El corpus de manuscritos árabes de los musulmanes de los territorios cristianos de la península ibérica medieval y temprano-moderna (mudéjares y moriscos) ha sido generalmente estudiado en menor medida que sus escritos en romance en caracteres latinos o árabes (aljamiado). Este artículo discute los nuevos datos en el códice misceláneo Árabe 1668 (El Escorial), copiado en 928 (=1522) probablemente por musulmanes en los territorios cristianos. MS Escorial Árabe 1668 no es totalmente desconocido por los estudiosos, pero han sido pocos los (...) intentos por investigar sus extraordinarios contenidos, que hasta ahora han permanecido en gran medida sin identificar. Destacable es la copia en árabe de la historia universal de ʿAbd al-Malik ibn Ḥabīb (s. IX), el Kitāb al-Taʾrīkh [La historia], considerada como el ejemplar más antiguo de literatura árabe en al-Andalus y que se preserva solamente en un único manuscrito árabe en Oxford. Además, MS Escorial Árabe 1668 contiene un número importante de narrativas adaptadas en aljamiado que ya se conocían, pero de las cuales aún no se habían identificado los originales árabes en circulación entre los musulmanes peninsulares. Estos materiales amplían los datos ya existentes de la producción tardía de manuscritos árabes de los musulmanes peninsulares y la preservación dentro de sus comunidades de originales provenientes de al-Andalus, el norte de África y el oriente islámico, algunos de los cuales contienen miniaturas. En el MS Escorial Árabe 1668 también encontramos un sermón árabe-Aljamiado (waʿẓ) que arroja luz sobre las reuniones de musulmanes que a veces se celebraron de forma clandestina debido a las crecientes restricciones impuestas a sus comunidades por los cristianos. (shrink)

In the era of the “Sunnī Revival” and the couple of centuries following, scholars engaged in a large historiographical project aimed at rehabilitating the reputation of the Umayyad dynasty and Syria’s role in the early Islamic narrative. One of Ibn Kathīr’s historiographical missions in his history Kitāb al-Bidāya wa-l-nihāya was specifically the defense of the Companions of the Prophet. As such, the narrative of ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib required some manipulation to answer Shīʿī narratives that cast some of the (...) most important Companions (especially those associated with the Umayyads and Syria) in a rebellious light. This article explores the literary-narrative strategies Ibn Kathīr employs to alter the narrative so as to counteract the implications of the pro-ʿAlīd versions of the story he found in his sources, especially al-Ṭabarī’s Taʾrīkh al-Rusul wa-l-mulūk. (shrink)

In a departure from the tradition of the Neoplatonic commentators of the Organon, the sequence of summaries in the insert two treatises between the Prior Analytics and the Posterior Analytics, namely the Resolution and the Sophistical Refutations. And even though the Tal30), while it. The contents of kitl and the different titles that the fahiktist), lead one to realize that it is an addition to the Prior Analytics offering a theory concerning the generation of the premisses of the syllogism, something (...) that may have appeared to Alfarabi as missing from Kits. (shrink)

Os povos da civilização islâmica clássica viram Platão (Aflātūn, Falāṭūn, Flātūn; raramente Aflāṭus ou Falāṭus) como um dos “sete sábios” ou “mestres de sabedoria” da Grécia, segundo Abū ’l-Fatḥ alShahrastānī (m. em. 1153) no Kitāb al-Milal wa’l-Nihal (“Livro das Seitas e Credos”), ou, conforme Alī ibn Yūsuf ibn al-Qifṭī (m. em 1248) no Kitāb Ikhbar al-‘Ulama‘ bi Akhbar al-Ḥukama’ (“Livro das Notícias dos Eruditos com os Relatos dos Sábios”, mais conhecido como Ta'rikh al-Ḥukama’, “História dos Sábios”), um dos (...) sete “pilares da sabedoria” junto com Tales, Anaxágoras, Anaxímenes, Empédocles, Pitágoras e Sócrates (ALON, 2006, p. 319). (shrink)

This study provides a detailed description of ways in which Muslim astronomers handled the Greek astronomical legacy, reassessed its cultural and philosophical implications in light of their religiously-inspired world view, and proposed to modify it.

Bu makalede, Erwin Schrödinger’in kuramsal biyolojiye önemli bir katkıda bulunan Yaşam Nedir? adlı kitabındaki fikirlerini ve bu kitabın da etkisiyle gelişen gen-merkezci yaklaşımı eleştirel olarak değerlendirmeyi amaçlıyorum. Schrödinger’in canlılık konusundaki entelektüel mirasının tartışmaya açılması moleküler biyolojinin yaşam bilimlerinde hakim hale gelişinin ve yaşamın organizasyona dayalı temelinin anlaşılması açısından özel bir önem taşıyor. Yayınlandığından beri biyoloji felsefesinde önemli tartışmaları beraberinde getiren Yaşam Nedir? kitabı, yaşamı termodinamiğin yasaları doğrultusunda ele alması açısından biyolojide organizasyonu vurgular. Bununla birlikte Schrödinger’in canlılığın kodu olarak tasavvur ettiği (...) aperiyodik kristal kavramı gen-merkezciliği destekleyen öncül fikirleri barındırmaktadır. Schrödinger, canlı varlıkların doğadaki entropi artışı eğilimiyle baş etmesi gereken nitelikte olması gerektiğini savundu ve bu görüş, canlılığa dair temel bir ilke olarak yaygın kabul gördü. Schrödinger’in yaşamın düzenliliğini mikro düzeyde aperiyodik kristal hipotezi ile açıklama girişimi ise nispeten daha tartışmalıdır. Makalede, bu tartışmalı konuları aydınlatmak amacıyla Schrödinger ve ardından gelişen gen-merkezci yaklaşımlara yönelik eleştirileri ele alıyorum. Ardından, gen-merkezciliğin sınırlılıklarına karşı yaşamın organizasyonunun organizma seviyesinde ele alınması değerlendiriyorum. Bu görüş, Kant’ın self-organizasyon kavramıyla tanımladığı, parça-bütün ilişkilerindeki karşılıklılığı temel alır. Son olarak, yaşamın organizasyonuna dair felsefî yaklaşımları ve entropinin buradaki rolünü tartışıyorum. Organizma düzeyinde ve organizma-çevre ilişkisindeki çoklu etmenlerin geri-besleme ilişkilerine dayanan ağ yapısı, gen-merkezciliğin indirgemeci yaklaşımına karşı kapsayıcı bir alternatif sunmaktadır. (shrink)

Khalīfa b. Khayyāt(d. 240/854-855) was an historian- muḥaddith in the ʿAbbāsid’s period. There are references in sources to his competence in history and lineage rather than Ḥadīth. Two works of him have survived. The first one is al-Ṭabaḳāt which is about study of men and the second one is al-Taʾrīkhwhich chronologically narratesthe events in the history of Islam until 232 AH. The latter is the most significant work to be applied for the historiography of ibnKhayyāt. In this article, Khalīfa b. (...) Khayyāt’s methodology in historiography is examined. In this study, the early period of Islamic histography is handled and the subject is discussed comparatively. The main characteristics of his historiography are his adoption of a chronological style that facilitates the follow-up of the book, his knowledge for the lineage of those who died in wars and the details about the wars. Also, among the charactersitics are his application of isnād to his history book as a muḥaddith, his knowledge for the previous resources via his teachers who belong to the schools of al-Madīna and ʿIrāḳ and when required, his usage of ayah, ḥadīth and poems. These issues are dealed in the artcile with examples. Besides, a study in the West about Khalīfa b. Khayyātasserts that he was a follower of Umayyad dynasty and so this affected his historiography. In this article, this assertion is tackled by analyzing the whole book and it concludes that it is not valid because of some narrations against this assertion.SummaryKhalīfa b. Khayyāt (d. 240 / 854-55), who grew up in Basra, one of the most important centers of scholarship of the time and the meeting point of scholars, and he continued his scholarly works in this city. Since his grandfather and father are engaged in the field of Ḥadīth, Khalīfa b. Khayyāt started his scholarly adventure at an early age and he took his first education in the field of Ḥadīth.Scholars, in the early periods, continued their studies in the fields of sciences related to each other. Khalīfa b. Khayyāt’s studies are also in this kind. Although there are references in sources to his accumulation of Ḥadīth, Khalīfa b. Khayyāt ’s main area of ​​expertise is history and nasab/genealogy. The fact that his works and references to him in later sources are largely related to historical events, knowledge of the nasab/genealogy, and wafayāt (death dates of Ḥadīth scholars and narrators) reveals his considerable knowledge on these issues. Khalīfa b. Khayyāt lived in the period of ʿAbbāsid caliphs al-Maʾmūn (813-833) and al-Muʿtaṣim (833-842). This period is important because of the fact that the al-Mihna incident took place and the pressure on the Ḥadīth scholars increased. Although Khalīfa b. Khayyāt is not one of the direct opponents of Muʿtazila, his participation in a debate against them provides clues about the place where he stands. The scholarly atmosphere of Basra, enabled Khalīfa b. Khayyāt to benefit from a wide range of teacher-student network. In addition to his professors from whom he benefitted in the field of Ḥadīth, he had the opportunity to obtain the knowledge and understanding of the history of that time through his teachers who are important historians of the period in his field. Two works related to Khalīfa b. Khayyāt whose reliability is confirmed by djarh wa l tadil scholars reached to our time. One of the oldest Ṭabaḳāt works in the history of Islam is al-Ṭabaḳāt; the other one is the book, al-Taʾrīkh, which provides a new method for Islamic historiography.This study deals with the principles of the method of historiography, which can be put forward through Khalīfa b. Khayyāt 's al-Taʾrīkh. al-Taʾrīkhis important in terms of being the first example of chronological writing type in Islamic historiography and has not been subject to any independent study to date. There are two ongoing M.A. thesis about Khalīfa b. Khayyāt, however, no study has been identified that directly deals with its methodology of history. On the other hand, based on some riwāyats/narrations in al-Taʾrīkh, there is a work that claims that Khalīfa b. Khayyāt had sympathy towards Umayyads. The study named “Khalīfa b. Khayyāt’s History on the Umayyad Dynasty (660-750), prepared by Carl Wurtzel as his PhD. Dissertation, examined the life of Khalīfa, partly the historiography and the religious-political narrations in the work. On the case of Muʿāwiya’s (d. 60/680) request of the allegiance to Yazīd (d. 64/683), Wurtzel compared an event that took place between the envoy of Ibn al-Zubayr (d. 73/692) and Muʿāwiya with al-Balādhurī’s (d. 279/892-93) narrative and concluded that Khalīfa was an Umayyad sympathizer. However, Khalīfa b. Khayyāt’s exclusion of an event such as al-Mihna which was against the ʿAbbāsid and changed the course of history in his book, shouldn’t be considered as a symptom of sympathy; It would be more appropriate to accept it as a feature of history writing.At the top of Khalīfa b. Khayyāt's principles of historiography, adopting chronological method comes first. Accordingly, Khalīfa b. Khayyāt, gives a brief history about the siyar of the Prophet Muhammad at the introduction of the book. Then, by beginning from the first hijri year, he gives the important events, wars and deaths by the years. Sometimes, he refers to the people assigned by the caliphs of the period by referring to the Amîrs (Administrators) of the Hajj. He gives lists of those who died on both sides of the wars. The importance of mentioning the tribes of the deceased shows his competence in the knowledge of nasab. One of the highlights of his historiography is that he sometimes does not touch upon some of the events and situations that are considered to be turning points in Islamic history; and sometimes he does not go down into detail but just gives relevant narratives. For example, he doesn’t mention any narrations about the selection of the Caliph which perhaps the most fundamental point of separation between Ahl al-Sunnah and Shīʿa in the history of Islam.Although he gave detailed information about The Battle of The Camel (36/656) and Ṣiffīn cases (37/657), it is not possible to determine his views on this subject. In addition, he never mentioned the al-Mihna incident, which deeply influenced society and the scholarly environment during the ʿAbbāsid period. Isnād is also holds an important place in the methodology of history of Khalīfa who was a muḥaddith at the same time. In many of the narrations he used the words haddathanā and ahbaranā.In our study, the siyar section of al-Taʾrīkhwas examined in order to determine the sources of the Khalīfa’s historiography and has been seen that the works of Ibn Isḥāḳ (d. 151/768) and Ibn Hishām (d. 218/833) were the main sources of this chapter. Considering Khalīfa b. Khayyāt’s emphasize to isnād and his reach to Ibn Isḥāḳ 's work through the mediation of Bekr b. Suleiman, it can be said that he was dominant in historiography on the sources before him. Khalīfa b. Khayyāt rarely refers to Qur’anic verses and hadiths when describing events. He referred to the verses in only two places and hadiths in only five places. One of them, and perhaps the most remarkable one in the book is the Ḥadīth of the Prophet Muḥammad: “I am the guardian of whom; ‘Alī is his guardian” This narration is used in the letter of Caliph Mahdī (d. 169/785) of the ʿAbbāsid to khārijī (outer) Abd al-Salām b. Hishām who rebelled. The study is based on the principles outlined above. At the end of the study it is also considered that Khalīfa b. Khayyāt ’s works should be the subject of graduate studies which should be prepared with deep readings. (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)

