the Zaydī fukahâ are examined. The author of the work is ʿAlī b. ʿAbd Allāh al-Shaharī (d. 1190/1776) who lived during the period of the Qāsimī dynasty (al-dawla al-Qāsimiyya) in Yemen. The most important feature of the work, which was prepared using many sources that were attributed importance among the Zaydī literature, is that it was the most comprehensive of all that had written on madhhab doctrine until then. The first part of the work explains that the right madhhab to be followed is Zaydiyya. In the second part, the classes of the Zaydī fuqahā’, which is the subject of our study, are explained. The fuqahā’ classes are primarily divided into two parts: al-salaf al-ṣāliḥīn and al-ḫalaf al-ṣāliḥīn. The first dates back to the beginning of the 3rd/10th century. This class is divided into two parts, as al-sābiqūn and al-mutaaḫḫirūn. The sābiqūn starts with ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib, his two sons al-Ḥasan and Ḥusayn and ends with the sons of twelve imams who are their descendants. Zayd b. ʿAlī (d. 122/740) is one of the twelve imams. The most important of the faqīhs in the part of mutaaḫḫirūn, which started with al-Qāsim b. Ibrāhīm al-Rassī (d. 246/860), are the six imams called ahl-al-nuṣūṣ or aʾimma al-nuṣūṣ. The reason why they are named as such is that their words were taken as a basis in determining the views of the sect on the field of uṣūl and furūʿ l-fiqh. al-Qāsim al-Rassī is at a point where all the knowledge of the Prophet's family and the principles agreed upon by sābiqūn, reach him through many channels. al-Hādī Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥusayn (d. 298/911), grandson of al-Qāsim, is the most important imam in terms of his position in the madhhab. The ḫalaf al-ṣāliḥīn is also divided into two parts as ahl l-taḥṣīl and ahl l-naẓar. The first part also referred to as muḥaṣṣilūn or aʾimma al-taḥṣīl, has no subcategories. The second part is divided into two sub-sections as ahl l-taqrīr and mudhākirūn. The muḥaṣṣilūn class starts with those who catch up with the last class of ahl al-nuṣūṣ and ends with ʿAbd Allāh b. Ḥamza (d. 614/1217), one of the three important imams. Two other important imams of muḥaṣṣilūn are Aḥmad b. al-Huṣayn (d. 411/1020) and his brother Yahyā b. al-Husayn (d. 424/1032). It is the fiqh activity of the jurists of this class, called taḥṣīl l-madhhab, that brought Zaydī fiqh, which was fiqh of imams (madhāhib l-aʾimma) in its first period, into a single madhhab and to its classical form in the last period. Mudhākirūn jurists lived at the same time as the ahl-t-taqrīr. This period is about 700 years from the beginning of the 6th/12th century, which is the last century of the muḥaṣṣilūn class, to the end of the 12th/18th century, when Shaharī lived. The roles of the ahl al-taqrīr in the madhhab mostly consist of reviewing the works of the ahl-l tahṣīl, approving the correct ones, and correcting the wrong ones. That's why they are so named. The author of Kitāb l-Azhār, Aḥmad b. Yaḥyā l-Murtaḍā (d. 840/1437), is one of the prominent jurists among the ahl l-taqrīr. The majority of Zaydi fuqahā’ belong to the muẕākirūn class. These are the lowest class of the ahl-al-naẓar. As an important result reached in the study, it is possible to express the following: There is a difference between some of the knowledge and opinions in modern Zaydī studies, which include the same subject as Shaharī's work, in terms of the classification of Zaydī fuqahā’ and the terms used. Therefore, the findings and conclusions based on this work should be confirmed by new studies on other Zaydī classics, and existing opinions on Zaydī jurisprudence should be reviewed. (shrink)

While the Prophet's articulation of the message of tawhid resulted in the clustering of his followers around him, it also led to reactions from the majority of his interlocutors. At first, he was tried to be discouraged by not taking his message seriously or by humiliating him, and when it was seen that his followers increased over time, he was tried to be prevented by harsher methods. The polytheists claimed that the Prophet was a magician who spoke incantations from his (...) mouth, a liar who reported news he had learned from others as if it had been revealed to him, and a person who made statements contrary to the religion of ancestors because he had lost his sanity and needed to be treated. In this context, this article deals with the slander of the polytheists that the Prophet was a "majnun" and tries to understand what they meant by this claim. When the translations of the Qur'anic verses that remind us of the allegations of the polytheists are taken into consideration, it is seen that most of the translations give the word "majnun" the meaning of "madness". When we examine the meaning attributed to the expression by the Jahiliyyah Arabs, the word takes on a completely different meaning, and it is understood that the polytheists meant that the word revealed to the Prophet was taught to him not by Allah but by the jinn whom he had befriended. (shrink)

In the ḥadīth sources it is being conveyed that the companions (ṣaḥāba) refrained from asking questions to the Prophet. This situation is generally associated with the verse of sūrat al-Māʾida 5:101. An-Navvās b. Samʿān (d. 50/670), Abū Umāma al-Bāhilī (d. 86/705) and Anas b. Mālik (d. 93/711-12) are among the companions who consider this situation as the ban on the asking questions. The concern that asking questions may cause additional obligations that were not presumed to be obligatory also attracts attention (...) in these records. Keeping all numerous questions addressed to the Prophet in mind we may ask if there is a Prophetic prohibition on asking questions. We will seek an answer to this question, which constitutes the main axis of this article, especially in the framework of the narrations mentioned among the reasons of the al-Māʾida 101. We will evaluate the information concerned in their historical context and internal coherence inductively. Our investigation differs in this respect from the investigations, which dealt with the disapproval of excessive and unnecessary questions. As a result of our research, we think that it is possible to talk about a ban on asking questions about religious issues in the last three years of the Medina period. We will first discuss the dating and nature of this ban, from which only Bedouin and visitors who come to Madina were excluded. Then, we especially will evaluate the theological consequences of answer of the Prophet, which mentioned in the same context, of whether the pilgrimage is religious duty for every year. In the last part of the article, the prohibition of asking questions will be discussed in the light of Hans-Georg Gadamer’s principle “Der hermeneutische Vorrang der Frage”, which deals with the effect of the questions on the direction and nature of the answer.Summary: It is reported in Qurʾān and Ḥadīth that the Prophet Muḥammad (PBUH) was asked a lot of questions and he responded based on the revealed knowledge or his own. He did not like the questions which remain outside of the daily religious life like the questions whether he is able to know the end of the world or to show miracle. There are some reports which covey that the Prophet frowned upon some questions because they could cause new assignments or lead to complicate the existing ones. The Companions like an-Nawwās b- Samʿān (d. 50/670), Abū Umāma al-Bāhilī (d. 86/705) and Anas b. Mālik (d. 93/711-12) have been describing this situation as the ban of asking of religious implications.This issue which companions formulated exactly as the ban of the asking questions was regarded in research until now just as the depreciation of the Prophet upon the unnecessary questions. In this interpretation the idea played a role that the ban of the asking may not conform to the religious pedagogic of the Prophet and the real existence of a lot of asked questions contradict that. Therefore the imperative “do not ask” in al-Māʾida 5:101 (O believers, do not ask about things which, if made known to you, may vex you) were interpreted not as the prohibition of the asking questions in real sense, but as just the depreciation of the unnecessary questions.We argue that it is possible to talk about a prohibition of the asking questions in real sense. We are of the view that the asking to religious matters was prohibited in the last years of the Medina period. In a time of Madina period when the fundamental principles of Islam emerged the questions of companions let the Prophet think that they may lead to additional religious obligations. Therefore the Prophet warned his companions in these words: “Do not ask me about the details of the things which I do not mention to you” and “Allāh Taʿālā has remained silent about some things, out of compassion for you, not forgetfulness so do not seek after them.”The imperative “do not ask” in al-Māʾida 5:101 has to been understood in the light of the Prophet’s advice as quoted above. According to the expressions of the companions reported in hadith collections, it is obvious that the imperative “do not ask” signifies not only “do not ask unnecessary questions”, but “do not ask questions related to theology matters in general”.Anas b. Mālik served the Prophet nine or ten years and was not criticised by the Prophet anytime. A companion like Anas cannot have refrained from the asking questions because they may be unnecessary. Anas interpreted “ do not ask” in al-Māʾida 5:101 in words: “We were forbidden in the Qurʾān that we ask the Prophet anything". Anas’s observation reveals that the companions considered the “do not ask” in al-Māʾida 5:101 as a general prohibition for the questions to religious issue.According to our research it seems this ban was promulgated in last three years of Medina Period, and Bedouin and visitors were excluded. Al-Nawwās b. Samʿān noticed that the ban of the asking questions was only for the residents in Medina: “I was in Medina one year. The reason why I did not stay in Medina was my wish to ask the Prophet a religious issue. So, whoever stayed in Medina was not permitted to ask the Prophet questions.” Abū Umāma al-Bāhilī interpreted the ban of the asking in al-Māʾida 5:101 as a general ban. He reported that the companions give a garment (burda) as gift to a Bedouin in order to let him ask the Prophet questions. The ban on asking questions in Medina was not related to unnecessary questions. It was indeed related to the questions that might have caused addition to already well-defined obligatory rulings in Islam. Accordingly, the questions became unnecessary because they were asked in the time of revelation. With the ban of the asking the Prophet questions accentuated that God and his Messenger are aware what necessary and what was not. It means that God can intervene if it is necessary. For that they do not need ask the Prophet. Aṭ-Ṭabarī, al-Qurṭubī, en-Nawawī, Ibn RaJab el-Ḥanbalī and Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī are the scholars who interpreted the ban of asking in this general sense.We especially will evaluate the theological consequences of the Prophet’s response, as reported in the sources: “ If I said yes, the pilgrimage will be a religious duty for every year.” Here one may not misconstrue that the Prophet could determine the religious obligations arbitrarily. He meant that the believers have to practice only that which were revealed to them. The Prophet wanted to teach his followers the principle that became essential rule of Islamic jurisprudence: “What is not forbidden is permitted”.The Prophet did not perform tarāwīḥ-prayer in congregation in the month of fasting due to the apprehension that it might become obligatory for the believers and they would not be able to follow it. In this human reaction of the Prophet we see that the Prophet did not consider himself as the founder of the Islamic norms. In this context the following questions are important: Does God consider the human questions when making something obligatory? Is God influenceable in terms of His orders? Ibn Ḥajar observes: The scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah accept the causality in terms of the Islamic norms. Accordingly something can become a religious norm because the humans asked about that. But God’s decision does not depend on the humans. God can consider human questions, if He so wills. (shrink)

Kadınların mukaddes görevlerini, insan neslinin devamlılığını sağlamayı yerine getirebilmelerine imkân veren aylık kanama dönemlerinin ironik bir şekilde kirlilik sebebi sayılması kadim bir kabuldür. Belki de ilkel inançlarda kana yüklenen tabu anlamı bu kabulün benimsenmesinde rol oynamıştır. Her ne kadar feminist akımlarla beşeriyet tarihinin başlangıcındaki anaerkil dönemde kadınlara kutsallık katan doğurganlıklarının bir uzantısı olan adet görmelerinin, ataerkil düzene geçişle bir aşağılanma ve murdarlık sebebi sayılmaya başlandığı iddia edilmiştir. Fakat bu görüşün dayanakları doğruluğunu ispatlayacak sağlamlıkta olmadığı gibi alanın uzmanlarınca da ortaya atılmıştır. (...) Bir hukukçunun mitolojik anlatıları da referans alarak yaptığı taraflı bir antropolojik okumadır. Ayrıca tarihi süreçte kadınların regl dönemlerindeyken bereket ve şifa kaynağı görüldüklerinin de etrafına pislik bulaştıran bir murdarlık halinde kabul edildiklerinin de örnekleri bulunmak mümkündür. Bununla birlikte hayızlı kadını kirli kabul eden anlayışın daha yaygın olduğu söylenebilir. Özellikle bu güne ulaşan şekliyle Yahudilikte, Cennette işlediği ilk günah sebebiyle cezalandırılmasının sonucu olarak adet gördüğü kabul edilen kadın, manen kirlidir ve bu kiri dokunduğu her şeye bulaştırdığından tecrit edilmelidir. Kanaması bittiğinde temizlenmesiyse özel ritüellerle mümkündür. Zaten Yahudilikte kirlilik sebepleri ve kirliliğin toplumda yaygınlaşmaması için alınması gereken tedbirler ile ilgili ahkâm, geniş ve karmaşıktır. Onlara göre cüzzam hastalığına yakalanmak da kirlilik sebeplerindendir ve cüzzamlı olan kişi de, özellikle din adamlarından, tecrit edilmelidir. Güncel Hristiyanlık, Yahudiliğin hayızlı kadınla ilgili düzenlemelerinin neredeyse uygulanamaz yükünden hepsini yok sayarak kurtulmuştur. Fakat ontolojik açıdan kadını ilk günahtan sorumlu tutma anlayışını genel olarak devam ettirmektedir. Cüzzamlıysa Hz. İsa (as) aracılığıyla tedavi edilerek Tanrı'nın rahmetinin ulaştığı bir konuma gelmiştir. İslam dini ise ilk günahı işlemede kadına ayrı bir sorumluluk yüklemediği gibi adet dönemini de bir kirlilik sebebi saymaz. Ama Medine'de Yahudilerle bir arada yaşayan Müslümanların, İslam öncesi Arap kültüründe de bulunan adetli kadını kirli sayma inancından etkilendiği anlaşılmaktadır. Öyle ki Yahudiler gibi hayızlı eşlerini evden çıkarmaları gerekip gerekmediğini, yaptıkları yemeği yiyip yiyemeyeceklerini sorgulamışlardır. Hz. Muhammed (as), hayızlı kadın hakkında indirilen ayetteki ifadeleri açıklarken, kadınları kirli kabul edip tecrit etmenin yanlış bir yorum olduğunu vurgulamıştır. Aksine bu dönemdeki kadınların temiz oldukları hakikatini hem sözleriyle hem de uygulamalarıyla göstermiştir. Sünnete uygun davranışın adetli eşle, tam bir cinsel birliktelik hariç, ilişkinin devam ettirilmesi olduğunu açığa çıkaran rivayetlerin sayısı çoktur. Öncellikle uygulamaya bizzat şahit olan müminlerin annelerinden ve diğer sahâbeden; Hz. Peygamber'in hayızlı eşiyle aynı yatak ve yorganı kullandığını, aynı sofrada yemek yediği hatta onun ısırdığı yerden ısırıp bardakta dudağının değdiği yerden içtiğini, hayızlı kadının elinin, kan bulaşmadıkça giydiklerinin, tükürüğünün temiz olduğunu açıklayan bilgiler aktarılmaktadır. Yine de konu etrafındaki tartışma ve yanlış uygulamalar tabiîn döneminde devam etmiştir. Zira adetli eşle yatılır mı, aynı yorgan kullanılır mı, yaptığı yemek yenilir mi, döktüğü suyla abdest alınır mı gibi sorgulamalar sürdürülmüştür. Hz. Peygamber'in aile efradından İbn Abbas'ın hayızlı hizmetlisine saçını taratmaktan çekindiği, tabiîn fakihlerinden loğusalık kanaması bittiği halde eşini kırk gün geçmeden yanına kabul etmeyenin veya aynı yorganla yatmamayı tavsiye edenin olduğu nakledilmektedir. Kadim inançların değişiminin zorluğu bu örnekte de açığa çıkmaktadır. Ayrıca kadınların aybaşı hali İslamî literatürde çoğunlukla fıkhî açıdan ele alınmıştır. Çünkü kadınların bu dönemde bulunması ibadetler ve muamelat açısından farklı sonuçlar doğurmaktadır. Bu arada kadınla ilgili kökleri Eski Ahid'deki yaratılış kıssasına giden ontolojik suçluluğu ve cezayı hak ettiği inanışlarının Hz. Peygamber'in sünnetiyle ret edilmesinin önemi dikkatten kaçmaktadır. Kur'an'ın deyimiyle eza/sıkıntı çeken kadına muhabbet ve ilgi gösterip desteklemenin sünnette vurgulanması da meselenin ihmal edilen bir yönüdür. Oysaki nasıl cüzzamlı Hz. İsa aracılığıyla uzak durulması gereken murdarlıktan Allah'ın bir peygamberi aracılığıyla şifa ulaştırılmasına layık kulu konumuna geldiyse, hayızlı kadın da Hz. Muhammed'in sünnetindeki uygulamayla bir arada yaşanacak, manen temiz kişi konumuna getirilmiştir. (shrink)

The isnad and texts of the common narrations in the hadith literature of Ahl al-Sunnah and Shīa are an important source that provide information about the early periods of hadith history. The hadith, which is that subject of this article and whose text contains meaningful differences, “The essence of Islam is prayer, its branch zakat and its peak is jihad in the way of Allah” is a common narration with this characteristics. Because this hadith is narrated in Sunnī sources (...) during a conservartion between the Massenger of Allah and Muadh b. Jabal. On the other hand, in Shiite sources this hadith is reported during the conservation of Muhammad al-Bakir and Cafer as-Sadik with his companions. In order to determine how the change in the poles of the people who are the subject of the narration occured, firstly, information about the Shiite isnad and texts of the hadith was given, and it was determined whether the narrators were connected with the Ahl al-hadith circles. Then, the isnads and texts in the Sunni sources were pointed out, the connections of the narrators who transmitted them with Shiite circles and whether they adopted Shiite views or not were examined. Thus, it has been determined when, where and through which narrators the narration was transferred from one school to another, and also for what reasons the textual differences occured. (shrink)

The narration of tashahhud being a conversation between Allah, the Prophet and the angels is quite common among people. This article examines the authenticity of this narration and questions whether it has an informative value. In this context, the research undertaken in Hadith, Siyar, Tafsīr and Fiqh sources resulted that the narration was not stated in the hadith books -with sanad (the chain of narrators) or without sanad. The first and only summary version of the script was included in (...) the commentary of Thaʿlebī (d. 427/1035), which has very problematic sanads. The first narration without sanad but having a full text (matn) was narrated by Qurṭubī (d. 671/1273). It appears that various commentators of hadith, fuqahāʾ (expert in Islamic jurisprudence), mufassirs (commentators on the Qur’ān) and historians followed Thaʿlabî and Qurṭubī by narrating from them. In fact, these group of scholars did not specify a sanad for the narration but they usually used tamrīd forms (a form which shows that the hadith is weak or deficient), which suggests that they also did not convinced that the narrarion was makbūl (accepted). On the other hand, the fact that this narration did not accompany authentic (ṣaḥīḥ) hadiths on the emergence of tashahhud narrated by hadith scholars, such as Bukhārī, Muslim, Abū Dāwūd, Nasāʾī and Ibn Mājah, which also indicates another problem with this narration. Summary: The narration on the emergence of the prophetic prayer that is called tashahhud in the fiqh literature as it includes the word shahadah (testimony) and known as “al-tahiyyat” and “tahiyyat” is constantly transmitted among people. According to this narration, the Prophet (pbuh) praised Allāh by saying “al-taḥiyyātu lillāhi wa-al-salawātu wa-al-ṭayyibāt” on the night of Miʿrāj when he met Allāh. Our Lord responded to him by saying “al-salāmu ʿalayka ayyuhan-Nabiyyu wa-raḥmatullāhi wa-barakātuhu”. The honorable Prophet also included his ummah in this prayer by saying “al-salāmu ʿalayna wa-ʿalā ʿibād Allāh al-ṣāliḥīn” and the Gabriel (and/or angel community) who witnessed this greeting said “ashhadu an lā illāha illallāh wa-ashhadu anna Muḥammadan ʿabduhu wa-rasūluhu.”This article examines the authenticty of the narration and whether it has an informative value. The findings of the research undertaken in hadith, siyar, tafsir and fiqh sources suggests that the narration was not included in any hadith books with sanad or without sanad. The first and only narration with sanad is found in Thaʿlabī’s tafsīr titled al-Kasfh wa-al-bayān. However, it is a summary version of the narration and its sanads are very problematic. In this tafsīr, Thaʿlabī combines two different chains of narrators in one text. The sanads of these two narrations combined by Thaʿlabī as follows:1. Sanad: Zuhrī → Ibn Salimah b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān → Jābir b. ʿAbdullāh → Prophet (pbuh).2. Sanad: Suddī → Muḥammad b. al-Sāib → Bāzān → Ibn ʿAbbās → Prophet (pbuh).The identity of Ibn Salimah mentioned in the first sanad is disputed. The rijāl (literally; men, refers to knowledge of men/narrators) scholars, such as Ibn Abī Ḥātim stated that he is a man whose memory is corrupted in his old age. In the second sanad there are three dhaʽīf (weak) narrators, namely Suddī, Muḥammad b. al-Sāib and Bāzān. Ibn Abī Ḥātim stated that some parts of Kalbī’s (Muḥammad b. al-Sāib) narration with ṭarīkh (synonym of sanad) of Bāzān from Ibn ʿAbbās was fabricated. Moreover, Thaʿlabī who narrated these two sanads in his tafsīr was accused of being conveying fabricated narrations in his books.As far as we can ascertain, Qurṭubī narrated the first narration of this story without sanad and without referring to a source. However, he narrated the full version of the text. Similarly this narration was also transmitted by Suhaylī and ʿAlī al-Qārī without sanad and a reference but they transmitted it by seperating into two slightly different texts. According to Suhaylī’s text in al-Ravḍ al-Unuf, angels stated “al-salāmu ʿalayka ayyuhan-Nabiyyu wa-raḥmatallāhi wa-barakātuhu” not Allāh. According to ʿAlī al-Qārī’s text in Sharḥ al-Shifa, when Allāh Said “al-salāmu ʿalayka ayyuhan-Nabiyyu wa-raḥmatallāhi wa-barakātuhu”, the Prophet (pbuh) responded by saying: “Allāhumma anta al-Salām wa-minka al-Salām wa-ilayka yarjiuʿ al-Salām, al-Salām alaynā wa-alā ibād Allāh al-sālihīn.” It is clear that there are disputes about the contents of some sentences as well as their subjects in the text of Tashahhud’s narration.The full text and summary versions of this narrarion can be found in tafsīr books, such as Rāzī's Mafātiḥ al-ghayb, Samarqandī's Baḥr al-ʿulūm and Bursavī's Rūḥ al-bayān; in fiqh books, such as Bābartī's al-ʿInâyah, Ḥaddād's al-Javharah al-nayyirah, ʿAynī’s al-Bināyah, Molla Khusraw’s Durar al-ḥukkām, Jamal’s Futūḥāt al-Wahhāb and Bujayramī’s al-Tajrīd; and in various hadith commentaries and in some siyar books. The authors of these books did not mention sanads of their narrations and they usually used tamrīd forms. This suggests that they also did not consider this narration as authentic. On the other hand, the fact that all narrations transmitted in these books are not compatible with those authentic (ṣaḥīḥ) hadiths about the emergence of tashahhud, which were reported by muhaddiths, such as Bukhārī, Muslim, Abū Dāwūd, Nasāī and Ibn Mājah. This also indicates another problem with this narration. The authentic hadiths on the issue as follows: 1. Bukhārī→Musaddad→Yaḥyā→Aʿmash→Shaqīq→Ibn Masʿūd: He said:When we prayed with the Messenger of Allāh (pbuh), we used to say: “Peace (al-Salām) be upon Allāh, peace be upon Jibrīl, peace be upon Mikāʿīl.” The Messenger of Allāh (pbuh) said: “Do not say: Peace (al-Salām) be upon Allāh, for Allāh is al-Salām.” Rather say: “al-taḥiyyātu lillāhi wa-al-salawātu wa-al-ṭayyibāt, al-salāmu ʿalayka ayyuhan-Nabiyyu wa-raḥmatallāhi wa-barakātuhu. Al-salāmu ʿalayna wa-ʿalā ʿibād Allāh al-ṣāliḥīn, ashhadu an lā ilāha illallāh wa-ashhadu anna Muḥammadan ʿabduhu wa-rasūluhu (Allāh compliments, prayers and pure words are due to Allāh. Peace be upon you, O Prophet, and the mercy of Allāh and his blessings. Peace be upon us and upon the righteous slaves of Allāh. I bear witness that none has the right to be worshipped except Allāh and I bear witness that Muḥammad is His slave and Messenger.”2. Bukhārī→Abū Nuaym→Sayf→Mucāhid→Abū Maʿmar ʿAbdullāh b. Saḥbarah→Ibn Masʿūd: He said:Allāh’s Messenger (pbuh) taught me Tashahhud as he taught me a sūrah (chapter) from the Qur’ān, while my hand was between his hands. (Tashahhud was): “All the best compliments and the prayers and the good things are for Allāh. Peace and Allāh’s Mercy and Blessings be on you, O Prophet! Peace be on us and on the pious slaves of Allāh, I testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allāh, and I also testify that Muhammad is Allāh’s slave and His Apostle.” (We used to recite this in the prayer) during the lifetime of the Prophet (pbuh), but when he had died, we used to say: “Peace be on the Prophet.”As a result, it is unlikely that the Prophet (pbuh) did not touch upon the relationship between the Miʿrāj and the Tashahhud while teaching it. It is also unlikely that his companions who narrated this occasion did not mention about this important detail although they had such knowledge. Indeed, hadith scholars did not include the narrations that associated tashahhud with the Miʿrāj but they reported two other aforementioned narrations on the emergence of the Tashahhud in their books, which raises doubts over the authenticity of the relevant narration in question. (shrink)

Güzellik ve sanat iç içe geçmiş iki kavramdır. Bir bakıma güzellik, sanatın özüdür denilebilir. Her sanat dalında olduğu gibi hat sanatında da güzeli arama arzusu ve eşsiz eserler ortaya koyma çabası, hattatları sabırla çalışmaya ve kendi sınırlarını zorlamaya sevk etmiştir. Bir kitap sanatı olan hüsn-i hattın kelime manasının “güzel yazı” olmasına mukabil, daha iyisini yazmak uğruna harcanan çaba yorucu ve zahmetlidir, ancak sabırla çalışan elbette ki karşılığını alır. Başka bir deyişle “Muhakkak ki Allah güzeldir, güzeli sever!” hadis-i şerifi ışığında (...) bu sanata gönül verenler, yazıyı daha muntazam yazma hususunda büyük ölçüde gayret gösterirler. Kişinin muntazam yazmayı başarması ise, sistematik çalışmasına bağlıdır. Yazıyı kaidelerine uygun ve ölçülü yazabilmek bıkmadan usanmadan, karamsarlığa kapılmadan çalışmakla mümkündür. Bu sebeple gerek öğrenme aşamasında ve gerekse sonrasında, harfler defalarca çalışma kâğıdına yazılarak el melekesi artırılır. Kelimeler ve harfler kâğıda kimi zaman noktalanıp ölçülendirilerek, kimi zaman da noktalanmadan yazılır. Talim amaçlı yapılan bu çalışmalar, başka bir deyişle karalamalar, hat sanatının temeli niteliğindedir. Arap alfabesiyle yazılan ve “karalama” adı verilen el alıştırmaları yazıyla uğraşan kişinin o an irticalen elinden çıkan harf veya kelimelerden oluşur ve çoğu zaman bir anlam ifade etmez. Bu çalışmanın amacı, karalamaların estetik unsurlarını ele almak ve zaman içerisinde uğradığı değişime mercek tutmaktır. Hattatların bu özgür yorumları gün geçtikçe daha fazla önemsenmekte ve hayranlık uyandırmaktadır. Harf bünyesini oluşturan kaidelerin dışında satır ve sınırlara bağlı kalmadan yazılan bu yazılar kendi içinde bir kompozisyon oluşturmakta ve çoğu zaman yazan kişiyi dahi hayrete düşürecek özgün çalışmalar ortaya çıkabilmektedir. (shrink)

As in every religious issue, the two main resources of Islām which are the Qur’ān and the Sunnah/ḥadīths are the first reference sources for deciding the things that are forbidden by Islam. There is no evidence in the Qur’ān that suggests specific types of animals are forbidden to eat except pork. Other than pork, only the animals which are slaughtered without the name of Allah, their blood and their carcass are forbidden to consume. Except these restricted ill-gotten meats, in (...) the Qur’ānic verses there are no other limitations referring to different animals. However, in Ḥadīth sources there are some narratives referring to the Prophet Muḥammad, implying that He named some other forbidden animals beside the ones specified in the Qur’ān. Collecting the narratives and evaluating them as a whole will contribute for a better understanding of the rules and principles of prohibitions that the Prophet Muḥammad imposed on this issue. Moreover, it will help to identify whether those rulings on some animals are unconditional and world-wide or cause-related and thus changeable according to the conditions. Furthermore, in this matter, although some animals‘ meat are not mentioned as forbidden in the Qur’ān, they are banned by the Prophet Muḥammad. This brings the need to highlight the importance of the capacity of the Prophet Muḥammad on deciding what is permissible (ḥalāl) and forbidden (ḥarām) in the religion.SummaryWhile the authority for determining what is ḥalāl (lawful) and what is ḥarām(forbidden) belongs essentially to Allah, the Prophet Muḥammad is also authorized to appoint what is ḥalāl-ḥarām by Allah.Authority of the Prophet Muḥammadrelated to the issue is not absolute and stems from the Qur’ān. Ḥalāland ḥarāmin the Qur’ān prescribed by Allah can be included in the concepts of maʿrūf (right) - munkar (wrong) andṭayyibāt (clean) - hkabāis (filthy). It is understood that the Prophet Muḥammadgrounded his commands in the concept of hkabāis.Prohibitions related to animal meats in the Qur’ānare limited to four: carcass, blood, pork and animals, which are not slaughtered in the name of Allah. However, in the Ḥadīth resources there are some narratives about the Prophet’s prohibition on consuming some types of animals other than the forbidden animals specified in the verses. These narratives can be classified in three titles:1. Animals, which are prohibited to be eaten 2. Animals, which are prohibited because of the way they are fed and slaughtered3. The matter of prohibition of the animals, which are commanded or forbidden to be slaughtered by the Prophet Muḥammad.At the end of the studies conducted based upon ḥadīth resources, in particular Kutūb al-Sittah (the well-known six ḥadīth books), it has been discovered that the animals, which are mentioned as not being permissible in the narratives, they are limited to domesticated donkey and the species of “predatory animals, predatory birds”, namely wolf, fox and cat. Even though the narratives about hyena imply as eatable, hyena is included in this article as it’s a predatory animal.The narratives regarding the prohibition of meat of domesticated donkey were transferred by approximately twenty Companions in respect to the time of the Battle of Khyber. This prohibition is generally stated in the ḥadīthresources as: “We were having dire hunger at the nights of Khyber. When the day for Khyber came, we encountered domesticated donkeys. We immediately slaughtered them. When we put the meat in the pot and started to boil it, crier of the Prophet Muḥammadcalled “Knock over the pots and don’t eat any of the donkey meat”. Regarding the issue there are such statements of some Companions like “we were banned from eating domesticated donkey”, “The Prophet banned the meat of domesticated donkey” among the narratives about the ban. In addition to a large number of narratives about the prohibition of domesticated donkey meat, there are two narratives related to permission of the Prophet for eating domesticated donkey and a narrative that Ibn ‘Abbās did not accept the ban. One of the said narratives is not among the narratives in the Kutūb al-Sittah while the other one is stated solely in the Sunanof Abū Dāwūd and thought to be acceptable by the traditionists. Even though this narrative’s authenticity is accepted, it is understood that there is an implication for the permission based on a necessity. According to the narrative, Ibn ʿAbbās referred to 145thverse of the surah al-An’am as a proof to his view saying “What ḥalālis what Allah allowed, what ḥaramis what Allah forbidden and the things about which there is no judgement of Allah are mubāḥ (permissible)”. As for us, the fact that Ibn ʿAbbās did not accepted the prohibition implies that he did not recognize the Prophet’s command related to the prohibition as an absolute prohibition. The conveyances of many Companions, which are consistent with each other, about the Prophet’s prohibition on eating domesticated donkey during the Battle of Khyber, proved that the prohibition was applied. Even though there is no dispute about prohibiting domesticated donkey, it is controversial whether the prohibition is absolute, constant or provisional based on certain reasons. It is more reasonable to accept that this prohibition was provisional and it was based on certain reasons. Because there are many narratives bearing information that this prohibition was due to several reasons and this is a situation which needs to be considered. Accordingly, there are three reasons, nearly all of which are attributed to judgement of the Companions. These were the facts that domesticated donkey was used in transportation; it used to eat filth and it was slaughtered/consumed without distributing booty/paying taxes. The seeking of the Companions for any reason for this prohibition indicates that they needed to comprehend this prohibition and that the prohibition is not absolute and constant.There is no explanation neither in the resources where the narratives are included nor in the annotation about when, where, why and in which context the prohibition regarding the predatory animals was realized. It is highly possible to assume that the Prophet prohibited these animal as they eat carcass. Another interesting issue within this regard is the fact that there are narratives and views indicating permissibility of eating hyena, which is a predatory, while predatory animals are forbidden in the narratives. Statements of the Prophet related to permissibility of eating hyena, which are considered authentic by traditionists and information about the Arabs who used to eat hyena and some of the Companions who praised eating hyena indicate that urf (custom) has a primary and decisive role about permissibility of eating meats. Regarding this matter about the hyenas, the narratives pointing out some Companions like ʿĀʾisha bint Abī Bakr and Ibn ‘Abbās who viewed prohibition of animals other than the prohibited animals in the Qur’an as inapplicable and other issues referring to the dispute indicate that prohibition of the Prophet Muḥammadfor predators can not be accepted as an absolute and unquestionable prohibition. Some of the prohibitions mentioned in ḥadīth narratives, except these animals, stem from the way of feeding and slaughtering of some animals. It is understood that consuming meat and milk of the animals that eat filth is prohibited in order to abstain from the things harming human health and mujassam (killing an animal with an arrow, etc. by fastening it as a target) is prohibited as carcass is banned and it is not permissible to torture and harm animals. Some of the prohibitions are related to the some animals, which were allowed and banned to slaughter by the Prophet. As the Prophet commanded some animals to be slaughtered and some animals not, meat of these animals was considered as forbidden. There is a dispute among the scholars, whilst there is not any statement of the Prophet about whether the animals included in this group can be eaten or not. It is seen that the Prophet ordered to slaughter some of the animals and prohibited to slaughter some other animals based on several reasons. (shrink)

The supreme counsel of the religion of Islam insistently emphasizes and promotes social solidarity and solidarity at every stage of life. Among the encouraged advices; the Qur'an and the hadith how meticulously focused on orphans and promised conditions and provisions for a virtuous life. The aim of the protection of orphans, shelter, representation, surety, evaluation of his property for bestowal, approaching with compassion and mercy. The prophet of Islam, who was born as orphan, Muhammad (pbuh.), by addressing the conscience of (...) humanity in order to protect the rights and law of orphan, brought preventive, encouraging orders and prohibitions. When it comes to dealing with orphans and protecting their rights and laws, it is not a correct approach to understand only in the form of protecting and meeting their material needs. On the contrary, it has been emphasized to meet his spiritual and psychological needs, not to insult his personality, and to contribute to his growing up as a beneficial individual for the society. This issue is stated as follows in the verse: “So don't crush the orphan” (Duhâ, 93/9). This order and the person of the Messenger of Allah also, draw the attention of mankind to respect for the material and spiritual rights of the orphan. The main target of the related things is not to leave the orphans alone, but to protect them, to provide an atmosphere of love. Otherwise, orphans deprived of the environment of love may pose problems for themselves and society while struggling with some psychological problems. The main purpose of our study is to draw attention to the compliance of the orphans' rights-law in the axis of the Qur'an and hadith according to the rapidly developing and changing life conditions in our age. (shrink)

Religion refers to two excuses for the deliberately abandoning of prayers: sleep and forgetting. However, according to some scholars, some other reasons may also allow the deliberately abandoning of prayers. The most important support of these scholars is that the Messenger of Allah performed some prayers outside their own time during the al-Khandaq. However, there is a serious obstacle in front of this approach: The fear prayer. The aim of the article is to reveal the relationship between this application (...) of the Prophet and the fear prayer and investigates whether it is a general rule to leave a prayer due to the fear of war or the enemy. The importance of this issue stems from the fact that the practice in this battle is comparable. If this is accepted as a general rule, the framework of the issues that may cause a prayer to be left can be expanded. Excuses that can be considered force majeure and legitimate in terms of daily life can be added to the unconscious states of harmony and forgetting. Therefore, the article mentions a much smaller dimension of this broad framework, rather than the general aspects of the issue, such as the deliberately abandoning of prayers, whether it is possible or not, and its proofs. In this context, it can be said that it is of great importance to determine the historical sequence between this battle and the prayer of fear. The article comes to a conclusion through the determination of this relationship, which has clues in various hadith, history, and commentary books. (shrink)

Hadiths that have been discussed in this paper consist of narrations regarding divine attributes and having some problematic meanings between supporters of Bişr al-Marīsī and ʿUthmān al-Dārimī. These narrations were mostly accepted denounced (munkar) by Bişr al-Marīsī and his sopporters due to having an anthropormophist and corporealist content about God. They rejected divine attributes according to their understanding of God based on incomparability (tanzīh) which provided by Mutazilite approach towards divine attributes even though they conveyed some features of Ahl al-Ra’y. (...) They found contradicted of attributing human features to God based on their tanzīh understanding, therefore, they interpreted such this kind of narra-tions in terms of their approach or rejected at all. At the other hand, a hard Hadith scholar Uth-man al-Darimi believed that one should accept divine attributes as they are in the Qur’an and Sunna. According to his belief, he considered the explicit meanings of the narrations without interpretation of divine attributes, and based on his perpective he denied Bişr al-Marīsī and his supporters’ interpretations claiming they would cause divesting God of all attributes (ta‘tīl). He argues that these narrations should be taken into considerations based on their explicit mea-nings. The discussions on these hadiths are important due to showing different approaches of scholars from the schools of Ahl al-Ra’y and the ones from Ahl al-Hadith towards the hadith du-ring the period when the main Hadith works were collected. Discussions on the narrations stu-died in this paper reveal two schools’ understandings of divine issues, their approaches to divi-ne attributes, as well inform us their perspectives of hadith in general.Summary: The present paper examines the debates between ʿUthmān al-Dārimī (d. 280/894) and the supporters of Bishr al-Marīsī (d. 218/833) on the divine attributes mentioned in some hadiths in the period when the main hadith books were composed (i.e., III/IXth century). These debates that took place between the scholars of Ahl al-Hadith and Ahl al-Ra’y concern the un-derstanding and interpretation of the hadiths in a certain way.It could be stated that the debates focus on how the hadiths should be understood, or whether it is the explicit meaning of the words or the possible methaphorical meanings beyond them that should be considered.It is worth briefly introducing the parties who discussed the hadiths studied here. The aforementioned discussions about some hadith narrations are between the supporters of Bishr al-Marīsī and ʿUthmān al-Dārimī, one of the important figures of the Ahl al-Hadith who wrote a separate work on these hadiths. This work was written as a rejection of the views of Bishr al-Marīsī and his two students on the attributes of God and some issues regarding hadith.Bishr al-Marīsī was regarded as an important scholar of Kalam who received fiqh education from Abū Yūsuf (d. 182/798). He is a scholar of Ahl al-Ra’y who made scientific dis-cussions with many scholars including Imam al-Shafiʿī (d. 204/820). He was on the council of the Caliph Al-Mamūn (d. 218/833) and had a significant role in the adoption of the idea of the createdness of the Qurʾān (khalq al-Qurʾān).Uthmān al-Dārimī,on the other hand, was a scholar of Ahl al-Hadith who learned ha-dith from the authorities of his era such as Yaḥyā b. Maʿīn (d. 233/847), ʿAlī b. al-Madīnī (d. 234/848), Isḥāq b. Rāhawayh (d. 237/851), and Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal (d. 241/855). Having visited all the important cities for the training of hadith, he learned the hadiths and conveyed them.With the understanding of proving the divine attributes and the opposition of the misin-terpretation of the narratives related to them, the groups advocating the appropriation of these lines in accordance with the understanding of incomparability (tanzīh) have complied the works since the first period. According to ʿUthmān al-Dārimī, the rejection of the divine attributes by Mu'tazila was influential in the emergence of the criticism literature of the Ahl al-Hadith and many authors wrote works in this direction.Regarding a narration by Abū Hurayra, an opponent reports that this narration gives the impression that God has the eyes and ears as we know. ʿUthmān al-Dārimī reports that this hadith proves sight and hearing not the eyes and ear organs. He indicates that God has no like by no means. Therefore, it is slanderous to refer the claim that Allah is made of organs to the Ahl al-Hadith. Abū Dāwūd states that with this hadith the attributes of sight and hearing for God are proved and Jahmiyya’s denial of the divine attributes are rejected.The opponent also considered Abū Hurayra's narration referring to the Prophet: "Faith is from Yemen, wisdom is from Yemen! I feel the breath of your Lord from Yemen!" as denounced (munkar). Because, according to Bishr al-Marīsī and his companions, breath can only come from those with an abdominal cavity, and Allah is free from it. According to ʿUthmān al-Dārimī, the opponent misunderstood. What is meant here is the wind that blows from Yemen and comforts people. In the context of this narration, we see that supporters of Bishr al-Marīsī evaluate the narrative literally, while ʿUthmān al-Dārimī interpret the narrative.Regarding the narration, "You can not approach Allah with something more virtuous than what comes out of it (the Qur'ān)" Ibn al-Saljī reports that Mushabbiha understands this as one with an abdominal cavity and from whom speech comes out. This understanding is in-valid since God is "samad" in the sense that He has no void. With this hadith, it is meant that the Qur'ān comes out of Allah’s presence rather than Allah. According to ʿUthmān al-Dārimī, the real aim of Ibn al-Saljī is to deny God's attribute of speech. There is no doubt that the Qur'ān comes from Him, and those who do not accept it merely deny His attribute of speech.Attributed to Ibn Abbas; The meaning of "yamīn Allah" (the right hand of Allah) in narration "Black Stone (al-ḥajar al-aswad) is the right hand of Allah on earth, handshakes with the people" is not the right hand that we know according to Ibn al-Saljī, it is blessing and grace of Allah. According to ʿUthmān al-Dārimī, who acknowledges that Black Stone is not meant to be a hand, the purpose of Ibn al-Saljī is to deny the two hands mentioned in the verses and ha-diths about Allah with invalid interpretations.ʿUthmān al-Dārimī, who criticized that Ibn al-Saljī quoted from another narration which Ibn Abbās heard from the Prophet, says that such poor narrations should not be spread. In addition, he points out that Ibn al-Saljī's interpretation is ugly and he criticizes it. Because Allah who is mentioned in the narrative is depicted as a young man with curly hair in a green suit. Such a narration is also an untrustworthy narration as it contradicts the authentic narrations of the Prophet. ʿUthmān al-Dārimī, who made this assessment of the narration, rejects the com-ments that the opponent made about the narration. According to the opponent, the phrase "I have come to Allah" means "to come into the presence of Allah in the Garden of Eden." Accor-ding to ʿUthmān al-Dārimī’s understanding, such complicated hadiths should not be only narra-ted.About the narration that are based on the Prophet and he does not know the answer to what he has come to know of himself, then he feels the coolness of his fingers as he puts his hand on his back and learns everything, the opponent evaluates the following: He was not Allah who came to the Prophet, but a well-behaved angel who was being directed by Allah and he was the angel who put his hand. ʿUthmān al-Dārimī rejects this interpretation of that oppo-nent. This comment is also contrary to other authentic hadiths. After he refused to the com-ment of the opponent about relevant narration, ʿUthmān al-Dārimī stated that he could not trust this comment on the basis of the authentic narrations he mentioned.Salaf scholars have preferred to be silent in this regard, as it is seen among the most difficult subjects to talk about divine attributes. However, subsequent generations have held dif-ferent paths in this regard. The basic approaches to understanding the divine attributes can be summarized in three main titles: tafwīd, tashbīh, and ta’wīl. Tafwīd is the path adopted by the early salaf scholars and means to leaving the knowledge about Allah’s entity and attributes to His knowledge. Tashbīh means to compare Allah to the created or the created to Allah. Ta'wīl is to interpret the Qur'ānic verses and hadiths that give the impression that Allah is like the crea-tures with semantics and rational deduction. The ones who deny the adjectives are called as Muʿattila and those who prove their attributes are called as Sifatiyya. According to Ahl al-Ra’y, it is necessary to appropriately make interpretation (ta'wīl) of the attributes giving the impression of anthropomorphism in terms of the dictionary. In the divine attributes, Muʿtazila advoca-ted the incomparability (tanzīh), whereas Ashʿariyya and Māturīdiyya adopted interpretation in accordance with incomparability. Mushabbiha and the Wahhābī-Salafī understanding has also taken the expressions regarding divine attributes with their explicit meanings.The debate between the scholars who lived in the ages II/VIII and III/IX, when the most important works are composed in the science of hadith, is important in that it is the first turn. In addition to this, the debate also contains important information on the approach to the Qur'ānic verses and hadiths, in that it shows two basic approaches, one of which represents the school of Ahl al-Ra’y, and the other represents the school of Ahl al-Hadith.ʿUthmān al-Dārimī generally advocates adhering to the explicit meaning of the narra-tion, while Bishr al-Marīsī and his companions criticize the narration labeling it as denied (mun-kar) or making an interpretation. On rare occasions, the places where ʿUthmān al-Dārimī re-jects the narration and makes interpretation, or where Bishr al-Marīsī and his companions de-fend the narrative can be seen.Interpretations made by Bishr al-Marīsī on the problematic narratives have influenced on the next scholars. Alongside Muʿtazilite scholars such as al-Jubbāʾī (d. 303/916), Qāḍī ʿAbd al-Jabbār (d. 415/1024) and Abū l-Ḥusayn al-Baṣrī (d. 436/1044), his interpretations have been quoted by Sunni scholars such as al-Ghazālī (d. 505/1111), Ibn ʿAqīl (d. 513/1119) and Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (d. 606/1210).The fact that the truth can be put forward in the science of hadith, which is based on the narration, does not favor one of the "narration" and "ra’y", it should be kept in mind that both of these depend on the proper and balanced use of both. To reveal the truth, the narration is in need of the opinion and the opinion (ra’y) is in need of the narration. Narration and opinion sho-uld be seen as complementary elements, not each other's opponents. (shrink)

Âlemin zaman içinde vücûda gelip gelmediğine dair tartışma düşünce tarihinde kadim bir geçmişe sahiptir. Platon öncesi döneme kadar izleri sürülen söz konusu tartışma İslâm düşünce tarihinde de önemli bir yer işgal eder. Kelam ile felsefe ekolleri arasında cereyan eden münazaralarda kelamcılar, âlemin yokluğu üzerinde bir zaman geçtikten sonra yaratıldığını ileri sürerken filozoflar ise Allah’ın âlemden zamansal olarak değil zatî bir öncelikle mukaddem olduğunu savunurlar. Klasik dönem sonrası devam eden tartışmalarda probleme dair yeni çözümler ortaya konulmuştur. Bu makale klasik dönem (...) sonrası İslam felsefesinin önemli simalarından biri olan Molla Sadrâ’nın hudûs anlayışını konu almaktadır. Kendinden önceki hudûs yaklaşımlarını değerlendiren Molla Sadrâ, hareket-i cevherî teorisi bağlamında probleme yeni bir yorum getirir. Hareket ve zamanı, seyyal varlığın birer boyutu olarak gören Sadrâ’ya göre hareketin bizzat kendisi anlamına gelen yaratmanın olmadığı mevhum bir zamanın varlığı söz konusu olamaz. Bu anlamda âlem, öncesinde yokluk olan muayyen bir zaman diliminde yaratıldığı anlamda hâdis değil, yaratmanın zaman mecrasında gerçekleştiği anlamda hâdistir. Metafiziğin en girift meselelerinden biri olan bu problem hakkında Molla Sadrâ’nın yorumu kelamcılar ile filozoflar arasında kısırdöngüye dönüşen tartışmalarda bir uzlaştırma ve inkişaf sadedinde görülebilir. (shrink)

Koronavirüs olarak bilinen Covid-19 -salgını neredeyse iki yıldır hayatımızda. Salgının başlangıç aşamalarında kapsamlı bir çözüm bulunamadığı için âdeta şok yaşayan dünya, salgının yayılmasını önlemek için bir çözüm olarak tamamen karantinaya kapanmak zorunda kaldı. Uzun süren kapanmadan dolayı dünyanın her yerinde insanlar, psikolojik olarak bunalımlı bir dönem geçirmekteler. Hemen hemen herkes, bu bunalımdan bir çıkış yolu aramaktadır. Öte yandan, mezkûr bunalımlı dönemin toplumsal ve dinî açılardan da belirli yankıları olduğu söylenebilir. Örneğin boşanma ve intihar vakalarının artması bunlar arasında gösterilebilir. Dinî açıdan (...) bakıldığında ise, salgının yol açtığı psikolojik yükü hafifletmek için, pek çok bireyin manevi ibadetlere başvurduğu görülmektedir. Böylece, bu psikolojik bunalım hâlinin, temel olarak dinî ilgilendiren birçok soruyu da beraberinde getirdiği dikkat çekmektedir. Kelâm açısından bakıldığında, insan ve Tanrı arasındaki ilişkinin mahiyetine yönelik sorularla karşılaştığımız söylenebilir. Hiç şüphe yok ki Korona, herkes için ağır felaketlere yol açan ve insanların pek haz etmedikleri durumlar arasında kabul edilmekte. Her geçen gün duyduğumuz artan ölüm vakaları; Çin, İran ve Amerika'da karşılaşılan yoğun bakım hastalarının korkunç manzaraları, sıradanlaşır hale geldi. Ancak bireylere sorulduğunda, herkes bu virüsün özü itibariyle oldukça kötü bir durum olduğunu söylemektedir. Konu teolojik açıdan ele alındığında, şu sorular karşımıza çıkmaktadır: eğer Korona bir kötülük olarak görülürse, bu durumun Tanrı’dan gelmesi mümkün müdür? Eğer Tanrı’dan geldiği iddia edilirse, Tanrı’nın bu derece bir eyleme sebep olması nasıl anlaşılmalıdır? Tanrı kötü bir fiille nitelendirilebilir mi? Bu sorular doğal olarak günlük hayatımıza yansıdığı için, pek çok Müslüman belirli açmazlarla karşı karşıya kalmaktadır. Bu çalışmada salgın hastalıklar ve veba konusu, kelâm açısından tartışılarak, üç temel noktaya ışık tutulmaya çalışılacaktır. Birincisi: ağrı ve acı problemi ve bu problemin kelâm kitaplarında nasıl geçtiği ve hangi açılardan tartışıldığı. İkinci olarak ise: “Salgın ve veba meseleleri Allah'ın hükmünden midir, değil midir?” meselesi. Son olarak ise: "Salgınların Allah'ın hükmünden olduğunu söylemek, kulun tedbir almayı bırakmasını mı gerektirir?" sorusudur. Araştırma, Mu'tezile, Eş'ariler, Mâtüridiler ve Ehl-i Hadis gibi ekollerinönde gelen kelamcılarından (Mütekellimûn) bazılarını seçerek; ve mümkün olduğunca onların bakış açılarını yansıtmaya çalışarak bir perspektif sunmayı amaçlamaktadır. Makalede, tüm İslam kelâm ekollerinden kelamcıların görüşlerine yer vermiş ve bunların her birinin Kur'an, Sünnet ve hadislerden delillerini zikredilip karşılaştırmalı bir yaklaşımla el aldığımız konuda bir sonuca varmaya çalışılmıştır. (shrink)

Özİrâde, Kelâm’da, ilimden sonra üzerinde en çok tartışılan konulardan biridir. İrâdenin mâhiyeti hakkında, Mu‘tezilî bilgin Ebû’l-Kāsım el-Kâ‘bî el-Belhî’nin görüşleri dikkate şayandır. Kâ‘bî, oluşturduğu epistemolojik sistemde, irâdeye alışılagelenden farklı bir anlam alanı açmaya çalışmaktadır. Kâ‘bî’ye göre irâde, fiilî bir sıfattır. Ona göre Allah’ın irâdesi hâdistir. İrâde, Tanrı hakkında kullanıldığında, Tevhîd ve tenzih kaygısına; insan hakkında kullanıldığında ise özgürlük, imtihan ve sorumluluk kaygısına dayalı bir şekilde ele alınmaktadır. Kâ‘bî, bu iki kullanım arasında dikkatli ve kesin bir ayrım yaratmaya özen göstermektedir. O, (...) irâde hakkındaki görüşleriyle, Mu‘tezilî düşünce içinde de farklılaşmıştır. Kâ‘bî’nin Nazzâm’ın görüşleriyle uyum gösteren irâde anlayışı, insana otonomi sağlaması açısından önemlidir. Kâ‘bî’ye göre, Allah li-zâtihî mürîd olmadığı gibi O’nun irâdesi, hakîkî anlamda da kullanılmamaktadır. Ona göre irâde, Allah ve insan arasında ortak bir lafız olmasına rağmen, Allah mecazî anlamda mürîddir. Kâ’bî, Allah açısından İlâhî irâdeyi yaratma (tekvîn) insan açısından ise Allah’ın emretmesi olarak ele alır. Bu bağlamda onun epistemolojisinde irâde, Allah-âlem ilişkisine güçlü bir zemin oluşturmaktadır. Anahtar Kelimeler: Kelâm, Mu‘tezile, İlâhî İrâde, Ebû’l-Kāsım el-Belhî, el-Kâ‘bî, Nazzâm, Sıfatlar, Bağdat Mu‘tezilesiTHE WİLL ACCORDİNG TO ABŪ L-QĀSİM AL-KAʿBĪ AL-BALKHĪ AbstractAfter the problem of divine knowledge (‘ılm), divine will/volition (irāda) is one of the most debated issues in Kalām. In regard of divine will and volition Mu’tazilī scholar Abū al-Qāsim al-Ka’bī al-Balkhī’s opinions are of distinctive value. In his epistemology, al-Ka’bī tries to comprehend it in quite an unusual manner. For al-Ka’bī divine will (irāda) is one of the attributes of act. This means that divine will is an accident (hâdis). The term volition when used in relation to God it shall carry the apprehension of divine unity (tawhīd) and transcendence (tenzīh). Whereas in relation to man will implies freedom of action and responsibility of consequences thereby. al-Ka’bī put serious emphasis in differentiating meaning of volition in realm of man and of transcendence. Showing profound similarities with his prior Mu’tazilī al-Nazzam, al-Ka’bī undertakes the problem of divine volition in such a way that does not supersede both, realm of man and of transcendence. Showing similarities with the opinions of his prior Mu’tazilī al-Nazzām, his understanding on will is significant for attributing full authority to man. According to al-Ka’bī, transcendental being (Allah) does not have volition per se (لا هو مريد لذاته). His volition is not used in literal meaning of the word either. He believes that although volition is a common term between God and man, God wills (مرید) in truly metaphorical and figurative sense. al-Ka’bī states that the volition form God’s position is His creation (takwīn) whereas in regard of man, divine volition shall be understood as Allah’s orders. Within this context, term of volition in al-Ka’bī’s epistemology carries the ground for relational foundations of Allah and His creation.Keywords: Divine Will, Abū l-Qāsim al-Balkhī, al-Kaʿbī, God's Attributes, Mu‘tazila, Baghdādī School. (shrink)

Özet Hz. Peygamber’in her hâlini bizzat müşahede edecek kadar yakın ve Kur’ân’ın ilk muhatapları olan sahabe neslinin örnek hayatı ve ilmi kişilikleri hakkında çalışmak, bilgi edinmek, Kur’ân’ı ve Rasûlullah’ı doğru anlamanın temel yöntemini teşkil eder. Abdullah ibn Mes’ûd, ilmi yönden zengin birikime sahip ve yaşantısı bakımından farklı bir kişiliği vardır. Müslüman olduktan sonra Rasulullah’ın yanından hiç ayrılmayan, her türlü hizmetinde bulunan, öyleki ehl-i beytten fark edilmeyecek kadar O’na yakın olan İbn Mesʿud, aynı zamanda hemen hemen bütün savaşlarda Rasulullah’ın yanında bulunmaktan (...) geri durmayan diğer taraftan Resulullh’tan sonra da Kur’ân ve İslâm’a hizmet eden ve müslümanları eğiten bir muallimdir. Kur’ân-ı Kerîm’e ve Arapçaya olan vukûfiyeti, başta kıraat olmak üzere tefsir, hadis ve fıkıh ilmine dâir derin bilgisiyle öne çıkmış ve isim yapmış olan Abdullah ibn Mes’ûd Rasulullah’ın övgüsüne mazhar olmuş ashabın büyüklerindendir. Abdullah ibn Mes’ûd’un Kur’ân’ın nüzûlünün neredeyse tamamına şahit olması ve Peygamber’in yakınında bulunması, Kur’ân ve Kıraat ilimler açısından çok önemlidir. Abdullah İbn Mesʿud’un kıraatı iki gruptan oluşmaktadır. Birincisi hemen birçok kıraat-ı aşere imamının senetlerinde yer alan ve üzerinde ittifak edilen sahih kıraatler, ikincisi de müfessirlerin tefsirlerinde ele aldıkları ve tefsir kabilinden izahatları, dil bakımından istişhadda bulundukları, ihticac için kullandığı veya sadece müteradif olarak ele aldığı ifadeleridir. Bu çalışmada kıraatini bizzat Hz. Peygamber’den alan İbn Mes’ûd’un kıraat ilmini elde ettiği yol ve alanları irdelenmiştir. Özellikle onun Hz. Peygamber’den Kur’ân tâʿlimi, Allah Rasûlu ve Cebrail’in katılımıyla gerçekleşen Kur’ân’ın arzına katıldığını söylemesi, genelde İslâmî ilimlere özelde Kıraat’a yaptığı katkı, cem, istinsah ve Mushaflar konusundaki tutumu, ashâbın onun kıraati hakkındaki sözleri ve görüşleri gibi konuları incelenmeye çalışılmıştır. Sonuç olarak birçok ilim dalında söz sahibi olduğu gibi Kıraat ilminde de imam olan büyük sahabi Abdullah ibn Mesʿdun kıratinin mahiyeti hakkında bilgi verilmiştir. (shrink)

Erken dönem Mu’tezile kelâmcılarından biri olan Ebû Ca’fer Muhammed b. Abdullah el-İskâfî, kelâm ilmi ile ilgili sahip olduğu bilgi birikimini kullanarak İslam inanç ilkelerini daha çok akli ilkelerle savunmuştur. Mu’tezilenin genel metoduna uygun olarak tevhid, zat sıfat ilişkisi, halku’l-Kur’an, adalet, hüsün ve kubuh gibi konuları teşbihten uzak tenzihi önceleyen bir bakış açısıyla açıklamaya çalışmıştır. Allah’ın varlığını akli olarak ispat etmek amacıyla âlemin bütün unsurlarıyla hâdis olduğunu savunmuştur. Ayrıca yaşadığı dönemde sosyal bir problem olan imâmet konusu ile ilgili daha faziletli (...) imâm varken faziletli olanın imâm olmasını meşru görerek Şia ile diğer Müslümanlar arasındaki bu sorunu çözmeye çalışmıştır. Makalede müellifin ilahiyat ve âlem ile ilgili görüşleri daha çok klasik kelâm kaynaklarından, imâmet ile ilgili düşünceleri ise müellifin eserlerinden faydalanılarak tespit edilmeye çalışılmıştır. Çalışmamız, İslam düşüncesinin teşekkül döneminde İslam inancını savunan kelâmcıların görüşlerini dönemin şartları gözetilerek tarafsız bir şekilde ortaya koymayı hedeflemektedir. Bilindiği gibi İslam kelâmının oluşumuna katkı sunan ilk dönem kelâmcılarının yazdığı eserlerin büyük bir kısmı günümüze ulaşmamıştır. İslam kelâmının hangi şartlarda oluştuğu ve şekillendiğinin doğru bir şekilde öğrenilmesi açısından erken dönem kelâmcılarının görüşlerinin bilinmesi önem arz etmektedir. (shrink)

Mirrors for princes, in general, give advices to the rulers about the subtleties of political art. Another aim of these books is to define and explain the administration of the state and the duties of rulers based on experience. In consequence of this they reflect the practical ethics of the period in which they were written. As such, they resemble practical handbooks written for rulers. Another point regarding the mirrors for princes works in which the political understanding of the era (...) can be observed is that they generally use sacred texts in order to prove the political legitimacy or invalidity of the power, as well as the rightfulness or the unlawfulness of the claims to the throne. Evidences from the Qurʾān and the ḥadīth literature was almost always used to support such advocated opinions. In fact, during the Middle Ages when religion and politics were considered coupled, it was unthinkable that religious elements should not be included in the works of state administration. The important point here is that the verses and ḥadīths were sometimes removed from their contexts and interpreted and explained in a way to support the ideology of the author or the ruler whom the author presented his work. In this study, we will try to reveal the subjects in which the verses and ḥadīths used in the mirrors for princes, which is a genre that has emerged within the Islamic culture and civilization. Thus, we aim to prepare a background for the future studies, which will focus on a specific verse or ḥadīth.Summary: The first political splits in Islamic history occurred immediately after the death of prophet Muḥammad. These differences were resolved by the agreement of the majority of Muslims on Abu Bakr's name. Until the second half of the rule of the third caliph ʿUthmān, Muslims came together around the unifying power of the idea of conquest. Nevertheless, substantially as a result of economically based problems the period of tranquility in Islamic society came to an end and was replaced by disputes. Disputes turned into conflict and ultimately seperation fused with the massacre of ʿUthmān in the capital Medina turned into a big fire with the Battles of the Camel and Ṣiffīn, the emergence of Khārijīs, the formation of the Shia and the deepening of the intellectual divisions after the all of these. Islamic history has witnessed a clash of different religious views and beliefs. along with deepening of intellectual disagreements as a result of political debatesIn the Islamic political thought, especially the first two centuries process was formed around the views of the jurists, muḥaddiths and theologians. The first sources used by those who tried to justify their opinion in the differences of opinion experienced during this period were the Qurʾān and ḥadīth literature which Muslims accepted as the determining factor in all their acts. The views based on the Qur'an and the hadiths, which are the two main sources of Islamic religion, had been used to influence the people, legitimize the actions and refute the claims of the opponents. On the other hand the sort who gave direction to political thought changed and political thought adhered a new path with Turks and Persians served as bureaucrats and soldiers and took an active position in the state. Especially Persians carried the culture of advice to Islamic thought, which is the product of both Greek and Hind civilization. Such books had brought in the İslamic society with translation movements began in the Umayyad period and peaked with the Bayt al-Ḥikma in the Abbasid period. Together with these books, the ideas of these civilizations on ideal state administration, politics and morality were recognized by Muslim scholars.These type of works, which are famous in terms of Islamic thought as mirrors for princes, have been written by Muslim scholars since the middle of the eighth century. Mirrors for princes are political, moral and religious content books that gives the rulers practical advice to maintain their power in accordance with the religious orders and prohibitions, and to the consent of Allāh’s who grant them this authority and people which appointed for their administration. Mirrors for princes are mostly theoretical books since they are mostly focused on what should be. In addition, since they are written for names that currently hold power, they are centered on how the rulers can maintain and increase their power and with which practices the state will maintain its existence for a longer period. The basic point of political thought and political interpretation are concepts and definitions. When the concept meaning of a word is mentioned, it is generally considered that there is a general definition. However, the concepts reflect the meaning that the user assigns to him in the context of his thoughts, perceptions, criticisms, explanations and analyzes. Concepts such as fair, honest, brave, hero, beautiful, rich, good and clean express what the person imposes on the meaning. In other words, everyone’s experience determines the content of the concept so far. The meaning of the concepts varies with the age and its user of that concept. Even concepts such as justice, merit and consultation can change meaning in different periods and geographies. The concepts, which are often used to facilitate understanding, are sometimes used to judge, to mold or mislead the interlocutor. In this context, it is imperative to enter the mind of the user in order to make concept analysis.In Islamic civilization, the principles of management are explained with concepts. The idiosyncrasies that Muslims expect from an ideal ruler are defined as justice, consultation, merit, trust and legitimacy and a broad corpus has been written about the concepts related to the administration, especially those mentioned. One type of this corpus is mirrors for princes.In Islamic history, there are many Mirrors for princes who are written in different time periods by names coming from different geographies and different backgrounds. Although the advice given in Mirrors for princes indicate a great similarity to each other, the preferred arguments and examples in the foundation of the counsel are different. While the persons in active politics mostly based their opinions on political arguments, scholars with scientific tradition supported their advices with religious arguments.Verses are the leading religious elements highlighted in Mirrors for princes. While explaining the concepts and emphasizing the importance of the advices, many verses have been exploited. Some verses are used only by one author, while some verses are the subject of their work by many authors. In the same way, ḥadīths and the sentences accepted as ḥadīths were also used to reinforce the emphasis and meaning. At this point, sometimes the context of the verses and ḥadīths were not taken care of. In this study, we aim to address the use of religious elements.In the literature, different opinions have emerged about who is ülü’l-emr and the limits of obedience to ülü’l-emr that used describe the names of senior executives and leaders of society. The reason for the difference is that each sect or religious school provides an interpretation on the basis of grounding its own views in explaining the verse. Justice is the most emphasized concept among the advices given to the rulers in mirrors for princes. Justice, which is shown as the most important feature of a sovereign, has been regarded as extremely important for the state to existences until the Doomsday. In addition, justice has been described as the most important condition for the maintenance of the state/sovereign authority. Consultation was important to make the right decision.Verses and ḥadīths were used in the explanations about the personal characteristics of the sovereign. Some features such as being compassionate, keeping promise, controlling anger, patience, honesty, blessing, extravagance, self-esteem, break a promise, revoke a promise and arrogance have become the subject of politics. When the mirrors for princes are considered as a whole, it is seen that religion and state are considered as inseparable twin brothers, taken one step further the understanding that accepts religion and the world as brothers especially is a product of the old Persian tradition. In this understanding, religion was accepted as the root and was given the duty of its patronage to political authority. It is seen that in the Mirrors for princes verses and ḥadīths hold a significant amount. As the reason for this can be said that along with religion takes place on the basis of morality, the authors of the Mirrors for princes, which put deep meanings on the relationship between religion and the state in the period that we are dealing with, consider both institutions to be complementary and integrative. (shrink)

The type of ‘Al-isnād al-āli’ (higher chain of authority) which has great importance for the science of ḥadīths that constitutes the second best source of the Islam, expresses the value in terms of its proximity to the period of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). If ḥadīth has ‘al-isnād al-āli’ in the works of the scholars provides us with assurance on the intend of the ḥadīth. For this reason, the values of the works of those authors who have constructed (...) their works with al-isnād al-āli undoubted in the science of ḥadīth. However the work of Abu al-Jahm al-Bāhilī’s (d. 228/842) named al-Juz‘ had that kind of ḥadīth, it has not appreciated by scholars, he could not get enough attention in his period and after it. His work contains famous scholar al-Layth Ibn Sa‘d’s (d. 175/791) narrative who claimed by ḥadīth scholars that his students neglected and omitted his ḥadīths and knowledge. Al-Layth Ibn Sa‘d was known doing transmission by written copies. The similarity of al-Layth Ibn Sa‘d narrations in al-Juz‘ with al-Layth narrations, which are also found in other sources, strengthens the claims of the existence of a narrative process based on the written texts in the early periods. In this study, these transfers of Abu al-Jahm reflected on other works will be examined and tried to build narrations of his teacher al-Layth Ibn Sa‘d. country, we can say that the article will contribute to the studies of the history of religions.Summary: Ḥadīth works written in the third century of hijri are the most distinguished sources. The most fundamental works in the science of ḥadīth were written in this time. In the following period, numerous studies have been committed to paper on them. One of the eminent works is the named al-Juz’, which belongs to Abu al-Jahm al-Bāhilī (d. 228/842). The author was not a person that was taken into consideration much during his time. It is possible to that he has been criticized about his scientific proficiency (al-Jarh). Nevertheless, al-Juz’ attracts attention due to the fact that it contains the type of ‘al-Isnād al-āli’ (higher chain of authority). Al-Isnād al-āli, which means access with the least number of narration from the author to the Prophet has very major role to determining of being dependable and certainty of the ḥadīths. The work of Abu al-Jahm which contains the ‘al-Isnād al-āli’ did not attract enough attention. However, another value of the al-Juz‘ is that its been included the narration of famous muhaddith Al-Layth Ibn Sa'd (d. 175/791). He is one of the valued mujtahid imams who have played an active and important role in second century of hijri. Al-Layth's narrations have been available insufficient amount present day. At this point the al-Juz‘ of Abu al-Jahm has great important because it contains many narrations of his shaykh Al-Layth Ibn Sa'd.The Juz‘ seems to has attracted the attention of the ḥadīths scholars in the following period. Indeed, various authors had the get authorization to narrate al-Juz‘. Furthermore, it is also known that some scholar in his period utilized his narration in their own study. For in¬stance, it was declared by Ibn Ḥajar (d. 852/1449) that al-Bukhārī (d. 256/870) had a narra¬tion belonging to Abu al-Jahm in his work ‘al-Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī’ with a muʻallaq chain (Omit¬ting his name). In the following periods, we come across famous muhaddith such as Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal (d. 241/855), al-Ṭabaranī (d. 360/971), Abū Bakr al-Marwazī (d. 292/905), al-Dāraquṭnī (d.385/995) and al-Bayhaqī (d. 458/1066) who received qualify of Juz's narra¬tion. Although the narrations of Abu al-Jahm are included in the prominent works of schol¬ars, it is clearly seems that the Juz‘ had not enough value except being procure as a written text. As far as we determined there are eleven narration of Abu al-Jahm in the main ḥadīth sources. In addition, we detected that some studies which contain some ḥadīth of al-Juz’ are list them in the same layout and order. This situation indicates that al-Juz’ is owned by these people as a duplicated edition and they narrated by not only orally transmitted but also spread by writing copy. This inference strengthens the theory which conceived by Modern researcher Fuad Sezgin (1924-2018) that ḥadīth transmission had conducted not only through oral transfer but also through written copies.Even though he lived in a very active time of oral transmission of ḥadīth and the time of specific journey for learning and pursuing ḥadīth, it is seen that Abu al-Jahm formed his Juz‘ from the ḥadīths that he procured only from his six shaykhs. That was quite less amount in that period. Juz‘, has an ʿAlāʾ al-Rijāl classification (ranked according to narrators) as ex¬pected in his period method. Abu al-Jahm began his study with his shaykh Al-Layth Ibn Sa'd’s narration, then completed with Sufyān ibn ʿUyayna’s. Juz‘ includes 112 ḥadīths. Ex¬cept two muʻallaq isnāds (omitting one or more narrators), all of ḥadīth has muttaṣil isnāds (narrators in the chain connected each other without omitting). Al-Juz‘ available nowadays in a published form. It seems that some of ḥadīth datas included in the Juz‘ have content against Islamic juris-prudential judgements. For example, the Prophet’s sayings ‘One or two swallow of breast milk does not make haram’ and ‘Nobody can fast or pilgrimage for the benefit of someone else’; allowing to Subay‘a al-Aslamī to marry without waiting her ‘iddah (waiting period of a woman after the death of her husband or divorce); when she gave birth, ʿUthmān b. ʿAffān’s permission to al-Rubay‘a bint Mu‘avvidh not to wait her ‘iddah; when ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿUmar has nasal bleeding he leaves the prayer, goes to wash, then back and continue where he leave off, without taking ablution; and describing marriage with polytheist women as for¬bidden (ḥarām). Of course, all this information must be examined within the framework of Islamic jurisprudence. However, Abu al-Jahm stands alone (tafarrūd) in such issues, it can be seen as the reasons to be recognized as a censured person (majrūḥ).Al-Juz‘ included 66 isnāds of Al-Layth Ibn Sa'd’s narration. Therefore it leaves behind all the works that compile the narration of Ibn Sa'd. That is why, we hypothesize that Juz‘ is a form of Al-Layth’s study that has survived to the present days. As a matter of fact, the muhaddiths who included the narrations of Al-Layth in their works, especially Ibn ḳuṭlūbughā could not ignore the Juz‘ of Abu al-Jahm; on the contrary, they took it as reference. In this case, it should be said that Abu al-Jahm al-Bāhilī is a loyal follower of Al-Layth and the word at¬tributed to Imām Shāfi‘ī and characterizing Al-Layth’s followers with disloyalty is invalid. (shrink)

Love is one of the essential concepts of Maturidi's understanding of Morality. Although his conception of morality comprises will of act, there is remarkable linkage between love and action in his conceptualization. Maturidi's understanging of love is based on conscious of "love" which comes from God. Therefore, nature of humankind has love as part of his/her creation and seeks for beyond that love. Maturidi points out that each of us has inborn tendency for beauty and love for beauty. Each has (...) love of God, naturally. This natural sense becomes fundamental part of one's morality to seek God's love and His sake. The idea of a loving God is seen as an important element that directs people's moral actions that are praised. Knowing this fundamental understanding of love brings the groundwork for the person to turn into a virtue through which he can be exalted. In addition, the virtue of love (al-Fadl fi'l-Mavedde) includes the thought of doing it lovingly to please the Creator while performing an action, and to stay away from an action that he does not like because he will not be pleased. In general, in Māturīdī 's explanations, it is emphasized that "taqwa" in the sense of fear of Allah and in words derived from this root, this fear contains love. In addition, the situation of those who leave the middle way by falling into excess and understatement is equal to moving away from conformity with 'taqwa'. So, the deed that is suitable for "taqwa" is far from the excess and in the middle. It needs to be balanced. In addition, Māturīdī defines justice as "the middle way" and describes the middle way as being just. From another point of view, we can call it acting wisely in practice. According to Māturīdī, 'Wisdom' means grasp of things' purposes. He sees good behavior away from extremes. While Māturīdī states that the truth of the love in the heart cannot be known, he states that the feeling of affection in a person will only be for the person from whom he benefits, and that he cannot feel love for the person from whom he does not benefit. For him, it is an entity that tries to determine what it should be and is responsible for understanding how to live a virtuous life. When we look at the moral structure of the human being, we see that the important points such as the purpose of life, the determination of good and bad, duties and responsibilities are based on or should be based on a moral purpose which has divine roots in human existence. In this study, we will try to examine Māturīdī's understanding of morality, specifically his conceptualization of "love" from a philosophical perspective. (shrink)

The Sunnah has an important role in the correct understanding and the protection from wrong interpretations of the Qurʾān. Accordingly, ḥadīth played a crucial role in shaping the opinions of the mufassirs. In this article, the tafsir titled Kur’an Yolu written by a group of scholars and first published by the Presidency of the Religious Affairs in 2003 which is widely read in Tur-key is examined from ḥadīth usage point of view. The problems in ḥadīth usage are classified under headings (...) such as insufficiency/incorrectness in the explanation of verses due to insuffi-cient usage of ḥadīth, not including ḥadīth which corroborate the verse, wrong conclusions derived from ḥadīth, problems with citations, ḥadīth translation problems, wrong explanation of ḥadīth, problems with some issues related to Sunnah. Over fifty examples where there were wrong citations of ḥadīth, wrong conclusions were derived, there was mixing up of ḥadīth and translation errors leading to wrong meanings were determined and the most important ones were studied. Due to these problems regarding ḥadīth usage, it was seen that sometimes the unity of Qurʾān and Sunnah was violated and some wrong explanations were given. The article is important due to determination of these mistakes and attracting attention to care and pre-caution in ḥadīth usage in this kind of works. This study indicates the importance of Qurʾān-Sunnah unity and shows the important role that ḥadīths play in understanding the verses. It is observed that in case hadiths related to a verse are not given or given in an insufficient or in-correct manner the verse in question is understood or interpreted incorrectly. Therefore, the correct translation and explanation of the ḥadīth, avoiding citation mistakes and making use of primary sources are very important. The factors that lead to wrong conclusions are not evalu-ating a ḥadīth in its entirety (taking into account only the first part of the ḥadīth), not evaluat-ing the ḥadīths related to a subject in entirety (taking into account only certain ḥadīths), not making use of commentaries in order to understand a ḥadīth correctly and wrong citation of a ḥadīth. The fact that the ḥadīth which is about the gladness of Allah due to the repentance of a person has been confused with another ḥadīth and an additional error has been made in the text of this ḥadīth indicates that the authors have remembered this ḥadīth incorrectly and they have not verified this ḥadīth in its source. Given the material mistakes in many other examples under the citation errors title, it has been concluded that the wrong citation of ḥadīths in a way that affects the meaning constitutes a serious problem for the work under examination. As to the translation problems, it is observed that they arise from wrong citation of the ḥadīth from its sources (for instance omitting a word or adding expressions that are not found in the ḥadīth) or not making use of commentaries in understanding the ḥadīth. It is necessary that for the analysis of the ḥadīth the authors make use of the tafsir of Ibn Kathīr who is a ḥadīth schol-ar along with the works of other scholars who are not specialized in ḥadīth in order to correct-ly determine the accuracy level and meaning of the ḥadīth. It seems necessary that a commis-sion that includes ḥadīth scholars review this work in order to correct the mistakes that are found and to make use of the suggestions that are put forward. This step is important for cor-recting the mistakes found in this prestigious and widely used work. Furthermore, since many readers gain knowledge about Qurʾān using this work, consideration of issues raised in this study will contribute to the forthcoming edition of the work. It is surprising that despite pro-posed corrections since its initial publication, so many material mistakes still exist in this valu-able work which is a product of great effort. It is hoped that it will continue to become useful for people by making necessary corrections. (shrink)

As mentioned in the narrations, the messenger of Allah (pbuh) used to recite some prayers known as opening prayers such as Subhaneke, Wejjehtu and Allâhümme Bâid before reciting Fatiha surah while starting the obligatory and supererogatory worships (salat). In this study, it is aimed to find out the reflections of the abovementioned prayers in narrations, and to determine their authenticity and to reveal the reasons why jurisprudential sects preferred different prayers. Benefitting from literature review method, hadith inferences were made, (...) and moving from the books of refutation & corrections and biographies, the cases of the narrators of the hadiths, who took part in the ascription of the narrations, were put forth. After the investigation, it was determined that the narrated narrations about Subhaneke, an opening prayer, were found to have been narrated by eight different prophet companions in their later works through Aisha and Abu Sâ’id al-Khudrî in early hadiths resources; and that all these narrations were week in terms of authenticity. However, it was revealed that the most authentic narrations about the issue were those depending on the practice of Umar. In the hadith resources, it was seen that five different prophet companions narrated some narrations about the Wejjechtu prayer, and that the great majority of these narrations were through Ali, and that most of these narrations were authentic, yet only one reference was found to be weak. On the other hand, it was revealed that the narrations narrated by Abu Huraira between the opening prayer, Allâhümme Bâid, turned out to be genuine in terms of authenticity. For instance, while Hanafis and Hanbalis have preferred reciting Subhaneke during salat, Shafiîs have found it appropriate to recite the prayer Wejjectu in the salat. On the other hand, Malikis have thought that it was obligatory to start the salat with Surah Fatiha, and that it was makruh to recite these prayers in salat. (shrink)

This article, in the example of the subject of shukr (gratitude), proposes a ‘perspective’ for the instructor who determines the processes of bringing a subject into the learning environment. This perspective is related to the encounter with the knowledge of the subject to be taught. It points to the approach of the instructor to the information he/she will refer to about the subject he/she will teach while preparing in the mental plan. The content of the subject, the objectives, the methods, (...) techniques, and resources to be used to present the subject, and how the output will be measured and evaluated are largely determined by this perspective. In a way, the proposed perspective involves monitoring the change and transformation of life and the contextualization of religious knowledge by paying attention to the methodological functioning. Thus, the way the subject of gratitude presented in the Qur’an and hadith narrations aims to provide the teacher with a ‘perspective’ on what kind of content to prepare. This is a suggestion for the instructor to reveal that while managing the process of religiously understanding/interpreting life as it flows by, the instructor should not ignore the ways in which knowledge appears in the Qur’an and hadith narrations. For example, the first meaning of the word shukr (gratitude) in the Qur’an is “faith in Allah.” However, traditionally, shukr (gratitude) is not taught within the subject area of faith. In this context, the article follows the suggestion that referring to the method and source of the knowledge to be taught can provide the instructor with a holistic and in-depth ‘perspective.’. (shrink)

The Book and the Sunnah are the two main sources of Sharʿī science. These two sources are based on narration which requires an absolute certainty, and this makes the reports, especially the mutawātir reports, important for Sharʿī sciences. Many people were involved in the transmission process of the Sunnah and the Book; therefore, Islamic scholars remained loyal to the technical concept “mutawātir reports” which is used in logic and is not open to doubt in terms of credibility. This is particularly (...) important for the science of kalām, which deals with matters of faith. On the other hand, in the science of fiqh, which deals with the practices of the Muslim individuals such as worship and procedures rather than the matters of faith, only the reports that the believer will accept, rather than those that everyone will approve, are sufficient. In this context, as per the science of fiqh, it is sufficient to form a dominant opinion, rather than an absolute certainty as in the science of kalām, for acting upon reports. Some factors, such as the acceptance of conjecture sufficient in the matters associated with fiqh and the low number of mutawātir reports on fiqh matters, also affected the fuqahā’s understanding of certain knowledge. In the context of transmission of the Sunnah, fuqahā partially changed the nature of the concept “mutawātir reports” by going beyond the technical understanding of tawatur. The most important change made by the fuqahā in the nature of mutawātir reports was the inclusion of the phenomenon “sened (chain of transmission)”, which is used to ensure credibility to ḥadīt̲h̲s, in the understanding of tawatur. So much so that while the number rather than the qualifications of the people who convey the reports is important for the credibility of the mutawātir reports in the science of logic; in the determination of mutawātir sunnah, the number of the narration channels which consist of just and fair-minded narrators was taken as a basis in line with the hadith “Whoever ascribes to me what I have not said then let him occupy his seat in Hell-fire.” Even some methodologists valued the justness and fair-mindedness of the narrators so much that they included the famous reports in the scope of mutawātir reports, even though the first layer was ahad, due to their trust in the narrators in the later layers. However, in technical sense, for mutawātir reports, the qualifications of the narrators or who they are is not important at all. On the contrary, any person from a different religion, sect or disposition can take a role in the transmission of mutawātir reports. However, there is no place for fasiq narrators, let alone non-Muslims, in fuqahā’s concept of sened-centered mutawātir reports. Spiritual mutawātir is one of the subjects affected the most by this new understanding of tawatur based on isnād (reporting the chain of transmission). Normally, spiritual mutawātir is the agreement of the reports, conveyed in different texts by a large number of people who cannot agree on a lie, on a common meaning. However, fuqahā interpreted spiritual mutawātir as ahad ḥadīt̲h̲s with different chains of sened reaching a certain number and denoting the same meaning. What makes these two reports different is that the number of narrators assures the credibility of reports in the first one whereas the trust in the justness and fair-mindedness of the narrators does in the second. As a matter of fact, it is not possible to talk about such a spiritual mutawātir if the trust in the justness and fair-mindedness of the narrators who convey the ahad reports is damaged. This approach of spiritual mutawātir was used by the mutakallimūn as much as by the fuqahā. However, they used this approach of mutawātir mostly for matters that are evidenced by the Sunnah but not associated with the essentials of religion, such as Shafa'ah (intercession), Hawd al-Kawthar (Pond of Abundance), Ru’yat Allah (seeing Allah), and imams’ being from Quraysh. Thanks to this new concept of tawatur, Islamic scholars included many ḥadīt̲h̲s that are normally out of the scope of the technical definition of mutawātir reports, in the scope of spiritual mutawātir, and thus provided a credibility to more ḥadīt̲h̲s. (shrink)

