The contribution of the generation of Tâbi’un in the formation of Islamic sciences in general and in the development of hadith in particular is known. Various studies have been done on the quality of this contribution. Being a part of such an aim is among the targets of this study as well. Not to conducted any work on the hadithism of especially Abdullah b. Abbas' student and after him Atâ ibn Abi Rabah who the most famous teacher of the Mecca (...) school was another encouraging reason. While examining the life and scientific personality of Ata who was one of the early personalities, it has been tried to reach some results with the information obtained from the sources from the first period, especially the fatwa and rumors belonging to him. Atâ who was leading an observable, active political life, lived in the intellectual and social turmoil that emerged in the early period. Atâ who drawing attention with his educator personality, added his own experiences to the scientific heritage he received from the companions in the first instance Ibn Abbas, and had been passed it on to the next generations. Being a fatwa authority in Makkah mufti and pilgrimage organizations for many years is one of his important experiences. In addition to being well-known for his devotion to the Sunnah, he has been taken place between those known among the generation of Tâbi’un with his fatwa and ijtihad. Ata, who is a critical hadith reciter, is accepted as the absolute authority in the hadith. The fact that he was one of the first to make talfiq in the hadith shows that he knew the diversity of the sources he reported and the many tarikh of the narrations. He wrote narrations and encouraged writing of hadith. He contributed to the development of hadith terms with some of the hadith concepts he used and drew attention with the abundance of mursal hadiths. (shrink)

Hicrî birinci yüzyılın sonu ile ikinci yüzyılın ortalarında yaşamış bulunan Ca‘fer-i Sâdık ve Ebû Hanîfe, akran iki âlimdir. Kûfe’de yetişen ve Ehl-i sünnet mezheplerinden birinin imamı olan Ebû Hanîfe’nin, Medine’de yetişen ve İsnâaşeriyye’nin altıncı imamı kabul edilen Ca‘fer ile bir araya geldiği ve onun talebesi olduğu hem sünnî hem Şiî kaynaklarda rivayet edilmektedir. Mukaddem kaynaklarda Ebû Hanîfe’nin Ca‘fer-i Sâdık’ın öğrencisi olduğu yönündeki ifadelerin, muahhar kaynaklarda abartılı bir şekilde yorumlandığı görülmüştür. Bu çalışmada Ebû Hanîfe ile Ca‘fer-i Sâdık arasındaki hoca-talebe ilişkisi netleştirilmeye (...) çalışılmıştır. Bu sebeple öncelikle kısaca her iki imamın hayatı ele alınarak onların ilmî birikimi tespit edilmiştir. Akabinde Ebû Hanîfe ile Ca‘fer’in ne zaman ve ne kadar süre birlikte oldukları, Ebû Hanîfe’nin Ehl-i beyt’e yönelik tutumunun Ca‘fer’den ilim almasında ne gibi bir etkisinin bulunduğu ve çeşitli ilim dallarında Ebû Hanîfe- Ca‘fer ilişkisi tespit edilmeye çalışılmıştır. (shrink)

İslam felsefesinin tartışmasız en önemli filozoflarından biri olan İbn Sina, dönemindeki yoğun Aristoteles etkisine karşılık, Aristoteles’in sisteminden bağımsız yeni bir zaman sistemi kurmuştur. Şifa isimli kitabında bu sistemi sunan İbn Sina, aynı zamanda hareket, hız, mekansal büyüklük gibi belli kavramların yanında bölünebilir bir büyüklük olan ve zorunlu bir şekilde öncelik ve sonralığa sahip olan bir kapasite olarak tanımladığı imkana dayalı bir zamanın gerçekliği savunusu yapmakla birlikte bu kavramların anlam kazanabilmesi için zaman kavramına ihtiyacımız olduğunu göstermiştir.Zamanın gerçekliği sorusu, güncel felsefenin aktörlerinden (...) de büyük dikkat çekmiştir. Bu isimlerden biri olan J. Ellis McTaggart, hayli tartışmalı olmasının yanısıra etkili de olan “Zamanın Gerçekdışılığı” başlıklı makalesinde zamanın bir illüzyondan ibaret olduğunu tartışmıştır. McTaggart, gerek bu makalede gerekse Varoluşun Doğası isimli kitabında zamanın gerçek olmadığını ve zamana dair verdiğimiz her tanımın döngüsel, çelişkili veya yetersiz olduğunu savunmuştur. McTaggart, bu ispatını zamandaki anların birbirine nispetle iki farklı şekilde sınıflandırılabileceği varsayımı üzerine kurgulamıştır. Buna göre A serisi, zamandaki anları geçmiş, şu an ve gelecek şeklinde konumlandırırken B serisi, öncelik ve sonralık ilişkisi ile konumlandırmaktadır. Bu çalışma, İbn Sina’nın sunduğu zaman sisteminin McTaggart’ın B serisi ile uyumlu olup olmadığı sorusunu cevaplamayı amaçlamaktadır.Anahtar kelimeler: İbn Sina, Zaman, Mekansal Büyüklük, İmkan, Hareket, McTaggart, B serisi. (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)

Bu makalede, müşriklerle sosyal ilişkinin mahiyetine dair Müslüman düşünce geleneğinde ortaya konulan literatür genel hatlarıyla ele alınmaktadır. Söz konusu literatür, “müşrikler bu yıldan sonra Mescid-i Harâm’a yaklaşmasınlar” (Tevbe 9/28) ayeti temelinde şekillenmiştir. Bu bağlamda âlimler şirkin mahiyeti, Mescid-i Harâm bölgesinin sınırları ile bu bölgeye yaklaşmamayı ifade eden fiilin içeriği ve özellikle de ayetteki uyarının Hac ibadeti ile sınırlı/kayıtlı olup olmadığı gibi hususları tartışma konusu yapmışlardır. Bu ayet çerçevesinde ortaya konulan literatürde iki görüşün ön plana çıktığı görülmektedir. Bunlardan ilki, Mescid-i Harâm (...) ifadesiyle kastedilen mananın tüm mescitleri kapsayacağı düşüncesinden hareketle “yaklaşmama” yasağın sınırlarını genişletirken diğer görüş, maslahatçı bir yaklaşımla söz konusu bölgenin Kâbe ve çevresiyle sınırlı olduğu iddiasına dayanmaktadır. Bu bağlamda ilk görüşte, harem bölgesine müşriklerin hiçbir surette giremeyeceği savunulurken ikinci görüşte, müşriklerin cahiliye döneminde yaptıkları tarzda hac ve umre ibadeti yapmak amacıyla söz konusu bölgeye giremeyecekleri ancak ticaret, seyahat vb. farklı maksatlarla gelebilecekleri vurgulamaktadır. Makalede konu H. VII. yüzyıla kadar kaleme alınan rivayet, dirayet, ahkâm ve Şiî tefsirler temelinde irdelenmiştir. Bu bağlamda Mukātil b. Süleymân, İmâm Şâfiî, Cassâs, Ebû Bekir İbnü’l-Arabî ve Kurtubî’nin kaleme aldığı ahkâm tefsirleri; Taberî, İbn Ebî Hâtim, Ebû İshak es-Sa‘lebî ve İbn Kesîr’in yazdığı rivayet tefsirleri; Mâtürîdî, Zemahşerî, Fahreddin er-Râzî, Beyzâvî ve Ebu’l- Berakât en-Nesefî’nin dirayet tefsirleri ile Şiî müfessirler Kummî, Ayyâşî, Ebû Ca‘fer et-Tûsîve Tabersî’nin tefsirleri incelenmiştir. Konunun bahsi geçen tefsirler temelinde ele alınmasındaki amaç ayetin anlaşılmasına bağlı olarak ortaya konulan fıkhî hükümleri ve gerekçelerini tespit ederek mukayese yapmaktır. Zira Tevbe suresi 28. ayetin anlaşılmasında, dini anlama tarzları bakımından Ashâbu’l-Hadis ve Ashâbu’r-Rey olarak nitelenen âlimlerin görüşlerinin belirleyici olduğu görülmektedir. Konu bağlamında Şiî tefsirlerin incelenmesindeki amaç ise söz konusu literatürde Tevbe suresi 28. ayetin ele alınmasına ilişkin bakış açısının Ashabu’l Hâdis’e mi Ashabu’r-Rey’e mi yakın olduğunu tespite yöneliktir. İncelenen tefsirlerde ilk görüşün İmâm Mâlik ve İmam Şâfiî’ye ait olduğu belirtilirken ikinci görüş Ebû Hanîfe’ye nispet edilmiştir. İmâm Mâlik ve İmam Şâfiî’ye ait olan görüş genel kabul görürken Ebû Hanîfe ve Mâtürîdî’nin benimsediği, Hanefî-Mâtürîdî âlimler tarafından kabul gören ikinci görüş, tarihsel süreçte şaz olarak nitelendirilmiş ve dikkate alınmamıştır. Makalede, H.7. yüzyıl’a kadar yazılan rivayet, dirayet, ahkâm ve Şiî tefsirleri özelinde bu görüşlerin temel mantığı, ortaya çıkış süreçleri ve bu çerçevede üretilen fıkhî hükümler analitik bir bakış açısıyla irdelenmeye çalışılmıştır. Makalede sonuç olarak Ashabu’l-Hadis’e mensup âlimlerden İmâm Mâlik ve İmâm Şâfiî’nin konuyu sadece müşrikleri değil tüm gayr-i müslimleri içerecek şekilde ele aldıkları ve bu gruplarla kurulacak sosyal, ekonomik ve siyasi ilişkinin mahiyeti hakkında fıhkî hükümler koydukları görülmektedir. Bu hükümlerle, Müslüman düşünce geleneğinde gayr-i Müslimlerin özellikle sosyo-kültürel açıdan ötekileştirilmeleri meşrulaştırılmıştır. Bu bakış açısı Müslümanların birlikte yaşama kültürüne katkı sağlamalarını engellediği gibi insana saygıyı temel alan Kur’an’ın bakış açısı ile de çelişmektedir. Bu bağlamda Ashabu’r-Rey’in önemli temsilcilerinden biri olan Ebu Hanîfe’nin yasaklama emrini cahiliye döneminde yapılan hac fiili ile sınırlaması konuya ilişkin bakış açısında ciddi farklılıklara imkân tanımaktadır. Ebû Hanîfe’nin bu anlama biçimi, gayr-ı Müslimlere ilişkin olumsuz bir uygulamaya imkân vermediği gibi takipçisi Mâtürîdî tarafından geliştirilerek ahlakî bir boyutta ela alınmıştır. Süreç içerisinde söz konusu anlama biçimi, aynı düşünce geleneğine mensup olan Cassâs ve Ebû’l-Berekât en-Nesefî tarafından devam ettirilerek geliştirilmiştir. (shrink)

Ibn al-Qāṣṣ (d. 335/946), one of the representatives of the Shāfiʿī school of law in the 4th/10th century, compiled a short treatise of extraordinary nature: Fawāʾid Ḥadīth Abī ʿUmeyr. In this work, he deduces sixty different wajhs (verdicts, comments) from a ḥadīth reporting the Prophet’s interest and affection to a child known as Abū ʿUmayr and his family during a visit he paid after Abū ʿUmayr’s birdie died by jokingly telling him in rhyme, “yā Abā ʿUmayr, mā faʿala al-nughayr” (O (...) Abū ʿUmayr, what happened to the nughayr?) This study deals with the primary goal of the composition of the Fawāʾid, its content, and structural qualities as well as the author’s approach in deducing verdicts. As one of the aṣḥāb al-wujūh, the author’s legal/madhhab notion and the literalist and external perspective he developed regarding the interpretation of texts, seems to have directly affected his deductive reasoning and determined his approach. This concise work not only sheds light over certain aspects of the relationship between ḥadīth and fiqh at the time of Ibn al-Qāṣṣ, but also exemplifies to what extent methodological tendencies and personal factors might affect the process of deriving verdicts from ḥadīth and could push the limits in that regard. Summary: Ibn al-Qāṣṣ (d. 335/946), one of the representatives of the Shāfiʿī school of law in the 4th/10th century, compiled a short treatise of extraordinary nature: Fawāʾid Ḥadīth Abī ʿUmeyr. In this work, he deduces sixty different wajhs (verdicts, comments) from a ḥadīth reporting the Prophet’s interest and affection to a child known as Abū ʿUmayr and his family during a visit he paid after Abū ʿUmayr’s birdie died by jokingly telling him in rhyme, “yā Abā ʿUmayr, mā faʿala al-nughayr” (O Abū ʿUmayr, what happened to the nughayr?) The report of Abū ʿUmayr, which is in the focus of the work, is, in essence, reflects a singular and special aspect of the close relationship between the Prophet and Anas b. Malik’s family. Nevertheless, it is surprising that many ḥadīth scholars from the early times, not only Ibn al-Qāṣṣ, have chosen this ḥadīth as an example in which they can demonstrate their skill in the field of fiqh al- ḥadīth. Fawāʾid seems to be a work in which the juridical point of view centered and resembles the classical fiqh commentaries in a sense. In the work, different variants of the Abū ʿUmayr report were brought together and evaluated within the framework of the text and textual possibilities as possible. The author also analyzed some words in the narrative text for being a base for a verdict, referred to Qurʾānic verses, prophetic ḥadīths, reports, and legal opinions, tried to solve the disputes and the conflicts among legal evidences in various ways, and stated occasionally his personal opinions. Fawāʾid reflects the author’s rich accumulation of legal knowledge, while at the same time gives an idea about his knowledge of ḥadīth and his approach to the ḥadīth. Considering what the author did and wanted to do, it is understood that he deals with ḥadīth as well as fiqh, and he has a certain level of relationship not only with fuqahāʾ (muslim jurisprudents), but also with ḥadīth scholars. Ibn al-Qāṣṣ’s interest in fiqh and ḥadīth must have lead him to take initiative to eliminate the tension between the ahl al-ḥadīth of Shāfiʿī school of law who focused on transmitting ḥadīths and the fuqahāʾ of Shāfiʿī school of law who care about the fiqh perspective, in that period of time. It can also be said that he tried to establish a reconciliation between the ahl al-ḥadīth (the traditionists) and the ahl al-raʾy (the rationalists) and bring the parties together in the middle way. The work seems to have been written as a result of such considerations. As Ibn al-Qāṣṣ was considered as one of the aṣḥāb al-wujūh, that is, as a jurist who was bound of a madhhab Imām for legal reasoning, he seems to have followed the methodology of Shāfiʿī school of law for deriving legal solutions from the sources. Legal notion of the author and his literalist and textualist perspective with regards to the interpretation of texts, seems to have directly affected his way of reasoning from the ḥadīth and determined his approach. This approach, as mentioned in many contemporary studies, is not sufficient and appropriate for the evaluation of ḥadīth texts, which were transmitted by meaning, not word-by-word, and shaped by the transmitter’s dispositions. It is also difficult to say that Ibn al-Qāṣṣ sufficiently considered the physical, historical, social, and cultural context surrounding the text as well as other extra-textual elements, which complete the meaning. This situation implies that some of the wajhs recorded in the work are the author’s attempt to find a base and evidence for his ideas, which he already had, rather than deductions drawn from the ḥadīth. It makes the scientific quality and accuracy of his efforts controversial. The verdicts presented in the work, as wajh and fāʾida are predominantly jurisprudential and compatible with the opinions of the Shāfiʿī School of law, however, there are also controversial ones, and the author pointed to them without revealing his own tendency. It does not seem that these wajhs in the work are systematically ranked. In this vein, similar wajhs are sometimes in succession, sometimes scattered, and some wajhs are repetitive. The degree of accuracy, clarity and quality of some wajhs also seem arguable. Zayn al-Dīn al-ʿIrāqī (d. 806/1404), who made a general evaluation of these wajhs, said that: “Some of the (meanings of the) wajhs in the work are apparent, some of them are hidden and some are strained.” The work’s editor drew attention in the footnotes to the wajhs, which might be subject to objection. The early ḥadīth scholars, who reported this ḥadīth in their compilations, deduced six or seven judgments from the ḥadīth under the headings (bāb) specified for this ḥadīth. This appears quite modest in comparison to the treatise of Ibn al-Qāṣṣ. The given ḥadīth has also taken its place in the fiqh literature, and it has been questioned in the context of the issue of Madīna’s being of ḥarām region (holy land) and hunting ban in this region. In conclusion, Ibn al-Qāṣṣ’s treatise of Fawāʾid Ḥadīth Abī ʿUmayr, is a short but worthy example of the ḥadīth literature in terms of its purpose and interesting content. This work can be considered as a study that exemplifies how the purpose of writing can be determinative on the structure of a work, and in particular to what extent methodological tendencies and personal factors might affect the process of deriving verdicts from ḥadīth and could push the limits in that regard. The author’s universe of meaning, which focused on the apparent meaning and to draw as many judgments as possible from the text, should be related to his personal intention and purpose as well as to the fiqh perspective of his time. Due to the textual approach and the method for drawing inferences, which are observed in the work, the tool-purpose relationship between the text and the judgment sometimes remains obscure and sometimes becomes unimportant. In some respects, this work is a striking example of the consequences of ignoring the context and historical reality surrounding texts for specific purposes. (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)

The debate on the Prophet’s parents’ (abawayn al-Rasūl) religious status and their position in the hereafter goes back to several narrations from the Prophet himself. This subject, which can principally be considered part of the problem of the religious status of ahl al-fatrah, seems to be raised by the Shīʿah as an issue of creed in line with their understanding of imamate. Abū Ḥanīfah’s (d. 150/767) statement in his al-Fiqh al-akbar that “Prophet’s parents passed away on kufr/jāhiliyyah” is seen as (...) a Sunnī reaction to this earlier position and led to a new area of discussion shaping the approach of several scholars to the issue. The earliest treatises dedicated to this issue are attributed to al-Ghazzālī (d. 505/1111) and Abū Bakr Ibn al-ʿArabī (d. 543/1148), but these works did not survive to this day. The earliest examples available today are the six epistles that al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505) penned. Literature on the Prophet’s parents flourished during the Ottoman times after the introduction of al-Fiqh al-akbar to the Ottoman scholarship. Starting with the first examples that belong to Ibrāhīm al-Ḥalabī (d. 956/1549), Ibn al-Khaṭīb al-Amāsī (d. 940/1534), and Kamālpashazādah (d. 940/1534), the treatises in question were mostly written in Arabic in the Ottoman scholarly milieu. Consequently, it seems that Rawḍat al-ṣafā fī wāliday al-Muṣṭafá is the first treatise dedicated to the issue in Ottoman Turkish. In the library catalogue records, some bio-bibliographical sources, and consequently in some modern studies on the issue of abawayn al-Rasūl, Rawḍat al-ṣafā wrongly attributed to a certain Wajdī Aḥmad Efendī (in Turkish: Vecdî Ahmed Efendi). This is probably due to the author’s presentation of himself in the introduction as just “Wajdī,” without making further description. Besides the data in Bursalı Meḥmed Ṭāhir’s Osmanlı Müʾellifleri, no more information could be provided about the identity of Wajdī Aḥmad Efendī who is shown as the author of the treatise. Intra-textual signs such as the author’s words about the reason and process of writing the work, the way he handled the subject and the evidence he put forward indicate that the treatise belongs to Nūḥ ibn Muṣṭafá al-Qūnawī (d. 1070/1660). Indeed, it overlaps with the fact that Nūḥ ibn Muṣṭafá presented himself as Wajdī in many of his other works. Seemingly the fact that Nūḥ ibn Muṣṭafá defends the view that the parents of the Prophet are among the people of salvation (ahl al-najāh), and while doing this, he was mainly based on the view that they were resurrected after death and that their souls are recaptured after they believed in the Prophet, stem from various reasons such as the view that attributed to Abū Ḥanīfah, Nūḥ’s Sufi identity to the extent that he was initiated to the Khalwatiyyah/Gulshaniyyah along with the ever-growing Sufi influences and the consequent idea of nūr-i Muḥammadī in the public sphere, the authority of the narrations attributed to the Prophet, and perception about the Prophet Muḥammed in the public imagination. (shrink)

İbn Hacer’in Nuhbetü’l-Fiker ’i ve onun şerhi olan Nüzhetü’n-Nazar ’ının, kendisinden sonra yazılan hadis usûlü eserlerine kaynaklık etmesi ve onları etkilemesi açısından usûl tarihinde önemli bir yeri vardır. Nitekim mezkûr eserler üzerine yapılan şerh ve hâşiye çalışmalarının çokluğu bu önemi ortaya koymaktadır. Fıkıh ve hadis başta olmak üzere çeşitli ilim dallarında 100’ün üzerinde eser kaleme alan ve aynı zamanda İbn Hacer’in de talebelerinden olan Kasım b. Kutluboğa da bahsedilen eser üzerine çalışma yapan âlimlerden biridir. İbn Kutluboğa, hocası İbn Hacer’i birçok (...) yönden eleştirmiş ve çeşitli katkılarda bulunmuştur. Bu makalede İbn Kutluboğa’nın Nüzhetü’n-Nazar üzerine yazdığı Hâşiyetü İbn Kutluboğa adlı eserindeki itirazlar bağlamında kısaca red/itiraz kültüründen bahsedilerek örnekler ortaya konulacak ve mezkûr itirazlar esere hâşiye yazan ilgili bazı âlimlerin görüşleri çerçevesinde değerlendirilecektir. Ele alınan itirazlardan da anlaşılacağı üzere İbn Kutluboğa’nın polemik türü ve muhatabını ilzam edici itirazlarının neredeyse olmadığı ve yönelttiği kimi eleştirilerinde hadis usûlünde bilinen kurallardan farklı görüşler ortaya koyduğu tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca İbn Kutluboğa’nın öne sürdüğü her itirazında isabetli yorumlar ortaya koymadığını da söylemek mümkündür. (shrink)

This research aims, first of all, to establish that Abû Hanîfa's (d. 150/767) positive view on the issue of performing wudû’ with nabîdh of date is correct, and then to reveal Abû Hanîfa's dalîls on this subject. The issue of wudû’ with nabîdh of date is controversial among early Hanafî jurists, and the jurist who expressed a positive opinion on this issue is Abû Hanîfa, the founding imam of the madhhab. The opinion that wudû’ can be performed with nabîdh of (...) date is the strong opinion of Abû Hanîfa mentioned in zâhir al-riwâya. The riwâya reported by Nûh bin Abi Maryam (d. 173/789) stating that Abû Hanîfa reneged on this view is not strong enough to oppose the view in zâhir al-riwâya. For this reason, it is not a correct approach to ignore the view in zâhir al-riwâya based on this riwâya. As a matter of fact, Abû Hanîfa's view of zâhir al-riwâya is conveyed in many of the classical Hanafî texts such as Mukhtasar al-Karkhi and Mukhtasar al-Tahâwî. Although the majority of Hanafî jurists preferred the view of Abû Yûsuf (d. 182/798), a significant group of Hanafî jurists such as Jassâs (d. 370/981), Kâshânî (d. 587/1191) and ‘Aynî (d. 855/1451) He supports Abû Hanîfa's view. Therefore, there are two views on the issue in Hanafî fıqh. In the literature, the dalîls of Abû Hanîfa's view is not available as a whole in a single source, but is scattered in many Hanafî fiqh sources. The Hanafî jurist Jassâs is the one who deals with the mentioned dalîls in the most comprehensive way in his many works. For this reason, the subject was examined by focusing on Jassâs's dalîls. Jassâs' istidlâls regarding the issue of wudû’ with nabîdh of date also mean defending Abû Hanîfa against other Hanafî jurists such as Abu Yusuf and Imâm Muhammad (d. 189/805). Jassâs' insistent attitude on this issue and his passionate counter-answers prove how much he deserves the title of defense. For the relevant determination, Hanafî fiqh classics are centered. Because the jurists who argue that wudû’ can be made with the nabîdh of date are among the Hanafî jurists. Then, the positive and negative approaches of the jurists about the nabîdh of date are given. Starting from the early Hanafî jurists, the views of the sahâbîs, the tâbi'ûn and many later jurists on the subject are included. The approach of the four madhhabs of fiqh is also examined in this section. Then, the istidlâls of Jassâs, which is the main subject of the research, were emphasized. It is seen that Jassâs' istidlâls have three main pillars: âya, hadîth and idjma. As a âya, the 6th âya of the sûra of Mâida, as a hadîth, the hadîth of ‘Abd Allâh bin Mas'ûd (r.a.) and as a idjma, the the sahâbîs idjma tries to showas references. The most controversial dalîl is undoubtedly the hadiths of Ibn Mas'ud (r.a.). Jassâs opposes those who claim that the hadîth is da‘îf and discusses the hadîth with its detailed tarîks and argues that this hadîth is sahîh. (shrink)

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)

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)

In order for the Islamic message to be delivered to people, The Prophet (pbuh) and his companions have made great efforts. A great part of the companions (ashab) were not in the places where they lived after death of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). They have made enormous sacrifices by abandoning their homeland in order to bring Islam to different lands/intercounty. Especially the second Khalif Omer period has passed with the struggles against the two great states of the time, Sasani and (...) Byzantine. In this period, Muslims conquered many places such as Palestine, Egypt, Damascus, Hama, Aleppo, Antakya, Rakka and Urfa. Thus, the Islamic armies came to Anatolia. One of the companion who participated in the activities of conquest actively is Iyâz b. Ghanm who died in 20/641. Iyâz b. Ghanm who was brought to the governor of al-Cezîrah by Khalif Omer has conquered many places such as Nusaybin, Dârâ, Sincar, Meyyâfarikîn (Silvan) and Mardin and he has been conducive in meeting the region with Islam. Thus, in a time that could be counted as short as seven years from the death of the Prophet, the Islamic message reached remote geographies. The aim of this study is to give information about Iyâz b. Ghanm, who was at the head of the army that conquered the al-Jazeera region and to determine whether there are narrations that are personally transmitted from him or that it is included in isnad. As can be seen when the narrative literature is researched, some hadiths narrated by Iyâz b. Ghanm are in the following hadith sources: Sahîh-Bukhârî and Ibn Hibbân; Şuabu’l-Îmân and Sunan al-Kubrâ-Beyhakî; Musned-Ebû Ya’lâ and Ahmed b. Hanbel; al-Mu’cam al-Kebîr-Taberânî. Determination of these narratives will reveal the contribution of the Islamic commander, who has a significant place in the memory of the inhabitants of al-Jazeera region and the adjacent surroundings, to the hadith. (shrink)

Kelâm tarihi göz önüne alındığında belli parametrelere göre farklı dönemlere ayrıldığı görülmektedir. Bunlardan en çok bilinen dönemlendirmeye göre Cüveynî ile başlayan kelâmın felsefileşme evresi Gazzâlî ile ivme kazanmış ve Fahreddîn er-Râzî ile kemale ermiştir. Felsefi dönem kelâm âlimlerinden birisi de Ebü’s-Senâ el-İsfahânî’dir. Kelâmın yönteminin kusursuzlaşması ve delillerinin kesinliğinin artması noktasında kaleme aldığı eserleriyle bu alana yaptığı katkı göz ardı edilemeyecek durumdadır. Kelâmın felsefileşmesiyle beraber içerik ve yöntem olarak değişen konulardan biri olan tenzîhî sıfatlar meselesinde İsfahânî’nin felsefi yöntemi kullandığı bariz bir (...) şekilde anlaşılmaktadır. Bu bağlamda o, tenzîhî sıfatları felsefi bir ifade olan “zorunlu varlık” kavramı üzerinden ispat etmeye çalışmaktadır. Ayrıca İbn Sînâcı gelenekten de haberdar olan İsfahânî, “Allah’ın zâtının aklî lezzetlerle vasıflanabileceği” şeklindeki görüşüyle bu hususta belli ölçüde de olsa kelâmcıların bakış açısını terk edip filozofların görüşünü benimsediği görülmektedir. Bu makalede İsfahânî’nin konu hakkındaki görüşleri ve Fahreddîn er-Râzî özelinde kelâmcılara itirazları değerlendirilecektir. (shrink)

Müksirûndan biri olan Abdullâh b. Abbâs 1660 hadis nakletmiş ve İslâmi ilimlerin farklı birçok alanlarıyla birlikte hadis ilmiyle temâyüz etmiştir. Kur’ân’daki incelikleri kavrayıp yorumlaması için Rasûlullah’ın özel duasına mazhar olan Abdullâh b. Abbâs, fetvaları oldukça meşhur fakih bir sahâbîdir. Rasûlullah’ın sünnetini anlamaya yönelik çabaları sahâbenin gözlemine bağlı olarak farklılık arz etmektedir. Ayrıca onların her birinin hadisleri anlayış ve kavrayışları aynı seviyede değildi. Bundan dolayı rivâyetler hususunda farklı anlayışlar, yorumlamalar, unutmalar ve yapılan hatalar sebebiyle sahâbe birbirini tenkit etmiştir. Büyük bir ilmi (...) birikime sahip olan İbn Abbâs sahâbeden mirasa dair nakledilen bazı rivâyetleri, uygulama ve fetvaları düzeltmiş ve onları tenkit etmiştir. İbn Abbâs’ın hayatına ve hadis, tefsir ve fıkıh ilmindeki konumuna dair çalışmalar yapılmıştır. Ancak onun ferâiz hususundaki istidrâkleri hadis ilmi açısından incelenmemiştir. Araştırmamızda onun hadis ilmi çerçevesinde Rasûlullah’ın sözlerinin ve uygulamasının doğru anlaşılması için mirasa dair yaptığı istidrâkleri ele alınmıştır. Abdullāh Ibn Abbās is one of the companions well known for his verdicts in the area of the Islamic law of inheritance and the abundance of his verdicts in jurisprudence. In this regard, the inheritance sections of the jurisprudence books often include Ibn Abbās's verdicts and applications. He approached the matters regarding jurisprudence from a different perspective, ruled differently from the companions, and provided corrections mainly in terms of the science of inheritance regarding the sayings narrated by the companions, applications and verdicts of the companions. In this regard, Ibn Abbās considered the jurisprudential aspects of the sayings and applications of Prophet Muhammad and made a ruling by interpreting the same narration by his wide understanding and knowledge and considering the meaning of the sayings. Ibn Abbās, who made different interpretations and evaluations in his corrections regarding the law of inheritance, objected to Umar Ibn Al-Khattab and Uthman Ibn Affan, criticized and corrected the narrations of Zayd Ibn Thabit. Ibn Abbās, who interpreted the matters regarding inheritance according to the principles of the Qur'ān, made rulings according to the apparent meanings of the related verses of the Qur'ān. (shrink)

Mamluks reigned in Egypt a long time is an era of Kipchak Turks that have influence management, and Kipchak Turks has been influential in a period in the administration there. During this period, that Turkish rulers do not know Arabic language well, Turkish language is spoken in the palace and also idea of being closer to Turkish manager screated an interest in learning. One of the famous scholars realizing that interest is Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī. Abū Ḥayyān by learning Turkish language (...) especially from Fakhr al-dīn Divrigi and analysing written previously works, wrote Kitāb al-Idrāk li-lisān al-Atrāk. This book has consisted of introduction, vocabulary and grammar section. We also aimed in our study to examine Kitāb al-Idrāk in terms of content and than in terms of lexicography of the linguistic branch. -/- SUMMARY Mamluks reigned in Egypt a long time and in its reign Kipchak Turks had influence in management. Because of the Turkish rulers who have military background did not know Arabic language well, Turkish language was spoken in the palace and also idea of being closer of scholars and notable people to Turkish rulers got brought an interest in learning Turkish. One of the famous scholars realizing that interest is Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī (d. 745/ 1344). The true name of Abū Ḥayyān is Muḥammed b. Yūsuf b. Ali b. Ḥayyān al-Tawḥīdī and he is an Andalusian linguist and exegete. Abū Ḥayyān who came from a Berber family born in the Matahsharesh village of Granada in 654/1256 and died in Cairo in 28th time 745 (11 July 1344). There is not much information about his family in the sources, but it is mentioned that he has a daughter whose name is Nada, a son named Hayyân in his name, and some grandchildren which are named Muḥammad and Ummu Ḥayyān. Abū Ḥayyān became a famous as Ethīr al-dīn and at the same time, he is also known as Naḥvī, Ghirnātī (Granadian), Ceyyānī, and Nafzī. He took lessons in Granada from great scholars such as Abd al-ḥaķ b. Ali al-Anṣarī, Abū Ḥasan al-Ubbezī, Abū Cafer Aḥmed b. Ibrahīm b. Zubair, Ibn Abū al-Ahvas and became a proficient scholar and teacher in matters such as morphology, syntax, language, commentary, hadith, methodology of Fiqh and Kalām. He wrote about 18 works in different sciences and if we mention some of that are al-Baḥr al-muhīt, al-Nahr al-mād, Tuhfat al-arīb bimā fī al-Qur'ān min al-gharīb and some of his works have reached to our time and some of those did not. Abū Ḥayyān left Andalus for various reasons and visited many centers of science and eventually continued his scientific activities in Cairo. Abū Hayyān, who is a great interest in learning languages, has learned Turkish language with the other popular languages ​​such as Persian, Amharic and Himyarite language and written books about these languages. His mainly works about Turkish language are the Kitāb al-Idrāk li-lisān al-Atrāk, Zehv al-mulk fi naḥv al-Turk, al-Af'al fi lisān al-Turk and al-Durret al-mudiyye fi lughat al-Turkiyye. These works did not reach to our days except Kitāb al-Idrak. Kitāb al-Idrāk consists of three sections, namely introduction, dictionary which includes 2200 words, and grammar that is composed of morphology and syntax and this book which is known as al-Idrāk is written in the Turkish which is spoken in XIV-XVI century tongue and named as Middle Turkish Period-Mamluk Kipchak Turkish. The first chapter begins with basmala and continues with detailed his genealogy, personal record, praise to Allah and salawat and salaam to Prophet Muhammad. After this introduction, it is explained the intention of writing this work. The second chapter is a dictionary which the words are explained in alphabetical order. Although Abū Ḥayyān speaks about 23 letters in the Kipchak alphabet, he does not explain the words related to all, but examines 19 items. In this dictionary, it does not take part some letters, that is letters sā, zāl, zā (letters of lips which is written in English th); letters dâd, ayn, fa (letters of throat) which Arabs use. In the third chapter, there is a part of the tasrif (knowledge of morphology) which is generally called knowledge of morphology today. In this section, it is dealt with about the types of words namely, name of diminutive, name of belonging name, plural, agent name, passive name, exaggerated factor name, infinitive, name indicating the location, name of device, arbitrary name, and idâd (which adds are derivation of noun from name like lık, lik at the end of the word) and then it comes to the end with shadda. Section of syntax which is called by the author as consisted of compound and is prepared according to systematic of Arabic grammar begins with the sentence structure in Kipchak language. After that it continues with definite-ambiguous names, verb (orders, past, imperfect verbs), subject-predicate in nominal sentence, nevāsiḫ (additional actions helped change the meaning of the noun phrase), Arabic leyte which express by the actual wish mold and the like, such as two mef'ūl area of ​​the heart of verbs in Arabic told (I think) were deaf ( Turkmen thinks he), acts like it yet scientists (verb phrase in), acts offender (verb-subject), the abutment of the verb nefiy prepositions, prepositions, the nehiy (ban), passive verbs and naib-i fail (so-called subject); other elements of the sentence, called the act müteallakat are: cognate accusativ, direct object, time period (time complement), the envelope space (located complement), state (envelope), causative object, the exception, the specification, conflict of laws, the annexation, the oat, the dependencies: adjective, conjunction, confirm, the apposition; conditional structure. After these, he mentions to letters of meanings (huruf al-maani), and concludes this chapter with information about the date, place, and name of the author of the book. Abū Hayyān used induction method in the book. Since he gave the forms of the words in double, then the triple, quadruple, quintet and other forms. He tried to teach the pronunciation of words by explaining the etymology of word sand the changes of the voices. He examined the words which are synonyms/ contrasted, synonym voice, singular/plural, and words that are passed by foreign languages into Turkish dialects then they are turned into Turkish word structure; brought out witnesses from proverbs and poetries. As a result, in this work, which consists of dictionary and grammar sections, it can be said that it is used predominantly in linguistic information - translation method . (shrink)

İslam hukuku tarihine baktığımızda fıkıh usûlünün bir süreç içerisinde geliştiğini söylemek mümkündür. Bu süreç içerisinde, mezhep imamları de-diğimiz müçtehitler başta olmak üzere birçok âlimin, fıkıh usûlü ilminin yapısını oluşturan katkılarından bahsedilebilir. Örneğin İmam Ebû Hanîfe’nin istihsana başvurması, İmam Mâlik’in amel-i ehli Medine ile amel etmesi ve İmam Şafiî’nin hem Ehl-i rey hem de Ehl-i hadisin fıkhını mezcederek elde ettiği formasyonla “er-Risâle” adlı eserinde bir usûl ortaya koyması fıkıh usûlü ilminin yapısını oluşturan katkıların başında gelmektedir. Bu katkıların yanında özellikle mezheplerin kurumsallaştığı (...) dönem ve sonrasında Gazalî, İbn Teymiyye, öğrencisi İbn Kayyım ve Şâtıbî gibi âlimlerin, fıkıh usulüne dinamizm kazandırmak adına söz konusu ilme yönelik birtakım yenileme çabaları ortaya koydukları bilinmektedir. Modern dönemde ise fıkıh usûlünü yenileme çabalarının klasik döneme göre daha net ve yaygın olduğu görülmektedir. Bu dönemde fıkıh usulüne yönelik yenileme çabalarını iki merhalede değerlendirmek mümkündür. Bu merhalelerin birincisi, fıkıh usûlünü yenilemeye çağrı merhalesi, ikincisi ise fıkıh usûlünü yenilemenin amelî merhalesidir. İkinci merhalede âlimlerin dinî, siyasî, sosyal ve felsefî eğilimlerine bağlı olarak kendi içinde de farklı tezler içeren “fıkhî ve usûlî yaklaşım” ve “fikrî ve felsefî yaklaşım” olmak üzere iki temel yaklaşımdan bahsedilebilir. Bu çalışmada kendi içinde de farklı eğilimlere sahip fikrî ve felsefî yaklaşımın fıkıh usûlünü yenilemeye dair görüşlerini, Fazlurrahman,, Hasan Turabî ve Muhammed Müctehid Şebusterî örnekliğinde sunmaya çalıştık. (shrink)