History works written in the style of chronicles are used not only for the purpose for which they were written. Chronic works may also contain reflections on the position of the ulema (ʿulamāʾ) at the time of its writing and his view of the scientific world of the period in which he lived. This work is based on the book ʿIqd al-jumān fī taʾrīkh ahl al-zamān written by the celebrated Ḥanafī jurist (faqīh) and muḥaddith Badr al-Dīn al-ʿAynī as a (...) public history book. This article, focuses on the state of ḥadīth science and scholars in the Mamlūks between the years 648-707 (1250-1307) and approaches of al-ʿAynī to these issues based on the work of ʿIqd al-jumān. For this purpose, the work has been examined in terms of certain keywords that allude to the history of ḥadīth through electronic sources. In addition, the work has been completely reviewed with the traditional method in terms of allusions and information about the hadith studies of the Mamlūks period. Eventually, the historical elements of ḥadīth referred to in ʿIqd al-jumān, scientific institutions, different groups of rāwī, different narration methods and classifications made during the period have been identified. In addition, the professional, sectarian and political trends of the muḥaddith of the period in question were focused on. Comparing the information in the sources written in the field of general history with the studies focusing directly on the historical elements of ḥadīth will contribute to compare the similarities and divergences. This study is an example of how to make use of the wafayāt sections in chronicle works. Examining a single book that was not written directly in the field of ḥadīth - even if it contains important information - is not enough to find elements about the history of ḥadīth and to make constructions regarding it. This necessitates the formation of a team that will examine a large number of books using the same criteria. (shrink)

Deism, which is known for denying the belief in prophethood and the hereafter while accepting the existence of a deity who is understood through reason but does not interfere with the universe while, has gained increasing popularity especially in positive scientific circles in Europe with the Enlightenment period. The development of deism in Europe has been significantly influenced by the ideas of philosophers and scientists such as Descartes, Newton, Voltaire, David Hume, and Kant. Although there is no word in Islamic (...) terminology that corresponds with the meaning of deism, terms such as Dahriyya, Barāhima, ilhad and heresy have been used to refer to different types of denial, including deism and atheism. However, it can be said that “Dahriyyah” is closer to atheism in meaning, while “Barāhima” is used in a more specific sense to deny prophethood. The words “ilhad” and heresy are used to express any kind of denial that rejects the principles of Islam. Parallel to deism being a subject of interest in our country and around the world, there has been a significant increase in studies conducted both in favour and against it. In this article, the rational proofs mentioned by Māturīdī regarding the existence of the hereafter, which deism rejects, have been discussed. In particular, the evidence found in the exegesis of relevant verses of the Qur’ān in Kitab al-Ta’wilat have been subject to examination. Māturīdī has emphasized the importance of providing rational proof for those who do not believe in the Qur’ān, stating that they will not accept any evidence derived from it. Māturīdī, who researched the reasons why people deny the afterlife, explained that people’s attempt to understand everything by comparing them to their own abilities is an important reason for the denial of the afterlife. According to him, people deny the afterlife because they believe that the power to resurrect the dead is beyond their own abilities and assume that their power is not enough for such an act. If they had contemplated the creation of the heavens and the earth, they would have realised that Allāh’s power is different from the power of His creatures. Furthermore, Imam Māturīdī pointed out that it would be absurd and pointless for Allāh, the Creator of the universe, to have created it solely for the purpose of its destruction. He emphasised that there must be a purpose for its creation, and that this purpose indicates the existence of the afterlife, where the actions of the created beings will be accounted for. In addition, Māturīdī, who said “If the world was eternal, it would not be possible to repay the deeds done,” emphasised the necessity of distinguishing between virtuous and evil individuals and giving everyone the reward or punishment they deserve. He acknowledged that human beings live in this world as a test, and the true consequences of their actions will be revealed in the hereafter. (shrink)

bakhsh-i 1. Muqaddamah, Manṭiq, Umūr-i ʻāmmah, Ṭabīʻyāt, Ilāhīyāt.

2. Fī al-quṭb wa-al-aqṭāb wa-al-ghawth wa-dhikr al-abdāl -al-awtād wa-al-nuqabāʼ wa-al-nujabāʼ wa-ghayrihim --.

Ibn Taymīyah, Aḥmad ibn ʻAbd al-Ḥalīm, 1263-1328. Naqḍ al-manṭiq; Islamic philosophy; logic.

Arabic lanaguage; history and criticism.