Each narration or text, as it informs about an event, situation or person in history, has a history that sheds light on both its formation and how it arrived to us. The illumination of this history is at least as important as the content analysis of the information. For this reason, it is necessary both to examine whether the source in which the information is given has survived to the present day as it was created by the author without being (...) exposed to any external intervention, and to analyze the narration in terms of reliability and indication within the integrity of the isnād-text. In that case, when the word “text criticism” is mentioned, an understanding of a specific criticism should come to mind, which includes both critical edition (scholarly editing) of the first source and the critique of the narration by making sound research in terms of isnād and literary criticism (naqd al-isnād wa-l-matn). Due to reasons such as the inability to follow a standard method, the limited number of the copies and/or the distance of the copies from the author in terms of history and commercial concerns, many classical works published with relative verification contain such errors require a re-examination. One of these works is Ibn Hibbān’s (d. 354/965) book al-Majrūhīn. In his work al-Majrūhīn, Ibn Hibbān divided the narrators into two groups according to their reliability and collected the ones that he determined as weak according to his opinion. In this work, he placed Abū Ḥanīfa (d. 150/767) at the top of the list. First, he denounced Abū Ḥanīfa with the following expressions: Sahib al-ra’y, child of slaves, bicker, hypocrite, had little knowledge of hadith, a Murji’ī propagandist, a narrator who was blamed by imams. Then he tried to justify these claims by about thirty narrations from various salaf scholars. These narratives are completely different from the largely intellecutal discussions and criticisms of scholars such as al-Awza'i (d. 157/774), Ibn Abī Laylā (d. 148/765) and Ibn Abī Shayba (d. 235/849) on Abu Ḥanīfa and his school. The narrations compiled by Ibn Hibbān are display insulting and polemical narrations against Abu Ḥanīfa’s personality and reliability. In terms of being a source for later periods, it is important to examine and criticize these narratives in terms of the narration techniques. The al-jarḥ wa-l-taʿdīl is important part of the hadith science. al-Mejrūhīn, one of the leading works of this science is remarkable in many respects. According to this narration Abū Ḥanīfa Nuʿmān b. S̱ābit b. Zūtā b. Māh’ın (öl. 150/767) said, "If a man worships this mule to get closer to Allah, I see no harm in it." According to our analysis, there are the following determinations about the narrators in the chain of this narrative. Ibn Abī Mushir is unknown (majhūl), the narrator who is written as “Mahfūz b. Abī Savba” but his correct name is “Tawba” is matrūk. Ahmad b. al-Walīd al-Mahramī al-Karkhī is weak, and Yahyā b. Hamza, source person, is qadari who narrates from people with munkar al-hadith; but is also considered as a thiḳa narrator. As for Sa‘īd b. Abd al-Azīz, he has nothing to do with the reception and transmission of the narrative. In addition, there is also a break in the chain. First of all, what is expected from a basic work such as al-Majrūhīn, whose subject and purpose is purely a narrator analysis, is that the report in it should be acceptable, at least in terms of isnād. When the narrative in question, which is also included in earlier sources such as al-Fesewī (d. 277/890), is evaluated in terms of both the isnād and the text, one realizes the transformation of an expression circulating in the form of gossip against Abu Ḥanīfa in Damascus around the subject of ʾirjāʾ. ʾIrjāʾ was at the forefront of the heated debates in the second half of the second century into semā form in terms of isnād and text, besides, the word النعل/clog is transformed into البغل/mule. Apart from the weak points of the chain, Sa‘īd b. Abd al-Azīz, who has nothing to do with the reception and transmission of the narrative, has also been turned into the narrator/source of the report with the samā expression. Regardless of the purpose and the criteria of the narration technically, during the conversation with Sa‘īd, Yahyā b. Hamza’s sincere friend and teacher, a special speech in which a common report attributed to Abu Ḥanīfa was expressed, was transformed into Yahyâ’s samā‘ in the form of jazm. As a result, the word “shoe” or “clog” has evolved into mule. It would be a reductionist and over optimistic approach to assume that all this may have resulted from tashīf and tahrīf of the copyists. The narration we discussed is a typical example in terms of showing the effect of the conflict of ideas between Ahl al-Hadīth and Ahl ar-Ra’y on the narrations. Of course, this shoud be not regarded as the only example. (shrink)

Religion and culture play a central role in building harmonious relations between followers of different religions, both within the nuclear family and in the extended family. This study examines the revitalisation of religious moderation with a cultural approach in strengthening tolerance. Data was obtained qualitatively from in-depth interviews and observations of families of different religions, religious leaders, traditional leaders, and other relevant informants. The research findings show that the family institution is the most crucial place in carrying out moderate religious (...) culturalisation through the local wisdom values of kasiuluran [kinship], tengko situru [togetherness], and karapasan [tenacity]. Institutionally, traditional leaders, religious leaders, and clans in Tongkonan encourage peace in society, both in traditional and religious activities. Meanwhile, religious celebrations, traditional ceremonies, and community activities are occasions to socialise and interact by placing a firm tolerance for religious differences. CONTRIBUTION: This study contributes to the realisation of tolerance through the application of moderate religious values and local wisdom that the world needs today. Strengthening inter-religious relations is very important because the position of religion is complex and sensitive. This contribution is crucial in the midst of the rampant issue of radicalism in Indonesia lately. (shrink)

Religion and culture play a central role in building harmonious relations between followers of different religions, both within the nuclear family and in the extended family. This study examines the revitalisation of religious moderation with a cultural approach in strengthening tolerance. Data was obtained qualitatively from in-depth interviews and observations of families of different religions, religious leaders, traditional leaders, and other relevant informants. The research findings show that the family institution is the most crucial place in carrying out moderate religious (...) culturalisation through the local wisdom values of kasiuluran [kinship], tengko situru [togetherness], and karapasan [tenacity]. Institutionally, traditional leaders, religious leaders, and clans in Tongkonan encourage peace in society, both in traditional and religious activities. Meanwhile, religious celebrations, traditional ceremonies, and community activities are occasions to socialise and interact by placing a firm tolerance for religious differences. CONTRIBUTION: This study contributes to the realisation of tolerance through the application of moderate religious values and local wisdom that the world needs today. Strengthening inter-religious relations is very important because the position of religion is complex and sensitive. This contribution is crucial in the midst of the rampant issue of radicalism in Indonesia lately. (shrink)

Along the same line as that in Ono (Ann Pure Appl Logic 161:246–250, 2009), a proof-theoretic approach to Glivenko theorems is developed here for substructural predicate logics relative not only to classical predicate logic but also to arbitrary involutive substructural predicate logics over intuitionistic linear predicate logic without exponentials QFLe. It is shown that there exists the weakest logic over QFLe among substructural predicate logics for which the Glivenko theorem holds. Negative translations of substructural predicate logics are studied by using (...) the same approach. First, a negative translation, called extended Kuroda translation is introduced. Then a translation result of an arbitrary involutive substructural predicate logics over QFLe is shown, and the existence of the weakest logic is proved among such logics for which the extended Kuroda translation works. They are obtained by a slight modification of the proof of the Glivenko theorem. Relations of our extended Kuroda translation with other standard negative translations will be discussed. Lastly, algebraic aspects of these results will be mentioned briefly. In this way, a clear and comprehensive understanding of Glivenko theorems and negative translations will be obtained from a substructural viewpoint. (shrink)

Religious moderation is a crucial issue, along with religious and cultural values that develop in society. Religious moderation’s success will significantly determine millennial Muslim youth’s tolerant attitudes, mediated by intellectual humility. This study aimed to identify and design a model of religious moderation on tolerance by mediating intellectual humility. The research used mixed methods; data analysis used NVivo 12 Plus (software by QSR International), to compile variable nominations; and Partial Least Squares - Structural Equation (PLS-SEM) creates research models. There were (...) 350 Indonesian youth informants in the study, which used interviews and focus group discussions. The results showed that religious moderation in youth, including national commitment, antiviolence and acceptance of local culture, can strengthen tolerance, mediated by intellectual humility. The tolerant attitude shows high and stable data and confirms the strengthening of religious moderation in young people. From the identification, a model of religious moderation in youth was designed and revised, and the results have met all the requirements for modelling so that it can be continued for testing.Contribution: This research provides essential assistance in implementing religious moderation for young people, which is currently the most prevalent issue in Indonesia. The world needs a moderate religious attitude to become a middle ground for various religious and cultural differences among people globally. (shrink)

Strengthening Muslim-Christian relations is very important for a nation such as Indonesia that has plurality in terms of tribes, ethnicity and religion. This study aims to analyse the role of Muslim women who live in a pluralistic socio-religious situation. This is a qualitative research that uses purposive sampling to determine the informants. The approach used by the Discovering Cultural Themes model is to understand the symptoms of the many themes, cultures, values and cultural symbols. Data analysis was conducted by using (...) software for qualitative research, which is needed in managing data found from the field, in this case, nVivo Basic 12.00 for Windows. The results show that Muslim women translate justice, empathy and rationality in religion by building relationships with other religions. This attitude is part of Islamic teachings that contain moderate, accommodating and tolerant aspects. In addition, culture has encouraged women to blend in and form egalitarian equality in the social and cultural realm. The culture of generosity and mutual help has become a tradition both in religious and customary activities. CONTRIBUTION: This article provides an insight into the contribution of Muslim women in strengthening Muslim-Christian relations. This agenda is very important because Islam and Christianity have the largest adherents in Indonesia. This contribution is very important and crucial in the midst of radicalism issues in Indonesia lately. (shrink)

A contemporary to Thomas Aquinas in Latin Catholic Italy, and with a parallel motivation to stabilize each his own civilization in its flux and storm, 'Abd Allah Baydawi of Ilkhan Persia wrote a compact and memorable Arabic Summation of Islamic Natural and Traditional Theology. With the same strokes of his pen he presented the Islamic version of the Science of Theological Statement, bafflingly called "Kalam" while familiarly embracing "Theology". Baydawi's Tawali'al-Anwar min Matal'al-Anzar (Rays of Dawnlight Outstreaming from Far Horizons (...) of Logical Reasoning), with Mahmud Isfahani's commentary, is a formidably clear logical and mental vision of mankind's final completion as a spiritual structure in Islam. Reality - in nature's Possible mode, in an apodictic Divine mode, and in humanity's heroic Prophetic mode - comprises man's Worldview and is the Theme of the Baydawi/Isfahani discourse. The Edifice of Man and Humanity's evanescent Evidence within it are both hugely arresting and moving. The print edition is available as a set of two volumes (9789004121027). (shrink)

La relation est au coeur de l'existence individuelle et les multiplicités, que déterminent les différents rapports pratiques, affectifs, sociaux et politiques, sont coextensives à l'invention continue de l'individualité par elle-même. Le présent essai veut rendre compte de la constitution, à partir de la seule activité des individus, des diverses formes d'existence et d'organisation que peut revêtir un ensemble pratique : rassemblements, dispositifs collectifs, réseaux et systèmes, associations et communautés plus ou moins étendues et diversement intégrées, institutions et Etats, sans oublier (...) les conflits et les luttes, avec leur développement historique. Affectée par des phénomènes de domination, la multiplicité reçoit la structure passive de l'union en altérité, comme si la liberté en venait à réaliser, malgré elle, la transmutation de la puissance singulière en impuissance. Mais une multiplicité active peut aussi se constituer en résistant à la servitude et en rompant avec l'être sériel : elle s'affirme alors dans l'expérience subjective du groupe, avec l'apparition du pouvoir normatif et critique appartenant à une multitude libre, qui crée de nouvelles formes de la vie sociale. (shrink)