Bu araştırma hicri birinci asrın ilk yarısında varlık gösteren Basra’nın, fıkhıyla meşhur bazı sahâbîlere ev sahipliği yapmasına rağmen hadis ve fıkıh ilimlerinde, aynı dönemde öne çıkan Kûfe’den geri kalmasının muhtemel sebeplerine odaklanmaktadır. Söz konusu sahâbe arasında öne çıkanlar, Basra’da on iki sene ikamet etmiş olan Ebû Musa el-Eş’arî ve dört sene bulunan İbn Abbas’tır. Mezkûr iki sahâbenin fıkhî müktesabatlarının yanında çok sayıda hadis rivayetine sahip olduğu da bilinmektedir. Ancak buna rağmen her ikisinin de İbn Mes‘ûd’un, Kûfe’de yaptığı etkiyi gösterdikleri söylenemez. (...) Araştırmada, Basra’da meskûn bulunan sahâbeyle ilgili rivayetlerin tahlil ve değerlendirmesine dayalı bir yöntem takip edilmiş olup, özellikle sahâbe ile tâbiînin ilmî ilişkilerine yoğunlaşılmıştır. Bununla beraber coğrafya ve kuruluş bakımından benzerlik gösteren Kûfe şehrindeki sahâbenin ilmî etkisi ve tâbiîn neslinin faaliyetleri bakımından bir takım karşılaştırmalarda bulunulmaktadır. Makalenin, konu hakkında öngördüğü birinci ihtimal, söz konusu sahâbîlerin ordugâh şehrinde yaşamanın gereği olarak fetihlerle meşgul olmalarıdır. Bu sonuç ilk olarak Ebû Musa el-Eş’arî’nin sireti üzerine yapılan incelemelerde ortaya çıkmıştır. Söz konusu ilmî gecikmeye sebep olan ikinci ihtimalin ise bahsi geçen sahâbenin ilimlerini yaymak adına aktif davranmamaları olduğu söylenebilir. Bu durumda sahâbenin ilmî kişiliklerinin önemli bir rol oynadığı düşünülmektedir. Diğer bir ihtimal, Basra’daki tâbiîn neslinin, sahâbeden ilim alma hususunda sarfettikleri çabanın, Kûfelilere kıyasla daha az olmasıdır. Bahsi geçen durumda Basra’nın bedevî kabile yapısının önemli bir etkili olduğu düşünülmektedir. Konuyla ilgili zikredilebilecek son ihtimal ise ilmî yapının teşekkül etmeye başladığı süreçte vuku bulan fitne ve karışıklıklardır. Nitekim bir müddet valilik görevini yürüten İbn Abbas’ın, bu süre zarfında ilim ve eğitim faaliyetleriyle ilgilenemediği görülür. Özetle araştırmanın ulaştığı en önemli sonuç; Basra’nın hicri birinci asrın ilk yarısında, İbn Mes’ûd tarafından kurulan Kûfe’ye kıyasla hadis ve fıkıh ilimlerinde gelişmiş bir şehir olmadığıdır. (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)

The aim of this paper is to present the modes of action of venom as construed by Abū 'Uthmān 'Amr ibn Ba[hdotu]r al-Jā[hdotu]i[zdotu] in his Kitāb al-[Hdotu]ayawān. The toxicological information presented by Jā[hdotu]i[zdotu] is a synthesis of data available in his time, but Jā[hdotu]i[zdotu] complemented these early conceptions by his personal theoretical views. Jā[hdotu]i[zdotu]'s fundamental idea is that venoms act through their specific natures; this idea in a way is reminiscent of present-day theory of enzymes.

Assuming the crucial interest of Arabic material for the recovery of the textual tradition of some Greek texts of mechanics, the following article aims at presenting a partial survey of the Graeco-Arabic transmission in the field of mechanics. Based on new manuscript material dating from the ninth to the twelfth century, it investigates the textual and theoretical traditions of two writings ascribed to Aristotle and Euclid respectively and transmitted to Arabo-Islamic culture in fragmentary form. The reception and the impact of (...) the Peripatetic Mechanics are analyzed on the basis of texts edited by al-Khāzinī as well as by the comparative study of the proof of the law of the lever in three authors: Pseudo-Aristotle, Thābit ibn Qurra, and al-Isfizārī. The codicological analysis of the extant manuscripts of Maqāla fī ‘l-mīzān – a rather systematic treatise on the balance ascribed to Euclid – leads to the assumption that it is a Greek fragment edited in Arabic. This reconstruction of the Arabic tradition of Euclidean mechanics is further elaborated by an annotated synopsis of al-Isfizārī's systematic recension of the text. (shrink)

En la historia del pensamiento político musulmán ŷihād e iŷtihād siempre van unidos. Pero es en el pensamiento combativo donde más se manifiesta esa unión de un modo transcendente. El objetivo del presente trabajo es plantear el aspecto transhistórico del iŷtihād y del ŷihād, y con ello, exponer de manifiesto el siempre fracasado proceso de emancipación histórica y teológica del proyecto ŷihadístico basado sobre la mistificación de lo sustancialmente humano.

Few passages in Arabic philosophy have attracted as much attention as al-Ghazâlî's discussion of causality in the seventeenth discussion of Tahâfut al-Falsafa, along with the response of Ibn Rushd in his Tahâfut al-Tahâfut. A question often asked is to what extent al-Ghazâlî can be called an occasionalist; that is, whether he follows other Kalâm thinkers in restricting causal agency to God alone. What has not been thoroughly addressed in previous studies is a question which al-Ghazâlî and Ibn Rushd both see (...) as decisive in the seventeenth discussion: what theory of causality is sufficient to explain human knowledge? In this paper I show that al-Ghazâlî's and Ibn Rushd's theories of causality are closely related to their epistemologies. The difference between the two thinkers can be briefly summerized as follows. For Ibn Rushd, the paradigm of human knowledge is demonstrative science; for al-Ghazâlî, in contrast, the paradigm of human knowledge is revelation. Yet both remain committed to the possibility of Aristotelian science and its underlying principles. Thus, I suggest that al-Ghazâlî's stance in the seventeenth discussion sheds light on his critique of philosophy in the Tahâfut: namely, philosophy is not inherently incoherent, but simply limited in scope. I also briefly compare this position to that of Thomas Aquinas, in order to place the view in a more familiar context. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Der Islam Jahrgang: 94 Heft: 2 Seiten: 385-422.

The Prophetic hadith “pray with your leader,” which G. H. A. Juynboll argued originated with Shuʿba b. al-Ḥajjāj, urges Muslims to observe the prayer both at its appointed time and with an imam who delays its performance. An isnād analysis that factors in the different readings of the tradition could not reproduce Juynboll’s result and yielded significantly earlier dates of origin for the oldest two variants: the early 60s/680s and the early 80s/700s. It is argued that the tradition was invented (...) and distributed in reaction to activists who disapproved of Umayyad religious practice, especially the postponement of the ṣalāt. Two of the regime’s representatives in Iraq, the governors Ibn Ziyād and al-Ḥajjāj, were publicly accused of delaying the ṣalāt at the time the tradition was circulated. The tradition constituted thus an early articulation of the quietism that would later become a characteristic of Sunnism. (shrink)

Critical study of Sufism and Islamic philosophy with special reference of Ibn-i al-ʻArabī, 1165-1240.