Özet:

Fâsid istidlâl in Hanafi method is one of the important subjects of the science of usûl-i fiqh. It is extremely important that the isidlāl methods, by which fiqh rules are reached, are authentic. Hanafis, who acted with a prudent and meticulous point of view in the determination of the Shari'ah rulings, took literal evidence as reference in this matter and accepted the methods of inference based on literal indication as valid. At the same time, the rulings obtained through sound inference are accepted as rules that must be followed because they are shar'i rulings. On the other hand, the methods of istidlâl that are not based on literal indication have been evaluated as fâsid istidlâl on the grounds that they are based only on reason or syllogism and therefore are a sign of the occupied place. One of the types of istidlâl, which is considered unvalid in Hanafi method thought, is the iqtiran evidence. Hanafi scholars do not accept the iktiran evidence as a valid method of inference. They consider the judgments reached as a result of this method of inference as judgments that should not be acted upon, since they are not a Shari'ah rule. The evidence of iqtiran is formed around the idea whether the words or sentences being together in words necessitate their being together in the judgment. This study deals with the lexical and term meaning of the iqtiran, those who accept iqtiran, those who reject it, the evidences of those who accept it, the proofs of those who reject it, the objections that Hanafis acted with iqtiran, the answers to these objections and the claims that iqtiran is exceptional evidence.

Anahtar Kelimeler: