Miracles are extraordinary events that occur in the hands of those who claim to be prophets and which cannot be repeated by others. By these miracles, the prophets prove to society that the truths they convey are of divine origin. The miracles bestowed upon prophets vary according to the scope of the message they deliver and the interests and relevance of the societies with which they deal. Accordingly, Islamic scholars have classified miracles into three groups. The miraculous events that appeal (...) to people’s senses and lead them to the truths they convey by captivating their astonishment are called emotional miracles. Such miracles are events that occur without cause by overcoming the laws of nature, which are in the realm of causes, through the direct intervention of Allāh. On the other hand, spiritual miracles are truths that arouse the interlocutor’s interest in moral conduct and rational conclusions rather than in his sensory perceptions. Since these truths are attained through contemplation, they are not confined to a particular time and place, as in the case of emotional miracles. Some Kalām scholars have also considered the Prophets’ revelational knowledge about events that have occurred in the past or will occur in the future as miracles. They have studied these events that a person could not bear in the past or could not predict for the future under the title of "The news miracle" Among these three types of miracles, scholars have considered spiritual miracles superior to the others both in terms of the breadth of their influence and their continuity. That Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the last of the prophets, and that the teachings he received through revelation remain valid until the Day of Judgment necessitates that some of the miracles bestowed upon him must be of a quality that attracts the attention of all people. For this reason, Islamic scholars have placed the permanent miracle of Prophet Muhammad in the category of spiritual miracles. Scholars agree that his greatest miracle that has astonished all humankind is the Qurʾān. The clearest proof of this are the verses in the Qurʾān that challenge the opponents to bring a similar one. Allāh commands the disbelievers first to bring a similitude of the Qurʾān (al-Isrāʾ 17:88), then the equivalent of ten surahs (Hūd 11:13), and finally any surah of the Qurʾān (al-Baqara 2:23). Thus, the deniers are made aware of their inability to meet this challenge under gradually mitigating circumstances. Although scholars agree on the Qurʾānic miracle’s reality, they have expressed different views on its nature and essence. Thus, some scholars have argued that the miracle of the Qurʾān does not arise from some properties special to it but from the direct intervention of Allāh in human who have the ability to bring something like it. Most Islamic scholars, on the other hand, pointed out that the Qurʾān has aspects that exceed human powers in various fields, and they explained the inability to reply in the same vein to the Qurʾān due to its uniquenesses. Accordingly, some scholars have argued that miracles are perceptible, but it is never possible to define them. Other scholars, however, viewed miracles as an identifiable phenomenon and stated that the Qurʾān is an unusual and unique book in terms of verses. In this article, the questions Why was the Quran sent down as a miraculous Kalam with an attribute not found in other divine books and in what way did the Qurʾān make people weak to have a similar of it? were scrutinized, thus, some fundamental questions regarding the nature and character of iʿdjāz al-Qurʾān are elucidated. Since the topic deals with history and literature, scanning sources and data analysis were mainly used as methods in the research. The results can be summerized as follows: Although the Prophet was supported by both emotional and mental miracles in proving the Prophetic case, his greatest miracle is the Quran. The miracle of the Qurʾān is different from the other miracles, based on both the challenging verses and the Prophet's explanations of the miracles. The reason for this difference lies in the fact that the miracle of the Qurʾān is based on reason, unlike the other miracles which are emotional. Most Islamic scholars who deal with the miracle of the Qurʾān emphasize the issues of rhetoric, verse, style, and content. At this point, they emphasized that the Qurʾān has a unique expression and content that cannot be surpassed. (shrink)

Nefsin tanımı, mahiyeti, özellikleri, ilişkili olduğu alanların tespiti hem metafiziğin hem de teolojinin en temel problemlerinden biridir. Öyle ki nefs konusunun ele alınış tarzı, İslam düşünce geleneğini topyekûn bu konu üzerinden inceleme imkânı dahi sunmaktadır. Zira varlığı ve özel olarak insanı anlama noktasında, nefs konusunun kozmolojik, ontolojik, epistemolojik ve ahlâkî alanların tümünün temeline yerleştirildiği görülmektedir. Bu durum, nefs teorisinin kendi içinde bir bütün oluşturacak şekilde değerlendirildiğini göstermektedir. Literatürde hâkim olan anlayışa göre, nefsin; a) varlığın oluşumunda önemli bir yer teşkil ettiği, (...) b) bedenden ayrı ve farklı bir mahiyet taşıdığı, c) bilgi elde etmenin gerekçesi olduğu ve d) ahlâkî eylemlere kaynaklık ettiği vurgulanmaktadır. Bu doğrultuda, “Neredeyim ve neyle ilişkiliyim?”, “Neyim?”, “Neyi, nasıl bilebilirim?” ve “Ne yapmalıyım?” sorularına nefs teorisi bağlamında cevap arandığı söylenebilir. İnsan varlığının temel belirleyeninin bedenden ayrı ve farklı bir varlık olarak sunulması, birtakım gerekçelerden hareket etmektedir. Kognitif süreçleri üst düzeyde işletebilmesi, ahlâkî eylem üretebilmesi; ayrıca vahye muhatap kılınması, insanın diğer varlıklardan farklı ve üstün olduğu sonucuna götürmüştür. Bu farklılık ve üstünlük ise insanın maddî olanla sınırlı olamayacağı fikrini beraberinde getirmiştir. Maddenin daima; değişme, bozulma, parçalanma, yok olma gibi niteliklerle ilişkilendirilmesi bu kanaati beslemiştir. Dolayısıyla –özellikle müteahhir dönemde- hem maddî olan hem de maddî olana sıkışmayan bir varlık tasavvuruna yer verilmemiştir. Bir başka ifadeyle, maddî olduğu halde gayrı maddî üretimler sağlayabilecek bir varlık fikrinden vazgeçilmiş, insanı nefs-beden düalitesi ardında irdeleme tercih edilmiştir. Bu tercih, teolojinin oluşum özünde yer alan bir anlayış değildir. Zira erken dönem Mu’tezilî, Eş’arî ve Mâtürîdî kelâm literatürünün, ortak bir şekilde, insanın bedenden ayrık nefse referansta bulunmadan tanımlanması gerektiği üzerinde durduğu görülmektedir. İnsan varlığını çözümleme noktasında düalist anlayışın tercih edilmesi, farklı kültürlerle karşılaşma sonucundaki etkinin bir ürünüdür. Bu doğrultuda Yunan, Hint, Mısır ve Sümer felsefelerinin İslam düşünce geleneği üzerinde etkili olduğu görülmektedir. Özü itibarıyla kelâmın düalist anlayıştan uzak yaklaşımının ise Kur’ân’dan temel aldığı söylenebilir. Çalışmamızda bu iddiamızın temeli kurulacaktır. Kur’ân’ın temel terimlerimden biri olan nefs kelimesi, bütünsel bir bakış açısıyla incelenecektir. Bu inceleme, bu konuda oluşturulmuş literatürün nasıl değerlendirilmesi gerektiğiyle ilgili de zemin oluşturacaktır. (shrink)

There are two widely accepted definitions of ilm al-tafsīr in the hāshiyahs on Anwār al-Tanzīl. The most accepted ones are as follows: Tafsīr is the science that investigates the states of the word of Allah in terms of signifying the will of Allah. This definition mainly belongs to al-Taftāzānī in his hāshiyah on al-Kashshāf. Despite the objections directed to it, the definition was accepted in the later phases and there were not any detailed discussions on it. From this point of (...) view, it can be concluded that there is a common tafsīr definition in Anwār al-Tanzīl hāshiyahs due to the fact that the majority concurred with this definition. The prevalence of this definition is also out of the question for al-Kashshāf hāshiyahs. Its prevalence in the following literature may be attributed to its implementation in accordance with the definition requirements. Because in the definitions made based on the subject, the subject is regarded as genus, and how this subject is addressed is also considered as a difference (fasl). Accordingly, in the above definition, the subject of the tafsīr is explained as the states of Kalam, and the direction in which it is addressed is expressed in terms of the will of Allah. Thus, the subject of tafsīr and its research direction were explained and its difference from other sciences researching the Qur’ān was also stated. According to the second most widespread definition in the hāshiyahs, tafsīr is a science in which the meanings of the Kalam of Allah are known in terms of human capacity/capability. This definition is more or less a description (rasm) compared to the previous one. Hence, it is a looser definition. For this reason, the definition does not allow tafsīr to be separated from other sciences. Because, the meanings of words in the Qur’ān, language sciences and religious sciences are also explored. However, in the other definition, the difference of tafsīr was taken into consideration by including the directional record and the will/intent expression more quickly. On the other hand, the second definition has a limitation of being based on human capacity/capability that reveals some features of the tafsīr more clearly. This limitation expresses that the research in tafsīr is based on suppositional data in one way and continuity in another. Both definitions in the hāshiyahs show that there are clear and common definitions of ilm al-tafsīr between the hijri 9th and 12th centuries. It is stated that with a few exceptions, in almost all of the hāshiyahs, the ilm al-tafsīr is divided into two parts as tafsīr and ta’wīl. The tafsīr here is based on narrative, and ta’wīl is based on reason. Explanation of both of them in this way can be seen in al-Kashshāf. Accordingly, it is understood that both concepts become evident in al-Kashshāf and Anwār al-Tanzīl hāshiyahs. However, when we look at some tafsīr introductions, and literature of ulūm al-Qur’ān, it is observed that vastly different explanations have been made about them. This gives the impression that there is no clear and widespread acceptance of them. However, by explaining as mentioned, their meaning becomes clear in the next literature. Because this explanation about them is essentially a statement that al-Māturīdī conveyed from his predecessors. Accordingly, an explanation about both concepts that was conveyed from the early period has gained acceptance and became widespread especially in the sharhs-hāshiyahs for the following process. Since al-Baydāwī associates both concepts with muhkam and mutashābih, the commentators also explained this relationship. They contain the definitions of the muhkam and mutashābih, which al-Baydāwī made in accordance with Shāfi‘ī method. Accordingly, muhkam are the ones that is clear in terms of what is meant, and do not need further explanation. Examples of muhkam are verses about shari‘a 'orders, inheritance distribution, transactions, and marriage issues. The provisions on these issues should be based on narrative, not reason. Thus, the explanation of muhkam becomes tafsīr. The mutashābih is interpreted since the meaning is not clear. In this case, their interpretation is also ta’wīl. The religious sciences that tafsīr benefits from are explained as being hadith, fiqh, theology, mysticism, and usūl al-fiqh, and this case expresses a general opinion. Literary sciences required for tafsīr are also described as glossary, derivation, morphology, grammar, bayān, ma‘ānī, and badī‘. However, there are two opinions about the knowledge of disciplines such as prosody, rhyme, qard al-shi‘r, khat, and inshā. According to one opinion, since these sciences are not related to the Qur’ān, it is not necessary to know them in order to interpret them. According to the other one, for a competent interpretation activity, these sciences must be known, and their data are thought to contribute to tafsīr. (shrink)

Islamic thought, no matter what tradition it belonged to, went through a process in which almost all thinkers after the twelfth century were also commentators of Avicenna (d. 428/1037). When this phenomenon combined with Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī's (d. 606/1210) ability to problematize, his critical readings revealed the aporias and turned them into problems which would occupy the thinker’s mind after him and waiting to be solved. The quiddityof knowledge has an important place among these, both in terms of being closely (...) related to many issues where ontology, epistemology and axiology intersect and being a problem area where the Islamic intellectual traditions’ conception of existence is directly reflected. As seen in the analyses of many thinkers, notably Râzî, the ontology, quiddity and category of knowledge in Avicennian philosophy contain elements that are conducive to encountering important challenges when the system as a whole is taken into consideration. Accordingly, scholars like Shams al-Dīn al-Isfahānî (ö. 749/1349), al-Taftāzānī (ö. 792/1390), al-Sayyid al-Sharīf al-Jurjānī (ö. 816/1413), Alî al-Qūshjī (ö. 879/1474), al-Dawwānī (ö. 908/1502), Sadr al-Dīn al-Dashtakī (ö. 903/1498) have taken the discussion to a further point both in terms of identifying the problem and revealing its implications and proposing solutions. This study aims to analyze the sixteenth-century thinker Kutb al-Dīn al-Ījī’s treatment of this problem who inherited the debates of past on the matter in question. He carries out his evaluations especially through the Alī al-Qūshjī (ö. 879/1474), al-Dawwānī (ö. 908/1502) and al-Dashtakī’s comments on the subject. He makes important contributions by analyzing these scholars’ solution offers con-cerning the problem of categorical status of knowledge and putting forward his own approach. He thinks that Alī al-Qūshjī’s distinction between realization (husūl) and subsistence (qiyām), al-Dashtakī’s theory of transformation and al-Dawwānī’s offer to not put the knowledge under the category of quality are problematic from various aspects. (shrink)

Metaphysics is one of the most major disciplines of philosophy. Generally, since Aristotle, its subject has been accepted as "being qua being". However, in the history of Islamic thought, there have been some scholars who think that kalam should be accepted as a superior science instead of metaphysics. Therefore, these thinkers considered "being qua being", which is accepted as the subject of metaphysics, as the subject of theology. In this study, the approach of Qadî Sirâj al-Din Urmawi, a member of (...) the philosophical theology school formed by the philosophical-kalam scholars who think that the claim in question is true and is shaped within the framework of this idea to metaphysical science and metaphysical concepts will be discussed. Therefore, this study is limited to Urmawi’s approach to metaphysics and metaphysical concepts. With this study on Urmawi, it is aimed to determine the essential position of metaphysics according to Urmawi and the meanings of metaphysical concepts in his thought. It is important for the development of philosophical thought to determine the way in which these issues are handled by a thinker who is a member of the philosophical theological school. His works Matali al-Anwâr and Bayân al-Haqq, written in the line of Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, are remarkable in terms of revealing his philosophy and the way he dealt with metaphysical concepts in a broader way. Additionally, with this study, which will contribute to the understanding of the position of metaphysics in the 13th century, it is seen that metaphysics is a superior science in the eyes of Urmawi. However, his approach to metaphysical concepts is different from his approach to the science of metaphysics. Indeed, although he gives place to Ibn Sînâ’s views on metaphysical concepts, Fakhr al-Din al-Razi is dominant in his approaching. (shrink)

İslam’ın toplum hayatındaki tezahürlerinin mahiyet ve işlevi hakkındaki tartışmalar neredeyse Hz. Peygamber’in vefatından hemen sonraya kadar uzanır. Kelamın ehl-i hadisi eleştirisinde, Müslüman filozofların kelamcıları eleştirisinde, Gazzâlî’nin (ö. 1111) filozofları eleştirisinde daima İslam’ın “nasıl” anlaşılması gerektiği sorusunu görmek mümkündür. Gazzâlî ve İbn Rüşd (ö. 1198) gibi birbirine muhalif olan iki âlimin dahi kendi dönemlerindeki fukahayı eleştirmede müttefik olmasında yine İslam’ın “nasıl” anlaşılması gerektiği ve toplum hayatında “nasıl” uygulanacağı sorusu görülebilir. Son yüz yıllık dönemde ise bu tartışmalar ve uğraşların zirve yaptığını (...) söyleyebiliriz. Müslümanlar olarak küçük bir köye dönüşen dünyaya kayıtsız kalamayız, kendimizi merkeze aldığımız bir dünya tasavvur edemeyiz. Sosyolojimizin, psikolojimizin, siyaset, ekonomi, eğitim ve kültürümüzün diğer milletler ve din mensupları ile etkileşim halinde olduğu gerçeğini yok sayamayız. Durum böyle olunca maalesef Müslüman ülkelerin birçok alanda yaşamış olduğu sorunlar her geçen gün yüzümüze vurulmaktadır. Konuya vakıa tespiti yaparak başladığımız takdirde incelemesini yapacağımız İslam Işığında Müslümanlığımızla Yüzleşme eserinin önemi daha belirgin olacaktır. (shrink)