User Guide
Why can I only view 3 results?
You can also view all results when you are connected from the network of member institutions only. For non-member institutions, we are opening a 1-month free trial version if institution officials apply.
So many results that aren't mine?
References in many bibliographies are sometimes referred to as "Surname, I", so the citations of academics whose Surname and initials are the same may occasionally interfere. This problem is often the case with citation indexes all over the world.
How can I see only citations to my article?
After searching the name of your article, you can see the references to the article you selected as soon as you click on the details section.
  Citation Number 1
 Views 80
 Downloands 26
Fukahâ-i Seb’a ve Amel-i Ehl-i Medine’nin Delil Değeri
2019
Journal:  
Eskiyeni
Author:  
Abstract:

Fukahâ-i seb’a, tâbiûn döneminde yaşamış Medineli meşhur yedi fakihi ifade etmek üzere kullanılan bir kavramdır. Bu yedi fakihin kimler olduğu hususunda farklı görüşler ileri sürülmüştür. Ancak bu farklılık sadece yedinci isim üzerinde olmuş ve diğer altı isim üzerinde ittifak sağlanmıştır. Buna göre ittifakla kabul edilen altı isim Saîd b. Müseyyeb (ö. 94/713), Urve b. Zübeyr (ö. 94/713), Kāsım b. Muhammed (ö. 107/725), Hârice b. Zeyd (ö. 100/718), Ubeydullah b. Abdullah (ö. 98/716) ve Süleyman b. Yesâr’dır (ö. 107/725). Yedinci fakih için ise Ebû Bekir b. Abdurrahman (ö. 94/713), Ebû Seleme b. Abdurrahman (ö. 94/713) ve Sâlim b. Abdullah (ö. 106/725) olmak üzere üç farklı isim zikredilmiştir. Bu araştırmada yedinci isim, Ebû Bekir b. Abdurrahman kabul edilmiştir. Zira bu, Ebü’z-Zinâd’ın (ö. 130748) kabulüdür ve kavramın ilk izlerine onun kullanımında rastlanmaktadır. Mâlikî mezhebinin bağlayıcı bir delil kabul ettiği ve mezhebin kurucu imamı Mâlik’in sıkça atıfta bulunduğu amel-i ehl-i Medine, Medine halkının tatbikatını ve teşriî bir konudaki ittifakını ifade etmek üzere kullanılmaktadır. İmam Mâlik’in Medine halkının amelini derleme çalışması ve fetvalarında söz konusu ameli dikkate alan bir metot takip etmesi, kavramın daha ziyade İmam Mâlik ile anılmasını sağlamıştır. Ancak amel-i ehl-i Medine hem kavram hem de metot olarak İmam Mâlik’ten önce de kullanılmaktadır. Geçmiştekilerin görüş birliğine ve ortak uygulamalarına işaret etme geleneğini ilk devirden itibaren tespit etmek mümkün olsa da belirli bir dönemden sonra, özellikle ilk asrın ikinci yarısından itibaren fukahâ-i seb’a’nın da mensup olduğu tâbiûn âlimleri döneminde, bu tutumun iyice yaygınlık kazandığı söylenebilir. Tâbiûn döneminde Medine’deki fıkhî faaliyetlerin yürütülmesine öncülük eden fukahâ-i seb’a, Medine ehlinin amelini hüccet kabul etmiş ve amele işaret eden kavramları kullanarak buna dayalı hükümler vermiştir. Saîd b. Müseyyeb’in “ecmea ehlü’l-Medine (Medine ehli icmâ etti)” ifadesi, “sünnet” kavramıyla genellikle dayanağı Hz. Peygamber’de (sav) olan ancak sonradan da kabul gören görüş ve uygulamaları kast etmesi, sünnet-i mâziye bilgisi ve bu alanda hakkında söylenen övgü dolu sözler örnekleri Urve b. Zübeyr ve Kāsım b. Muhammed’de görülen “emr” ifadesi ile fukahâ-i seb’a’nın hemen hemen hepsinde görülen “yetiştiğim kimseler”, “insanlar” şeklindeki bir çeşit ortak kabulü yansıtan tabirler amel-i ehl-i Medine’ye delâlet etmektedir. Fukahâ-i seb’a’nın “yetiştiğim kimseler” derken kastının kimler olduğunu tam olarak tespit edebilmek hayli güçtür. Bu ifadeler tüm Medine halkını kapsayabileceği gibi fakih veya âlim olanları veya görüşü nakledenin hocalarını ya da çok daha sınırlı bir zümreyi kapsayabilir. Benzer kavramlar daha sistematik bir şekilde İmam Mâlik tarafından da kullanılmıştır. Ancak onun da bu kavramlarla tam olarak neyi kastettiği tespit edilememiş ve ulemâ arasında tartışma konusu olmuştur. Amel-i ehl-i Medine kapsamında değerlendirilebilecek bir diğer husus da Hz. Ömer’in uygulamalarına dair yapılan aktarımlar ve bunların nispeten güçlü birer delil kabul edilmesidir. Hz. Ömer’in uygulamalarına vâkıf olmak fukahâ-i seb’a’nın yaşadığı dönemde bir yetkinlik alameti olarak görülmekteydi. Hz. Ömer’in uygulamalarının bu derece önemsenmesinin temelinde bir çeşit icmâ düşüncesinin yatmakta olduğu söylenebilir. Zira Hz. Ömer, büyük sahâbîlerin Medine’den ayrılmasına pek izin vermemiş, aldığı kararlarda genellikle onlara danışmış ve böylece bir tür fikir birliğine varılmıştır. Bu yaklaşım bir yönüyle amelin özününe dair fikirler de vermektedir. Medine’de amelin oluşumu, tespiti ve aktarımı noktasında önemli roller oynayan fukahâ-i seb’a’nın amel ile olan münasebeti sonraki dönemlerde de araştırma konusu edilmiş ve bu bağlamda birtakım iddialar ortaya atılmıştır. Bunlardan biri İmam Mâlik’in Muvatta’da yer verdiği icmâların “fukahâ-i seb’a’nın icmâları” ya da “içerisinde fukahâ-i seb’a’nın da yer aldığı on kişilik bir grubun icmâları” olduğu yönündeki iddiadır. Ancak bu iddia, Mâlikîler nezdinde muteber bulunmayıp reddedilmiştir. Konuyla ilgili bir diğer iddia da oryantalist Schacht’ın (ö. 1969) “anonim ekollerden ferdî ekollere dönüşüm” şeklindeki tezidir. Schacht’a göre âlimlerin icmâı anonim bir şeydi. Ancak hicrî ikinci yüzyıl ortalarından itibaren, sünnet kavramının özünde bulunan devamlılık fikrinden hareketle bu geleneğe teorik meşruiyet kazandırmak amacıyla bu anonim icmâ, geçmişteki büyük şahsiyetlere isnat edilmeye başlanmıştır. Bu bağlamda Medineliler doktrinlerini, hicrî birinci yüzyılın sonlarında veya ikinci yüzyılın başlarında vefat eden bir kısım eski otoritelere dayandırmışlardır. Daha sonraki bir dönemde bu otoriteler arasından yedi tanesi seçilmiş ve Medineli yedi hukukçu (fukahâ-i seb’a) olarak anılmıştır. Geriye dönük bu isnat işlemi, bu âlimlerle sınırlı kalmamış ve her bölge kendi doktrinini mahallî bir sahâbîye dayandırmıştır. Medineliler Ömer ile İbn Ömer’i iki önemli otorite olarak kabul etmişlerdir. Schacht, bu eski otoritelere dayandırılan herhangi bir doktrinin otantik kabul edilemeyeceğini söylemektedir. Çünkü ona göre bu isnat işlemi, sonradan izafe edilmiş olup asılsızdır. Schacht’ın “bölgesel ekollerden ferdi ekoller dönüşüm” şeklindeki bu tezi bir başka müsteşrik Hallaq tarafından reddedilmiştir. İslam âlimlerinden Mustafa el-A’zamî (ö. 2017) de Schacht’ın İslâmi ilimlere yönelik iddialarına reddiyesini sunmuş, bu bağlamda bahsi geçen iddiayı da eleştirmiştir. Bu makale fukahâ-i seb’a’nın amele yaklaşımını konu edinerek Medine amelinin oluşumu, tespiti ve aktarımı noktasında üstlendiği rollere işaret etmeye çalışmakta ve konu ile ilgili bahsi geçen iddiaları ele almaktadır.

Keywords:

Fukahâ-i Seb’a ve Amel-i Ehl-i Medine’nin Delil Değeri
2019
Journal:  
Eskiyeni
Author:  
Abstract:

Al-Fuqahāʿ al-sab'a is a concept that used to refer to the seven famous scholars from Medina who lived in the era of tābiūn (successors). Different opinions have been proposed regarding who these seven faqihs are. However, this difference was only on the seventh name and a consensus was reached on the other six names. Accordingly, the six names accepted by the union; Saʿīd b. al-Musayyab (d. 94/713), 'Urwa b. al-Zubayr (d. 94/713), Qāsim b. Muḥammad (d. 107/725), Kharija b. Zayd (d. 100/718), ʿUbaydallāh b. Abdallāh (d. 98/716) and Sulaymān b. Yasār (d. 107/725). For the seventh scholar, three different names were mentioned: Abū Bakr b. Abd al-Raḥmān (d. 94/713), Abū Salama b. Abd al-Raḥmān (d. 94/713) and Sālim b. Abdallāh (d. 106/725) In this research, the seventh name, Abū Bakr b. Abid al-Rahman was acknowledged. Because this is the adoption of Abū l-Zinād (d. 130/748) and the first traces of the concept are found in his use. The 'amal of Medinese (the judicial practice of Medinese), which is accepted as a binding evidence for Mālikī sect and frequently referred by Mālikī, is used to express the judicial practice and consensus of the people of Medina on a religious issue. Imām Mālik's compilation of the judicial practice of the people of Medina and the follow-up of a method that takes into consideration the judicial practice in his fatwas led to the concept rather being associated with Imām Mālik. However, the 'amal of Medinese is also used both as a concept and method before him. Although it is possible to determine the tradition of pointing to the consensus and common practices of the past from the first period, after a certain period, especially from the second half of the first century, in the era of tābiūn (Successors), of which al-fuqahā' al-sab belonged, it can be said that this attitude gained widespread popularity during that period. Al-Fuqahāʿ al-sab'a, which pioneered the conduct of the fiqh activities in Medina during the tābiūn period, accepted the 'amal of Medinese as a proof and made judgments based on it using the concept that points to the judicial practice. by Sa’id B. Al-Musayyab’s statement “Ajma’a ahl al-Medina (consensus of people of Medina reached)”, his meaning by the concept of “sunna” as views and practices that are generally based on the Prophet (pbuh) but which are alos later accepted, his knowledge of sunna madya (the well-established precedent) and the praises about him in this field; examples that are shown in the ‘Urwa b. al-Zubayr and Qāsim b. Muḥammad as “al-amr (the practice)”, and the phrases, that are used by almost all of them and reflect some kind of common acceptance, like “People I lived in the same era”, “the people” indicate to the ‘Madinese.” It is quite difficult to determine exactly who al-fuqahāʿ al-sab'a caste are by the phrase "people I lived in the same era". These statements may include the whole of the people of Madina, as well as those who are either fuqahās or scholars, or teachers who their opnion conveyed, or a much more limited group. Similar concepts have also been used more systematically by Imām Mālik. However, it was not determined exactly what he meant by these concepts and it was the subject of discussion between the scholars. Another issue that can be evaluated within the scope of 'amal of Medinese is the transfers made regarding the practices of Caliph ʿUmar and acceptance of these conventions as a relatively powerful evidence. It was seen as a sign of competence during the period of al-fuqahāʿ al-sab'a to be a aware of the practices of Caliph 'Umar. It can be said that the basis of this such importance of Caliph 'Umar's practices is the idea of some kind of consensus (ijmāʿ). Because Caliph 'Umar did not allow the major companions to leave from Medina, he often consulted them in his decisions and thus some kind of consensus was reached. This approach also gives ideas about the essence of judicial practice in one aspect. Relation with the judicial practice for al-fuqahāʿ al-sab'a, who plays an important role in the formation, detection and transfer of the judicial practice in Medina, was also investigated in the latter periods and a number of claims were made in this context. One of them is the claim that the consensus in Imām Mālik's Muwatta's were "the consensus of al-fuqahā' al-sab'a" or "the consensus of a group of ten people, including al-fuqahā' al-sab". However, this claim was rejected and was not found to be reputable in the eyes of the Mālikīs. Another claim on the subject is the orientalist Schacht's (d. 1969) thesis that "transformation from anonymous schools to personal schools". According to Schacht, the consensus of the scholars was anonymous. However, since the middle of the second century, this anonymous consensus has been credited to the great personalities of the past in order to give theoretical legitimacy to this tradition based on the idea of continuity at the core of the concept of sunna. In this context, the people of Medina grounded their doctrines on some ancient authorities who died at the end of the first or early second century. In a later period, seven of these authorities were elected and seven lawyers from Medina (al-fuqahā' al-sab'a) were referred to as. This retrospective attribution process was not limited to these scholars, and each region based its doctrine on a local companion of the prophet. The Medinaians accepted Caliph ʿUmar and his last ʿAbdallāh Ibn ʿUmar as two important authorities. Schacht says that any doctrine based on these ancient authorities cannot be considered authentic. Because according to him, this attribution process was attached later and it is unfounded. Schacht's thesis of "transformation of personal schools from regional schools" was rejected by another orientalist, Hallaq. One of the Islamic scholars, Muṣṭafā al-A'zamī (d. 2017), presented his rejection of Schacht's claims against Islamic sciences and criticized the aforementioned claim. This article focuses on al-fuqahāʿ al-sab'a's approach to the judicial practice and tries to point out the roles it takes in the formation, determination and transfer of 'amal of Medinese and discusses the aforementioned claims.

Al-fuqahāʾ Al-sab’a and The Proof Value Of ‘amal Of Medinese
2019
Journal:  
Eskiyeni
Author:  
Abstract:

Al-Fuqahāʾ al-sab’a is a concept that used to refer to the seven famous scholars from Medina who lived in the era of tābiūn (successors). Different opinions have been proposed regarding who these seven faqihs are. However, this difference was only on the seventh name and an consensus was reached on the other six names. Accordingly, the six names accepted by the union; Saʿīd b. al-Musayyab (d. 94/713), ‘Urwa b. al-Zubayr (d. 94/713), Qāsim b. Muḥammad (d. 107/725), Kharija b. Zayd (d. 100/718), ʿUbaydallāh b. ʿAbdallāh (d. 98/716) and Sulaymān b. Yasār (d. 107/725). For the seventh scholar, three different names were mentioned: Abū Bakr b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān (d. 94/713), Abū Salama b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān (d. 94/713) and Sālim b. ʿAbdallāh (d. 106/725). In this research, the seventh name, Abū Bakr b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, was acknowledged. Because this is the adoption of Abū l-Zinād (d. 130/748) and the first traces of the concept are found in his use. The ‘amal of Medinese (the judicial practice of Medinese), which is accepted as a binding evidence for Mālikī sect and frequently referred by Mālikī, is used to express the judicial practice and consensus of the people of Medina on a religious issue. Imām Mālik’s compilation of the judicial practice of the people of Medina and the follow-up of a method that takes into consideration the judicial practice in his fatwas led to the concept rather being associated with Imām Mālik. However, the ‘amal of Medinese is also used both as a concept and method before him. Although it is possible to determine the tradition of pointing to the consensus and common practices of the past from the first period, after a certain period, especially from the second half of the first century, in the era of tābiūn (Successors), of which al-fuqahāʾ al-sab’a belonged, it can be said that this attitude gained widespread popularity during that period. Al-Fuqahāʾ al-sab’a, which pioneered the conduct of the fiqh activities in Medina during the tābiūn period, accepted the ‘amal of Medinese as a proof and made judgements based on it using concept that points to the judicial practice. Saʿīd b. al-Musayyab’s statement “ajma’a ahl al-Medina (consensus of people of Medina reached)”, his meaning by the concept of “sunna” as views and practices that are generally based on the Prophet (pbuh) but which are alos later accepted, his knowledge of sunna maḍiya (the well-established precedent) and the praises about him in this field; examples that are shown in the ‘Urwa b. al-Zubayr and Qāsim b. Muḥammad as “al-amr (the practice)”, and the phrases, that are used by almost all of them and reflect some kind of common acceptance, like “people I lived in the same era”, “the people” indicate to the ‘amal of Medinese. It is quite difficult to determine exactly who al-fuqahāʾ al-sab’a caste are by phrase “people I lived in the same era”. These statements may include the whole of the people of Madina, as well as those who are either fuqahās or scholars, or teachers who his opnion conveyed, or a much more limited group. Similar concepts have also been used more systematically by Imām Mālik. However, it was not determined exactly what he meant by these concepts and it was the subject of discussion between the scholars. Another issue that can be evaluated within the scope of ‘amal of Medinese is the transfers made regarding the practices of Caliph ʿUmar and acceptance of these convenctions as a relatively powerful evidence. It was seen as a sign of competence during the period of al-fuqahāʾ al-sab’a to be a aware of to the practices of Caliph ‘Umar. It can be said that the basis of this such importance of Caliph ‘Umar’s practices is the idea of some kind of consensus (ijmāʿ). Because Caliph ‘Umar did not allow the major companions to leave from Medina, he often consulted them in his decisions and thus some kind of consensus was reached. This approach also gives ideas about the essence of judicial practice in one aspect. Relation with the judicial practice for al-fuqahāʾ al-sab’a, who plays an important role in the formation, detection and transfer of the judicial practice in Medina, was also investigated in the latter periods and a number of claims were made in this context. One of them is the claim that the consensuses in Imām Mālik’s Muwattaʾ were “the consensuses of al-fuqahāʾ al-sab’a” or “the consensuses of a group of ten people, including al-fuqahāʾ al-sab’a”. However, this claim was rejected and was not found to be reputable in the eyes of the Mālikīs. Another claim on the subject is orientalist Schacht’s (d. 1969) thesis that “transformation from anonymous schools to personal schools”. According to Schacht, the consensus of the scholars was anonymous. However, since the middle of the second century, this anonymous consensus has been credited to the great personalities of the past in order to give theoretical legitimacy to this tradition based on the idea of continuity at the core of the concept of sunna. In this context, the people of Medina grounded their doctrines on some ancient authorities who died at the end of the first or early second century. In a later period, seven of these authorities were elected and seven lawyers from Medina (al-fuqahāʾ al-sab’a) were referred to as. This retrospective attribution process was not limited to these scholars, and each region based its doctrine on a local companion of the prophet. The Medinaians accepted Caliph ʿUmar and his son ʿAbdallāh Ibn ʿUmar as two important authorities. Schacht says that any doctrine based on these ancient authorities cannot be considered authentic. Because according to him, this attribution process was attached later and it is unfounded. Schacht’s thesis of “transformation of personal schools from regional schools” was rejected by another orientalist, Hallaq. One of the Islamic scholars, Muṣṭafā al-A’zamī (d. 2017), presented his rejection of Schacht’s claims against Islamic sciences and criticized the aforementioned claim. This article focuses on al-fuqahāʾ al-sab’a’s approach to the judicial practice and tries to point out the roles it takes in the formation, determination and transfer of ‘amal of Medinese and discusses the aforementioned claims.

Keywords:

Citation Owners
Attention!
To view citations of publications, you must access Sobiad from a Member University Network. You can contact the Library and Documentation Department for our institution to become a member of Sobiad.
Off-Campus Access
If you are affiliated with a Sobiad Subscriber organization, you can use Login Panel for external access. You can easily sign up and log in with your corporate e-mail address.
Similar Articles






Eskiyeni

Field :   İlahiyat; Sosyal, Beşeri ve İdari Bilimler

Journal Type :   Ulusal

Metrics
Article : 955
Cite : 1.230
Eskiyeni