Kullanım Kılavuzu
Neden sadece 3 sonuç görüntüleyebiliyorum?
Sadece üye olan kurumların ağından bağlandığınız da tüm sonuçları görüntüleyebilirsiniz. Üye olmayan kurumlar için kurum yetkililerinin başvurması durumunda 1 aylık ücretsiz deneme sürümü açmaktayız.
Benim olmayan çok sonuç geliyor?
Birçok kaynakça da atıflar "Soyad, İ" olarak gösterildiği için özellikle Soyad ve isminin baş harfi aynı olan akademisyenlerin atıfları zaman zaman karışabilmektedir. Bu sorun tüm dünyadaki atıf dizinlerinin sıkça karşılaştığı bir sorundur.
Sadece ilgili makaleme yapılan atıfları nasıl görebilirim?
Makalenizin ismini arattıktan sonra detaylar kısmına bastığınız anda seçtiğiniz makaleye yapılan atıfları görebilirsiniz.
  Atıf Sayısı 5
 Görüntüleme 34
 İndirme 4
TABERÎ VE MÂTÜRÎDÎ’DEN HAREKETLE FARKLI BİR TASNİF DENEMESİ: EHL-İ HADÎS - EHL-İ RE’Y TEFSİRLERİ
2020
Dergi:  
Kilis 7 Aralık Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi
Yazar:  
Özet:

İslam düşünce geleneği bir bütün olmasına rağmen tefsir, kelam, fıkıh, hadis gibi ilmi disiplinler ayrı ayrı sınıflandırılmıştır. Daha özelde ise tefsir geleneği dirayet ve rivayet şeklinde iki başlık altında değerlendirilmiştir. Bu ayrımın kökleri on asır öncesine kadar ulaşmakta ve ayrım günümüzde de varlığını sürdürmektedir. Bununla beraber bazı araştırmacılar, bu ayrımın problemli olduğunu belirtmişlerdir. Nitekim rivayet tefsiri Kur’ân’ın sahabe ve tabiin kavilleri ekseninde anlaşılması ve kişinin re’y ile görüş bildirmekten kaçınması şeklinde tanımlanmıştır. Ne var ki bu tanımının kriterleri Taberî’ye uymamaktadır. Çünkü o, rivayetler arasında tercih yapmış, fıkıh ve kelam konularını tartışmış, soru cevap yöntemini kullanmıştır. Bu vb. durumlar dikkate alındığında onun rivayet değil, dirayet ehli bir müfessir olduğu söylenmelidir. Aksi durumda Taberî ile İbn Ebî Hâtim aynı olarak kabul edilmiş olur. Bu ise başka problemlere neden olacaktır. Zira Taberî, aktardığı rivayetler arasında hangi rivayetin doğru olabileceğine dair bir yorum yapmıştır. İbn Ebî Hâtim ise rivayeti sadece nakletmiştir. Bu durumda her iki müfessiri aynı kapsamda değerlendirmek yanlış olur. Neticede biri dirayet ehli diğeri rivayet ehli bir âlimdir. Ne var ki Taberi’nin Mâtürîdî ile aynı düzeyde bir dirayet âlimi olduğunu söylenirse bu da başka karışıklığa yol açacaktır. Çünkü iki müfessir arasında önemli farklar bulunmaktadır. Bunların başında onların bağlı bulundukları geleneğin etkisi gelmektedir: Ehl-i Hadîs ve Ehl-i Re’y. Ehl-i Hadîs - Ehl-i Re’y ayrımı ilk etapta fıkıh ile irtibatlandırılmıştır. Bununla beraber bazı araştırmacılar tasnifin sadece fıkıh sahasına indirgenmesini doğru bulmamıştır. Zira bu iki ekol, kelami sahada da kendilerine has düşünce yapıları ile dikkat çekmektedir. Şu halde hem fıkıh hem kelam sahası ile ilişkisi kurulan bu iki ekolün tefsir sahasını etkilediğini düşünmek mümkündür. Geniş bir perspektiften bakılması durumunda Ehl-i Hadîs - Ehl-i Re’y ekollerinin temel kriterleri Taberî ve Mâtürîdî’nin tefsirinde karşılık bulmaktadır. Nitekim Ehl-i Hadîs kriterlerine göre esas olan ilk dönem âlimlerin sözleridir. Onlara rağmen görüş beyan edilmez. Tabii erken dönem âlimlerinin bidat ehli kimseler olmamaları da esastır. Aksi durumdaki âlimlerin sözlerine itibar edilmez. Onlardan gelen rivayetler birbiri ile çelişiyorsa hangi rivayetin doğru olduğunu anlamak için çeşitli kriterler esas alınır: Mesela Kur’ân ayetlerine literal olarak en yakın rivayet hangisi ise o rivayet doğru kabul edilir. Ayrıca çok sayıdaki rivayet az sayıdaki rivayetten üstündür. Diğer yandan Allah’ın gelmesi gitmesi gibi haberi sıfatlar literal olarak anlaşılır fakat nasıl olduğunun bilgisi Allah’a havale edilir. Kelam ile ilgili meselelerde ayrıntıya girilmez. Ayrıca felsefi meselelere de temas edilmez. Ehl-i Re’y ise bahsi geçen hususlarda farklı tavır takınmıştır. Onlara göre ilk dönem âlimlere mukabil sonraki dönem âlimler de görüş bildirebilir. Sahibinin kimliği değil, söylediği söz itibara alınır. Dolayısıyla isnad birinci derecede önem taşımaz. Rivayetler Kur’ân’a arz edilir. Kur’ân’ın maksadıyla uyuşan rivayet esas kabul edilir. Kur’ân’a, akla ve genel geçer kanunlara aykırı olan rivayetler ise kabul edilmez. Bu rivayetlerin kimlere isnad edildiği de önemli değildir. Kur’ân’ın yorumlanmasında dikkate alınması gereken literal mana ise literal mana esas alınır. Dikkate alınması gereken batıni mana ise o esas alınır. Fakat bu ikisinden hangisinin esas alınacağına Kur’ân’ın bütünlüğü hesaba katılarak karar verilir. Allah’ın gelmesi, gitmesi gibi meseleleri konu edinen haberi sıfatlar tevil edilir. Kelam ile ilgili meselelere temas edilmelidir. Son olarak felsefi eserlerde yer alan bilgiler Kur’ân’a arz edilir. Ancak Kur’an’a aykırı olan bilgiler reddedilir. Açıkçası söz konusu kriterleri Taberî ile Mâtürîdî’nin tefsirlerinde ayrı ayrı görmek mümkündür. Taberî, erken dönem âlimlere rağmen söz söylemek doğru değildir kuralını kabul etmiştir, zaman zaman farklı düşünceye sahip olduğunu söylese de ısrarla öncekilerin düşüncelerini kabul ettiğini belirtmiş ve rivayetler arasında tercih yapmıştır. Tercihinde en çok dikkat ettiği husus rivayetin ayetin zahirine uygun olmasıdır. Rivayetleri senedi ile aktarmaya da çok dikkat etmiştir. O, haberi sıfatları literal olarak anlamış fakat nasıl olduğunu Allah’a havale etmiştir. Bazı durumlarda ise Allah’ın kürsüsü gibi ifadeleri tevil ettiği de olmuştur. 

Anahtar Kelimeler:

This is a great way to get to know what is going on, and what is going on, and what is going on, and what is going on, and what is going on, and what is going on, and what is going on, and what is going on, and what is going on, and what is going on, and what is going on, and what is going on, and what is going on, and what is going on, and what is going on, and what is going on, and what is going on, and what is going on.
2020
Yazar:  
Özet:

Although the Islamic thought tradition is a whole, the scientific disciplines such as tefsir, kelam, fıkıh, hadith are classified separately. More specifically, the tradition of the expression is considered under two titles in the form of resistance and rivayet. The roots of this distinction reached ten centuries ago and the distinction continues to exist today. However, some researchers have stated that this difference is problematic. In fact, the interpretation of the Qur’an is defined in the form of understanding the axis of the Sahabe and the nature of the peoples, and the person is avoided from communicating with the re’y. However, the criteria of this definition do not comply with the Taberi. For he made preference among the rivayets, discussed the subjects of fiction and curvature, and used the method of answering questions. This is VB. When the circumstances are taken into account, it should be said that he is not a rivayet, but a resistant inspector. Otherwise, it will be accepted in the same way. This will cause other problems. He has made a comment on what the righteous righteousness could be between the righteous. And I was only the one who gave righteousness to him. In this case, it is wrong to evaluate both inspectors in the same scope. One of them is a righteous man, and the other is a righteous man. But if it is said that the Taberi is the same level of resistance to the Maturidi, it will lead to another confusion. There are significant differences between the two officers. They are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones who are the ones. The Ehl-i Hadîs - Ehl-i Re'y distinction was linked to the first phase of fıkıh. However, some researchers did not find it right that the tassif only was reduced to the fictional field. The two of them are in the midst of their mind, and they are in the midst of their mind. So it is possible to think that both the fist and the curve fields that are established affects the interpretation field of these two edges. If you look from a wide perspective, the basic criteria of the Ehl-i Hadîs - Ehl-i Re'y ekol finds the interpretation of the Taberî and Mâtürîdî. The first word is the word of the first word, the first word is the word of the first. Despite them, the view is not declared. It is also important that those who are in the early stages do not have the right to do so. Otherwise, the words of the people will not be accepted. If the rivayets that come from them contradict each other, the various criteria are based to understand which rivayet is true: for example, which rivayet is literally closest to the Qur’an verses and which rivayet is considered true. There is also a lot more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more than a few more. The knowledge of the coming of God is literally understood, but the knowledge of the coming of God is transferred to God. There is no detail in the matter. There are also no philosophical issues. Ehl-i Re'y has a different attitude in the aforementioned matters. The first time they saw, the next time they saw, the next time they saw, the next time they saw. It is not the identity of the owner, but the promise that he says is accepted. Therefore, it does not matter at first. The Qur’an is revealed. The Qur’an is the meaning of the Qur’an. The Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, the Qur’an, and the Qur’an. It doesn’t matter who the rivers are. The literal mana that is to be considered in the interpretation of the Qur’an is the literal mana that is to be considered. The western man should be taken into consideration. But which of these two will be based on the fullness of the Qur’an will be determined. The knowledge of the coming of God is given to them, as it is, as it is. It is necessary to get in touch with the issues related to Kelam. The knowledge of the Qur’an in the philosophical works is presented in the Quran. But the knowledge that is contrary to the Qur’an is rejected. It is clear that these criteria can be seen separately in the tabernacle and the Maturidi's interpretations. It is not true, but it is not true, it is not true, it is true, it is true, it is true, it is true, it is true, it is true, it is true, it is true, it is true, it is true, it is true, it is true, it is true, it is true, it is true, it is true. The most important thing to do is to be aware of the righteousness of the Qur’an. He was also very careful to transfer his rides. He understands literally the numbers of knowledge, but he has transmitted to God how it is. In some cases, it has also been revealed as the covenant of God.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

A Different Classification Attempt Based On Al-tabarī and Al-māturīdī : Ahl Al-hadith and Ahl Al-re’y Tafsirs
2020
Yazar:  
Özet:

Although Islamic thought tradition is a whole, scientific disciplines such as Tafsīr, Kalām, Fiqh, Hadith are classified separately. More specifically, the tradition of Tafsīr was evaluated under two titles, dirāyah and narration. This distinction has its roots up to ten centuries ago, and it still exists today. However, some researchers have stated that this distinction is problematic. For example, the criteria for the definition of narration run counter to those of Tabarī. Because he made choices among narrations, discussed issues of Fiqh and Kalām, and used the catechetical method. When these situations are taken into consideration, it should be said that he is not a mufassir of the people of narration but of the dirāyah. Otherwise, Tabarī and Ibn Abī Hātim would be accepted as the same. This would cause other problems. Because he made a comment about which narration might be right among the narrations he conveyed. Ibn Abī Hātim conveyed the narration only. In this case, it would be wrong to evaluate both mufassirs / commentators within the same scope. One is a scholar in the field of dirāyah, and the other is a scholar in the field of narration. However, to say that Tabarī and al-Māturīdī are scholars of the same level of dirāyah would cause confusion. Because there are important differences between the two commentators. The most important of these is the effect of their tradition: Ahl al-Hadith and Ahl al-Raʿy. The distinction between Ahl al-Hadith and Ahl al-Raʿy was linked to Fiqh in the first place. However, some researchers did not find it correct to reduce the classification only to the field of Fiqh. Because these two schools attract attention with their unique structures of thought in the theological field. Therefore, it is possible to think that these two schools, which are associated with both Fiqh and Kalām, affect the Tafsīr field. Because if viewed from a wide perspective, the main criteria of the schools of Ahl al-Hadith and Ahl al-Raʿy correspond to the interpretation of Tabarī and al-Māturīdī. Indeed, according to the Ahl al-Hadith criteria, the first period scholars’ words are taken as basis. Opinions would not be expressed in contrast to them. Of course, it is essential that the early scholars should not be of the Ahl al- bid‘ah /People of heresy. Otherwise, the words of the scholars would not be respected. If the narrations coming from them contradict each other, various criteria are taken as basis to understand which of the narrations is correct: For example, the narration which is the closest to the Qur’anic verses in literal consideration is considered correct. In addition, narrations conveyed in greater numbers are superior to those in fewer numbers. On the other hand, verses concerning recondite matters such as the arrival of Allah are understood literally, but its real meaning is left to Allah. It is not likely to elaborate on issues related to Kalām. Also, philosophical issues would not touched. Ahl al-Raʿy, on the other hand, took a different attitude regarding the issues men- tioned. According to them, scholars of subsequent periods may also Express their opinions against those of the first period. Scholars’ statements must be taken into account, not their identities. So isnād is not of primary importance. Narrations are submitted for the Qur’an’s appraisal. The narration that matches the purpose of the Qur’an is considered correct. Narrations which are against the Qur’an, the mind and the mainstream are not accepted. It does not matter to whom these narrations are attributed. If it’s the literal meaning that should be taken into account in the interpretation of the Qur’an, so it happens. If it is of the bāṭini kind that should be taken into account, then it is done so. However, it is decided which of these two will be taken into consideration by examining the entire Qur’an. Verses such as Allah’s arrival and passage are interpreted. It should also be touched on the issues regarding Kalām. Finally, the information contained in the philosophical works is presented to the Qur’an. However, information contrary to the Qur’an is rejected. Obviously, it is possible to see these criteria separately in each of Tabarī and alMāturīdī’s tafsīrs. Tabarī accepted the rule that it is not correct to make a statement against those of the early scholars, although he said from time to time that he had different thoughts, he insistently stated that he accepted the thoughts of the previous ones and picked out of narrations. The criterion that he pays most attention in his choice is that the narration fits the verse apparently. He also paid much attention to convey the narration with its chain of conveyors (sanad). He understood khabarī attributes literally, but left how would they happen to Allah. 

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Atıf Yapanlar
Dikkat!
Yayınların atıflarını görmek için Sobiad'a Üye Bir Üniversite Ağından erişim sağlamalısınız. Kurumuzun Sobiad'a üye olması için Kütüphane ve Dokümantasyon Daire Başkanlığı ile iletişim kurabilirsiniz.
Kampüs Dışı Erişim
Eğer Sobiad Abonesi bir kuruma bağlıysanız kurum dışı erişim için Giriş Yap Panelini kullanabilirsiniz. Kurumsal E-Mail adresiniz ile kolayca üye olup giriş yapabilirsiniz.
Kilis 7 Aralık Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi

Alan :   İlahiyat

Dergi Türü :   Uluslararası

Metrikler
Makale : 251
Atıf : 271
Kilis 7 Aralık Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi