Özet:

Ta’wil takes place in history as a very debated and fundamental concept for Islamic studies. Whether it is the same as interpretation(tafsir) or not and whether there is a need for ta’wil to understand the text better have been a very hot topic in Islamic tradition. Regardless, throughout history ta’wil has been used by scholars of different fields such as fiqh, tafsir, theology, and mysticism. For theology and fiqh, the requirements such as being subjected to rules of logic and presenting proof for ta’wil to be applied led it to a more reasonable and stable application. On the other hand, it is hard to say the same thing for tafsir and especially mysticism. It is a known fact that when ta’wil is used in tafsir studies, the requirements are not that strict. Ta’wil is divided into three separate categories. First one is bayânî ta’wil. This type is mostly used by fiqh scholars, mufassirs, and linguists. It can be described as deducing meanings from Qur’an by operating within the linguistic features of the Arabic language. This type of ta’wil is merely based on choice, istihrâc(inferring), and istinbat(comparison). Ijtihad is also perceived as the effort of the interpreter (faqih, mufassir, and muawwil) to discover the divine will. The second category is irfânî ta’wil. It is a type of information that appears in the heart of a mystic by inspiration or intuition. That is the result of the internalization of a spiritual experience by them which is commonly referred to as tadabbur, taamul, tafakkur, and tazakkur. The third category is named burhânî ta’wil. This type of ta’wil deals with the verses as a whole and try to come up with a meaning that aligns with the apparent meanings of them. Ibn Rushd al- Hafîd is the most important representative of this category. He claims that the reason never contradicts the revelation. The information we get from these two is always in harmony. This harmony is reached either directly from the apparent meaning of the verses or ta’wil that is based on reason. Sometimes verses do not convey the message. In that case, ta’wil based on reason is accepted as the way to get the information. If the information we get by reason does not contradict the verses, there is no problem. But if they contradict, then the ta’wil must be renewed following the apparent meaning of the words. These three categories cover all the Qur’an-related fields and their attempt to understand the verses of the Qur’an better. Among these three, since they are based on proof and reason, burhânî and bayânî ta’wil are more objective. Irfânî ta’wil on the other hand is more subjective due to its personal structure. It can be said that the bâtînî interpretations made by Sufis on the verses related to cleaning in the Qur’an goes way beyond the apparent meaning and crosses the border of mundhabıt ta’wil. At this point, the fact that dhahirî and bâtınî interpretations are on both sides also explain the fiqh-mysticism relationship methodically. But how to balance the relationship between those two remains a big problem. Shatibi, the great Maliki jurist’s approach to ta’wil, who has a central position in the makāsid/gâi interpretation sets an example for the balance to be restored between dhâhir and bâtin. According to him, all the meanings that are said to be extracted from Qur’an need to be in accordance with the Arabic language. If that’s not the case and the meanings are not aligned with the Arabic language, it’s not accepted as a Quranic information. For this reason, the examples of ta’wil he gave made significant contributions in determining the boundaries of ta’wil and the scope of legitimacy in the context of dhâhir and bâtin. In this way, his approach to the subject in the study constituted an important parameter in the evaluation of the issue. Considering the conditions that must be present in a sound and acceptable ta’wil in the fiqh method, it can be said that the ta'wils made by the Sufis are extreme ta'wils that transcend the rules and exclude the apparent meaning. However, it is not appropriate to put this attitude of theirs in the same category as those of the Bâtinîds. For, the most prominent element in the ta’wil of the Sufis is the idea that it is the nafs that prevent a person from seeking the consent of Allah. Therefore, they interpreted the relevant verses in this context. In the verses about cleaning, purification from sins, and purification of the soul come to the fore. However, the Sufis, like the Bâtinis, did not deny the apparent, but they did not act on a mundhabit basis, like the jurists and theologians, at the point of adhering to the evidence in ta'wil. For this reason, it can be said that they have made distant ta’wils from time to time.

Anahtar Kelimeler: